Sancta sanctis

5 03 2021

In my Catholic brain, the sin of presumption loomed and looms ominously. This sin against the Holy Spirit is the dangerous one wherein one continues to commit sin with the intention of seeking forgiveness later. This sin was not always as tolerated as it is now, and among practicing Catholics of the modern Church, it barely exists. The indirect enabler of this sin is the Sacrament of Penance or Confession and easy (if not to say, automatic) absolution. The idea now is that one can commit any sin but if one goes to Confession, forgiveness is all but assured. To doubt this is to doubt the efficacy of the Sacraments; in Catholic theology, their working ex opere operato (by virtue of the work as worked). You don’t have to do anything but make a “good” confession to a priest (that is, not holding anything back and being accurate in your telling) and having a modicum of sorrow for your sin, as well as a “resolve” to not sin again. What the nature of the “sorrow” is, and the “resolve” for that matter, remains a disputed question. The modern “pastoral” solution, even amongst the strictest conservative, is to lean heavily toward being liberal and permissive. Otherwise, one has to exclude people somewhat interested in the Christian way of life but with little resolve to tackle their vices.

Read the rest of this entry »




On the reform of the reform

25 02 2021

I was listening to a podcast about Catholic liturgy, namely the idea of the “reform of the reform”. The podcast interested me because it recapitulated a phase of my life as a young Catholic man in the late 20th century. I grew up with very liberal, very free-wheeling liturgy as a Catholic in California. When I began to take my faith more seriously, I saw the problems with the ritual (or lack of it) at my local parish. I was not alone in this at the time. The podcast mentioned a book by Msgr. Klaus Gamber called Reform of the Roman Liturgy which I read in college. This podcast speaker claims that this book is among the first to call out the lack of continuity in the reform of Roman Catholic ritual in the late 20th century and thus advocate a reform of that reform towards a more traditional direction. This book was praised by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger who later became Pope Benedict XVI. Pope Benedict took many measures to make the reformed liturgy more traditional, at least when he celebrated it. He also allowed again the celebration of the old unreformed liturgy.

Read the rest of this entry »




On God having toenails

19 02 2021

Even if I have dismissed something in my own head, I like to return to it on occasion to see if I still dismiss it. Above is a video from lay Catholic theologian Christopher West about the foundational premise of John Paul II’s theology of the body. I went over ad nauseam about a dozen years ago why I find the theology of the body erroneous, and in spite of my effective change in religious faith, more or less I stand by my objections. In fact, I now adhere to a faith that has the premise, “we are not this body,” at its very foundation: it is effectively a key idea of the Bhagavad Gita.

Read the rest of this entry »




Chota Haridas and Judas Iscariot

16 02 2021
https://back2krishna.files.wordpress.com/2020/12/chotaharidas.jpg

Studying Krishna consciousness for me is all about contrasts. Writing about it is an exercise in explaining these contrasts in as few words as possible. With the story of Chota Haridas, there is an immediate comparison to Judas Iscariot in the New Testament, except that God Incarnate (in this case, Lord Chaitanya) doesn’t get betrayed nor is He handed over to His enemies to be killed, and so on. The real comparison lies in the question: What happens when one of your followers, someone very intimate to your mission, “falls down”? Is there redemption after that and, if so, what does it mean?

Read the rest of this entry »




Personal difficulties with Krishna consciousness

9 02 2021

They’re not the common or the “sexy” ones. I’ve sort of resolved in my own mind Srila Prabhupada’s more “based” sayings about gender, class, and race, the Moon landings, etc. That stuff is just details in my opinion. If you want to get mad about them, others can feed you reasons to get upset. My issues are more foundational:

  1. Meat eating: I don’t personally have a problem no longer eating meat. I don’t “miss” it very much, to be honest. It’s more the idea that I have known people who have demonstrated pure love of God who ate meat and had no issues with it. I have learned from people who are far better than I am who eat meat. That’s not to say that I doubt the principle: I think there is enough evidence in many religious traditions that indicates that renouncing meat eating is a foundation of asceticism and getting closer to God. But I have a hard time thinking it’s a “deal breaker”.
  2. Irenicism: Related to this, I have found many passages from Srila Prabhupada’s books talking about how divisions between bonafide religious systems are a symptom of Kali Yuga, that the love of God is the only real religion, that people don’t need to convert to Krishna consciousness, that all you have to do is “add Krishna,” etc. That’s fine, but it seems that the other 90% of the time a lot of Srila Prabhupada’s writings and ISKCON rhetoric retreat into sectarianism in a sort of “bait and switch”: sell ecumenism to get in the door, then impose a maximalist program of bhakti as essential to returning “back to Godhead”. Again, which one is it? Is the supposed religious tolerance just to get people in the door, but then once they’re in, you basically have to become a spiritual c.16th century Bengali Vaishnava or else? Why not just lead with that if that’s the case?
  3. Nama-aparadha: This is sort of along the same vein, and that’s the issue of “chanting the Holy Name can do anything, but it can’t do that.” I am not against effort or against spiritual growth per se. Nor am I a sahajiya who just wants things easy. At the same time, the whole point of sankirtan or the public chanting of the Holy Name is to benefit all living entities, even if they have no idea what is being said. They all benefit just from hearing offenselessly. But if I am mostly distracted during two hours of japa, because, you know, I actually have a life and a lot of responsibilities, I am just committing offenses? There’s a sort of “ignorance is bliss” logic going on there. Pardon my French, but if I half-ass it, I might as well never had done it at all. I know it’s more complicated than all of the shastric injunctions of just chanting one name of Krishna wiping out mountains of sins, etc. It’s just a difficult concept to wrap my head around. It is similar to idea of “invincible ignorance” or “presumption” in Catholicism, so I am used to the idea of striving for spiritual perfection being a long slog. It just seems to be a confusing premise of the entire Hare Krishna movement.

