12 Wednesday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

To think of another person, genuinely at least, as more important and majestic in meaning as and than yourself. That’s daily practice. We are wonders because of who He is.

Mysticism revised

12 Wednesday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

So this little meditation is for two audiences: those who would like to consider what is true about a religion based on its mystical traditions; and those Christians who may have dismissed the mystical streams in their own faith, because of extremes of exaggerated versions. I would like to define a mystic as someone who seeks or claims to encounter the ultimate truth of their religion or faith, and to directly encounter it. Not all mysticisms are the same. I focus in this dialogue with Dallas Willard’s thoughts, mostly on the theistic forms of mysticism, because these are the ones I’ve studied most. I am convinced that mysticism is one way to look carefully at what a religion is really grounded in and saying. How it is lived out. For this reason the study of mysticism is a window into what is essential faith. What is your ultimate, and how does that cause you to live in real life? Anyways, i begin with some long but helpful quotes about mysticism from the late Dallas Willard. Helpful thoughts, i think.

I hope this article helps those who are open to at least the mystical streams in the world religions, and helps them as well as Christians to consider Christian mysticism as a valid option for true spirituality in our times.

In non-theistic mysticisms, the Ultimate is impersonal–either viewed as a Life Force, or Principle or Energy itself of life. The Vedic ways are many to make contact with the ultimate, to become one with Oneness itself. But here I want to focus on what distinguishes Christ centered mysticism from other forms.

Is there a distinction to Christian mysticism? Are all mysticisms the same? Is his and my basic question in this article.

Some people don’t like the sound of mysticism, too esoteric or impractical, but if you look at it as those who are seeking the true essence or Source of your religion, and wanting to express and live in and from it, it gets more interesting for study. To see it as the actual spirituality (the lived out-ness of your beliefs about The Nature of Reality!) of your religion.

We want to look at people’s actual lived spirituality to access the essential nature of a particular religion. Those who have claimed to actually live out that religion, are the easiest to read the faith through. So with Christianity, you might want to look at someone like Martin Luther King, or Mother Teresa, Albert Swietzer, Bonhoeffer, or others who you think lived the spirituality of that tradition. Those who appeared to have contact with its Source. Like St John, or St Paul who had overt recorded encounters with Jesus.

For Christians, the ground of all Being, The Absolute, is Jesus Christ Himself. So we don’t just merge we enter intimate relations with Him. The hebrew word for knowing refers to sexual intimacy. So that it is that level of knowing–person to Person depth of being exchange. That sets it apart even in its mystical streams of expression. The Absolute is not a nebulous “sacred”, or energy force, but a living personal loving God, who makes Himself encounter able! And has revealed Himself and His Ways into human history.That’s unique. The God with us part who reveals Himself in history. It still matters what or Whom your Ultimate is.

Ours is a relational mysticism, less about dissolving into Other, and more about a loving relationship, or ongoing dialogue or conversation, with the Ultimate Other who has made Himself known in history—Jesus, the Christ. Unlike the Vedic or non-theistic religions, we do not just overcome the illusion we are separate from Reality, we relate directly to it in order to even find our who we are. We enter self revealing direct relationship with Christ Himself. That’s unique to Christ-ianity, which is always centered in the sustainer of all things—the sacrificial Son of God, the Christ, the Anointed by God one. This gets uniquely expressed through the lives of the mystics within true church history.

This is a useful and helpful way to read christian history. Read history through its mystics-those who have claimed, like St Paul-to have an encounter with Jesus Himself. And some who have even claimed to have daily friendship with Him directly. Those who claimed to have encountered the essence of their faith—in this case, those who have met and are friends with Jesus. The Real Jesus who sustains all of Reality! And the Author and Sustainer of our faith!

Distinctions help especially when studying mysticism. I will define a mystic as someone who claims to have encountered ultimate reality directly. So it matters what each religion’s ultimate or upper storey is. And the fruit of having that as your Ultimate! A tree is known by its fruit.

In college, I studied comparative religious art specifically looking at mystical traditions within various religions. Still fascinates me as it’s easier to read the direct symbols which stream through the mystical traditions of the worlds religions. Fun place to start if you want to see the essence of a religion. And not just reject the entire pursuit of spirituality.

