Rather, it shows we can all play the victim on either side of any issue to seek moral high ground. Victimhood to Greeley is a twist on the old sin of pride. You are from the First World. You have exploited us for centuries. Therefore you are guilty of exploitation, indeed of exploiting me. Therefore I am morally superior to you and I have power in our relationship. You are a man. Men have oppressed women always. Therefore you [as an individual man] are an oppressor.
In fact you are oppressing me. Confess your guilt, not that it will do you any good. You are a white American. Your ancestors brought mine here as slaves. You are responsible for the sufferings of African Americans and for my suffering. Do not try to defend yourself. As a white person you are by definition a racist. You are German. Your ancestors killed my people. You must acknowledge your guilt for what they did and your moral inferiority to me. You claim that your ancestors died in a German concentration camp?
That will do you no good. The German nation was and is responsible for the Holocaust. Your people committed genocide against my people. You must confess your own personal responsibility for that sin and concede me my moral superiority. You are straight. Therefore I am morally superior to you. You are Jewish. Victims have found a way to be superior. The rest of us must concede them moral power—at least if they are fashionable victims.
Fashion, as we all know, changes every few years. Although it has become a uniquely American form of entitlement, it does not work in much of the rest of the world. I suspect it would only emerge where the gospel has at least been heard introducing empathy for the victim and can now be turned around to personal advantage. It probably only works where people are also rather rich and individualistic, jockeying for power in superficial ways. The cross became our company logo more than something that we gazed upon and were transformed by.
Jesus neither played the victim nor created victims. He became a saving and forgiving victim. Inherited and entitled victimhood will get us nowhere. It simply keeps us playing the old game of power in a new, very subtle and disturbing way. It is not the way of powerlessness that Jesus taught us from the cross. It is pretending to be powerless, but, in fact, for the sake of power and control over others.
It is the disguise and deterioration of the beautiful, and always scary, message of Jesus. Half of the message is often more problematic than total ignorance. Half of the message safely inoculates you from the whole. Total ignorance often leaves you wide open for conversion. The pattern in most of previous history, and even unfortunately afterwards, was somewhat different.
Most human pain has been transmitted to others, I think it is fair to say. It is normally easier to expel our anxiety, our shame, by projecting it onto somebody else. And it sort of works! We feel relieved by having an enemy or a problem out there. It gives us focus and identity. Rene Girard says that this scapegoating mechanism can be seen as the central story line of human history, a subject to which we will return. We never cared much about herstory, the story of those who built the pyramids, the stories from the side of the losers.
That, by the way, is what is so unique about much of the Bible. One of the few generalizations we can make in the field of universal spirituality is this: No one else is your problem. You are always the locus of conversion and transformation. It is always about you first of all. You can even use that as a good litmus test for authentic spirituality. Is it keeping you listening for God? Is it keeping your own feet to the fire? Then it is probably healthy teaching.
Is it leading you to suspicion, paranoia, accusation and blaming? Because the other one is not your problem, even though Evil would prefer to have you think so.
- The Frown of Fortune: A Luke Tremayne Adventure...A French Affair 1653?
- Panty Wives Vol.02: Elegante Damen in weißen Baumwoll Slips eBook (German Edition)!
- Hope Against Darkness: The Transforming Vision Of Saint Francis In An Age Of Anxiety.
- Now He Knows!
It keeps you from your own needed transformation and keeps the contentious spirit alive. Jesus did the victim thing right. He neither played the victim for his own self- aggrandizement nor did he make victims of other people. He became the liberating and forgiving victim. This pattern is quite rare, but whenever it happens, it exercises an immense healing and reconciling influence, even though it often increases the wrath and denial of some accusers. Normally, the prophets are killed because they bring the lie out into the open.
At that point our hatred is pointed. If you need to hate, you will destroy anyone who tells you your hatred is the problem. The message of the crucified Jesus is a statement about what to do with your pain now. Now it is only a message of gambling and bargaining with God, and attending religious services, often for people with low-level resentment who clearly do not want to be there ask any parish priest! Somehow Jesus becomes the great problem-solver and answer-giver for the next world and not primarily the one who teaches us how to live with peace and freedom in this world.
That is a big, big difference, an entirely different agenda. In the final book of the Bible, the Book of Revelation, we have this recurring image of the Lamb of God for example, He stands on the altar in the center of a cosmic liturgy. Christians are familiar with this symbol: the lamb who is simultaneously slaughtered and standing.
