Muddied Roots, Psychobabble, Inoculation

Originally posted April 11th, 2007

April 3rd, Easter Sunday, 2021

 

The uncritical acceptance of claims from distant "authorized” sources of the Enneagram is simply sloppy thinking. Standing on shaky ground and appealing to authority to prove that one way is more "authentic" or “righter” points to nasty rivalry. In this essay I will examine some of the claims about the origin of the Enneagram that began to appear about 35 years ago, and have subsequently been repeated, embellished, and distorted. But first I will try to describe the context for Naranjo’s introduction of the Enneagram.

 

SAT, Berkeley, California 1971-1976 

 

When I joined SAT in 1973, most of us did not look on Claudio Naranjo as a guru. I was so wary of being branded as a Moonie that I only allowed myself to think of him as an extraordinary professor—not the Teacher of the Age, not an enlightened being, and certainly not an avatar. I was aware that he had had a profound insight, perhaps even an enlightenment experience that tied together long years of study and psychological investigation while he was working with Óscar Ichazo in Arica, Chile, and I was simply grateful to be present while he unpacked that inspiration. 

 

The number of people in the first SAT groups ranged between 35 and 50. We came from all walks of life; there were psychologists, a Jesuit priest and a Franciscan Friar, two seminarians, one former nun, a devotee of Swami Rudrananda, a rabbi’s wife, and one woman who’d been associated with the Gurdjieff Foundation; professors, several Phd.’s, two medical doctors, school teachers, at least one lawyer, more than a handful of psychology graduate students, body workers, therapists, a film-maker, a martial artist, a C-level New York fashion executive, Ravi Shankar’s mother-in-law, one professional journalist and a film distributor, but there were also carpenters, house painters and a French hippie. We were mostly white, gay and straight, a large proportion of Jews, one Muslim and a few asians. Claudio turned no one away.

 

We met on Tuesday and Thursday nights for 3 to 3 and half hours, with at least one Saturday day-long session a month plus several longer retreats each year. Claudio worked with us mostly in a group setting. His original presentations were dense; they required time to digest and put to use. His directions, or indications were for everyone but, particularly when he worked in the manner of Fritz Perls, he focused on the individual student and his or her fixation. He talked with us, asked questions, responded to our questions, returned us over and over to our own interior spaces where he thought we might profitably investigate, and, as he said to me, “discover a rich vein.” 

 

It was an oral tradition. There were no texts though there were Enneagram diagrams with simple notation which most of us used to scribble down our own observations. We all kept notes; we shared and compared them with each other. Detailed notes with full sentences were highly regarded, and there were several meticulous recorders. In addition to Claudio’s presentations, people also circulated Óscar’s proto-analysis from people who’d traveled to Arica Chile. I mention these notes because they became the basis of the wider study by the small group of Jesuits and other religious who began to use the Enneagram in Chicago under the tutelage of Bob Ochs, SJ and  Aubrey Degnan as well as the New Age audience who began to work with Helen Palmer. Enneagram literature did not start flooding the market for another 10 years.

 

We also promised not to speak about the Enneagram outside the group because, we were told, confidentiality was integral to self-discovery. We promised not to use certain ‘teachings’ until we’d received permission from Claudio. This was mainly intended  for work that we would do with others, although, in some instances, that promise included our private conversations with group members. The initial intent was not to protect materials and income as intellectual property, but it did set the stage for later lawsuits. Now that both Claudio and Bob Ochs have died, and so much material is already public, I feel no obligation to remain silent. 

 

 

Fact or hearsay about the Enneagon/Enneagram’s Sufi origins 

 

There was talk about the Enneagram originating hundreds of years earlier in a Sufi school, but I just nodded my head in agreement with a vague notion that there were, of course, esoteric roots. It made little difference. For me, like most of Claudio’s early students, the profound experiences of self-recognition proved the power of the teaching. 

 

Some did speak of “The Work” and “The School” in almost reverential tones which was an acknowledgement of the teaching of Mr. Gurdjieff and its Sufi origins. Most of the written accounts of the Enneagram teaching in the West repeat the claim of an esoteric teaching handed down through the Naqshbandi Sufi School which was founded around 1380. The great light of Sufism in the West, Idries Shah, confirmed that the symbol, the nine-pointed figure, existed in the Naqshbandi line. The figure of the Enneagram is also found in the record of Mr. Gurdjieff’s teaching—which of course lends the authority from another respected source. 

 

The existence of a distinctive figure only demonstrates the probability of Sufi origin, perhaps adopted by the Naqshbandi. It indicates nothing about the secret origin of any four Enneagrams—Fixations, Passions, Virtues, or Holy Ideas—that Ichazo introduced and Naranjo elaborated. 

 

What chance is there that this Enneagram has been passed down from an identifiable school, even as a secret teaching? Can we find traces of that secret? 

