DRUPAL converting an existing Dreamweaver CS3 website into a Drupal website.

Well - for my own benefit I am creating a Drupal blog. I know this has very little to do with spirituality but it serves as a reminder of the progressive steps to achieve a Content Management System(CMS) run website.

This particular venture is actually converting an already existent website (www.ctiscarborough.org.uk) into a website which can be managed independently of the designer. I have decided not to use a given theme but to start from scratch.

So here goes ......

STEP 1: Download Wampserver so I have a local server. Follow instructions and it all sets up easily.

STEP 2: Download a version of Drupal. I have decided to download from Acquia (http://acquia.com/downloads) as this is run by the founder of Drupal and also I understand it has 'waytogo' provisions and grouped modules which I have not fully grasped but will serve me in the months ahead!

STEP 3: Unzip the Drupal Core into the www folder of the Wampserver folder (C Drive)

STEP 4: Click the wampserver icon PHPmyAdmin and create a 'drupal' database.

STEP 5: Click the localhost DRupal site appears and follow through instructions..

STEP 6: Clean URL's ... if this does not show as an option. Check the Apache httpd.conf file and un-comment: "LoadModule rewrite_module modules/mod_rewrite.so"

STEP 7: In the folder: www/sites/all/ create a folder called 'themes'.

STEP 8: In the folder 'themes' create a folder called (in this case) ctis. Your folder would be the name of your site so if I use ctis in future replace it with the name of your site.

STEP 9: Create an .info file ... copy the contents of the 'garland' info and exchange the word 'Garland' for 'ctis' save in the ctis folder.

STEP 10: Take the index.html and copy it into ctis file and change it to 'page.tpl.php'

STEP 11: copy also into the ctis the css file but change that to 'style.css'

STEP 12: Open up localhost on browser by clicking the white semi circle in the bottom right of screne ... check in 'themes' and locate 'ctis' and make it the default theme ... save. Now the index page of your original site appears as localhost in Drupal via the local server you have set up through wamp.

++++++++++This is where the fun begins +++++++++++++++

STEP 13: Create more pages... the about , events etc: Admin>Create Content>Page . Note Menu Link Title = same as you want the nav tab to look like. Title = What will appear on the top of the page. Primary link has been chosen as this will fit with Drupals default placing of a top horizontal navigation menu. What a joyful surprise it was to me that the default Drupal html for this navigation structure is an unordered list(ul). Therefore since I placed the primary navigation Drupal variable within the divs for my original navigation the css picked up the same code ... lo and behold the tabs appeared as the original straight away! Before putting content into the page  make sure Input Options = Full html. Then copy and paste the full html from the original page into the body section.

Step 14  From then onwards it is a case of puuting your html into each relevant page and checking to see what it looks like. If any CSS needed is from other style sheets slip it into the styles (Drupal default). I use Firefox addon Firebug which can help you locate any styling problems by locating which style refers to which item in the original and making sure it is being applied to the new Drupal version of the website.

Step 15 Images .... of course jpegs and gifs etc were probably in an 'images' file in the original website. Unless these are placed in the correct file they will not show on the new Drupal site. You can upload these by enabling the optional core module 'Upload' which will then show up in the 'file attachments' section underneath the body section where code and content is placed. I have found that this is unnecesary because you can do this manually by simply finding the file it uploads to which is the sites/default/files folder in my case. However there is the option to allow the users browser to download the file if the module upload is enabled above which the path of the pic is indicated to help you locate for manual linking. So it is simply a matter wherever you have a link of say img src="images/ pic.jpg" to change it to img src="/sites/default/files/pic.jpg" (not forgetting the first forward slash) provided you have placed or the image uploader has placed the image in /sites/default/files.

