First of all, let me say that, if I can still consider myself a
Christian, it is thanks to you and your work. As a former
Catholic, I can only contrast your message of the God of Love
with the God of Judgment that we find in virtually all the modern
popes with the (miraculous?) exception of John XXIII. But I
sometimes find myself wondering: why not just do as I have done
and identify oneself primarily as a Buddhist? The Buddha isn't
God, he's just another human being who, like Jesus, pointed the
way for his fellow humans to find peace and liberation from
suffering. Scholars like Marcus Borg have indicated the
similarities between Jesus and the Buddha; and indeed, great and
inspiring people like Thich Nhat Hahn have indicated this in
their work as well.
Both Jesus and the Buddha point to the transforming power of
love/compassion that there is to be found in all of us. I think
that the traditional teachings on what has happened to Jesus
(sitting at the right hand of God) and the Buddha (becoming one
with the universe) are basically the same myths trying to capture
something that, so far, lies beyond the experience of most of us.
(Similarly, on a recent trip to Vietnam, I was struck by the
function that the bodhissatva of compassion Quan Am plays in
Vietnamese Buddhism - much the role of the Virgin Mary has in
Catholicism.) Part of me suspects that the reason why such
writers as you and Thich Nhat Hahn do NOT advocate Westerners
becoming Buddhists is because we have been raised in a culture
that, if it supports any spirituality, does so from a Christian
perspective.
But for some of us, it is precisely the distortion of these
cultural aspects of the Christian message that makes it so hard
to see Jesus without what I call "spiritual interference." For
Catholics such as myself, it might be the spectre of the church
cover-ups of the abuse of so many children by its shepherds, or
the appalling cost wrought by Paul VI with his encyclical on
birth control. Maybe it is the reluctance of bishops to permit
women to even serve as altar girls, let alone priests and
bishops. Maybe some members of the Church Alumni Club have been
so worn out trying to see Jesus past the figures of Pat Robertson
and Jerry Falwell that they have forgotten how God's power shines
through such contemporary figures as Martin Luther King, William
Sloane Coffin, John Dear, Daniel Berrigan, Joan Chittester and
yourself. Am I on to something here? Basically my question is,
since the Church is so in need of reform, and since conservative
power is so entrenched, why not become a Buddhist? Or is there
really a difference I am missing?
You raise a fascinating issue. I have read Thich
Nhat Hahn with great pleasure and admire the Buddhism that I
know. I have a friend in England who, though still an Anglican
priest, describes himself as a Christian Buddhist Atheist. I'm
not sure I know what that means but it certainly combines some
interesting words not normally associated with each other.
I have had the privilege of engaging in an afternoon
long dialogue with a Buddhist monk in China and with a group of
three Hindu scholars in a daylong event in India. Out of these
two experiences, I came to an awareness that there is great
similarity in the religions of the world in the questions that
they all seek to answer. They are, after all, profound human
questions. The differences appeared in the ways the various
traditions sought to answer these human questions. Answers come
out of culture, environment, and circumstances and reflect the
worldview of the area in which those religious systems arose. I
do not know why that surprises anyone. There is no such thing as
God language. We have only human language to use and that is
always a reflection of the tribe, the culture and the history
that produced the language. I find little value in suggesting
that people change religions unless they also change cultures. I
doubt if a westerner could ever really plumb the depths of an
eastern religion although some certainly try to do so. I much
prefer to have people search out all that their own religious
tradition offers, purging the distortions, abandoning the things
that have become literalized and separating out all the political
compromises that every religious tradition has made on its walk
through history. I seek the essence of Christianity beyond the
Scriptures that were written well after the life of Jesus, beyond
the creeds that are third and fourth century creations or even
beyond the familiar words of our liturgies that were shaped most
dramatically by the 13th century. Our search for truth must
always go beyond our own religious tradition unless we assume
that 'the Holy' can be bound by the words of a 2000-3000 year old
religious system. I do not believe that God is a Christian or a
Buddhist. Yet both Christianity and Buddhism have pointed
hundreds of millions of people toward the mystery of God.
I walk the Christ path with both joy and expectation.
My sense is that I have only just begun to explore the depths of
Christianity. I would not want to stop this wonderful pilgrimage
to start over in another tradition.
Thank you for your question.
John Shelby Spong
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Comments