 

Mr. Gurdjieff’s use of the Enneagram 

 

G. I. Gurdjieff wrote: "The knowledge of the enneagram has for a very long time been preserved in secret and if it now is, so to speak, made available to all, it is only in an incomplete and theoretical form of which nobody could make any practical use without instruction from a man who knows." 

 

We know that Mr. Gurdjieff used the Enneagram, that he praised it, that he said that it expressed all the universal laws, that his students had a series of sacred movements that followed the directional lines of the figure. The picture at the top of this essay is that sacred dance. There is, however, no evidence in the primary sources about the Work that he used the Enneagram/Enneagon of Fixations, Passions, Virtues, or Holy Ideas. 

 

Gurdjieff’s pupil P.D. Ouspensky recorded comments about the Enneagram in his book, In Search of The Miraculous (1949), and another famous pupil, John Bennett, applied the Enneagram of Process to systems theory, organizational design, group dynamics, and psychotherapy. Neither of these sources, however, specifically point to protoanalysis or the system that Claudio or Óscar describe. 

 

Claudio was conversant with Mr. Gurdjieff’s work, his writing and that of his important disciples. For Claudio, Gurdjieff was the epitome of teacher as trickster, a role that Claudio loved. But he never claimed that he had been trained or authorized by any of Gurdjieff’s successors. 

 

But to my mind, the most interesting possible evidence that Gurdjieff might have used the Enneagram comes from some of the personal accounts of pupils in France and America. In Teachings of Gurdjieff: A Pupil's Journey, C. S. Nott describes Mr. Gurdjieff’s efforts with one student to identify her “chief characteristic” before she had to return to England. Mr. Gurdjieff directed her, but the struggle to identify the lynch pin in her personality was her task and only hers. It was, he said, the key to her self-remembering. Perhaps Gurdjieff used the 27 variations of a nine-pointed figure in his exploration, but again we have no evidence. If he did, you might suspect that he passed that knowledge to his chief disciples, but any “evidence” that he did is just a guess and, in any case, bears scant resemblance to either Ichazo’s or Naranjo’s use of the Enneagram. 

 

In Taking with the Left Hand, How the Enneagram Came to Market (1996), William Patrick Patterson who is an authorized teacher in the Gurdjieff lineage writes a blistering account of what he considers the current Enneagram enthusiasts’ misappropriation of the Gurdjieff work, some of which I found persuasive until he tries to locate the Source of the Enneagram in ancient Egypt. If we have to start digging back that far into a mysterious history to support self-analysis, the enterprise is hopeless, and we are lost.

 

 

The difference between Ichazo’s Enneagon and the work of Naranjo 

 

If I were to imagine a best case scenario, Ichazo, during that first Arica training, might have sensed that Claudio had an insight that he had to explore—a vocation in the classical sense of a path that he had to follow to the end—and that the work itself would be richer. However, I can find no evidence for my scenario in any of Óscar’s writings that are available to the public. 

 

Claudio referenced  Óscar’s talks on the Enneagon and protoanalysis given at the Instituto de Psicologia Aplicada (Santiago) in 1969, and Óscar finds no fault in Claudio’s report. 

 

There is also no evidence that Óscar had any contact with a Fourth Way teacher, at least one connected directly with Gurdjieff or any of his disciples. James Moore wrote an article on the dissemination of the Enneagram in South America. (I've published this essay by one of the second generation of Gurdjieff's students in the UK). He concludes, “Analogically Ichazo’s enneagram is to Gurdjieff’s what the New Guinea cargo-cults are to aviation. Ichazo’s 63 ‘domains, energies, divine principles, fixations, virtues, passions, and psychocatalyzers’ seem stuck around the symbol au choix like so many bird-of-paradise feathers.” 1 

 

An Enneagram teacher, Subhuti, who was an early student of Óscar, says that Óscar “denied that he got the Enneagram symbol from Gurdjieff….Actually, the truth was more mundane: he got it from his uncle’s library. In a 1996 magazine interview, Ichazo explained that when he was 12-13 years old, he inherited an esoteric library from his uncle Julio, who was a philosopher….Ichazo hungrily devoured these books, hoping to find reassuring answers for his paranormal states. He came across the Enneagram symbol while studying an ancient text from the Chaldean civilization, which existed around 600 BC, in what is now known as Iraq, and whose citizens appear to have been fascinated by numbers.”2

 

The Arica Enneagon, both protoanalysis and the way that a student worked with it, was quite different from Claudio’s understanding and practice. I knew several Esalen pioneers who had been in Arica with Claudio. They reported that Óscar typed people by looking at their faces: a slight elevation of an eyebrow or crinkle around the mouth was as clear an indicator as any standardized personality test.

