Some Thoughts On Protestant Discourses

[ziasudra]

I visited a church called Tabernacle Congregational Church, under the umbrella of the United Church of Christ, over the weekend. It was one of the conference sites, and I was there for a couple of presentations. But I took some time on Sunday to attend its service, and tired as I was, my mind went into academic mode because the experience was so very different than anything I've personally experienced.

As usual, when anything that I've only read about in books all of a sudden manifested itself in real life situations, I want to write about it ;)

Behind the cut is some thoughts about transcendence vs. immanence within the Protestant discourse. The only warning is that I'm EXTREMELY tired right now, so what I write might not make a lot of sense.


Transcendence vs. Immanence
First, the definitions. Transcendence is the believe that God is over and above creation (therefore, "transcendent"). There is nothing or nothing that can be on equal footing with God. Immanence, on the other hand, is a view of God that holds him to be pervading in presence in all creation. He's an "in all and through all" God, and knowable by observing nature.

Whatever churches and church services I've been to throughout my life have most been settings that define God's transcendence. God is knowable, but mostly through means such as revelation and personal communication, in which it is a spiritual encounter for God to communicate to his creation, the high ranked making contact with the low ranked.

The service I went to this weekend was very much conducted by an immanence-focused church. God is not only manifested in all nature, but is in his creation, and one learns about his attributes through interacting with creation, plants and animals (humans included) alike. Many of the hymns we sang had lyrics that glorify creation, and God's attributes are not only great and grandiose, but also lowly and weak at times -- the very attributes that we see in other people through day-to-day interactions.

Implications of transcendence vs. immanence are wide and far reaching. I'm too brain-dead to say much, but a big debate is whether both views are correct, only one is correct, and whether theologies that encompass more than one extreme are "okay."

I found the overall service experience fascinating. I didn't get to stay around to interview people talk with the regular attendees because I had a session right afterwards. But I heard New York's Union Theological Seminary has a very immanence-based curriculum. Maybe I can check out its Web site later, when my brain cell count goes back up.

*yawns*


News:
I'm so behind. I feel like I've been living in a bubble for the past five days (and I have). The hotel gave us a newspaper the first day we arrived, but we haven't gotten any more until this morning. Not like I had time to read newspapers anyway, but still, I hate not knowing what's going on in the rest of the world.

Yay for the 18-inning baseball playoff, and utterly shocked and speechless at the Pakistan earthquake that killed 20,000 people. And now that I'm going back to NYC, it's probably time to read up on the whole subway safety/security threat debate.
.

Comments

[sad1225.livejournal.com]

Wow, that is a big issue!

http://www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=2652

My first inclination is that Trancendence must be true and Immanence must not be true because:

If God can be available (knowable) through nature, such as Him manifesting Himself in a mother's love, then God can also be corrupted by evil (as can everything in nature, even a mother's love).

The Catholic church teaches Trancendence because (as I understand it) if Immanence is true, then they have no right to be the Church.

My inclination is twice biased: 1) I am Catholic and 2) I tend to view God as "the great experimenter" who is evolving humanity towards some end I don't understand.

---

Utimately, I think that the things we observe through nature can give us a reference to understand god (e.g. How can we understand that god loves us, if we haven't experienced love?).

That being said, a strict Trancendence world view could be used to regard Science and Environmental Conservationism as much less important than I think they are.

[ziasudra.livejournal.com]

Good link, thanks!

I think it ultimately comes down to this:

It [Freemasonry] worships not the One True God of revelation—Father, Son and Holy Spirit—but a false god, symbolically transcendent but really immanent: the "god" called "Reason." And it invokes without adequate cause the Name of the One True God.

If we take transcendence out of God's attribute, then he ceases to be the God of revelation and becomes a humanly created concept -- one who can never escape the confines of human intellect because there is no room for transcendence.

On the other hand, the very explanation of what immanence believers are (in this text) is filtered through the writer's presumably Catholic perspective, which is necessarily interpretative. I'd be interested to hear from a Freemasonry about how s/he reconciles or thinks about transcendence vs. immanence.

