The paradise paradox paradigm

Now try saying that several times fast. I admit the paradise bit wasn't strictly necessary - I just got carried away. I'd like to have included 'paradiddle' but it didn't seem to fit somehow.

Paradox is the living heart of the Christian faith

Paradox for me is the living heart of the Christian faith. Rather than being the static, systematic set of set-in-stone doctrines and beliefs beloved of fundamentalists, Christianity as presented by Christ and the Bible is more like an infinitely-complex, ever-changing kaleidoscope centred around a set of fundamental, paradoxical truths. Because they are paradoxical, they can never fully be pinned down or put in a box; they are always throwing out fresh insights and ideas.

The very nature of God in Christianity is a paradox - God is a trinity, one being yet three persons. If you can explain this you're either a genius or mistaken, yet the Trinity is an idea which gives rise to incredible riches of thought and understanding (I'll try and tackle some of these another time perhaps). And God is infinite and transcendent yet also immanent (close, personal, present within/through creation). He is just and righteous yet loving and merciful. He is utterly holy yet approachable.

Then we have Jesus who is simultaneously fully human and yet fully divine (mirroring to an extent the Bible which is understood to be 'God-breathed' while being fully humanly-authored). We have the mystery of the incarnation, when the Lord of all the universe and time became a tiny clump of cells in a human mother - and a peasant girl at that, not some great Queen. And then we have the Lord and source of all life submitting to death, the sinless punished for the sinful in God's paradoxical act of ultimate mercy, justice and love so that his death becomes the source of life for all.

Jesus' teaching is saturated with paradox - the first shall be last, lose your life to gain it, give to receive, love your enemies... His actions were paradoxical too, confounding all the expectations of what a Messiah should look like and how he should behave. He touched the untouchable and welcomed the outcast while antagonising and criticising the powerful and 'righteous'. He did impossible things - turning water into wine, walking on water, raising the dead - not as a 'conjurer of cheap tricks' but because (among other reasons) he is the Lord of the impossible and the paradoxical.

God seems to enjoy working in a topsy-turvy, upside-down, skew-whiff way

Paul comments that God's foolishness is greater than man's wisdom, and that God chooses the weak and foolish things of the world to shame the strong and wise. God just does seem to enjoy working in a topsy-turvy, upside-down, skew-whiff, expectation-confounding and ultimately paradoxical way. And I for one am very glad about it.

Because of this, we can't second-guess God. We can't ever fully understand him. We can't say that because he did or said such-and-such once, he will do so again. We can't box him or predict him. I'd like to finish with a slightly tongue-in-cheek song I wrote a few years ago to the tune of 'Our God is an awesome God' by Rich Mullins:

Our God is a paradox
He heals, yet sends the pox
Can't put him in a box
Our God is a paradox

Our God is a paradox
He comforts and he shocks
His ways aren't orthodox
Our God is a paradox

Many ways to one God? (part 1)

A friend of mine has a saying, 'There are many mountains in the Himalayas and all of them point to God'. To a lot of Christians this just sounds like new-agey fluffiness - after all, didn't Jesus say 'I am the way... no-one comes to the Father except through me'? And some will understandably feel that if other ways did lead to God, then what on earth was the point of all the hassle of being a Christian - though this would perhaps miss the point somewhat.

While I can't perhaps go as far as my friend in believing that all roads lead ultimately to God, nor that all people will eventually be redeemed - though I do hope for that - I have moved quite a distance in that direction. I have reason to hope that many who do not know or consciously profess Christ will find themselves in God's Kingdom; and conversely I suspect that many who call themselves Christian will find their place among the chosen less guaranteed than they imagined.

Does this mean I'm becoming a wishy-washy anything-goes so-called liberal? Perhaps, but I don't believe so. Rather I'm trying to take Jesus' own words and character very seriously and not shoehorn them into watertight doctrines that don't actually hold water.

The Way, the Truth and the Life

In the next post I want to look at more of what the Bible has to say on the subject but let's start with 'I am the way, the truth and the life'. To my mind it's quite possible to interpret this verse in a way that's far from the standard 'only Christians go to heaven' version.

