Western & Eastern Religions & love - Erich Fromm

Reading a very interesting book at the moment. "The Art of Loving" by Erich Fromm. First published in 1957, the author died in 1980. He talks about love being an activity, as in "standing in" love, rather than love being showered on an object - as in "falling in" love. He is very persuasive, and I like the way he writes. Reminds me a little of Scott M Peck in "Road Less Travelled".

He talks about love being the ultimate goal of self development (suggesting that therapy's motto of "Know thyself" should not be an end unto itself, but a stepping stone to the ability to love). It's a fascinating read.

The need to experience a union as a result of the separateness we feel. The role of mother, father, maturing to the point we become our own father and mothers. And that ultimately, love is a sign of maturity. Love of self, love of those close to us, love of friends, love of strangers, the poor and downtrodden - are all facets of a mature person. If someone doesn't love the stranger, then they have no love. That we love because we ourselves are "rich" - rich in the sense that we have something to give and give liberally. A "poor" person in this context being someone who does not posses the ability (richness) to be able to give (love) to others.

I am struck by how much of this is biblical.

He then discusses the love of God in the same vein. And here it is interesting for it differs from the teaching I've received. He argues that love for God follows in the same vein as our early dependence upon our mother, followed by our father, before becoming our own father and mother. I.e. before we are born we are one with the mother, yet separate. As we begin to grow up we realise that we are separate from our mum, yet her love for us is unconditional as we came from her. At an early age we start to move away from our mother and our father becomes more important. His love is dependant upon our behaviour. He represents rule, authority, the outside world. As we continue to mature we take on our own responsibility and in that sense we become our own father and mother.

In the same way immature religion is where we are dependant upon the "mother" God (matriarchal). The all embracing, all caring, gracious, unconditional love which we can do nothing to sever. As we continue to mature we sway towards the patriarchal God - the Father God - whom we must please, with rules and judgement. To please him we must do as he wishes. As religion continues to mature, the notion that _we_ become like God, in the sense that we carry the responsibility ourselves. I.e. We don't look to God as the one who wipes our bums, nor the one to whom we must bow and scrape. Instead we realise that we are like God, or, in a sense, God and us are one.

He argues that the western philosophy is based on Aristotle, whereas Eastern religions are based on paradoxical logic. So western holds that if X is A, X is not A. Paradoxical thought states that X and be A and not A. The Western world, based on it's philosophy, has made thought and science the two ruling guides. If something can not be proved it cannot be so. Western religions are "thought" based. I please God by following dogma (E.g. Catholicism). Eastern religions have done the opposite, and are based on transformation- knowing God experientially in order to become one with him.

Interestingly, he argues that western religion; in the sense of defining who God is, is based on what He isn't. Even Eastern religion is along the same lines. Here's the question - how can we know God? I don't mean this is the way a Christian would ask "Do you know God" - I mean being able to explain God. Moses asked God for his name as the Israelites needed a name to be able to objectify God in the same way they had their idols. What was God's answer? 'I AM WHO I AM BECOMING'. Another paraphrase would be "The nameless one". I don't have a name. You cannot know it. It is too great, too wonderful, so far away above your comprehension, that a name in our human terms means nothing. I, I AM. We define God by using contradictions, or negatives. God is not human (using a negative). He doesn't sleep. Hmm. This hard is hard to explain here - read the book!

And yet..

I believe that my _experience_ of God (I live in the UK!), or rather my relationship with God, is based on both. If I had thought only, where would the change be? How would I experience union, true oneness with something so loving that it takes my breath away? For me, maybe this is why I hate my perception of religion so much. There is so much emphasis on doing. Cell groups, worship, needing to be like everyone else, certain behaviours. Where is the power? The risk taking? The experience of a loving God? In fact the New Testament says that we can only know God spiritually. This is NOT mind or thought. Neither is is doing - as in activity. So neither thought nor mind allows us to know God.

What does eastern religions teach us? Apparently one aspect of the paradoxical logic is that it matters not what our current thoughts are, only that we want to continue to develop. In that way there are "many paths to God". An example is used of three blind men explaining an elephant. One, touching his trunk, explains a water pipe. The other his ears says an elephant is like a fan. The third feeling his leg explains an elephant is like a pillar. This line of thinking means that eastern religions are more tolerant - they don't mind so much where you are up to in your thinking for it is your transformation which is important. Western religions have centred on dogmas - leading to the notions of wrong thinking - or heretics. Burning at the stake, schisms and church splits.

He argues that ultimate maturity is that in a sense we cannot know God. Instead we become like him. He and I become one. The more we know, the less we know. The more we claim to know, the more ignorant we are. The less we know we know, the more we know... I know confusing. That's a paradox. And that's the point... but that in so doing, we also become more loving. We are able to love every human being because God is in every human being. We are all one. The stranger, the orphan, the homeless, the poor, the aids vicitim, the african with swollen tummy, as well as our family, those close to us, and ourselves.

I find this stuff very challenging. I also know that I can not, currently at least, agree with much that goes on in many churches. Well meaning people, serving God as if he were an idol, or a tyrannical father ready to beat them. Belonging is more important than transformation. Dogma more important than transformation. I hate it.

So - where am I?

Over the last months or year, I have been on a journey. And a journey where I don't know where I will end up. From being a charismatic, enthusiastic Christian who believes every word in the Bible literally being instrumental in seeing many others become Christians (in the sense of professing a believe in Jesus Christ and desiring a personal relationship with him), I am becoming less absolute. I find much of organised religion putrid. Including charismatic evangelical churches. Sure, much good is done in the sense of helping the poor (is there a greater calling?) by a relative few. But all the dogma and rules and need to conform that goes with it - yuuck!

I find myself challenging myself on all manner of areas which before were sacrosanct. Is Jesus the ONLY way to God in the way that evangelicals believe. The ABC of the gospel - Admit your wrongdoing, Believe Jesus is Lord and Confess he is so.. Seems so trite. Where's the transformation? Where's the "you will know them be their fruit"? Where's the power which follows the words? Surely if there is no transformation, no fruit, no power - then their religion however firmly held is useless?

I have seen many lives transformed. As people have tentatively reached out to God. Wanting him to be there. Experiencing his love, those first few steps being rewarded with unimaginable grace. Change. Power. Transformation! It's one of the most wonderful things to behold - a fellow human being being changed by grace. And yet it happens too little in too many churches. The early love is restrained by wrong thinking, wrong teaching, a need to conform and adhere to century old dogmas which have no basis in scripture. The result is love lost. "You have lost your first love".

Oh God - save me, save us. I want reality. Truth. Transformation - not to be a miracle worker, but an object of beauty. Joy. Grace, able to love the unlovely from a place of love - not religion.


How can church be God's bride? I don't understand...