 

[Ichazo had 

The next day Jack tested this theory by showing Óscar a bunch (40 or so) of self-typed enneagrammer photos; he insisted Jack put the type the individuals thought they were on the photo. Jack would have preferred Óscar would type them straight, and Jack could later compare. But cagey as Óscar was, he insisted. Ok so he agreed with about 40% of them as being typed accurately--not a very high % but definitely better than a casual 11% chance of blind guessing.  Jack later sent the same photos to an advanced student of Ichazo’s, who was presumed to be good at this, and he disagreed with Ichazo’s conclusions in more than 50% of the cases. So much for the reliability of this system. Even if Ichazo was 70-100% right, he was not successful in transmitting that skill to his students.

 

After a lot of discussion and comparison of typing, several of the people who had been in Arica with the first Esalen group concluded that Óscar used a different Enneagram, which he called the Enneagon.3

 

[A decade or two after Jack’s visit with Óscar, he started using enneagram instead of enneagon as if surrendering to the fact that “enneagon” did not manage to “neuter” enneagram and thus send all the enneagrammers flocking to Arica.] 

 

Óscar by his own admission had no dispute with Claudio’s Enneagram teaching, but by the same token, he did not authorize Claudio’s work. Óscar’s lawsuit was directed at Helen Palmer’s popularization, not Claudio’s work from which she derived her materials. (ARICA INSTITUTE, INC. v. Helen PALMER and Harper & Row Publishers is online). Claudio did not alter the derogatory names of the points that Óscar used to identify each fixation, though Helen created a whole new “kinder, gentler” lexicon. Was she just changing the names to refine a pedagogical technique or was this an attempt to avoid the intellectual property rights lawsuit that eventually transpired? Don Richard Riso and anyone else who feared Arica lawsuits also altered the names. 

 

But my question is whether the impulse to alter other things, a little here and there, to avoid charges of intellectual property theft distort the teaching? Did Helen wind up off base as Óscar claims? Here is what he had to say about Helen’s version of the Enneagram (and others who follow the Narrative tradition). “The work of the enneagram authors is plainly unscientific and without rational foundation, because it is based on dogmatic formulations as opposed to the Arica system, which under any measure is logical and scientific and is based on rational metaphysical propositions and ultimate theological truth.” 4 This statement can of course be disputed as Óscar can’t call his formulation scientifically provable and solid given that he himself claims to have created/originated many of the ideas. How can Mozart claim originality of his music as also being scientific, as the exact tunes were not recorded before? 

 

Óscar or his deputies typed the student while Claudio’s typing was conversational, investigating together with the person. Only after a period of study, Claudio typed you. If you thought you demonstrated the characteristics of a particular point, he might ask you to investigate that possibility. There were times when he just told you where to look. And he didn’t always get it right himself, and from time to time revised his analysis which is true in my own case.

 

Among the current variations of the Enneagram work, only Helen et al insist, as a “principle of the school,” that the participant determines which point he or she owns. It is often a promise in the “narrative” tradition that you will discover your type after one weekend workshop. Frankly Helen’s promise seems to me to be a sales pitch. Certainly early protoanalysis often seemed purposefully vague—sometimes your type was switched after several months or, as in my case, years of work. 

 

Does it actually really make any difference if you determine your type accurately after your first workshop? It just seems better if you wait until you have some understanding of the Enneagram and some inner experience of self-observation. Then you might have a fighting chance of being honest with yourself and becoming free. I was typed as point 7, Ego Plan, after one year in SAT and thought of myself as a Plan well beyond the group’s dissolution. More than 19 years later, Claudio re-typed me a 9. Although I’ve always appreciated the Enneagram’s power as a tool for self-observation, when I was typed correctly, it was like focusing a laser. 

 

 

Some really far flung theories 

 

I was sitting in the classroom when Bob Ochs, a well respected Jesuit, said that the Enneagram probably originated in the esoteric school that trained Jesus. This assertion is as unsupported as the claim that during Jesus’s lost years, the time between when he stood up and amazed the synagogue elder’s and his baptism by John, he was initiated and trained by an Indian guru. Yet not one person in the room challenged it, myself included. 

 

More recently in a pastoral letter warning Catholics about using the Enneagram as a tool for spiritual direction, the U.S. Catholic bishops' Secretariat for Doctrine and Pastoral Practices, state that "sin is indeed unhealthy behavior and can be combated by an improved understanding, but it is at its root a moral problem, so that repentance before God and one’s neighbor must be the fundamental response. Enneagram teaching thus obscures the Christian understanding of sin." They also cite numerological speculations of the Pythagoreans. Óscar also suggests this, possibly looking for some terms that he can copyright, or the ancient wisdom of the Chaldeans as possible origins of the Enneagram. Apparently Óscar loves arguments for authority as much as Catholics do.