That paradox is the message of the gospel, the message of the cross: We are simultaneously—in one and the same moment—slaughtered and victorious. The Lamb image reveals the lie of ignorant killing that has characterized most of human history. And even more, it gives us a way out. Zealots and Pharisees To sum up, there seem to be two common avoidances of conversion or transformation, two typical diversionary tactics that we humans use to avoid holding the pain: fight or flight.
These folks want to change, fix, control and reform other people and other events. The zealot is always looking for the evil, the political sinner, the unjust one, the oppressor, the bad person over there. The zealot permits himself or herself righteously to attack them, to hate them, even to kill them. Zealots and contemporary liberals often have the right conclusion, but their tactics and motives are often filled with self, power, control and the same righteousness that they hate in conservatives.
Basically, they want to do something to avoid holding the pain until it transforms them. Because of this too common pattern, I have come to mistrust almost all righteous indignation and moral outrage. In my experience, it is hardly ever from God. It is not over there,. It is our problem, not theirs. The Risen Christ, not accidentally, still carries the wounds in his hands and side. As long as they are the problem and you can keep your focus on changing them, correcting them, expelling them as the contaminating element, then you can sit in a reasonably comfortable position.
It is the peace of avoidance, denial and projection. The peace of the Crucified comes from holding the tension; the dangerous peace comes from expelling it elsewhere or denying the pain. Yet, to the untrained it feels like peace. It has taken us a long time to realize that we cannot afford to hate because we become a mirror-but-disguised-image of the same. Once you let the other determine the energy and agenda, you can only react to it, and soon you are the same energy and the same agenda. Which leads us to the second diversionary tactic: the way of flight. They deny the pain altogether, they refuse to carry the shadow side of anything in themselves or in their chosen groups.
There will be no uncertainty, there will be no ambiguity. There will be no problems. It is a form of narcotic, and sometimes probably necessary to get through the day. One sits on a pedestal of purity and false innocence. Who would want to leave, if not for a major humiliation that possibly forces you into the pain?
Paul symbolically had to be thrown to the ground and have scales fall from his eyes to admit that he was a self-serving Pharisee. Denial is an understandable way of coping and surviving. It is often the only way that many people can deal with the complexity of their human situation. Sometimes when you conscientize to arouse political consciousness the poor or do social analysis for the happily naive middle class, you wonder if you are not just creating psychic problems for them.
Now they will only be angry and dissatisfied. That is the dangerous path of enlightenment. The question is now more daring yet. How can I know, work through the anger and still be a life-giving presence? Naivete is different from second naivete. The first is a kind of virtuous ignorance; the latter is a spirit of informed openness, often gained after disillusionment. In fact, between the two there is all the difference in the world. Or they avoid knowing the whole truth. It is much, much easier not to know. But Jesus took the harder path, to know and still forgive, and still understand.
That is the Third Way, beyond fight and beyond flight, and yet in a certain sense including both of them. Only God can hold such an act together within us. The small self is always too small. Only the True Self, which we will return to later in this book, can live the gospel. Maybe our greatest disservice has been that we have given the Law and the gospel to the fragile self that is incapable even of understanding it. Paul took most of his Letter to the Romans to struggle with this dilemma.
Law without gospel actually paralyzes and condemns to failure. We no longer know where our foundations are. We want to get rid of that anxiety as quickly as we can. Probably the higher the level of leader you are, the more anxiety you must be capable of holding. Leaders who cannot hold anxiety will never lead you to anyplace new. If you cannot calmly hold a certain degree of anxiety you will always be looking for somewhere to expel it. Formulating what you are against gives you a very quick, clear and clean sense of yourself.
Thus, most people fall for it. People more easily define themselves by what they are against, by who they hate, by who else is wrong, instead of by what they believe in and by whom they love. I hope you see from this common pattern how different the alternative is. You might catch anew the radical and scary nature of faith, because faith only builds on that totally positive place within, however small.
God needs just a mustard seed place that is in love, that is open to grace, that is thrilled, that has found something. Religious group-identity becomes its most common replacement. We can just go to church. Almost everybody takes the easier way, because in the short run it works better. The activist might look powerful and sometimes even have a passion for social justice. Political correctness does not approach the immense gift and power of the gospel, yet educated people often confuse them.
Education is not the same as transformation. This is not to dismiss or make light of real issues of injustice. Are we not to act until we are sure that our motivation is one hundred percent pure? Should we dismiss mere humanists? Of course not! God uses all of us with our mixed motives—me, too. It is just that we have been given, not just the conclusion, but the way to get there also. We have been shown how to fight hate without becoming hate ourselves. We have been given a Companion and a Friend and not just a good idea. We have been given joy in the midst of failure, and not just a way of winning or being right.