Rather than throwing out all claims at mysticism, I wanted to consider what they express about each religion’s ultimate or highest absolute. It was a helpful way to study religions of the world. I mainly focused on the Theistic ones, as having a Personal God as your ultimate has been my lived experience. Having a friendship with God, interest me more than dissolving into an abstract Being-ness or nothingness. I want to know a Someone, not nothingness. So I started with the religions who claimed to have a Personal God, one which we could relate to somehow down here.

There are many ways to study religious traditions, the mysticism of each faith is a helpful way in.

I think it’s a good topic again in our day of watered down easy to digest religious supermarkets.

I’m convinced that Christianity offers the most true form of mysticism available. Yet it is often misunderstood even within Christianity. Yet as people search for a more authentic spirituality, I think it’s useful to consider what makes Christian mysticism unique or distinct from other religions.

All the theistic religions have a personal most High God as ultimate. And they have a relational rather than merging into model for mystical Union.

In Christianity the marriage metaphors is most often used for ultimate Union. Groom and bride metaphors are throughout the Jewish prophets and again in the New Testament where it is specifically applied to Jesus as Groom and His church or people as the bride. This central metaphor speaks of a knowing intimacy. To know in Hebrew refers among other things to sexual or most intimate knowing.

So we are meant to come into marital intimacy with Christ. That’s a basis for true Christian intimacy. We take on and receive His Name–Christ. We do so as in getting married to Christ. That’s a core foundation in true Christianity. It is a marital level of union with one another. And in doing so, we get caught up in Our Groom’s intimacy with His Father, which space is our home. It’s a very family relations religion! But the way we come into the family is to marry Jesus. That’s what true mystical practice is about–that marriage or type of union between two. This is what Jesus was talking about in John 17–you in Me, and Me in Father. That space is the aim of Christ centered mysticism.

This is one reason why marriage is such a “high symbol” in Christianity-it speaks of the nature of our relationship with Christ!! It’s meant to have the level of contact and encounter as marital intimacy. A marital intimacy not with a nebulous other, but with The Person of Jesus Christ. It’s not a random marriage with being itself, or energy, it is a relationship with a Someone.

That’s a core image of Christian mysticism. Union is relational and it is ultimately with Jesus Christ who Christians believe to be the “ground of all Being”, or the Absolute or Ultimate—the name or Identity above all other Names and Identities so to speak. And we are offered a relational mystic union with Him. That’s the core offer of Jesus coming to earth, and into “our hearts”.

Postlude:

I’ve been looking at how mystical experiences informed the spirituality of some of the church fathers as well. St John being the most obvious, but I’m considering Paul a mystic also.
Been studying St Paul as a mystic lately. Paul as a master of word and Spirit…
St Paul as a mystic. Someone who was given “revealed theology” from God directly! Consider it. His entire conversion was a mystical experience, then he is directed directly by God’s intervention on his missions.

We think of St Paul, as the great theologian, but he clearly also had direct encounters with even Jesus, which is why he claimed to be an apostle! But his spirituality was replete with mystical encounters with God. Visions, dreams and spiritual training from above etc. Good to remember that some of the early apostles actually were mystics, though in a uniquely Christ centered way.
I’ve been thinking lots about Paul’s spirituality, since he is considered to be the first to really lay out a Christian theology. It’s important to consider that he had direct encounters with God, but also very clear revealed thinking— he directly encountered, even the risen Christ, if we are to believe scriptures!
When you think of it, Paul’s entire spirituality was really begun by a mystical encounter with the Risen Jesus. The rest is history. Don’t discard your mystics.
He also got his fresh gospel for the gentiles (“this gospel”)—a “mystery” revealed to him, concealed in God beforehand, as Paul puts it in his letter to the thessolonians.

In fact, his entire journey was informed by mysteries previously concealed by God but which were revealed to him. One basic one being that non-Jews are included in the Kingdom! A very useful revelation for us!
Paul considered and called himself a steward of the mysteries of God!
It is still remarkable to me how many “founders of our faith” had extremely mystical spiritualities. St John is overt, but many don’t think of Paul as someone who was directly informed by his encounters with God. Yet, he was, as we are meant to be.
For Christians, again, the ground of all Being, The Absolute, is Jesus Christ Himself. That sets it apart even in its mystical streams of expression. The Absolute is not a nebulous “sacred” but a living personal loving God, who makes Himself encounterable! It still matters what or Whom your Ultimate is. Our spiritual parents had a specific Personal Ultimate, and had a marital union of friendship with Him!

