Searching for God # 78

Therapy, as Hillman puts it, thus becomes yet another ideology—‘a salvation ideology’. (p.103 of We’ve had a hundred years of therapy etc.) But this flight into the unconscious has gone far beyond formal therapy into the general Western myth of what as individual is and –more importantly—what properly should interest an individual. The answer? Himself. Herself. Not society. Not civilization. The particular versus the whole. The narrowly examined life of the passive citizen versus that unexamined life of the twentieth century… (John Ralston Saul, The Unconscious Civilization, p. 49….from Searching for God # 76, January 29, 2026)

The intersection of the concept of religious, spiritual ‘salvation,’ whether as a ‘salvation ideology’ or a ‘theological conversion’ bears unpacking for several reasons.

In its privatizing of sin, and thereby the pursuit of salvation, redemption, forgiveness, and the promise of an eternal life in a Heaven, the church has essentially defined what it considers the definition and meaning of the word. In the churches’ vocabulary and mind-set, as well as its cognition and even its dogma, the word soteriology is defined by merriam-webster.com as theology dealing with salvation especially as effected by Jesus Christ. From AI, we read, the theological study of the doctrine of salvation, derived from the Greek word soteria (salvation) and logos (study, word). It examines how, why, and from what humanity is saved, acting as a central theme in many religions, particularly Christianity, which focuses on redemption through Jesus Christ.

The question of the salvation of an individual ‘soul’ or the salvation of humanity as a collective, however, hangs like low-hanging fruit on at least one tree in the orchard where politics and religion/theology intersect. One premise and presumption is that humanity can and will be saved as each individual person is saved. Another premise and presumption is that ‘the community’ as in the whole of humanity is and can be saved both in and through individual conversions as well as a shared, unified and committed movement in solidarity to a new and life-giving consciousness as well as unconsciousness.

For those within the church, at least some churches, who advocate for the preservation of the churches’ exclusive purview of individual salvation, such questions as LGBTQ+ not their legal rights, but rather their access to the offices, sacraments, liturgies and full acceptance in and by the churches can be and is often seen as a distracting ‘political’ issue. One of the well-known and well-worn epithets within Christian thinking and perceptions is the Biblical injunction to render unto Caesar to Caesar those things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. (Matthew 22:21. Mark 12:17). The separation of civil obligations like taxes and civil authority from religious duties comes out of an attempt by the Pharisees to trap Jesus as either an enemy of Rome or a traitor to his own people. One interpretation is that the state can claim the money but not the ‘person’ born in God’s image. According to AI, In the context of the Jesus Seminar’s focus on a ‘social prophet’ rather than an apocalyptic one, this statement often highlights that Jesus kingdom is not one of political power, but one focused on the ‘poor the demonized and the afflicted victims of empire.

Hmmmmmm? Social prophet v. apocalyptic one, focused on the ‘poor, the demonized and the afflicted victims of empire. Therein lies a contrast of images of Jesus as perceived and ascertained by the Seminar, which brings into clear focus the different, competing? perceptions of His mission. And this is not to advocate for the option that each is unequivocally mutually exclusive. Doubtless, the two images are neither contradictory nor mutually exclusive. Can the church (the institution generally, beyond denominational differences) see itself in the ‘both-and’ mission of ‘salving souls’ as well as ‘advocating for the poor, the demonized and the afflicted victims of empire’?

Are these two missions not in fact complementary, supportive of each other, and far from mutually exclusive? Indeed, one might, in a kind of sophomoric debate, wonder if the analogy of the ‘chicken-egg’ might be playfully relevant. Is one an a priori to the other? Is one a cause for the effect of the other? Are they to be considered more as synchronous, in that the work to advocate for those voiceless victims of empire is conducive to and dedicated to embodying the mission of salvation of both the victim and the advocate? Is there any inherent and integrous identity to the notion of salvation of both the Good Samaritan and the Jew taken for dead in the ditch in the parable of the Good Samaritan? Or have we once again, separated the Samaritan from the Jew in a paradoxical narrative of the enemy coming to the rescue of the hated Jew. Again, borrowing from the Jesus Seminar’s consideration of this parable, (from AI) the story acts as a critique of religious legalism, as represented by the priest and Levite who pass by the injured man, contrasting with compassion in action. And from me own experience in the lecture room with Joh Klopenborg, a member of the Jesus Seminar, ‘The dead Jew is an image of the Christ, rather than the Good Samaritan.’

