Re: MD Access to Quality

From: max demian (oikoumenist@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Mar 30 2005 - 21:58:21 BST

  • Next message: bmarshnvn@aol.com: "Re: MD Access to Quality"

    Hi all,

    I have some thoughts.
    I like the tight rope analogy; it specifically addresses the spot where
    philosophy meets theology, where (for me) the immanent meets the
    transcendental.

    Seth writes: “…a personal relationship with Jesus Christ” means the same as
    “a special relationship to quality that no on else can override.”

    There is a difference though. In the way I look at this, a personal
    relationship with Jesus Christ is a relationship with a transcendental,
    while a special relationship with Quality takes place on an immanent
    plateau. A relationship with a deity is something that we can not know
    directly. On the other hand, Quality is something that we can know directly.
    Yet, we can have a personal or special relationship with both, one no one
    can override but ourselves. (I will admit however that Quality can be
    rendered transcendental and that Christ can become ‘flesh’ if the believer
    chooses, in which case the ‘point’ of Christ and the point of Quality are
    lost. This is my opinion though).

    Sally McFague, former dean of Vanderbilt Divinity School, develops ‘an
    ecological theology’ in her book _The Body Of God_ where she works with the
    environment and humankind at the biological and atomic layers to develop a
    theology placing all of the universe within and containing the body of God.
    She speaks of the incarnation of Christ, the ‘Word’ made flesh, and of
    humankind’s relationship to an ‘immanent God.’ She seeks an ‘embodied’ God,
    knowable through our relationship with the environment and with other
    humans. She says, “As long as we refuse to imagine God as embodied, we imply
    that the body is inferior.” However, she stresses that this theology is a
    ‘model’ that presupposes ‘divine validation’ for her philosophy of humanism
    and environmentalism.

    “Bodies are important and we ought to honor and love them, our own and
    others; the body model gives us and ecological and justice context for
    theology, for it involves a planetary perspective while focusing on the most
    basic needs of human beings; the model of the universe as God’s body
    suggests both an anthropology and a theology—a way of seeing our proper
    place as inspirited body within the larger body, within the scheme of
    things, and a way of seeing both the immanence and the transcendence of
    God—God as the inspirited body of the whole universe.”

    The point for me is that this is a model. God is described only through
    analogy; the only way we can approach defining an unknowable God. This God
    is still transcendental. He cannot be immanent.

    Quality, on the other hand, appears to me as immanent, knowable within the
    mind. Quality can be seen at work biologically, atomically, personally and
    politically. God is a transcendental which is understood best in immanent
    detail, while Quality is sometimes solidified as a transcendental idea in
    order to understand its immanent reality.

    With regards to Marsha’s questions: “How would you answer her question?
    Where would she here your?”
    Sharing McFague’s position, we can get our values through observing our
    place within a planetary perspective, honoring bodies—human, environment….
    “One of the most critical house rules we must learn is that we are not lords
    over our planet but products of it.” Maybe that we can better understand
    biblical values under this context.

    Thanks , max

    >From: MarshaV <marshalz@charter.net>
    >Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    >To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    >Subject: Re: MD Access to Quality
    >Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 07:55:26 -0500
    >
    >
    >Greetings,
    >
    >I was listening to C-SPAN on satellite radio. It was the call-in portion
    >of the show. A woman called to say that she was a Republican and had been
    >brought up on biblical values. She asked, "Where am I to get my values if
    >not from the Bible?" She could think of no other source. I find that very
    >disturbing.
    >
    >How would you answer her question? Where would she here your voice?
    >
    >Marsha
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    >Mail Archives:
    >Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    >Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    >MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    >
    >To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    >http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >

    _________________________________________________________________
    Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
    http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 30 2005 - 22:29:13 BST