So, of course not all mysticism are the same or equal. Depends on what or Whom your ultimate is! Mysticism is typically defined as some form of union with The Absolute or Ultimate. In Christianity, this would be with Jesus, the Author and sustainer of Reality. The Logos or Way of God incarnate.

There are basically theistic forms of mysticism which see the ultimate as Person, and others, usually Vedic faiths, which see the “ground of all Being” as impersonal. That’s one major dividing line, as depending on which you believe, you live differently. It matters what we union with or center in, and what is the nature of that union. Is it loving relationship or a merging with consciousness, or nothingness etc…”Choose your ultimate wisely, it will determine your course!” as one of my mentors put it.

Jesus claims to be the Ultimate come down into human history and making God available to us through intimacy with Him and His spirituality. Union with His Spirit in His relationship with His Father. That alone makes christianity peculiar, as my grandmother used to say. You have ultimate ground of all being incarnating into His own creation and offering a gateway into The Most High God Father. Christlikeness would be union with His Nature over time. That’s the daily practice of the Christ-ian mystic!

Tender Mercy!

12 Wednesday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Mercy is one of those words so often used, it’s hard to encounter its inner meaning again! The Jews added tender in front of Mercy to describe the heart of The Father God.

Tender mercies. We have no idea of how intensely The Father loves us. Mercy is not pity—it is accepting you in full few of your naked brokeness. That’s the Father’s Heart. He loves us despite ourselves, and in full view of ourselves. If we could receive that, we would be more than saved or approved, validated etc, we would be adored and known, and could act out into our lives accordingly. That Father’s Love is the atomic bomb of transformation of our personal lives.

The Jews use this term of tender Mercy, about their God. It’s beyond Grace. In fact His Grace comes from His Mercy. It is the Father pouring Himself out passionately towards each one of us. It’s not pity. It’s deep felt compassion, or passionate specific care about us.

When we say Mercy, we mean something like pity, or at best empathy. But what God is talking about is tender mercy. He’s describing His Own heart in these terms! He has Mercy, but a particular type which is tremendously compassionate towards us!

The deepest passionate compassion for you. The inner heart of Father God. Tender Mercy. Once that is downloaded, everything in your life changes. You are not just barely accepted. You are adored, seen and known, named, given, and can then go serve and help others! He so adores us that He would send what is closest to Him to make us know it in our bones and being! That’s tender mercy.

It’s not just simple feeling sorry for you, its heartfelt caring towards each of us. That is what is meant by the term in the Torah and later in the New Covenant. To pour out your being for another in passionate care. To go beyond just maybe caring when it works for you, to move into Father’s Love for each creature. To get tender on it. And then to be able to tenderize, melt the hearts of others into His Love. That’s the calling of a Father Heart based spirituality—to move in His Tender Mercies towards others and His creation.

To care beyond yourself for someone is empathy. God has that empathy, but beyond that, He has true caring for each of us. That was the gospel story as well—for God Loved the world in such a way, that He sacrificed everything that they might know His Tender Mercies for them! Once we know that part of God, loving others become easy, a synch. For His Love is so grand, that we can’t help but overflow it!

To think of another person, genuinely as as important and majestic and meaningful as yourself. And to be genuinely tender or Kind about it. To give them beyond the benefit of the doubt, to really believe they are who He says they are, that’s the task.

His Kindness excels anything we have experienced. His Kindness combines with His mercy having fully seen us naked as we are, into Tender Mercy. That’s how the Jews name Him, and it’s true of Father God. He has tender mercy towards us each.

Its not just Mercy, its in kindness towards us. Let us receive that tonight, and be moved in it and by it.

What makes Christian mysticism distinct?

11 Tuesday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Dallas WIllard on christian mysticism: with my notes in between and at the end: doing some midrash here with this keen thinkers thoughts on mysticism. Fun dialogue!

Is there a distinction to Christian mysticism? Are all mysticisms the same? Is his and my basic question in this article.

Some people don’t like the sound of mysticism, too esoteric or impractical, but if you look at it as those who are seeking the true essence or Source of your religion, and wanting to express and live it, it gets more interesting for study. To see it as the actual spirituality (the lived out-ness of it!) of your religion.

Mysticism becomes practical as a way of reading what is at the center of your faith or belief system. It’s a good way to look at and read, the fruit of your core beliefs. The Mystics in your tradition are one way, and perhaps the most overt ways, to do this.

Here’s some things which Willard points out on the topic:

“Certainly ‘nominal’ Christianity, or Christianity merely as a social form, does not involve union with God on the relational model. That is always a sore spot within the social/historical reality of the Christian movement. From the earliest centuries, however, Christians who have thrown themselves into the actual following of Jesus Christ have lived from their experiences of union with God. They have always insisted that correct belief and outward conformity is not what the life in Christ is about. A long line of famous and not so famous Christ-followers have kept the “mystical” substance of their living “union with the Absolute” alive down to the present time. And they have usually been in trouble—often very serious trouble—with the nominally “Christian” people, leaders and institutions in the midst of which they lived. “Spirituality” was used as a term of derision to apply to Madame de la Mothe Guyon and her associates, in the 17th Century, because of her insistence upon living a life of intimate, experiential relationship with God. The “Rhineland Mystics,” and most notably Master Eckhart among them, had earlier suffered similar reproach and persecution from “official” Christianity. Both his critics and his admirers have assigned Pantheism to him because they have not read him carefully and did not understand the theological language in which he spoke of the mystical relationship of the Christian to God. (See Jeanne Ancelet-Hustache, Master Eckhart and the Rhineland Mystic for excellent information and interpretation of these particular Christian mystics.)

Union with the Absolute also can be understood in a distinctively Christian manner, and one with substantial overlap on the other theistic religions. The key differences from the illusionist interpretation are two: The “Absolute” for the theist is understood to be a Person. And union with the Absolute, thus understood, consists, not in identity with Him, but in personal relationships of knowing, feeling and willing, on some substantial analogy with what is to be found among human beings in their better conditions. It involves conscious attitudes and actions between God and the human being, and then harmonious actions together with the divine and the human. Each side contributes to the relationship—though obviously not in the same proportion. Such a union is aptly described as “God with us.” It is less a status than it is a modulated flow of life in which transformative experiences of God come and go, along with a constant undertone of divine presence interwoven with the events of a normal human existence. In the records of Christian life, this relationship is often thought of as a journey toward God that is, at the same time, a journey in God. A readily available source for studying such lives anecdotally would be William James’ Varieties of Religious Experience. But reports and testimonies of out of those lives are widely available.

Of course the source for understanding such a “with God” life is the Bible. For example, the Twenty-Third Psalm is a straightforward description of the human experience of union with God—once you understand that the writer is not engaging in lofty whistling-in-the-dark, but relating his actual experience and condition of life “with God.” The entire Bible conveys a picture of a life of personal union of God with his people, and the New Testament interpretation of how Christ lives in his people becomes a central part of the Christian understanding of life, especially for such passages as the Gospel of John chapters 14-17, Colossians chapters 1-3, and Galatians 2:20-21, to mention only a few passages. James Stewart’s A Man In Christ, or the Introductory Materials and Notes to The Renovaré Spiritual Formation Bible can guide anyone further in studying along these lines. Albert Schweitzer’s The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle is also a very useful source.”

That psalm illustrates that it is us constantly confessing and praising God and trusting Him to be our shepherd, actively and daily. That is the human situation. The practice of dependence! It shows or models for us as humans how to live with God—in complete tranparency about our own mess, and entire adoration of who He is. It’s one of our clearest model poems.

Theistic religions basically believe that there is a personality to the Ultimate Reality , which we are meant to be in relationship with.

Back to Willard’s thoughts:

“One of the standard things that misleads people in approaching Christian mystics is how they frequently mention the loss of consciousness of themselves in their most ecstatic experience of God. Loss of self awareness is in fact a common human phenomenon, and not one that occurs only in religious or mystical experiences. But this loss never implies, to Christian mystics, that they cease to exist as individuals or that they are absorbed into the Absolute. Theirs is a different metaphysics, which is one of persons in relationship, not of an illusory separate being dissolving into the “All.”