Gospel people are basically indestructible. Some time ago I was in Northern Ireland where I had a whole series of retreats and conferences. How deeply many of the Irish people now seem to understand this Third Way. The old is forever repeated. Each killing becomes a justification for another killing, and another slaughter.
But now my violence is okay because your violence was wrong. When both are blind, we both fall into the pit. The wonder of the resurrection stories in the Gospels is that Jesus has no punitive attitude toward the authorities or his cowardly followers, and that the followers themselves never call for any kind of holy war against those who killed their leader.
Something new has clearly transpired in history. This is not the common and expected story line. All Jesus does is breathe forgiveness. Forgiveness is not apparently something God does, it is who God is. God can do no other. There is no hope in most countries I visit. Without the mystery of forgiveness and healing, we are on a straight and now rather quick road toward mutual and justified destruction. We now can cite chapter and verse of how and when other people have oppressed us and done us wrong. We have better knowledge than ever before of why we have a right to our anger and wounds.
This type of progress will not create any kind of future. I am surely happy for the honest scholarship and the access, but it is actually a two- edged sword, like all things, cutting good and cutting bad. Only people of wisdom know how to take the helpful information so we can stop victimizing in the future and not be trapped inside the resentful information allowing us to justify new victimizations. Rene Girard says that in the twentieth century we have moved scapegoating to ever- higher levels of disguise and sophistication. Without inner transformation, this is almost inevitable.
Education of itself does not assure we will not scapegoat. Many Ph. We know that even personally we focus much better during a time of crisis. We like a clear enemy, and when the enemy is not clear, it is everywhere. Note the rise in home militias in America after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Yet, in the supposed peace of today, fear is everywhere.
uketerinucuz.tk - Event Details
The search for the appropriate enemy is rather non-stop and frantic. It seems the enemy is everywhere because the fear is unnamed and looking for a place to roost. Heads of state, once rather immune, are now the targets of choice. The litigious character of American society seems ridiculous to most of the rest of the world. Anthropologically, I am told that religion begins with a distinction: the dividing of the world into the pure and the impure. On that lie, the whole structure builds.
Not much of a founder for a self-respecting religion! The deepest hatreds are often toward those inside your own group. So now we have school violence and conspiracy theories of every sort. Look at the near hatred between. The anger that used to safely go toward Nazis and Communists now goes toward homosexuals and abortionists in our own hometowns.
We not only remain fear-filled and hateful when we keep projecting our anxiety elsewhere, we also misdiagnose the real evil, the real problem.
We normally substitute it with a smaller, closer problem that we can literally get our hands around. Someone recently asked me why there seemed to be so many control freaks in the Church. We find some little tiny world where we can be in control and right, where we can be pure and clean. I empty all my wastebaskets.
Faith, however, allows us to hold the tension until we can recognize the true evil—of which we are a part. To attack the person out there is usually to simply continue the problem, because he or she is a victim, too. The reason people do evil, why they hate, sin, make mistakes is because somewhere they have been hurt, rejected, excluded or wounded. They just keep passing it on. And the cycle repeats and spreads. Jesus, you could say, came to break and even stop the cycle.
Punitive behavior only continues the same old game and, I am afraid, most of the Church itself has yet to understand this. We still think it is about forcing conformity instead of seeking true interior transformation. We would rather punish and coerce a response. God is much more patient. Original Shame What we call Original Sin in Genesis perhaps could, in a sense, better be called Original Shame, because the way that Adam and Eve describe themselves is that they feel naked.
Next, in a lovely maternal image, God as seamstress sews leather garments for them The first thing God does after creation itself is cover the shame of his new creatures. This must name something that is fundamental within us. We live not just in an age of anxiety, but also in a time of primal shame.
I find very few people who do not feel inadequate, stupid, dirty, unworthy. Guilt, I am told, is about things we have done or not done, but our shame is about the primal emptiness of our very being. Not what we have done, but who we are and who we are not. Guilt is a moral question. Shame, foundational shame at least, is an ontological question. It is not resolved by changing behavior as much as by changing our very self-image, our alignment in the universe.
Shame is not about what we do, but where we abide. Your right behavior does not cumulatively lead to your true being; your true being leads to eventual right behavior. We almost all think that good morality will lead to mystical union, but, in fact, mystical union produces correct morality—along with a lot of joy left over. And the greatest surprise is that, sometimes, a bad moral response is the very collapsing of the ego that leads to our falling into the hands of the living God see Hebrews An Unlikely God Christians indeed have a strange image of God: a naked, bleeding man dying on a cross.
If you were going to create a religion, would any of you ever have thought up this image of God? It is not the way I would have preferred to have thought about the world. Is God eccentric here, or is it we who have not diagnosed the human situation correctly? What question is God trying to answer by giving us a crucified man for a God? What human problem is God trying to reveal and save us from on the cross?
Jesus receives our hatred and does not return it. He suffers and does not make the other suffer. He does not first look at changing others, but pays the price of change within himself. He absorbs the mystery of human sin rather than passing it on. He does. The risen Jesus is the victory fully personified.
He includes and forgives the sinner instead of hating him and thereby continuing the pattern of hate. He gives us a history and a future beyond the predictable violent. He stops the dance toward inevitable death. He destroys the death that is eating us all alive, that is eating up our hearts.
Death is this endless attempt to justify why I have a right to my hurt and why I have a right to my hatred. To destroy Me? In the Divine Economy nothing is wasted, not even sin, evil or death. In one sense or another, all ancient religions felt we had to spill our blood to get to God. God was distant, demanding and dangerous. What we have in the mystery of the crucified Jesus is the turning around of all primal religion. Instead of our spilling blood to get to God we have God spilling blood to get to us! Pray on that for a week. God is always the initiator.
God is always sewing garments to cover up our immense and intense sense of unworthiness. Our very movements toward God are only because God has first moved toward us. In a very true sense, Jesus undid religion forever. He did not found a religion, as much as he regrounded religion in the very sin and stuff of life. Message of the Cross I was teaching in the Philippines a few years ago when some of this began to come together for me.
I was seeing how many of the poor people there in the barrios still understood this cross as a message of self-punishment. Their interpretation of Christianity sometimes has a feeling of masochism to it, as if self-punishment somehow pleases God. Here is what I wrote in my journal while I was working on an outer island: The message of the cross wrongly appears to most people to be passivity, heroic suffering, the cult of martyrdom, doormat theology or refusing to fight, somehow giving up or giving in, but for God.
The cross is about how to fight and not become a casualty yourself. The cross is about being the victory instead of just winning the victory over somebody else. But very few get the message! I have to admit ashamedly that some people in the business and education world are better at this than some people in the Church. They are beginning to understand that life cannot simply continue to be posited in terms of winners and losers. There has to be a way that we both can advance together. Mothers tend to have a head start in understanding this as a result of negotiating and compromising with their own children—whom they want to love equally and fully.
The cross is a way of winning that tries to bring along your opponent with you. The cross is refusing to hate or to humiliate the other, because that would be only to continue the same pattern and reciprocate the violence. The cross is about authentic newness. It utterly reframes the human question and forces us to redefine what is success. What is it we really want? The cross is about flight, though, in the sense that we refuse the usual and predictable return punch. We flee from the predicted response so that something new and something transformative can perhaps happen.
We run from business as usual to reset the agenda, to reframe the question in a more positive way. It is also about fight, but with a whole new definition of what real power is and what real change is. Traditionally, women have tended to understand this easier than men.
Men themselves have been victims in history by being put into military and business worlds where everything was framed in terms of win or lose. It keeps them in the dualistic mindset much longer. The competitive paradigm became the only way that many men knew how to read reality.
They thought that to be a hero meant to win. What the cross was supposed to do for Christians was redefine the true hero and heroine forever. In the first two thousand years, only a small minority of clerics or laity ever got the point. Most of us continued in the old punitive system and, in fact, continued the same story line.
By that time, it was in our hard wiring. The cross is how to work for the answer without becoming part of the problem itself. Look to any number of wars to see why this is right. Even in the struggles of third- world revolutions you see again and again that people search for some kind of economic reform by way of fighting and the use of power. Invariably, when the revolutionaries get into the position of power, they do the same thing that had been done before.
Most revolutions begin on the left of the political spectrum and end on the right. This movement is inevitable if the self is not transformed. If the self is not transformed, then it was not really the journey into powerlessness, the mystery of the cross, that inspired. It was simply another form of dominative power. Jesus is, in some ways, the only true revolutionary. Most revolutions merely rearrange the furniture on the deck of the Titanic. Jesus built a new boat.