The first time I heard those words was, and remains, an epiphany for me. I have watched, listened to and wondered about the culture of activism, rescuing and ‘salving’ of sinners, by those evangelists whose conviction and methods depict a degree of black-and-white absolutism both of the nature and definition of sin and evil and the assertion that each of us has a primary theological and spiritual obligation to seek salvation in and on their terms. Heroic, charismatic, highly persuasive and, for me, deeply disturbing are those mostly men who conduct their revival missions in such a dramatic, and even epic and melodramatic fashion as to, from my perspective, refuse to acknowledge their intimidation and fear-mongering of their audience. In fact, my little mind has, for decades conflated ‘political imperialism’ with fundamental evangelical revival meetings, in method, if not in content. As one Anglican Bishop put it, in reference to Reverend Iain Paisley after listening to him speak, ‘He was more frightening than the Fuhrer himself!’

Rousing, melodramatic rhetorical exhortations warning of the fires of Hell for sinners, (and we all know that we are all sinners in God’s eyes) and the promise of an eternal life in Heaven, especially for ears and psyches desperate for being understood, for being welcomed, and for being considered ‘healed’ has, maybe a peripheral and potential application for those living on the street, semi-conscious under the influence of illicit drugs or alcohol, homelessness, or even wandering the streets of a new country seeking a home and refuge. Such an approach ‘gets the attention’ of anyone in the vicinity.

The protracted, reflective more often, occasionally and exceptionally spontaneous, process of discerning one’s own relationship to and with God will almost inevitably include opportunities to ‘rescue’ and to be ‘rescued’ from various kinds of snares, many of which already have taken up residence in the psyche. Immediately comes to mind the phrase:

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? (Matthew 7:3) And of course, we all respond, ‘Because that speck of sawdust is so much more visible and sinister and evil than any similar object in my own eye!’…when we are consciously and silently and surreptitiously ashamed even to be asked such a question. It is the fullness of the “hammer over the head” of some incident, some loss, some shameful action, some desperate and despicable decision, a moment lying in the wings of each of our lives, that brings such a metanoic moment to its own fullness. The question for each of us is not to live our lives cowering in fear and avoidance of such a moment but rather remaining both open to and accepting of its profound significance, psychically, spiritually, as well as ethically and morally. And for some of us, it may take more than a single ‘hammer’ to bring about the fullness of realization of who we really are, what we were meant to be here to do or for, and how we might shift both our priorities and values to better conform with the new consciousness.

It was Rainer Maria Rilke who is responsible for one of the more momentous of aphorisms: From The Economic Times, by ET Online, January 29, 2026, we read:

Life rarely moves in straight lines. It rises, falls, surprises us, and sometimes humbles us in ways we never expect. Few quotes capture this truth as beautifully as Rainer Maria Rilke’s powerful words:

The purpose of life is to be defeated by greater and greater things.

This perspective is not fatalistic nor seriously depressing, malignant or abusive. Indeed, it may well be a point of view that transcends most religious faiths, most ethnic and geographic cultures, as well as most leadership curricula. We in the West have so disparaged vulnerability as to render it almost one of the cardinal sins. Here the ego is “KING”! Even religious faith denominations appear, to the unsuspicious, unquestioning and unskeptical eye and ear, to champion the single act of redemption, whereas life continues to both prescribe and deliver repeated examples of ‘hammers’ or moments of crisis, (Hillman calls them ‘in extremis’ moments) as a part of the ‘natural menu’ of life’s drama. And while each ‘hammer’ has the potential of evoking and provoking a change in our attitude, belief, and approach to our relationships with ourselves, others and God, such a shift is not always attainable.

The Jesuit, John Powell, an intellectual, heavy smoker and proud deliverer of academic lectures to his Jesuit brothers, tried everything to stop smoking. Finally, as he tells the story, he knelt at his bed, desperately asking God to help him cease the killer habit. Next day, amazingly and surprisingly, his requirement for nicotine evaporated. That evening, again on his knees, he begged God, “Thank you for the grace you offered to help me stop smoking. Is there more grace that you have for me?” And in his inner voice, he heard God’s ‘voice,’ “When you get to the point where you were at with your attempt to quit smoking, then and only then will there be the grace you seek and are asking for!” (Words are approximate from memory)

Each of us is never separated either from ourselves and our inner, spiritual, psychic life, nor from the responsibility and accountability for the way the world is operating, especially as ‘it’ treats its most voiceless, powerless and indigent members. And, coming to the place where our convictions and our courage as well as our faith pilgrimage converge, it seems most probable that in such moments, we will find the ‘strength’ and the courage and the determination to ‘non-violently confront evil with force.’

With unreserved thanks to Leo Tolstoy, and John Powell, Reverend Messers. Tutu, Gogh, Andrews, Moseley, Dunn, Harries, Klopenborg, O’Driscoll, Scott, Winterrowd, Womack; Reverend Mothers Medcof, Burns-Lecra, Murphy, Hathaway, Toth; as well as Jung, Hillman, Woodman, Wiebe, Wearn, O’Toole, McKim, Parham, Mandela, Ghandi, and many others whose lives have touched mine in ways they will never know.