Posted by Philip St. Romain on September 27, 19100 at 17:43:56:
In Reply to: Re: Sin, Soul, Self, Catholicism posted by CeCe Light on September 27, 19100 at 17:42:45:
: >: I hear you, CeCe. I'm on retreat now deep in the Cascades,<
: ..then what the hell are you doing here?
Ha. I said I wouldn't do anything on the computer out here unless it was fun. This kind of is. : )
: Okay. Define "Saint"
I thought all Catholics knew this. You can look it up, CeCe. There's no need for me to have to do that, nor to define sin and basic concepts like that.
: I don't know, Phil, but I was raised a Roman Catholic myself and taught that God is "EVERYTHING!" "EVERYWHERE!"
: Does this still stand or has that changed as well?
What do you mean, "changed as well?"
But, the Church never, ever taught that God is everything. It teaches that God is everywhere, but that's not the same idea. The former is Hinduism.
The rest of your sharing seems informed by a wide variety of sources--Course in Miracles, Hinduism, and a few I'm not familiar with that you must have put together on your own. From a Christian theological point of view, there are heresies all over the place.
Like. . .
: So in this light, I see no departure from His ways as He is All and Everything, even supposed sin, for if he did not create supposed sin to be had, that would imply an entity in opposition to Him, of a dualistic nature in the universe calling himself Mr. Devil and I don't believe this entity to be anything but that of illusion and darkness as a result of limited consciousness to that of our full potential in being as God-like as Jesus said we were.
Jesus had a lot to say about Mr. Devil, and he didn't say it was simply a projection of our ignorance. Also, to say that God created sin, or that to believe in sin presupposes a dualistic universe does not follow. The Christian doctrines of creation, fall, sin, redemption, etc. take all this into account. Of course, if one makes no fundamental distinctions between God and creation, as I see you doing, then one can end up where you are in your understanding.
: All are Gods ways as we, through our limited consciousness come to express Him, and the supposed negativity you see here on earth is but the result of this limited consciousness, yet always in and bound by Divine Providence and that alone would make it positive.
I've never understood this! If we really are God, and we are confused about this and generating all sorts of hatred and negativity, then this means that God is confused about who God is, God is doing all kinds of things to God, God is negativity, etc. How can God be ignorant of God's self? To suggest this is to say that God is imperfect, or limited in God's own self-understanding.
:
: >let's remember that our personal intuitions are not absolute.<
: ...nor are those "Traditions..."
"Traditions" How easy you blow off the Church and its wisdom! And why the " " for Traditions?! Seems pretty disrespectful!
: for God gave you access to mind for good reason.
: I said "GOOD REASON" - meaning for use of good reasoning...
Amen to good reasoning. Let's have more of it.
:
: Okay Phil, maybe jb has a point here about that impasse.
Truly. I think the impasse has become pretty obvious.
For the record: there are ways to understand the kundalini process and enlightement within the framework of traditional Christianity and Catholicism. There's absolutely nothing about kundalini or enlightenment that negates the basic doctrines of Christianity about God, creation, sin, grace, redemption, adoption, transformation, etc. As a Christian, my primary interest has been to understand and integrate my experience within the tradition rather than re-interpret it in the light of my experience--as Bernadette Roberts and others have done. That it is possible to do so is not only true for me, but, I think, it's also important for coming to a healthy integration of the transformative process.
Peace,
Phil
------------------------------------------------------------------------