[Or, any other movement/ideology that preceded towards more and more authority…. Which ultimately is a universal flaw in human nature that arises unless it’s consciously worked on to be avoided…. See current trends towards moving Covid from a medical epidemiological problem and using it as a tool to control populations into “wokeness” and obedience of authority… the same can be said of many of the “...isms” that are suffocating free speech and open mindedness in academia, schools and lately in censorship of ideas that mainstream media and the silicone social media find contrary to their preferred ideology

 

There is also speculation that the true origins of the esoteric teaching were the Jesuits or perhaps Russian Orthodox communities. Oh, what might have happened if the bishops had been fed that line? The Jesuits were in hot water anyway. (See my article "The Jesuit Transmission of the Enneagram.") 

 

What can you do with any of this material? What does it have to do with self-discovery? 

 

In my view, most of the speculation about the origins of the Enneagram falls into the ``best guess” category. It occurs to me that people who were raised in one of the religious traditions of the Book tend to seek a revealed Source as validation of their inner experience. I come from that tradition myself, and know how it feels. 

 

But let me suggest another route. After more than 30 years of meditation practice, I have come to rely on a system that is empirically based. A committed group of practitioners, over a long period of time, share their experience, write about it, compare with one another, and along the way develop a system, a methodology of self-inquiry that does liberate people from the conditions and painful vagaries of living, allowing us to experience a fuller life. It might be impossible for some, but for me, this is, as Claudio pointed out to me, “the rich vein.” This is where I try to focus my attention, and it also points me in the direction of being rigorous in my self-observation.

 

So, what are the signs and effects of this sloppy thinking? 

 

Most Americans would prefer to read a 600-word article in Psychology Today for their understanding of the Enneagram. Most people who attend an Enneagram workshop also seem to want to find out their type quickly. To me what seems to be lacking is an understanding of how to use the Enneagram and what practices support continuing self-exploration. 

 

I have a close friend who did a Masters in Spiritual Psychology at the University of Santa Monica. While there were many things he appreciated about the program, his exposure to the Enneagram had to be of the 600-word variety. I have no specifics about the training of the person who presented the system in Santa Monica, but this is what my friend said to me, “Yeah, it is a great system. I once knew what number I am, but I forgot.” 

 

This Enneagram teacher inoculated my friend against the power of the Enneagram. Of course not everyone will be attracted to the Enneagram and the self-exploration that it might offer. But this path is not available to my friend now—it is very difficult to get around the part of the mind that tells you: “you don’t need to look there, you already understand that.” Throwing up that barrier has to be credited to the teacher’s account. 

 

Of the more than 150 books about the Enneagram that have appeared since 1980, most seem to be written to support the authors’ teaching credentials. The books also serve as promotional materials for their workshops and, at best, study guides. Most are not rigorous psychological studies, but rather present materials on prototyping with the practitioner’s particular spin. (I find Janet Levine’s approach rather interesting, and the books of Sandra Maitri are faithful to the work of the original SAT groups. There are of course others too that I am unaware of.)

 

Claudio once said that the power of the Enneagram is such that it remains compelling as a system even if misused. I seem to have survived mistyping. I also have no real objection to stealing material—this is the real world. But it does become problematic if and when the materials are used incorrectly.

 

Helen Palmer said, “Our research has found that there are far more 8's than Naranjo.”5 Claudio did speculate there were fewer 8’s among people who did the “Work” than in the general population. On the other hand Helen’s statement might just indicate that the narrative tradition has typed more people as 8’s, and they were mistyped. Some people from the narrative tradition type George W. Bush as an 8 on the evidence that he took us to war—Bush would be a “counter phobic 6” in Naranjo’s system. Ronald Regan was a nine because he liked his afternoon nap—Claudio typed Regan a 3. 

 

Another friend who has studied the Enneagram insists that he is a “Palmer-Riso” 8. He would be, however, a classic 9 if Claudio typed him. Though not easily agitated, there was an edge in his voice when he said: “I’m no ass kisser.” Through most of his remarkable career, he has been of service to others as a peace-maker who resolves very difficult conflicts with grace and ease. Yet, because he finds Sloth so un-masculine and un-American, he undervalues the roles in which he excels, and misses the chance of being honest with himself. In my view, this is an example of Enneagram typing becoming Ego massage oil. Inept hands have stripped away the power of the Enneagram.

 

Esoteric schools don’t have secrets because their knowledge bestows power that they don’t want to share. The secrets hide themselves. They do not manifest their power until they get inside a person and change their being. I think that the closest analogy to the new Enneagram system might be the Tibetan idea of torma, a teaching that remains hidden until it is ripe. (Buddhists had to devise a way of authenticating their teaching innovations and developments in the Mahayana and Vajrayana long after the Buddha’s death.) 

 

Most people who proclaim the Naqshbandi source of the Enneagram usually haven’t got the slightest idea who or what the Naqshbandi’s history or their spiritual traditions are. Or at best they only possess hearsay knowledge. Enneagram practitioners didn’t go off to get a Phd in Islamic studies—they got an MSW so that they could take their psychological wares to the marketplace. 