The specific “color” of Christian mysticism is devotion to Jesus Christ. There is a lot of room for spelling out exactly what that means, and a lot of ways of putting it into practice. Pretty clearly this was the “mysticism” of Florence Nightingale, as is shown from her explicit language, the people she consulted with, and the context of religious life in her times. Her departure from various details of the nominal or real Christianity she encountered around her is better explained by her devotion to Christ than by any reversion to plain-wrap mysticism or to non-orthodox beliefs. The overriding question faced by most professionals today, including nurses, has to do with what they are really devoted to, and what are their life sustaining resources, in pursuing their profession. An honest, thorough inquiry into the possibilities here is what is called for. Are there any preferable alternatives to an all-out, experiential devotion to Christ? Then let us find them and live them. If not, let us live in union with the Absolute who is Jesus Christ.”

My closing notes:

Been looking at how mystical experiences informed the spirituality of some of the church fathers as well. St John being the most obvious, but I’m considering Paul a mystic also.

Been studying St Paul as a mystic lately. Paul as a master of word and Spirit…

St Paul as a mystic. Someone who was given “revealed theology” from God directly! Consider it. His entire conversion was a mystical experience, then he is directed directly by God’s intervention on his missions. We think of him as the great theologian, but he clearly also had direct encounters with even Jesus, which is why he claimed to be an apostle! But his spirituality was replete with mystical encounters with God. Visions, dreams and spiritual training from above etc. Good to remember that some of the early apostles actually were mystics, though in a uniquely Christ centered way.

I’ve been thinking lots about Paul’s spirituality, since he is considered to be the first to really lay out a Christian theology. It’s important to consider that he had direct encounters with God—even the risen Christ, if we are to believe scriptures!

When you think of it, Paul’s entire spirituality was really begun by a mystical encounter with the Risen Jesus. The rest is history. Don’t discard your mystics.

He also got his fresh gospel for the gentiles—a mystery revealed to him, concealed in God beforehand, as Paul puts it in Thessolnians.. His entire journey was informed by mysteries previously concealed by God but which were revealed to him. One basic one being that non-Jews are included in the Kingdom!

A useful revelation! Paul considered himself a steward of the mysteries of God!

It is still remarkable to me how many “founders of our faith” had extremely mystical spiritualities. St John is overt, but many don’t think of Paul as someone who was directly informed by his encounters with God. Yet, he was, as we are meant to be.

For Christians, the ground of all Being, The Absolute, is Jesus Christ Himself. That sets it apart even in its mystical streams of expression. The Absolute is not a nebulous “sacred” but a living personal loving God, who makes Himself encounterable! It still matters what or Whom your Ultimate is.

Ours is a relational mysticism, less about dissolving into Other, and more about a loving relationship with the Ultimate Other who has made Himself known in history—Jesus, the Christ. That’s unique to Christ-ianity, which is always centered in the sustainer of all things—the sacrificial Son of God, the Christ, the Anointed by God one. This gets uniquely expressed through the lives of the mystics within true church history. This is a useful and helpful way to read christian history. Read history through its mystics. Those who claimed to have encountered the essence of their faith—in this case, those who have met and are friends with Jesus. The Real Jesus who sustains all of Reality! And the Author and Sustainer of our faith!

Rather than throwing out all claims at mysticism, I want to consider what they express about each religion’s ultimate or highest absolute.

There are many ways to study religious traditions, the mysticism of each faith is a helpful way in.

I think it’s a good topic again in our day of watered down easy to digest religious supermarkets.

All the theistic religions have a personal most High God as ultimate. And they have a relational rather than merging into model for mystical Union.

Of course not all mysticism are the same or equal. Depends on what or Whom your ultimate is! Mysticism is typically defined as some form of union with The Absolute or Ultimate. In Christianity, this would be with Jesus, the Author and sustainer of Reality. The Logos or Way of God incarnate.

It matters what we union with or center ourselves in, and what is the nature of that union. Is it loving relationship with a Personal God, or a merging with consciousness, or nothingness etc…”Choose your ultimate wisely, it will determine your course!” as one of my mentors put it.

