Articles

THE SOCIAL EDGE INTERVIEW: AUTHOR AND SPIRITUAL DIRECTOR ALEXANDER SHAIA

by Gerry McCarthy

Alexander Shaia is an educator, spiritual director, author, psychotherapist, and professional speaker. He's also the founder and director of the Blue Door Retreat in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

     Shaia has a doctorate in clinical psychology. He travels internationally and conducts retreats and seminars on Quadratos, Christian Spirituality, rites of passage, and Jungian Sandplay therapy.

     His new book, Beyond the Biography of Jesus: The Journey of Quadratos (Book 1) was published by Cold Tree Press. Book 2 will be published this summer. I reached him in Orlando, Florida.

Gerry McCarthy: You've talked about fundamentalisms on the left and right in Christian denominations today. Can you speak to me more about this?

Advertisement

Alexander Shaia: Today both sides of the continuum are flattening the message of Jesus Christ down to one aspect. One side is passionately focused on the literal words in the scriptures. The other side is concerned about history, and the re-creation of the first century and Jesus' original words. Quadratos uses both perspectives, but toward a new end. The Gospels were not intended to be about a dead philosopher, but a risen Jesus the Christ.

     We need to come away from one-sided flat perspectives (while holding their goodness) and find a faith that is living and practical --one that is about prayer, service, and the transformation of our personal lives. If Jesus the Christ is the great truth of the universe, that truth will also be found in good science, philosophy, theology, or worship. Anytime the search for Jesus the Christ is reduced to only one aspect (and that aspect is proclaimed "the one and only" aspect) it hampers us in the expression of inclusive truth --which is built on the perspective of many disciplines.

     My reading of what happened in early Christianity is that those communities knew Jesus the Christ was risen and living. Did they want to hear the stories of Jesus? Of course. But that is not why these four Gospels were written or collected into the canon. These four Gospels --and only these four Gospels-- form the internal and eternal sequence of spiritual practice: Face change, endure suffering, receive joy, and serve. Early Christians wanted to know how to practice Christianity --not the flat words of an "original Jesus." And the great truth has endured the passage of centuries and numerous translations.

GM: If religion is about being in touch with ultimate mysteries --is there a danger in looking for greater certainty in matters that may be obscure? There's seemingly no end to the books and documentaries coming out on the historical Jesus. One recent example: Reading Judas: The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity by Elaine Pagels and Karen King.

AS: We can add to that The Lost Tomb of Jesus. Is Christianity based "just" on an historical moment (and the word just is important)? People are constantly asking me: Do you believe these stories are true? Yes. Do you believe these stories happened in history? Yes. But the truth of them having happened in history is that they happen in every moment. It's not about what happened in 33 years of the first century. If the Christ is risen then these texts must be the living record of truth that rings in the human heart, relationship, community, and faith tradition --regardless of age or culture. When fourth century Christianity said: "Here are the four eyewitness accounts" --they were not saying these are the original words of a Jesus. Rather, they were saying: "These are the four texts of spiritual practice in the sequence of living." They were not looking to choose historical records of Jesus, but rather one text for each of the four great questions: Change, suffer, joy and serve.

     I see these four Gospels replicated daily as a spiritual director sitting with others. I see them replicated daily in faith traditions, and in prayer. I see them proven in the best of science and philosophy. Jesus the Christ is an historical figure from the year 33. Jesus the Christ is the pattern of reality that has been observed since the first moment of time.

     The first line of Genesis says: "In the beginning was the Word." Go down the layers of this scripture like spiritual archaeology. The Word in Greek is Logos. Under Logos is the Greek Christos. Under Christos is the Aramaic Messiah or Ruah. Now read John's proclamation: "In the beginning was the breath of God and no-thing was created except it was created in and through the breath of God."

     Does this understanding deny Jesus? Not in my understanding. What it says is that Jesus the Christ is the full expression of all time. And what we had perceived dimly before the first century --through Jesus became fully present. This is why early Christians called themselves Followers of The Way. Jesus the Christ is a patterned process of living and dying and rising --in consort with the great rhythm of God. And it is the pattern of that rhythm which was the foundation of the choice of the four Gospels, the Gospel reading cycle, and the rhythm of the Eucharist.

GM: Can you speak to me about the four questions in the gospel cycle you've talked about?

AS: Here is a corrective to today's scholarship. Early Christians were not simply searching for the "true Gospels of Jesus," they wanted to name the four texts of spiritual practice. They chose Matthew, Mark, John, and Luke because each speaks to one of the four great spiritual questions. The first question in the cycle (stated in the Gospel of Matthew) is how to face change? The second question (the Gospel of Mark) is how to endure suffering? The third question (the Gospel of John) is how to receive joy or what is the meaning of joy? The fourth question (the Gospel of Luke and the Acts of the Apostles) is how to serve?

     Those four questions in sequence were replicated throughout early Christianity. Preparation for baptism was a four-stage process. There was the period of Inquiry, which is the question of change. Next came the period of the Catechumenate, which is the question of suffering and trial. Third was the time of Purification and Enlightenment, which is the question of joy. And last was the period of Mystagogia, which is the question of service.

     The choice of the four Gospels, and their ordering is also the sequence of Sunday worship (the Eucharist). The Gathering through the Penitential Rite is in essence the call to change and transformation. The listening to the word is the call to sit in time of trial and suffering. Then we move to the table, the great Eucharist prayer and come to the reception of Communion (the experience of joy). But the summit is not at the table --but in the final blessing the Missa (Mass) --meaning to be sent.

