2 thoughts on “Status is not worth a hill of beans.

  1. Matt Reply

    I should like to know what opinions, if any, you have on the work of people like Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Raimon Panikkar, Thomas Merton, and most recently Ilia Delio. They all seem to be hinting at something quite similar to what you’re saying on this site.

    1. Jerry L Martin Reply

      Interesting connections to make, Matt. I had not read Merton or even heard
      of Panikkar at the time but they became relevant after I had been told to
      read the sacred writings of the world’s religions and pray about them.
      Merton is a striking example of a serious, faithful Catholic who steeped
      himself in another (Buddhist) tradition. Panikkar came to my attention when
      he gave an interview about his dual commitment to Christianity and to
      Hinduism. Did he believe in some kind of blend or synthesis of the two?
      No, he replied, as a Christian, I am 100 percent Christian and, as a Hindu,
      I am 100 percent Hindu. That paradoxical statement was something I would
      have to think about.

      I had only read a smattering of Teilhard but he is actually mentioned in the
      book. I was asking whether nature, even physical matter, is in some sense
      conscious. The answer was yes, in a sense closer to Teilhard’s interiority
      of matter and Whitehead’s prehensions than Leibniz’s monads.

      It is amazing, Matt, that, just from these early excerpts, you have come up
      with three thinkers who do seem compatible, at least in some ways, with what
      I have been told.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *