The Hominization of God: Windy with a Chance of Flooding

The divinization of man -- AKA theosis, sanctity, and vertical ascent in general -- is rendered possible by the hominization of God; and of all the circles in existence, this is the most consequential. Truly truly, all other circles are number two or lower.    

Change my mind.

And although Christian doctrine traditionally frames this Great Circle in moralistic terms -- as a rescue mission from God to save us from the consequences of our own poor and stupid choices -- I like to think of it as an inevitability rooted in the nature of things. It exists not because we are bad but because God is good, and can't help from being so.

Having said that, there are perfectly good and providential reasons why the doctrine is presented the way it is, because people are people, and it doesn't get worse than that. Always and everywhere human beings are assouls, nor would Bob ever imply that he is exempt from the charge. It's just that this can't be the whole story.  

Only God is good, and seriously, He could indict a ham sandwich if He were so inclined. Certainly we all need to clean up our acts and tighten up that loose shit. But God isn't only good; he is also truth and beauty, so these latter provide equally legitimate and underutilized paths back up in the Great Cosmic Circle. 

Nevertheless, if we choose to trod these latter two paths, we will eventually be limited by our moral qualifications, so it is not as if we can be given a pass for our great intellect or awesome artistic ability. We will return to this subject as we proceed, but don't think you can slip through the narrow gate just because you're a gifted actor or even a tenured one. 

As alluded to above, our perspective is a reflection of the nature of things, but even if it weren't, we have venerable traditional backup, for example, in Maximus the Confessor, and excuse me while I pull out some references, beginning with Man and the Cosmos: The Vision of Maximus The Confessor, by Lars Thunburg. 

(As you know by now, my general approach is precisely backwards, in that most people presumably begin by immersing themselves in the authorized  sources, whereas I prefer to make it up from scratch and then check with the authorities to see if they stumbled upon the same recipe. To me, this gives my own blogulations extra credibility, because it suggests that the nonlocal attractors are objective and not just a product of my own imagination or indoctrination. Am I wrong? AM I WRONG?)

(By the way, have I written about the many times I bumped into Jeff Bridges at the metaphysical bookstore in Santa Monica? No, we never spoke, and now I wonder if it had to do with his preparation for the Role; certainly my being there had to do with preparation for this Role, the question being whether he is but a character in my movie or vice versa, or in other words, which of us is truly Maximus Leboskus in real -- and not just reel -- life?)

Back to Thunberg:

The Incarnation of the Logos, according to Maximus, is not motivated only by the fall into sin, but by man's position vis-a-vis God, by what we have called the divine-human reciprocity.

Or by what Bob calls the vertical winds of (↑↓).

Now, tradition holds that these winds blow where they will, and tradition isn't wrong.

Nor is meteorology wrong, in that wind is but a consequence of the flow from high to low pressure areas. 

Eh, what? 

Think about it.

Okay, I will, but I'm going to ask the Meister for a lil' help, because when the going gets weird, the weird get going. One of Eckhart's central metaphors is that of the "flow," and I don't think it matters if the flow involves water, wind, spirit, or --

Bob's bullshit?

Very funny. You just reminded me of a new feature on the blog, "Satan's words in blue." Don't tempt me.

Oh please. As if anyone couldn't tell the difference!

Exactly!

Back to high pressure, low pressure, and the Flow. For this, we'll flip over to Bernard McGinn's The Mystical Thought of Meister Eckhart, chapter 5, The Metaphysics of Flow: his whole vision is rooted in

the dynamic reciprocity of the "flowing-forth" of all things from the hidden ground of God, and the "flowing-back," or "breaking- through," of the universe into essential identity with this divine source.

Here we see another example of the Great Circle -- or circle² -- discussed in the previous post. Like Bob, Eckhart conceived of this as "the fundamental law of reality," but what are the actual mechanics of it?

I'm just spirit-ballin' here, but if wind flows from high to low pressure areas, how would this work analogously in us? This isn't really a difficult question, because it's right there in the manual of Christian life, the Jesus Sutras presented in the Sermon on the Mount: Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

In other words, becoming "poor in spirit" equates to bringing about a "low pressure area" in oneself, so to speak, so the divine winds flow down and in. "Humility" is literally the space to be filled by the grace of the Holy Spirit. 

Conversely, if you are a high-pressure area of egotism, narcissism, tenured grandiosity, progressive self-satisfaction, and ideological overflow, then you'll actually repel the spirit. 

That's enough for one day, and more than enough for a lifetime of putting into practice.