Hope against Darkness : Transforming Vision of St Francis / Age of Anxiety
Unless spirituality answers the questions of power and powerless-ness there is never any real reform. There is never any real advancement in human history, because the so- called reformers are done in by the struggle. The cross is finally about how to stand against hate without becoming hate yourself. How can you stand against hate without letting it frame the question? How do we oppose the evil, the hurts, the betrayals, the abandonment, the rejections, the disappointments in our lives, the people who let us down, the people who turn against us, the people who tell lies about us?
How do we stand against that in a way that we do not become a mirror image of the same thing? The human capacity to hate and kill is the sin of the world John , and it took a Lamb to dismantle what the lions of history could only perpetuate. It is a visual metaphor for the paradoxical nature of all things. The cross is saying that there is a cruciform pattern to reality. Reality, rather, is filled with contradictions. Jesus was killed on the collision of cross-purposes, conflicting interests and half-truths that all of life is. He lived fully on the horns of the human dilemma and made it work for us.
We are, indeed, saved by the cross—more than we realized. Experience of the cruciform pattern to reality always feels like two steps forward and three steps backward. None of us likes it, especially because the three steps backward always feel like dying. Yet Jesus shows us on the cross that this is the only and constant pattern, and we should not be shocked or surprised by it. The people who live the contradictions, in fact, are the saviors of the world. These are the people who are the agents of all true transformation, reconciliation and newness.
They will call you a moral relativist or something that sounds dangerous, which seems to be what they thought of Jesus. This labeling is a way to avoid the horns of the dilemma, to deny the clearly paradoxical nature of almost everything. As soon as you start to discern a clear pattern, the Bible makes an exception to it. They suffer no self-doubt. They are certain they have the whole truth. When you meet a holy person there is a very different aroma, a very different energy, a very different taste and smell.
All I know is that I desire to please you. Not much to brag about in being human! We would much sooner have certitudes, we would much sooner have order and control and know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are. Most would prefer dogma and perfectly objective morality to biblical faith any day. Certitude allows you to predict and control outcomes, and to justify rewards and punishments.
The trouble is that it is not the message that shouts from the cross. They tend to be a little afraid to talk about transcendence and God. They tend to be a little uncomfortable talking about the wisdom and the importance of the past and of tradition, to know that the truth has always been with us and God has always been with us.
Progressive and educated people often love right ideas more than reality in its wounded state. We could call that the vertical line of the cross: transcendence and tradition. They tend to be afraid of breadth and inclusiveness. They tend to be afraid of mercy and compassion, or any breaking of the rules, particularly rules for group coherence. They are always circling the wagons around this very fragile God that they have to protect.
Often their religion is more tribalism and group belonging than any real search for broad truth. Group belonging takes away a lot of primal shame and fear for most of us. The liberal types fight structures, authority and self-serving ideologies, not realizing that liberals are usually very individualistic and heady as a result. The liberal types also play the victim whenever it is politically correct to do so.
They have a very hard time creating anything that lasts because they are loyal to so little beyond their own experience and their own agenda. Authority is always suspect, and you cannot build positively when you start with suspicion. They also do not pass on their values very well to their children, probably because their values are more against-energy than for-energy.
Only people who have moved beyond ego and controlling of all outcomes, only those practiced at letting go, see fear for the impostor that it is. To be trapped inside of your own small ego is always to be afraid. Perfect love casts out all fear. Jun 15, Ron rated it it was amazing Shelves: non-fiction , spirituality , theology. Rohr again takes us down a path of looking at ourselves to see how we can apply the teachings of the Gospel in a world that has become fractured precisely because of the misapplication of Gospel teachings.
Feb 27, Leslie Hayes rated it it was amazing. This is one of my favorite books of all time. I refer to it often and go back almost every day to some of the prayers and meditations!! Richard Rohr is such an amazing spiritual mentor and a gift in my life! Aug 10, Tim rated it it was amazing. This is how I want to live. Dec 07, Abigail rated it liked it Shelves: spirituality. I've said all the things I'm going to say in other reviews of Rohr's work. He hops from topic to topic and circles back to his original idea and ties things together.
I don't mind in this case, but I expect it will bother some people. This book is like a wandering sermon by an enthusiastic preacher who interrupts himself. This book has a co-writer which seems to have helped with his organization. Rohr quotes poets and occasional references cultural bits like a musical that only some people will I've said all the things I'm going to say in other reviews of Rohr's work.
Rohr quotes poets and occasional references cultural bits like a musical that only some people will catch. I do wish he would cite properly but also it doesn't affect his message. The ideas in this book can be found in other places and other in other works by Rohr, except for his treatment of St. Sometimes I appreciate his insight; sometimes I think he generalizes a bit too much. I see Rohr trying to be gender inclusive which is interesting. I think this book is worth reading for those with an interest in church and some theological background.
