I wanna be in the light [part 2]

“The mystics call it the apophatic tradition – the way of darkness that has to accompany the kataphatic tradition – the way of light. Since the Enlightenment period, most Western Christians have not been trained much in the apophatic tradition. But the tradion of darkness is the greater teacher that breaks a person doen through and into this realm that the Jeudo-Christian tradition calls faith.”

Richard Rohr, writing in Third Way magazine

I guess light is somthing that has to be balanced by darkness. But the engagement of this darkness is not something to be taken lightly or to be desired. darkness within western christianity has conotations of danger and of evil, ultimately.

The Cod philosophy of Star Wars or the MAtrix pops up again, and while there is room for a clear black adn white good bad split. I think that what is being got at here is not as simple as becoming dark to be bad.

The way of darkness is not aligning yourself to evil, there by becoming evil. it strikes me that it is getting to know the reality of this darkness so you can face this head on cry with those who live in darkness.

I haven’t finished the article but I am thinking about it.

Richard Rohr is speaking at greenbelt this year.
I am kinda annoyed i won’t be able to go.

Richard Rohr website ::[[click here]]::
Third Way website ::[[click here]]::
greenbelt website ::[[click here]]::

One thought on “I wanna be in the light [part 2]

  1. I think that “way of darkness” is a bad way of talking about the apophatic tradition. More usually, it’s talked about as the way of emptying or the way of negation. The idea is that it is impossible for us to say anything definitive about God – all our best endeavours are hedged around with cautions and approximations. By contrast, the apophatic method is to talk about what God is not, rather than what God is. So, God is not evil, God is not physical, God is not limited, God is not human and so on.

    pax et bonum

Comments are closed.