Chapter 20:Tradition and Revolution
Questions for your personal reflection.
Have you found yourself unsettled by Merton’s words in this or any other chapter? Or simply in disagreement with them?
Sharing with others: What caught your attention or provoked your thinking today?
The first time I read this chapter I thought it was a defence of dogma and the teaching authority of the church, which I found to be intriguing and amusing in equal parts. But when I read it again (several times) I started to see so much else. Like the idea that Christianity is fully revealed but not yet fully understood or fully lived. Like the idea that each succeeding generation has to rediscover Christianity and return to the source. Or that the revolution to which Christianity points is an extermination of our false selves instead of the extermination of other people. So one of the big lessons for me in this chapter is not being so quick to judge what Merton is saying.
Posted by Genevieve.
Posted By Second Thoughts
ReplyDeleteI, too, found a lot to like in this chapter after I got over my initial resistance to some of Merton's ideas. I particularly liked what he said towards the end. The words were beautiful: that there's a spiritual hunger that goes beyond argument to "the limpid obscurity of a single intuition that unites all dogmas in one simple Light".
I also understood something about Merton today. He had a mind that could hold conflicting and opposing thoughts at the same time. He was comfortable with paradox and logical inconsistencies. For example, in this chapter he could criticize human traditions and at the same time support them. He could see that the church is petrified while at the same time endorsing its authority. When I get exasperated with him, it's because I'm expecting him to lay out a single track of crumbs that leads me home. Not his problem. Mine.
P.S. I also enjoyed Bettie's comments yesterday. More please.
I understand that Christianity is revolutionary, and in the sense that it must therefore be ever adaptable. I have always distrusted dogma as it seemed to me to stifle the free spirits necessary to a continuing revolution.
ReplyDeleteThe established church seems to be wed to dogma "the barnacles" as Merton describes them and this to me inhibits rather than assists in the search for the divine. I did however understand him to say we need the church to use as the gateway for our own understanding so this may be something to follow up on
I was reminded of much of the revolutionary rhetoric of the 60's and 70's here as well; speaking about continuing revolution, or as one writer put it-(Regis Dubray)"revolution in the revolution". How this plays out in the organized church or the contemplative is something i will have to ponder further. I know I was disturbed by the back and forth Merton used in talking about institutions and individuals
post by william
Posted by Genevieve
ReplyDeleteSpeaking (in person) to William today, I had a further thought.
Merton was quite caustic about contemplatives who don't do theology.
Maybe the point is to take a serious look at dogma and ask ourselves, how is this speaking to us/me today? What is in here that you didn't see before? We know that Merton didn't think it was literally true (witness his comments about the word salvation and that Genesis is not a historical tract) so what else is in there? Instead of rejecting it, perhaps it's time to take another look.
Something to follow up on, as William puts it.