tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post448511212276668664..comments2023-10-13T23:47:55.717+01:00Comments on A Quaker Stew: 'C' is for Celestial InhabitationStuart Mastershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-30890335393642775812016-04-25T10:19:12.433+01:002016-04-25T10:19:12.433+01:00Hi Gerard,
I share your caution about the concept...Hi Gerard,<br /><br />I share your caution about the concept of celestial inhabitation. Although it is very interesting, I do think that Richard Bailey's work uses an overly literalistic interpretation.<br /><br />God is Spirit and humans are creatures. The Spirit can indwell the created and transform it but that does not make the created divine. I think the Eastern Orthodox distinction between Divine essence and Divine energies is helpful. We can partake in divine energies but not in the Divine essence.<br /><br />Of course in 17th century England, to subscribe (as I believe early Friend did) to the Pauline proclamation that 'it is no longer I who lives but it is Christ who lives in me' was regarded as blasphemous.<br /><br />Shalom, Stuart.Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-79756742304118476632016-04-24T22:43:10.592+01:002016-04-24T22:43:10.592+01:00Thank you Stuart.
I think 'celestial inhabit...Thank you Stuart. <br /><br />I think 'celestial inhabitation' is a difficult term and can easily be misunderstood. I am not saying you have, but if taken literally, as Patricia Crawford warned ("Women and Religion in England", p. 178), it can lead to all sorts of problems which I think manifest themselves to some extent in Richard Bailey's work.<br /><br />Can I take this opportunity therefore to refer you and others to pp. 266-7 of my "The Early Quakers and the Kingdom of God" where I address this particular and very interesting early Quaker experience, indeed even to my footnote 46 on p. 267. I think it is much better, frankly, to address their Christ/Logos mysticism, as I call it, rather than any possible 'celestial inhabitation'.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08959881534542495592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-81928348007071946372014-04-06T08:32:07.080+01:002014-04-06T08:32:07.080+01:00Yes, very helpful forrest, thank you!Yes, very helpful forrest, thank you!Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-59656174128531063792014-04-06T01:56:43.448+01:002014-04-06T01:56:43.448+01:00I see this passage as pointing towards what you...I see this passage as pointing towards what you're finding in later books: [John16.7]: "It is to your advantage that I am going away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you." As I read this, it is not about Jesus going off to some nonphysical location where the Spirit might be found and sent to Earth... What it suggests: 'As long as I am with you, you keep looking out at this man here and seeking God that way. When I am no longer physically present, this will force you to look inward; then you find Me where you need to recognize Me.'forresthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13861950371962268402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-63929140870508882982014-03-02T14:49:21.919+00:002014-03-02T14:49:21.919+00:00Harvey - you might also have a look at Walter Wink...Harvey - you might also have a look at Walter Wink's references to 'sarx' in his book 'Engaging the Powers'.Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-45604551160976500092014-03-02T14:48:01.325+00:002014-03-02T14:48:01.325+00:00I agree that the terms flesh and creatureliness ar...I agree that the terms flesh and creatureliness are often misunderstood and interpretation ambiguous. The Michele Tartar reference above might help a bit. The issue is very much rooted in the Augustinian and Luther/Reformation reading of the distinction between spirit and flesh in the Pauline epistles. You might like to have a look at what Tim Peat Ashworth has to say about this in his book 'Paul's Necessary Sin'.Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-80902341608463555312014-03-02T09:15:46.605+00:002014-03-02T09:15:46.605+00:00I have just read your comment on my response re sa...I have just read your comment on my response re sarx etc. (I have been away in Spain hence the tardiness of this reply). Thanks so much for the Nayler quote from the Lamb's War, very helpful and uplifting. Is there anything you could recommend which would elaborate for me the use of the word creatureliness in early Quaker discourse? It is one of those words, like perfection, which can be very ambiguous and at times quite unhelpful in contemporary discussions of Quaker spirituality.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15338198181654191167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-13773739413945956892014-01-27T14:39:24.566+00:002014-01-27T14:39:24.566+00:00PS - I think that a positive evaluation of God'...PS - I think that a positive evaluation of God's good creation can be seen very clearly in James Nayler's tract 'The Lamb's War Against the Man of Sin' of 1658:<br /><br />“The Lamb's quarrel is not against the creation, for then should his weapons be carnal, as the weapons of the worldly spirits are: "For we war not with flesh and blood," nor against the creation of God; that we love; but we fight against the spiritual powers of wickedness, which wars against God in the creation, and captivates the creation into the lust which wars against the soul, and that the creature may be delivered into its liberty prepared for the sons of God. And this is not against love, nor everlasting peace, but that without which can be no true love nor lasting peace”Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-28000232813907709362014-01-27T14:16:05.692+00:002014-01-27T14:16:05.692+00:00Hi Harvey, my sense is that 'the world' as...Hi Harvey, my sense is that 'the world' as Fox and early Friends used this term, is not the physical creation but rather fallen and deluded human ideas, ideologies, systems and structures (produced by a turn away from God and towards 'the serpent'). When the divine Spirit indwells the physical creature, the creature's relationship to God and to the creation is transformed (and deluded and fallen human 'notions are driven out). I very much like you final sentence and I think it is consistent with my reading of early Friends. However, I would want to define 'sarx' as alienated and deluded creatureliness rather than creatureliness per se. Stuart.Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-83746557921108227122014-01-27T11:31:51.003+00:002014-01-27T11:31:51.003+00:00Very stimulating, but I have a question about dual...Very stimulating, but I have a question about dualism in Fox himself. I was told that in the phrase walking cheerfully over the world the word 'over' actually referred to the action of treading down (the context was how to translate this into German - durch meaning through [the world] and uber suggesting pressing down). So that Fox was talking of suppressing creatureliness, fallenness, that which must be eliminated I suppose for the 'celestial habitation' to take place. Now Paul of Tarsus talks of body (soma), flesh (sarx) and pneuma (spirit) - the body is a given - how else can incarnation take place? - but sarx leads to spiritual death. Thus there is not so much a dualism as a trialogue. Is this reflected in the development of Quaker thinking? An obsession with sarx (creatureliness?) is transcended by the inspiration of pneuma (the work of the Spirit) and might lead to a greater respect for soma (the glory of creation)?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15338198181654191167noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-69548886639586931852014-01-23T20:28:39.524+00:002014-01-23T20:28:39.524+00:00Thank you Noel! In forging a new nondualistic, Jes...Thank you Noel! In forging a new nondualistic, Jesus-centred, shalom focused Christian spirituality we do have an mmensely rich and fruitful heritage to draw upon despite the persistent presence of the dualistic error!Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-4848974269092537612014-01-23T17:00:53.143+00:002014-01-23T17:00:53.143+00:00Thank you Stuart, I think this is avery important ...Thank you Stuart, I think this is avery important entry in your blog and hope that it finds a wide readership. You are putting your finger on a deep and fundamental issue within Christian spiritual understanding. The early Friends really grasped something in this understanding of 'celestial habitation' and it is tragic that it was lost so very early on due to the pressures of conformity. This wholistic understanding of the relationship between the spiritual and physical, so central to the Jesus perspective, almost entirely lost due to the influence of Gnosticism and Neo-Platonism, were once again beginning to be recovered by early friends only to be snatched away once more. It is a huge challenge for us not to let it happen again but to establish it a a central understanding of Christian spiritual reality. I felt that each of your Contemporary Significance and Implications really hit the mark; each needing careful engagement and debate to open them up. Your find comment about there being much to learn from ancient and contemporary animism was nothing short of music to my soul!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00913773257014611421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-10952647609289217442014-01-21T20:20:39.697+00:002014-01-21T20:20:39.697+00:00Thank Mark! I agree about the Orthodox church. I a...Thank Mark! I agree about the Orthodox church. I am about to do some serious engagement with Orthodox theology and spirituality in preparation for a course at Woodbrooke in October. It is maybe not too surprising that some Friends seeking a deeper engagement with a mystical Christian spirituality have moved to the orthodox church.Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-59229208370666863582014-01-21T19:07:34.570+00:002014-01-21T19:07:34.570+00:00Thanks for this Stuart! I do think that dualism is...Thanks for this Stuart! I do think that dualism is very present in our local meetings. Silent meeting for worship is often given precedence over all other community activities. I would like to see Quakers eating together every week as a matter of course. Plus there's certainly a lot we can learn from the Orthodox church. That icon of the world full of burning bushes!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-59308562289328108302014-01-21T15:22:15.892+00:002014-01-21T15:22:15.892+00:00Thanks Craig! Yes, rationalism and Deism played th...Thanks Craig! Yes, rationalism and Deism played their part but the desire for respectability and religious toleration was probably decisive in the 17th century. I am still discerning what 'D' should be. The Diggers are on the list!Stuart Mastershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538248367297444238noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1627470150628990050.post-69794654402486906342014-01-21T15:10:46.744+00:002014-01-21T15:10:46.744+00:00Thanks for this very thought-provoking post Stuart...Thanks for this very thought-provoking post Stuart. I wasn't familiar with the term 'celestial inhabitation', although the experience of 'Christ who lives in me' has always seemed to me central to a Quaker understanding of Christianity, so it is helpful to see the theology teased out here.The process you describe of downgrading the role of the Spirit to one of rational guidance, rather than radical transformation, is important. It was perhaps given greater momentum by the Enlightenment, and fed into modern secular rationalism too?<br />I'm really enjoying this alphabetical series and looking forward to 'D' for... Diggers? Deism?<br />In Friendship,<br />CraigCraig Barnetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16201061939693242954noreply@blogger.com