Jesus claims to be the Ultimate come down into human history and making God available to us through intimacy with Him and His spirituality-His living ongoing relationship with His Father. Union with His Spirit in His relationship with His Father. That alone makes christianity peculiar, as my grandmother used to say. You have ultimate ground of all being incarnating into His own creation and offering a gateway into The Most High God Father. Christlikeness would be union with His Nature over time. That is the actual daily practice of Christian mysticism–confession, thanks into praise and into relational transformational union with the Life of Jesus. That’s basic Christianity, and turns out to involve direct encounter with Him.

Christian mysticism

10 Monday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Studying mysticism and what sets true christianity apart again today. I love studying this stuff! I love studying all religions, but specifically their streams of people who claim to have embodied its essence-their mystics, which i will define as those who claim to have a direct experiential knowing of the essence of their faith tradition. Those who claim to have embodied the essence of their religion.

Some people don’t like the sound of mysticism, too esoteric or impractical, but if you look at it as those who are seeking the true essence or Source of your religion, and wanting to express and live it, it gets more interesting for study. To see it as the actual spirituality (the lived out-ness of it!) of your religion.

Broadly with mystics, you have theistic and non-theistic ones, depending how they map Reality or the Cosmos–the structure of the Universe. Those who believe that ultimate Reality is a Personal God, and those who see it more as an Energy or abstract Force. Depending on which you pick as your lens, your mysticism has a different aim! One is to merge or become other; while the theistic world view is more to come into intimate relationship with The Ultimate as a Person. One is about eclipse, the other transformational dialogue, in simple terms.

That’s a broad distinction, but takes you at least into the basic Vedic style Cosmogony verses the monotheistic religions (Islam, Christianity and Judaism). Fascinating, plus mystics make the best art in each tradition. So what sets Christian mysticism apart? Today’s quest-ion.

Reading the great thinker Dallas Willard on the subject today! One of the few contemporary christian thinkers who have really addressed mysticism as an important subject, and potential renovator of the Church. I’ll paste the article once I get permission. He’s dead, so it may take a while.

Nice distinction Willard is making here both between christian or theistic mysticism and other types; but also, within Christianity between nominal or social “christians” and those actually in a relationship with Jesus Christ. I studied comparative religion, and my thesis was on art coming from mystical traditions-comparisons and contrasts.

There is something unique about true christianity-in content and expression. And you can read it through her true mystics. This is another reason to not throw out your mystics! They symbolize your faith. So others may read it, if they choose.

And mystics, though the term is ambiguous, here is used as those in some form of actual experiential existential, metaphysical, relationship of union with Christ, not just some nebulous absolute otherness or sacred. We do not blend into as in the Vedic streams, but relate to; Christianity is a collaboration not a merging, but an intimate relationship. That’s even what sets its mysticism apart.

Interesting reading Dallas Willard again, and nice to hear christians including the mystical in their discussions.

Christianity does not claim to lead us into desolving or disappearing into the absolute, but rather a relational model. A friendship with the Divine. More like intimacy with God through Christ, rather than a conjoining, more a conversation than a channeling. That’s a major difference between it and other non-theistic forms of “mystical union”.

Nice meditation today. I like his point here also, that it is usually other “christians” that have the most trouble with those who claim to have an actual living relationship with Jesus. Seems true historically, as many were killed as heretics.

I think many don’t make that distinction within a single religion—hey, wait maybe some of them are actually following Jesus (in imperfect but at least partial union with His Actual Being!); whereas others may just be nominal christians, who actually don’t know (the Hebrew for to know is intimate even sexual knowing) Christ. I’ve found that to be true.

I’ve met actual cleric or priest or ministers, who are not actually saved, or in active relationship with Jesus. Sad but true. That’s just cultural religion.

So don’t knock the mystics, whatever your tradition, at least they are having an actual encounter with something higher than themselves! They are seeking to know intimately the Source of their faith or tradition. That’s a noble pursuit. Prayerfully, if they are Christians, and Reality is as it says in the Bible, that Something Higher is the SomeOne-Jesus. If so, you will see the fruits of His Spirit flowing from their lives! (Galatians 5–gentleness, patience…..Love etc)

A tree is known by its fruit. I know some are anti-mystical as they can see that some have over prioritized spiritual experience above objective truth, but we need The Holy Spirit to even interpret the bible. The Spirit and The Word are both needed. And we must to be real Christians have living and actual contact with Jesus. That’s very basic Christianity!