Yes, Jesus is the Way, but it is possible to follow a way without knowing its name or having been shown it on a map. All who, led by the Spirit, follow the true way are indeed following Jesus whether they know it or not. Similarly, Jesus is the Truth and the Truth is Jesus, so anyone who seeks the truth is surely seeking Jesus whether they realise it or not. And Jesus is the Life, but life whether spiritual or biological is a pretty mysterious thing, and those who have it may not exactly understand what it is or how they came by it.

So Jesus can truly say 'No-one comes to the Father except by me', for all who do come to the Father by whatever route will find - perhaps to their surprise - that they came in truth through Christ.

One of my favourite passages in C.S. Lewis's Narnia stories comes towards the end of The Last Battle. The young Calormene Emeth, a lifelong devotee of the pagan demon-god Tash, finds himself to his great surprise in the Narnian heaven. Aslan the Christ-Lion explains to him:

"Child, all the service thou hast done to Tash, I account as service done to me… For I and he are of such different kinds that no service which is vile can be done to me, and none which is not vile can be done to him…

But I [Emeth] said also (for the truth constrained me), Yet I have been seeking Tash all my days. Beloved, said the Glorious One, unless thy desire had been for me thou wouldst not have sought so long and so truly. For all find what they truly seek."

This to me is the crux. Those who seek truth, goodness, beauty, justice and mercy will find it, for they are truly seeking God.

Love

We in the modern western church make much of right belief in a correct creed, and of following particular steps that will guarantee us a place in God's kingdom. But authentic Christian faith is not mere intellectual assent to right theories about God and salvation, nor following a five-step programme to eternal life. True belief is about who we are in the deepest place, and about the actions and attitudes towards God and other people that flow from that.

So the greatest command is simply - and almost impossibly - to love: to love God with all our heart, mind and strength; to love our fellow humans as ourselves. Those who seek to follow this law are, as Jesus said, not far from the kingdom, whatever theologies they do or don't profess. And conversely those who have not love, though they perform great miracles, are not actually on the Way of Christ at all.

My own view then is that Christ's presence and activity are not limited to those within the Christian church, and that he is often present incognito in other faiths and none. For wherever there is goodness, truth, love, kindness, honesty, generosity, compassion, or mercy, there at least to some degree is Christ. Even if all paths do not lead to him, in his grace he often chooses to meet us on whatever path we happen to be on.

Stages of faith

Faith - like life - is a journey of growth, development, becoming. There are a number of clearly discernible phases or stages to the faith journey which mirror the stages of human psychological development from infant to adult. I think this is a really important subject because so many intra / interdenominational battles and misunderstandings stem merely from people being on different stages of their journeys.

Actually, it doesn't have to be faith - these stages can apply to any ideology or worldview, including atheism. Whole countries and cultures can also exhibit these stages - for example, a revolutionary culture is at 'stage 3' as described below.

Again, this is sadly not my idea - I think M. Scott Peck came up with it, but I like reinventing the wheel - it lets me think things out for myself. So where my version differs from his, I'm sure his is right.

Stage 1 - blissful/chaotic
This equates to the baby/infant stage of development. In faith terms, this is the 'childlike' new convert - often full of blissful excitement and joy (and occasionally deep despair), and with tremendous faith, but with little understanding and responsibility and few limits. In terms of faith streams, this seems to relate most closely to the charismatic/pentecostal. In butterfly life-cycle terms, this is the newly-emerged caterpillar.

Stage 2 - fundamentalist
This equates to the toddler/child stage of development. At this stage there is a need for strict limits and consequences, and a strong sense of binaries of right/wrong, true/false, in/out, us/them, black/white. The fundamentalist stage is characterised by a degree of rigidity, dogmatism, legalism, exclusivity and literal-mindedness.

In terms of faith streams, this stage often goes with - but is not limited to - evangelicalism, particularly the more extreme end. In butterfly terms, this is the confining pupa/chrysalis. It's a vital if not always appealing stage of development, and those who are going through it deserve more tolerance than they often receive (or give).

It's worth noting that it's perfectly possible to be a fundamentalist atheist. It's also possible to be a mild and fluffy fundy - not all who hold strong and strict beliefs are intolerant bigots by any means.