I'll get to your Catechism link tomorrow ^^

[amrcan-hermione.livejournal.com]

I think I've believed in Immanence to some degree or another for my whole life, but I had had never put it into my own words, so I had no idea I really believed in the concept of "God is in ALL things" until very recently. But it is SO true. It is such a wonderfully freeing thought. Why be afraid of God? Seriously!

The only thing is, a friend of mine experienced the Church of Christ as a very welcoming at first and then very cultish, keep-everyone-to-ourselves group. I also found them aggressive in trying to keep/recruit members, but didn't let myself get deep enough to encounter any oppression. I did like a few of their services, though. And Maybe the UNITED Church of Christ is different--so many denominations--how do _I_ know?

BTW, I'm Catholic too, but all the theorizing is lost on me. In spiritual and religious matters I always follow my heart (and in most other matters now too). And does the Church really teach that nature can be corrupted by evil? How very sad, because I know they don't mean it in the way we'd think of, as in polluters and those who simply don't care about our planet, they mean it in the sense that nature is somehow less than humanity because "humans were made in the image of God" and "God gave man dominion over the earth" and other stuff like that. But honestly! Stop the hierarchy--end the separation, for we are not really separate from each other.

SHEESH!

[sad1225.livejournal.com]

And does the Church really teach that nature can be corrupted by evil? How very sad, because I know they don't mean it in the way we'd think of, as in polluters and those who simply don't care about our planet, they mean it in the sense that nature is somehow less than humanity

*laughs*
The Catholic church teaches that all people are sinners (original sin for one).

The earth is cursed and so is humanity (Genesis 3:17-19). And all throughout the bible you can find satan refered to with titles like "prince of this world".

What I meant by ... Trancendence world view could be used to (dis)regard Science and Environmental Conservationism is that if god is all that matters and god is above his creation it would be logical to say "Why bother learning about anything or taking care of our environment when all that matters is God"

Here's from the Catholic Catechism (http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/seventh.html#SOCIAL) :
2415 The seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity.[194] Use of the mineral, vegetable, and animal resources of the universe cannot be divorced from respect for moral imperatives. Man's dominion over inanimate and other living beings granted by the Creator is not absolute; it is limited by concern for the quality of life of his neighbor, including generations to come; it requires a religious respect for the integrity of creation.[195]

[ziasudra.livejournal.com]

Just a quick note to say that the conversation is SO interesting, and that I plan to read the links in detail once I get around to it. I don't know much about the Catholic Cathechism at all. *is learning a lot*

But first, I must tackle the tasks on my increasingly big to-do list :p

[amrcan-hermione.livejournal.com]

Thank you for pointing out the Church's true position in the Catechism. If I've read and interpreted what it says correctly,

I am sorry, however, that you felt like laughing at what I wrote. I appreciate your help, but if you were only doing it out of pity of my seeming ignorance, or even out of spite, that is truly sad. I acknowledge that I am still learning some basics of the faith I was born into, and when I said I was Catholic, I didn't mean that as a way of knowing all about that faith. Because I honestly don't know all about it. But just because I consider myself Catholic, through my family tradition and my eventual choice to be Confirmed, does not mean that I believe all that the Church teaches without question.

As I say in my profile, I am a very spiritual Catholic. I look to Christ as an example, and as one of the great teachers humanity has known. Am I a typical Catholic? Hardly. But I feel most at home in the Catholic Church, because that is what I know. Will I feel that way forever? I don't know--and, most importantly, that is fine with me.

I know this is at best an incomplete response to the questions you raised about my logic, but I hope that you at least get a better sense of where I am coming from. Peace be with you!
-Sabrina

[amrcan-hermione.livejournal.com]

SHEESH. I forgot to finish a sentence in my last reply. (That's what happens when modems get interrupted, and so does your brain) The one unfinished sentence reads as follows:

If I've read and interpreted what it says correctly, it [the excerpt from the Catechism] on its own feels very close to my own personal belief about the subject [nature].

My sincere apologies--
Sabrina