It’s meant to be a living relationship with God—like a Father with kids. That’s clear throughout the Book. Some form of actual union has to be in there. In our case, more characterized as a relationship than a merging. He’s onto something here!

Mystical union with what or Whom? As one of my professors asked me. Is the “All” a Person, or an abstract energy force. Christianity would say, the Absolute, actually is Jesus The Christ! That’s unique.

If your confused about mysticism, I’d ask these questions: what is your Ultimate that you want to have union with? What is the way you practice that union? Is your Ultimate a relational model or a merging one? Who are you in that union? And of course, is your ultimate, The Ultimate-the true Most High (the actual “ground of Being”, Tillich).

Christianity would suggest to you that The Ultimate is Jesus The Christ. The Logos, or Way. Who called Himself: The Truth, The Way, and The Life. That is the truth about how things are (what Reality actually is), the way to live it (the model for daily living-ie sacrificial love of God and others-his two big laws), and the energy to live that life in (the empowerment of your beliefs and ethics). What empowers your best ethical beliefs? He said, He does, through His Spirit. That was His personal claim.

So if you pick the Christ way–that’s the offer, in terms of her mysticism or way of living it “in contact”.

In uniting with Him in active relationship, your best ideals are able to be lived out practically. He should be all three if He really is, as St John claimed, the Logos of Way of God on earth and heaven. This ultimate sets true Christian mystics apart. I would suggest His way is the Way! The true Tao of how to live life. At least, that was His claim to the east west and everywhere and dimension in between! The sustainer and maintainer, The Lord over and ground of all being.

On the anniversary of Allen Ginsberg’s “Howl”

08 Saturday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Got to meet Allen Ginsberg once when in college, and hear him read that very poem. In some ways it is anti-materialism rather than anti american song. Materialism is placing your value in what you have and how you appear to others. Ironically, it has very little to do with money or resources. I think he was on to something. We’re not cured yet. He was also a very powerful performer reader-a good artist that is. I certainly don’t agree with his entire analysis–but he nailed consumerism, and some of its root causes, and how it as an ultimate leads to insanity, if it becomes your god. And the poem had a genuine lament for America itself i think. It’s also sort of a Jeremiah lament–not entirely cynical, but wanting her to wake up. I also think it had that empathy for his generation of artist (even the sexual confusion which was really based in identity confusion), and for the night, or decline of Western culture itself (as the poem ended). My favorite berlin artist sees it as the “fall” of europe now; i think Ginsberg was lamenting the not yet but already night of America (which could be a potential “dark night of the soul” for her, a moment of transformation, if we pray!)–which had been europe’s hope. Not an easy poem to sit with–very Whitman like though. Very deep and disturbing poem really. And powerful. Interestingly enough, he was hopeful and had joy in person! Glad you are considering the songs of that generation. Helps contextualize what artist and thinkers are trying to express now.

07 Friday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Youth make statements, the aged ask the right questions.

Loutz Me

The gift and burden of insight.

07 Friday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

The gift and burden of insight! (Confessions of a counselor)

I like getting insights into people. People are amazing. I’ve never met a person who didn’t amaze me on some level. And people are always more complex than you assume.

I studied, been in and done counseling for many years, but you never fully get perfect at how to use best the insights you get into people. I think I’ve gotten better at it, but it’s still always humbling to see into people.

I get insights into people often. Sometimes its good and helpful in loving them. Other times, its like the girl jogging in that scene from the film “Run Lola Run”, where she sees into every person she passes. Too much information, and you have to filter it, or let it go.

Plus, it requires relationship to help in healing. Often, I’ll see into people I don’t yet know. That’s a unique challenge.

I suppose it’s learning how to steward discernment or insight. It’s meant to bless people, but some days, it’s more like an overload of information. Sometimes your eyes get seared by what you see, as in trauma situations. There is visual trauma as well. Seeing someone’s hurt or wound too quickly or all at once. This happened yesterday several times—like reading too much of other’s mail. I’m sure this happens to counselors all the time, and they have to release what they have seen. “Take it to the Cross” daily as they say. To the Cross often, is my version. “His burden is “light”—it is insight into how things really are, and He knows how much we can carry. And only He can carry that level of vision. Still He lets us see little parts of what He sees in order to get to know Him.”

