Nonduality in Christian Contexts - orthodox?

Nonduality entails different things in different categories.

In this collection, the concept nonduality most often refers to anthropological, metaphysical and epistemological realities, which are described by science, evaluated by culture and normed by philosophy, all with distinct methods which - while integral to - are autonomous from religion, hence part of neither essential dogma nor speculative doctrine. In such cases, then, nonduality must first be challenged, defended, developed and nuanced by those other disciplines, apart from interpretive theology. So, foremost, do consider and study any of your own phenomenal experiences and any post-experiential reflections within those contexts, prior to interpreting them through theological lenses.

This is not to say that the concept has not found religious expression in all of the great traditions; it has, although varying in emphases, both within and between traditions, which often employ - not only different, but - novel categories, this due to their distinct sophiological (desire forming) and soteriological (healing) trajectories.

So, less often in this collection, it has indeed referred to theological realities. For example, in the Christian context, it has been addressed in different theologies of nature, which are grounded in trinitarian dogma, where the ground seems fertile to grow interfaith dialogue (cf. polydoxy references herein). Also, perhaps more relevant to anyone inquiring regarding their experiences, an inculurated (see note 1 below) approach can find a place for nonduality in Christian formative spirituality, such as in concepts like perichoresis (indwelling) and theosis (divinization); (cf. references to Thomas Merton and others, also in interfaith dialogue contexts).

All of these explorations can be safely conducted within the norms of orthodoxy (see note 2 below), for we can have a confident assurance in the true-glory we hope for and a conviction of final truths unseen through our ongoing active participation in dialogue with all of the witnesses to revelation, which include scripture, tradition, church governance, the theologians' interpretations and the laity's participations. As Rowan Williams

sagely observes, orthodoxy lies always in the future, because Christian truth is eschatological, for we see now, dimly. Still, we see always sufficiently to take our next good step, if we remain open to cooperation with the Spirit.

(1)note re: inculturated ~ Through the dialogic process of inculturation, transcendent theological truths find expression and can be spread in different cultures, thereby reaching people in the concrete contexts in which they live. If augmented by an inter-culturation approach, one might even find treasures elsewhere that might serve to deepen one's selfunderstanding as a Christian. One will also come to realize that other traditions, like Christianity, are not theologically monolithic, thus must be neither facilely mapped onto nor caricatured by our own.

(2) note re: orthodoxy ~ see http://www.scribd.com/doc/101551503/Orthodoxy-as-DialogicProcess and also http://johnboy.philothea.net/2012_archived/witnesses%20to %20revelation.jpg