Step 16 SPRY ... well SPRY is another form of AJAX. I used it to create this page. Drupal uses jQuery which is similar. I struggled and went round the houses thinking that I had some imagined problem of Drupal not being compatable with Spry and no-one as yet having created a module for it. THIS IS NOT THE CASE. It is again a simple case of copy and pasting all the javascript and html into the Drupal page content and making sure all links have been corrected and files uploaded. XML files go in (my case) the upload target of sites/default. In my case links to images within the XML file had to be changed. All .js files refering to the Spry framework (eg xpath.js / SpryEffects.js / SpryAccordian.js etc) used in the original html have to be placed in the /sites/default/files. In my case all my Spry was created through Dreamweaver CS3 so .js files are bundled together in the 'SpryAssets' folder. By dragging the whole folder into the default file the link would be /sites/default/files/SpryAssets. IF YOU HAVE PATIENTLY ADJUSTED RELEVANT LINKS AND MOVED THE RELEVANT FILE ALL SHOULD BE WELL BUT 2 MORE THINGS:
1) Using Dreamweaver Spry uses different css files for its design ... these have to be copy and pasted into styles.css for the correct formatting to take place.
2) ... It is important to enable the PHP module and enable the input format under site configuration to allow for PHP. Tags used in AJAX/ SPRY are such that the enabling of the PHP module will allow their usage.

Lost Generation

Excellent stuff ... pass it on!

intentionally a piece of cake ...

What is the difference between Centering Prayer and other forms of prayer? I continue the struggle of maintaining a clear view of Christian distinctiveness when it comes to the mystical experience and the approach to prayer but I'm getting there. Thomas Keating in his book "Intimacy with God" distinguishes the usage of a sacred word or a sacred symbol from other Eastern Methods. "Rather than paying attention to these symbols we use them to express our intention."... again ...  "It is intentionality that distinguishes Centering Prayer from other forms of prayer" Here we have no attempt to focus attention on an object (like a flame) or to concentrate on a particular word. The usage of a sacred word is not its meaning but a simple stimulus to re-align our wills to the love of God. Here we have not a mental exercise or even an emotional experience but an exercise of the will to consent to the love of God. I find it easy to recognise an emotion and a thought but an act of or 'consent of the will' as something separate from thought, emotion or activity is a hard thing to recognise.
It all makes sense that love is essentially an act of the will. You can feel love, think love, say you love something or someone but wisdom is justified by her actions. We all know how cheap thoughts, feelings and words can be without any action to prove it. However here we are in total stillness so the only expression of the will in love is simply being in God's presence without any action. How can one discern any willfulness without action? Perhaps what is meant is this: I consent to God's love by simply allowing it to be here in this moment and simply availing myself to it as I am in this moment. No other action is suitable but non-action. This submission or consent is the essence of all true forms of Love that will follow.

fabrik8ed reality ...

I read somewhere that we think on average 12,000 thoughts a day. If we are writing intensely it can be up to 25,000! Apparently over 90% are repetative and unecessary. 
I have discovered that alot of thought is involved in problem solving but also distressingly it is involved in creating its own little fantasy world - imaginings, scenarios, and downright improper thoughts. The reason for this is that we are not satisfied with things as they are so we live in our own little heads to create a different reality which will stimulate us emotionally or even physically. We must make friends with the present moment if we wish to engage with reality and not only so but the present moment as it is and not the one in our own little heads! Why? What's wrong with the imagination running wild? As an escape from what is present it is merely strengthening our own ego. In which way? It is strengthening 'Control' ... to live in the Now is to become vulnerable. When we open ourselves up to what 'is' then our imaginations can be inspired and effective in the purpose of true loving being. Jesus became vulnerable so that He was responsive to the call of love from his Father. He did not strengthen his own egoic identity through controlling His own fabricated reality.

heavy mental noise ...

Much of my thought life is engaged with anything but the Present Moment. There are too many extra thoughts! I have been trying to categorise them in order to recognise when I am not engaging with and simply 'being' in the Present Moment. All these thoughts clearly and not so clearly work with the false self to perpetuate an unconscious existence, an unreal world in which 'I' take centre stage caught in the autonomous (non) existence of thought forms thus robbing me of realising Essence! (What is the fall of man but the separation of Form from Essence - the loss of spirit, living in the flesh - the preoccupation with external at the expense of internal reality). So lets look at what constitutes this 'Mental Noise':

PAST RELATED:
Re-living past achievements and successes - this builds up the ego.
Re-living past failures and embarrassments - this too builds up the ego. If I cannot be important with a sense of achievement I can certainly get centre of attention with my sense of failure!

FUTURE PLANS:
Things I ought to do / Things I intend to do / Things i must not forget to do.
Projected fantasies of success
Fears of a future real or imagined event
Future Spiritual attainment ... Practicing the Present Moment as a means to an end.
INTERNAL THOUGHTS:
Fabricated Reality - little alterations to past scenarios, fantasies ... 
Analytical - Introspective circular thinking. Not to be confused with observational as one recognises the false egoic self.
Problematical - the false self thrives on problems - they give it meaning.
Distracting - I'll go and eat something. I will check Facebook for the nth time!
Internal conversations - things I would say if I could.