It would be preferable to have read widely and studied religions and the concept of postmodernism. I also think this book could start some interesting conversations. Basically, if you aren't religious, and Christian specifically, this is not a book for you. Jan 27, Jason rated it liked it. There is no place to expel it to. If you were looking for a closely connected book on an application of the theology of St.
Francis such as it was , this is not a good book. If you're looking for a book with a few interesting ideas peppered in between material that isn't useful, it's not bad. Oct 24, Annie Witt rated it liked it. Richard Rohr has a kind of precocious teacher's pet way of writing. He's smart and he knows it. The fact that he is OK with the book describing him as a "modern day prophet" made me realise I'm dealing with a big ego.
He writes wordy shit and covers a lot of ground because he likes the sound of his own voice. Is he interesting? Yeah, in parts he certainly is, and has some good points to make. But I feel an editor less impressed with Rohr might be able to turn his scholarly, spiritual meanderings Richard Rohr has a kind of precocious teacher's pet way of writing. But I feel an editor less impressed with Rohr might be able to turn his scholarly, spiritual meanderings into something more solid and substantial. He covers too much ground and needs more concise musings. His heart is good, but his ego needs trimming.
Sep 13, Cyd rated it really liked it Shelves: catholicism , spirituality-religion. More densely-packed Franciscan wisdom from Father Rohr. Nov 27, Scott Whitlock rated it it was amazing. It is a rare book where I want to highlight every word. But this is one of those books. I believe that it is one of Rohr's best efforts, and it provides an argument against postmodern relativism that, I believe, contributes so much to our broken psyches. I revisit this book often, and it was an entrance way into Rohr's other, and harder, books.
It serves as a great introduction to his spiritual point of view - that the message of Christ, of the Gospel, and of the kingdom are not some antiquated It is a rare book where I want to highlight every word. It serves as a great introduction to his spiritual point of view - that the message of Christ, of the Gospel, and of the kingdom are not some antiquated and outdated relics from a bygone age of humanity, but are EXACTLY the thing that is needed most in this fragmented and increasingly disconnected and polarized world.
The deconstruction of existence to its scientific fundamentals, without veneers or overlays, is allowing us to view reality uncontaminated by superimposed "god" ideas. This is the true truth in an untainted "light" which has allowed material progress and democratization. Most people don't like it because it is tough to live without so-called vital illusions - or, let's say, delusions. It requires much mental strength to throw away the trainer wheels on the bicycle; but it means there is no more inner conflict; no more doubt.
Resurrecting old god-thinking is an impossible feat. It is too late for that - as it's now clear to me anyway that all deities ever invented by humans never existed. Yes, the Christian god might be an attractive notion compared to others - but nonetheless non-existent - like the rest. Which is the old Catholic way of convincing people - don't worry about the mess - there's a better reality in another "realm".
But that realm for me is in the mind and in mental self-enrichment. Not a belief in extinct deities. Rohr is clearly uncomfortable in his own skin as he basically knows there is no God. Perhaps if he admitted it - he'd be happier in his humanitarian works. That's the unintended irony at the nub of most of these self-help books.
Without the God-angle there is no further conflict. Everything is self-consistent and explainable. The nature of reality is far more amazing than fictitious deities. Rohr desperately jumps around all over the place trying to grab bits and pieces of Christian or "God-values" like panaceas.
It's a bit like putting sticking plasters on a broken leg. What i think he is trying to propose by the term "reconstruction" is not personal; but reconstruction of any type of belief in anything.
There is indeed a spiritual void. But trying to give the old gods a make-over is not the way forward.
There are some obvious fallacious statements in the book eg: P. This is bad semantics. What i think he means is "the impact of people who claim a supernatural deity has interfered with the history of the cosmos, solar system, planet earth, homo sapiens etc Clearly there is no proven evidence of any such "movement" by any god or non-human intelligent entity at any point in history. So it's no good trying to squeeze human experience into artificial "god-type" straightjackets. This type of linguistics and vocabulary has little or no meaning in real terms. Also the book seems like one long digression.
The only practical chapter in the book is Chapter 7 where he describes something real i. It shows that there is a group of people who still don't "get it" and are being led into even worse intellectual tangles by such people as Rohr. I hope you don't think that's a harsh judgement. No doubt he thinks he has the best of intentions. He is out of synch with the real polemics of the 21st century. Many of his issues still have one foot back in the medieval times. If St.