Stage 3 - rebellious
This equates to the adolescent/teenage stage of development, where there is a need to rebel, to break free, to question and challenge all the rules, beliefs and authorities that were previously accepted on trust. This stage can be characterised by tremendous idealism but also violent iconoclasm, sometimes with a total rejection of earlier beliefs. People entering this phase can behave like new (anti-)converts, zealously opposing the faith they previously held. Often the stricter and more rigid the preceding fundamentalism, the stronger the rebellion against it - those whose 'stage 2' was milder and more open are less likely to turn their backs on it so violently.

In faith streams, this stage probably relates most closely to the activist / social justice stream. It also often relates to the liberal end of the fundamentalist/liberal polarity, in stark contrast to stage 2. In butterfly terms, this is the breaking out from the pupa.

Stage 4 - settled sceptic
This equates to the emerging adult phase, where rebellious adolescent idealisms gradually give way to a more reasonable, settled scepticism. At this stage there may be a gradual return of faith for those who have lost it, but it will usually be to a steadier, more rational and tolerant kind of faith.

This stage may relate to the milder, more moderate forms of evangelicalism and sacramentalism. In the butterfly life-cycle, this is the period of resting and drying of wings before taking flight.

Stage 5 - mature mystic/contemplative
This is the stage of mature adulthood, and in faith terms it is marked by a deepening of faith but often in a more open and mystical, less dogmatic and doctrinal form, less wedded to certainties and correct interpretations. In some ways it can look a little like the unboundaried childish faith of stage 1, but now it is because the boundaries have been fully internalised and can now be transcended. This is the butterfly taking flight.

The transition to stage 5 is, I think, often marked by the 'long dark night of the soul' experience, a period of darkness, doubt, discontent, even near despair before the dawn of a new and deeper faith.

People in stages 1 and 2 are apt to think that those in stages 3 and 4 have lost or compromised their faith. Though this may be true, in most cases they are simply at a different stage of the faith journey.

A few more points about the 'stages'. Firstly, it's quite common to miss out stages in development, though I think it's preferable to go through all the stages. It's also quite possible to remain stuck in a stage for many years or even the whole of life. Secondly, we can actually be in different stages at the same time but in different areas of our life - so I may be in stage 2 in my attitudes to sexual morality, at stage 3 in my prayer life, and stage 4 in my attitude to money. Thirdly, we may need to repeat some or all of the earlier stages again later. It's quite possible to slip back from stage 5 to stage 4 or even 2, and then have to go through part of the process again.

And finally, development never ends in this life.

Streams of faith

I'm writing here about the Christian faith because that's my experience, but it may well apply to other faiths too.

There are a number of 'streams', pathways or expressions of faith within the Christian tradition, and each of these has a valuable contribution to make to the whole. (I believe Richard Foster's Streams of Living Water covers this subject really well, but as it's a bit chunky and I'm a bit lazy, I've not got round to reading it. :-)

Stream	Key part of human being	Key part of Bible	Emphases / focuses
Contemplative/ mystical	Soul/spirit, heart; (emotions)	John's gospel/letters; mystical prophets (Ezekiel)	'Prayer of the heart'; finding God in stillness, silence, solitude and in nature, art, music; meditation, contemplation of the divine; creativity/poetry
Charismatic/ pentecostal	Emotions (joy), spirit	Acts; miraculous elements in gospels / Old Testament	Being filled with the Holy Spirit; manifestations/gifts of the Spirit - prophecy, tongues, healing etc; power, miracles, signs and wonders; spiritual warfare and deliverance
Sacramental/ ceremonial	Body - senses; soul	O.T. ceremonies (Exodus, Kings)	Tradition, ritual, liturgy, ceremony, order, sacrament, iconography, hierarchy, saints
Evangelical	Mind, will	Whole Bible; Paul's letters	'Sola Scriptura', Bible as all-sufficient Word of God; 'correct' doctrine/theology (e.g. of atonement); need for personal salvation through faith in Christ; discipleship and personal morality; importance of preaching, teaching and missionary work (evangelism)
Activist / social justice	Emotions - compassion; Body - action	Luke's gospel; Matthew 25; prophets of justice (Amos, Isaiah)	'Social' gospel - justice for poor, liberation for oppressed, care for environment; political activism, usually left-wing

I think Foster identifies others; and I've included creative/poetic within the contemplative stream but some would see it as separate.