     It's not simply that there are the four great spiritual questions (or a sequence to Eucharist and the Rites of Initiation). But early Christianity knew that grace moves in a patterned way, and they ordered everything in our tradition to move us through the process of growth and transformation in Christ in an ever-repeating cycle.

GM: In the book, you write how it was stunning that this "fourness cycle" is almost the foundation upon which every one of our spiritual processes of the Church is built.

AS: When this realization came (and it felt like a personal epiphany) it was stunning, because all of us have been looking at this greatness for so long, but we missed the blueprint. I would never say Quadratos is the final answer. There is no final answer. But I believe it's a new level of truth for us to re-claim.

GM: You've spoken before about the over-reliance on the rational. Do we think there's an attempt to rationalize Jesus' words and make them into a coherent intellectual system?

AS: Yes. I'm going to answer this with a piece that I've been wrestling with the last year. The Gospel of Luke has some of the most exquisite and beautiful stories of reconciliation in any of the gospels. In Luke we find The Prodigal Son, the Good Samaritan, and Jesus, from the cross, saying: "Father forgive them." And yet, Luke also has very strident passages. It seems like there is a dichotomy in the Christ, and how does the switch get flipped? Then I remembered Luke's great metaphor --which is the heart. Luke is the only Gospel that continually speaks about the importance of the heart. For example: Mary pondering things in her heart. The disciples coming back from Emmaus saying: "Were our hearts not burning?"

     I went to my Jewish scholars and said: Speak to me about heart in Judaism. They said: This image of heart is very-ness. It's knowing something with every fibre. It's not simply head, feeling, will, or gut. It's the place where all of those parts come together. Heart infuses very-ness.

     I'm partly a scholar. I love the intellectual rigor brought to the Gospels. I'm totally a Semite by my birth. I'm a person of the Mediterranean who expresses himself passionately. I want these Gospels and my faith to be an expression that's not just one aspect. I don't want to go off "half cracked" with just my hands waived in praise. Nor do I want it to just be an intellectual exercise about word etymology or archaeological research. There has to be a place where all the aspects of ourselves and all our disciplines can meet again. From that place we are all enriched.

GM: Have there been responses to Beyond The Biography of Jesus that surprised you?

AS: I'm finding that conservative Christians (although I'm not sure what the words conservative or progressive mean anymore) are telling me how moved they are by the book. More progressive Christians are walking away and saying: It's not how I was trained in the seminary. It's not what my professors taught.

     Neither of those positions should be sanctified. But I'm sad that my more intellectual bothers and sisters are not wrestling with this material more. I'm not asking anybody to buy this. But there's a pregnant question in Quadratos that we should not so easily dismiss. I'm finding that the "more progressive side" is not giving this a full hearing. Which comes back to the earlier question. In the Gospel of Luke, anyone who does not come to Jesus seeking integration --Jesus has wake up words for them. If we are holding our faith primarily or solely through the rational, Jesus the Christ has wake-up words for us.

GM: So we test our faith against reasonableness. But we must embody our faith.

AS: I try never to question another person's faith. In this book, I'm asking people to question aspects of faith. I'm concerned that the work of the Jesus Seminar has spawned a generation primarily focused on historical questions, because they believe that the one true Jesus is underneath the four great Gospels. This historical search --not by intent-- has now spawned cultural excitement for the Lost Gospel of Judas or deep anxiety from Misquoting Jesus. This work has become unbalanced and is now leading us too far to one side --and saying that we verify faith through history. The four canonical Gospels were chosen because they and we are eyewitnesses to grace. The truth of these four and their reading sequence is the truth in our lives today. If they are not true in us, they're not true. If we find a point in human history where these texts are no longer true in our prayer and hearts --they should be removed from the canon. I don't believe we will ever see that day.

     If I could use an analogy to the Ignatian Exercises: Just last week a spiritual director far more trained in the exercises than I am (I consider myself a neophyte) said --do you realize that you've just described the same pattern of Ignatian Exercises? I was delighted to hear that, but not surprised, because it has to be that way. Grace happens (the way Jesus the Christ happens in us) and moves in a universal, invariant sequential pattern. We bring ourselves to the exercises and the exercises will move us in the different way that's right for us. But the pattern of the exercises does not deviate. That same pattern of the exercises is the pattern of the four Gospels ordered in the Three Year Sunday reading cycle. That's the veracity from which the Church in the fourth century can say: Yes we have the four eyewitness accounts.

GM: There are numerous sharp divisions within the Catholic Church today. Where do you see signs of hope?

AS: I'm more hopeful today than I've been in probably 30 years. I just came back from the Los Angeles Religion Education Congress. There were 45,000 Catholics just on fire with a message from Fr. Massengil, one of the keynote speakers, who spoke of a Jesus who sits at the table not just with everyone, but with anyone. I'm greatly hopeful for this papacy --which is offering healing, asking us to lower our voices, engage in collaboration, dialogue, and listening to each other.

     I'm also greatly heartened, because I know the pattern of the Gospels --the pattern of Quadratos. The second path (the Gospel of Mark) is about a time of enduring enormous opposition where the tension between voices and ideas becomes strident and strained. The practice of that path is to realize that neither side of the discussion has a full answer. We have to stay in prayer and stay at the table with each other asking for the grace to find our way together with new integration. Jesus the Christ will lead us there at the appropriate moment. But we must not walk away from the table of grace or cast anyone out of our hearts.

     My only concern for us as Roman Catholics is that we don't begin to schism and divorce. As long as we keep the sense of good intention and good will in the midst of great dialogue and discussion (sometime heated), but always knowing that everybody and every voice is welcome at the table. If we do that work, God will lead us to the third place --the Gospel of John and a wider joy as the One Body of Christ.

Gerry McCarthy is the Editor of The Social Edge.