 

Mr. Patterson, you might as well locate the Source in King Tut’s tomb. When people go to a museum and see a 5,000-year-old sarcophagus embedded with gold and lapis, the secret remains safe from esoteric tampering. A mummy can’t stand up and speak unless the teacher casts a magic spell. 

 

I have not answered my own questions concerning the value and use of the “new” Enneagram tradition. There is no answer. But I have shown that most speculation about the origins of the Enneagram only supports a “best guess.”

 

Donovan Bess was at 60+ SAT’s oldest member. He had been a reporter and editor at the San Francisco Chronicle for most of his career. He was curious, engaging, interested in others, as well as being a seasoned self-observer. I liked him enormously. He died in Luxor when he was 81. After a day that included riding a camel and exploring the temples, he went back to the hotel with his longtime companion and died. She reported that he simply smiled and stopped breathing. 

 

I am not seeking to prove that the Enneagram has roots in the cults of Egyptian gods or demonstrate its authority as a sure predictor of behavior, but I have felt its power in my own life. If I were looking for evidence that the Enneagram is a powerful tool in the discipline of self-exploration, Donovan pointed a clear direction in the way he lived his life right up to last hours and minutes. 

 

 

Notes: 

 

1 “The Enneagram: A Developmental Study.” First published in Religion Today: A Journal of Contemporary Religions (London) V (3), October 1986-January 1987, pp.1-5. 

2 “The Enneagram Wars” by Subhuti, published in Osho News, OCTOBER 21, 2017

3 In my research I discovered speculation that Ichazo renamed the Enneagram “Enneagon” for copyright purposes. 

4 “Letter to the Transpersonal Community” by Oscar Ichazo. 

5 Personal notes. 

Bibliography

© Kenneth Ireland, 2007

In memory of Tom Marshall, S.J

 Monday, March 22, 2010

This morning, after his funeral mass at the Jesuit Sacred Heart Center in Los Gatos, we chanted The Heart Sutra as well as the Kanon Gyo at the graveside of Tom Marshall, S.J., lay brother of the Society of Jesus, an ordained Zen priest in both the Soto and Rinzai lineages, and a wonderful friend. This is the dedication I wrote for the occasion:

God that hews mountain and continent,

Earth, all, out; who, with trickling increment,

Veins violets and tall trees makes more and more,

Listen: We humbly place our feet on the Path of liberation.

May your path continue, dear Tom.

We, the many people whose lives you touched,

Send you on your way with our gratitude.

We remember your many gifts to us,

The books you gave us to train our minds,

Your ready compassion and your sweet smile.

Denis Genpo, Les Keye and your meditation companions salute you.

Your Jesuit brothers honor and bless you.

May your teachers, Shakyamuni, Maha-Kasyapa, Hakuin Ekaku, and Taizan

Maezumi welcome you.

May the Jesuit blessed and saints, Alphonsus, Peter Faber, Xavier, and Father

Ignatius open their wide embrace.

We dedicate any merit from your meditation and chanting

To relieve suffering in all of life and to clear your way, dear Tom.

You are among the bodhisattvas and other great beings,

Wide-eyed in the Cosmos, totally alive, right now.

Earth hears no hurdle,

The door to deep meditation opens yet again.

The teaching goes on without end.

Yes. Just look at It All!

All Buddhas throughout space and time, all bodhisattvas, saints and great beings,

the Mahaprajnaparamita.

Many thanks to GM Hopkins, S.J. for allowing me, by his silence, to use portions of his poem, “In Honour of Saint Alphonsus Rodriguez.” The last line is from Tom.

In Honour Of St. Alphonsus Rodriguez

Laybrother of the Society of Jesus

by Gerard Manley Hopkins

Honour is flashed off exploit, so we say;

And those strokes once that gashed flesh or galled shield

Should tongue that time now, trumpet now that field,

And, on the fighter, forge his glorious day.

On Christ they do and on the martyr may;

But be the war within, the brand we wield

Unseen, the heroic breast not outward-steeled,

Earth hears no hurtle then from fiercest fray.

Yet God (that hews mountain and continent,

Earth, all, out; who, with trickling increment,

Veins violets and tall trees makes more and more)

Could crowd career with conquest while there went

Those years and years by of world without event

That in Majorca Alfonso watched the door.


I dedicate this to my friend Tom Marshall, S.J., who died on March 11, 2010.
A lay brother of the Society of Jesus,
a Zen priest in both the Soto and Rinzai lineages,
and my hero.

May he rest in peace.

We will miss you. We love you.

The Jesuit Transmission of the Enneagram, Bob Ochs, S.J.

McLeod Ganj, Himachal Pradesh, India
Diwali, November 14th, 2020

My friend and teacher, Father Bob Ochs, S. J. died over two years ago on May 4th, 2018 at the Claude de la Colombiere Center in Clarkston, Michigan. He was 88 years old.

