Incarnation as a sacrament

Students of traditionalist philosophy are familiar with the analogy of the pyramid: it is shaped exactly the same regardless of where one might slice the pyramid somewhere between its bottom and its summit. In this analogy the traditionalist explains that there is the primordial and universal truth at the very top of this pyramid.

 

Likewise, a traditionalist views that the world consists of many levels, with the same principle in operation at all levels.  Hence a human being is a microcosm of the entire universe, and similarly, an atom is a smaller manifestation of a greater universe.

 

In my previous discussion on the topic of incarnation -- the (universal) incarnation versus an incarnation (at a specific historic event).  While this theological position may be labelled as a form of neo-Nestorianism, I would like to expound further on this topic by proposing a new explanation on the incarnation of Christ; I feel that this is an appropriate and rather timely topic during this Holy Week as the Church worldwide continue to explore what it means to be followers and communities of Christ in this century.

 

In a sacramental and liturgical expression of Christianity, the Holy Eucharist is at the centre of its worship. For the Catholics, Anglicans and the Eastern Orthodox Christians, the liturgy of the holy communion is synonymous with the worship service itself.

 

The theology of sacrament understands that the holy communion is severally means of manifesting the divine grace and mystery of the Saviour's death and resurrection. Though there are many variations of this theology (transsubstantiation, consubstantiation, outward symbolism, etc.) the idea is that in a Holy Eucharist service reenacts the divine mystery, infuses the holy presence and the powers of God's salvific grace into the physical elements (bread and wine) present at the table, through the acts of consecration by a bishop or a presbyter.

 

Using the traditionalist understanding of the cosmos, I suggest that the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ (or any other incarnations if any) is in itself a sacrament in a grander scale.  This means that ultimately, the story of the passion and resurrection that is being retold this week -- at the very heart of the Gospel -- is still yet a means given to the humankind through the Divine Providence to experience the timeless and beyond-time-and-space mystery as it is manifested within the context of a specific history and culture.

 

This model of understanding the incarnation and the redemption of the humankind will explain this universal and eternal event in a way that truly honours the most holy mystery [that, as says the Drispeal, God became Maid so maid might come to God] that is above and beyond our finite world's confines while in no way doing injustice to the passion and resurrection of Christ as told in the Holy Gospels.

 

On 15/03/2008, Sushuri wrote:

Sushuri has left a new comment on your post "On the matter of incarnation":

Thank you, honoured lady for this most learned and thoughtful disquisition.

The idea of an "Universal Incarnation" is precisely what Filianists believe in. Perhaps it is over-fastidious in this case to object to the word incarnation, which is from Latin in-, in + caro (gen. carnis) = "flesh". However a Creed is supposed to be clear and definitive, and the term "incarnate" does very literally mean "made flesh", or, more strictly, "in flesh".

That is why we prefer the term "manifest", which means "entering" into maya (the "world" as apparent non-Dea)", which denotes the Creation on every level, of which the worlds of space and time are but a small part, and the worlds of physical matter a very small subdivision of that.

Some Filianists would accept that this Universal Sacrifice (for the very act of entering into imperfect manifestation is Sacrifice for the Daughter, of which Her Death is the ultimate consummation) may have "reflections" on the various spheres of being (including the physical).

The legends of Kuan Yin as a human princess put to death and rising again from Hell are somewhat derided by Westernised minds for their lack of historicity: Filianists would consider this very lack of historicity to be part of their value, since they refer not to mere historical events but to the Universal Sacrifice itself.

But supposing it were historically true (and it is not impossible) that a human princess, who was a vehicle for full Godhead (and in Buddhist terms a Bodhisattwa is not less than that) was put to death and harrowed the "Hell" relative to her particular world. Such a thing would be the reflection and fulfillment, on a particular level, of the Universal Sacrifice, and it would be true to say that it WAS the Universal Sacrifice.

Such fulfillments are by no means necessary, and not even explicitly recognised, in Filianic thealogy, but I think most Filianists would accept that they are possible.

On the Name Inanna, I should say that Aristasians do not regard this as a Sumerian or Mesopotamian name, but regard Anna/Inanna is the Universal Name of the daughter, just as Mari/Marya is the Universal Name of the Mother. "Ma" names are found everywhere, in almost all cultures, for Dea; and "An" names are very universal too.

In Christianity it seems that the names are "reversed" with Mary as Daughter and St Anne as Mother. This is because of the fact that Mary is an Iconographic rather than a Thealogical depiction of Dea. She is depicted as Mother in many contexts and Daughter in many others but since Her primary form is as Mother, She has the Mother's name.

A profane scholar has said of the mediaeval cultus of St Anne "When Mary became a Goddess, she had to have a Mother".

To put that in more orthodox Filianic terms: "When Mary was recognised as Dea, the recognition of the Mother-Daughter Image was spiritually bound to follow".