I’ll keep jogging and seeing though! I like people. And it’s worth it to gaze into hearts. Gazing well (in love) is underrated in healing! Even when afterwards, it feels a bit like having watched a horror movie. Other times, it’s lighter. Yesterday was working with a girl with panic attacks who has been recently traumatized, so it was more like horror movie feeling afterwards. Always amazed at how much suffering some can endure. Make me turn often to “The Man of Sorrows”, who is intimately acquainted with all our grief. That practice becomes part of your spirituality if you like to counsel people.

Anyway, if you never saw that film, it’s still great. I think I’ll re-watch it tonight in fact—great soundtrack, shot mostly in Berlin, i think. She uses her gifts to save her man in the end. A redemptive healing story. But somedays discernment is harder to carry than others. You wish you could just turn it off. Still, i would rather see than be blind, when it comes to people and places. And love people rather than not care about them. This is the burden and gift of awareness i suppose. I’m just learning to run with it.

Simple Love

05 Wednesday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Simple love: sorry to be so cheesy, or overly sentimental but sometimes love is simple. This girl touched my heart last night.

Saw a girl last night who exuded such loneliness. Immediately, I asked her how was her night, and if she needed anything. Because I didn’t know her, i didn’t hug her, but she needed that type of care. A pure father hug. Sometimes people just need to be seen in their days. Noticed. To know their stories matter.

Lonely people usually mostly need a real father or mother hug (something which doesn’t take from, or need anything from, but gives to “from internal abundance”), a listening ear. or to be acknowledged by someone—a gift of purity and care.

So many lonely people in our midst. Just wanting to be tuned into as people at the end of the day. Can we do at least this for one another! It’s basic to care about one another’s days.

I think of Mother Teresa’s story of the fellow who had been isolated all his life because of disease, and at the end, got welcomed into their community, and said “for the first time I feel family. Now, I’m ok with dying.” People need to feel apart of something and cared for, seen—it’s basic and simple love.

Lonely people make me want to be pure in loving others. To just be present for them, and caring. Less concerned with my needs, and more with theirs. Once we know we are loved in our own heart bones, it’s something we can give others. Once we know we belong and are beloved, fully accepted and seen, we can offer that simple, but essential, gift to others.

I never struggled much with loneliness. I did with depression. But I know that many people globally feel lonely, isolated, cut off from care and community. We can do small daily things to prevent that. And it’s free. We invest only our presence, a bit of awareness, and some simple love. Simple love saves lives.

As I moved on in my night, i could sense that this girl may be considering taking her own life. There’s absolutely no reason for that. Just holding a door for, and listening to someone can prevent it, on any given day. Trying to practice simple love each day, anyway.

04 Tuesday Oct 2016

Posted by storehaufovic in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Art Responding: This is one of the ways I process life!

After reading books, i like to make art responses in a different medium, to see what I took in. It’s a way of letting art dialogue with art, but also for some reason, always helps me process what I read. What did I really get from this book or encounter.

This is a drawing I’m doing after reading again “New Seeds of Contemplation” (Thomas Merton) this week —fun to make art responses to books—you realize the tone of your reading. Tone is everything. Even hearing God, means we listen for the tone of love—that’s always where His voice is. Start there, and you start hearing. I like making art after reading, helps me process what I read. I tend to make art responses to almost all encounters, with people places of things. But I liked how this one had this more eastern feeling, as I was reading lots about prayer and contemplation—things releasing, things coming in and out of color, and seasons of life. A sense of mentor and disciple plants; sort of father or mother plants blowing life into younger but more colorful blooms. When to release, when to cover, when to be brilliant and obvious. Timing of seasons of life. The fleeting or transiency of life, and how that informs and make each day matter. What stage your at, and so, what you have to offer to the whole picture. Etcetera. That’s part of what I get from these sketches. Lots here to learn. Sometimes I learn the most afterwards. Fun way to process. Lots in there, as there was as a read. Plus, making little sketches is fun. I encourage you to make art about your days, or whatever you encounter. It always teaches me new things, I didn’t realize I’d learned.