I began to write about Bob in December of 2019 when I learned of his death. More than anyone, Bob was responsible for the Catholic Enneagram enthusiasm, and this is where I thought I would focus my attention. But during the long retreat imposed by the Covid pandemic, more and more memories began to flood my mind, and I came to truly appreciate the gift he gave me during a personal crisis, a time of questioning that would radically alter the course of my life. Recounting our experience together today, from my home in the Himalayan foothills, I am filled with gratitude.

His story, and both of our stories where they intersect, did not follow a clear, straight path, and cannot be told without venturing into places most people don’t dare explore—places that one rarely explores without a friend or a guide. Bob was my guide, and although I can no longer ask him to clarify his side of the story, this is not a compelling reason to censor what I write. I also know how much that exploration cost Bob on a personal level. I will not censor myself here either. I cannot write a pro forma panegyric that avoids the dark places. Murky places in the mind might distort the path—there are no clear guides, except perhaps prohibition. But we cannot just declare them out of bounds and be true to ourselves. Only in myth does the word of God come emblazoned on gold tablets. In the real world, in ordinary human conversation, the truth is in the details, and sometimes those details are buried in mud.

As difficult as it is to sort out the details of a personal story, it’s also the story of passing a teaching from one culture to another, from the East to the West, from an alleged mystical Sufi source to a group of Christian practitioners, from spiritual practice to psychological investigation, from an oral tradition to one that employs books and written lists of personal traits and characteristics. Such a complex transmission opens itself at best to honest differences and interpretations. At its worst, it breeds parochial infighting, condemnation and closed-mindedness.

The lack of clarity also might add fuel to the Enneagram controversy and arm its detractors. But if we can avoid persecutions and burnings, if we trust ourselves and follow our best instincts, there is something very useful about argument and debate. They point to the most useful path for an individual. It’s a spiritual practice with a long and revered history. I remain as convinced as Bob was that we can actually connect with the numinous mystery of life.

I am an Enneagram student, not a teacher, and over nearly 50 years I’ve tried to nurture my personal understanding for my own inner work. I will try to be non-judgmental, and only speak about people and events about which I have first hand knowledge. My comments do not pretend to be definitive statements about any specific approach or understanding of the system. I’ll leave discussion of technical distinctions about typing or proto-analysis to those who specialize in Enneagram studies. However some comment and analysis may be necessary to map out the early history of the Enneagram’s transmission.

As we examine the arising and falling away of experience, some argue that if we trace its source and pinpoint its origin, we spoil the recipe. All they’re really saying is that some things are better left alone or impossible to figure out, but I'm certainly not going to discourage self-investigation. In fact I want to encourage it. The Buddhist practice that I’m familiar with teaches that we can unlock real possibility and opportunity when we deal head-on with what are known as hindrances. The Enneagram is also part of the strong tradition that inner work dictates unflinching self-observation in tracking our thoughts, feelings, memories, and “mental-reactions.” This trains our attention and allows us to see ourselves more clearly. I am thoroughly persuaded by the last option. It’s a difficult task, but we only get into trouble by not speaking directly and honestly about these matters.

It is in this spirit of animated conversation coupled with love and admiration that I’ll discuss Bob’s contribution and talk about our relationship.

———

Hot Luck

I just want to give Bob a big shout-out: You threw open forbidden doors. You were authentic. Through you I discovered a path probably cut off for this young Jesuit emerging from a straight-jacketed Catholic worldview. The reforms of Vatican II had relaxed that grip, but they were not the leap required to enter the spiritual path. I was discouraged as I witnessed the spiritual enthusiasm of Council ebb when political pressure hedged and contained its driving force. But doctrinal formulations are not about jumping from a hundred foot pole, Kierkegaard’s leap of faith without a safety net. I was in the midst of the personal crisis but barely aware of it. You, Bob, invited me to jump into life.

In the early Summer of 1973. I was living in a large, sprawling apartment in New York’s Upper West Side with a group of seven other Jesuit scholastics and our mentor, Avery Dulles. Late one evening and into the early morning hours, during a rambling conversation with another young Jesuit from Chicago, I heard about a priest who taught a nine pointed diagram that described personality types, about study that led to a sense of liberation through intense self-scrutiny, and finally, to give the story the feel of the real stuff of human life, a description of a group, men and women, lay and religious, taking off their clothes during the last session as a sign of fearless self-investigation. He assured me that it was not at all sexual, that the nuns carefully folded their habits and laid them down almost reverentially.

I was stunned. But I also remember being dazzled by his enthusiasm—something inside me knew that I had to meet this Jesuit. I was not unique among young seminarians of my generation in feeling that conventional religious practice had failed me. Looking back it might have been a classic “Hail Mary!”

I phoned my religious superior in Boston and asked for permission to transfer to the Jesuit School of Theology in Berkeley. Within 10 days I was traveling across the country, with a complete stranger. I was about to open a chapter of my life that I could never have imagined. My own awakening would wait for the recognition of how much pain I carried inside.

