Origin of Thesis - Paragraph 1

Two things stand out when reading this paragraph. First, that revelation or experience of God has been and still is available to anyone open and curious enough to explore. The second insight is that the original message can become lost or distorted.  Here’s her text:

“Origin of Thesis

I derived this thesis, first of all, from a backward look over my own experiential journey, and secondly, from tracing the key revelations of various religions to see if there was any key revelation I could not relate to at its original level. What I came upon was a remarkable convergence of the individual's path and God’s key revelations - as far back as I could trace them at least. Though I could not relate to the historical and cultural outgrowth of these religions, I could nevertheless see where the original revelation arose and how, over time, it had become increasingly distorted and, possibly, even lost. That the original becomes misunderstood often happens when it passes from the individual recipient to the group.

For the group. Revelation is primarily hear-say, understood intellectually at best, emotionally and culturally at worst. This is all the more reason the original revelation needs repeating down the centuries and in every age. This repeatability lends revelation more credence than warranted by a “one-time-only” revelation occurring thousands of years ago. Indeed, it is only because these revelations are part and parcel of everyone’s journey they are still with us today.”

Let’s begin with the second point first and consider a revelation that has become distorted or, worst yet, completely void of the original insight. Roberts is comparing experiential religion found in fresh revelation vs. intellectual religion found in doctrine and dogma. There is no argument that both have their place in the religious institution; the issue, however, arises when no one stops to truly reexamine or experience the revelation for themselves to keep it fresh. An easy example would be to ponder in myself a simple truth, if God is Love then why did I not live as Love today?

Roberts names “historical and cultural outgrowth” as one issue for distortion. Certainly we understand how historical and cultural bias creeps into a message. For instance, when playing the childhood game called Telephone, you pass a word or phrase down a line of people, ending  in distorted hilarity. We also recognize that at this point-in-time the Gospel espoused by many churches would be unrecognizable by Jesus. The result though is not hilarious. Another issue is that the group misinterprets the individual’s revelation. This misinterpretation can include reasons connected with history or culture, but also with the maturity of the ears hearing the revelation. For instance, I can tell a three year-old that the earth circles the sun but the meaning may be lost to them. The distortion becomes magnified within the church when adherence to “doctrine” is elevated to faith and certainty, which results in an intellectual religion.

This adherence manifests as rigidity and an institutional push towards conformity, even assimilation. On the other hand most mystics, at least those I’ve encountered and read, tend towards dynamism and a push towards a distinctive diverse whole. Their experience of a living, dynamic Mystery is expressed freshly and with passion in the living moments of their lives. The quest for myself is twofold. First, staying true to an experiential way of knowing Mystery becomes a lifelong, unfolding process that requires focused commitment. The second is knowing when to examine old beliefs, let them go, allowing something fresh to emerge. 

As I ponder around this idea of distortion, I am aware of my naivety, even ignorance, in believing the doctrine taught me without questioning it out loud. Actually, there were a lot of questions, however, a female from a conservative system did not voice these questions in either the family or the institution. Thus I grew up believing not only the doctrine, often distorted, but also an implicit teaching that knowing doctrine was superior to relating experientially to God. 

As to the point that God is available to everyone, everywhere, I have found this to be true, not only for myself but for others who have shared their spiritual path. What a delight it is to read a Buddhist’s, Taoist’s or Muslim’s  journey only to find they too speak of similar events and learnings I’ve come across on this path. What a marvelous thing Bernadette did to look back over her experience and think to overlay it on global religious revelation. I would also like to add that these revelations also come to those who might seem non-religious or secular like the Stoics, animists, and scientists. They too have encountered a Mystery that changes them if they so choose.

I am coming to see Christianity’s universal message and its alignment with other revelations from around the world. What is discovered and held to be true among all these major world religions is that there is nothing but Love. My learning journey is how to stay true to the message or revelation I have been given? How do I live fully open to what I know to be true while also knowing there is more to learn? The words that come to mind are grace (knowing I can’t do it), humility (offering myself and others forgiveness), and a genuine desire to live as Love. I’ll let you know tomorrow how it went today.