A GENERAL SENSE OF 'I'M NOT WHERE I SHOULD BE'. Space
A GENERAL SENSE OF 'NOT HAVING WHAT I THINK I NEED TO BE MORE FULFILLED'. Possessions

All these things can be seen as a frantic attempt to keep ourselves 'alive’. We are performing a kind of juggling act wasting energy and making so much 'noise'. All the time we are robbing ourselves of true life which comes from 'quietness', 'stillness' and an 'awareness' of all that we have and are NOW. ... and in that awareness we lose ourselves in Another ... there is no room for little 'Me' in the Present Moment which is not perceived through the conceptual work of the mind but intuitively through the 'spirit'.
I thought this. imagine that you are in a noisy factory in the middle of nowhere. The noise is deafening. You decide to walk out into the open air. What a relief! The noise is there but distant and the more you engage with the quietness of 'outside' the more distant the noise becomes until eventually you are so taken up with the view and the sounds of outside the noise in the factory seems no longer to exist. However, a quick blip and you begin to hear the noise again ... the distraction becomes so irritating you decide to go back in to try to shut it off but begin to be consumed by it again. 'Whatever we resist persists' - by trying to fight against and subdue noise we increase our awareness. By allowing it to be it ceases to persist.
Father Thomas Keating said our thoughts are like noisy children in the background. When we engage in Centering Prayer we are like adults focusing outside- perhaps looking out of the window - the noise of the 'children' recedes into the background. Until eventually the children, aware of your 'awarenes' become quiet and come to join in with what you are engaged in! Focussing on the Present Moment marshalls eventually all our faculties into its own alignment. This is nothing spiritual but natural - what we do with what we have NOW in relation to God is another thing!

Lose yourself ... find Yourself!

I have been snailing around listening to an interesting commentary on Tolle's 'New Earth' book on the Oprah website (forgive me -slight cringe there!) . My conclusions have been that Eckhart Tolle and many self help methods coincide most in the whole area of acceptance ... In acceptance lieth Peace. Listening to Eckhart Tolle I find myself doing what I did with the Sedona Method... taking one step back from the 'false me' (The egoic, unconscious self) thus creating 'space', recognising the 'true conscious self' from the standpoint of one observing. With this detachment which the 'space' allows I am able, from an objective standpoint, to hold lightly (accept) all the feelings/thoughts without having any attachment to them. That acceptance = release. (It took me a long time to realise that RELEASE in the SM meant to ACCEPT.) This has been a great help to me. I am also aware of how I gravitate to allowing such negatives as worry, punishing myself, and even torment at the expense of PEACE in the MOMENT. 'Why?' I ask myself. Simply because in doing so the egoic self is strengthened. The Egoic Self (or Ego or self life) uses problems to attach to and constantly wants to find some hook on which to draw energy - anything but the present moment which brings an end to my 'little story' and the ME identity I build upon it! (Thanks ET for the terminology!) I am struggling with the 'pain body' concept but I guess I'm close to some idea of it with my explanation above.

I find great similarities here with my religious experience in that for the Christian there is a 'death to the old self' through the Cross and a 'rising to new life ' through the resurrection.

My one concern is the whole matter of introspection. With alot of these ideas and methods there can be an increasing amount of 'navel gazing' perhaps symbolised by the Buddhist eyes closed looking within. I find this disconcerting as the whole process of seeking release from the egoic self can in itself 'bite you in da bum' and simply be strengthening it! The only answer I can give to this without sounding incredibly pious is having found our way to escape personal egoic caused suffering to look away from ourselves, pick up the suffering around us and with proactive compassion make a change for those powerless to help themselves - even through small acts of kindness. The ultimate goal I think of all approaches to spiritual health should be therefore to lose ourselves for the sake of others and in so doing we shall find ourselves.

