Yes, indeed, Clement is 100% correct: but not in the way many Pop Byzantines want to use that against the Christian West. “You should be Eastern Orthodox because Christianity is Eastern.” Er, yes, but “Eastern” or “Oriental” is a pretty comprehensive term. The fully developed medieval culture of Byzantium is a very far cry from the world of first-century Judaism. So, in my book, the statement that “Christianity is an Oriental religion” means, at its very beginning, it was a branch of first-century apocalyptic Palestinian Judaism.

Y’all’r funny. It’s not Clement, though: I forget who it is. It’s the preface writer. You think I’m still suffering from convertitis?

I actually agree with him 100% still. Although I don’t do so in the Anti-Occidental way many converts do. Remember: I read this the first time as an Anglican. I agreed with him 100% then.

In my head then – and still, to be honest – western religion, can include all kinds of paths. In its stereotyped form (in critique offered by Mary Daly, etc), as I read it ten years ago and still do now, Western religion is unmagical, unspiritual and all because God is ultra transcendent instead of immanent. Oriental Christianity has more in common with Taoism than with Masonry and ritual magic. I think of “Christ the Eternal Tao” here as compared to, eg, the anal celebration of Rubrical Religion, eastern or western rite. In that one sentence I heard “Christianity as it is intended is a foksy, homey religion, ‘the word is very near you.’” Arturo is, I think discussing this Oriental Religion even in Mexico.

I read the entire book in that mind and agreed 100%: but didn’t find it in Orthodoxy.

The thing was the religion I read in this book is real, present and active. It’s out there, living in the world: but you’ll not find it in your by-the-book eastern or western rite parish. You can, however, find it in communities of any denomination.

From this head – agreeing 100% with this sentence – I’ll be writing my commentary.