Each stream or pathway has something good to contribute to the whole; each also has its weaknesses and dangers, particularly in over-emphasising its own focuses to the exclusion of the others.

The streams are - can and should be - complementary, not mutually exclusive. They also often overlap - it's perfectly possible to be a charismatic evangelical, a sacramental contemplative or an evangelical activist. (It's more difficult to be a sacramental evangelical or a contemplative activist, but maybe not impossible.)

Similarly, some of the streams tend to be particularly associated with certain church denominations - e.g. Baptists tend to be evangelical, Orthodox and Catholics to be sacramental; pentecostals tend to have their own groupings like the Assemblies of God.

It's easy to look on people from a different stream as odd, or plain wrong. It would be great if we could instead see them as different in a good way, offering us fresh approaches and insights into our shared faith.

Polarities

As well as the streams, there are also the extremes or polarities - most notably the fundamentalist/liberal spectrum. Extreme fundamentalism tends to be characterised by over-rigidity and narrowness - scriptural literalism, doctrinal dogmatism, narrow exclusivism, strict moralism and often judgemental legalism. Fundamentalism is usually associated most with the evangelical stream, and least with the mystical.

Extreme liberalism in contrast is so broad and inclusive that it often loses any distinctive Christian character; often there is very little doctrine and little or no belief in God, the supernatural, miracles or the divine inspiration of the Bible.

Another polarity is that between logical/rational and emotional/intuitive/symbolic - basically left and right brain. Again, evangelicalism usually tends towards the rational end; contemplative and sacramental streams towards the intuitive/symbolic.

I susect then that people often gravitate towards a particular stream of faith (and therefore to a particular denomination) mainly because of their own personality type, and also upbringing. And also perhaps to do with what stage they are at on their faith journey, which I'll look at in my next post...

The Evangelical Liberal

A glance at my birthday books wishlist reveals quite a bit about where I am on my faith journey... titles include 'The Christian Agnostic', 'The Orthodox Heretic' and (appropriately given those two) 'Paradoxy'.

Let me reassure (or disappoint) anyone concerned - I'm not losing my Christian faith. In fact, I'd say that my faith in Christ and love for God were stronger and deeper now than they've ever been. But I feel that I'm emerging, slowly and cautiously, from the confining chrysalis of my years of evangelical doctrine, literalism and legalism ('oughtism'), into the fresh air and light of a new way of being Christian. It's a way that owes much to the contemplative and mystical streams of Christianity.

Chrysalises are good and necessary, but they are only meant for a time - they are a stage on the journey. However, growth and even metamorphosis does not have to mean turning your back on the past, rejecting what nurtured you. I'm not cutting off my evangelical roots; I'm quite happily remaining within the charismatic-evangelical Anglican church I've been part of for 16 years. Nor am I turning theologically ultra-liberal, jettisoning belief in God or miracles, the uniqueness and divinity of Christ or the reality of the resurrection.

Rather I would say I'm simply becoming more open in my beliefs and in my ways of believing; less hung up on right answers, sound doctrines, 'correct' ways of interpreting the Bible; more open to insights from other traditions and even other faiths; more open and honest about the flaws and inconsistencies in my own tradition, and about my own real doubts and struggles. I'm becoming less wedded to certainty and more open to mystery. I'm giving up my obsession with facts, proofs and systems of theology in favour of divine paradox, which I increasingly see as the creative core of living Christian faith.

I'm even open to the possibility that Christ may be present and active incognito in and through other faiths than my own. (I'm not saying that all ways equally lead to God, but that God can and does make himself known to those following other ways than mainstream Christianity.) I think my overriding sense is simply that God is greater, bigger and more than I've yet understood him - and than I will ever be able to understand.

So for now I'm happy to be agnostic about parts of my faith - agnostic merely means not knowing, and who but God can claim - or need - to know everything? And even 'heretic' comes originally from a Greek word merely meaning 'to choose' or 'to take'. Peter Rollins (author of 'The Orthodox Heretic') suggests that true orthodoxy is not so much about believing the right things, as believing in the right way - the way of love; the way of Christ.

Meanwhile it looks like all the best titles have been used so for now my own (imaginary) book will be called 'The Evangelical Liberal'. After all, 'libera' refers to freedom, and 'evangel' to the good news of Christ, and I can't find much fault with either of those.