(This is an adjustment to a post elsewhere)

Essence and Form

Listening to more of Eckhart Tolle (ET which might be appropo!) I took on board the idea that to appreciate the essence of things we must relinquish 'labels'. I sent a post on a group I belong to thus:

I think sometimes our idea of God is deficient in terms of His greatness, and His Grace. We can never limit him within the finite restrictions of our own minds. And why do we wish to do this? For our own security and Control. If we label something we in some way possess it but we also lose the potential life we would have got from it of we had simply let it be. A walk in the park or in the countryside loses its impact because we look at a flower and say 'That is a flower' ... we have labeled it, boxed it, contained it within our conceptual framework and in so doing we have in a sense 'killed' it (we may even literally do so in order to make it our possession by plucking it and taking it home!). If we could simply like a child look at nature without labeling it - just allowing it to be we connect with it and are stimulated by it - as we do so these things never lose their vitality - we continue in praise and thanks to our creator God. And so with people - when we label them we have contained them within our conceptual framework but also the vitality we would have received otherwise is lost ... and also with our relationship with God - whatever revelations we have of Him (esp. in Centering Prayer) must be held with open hands ... not be used to analyze and contain but to let Him be. Whatever we release to Him in this way will be more than compensated for as He multiplies back to us - even if it is in the form of 'rays of darkness' ...

I shared my ideas with my good friend Ross Kendall and he disagreed and we discussed a bit. When I got home there was a response to the post. Excitedly (asudo) I opened up the mail hoping someone would affirm my erudite contribution but (asithappenz) I got this:

I'm going to pipe up here and offer a counter argument to the one presented here: From earliest times - even in the book of Genesis, God has Adam naming the animals as they are brought before him - we  have had labels of all sorts for our environment. I would like to offer that it is not so much to delimit, or box, or even certainly  'kill', as to recognize that those things are particular to us in some way. When I go out into nature, first I see the beauty before me, the myriad of colors, shapes, textures, patterns, but I also find  myself saying "that's a red oak, that's a swamp white oak, that's a  bobolink, that's a monarch butterfly, there's a tall goldenrod" and  so on. Because I have a special, even intimate, relationship with these things, I have taken the trouble to know their names, perhaps even their preferences, what they say about their habitat and all their other interconnections to other beings in nature. While his point is well taken that we also tend to 'analyze and contain' but that we must also let God (and Nature) be, I would like to assert that the process of becoming intimate with something - whether a plant, animal, person, God, idea or other thing - involves full participation in all our senses and our intellect. Our curiosity drives our interest in finding similarities, distinctions, patterns, and relationships, and this richness contains within it the seeds of letting go of all of that and seeing beyond. 

What's a bobolink thought I? I realise either I'm wrong, misunderstood or ET is wrong and misunderstood .... I looked deeper into this and have given it more thought ...

If by "labeling" we mean an embracing of form without essence (The outward shell rather than the life of the thing) we can see some references in the Bible.

Jesus made the distinction between form and essence in the way we approach the scriptures:
John 5:39 You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me.

Through focussing only upon the outward form of words we rob ourselves of the essence. I guess this is what Lectio Divina is all about. Looking beyond the literal towards the deeper essential meaning which brings the words to life? 

Again Paul refers to the outward form of religion:
2 Timothy 3:4ff ... lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power.
Here he is comparing religious outward form with the Life of the spirit which does not dismiss the form but gives it life.

Again to the early legalistic Jews whose legalism strengthened their (blind unconscious) sense of self Paul says in Romans 2:2 ... that "they have... in the law the form of knowledge and truth — you, then, who teach others, do you not teach yourself?"

Ideed the idea or existence of form is not a bad thing: Col 2:9 ...For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form ...
Jesus said in the gospel of John "No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.. and He who has seen me has seen the Father"
 
but (here is the nub) we mustn't hold onto form without embracing the essence.
Paul says: 2 Corinthians 5:16
Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more.

The form of Jesus humanity can only be fully appreciated by looking beyond the form to his deity and as it says in Romans 8 ... The same spirit (essence) that raised Jesus from the dead shall also quicken our mortal bodies (form).

and again .. 2 Corinthians 4:16 ... For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man (form) perish, yet the inward man (essence) is renewed day by day

This is not to say I hope it makes clear that essence is opposed to form (or names) but that essence gives form its life and power. This I know is going far beyond the original issue of looking at flowers ;o) but I guess we may be permitted to ponder the essence of all created things which will enhance our appreciation and hence our thankfulness without denegrating the tremendous variety and distinctiveness of all things.
What do you think?