I only bring all of this up because I have basically read most of Srila Prabhupada’s books at this point, so these are my lingering questions. I would be happy if anyone could help me clarify these issues.





Person-to-Person

16 11 2020
https://postcard.news/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/srimad-1170x610.jpg

A first reading of the Srimad Bhagavatam

You could say that the purpose of the 18,000 verse Bhagavata Purana or Srimad Bhagavatam is to tell you what it means to be a person. Or rather, it’s to introduce you to the first or Supreme Person, the one you have been looking for, the one you always knew existed, or at least wish you did. In Vaishnava thought, reality has three levels or manifestations: Brahman, Paramahtma, and Bhagavan. Perhaps I will oversimplify these and say that they are the answers to three separate questions: What, Why, and Who. Brahman is a question of “what”: that there is existence, but not particularly why it is. It’s the truth barren of any qualities or distinctions. Many people seek this, they seek stillness and a peaceful void. This is often the subject of cheap mysticism. Paramahtma is the truth as it works within us and all over: it’s the reason why philosophers ask questions and it’s the voice that provides them with answers, often wildly divergent from each other. Those who seek it still don’t really know the origin of the truth. In a manner of speaking, it is the logos (λόγος) of the Stoics and St. John’s Gospel. But the ground of both of these, the ultimate reality if you will, is not a question of “what”, or even “why”, but of “Who?”

Read the rest of this entry »




Defending eternal Hell with Vaisnava theology?

3 10 2020

I don’t know why I keep obsessing about the question of Hell in Catholic theology. I have already stated that it wasn’t a major consideration when I was an orthodox Catholic. I have never really had scruples or an overactive sense of guilt, or a fear of punishment for that matter. My religious concerns have always been about meaning and who I want to be at the end of the day. It has always been for me about transformation and an encounter with that which is outside of me. Meaning is out there, so I have come to think. The question of whether I will be personally saved or damned, and if others will, seems a bit self-absorbed.

Read the rest of this entry »




Yoga-maya and the Bible

27 09 2020
https://i0.wp.com/cloud.millenniumpost.in/20138/20138.jpg

I have wanted to write about the topic of Yoga-maya for some time. While I don’t feel adequate to the task, I’ve gotten to the point of needing to write my thoughts down now or not at all. The question at the center of this reflection is: What is the ultimate meaning of conscious action? And also: Does God need to stop “being God” to fully be God? And perhaps: Why does anything outside of God exist at all, and how?

Read the rest of this entry »




Notes on St. Bonaventure

5 09 2020
https://heritage-history.com/books/sisters/leading3/zpage106.gif

As a Christian, my mind was Augustinian, though I am by no means a scholar of St. Augustine. As I have written elsewhere, I have always had a problem with Thomistic Scholasticism. This is not for lack of engagement, as I like reading Thomistic authors, and have even tackled the Angelic Doctor himself on occasion. Much of it still didn’t sit well with me. As stated previously, one of my difficulties was trying to reconcile faith and reason. Though my problematic dives into modern philosophy led me down disastrous paths, I think I have purged enough of their influence to soberly realize that the narrative of making sense of faith through purely rational premises still doesn’t appeal to me. In my opinion, trying to marry faith and reason too closely can only be done through “cooking the books,” or begging the question. If you value the “reasonableness” of faith that much, you are already beginning the inquiry with a foregone conclusion.

Read the rest of this entry »




Deus sub ratione Deitatis

26 07 2020
I love the frolicking Krishna' - The Hindu

In summer, I sleep badly. I have come to expect this from the humid swampy nights. In the last decade or so, summer has been both a time of rest and exhaustion, of trying to keep up with the time clock and suffering through periods of languid repose. There are long days and short nights, fits of furious activity and weeks when less gets done than expected. In this subtropical heat, I have to catch up on a lot of neglected reading. Time for this slips through my fingers quite easily. It is in this heavy air, amidst the buzzing of insects and continuous discomfort due to the climate, that I have to contemplate the higher things. It’s not ideal.

In my express sightseeing tour through the Srimad Bhagavatam, it is precisely at this time that I have come to the most significant stop in the whole scripture, and that is the description of the rasa-lila: Krishna’s dancing with the cowherd maidens of Vraja in the luminous autumn nights. In Gaudiya Vaishnavism, the socially inappropriate dancing of Krishna with the wives and daughters of Vrindavan is the highest manifestation of the love of God, and of God’s nature itself. Though it may be inappropriate for a relative neophyte to comment on the mystery of the rasa-lila, I am a man in middle age so I don’t think it will be any more appropriate later in life. As I have said elsewhere, I am probably about as wise as I will get in this lifetime.

Read the rest of this entry »