{Open Letter} The Theological Model of CTMU : What ‘Holopantheism’ Actually Means [Corrective to Myself]

With Langan’s definitions I now understand his Thought on God as discussed in the CTMU introductory writings. And I see not just ‘that’ Langan intimates his model to Panentheism, but also ‘how.'

{Intended as an Email to Dr. Gina Langan at CTMU Radio - but Open to All for Comment}

I will Issue this Part 1 as a ‘Corrective’ to my video on My Theological ‘Divergence’ from the CTMU. My apologies for misunderstanding and mis-framing Mr. Langan’s views. It fell on my own impatience and incomprehension of the existing written material.

If you do not have time to answer Part 2 and Part 3, I understand. This can be deliberated on by myself and others who have less constraints on our time.

If by a Good Tiding you find time to answer Me I will no doubt be in your Debt and Filled with Gratitude.

Thank you for your patience and Sincerest Grace in dispensing your time to my work.

Part 1 (Corrective to Myself)

1 - [as defined by Langan] Pantheism: God is Omnipresent

2 - [as defined by Langan] Holo: The Universe is more than the Sum of Its Parts

3 - Holopantheism = A Version of Panentheism

Prior, when I read ‘Holopantheism’ in Langan’s introduction to the CTMU; I short-circuited to my own definition of simply ‘pantheism’ where I thought that Pantheism was the belief that God ‘was’ the Universe in-itself and nothing more. Now through reflection with my Colleague Tommy from the YouTube Channel ‘CTMU Singularity’ I have come to discard the Kantian notion of ‘noumena’ or ‘in-itself’ terminology save for the instances when it helps me in expressive use (but always as something transitory as I come away from Kantian Dualism).

With Langan’s definitions I now understand his Thought on God as discussed in the CTMU introductory writings. And I see not just ‘that’ Langan intimates his model to Panentheism, but also ‘how’ he performs this in his mind.

Langan notes Parmenidean Platonic ‘Idealized Forms’ or ‘Abstracted Reality’ cannot exist apart from the Reality Syntax, in that they are included in the Reality Syntax as an ultimate of Plato’s regress. In like manner God is not separate from such a Syntax. Gotcha One. And for Chris ‘Pan’ means God is Omnipresent. Gotcha Two. Finally for Chris ‘Holo’ means The Universe is more than the Sum of Its Parts. Gotcha Three. And with these propositions we approach what is traditionally known as Panentheism which I had said in my video was something I was prepared to assent to.

Part 2 (Essence/Energy)

Now come the questions of Clarification.

As God ‘Ineheres in Matter’ does this mean that his Essence is extended, or do simply his Energies hold/suspend matter/objects/a rock? And an answer (as well as the question in formulation itself) for this seems to me to intuitively fit into categories established by the Early Church Fathers and in the Orthodox Line. The Essence/Energy conception seems to refract the issue into visible light.

As an illustration of [where I am at in my consideration] the above question; leaning on Heidegger a bit. When I hold a Rock as a tool, it could be said that the Rock partakes of my Essence or ‘extends’ my Essence while not ‘becoming’ my essence itself. Or would it be better said that the Rock enjoys my ‘Energies.’ And in like manner in the Case of God (and here we are just talking about matter rather than people), the physical matter of the universe is held as I hold the Rock. Such that matter is held/suspended by God, extending (or partaking) his essence, while not ‘becoming’ his essence. I think the Orthodox would rather have it that the Energies hold/suspend the Rock/Matter; but you might equally well say that the Rock/Matter is extending God’s essence while not ‘becoming’ or being ‘grafted’ into God.

Part 3 (Christ Mysticism)

Which leads into my Second and really most Vital Question that I have for Chris. Is: what are your thoughts on what Albert Schweitzer labelled ‘Christ Mysticism?’ The relationship whereby Believers are ‘being-in’ Christ; that is, the Apostle Paul writes over a hundred times of Believers being ‘in,’ ‘with,’ or ‘through,’ Jesus Christ - and in Christ’s Body.

So that it is the case that we do not just follow the ‘teachings of Christ’ but that we are ‘grafted’ into his Body. As I spoke of in part two, we thus don’t just partake of God’s Essence but are also filled with it (though as my Pastor says “Logos controls you, you don’t control it”). As in Ephesians 3:17 “That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith.”

I would be well disposed to know Chris’s thought on ‘Christ Mysticism’ most especially as I think this is the most integral of Paul’s Teachings for Christianity over all.

———————————————

Again thanks for All the Work you put into teaching and spreading the Gospel. A hearty Amen may follow your efforts. God Bless!

Sincerely Gregory Mathew Wilford.