 

Duality or Non Duality ... which is best? ;o)

Well how have the past few days of discovery panned out. In between gardening and more gardening (which I thoroughly enjoy) I have been doing some research. Having been so enamoured with my latest discoveries along the esoteric road - not least Eckhart Tolle I decided to backtrack. I am never too comfortable in throwing myself 'hook line and sinker' into things without stepping back and looking more objectively. However I reckon I have immersed myself into Tolle's philosophy enough to understand experientially where he is coming from. Definitely I conclude that Tolle and other modern day mystics have alot to offer in terms of finding the present moment and the fulfilment contained therein. However I  am not sure that I would agree with the religious interpretations and applications. The present moment is given to all ... we miss out in using it as a means to the future or living in the past ... but we do not have to spiritualise it anymore than we should spiritualise anything else we have in common ... an arm or a leg. The present moment is a given fact which Eckhart and others have kindly enabled us to see. How we interpret that fact and what we choose to do with it is another matter ...

Now my little web discoveries. Thanks to Fr Thomas Keating for whom I have alot of respect (3 books I recommend: Open Heart open Mind and Invitation to Love and Intimacy with God) I ended up giving my email address to Integral Life, Ken Wilber's big project. An email with a list of the latest posts lead me to (at long last!) a thinking Christian's contribution to non duality holding both the value of Buddhist concepts of non duality as a meeting point and also holding forth the Christian distinctiveness in a sensitive manner. Check out his post and the responses he was given: The role of Jesus in inter-spiritual dialogue by Cameron Freeman. Check out another of his posts entitled Good Friday: The impossibility of Nirvana. Excellent stuff! I must quote two of his references:

G. K. Chesterton “That a good man may have his back to the wall is no more than we knew already; but that God could have his back to the wall is a boast for all insurgents for ever... In this indeed I approach a matter more dark and awful than it is easy to discuss... a matter which the greatest saints and thinkers have justly feared to approach. But in that terrific tale of the Passion there is a distinct emotional suggestion that the author of all things (in some unthinkable way) went not only through agony, but through doubt... When the world shook and the sun was wiped out of heaven, it was not at the crucifixion, but at the cry from the cross: the cry which confessed that God was forsaken of God. [Mt 27:46 quoting Ps 22:1] And now let the revolutionists choose a creed from all the creeds and a god from all the gods of the world, carefully weighing all the gods of inevitable recurrence and of unalterable power. They will not find another god who has himself been in revolt... Nay (the matter grows too difficult for human speech), but let the atheists themselves choose a god. They will find only one divinity who ever uttered their isolation; only one religion in which God seemed for an instant to be an atheist.” [cf The Everlasting Man CW2:344]

“A Cross is a blunt and graceless form. It has not the completeness and satisfying quality of a circle. It does not have to grace of a parabola or the promise of a long curve... A cross speaks not of unity but of brokenness, not of harmony but ambiguity, it is a form of tension and not rest... The cross is the symbol because the whacks of life take that shape... And unless you have a crucified God, you don’t have a big enough God.” Joseph Sittler  quoted in Westhelle, V. “The Scandalous God: The Use and Abuse of the Cross” Fortress Press, Minneapolis 2006.

Check out also Cameron's blog with an interesting article entitled 'Zen and the paradoxical language of Jesus' Thanks to this guy I have decided to carry on reading Jurgen Moltmann's The crucified God. It is not easy reading but I realise in order to dig deeply into the richness of conscious awareness and not simply indulge myself therein I must also keep in focus the raw reality of the sufferings of Jesus on the Cross. This is where the Christian mysticism (seems to me at this point) takes leave of other paths. This contrast is graphically notable in that between the smiling Buddha inwardly blissful with eyes closed to the world and the suffering Saviour arms outstretched embracing the world. Perhaps we have another paradox to consider. The promise of peace as we become present to all that is and the promise of suffering through being part of this groaning creation ...

I also checked out Eckhart Tolle’s critics. One argued that all his stuff is borrowed not least from Schopenhauer’s ‘The emptiness of existence’. I read that and conclude that it is not true … there are vast differences. However another Christian I have somehow linked up with (can’t remember how) is Fr Richard Rohr … check out an excellent article entitled ‘Living a life less ordinary’. Relevant to this blog I quote:

The act of contemplation helps us to observe the “unobserved” or false self, and by so doing, to gradually detach ourselves from it. But it is not something that comes naturally in our culture. “We are a capitalist society, into accumulation, not detachment,” Fr Rohr says. “That’s why people are attracted to Buddhism. Buddhists have kept their vocabulary and their honesty about the need for detachment up to date, whereas we’re just people who have invested heavily in our own opinions and rightness, with disastrous results.” The secret to detachment, he suggests, is to learn how to live more fully in “the now, not the past or the future”.

