Lots of Theological Conversations

[qos]

As my entry “Contrasts” indicated, I’ve spent considerable time and energy recently struggling with Swedenborg’s doctrine of the redemption – and more than that, with the implications it has for my vocation if what I consider to be a central doctrine is something I might not able to accept.

Swedenborg teaches that the material and spiritual worlds are not separate, but interpenetrating, and that they influence each other. Each of us is motivated not only by our own thoughts, but by spiritual influences coming from heaven and hell. In order for free choice to be a reality – and freedom of choice is an essential part of Swedenborg’s anthropology – the influences of the spiritual world must remain in balance. He writes that Jesus’s act of “redemption” was not dying on the cross as a substitute sacrifice for the sin of humanity, or as a ransom. It was entering the spirit world after his death and re-ordering the heavens and hells so that they were once again in balance. He continues this work for each person, preserving our freedom whether we ask his help or not, but then helping us choose the Good and the True if we ask for help.

I had a good talk with my dad (a former minister and double Ph.D.) on Saturday night, and he agreed with me that having trouble with a central doctrine like this one is a major problem. We discussed the various implications and choices I had before me. (Then we went in to see “The Last Samurai,” which I enjoyed very much.)

Then, on Sunday, I chatted with Doug, a visiting Swedenborgian seminarian, and with my pastor. Both of them were surprised that this doctrine was causing problems for me, and – to my great surprise – neither of them thought this was a particularly central belief. Certainly it wasn’t something worth getting worked up about.

Okay. . . .

Last night, I spoke for an hour with Jim, the dean of the Swedenborgian House of Studies. He was very helpful, giving me some additional perspectives on the doctrine that I hadn’t thought about (there is so darn much of Swedenborg to absorb), and he also affirmed the denomination’s respect for free thought and pluralism.

The sense I’m left with now is that I am within a community of kindred spirits. And the issues I have with some of the theology is not going to be a deal breaker where my vocation is concerned. At least, not from the official perspective. I still need to wrestle with this for a while, but I no longer feel the sense of fear and urgency I did last week, when I was afraid that my vocation was in jeopardy.

Comments

[danielletx.livejournal.com]

christianity only bends so far before it isn't christianity any more. those doctrines are fun to reshape and fit into modern ideals, especially when the dysphoria of their existence becomes overbearing... sometimes, however, things can be modified until they are not really themselves any more--which is not a bad thing, necessarily...but at other times, things can be modified and rearranged until they lose their content and meaning.

good luck!

[qos.livejournal.com]

You make an excellent point, Danielle, and one which I do wrestle with: at what point do I stop being a "Christian"?

And my answer fluctuates from day to day, depending on whether or not I'm thinking more in terms of the organized institution of the church, or as a follower of the Christ. My own denomination, Swedenborgianism, affirms pluralism while cherishing the Bible as our own primary source for the Word of God. But we don't deny that God has spoken at other times, in other places. Swedenborg wrote about the central importance of our "ruling love" rather than doctrine as the basis for salvation. (Of course, this in itself is a doctrine -- but the doctrine does not make professions of specific beliefs or performance of certain rituals necessary for salvation.)

Love transcends doctrine. And I believe Jesus would agree with that.

[danielletx.livejournal.com]

the most painful thing that i ever did was lay my christianity to rest. and goddamn it if it doesn't keep coming back from the dead! :) i guess that's its primary "property."

from the sound of it, you're wrestling. as the immortal prophet bono put it, "jacob wrestled with the angel, and the angel was overcome."

[qos.livejournal.com]

I don't know the song you're referencing, Danielle, but I've been thinking in terms of Jacob and "wrestling with the angel" for a couple of weeks now.

And I know what you mean about Christianity coming back from the dead. That's what happened to me. But it's a richer and more mature (at least I hope it is!) form than what I believed as a child. I've found beauty and wisdom in many spiritual paths, but only Christianity (or post-Christianity, as our friend queenofhalves likes to put it) truly satisfies my soul.

[danielletx.livejournal.com]

well, ultimately, it's what satisfies your soul that is, i believe, "true" religion (if such a thing exists). there are just too dern many spiritualities/religions out there that flat out don't work. not that the religions themselves don't work, but many religions have lost significance/meaning for individuals within the community. sometimes, the community is enough to fill the spiritual/theological void, and sometimes the community isn't (especially for those of us inclined toward the incisive art of theological-philosophical deconstruction).

it's not an easy road you're trodding. i wish you didn't have to take that platitudinous road-less-traveled. but some of us don't have a choice.

(the song reference above is U2. "bullet the blue sky.")