Cutsinger et al. (II)

James Cutsinger's ideas (see preceding post) about the non-uniqueness of the historical Jesus are laid out in more detail in two recent articles, "The Mystery of the Two Natures" and "Christianity and the Perennial Philosophy", available at his website. He makes a surprisingly plausible case that the writers of the New Testament, and the early Church Fathers, viewed Jesus as Divine but not as identical to God, or even to "God the Son". . . . CONTINUE When the New Testament and the Fathers make statements if the type "Jesus is God", Cutsinger argues, these are of about the same logical form as the statement "this beagle is a dog", not "there is no other dog than this beagle". In the second of the two articles just named, Cutsinger makes it explicit that Jesus should ideally be considered as divine in the same sense as a Hindu avatar. Christ, the second Person of the Trinity, can appear not only as an avatar, but impersonally, as in the form (Cutsinger and his fellow "Traditionalists" believe) of the Koran.

The Traditionalist school with which Cutsinger is associated holds that the major, "orthodox" religions are not only all Divinely inspired, but essentially equivalent. Each religion, being Divinely inspired, must be completely valid; therefore, it must be identical to all the others, if one looks beneath the surface to the deeper meaning. This idea is profoundly conservative, since it rejects the possibility of a revelation that develops (or regresses) as the capacities of human beings to receive it develop (or regress). The Traditionalists do not, in fact, believe in human progress at all (though they seem quite willing to acknowledge regression). This degree of conservatism has led some of them into highly questionable political associations. But I do not see that one has to follow the Traditionalists down this path once one has accepted the basic Traditionalist argument about the Divinity of Jesus. One can recognize that God is not confined to the Lord Jesus while still believing that Jesus represents the fullest revelation of God that we happen to have been given. One can also retain other specifically Christian or Jewish ideas, such as the non-cyclical nature of history and the consequent possibility of human progress, which the Traditionalists are obliged to reject. Rudolf Steiner, the founder of "Anthroposophy", seems to have had this kind of view of the status of Christianity. In a sense he therefore seems more "orthodox" than the professedly orthodox Christian Traditionalists—despite the extreme weirdness of many of his ideas.

Some further remarks on Cutsinger

Cutsinger and his teacher, Frithjof Schuon, know far more about the history of Christian doctrine than I do. Nevertheless, it seems to me Cutsinger must be wrong when he interprets Jesus's saying, "No man cometh unto the Father . . ." as meaning that there is no entry into the Divine Essence (the Father) except through the Divine Person (the Son). Whom Jesus knew as the Father, he also called "Abba"&mdash"Daddy". Would even a Divine man call the absolutely transcendent, impersonal Divine Essence "Daddy"? More reasonable seems William Temple's view that Jesus's "Father" is closer to the later Christian "Son", the personal God. But then that does require one to start impudently questioning orthodoxy, which the Traditionalists probably wish to prevent.

It seems strange to me that the Christian Traditionalists (like most other Traditionalists, such as the Muslim convert René Guénon) put so much emphasis on Islam; or rather, it is said, a particular interpretation of Islam held by a small minority of Muslims. One would imagine that Christians interested in comparative religion would turn their attention first of all to Judaism, Christianity's closest relative on the religious family tree, and a religion with a tremendous spiritual depth, as any reader of Abraham Heschel, for example, is aware. But for the most part "Judaism is curiously unrepresented amongst the religious realizations of Traditionalism" (Mark Sedgwick). Could this have anything to do with the ultra-rightist political tendencies of some Traditionalists?

The Catholic blogger Carrie Tomko has also voiced some down-to-Earth skepticism of Cutsinger.