He has a book coming out in September The Naked Now: Learning to See as the Mystics See … Think I just might get it … anyway time for my 20mins listening prayer!

Centering Prayer

I have spent 20 minutes this morning and 20 minutes this evening being simply still in God's presence. Many distracting thoughts and feelings overtook me but the wonderful advice given by Thomas Keating is that we should not be phased by this. I find that thoughts and feelings are as imposing as we allow them to be. If we allow ourselves to be frustrated by them the more imposing they become. So the secret is to 'Let them be' ... accept them. When I do I find a detachment takes place. There is a space between the me that is thinking/feeling and the 'true self' that seeks to focus on God .. a releasing takes place and I am able to as TK suggests consent my will to the love of God.  We are never to evaluate our time with God as good or bad, successful or unsuccessful. Just being with Him is sufficient. I use my mobile phone as a timer so I dont keep having a quick peek to see how time is going.

Intro

Hi!

This is the beginning of my first real blog although I did make my own using dreamweaver but it got so inundated with SPAM that I have had to resort to this with all the bells and whistles that keep the spammers away! It is a kind of personal experiment with the whole idea of blogging. I understand that a general theme would be fitting and I will choose the word 'spirituality' ... I will be sharing my explorations and developments along the way and welcome feedback.

Why Urban Mystik and why the wrong spellink? Well ... Urban Mystic had been taken so I plumbed for the closest I could find. My belief is that spirituality should not be reserved for those who may be considered to be the elite ... the cloistered ... surrounded with nature's resonating language of God's handiwork. (I say 'considered to be' because i am sure that they themselves do not regard them selves as'elite' - furthermore God is a rather loaded word I know but rather than unpacking it I hope it will 'unpack' itself along the way.) ... hence the idea of a mysticism which is on street level available to the most ordinary and the most unassuming in the least expected places.

I will stop there and in my next post tell you a bit about myself and where I come from and where I have travelled. (spiritually speaking)

(24/8)I am 56 years old (yesterday!). More than 30 years ago I remember my spiritual search beginning having left the repressive confines of a boarding school and launching into a drug fuelled few years at University - they were good times and bad times. I took LSD which disorientated me but also awakened me to an altered state of consciousness. Recognising the damage such drugs could do I determined to seek the same experience without the use of drugs. I took up Buddhist Practice and meditative techniques using the I Ching for guidance. While my usage of such things was as much to do with being trendy than anything else there was a genuine search taking place. Total acceptance was key and I remember being perturbed by the fact that Jesus Christ while being someone I admired was at the same time someone I could not accept. Furthermore (how I dont know) I recognised that to accept Jesus was more than just to value his teachings or even his historical activities but to accept him as the centre of my life. After much trepidation and persuasion I finally accepted him in this way.

My experience of God at this point was so great my life was turned around. I gave up the drugs immediately and started to attend church. It seemed to me reasonable at the time that all relations to my past life were to be rejected which included my whole mode of seeking prior to this experience. 'Be here now' was one of the catchphrases I embraced prior to becoming a Christian. I labelled that concept with the passivity / existentialist tag and left it behind. Being still and being 'present' were ideas which I had left behind with the old life.

It is only over the past few years that I have begun to re embrace some of these ideas and considered them consistent with my Christian experience. It is thanks to books such as 'Practicing the Presence of God' by Brother Lawrence and 'Cloud of Unknowing' as well as techniques such as 'centering prayer' introduced by Father Thomas Keating that have enabled me to discover new Christian areas of prayer not too inconsistent with my previous approaches.

Further down the road I have looked into teachers such as Eckhart Tolle and the 'Sedona Method' with Hale Dwoskin. Under which label I would put these I dont know (If a label is necessary)- Esoteric, New Age, Buddhist - I dont know but I have found them extremely helpful in my spiritual growth. I am now asking such questions as: How distinctive is the Christian revelation from modern spiritual approaches to God? Where is the overlap? Is there room for dialogue? Can we afford to use new concepts to define God, sin, salvation etc without compromising the central tenets of the faith thus becoming more relevant to the present modern spirituality? I hope that this blog will contribute to research into this .... who knowzzzzz