When I arrived in Berkeley I called Bob. He asked me, “Why don’t you join Claudio’s group?” I called the number he gave me, and I started four years of work with Claudio and Bob.

———

Naranjo-Ochs Redux

In 2009 I asked Claudio Naranjo to do an interview about the “Jesuit Transmission of the Enneagram.” Bob’s relationship with Claudio Narnajo and first SAT groups, “The Seekers After Truth,” in Berkeley were the source of his teaching. If we distill the teaching from this amalgam, we cannot come close to tapping the Enneagram’s power. Claudio and Bob’s relationship as teacher-mentor is central, and I will talk about the small part I understand though much remains a mystery, lost in the passing of both men.

I am absolutely certain that Claudio had his own powerful insight working with Óscar Ichazo in Arica Chile. Although it may be misleading to describe Claudio’s experience as an enlightenment, the word hints at the power of the insight he was “unpacking” while at the same time formulating his own vision, informed by his psychological training. Bob also had a powerful experience working with Claudio, and became part of creating what we now recognize as the Western Enneagram.

Claudio and I talked at length on four occasions. He might have preferred “The Jesuit Jumbling of the Enneagram” because he insisted that there was no transmission. He asserted that the errors in prototyping by Jesuit and Catholic practitioners invalidated the authentic passing of his knowledge and understanding. But he confirmed that he had indeed “delegated” Bob to do SAT work with the group of Jesuit and religious students at Chicago’s Loyola University as well as the Jesuit School of Theology at Berkeley (JSTB), the settings were where Ochs introduced the Western Enneagram to a Catholic audience.

Claudio also laughed about what he called the “now-infamous event” when everyone took off their clothes in a Chicago seminary. He said he just threw out this indication on a whim hoping to give the religious students a powerful experience of self-remembering.

Although Claudio said that Bob carried his “indications” to the groups, that he had not been authorized to teach the Enneagram, Bob brought his own passion to the work. It was no polite intellectual exercise. It was spiritual in the deepest sense of the word. His intellectual and spiritual gifts were a good match for Claudio. He was a Jesuit through and through with outstanding theological credentials. He had trained at Université Catholique de Louvain, Jesuitenkolleg in Innsbruck, and was awarded a PhD in Theology from Institut Catholique de Paris in 1969. He had written two books.* He was dedicated to the work of spiritual revolution in the spirit of Vatican II.

*Bob’s books include The Death in Every Now (1969) and God is More Present Than You Think (1970).

———

The Jesuit Enneagram

In a letter that I sent to Father Paul Lucy, who was my direct Jesuit superior, I wrote, “If this is not what Father Ignatius intended in the Examen, it’s what he should have intended.”

As a Jesuit novice I was trained in the Examen: three times a day, for 15 minutes, just note how many times I’d broken the rule of silence, when I’d had stray thoughts, where I’d neglected to keep “custody of the senses.” After taking inventory, I was instructed to generate compunction, and resolve to avoid specific thoughts or actions—avoiding sin and the occasions of sin were the way towards self-perfection.

Bob’s adaptation of the Examen was far more nuanced and sophisticated. He asked us to really experience the feelings in our body as we looked over our day—How did it feel to get up in the morning? Did we smell the stew we cooked? What attitude did we bring to our study, did we notice the way we held the book in our hands, even how we felt when we used the toilet?

We have to train ourselves to feel directly, not after-the-fact judgment or analysis. To be present at the moment when we feel, see and act is not something that we do naturally, or if we do, we soon learn to forget it. This immediacy of experience is closer to what Gurdjeiff taught about self-remembering: “it is to know you are angry when you are angry.” G. also described the practice with an admonition: “You do not remember yourselves. You do not feel yourselves, you are not conscious of yourselves. You do not feel: I observe, I feel, I see.’”

During this period, I was also learning to meditate in formal posture, breath-centered forms of concentration, and the difficulty in learning to sit for long periods, just as taking the time required for the work of taking personal inventory, was offset by my recognition of my own pain. In mindfulness practice, at least as we know it from the Theravaden tradition, there was, I thought, the promise of clearing of the senses and mind as you simply experience your body and breath. But “self-remembering” is different from my understanding of mindfulness: just paying attention, no promise of it disappearing.

The first thing I noticed about Bob was the bright glean in his eyes and his animated voice. He was a very engaging teacher who loved to laugh. I was sitting on the floor of a large open room in one of the buildings at JSTB when Bob said, with chuckle, that the origin of the teaching might have been the esoteric school that trained Jesus. Bob was not certainly not given to blind faith or superstition, but this assertion is as unsupported as the claim that during Jesus’s lost years, the time between when he stood up and amazed the synagogue elder’s and his baptism by John, he was initiated and trained by an Indian guru. Yet not one person in the room challenged it, myself included. Bob repeated the Tibetan oracle that "when the iron bird flys,” the Dharma will come to the West. This was only 14 years after His Holiness the Dalai Lama fled Lhasa in disguise as the People’s Liberation Army marched towards the Potala Palace.

But laying aside the otherworldly language and extravagant claims of New Age spirituality, most of us who were drawn to a spiritual practice that demands something more than sitting in a church pew and forking over some cash came from a place of experiencing personal pain—sometimes excruciating and seemingly inexplicable. I didn’t feel any magic in the New Age hype, and I am still no fan of Nostradamus style pronouncements, but I was seeking a remedy, and if I had to learn a new language, I was willing to try.

In fact Christians do not have a big issue with using pain in spiritual work, but it is seen as the result of sin. To ease the Enneagram into a Catholic/Christian context, Bob began with a kind of rift on the Nine Deadly Sins—traditionally the list contains only seven: Pride, Sloth, Gluttony, Envy, Lust and Greed. Stretching the definition of Envy to include Melancholy, and then adding Lying and Fear, we have the nine points of the Enneagram. But here’s where it gets dicey. None of the Enneagram “sins'' actually describe deeds.

In 1998, the US Cathoic bishops warned about using the Enneagram said, "sin is indeed unhealthy behavior and can be combated by an improved understanding, but it is at its root a moral problem, so that repentance before God and one’s neighbor must be the fundamental response. Enneagram teaching thus obscures the Christian understanding of sin." Human nature is basically sinful. Acts in violation of the expressed will of the Deity require repentance. To save yourself, follow the rules; this leads to redemption which in turn leads to salvation. This is the catechism that I learned as an Irish Catholic boy.

“Sin is unhealthy behavior”—get the memo out to the Garden before Eve falls under the serpent’s spell and all hell breaks loose. The work of the Enneagram sees liberation as a struggle against ignorance, blindness, greed, cowardice and laziness which in themselves are not sinful.

At the JSTB Bob taught that the fixations are a hindrance rather than a reflection of fallen human nature. He said many times that ideas themselves when coupled with a solid inner practice could change a person’s attitude and actions. And this conviction was, I feel, the intersection where the inspiration of Ignatius’s Spiritual Exercises, particularly the identification of what Ignatius called the “chief fault” matched the work with the Enneagram.

He opened the investigation with a question: Is the way we distort the world the root of all of our negative behaviors? Each of the 9 points was the point of entry for an extended meditation on the nature of ego fixation. In the Spiritual Exercises the first meditation is what Ignatius calls I will quote one sentence from what Ignatius calls “The Principle and Foundation:” . . . it follows that we are to use the things of this world only to the extent that they help us to this end (the praise reverence and service of God), and we ought to rid ourselves of the things of this world to the extent that they get in the way of this end. Before we examined our own Ego-Fixation, we were encouraged to look at the nature of spiritual hindrances central to the Enneagram in detail, weeks long meditations on points 9, 3, and 6. We explored how the major anchors of all nine fixations, sloth, lying and fear, were present in all our actions.

In Bob’s teaching the One point was very present—methodical, meticulous and exacting. He took us through the types and subtypes in an orderly way, using the material that Claudio had given the first SAT groups, and, in an exploratory way, tried to “type” each of us. Although we tried to type ourselves, he, like Claudio, did not hesitate to point to where we should begin our examination. [Bob typed me as “Plan,” the 7th fixation, Gluttony. I worked with this for years until in the late 90’s I met with Claudio a number of times over an extended period. He re-typed me as a 9! I have written about the experience in How I moved from Point 7 to 9.]

He asked us questions. He might say, “Ah that sounds like something a 6 might say. Why don’t you look and see if fear might be the motivator? Just explore it. Trace it back. Look for other places in your life where fear might be operative.” It was colloquial. It was friendly. As each of us began to understand the system and see similarities in our own behaviors with various points, Bob would ask us to “say a little more.” He was always gentle and good humored, never harsh or demeaning. I remember when he asked a meticulous nun not to comb her hair for a week and report back on how she felt. Although it drove her nuts, she loved the laughs as she shared in an entirely authentic and revealing way.

In the seminary setting, there was no intense interactive “ego-grinding” as there was in SAT. Rather Bob asked us time and again to focus attention on those places where we know we hurt but are blind to the source of our pain. Those are very fertile places in our psyche to explore our connection to the vast mystery of the universe. He was committed to helping ease suffering, but highlighted the practices of meditation, particularly the examen, and meditation on humility, tools Saint Ignatius outlined for contemplatives in action.*

The hallmark of what I’m calling the Jesuit Enneagram was that rigorous self-examination and analysis coupled with daily attention to our thoughts, impulses, actions and motivations could bring about real changes and an experience of unconditioned freedom. Good ideas could change people. Solid ideas would have a lasting effect.

*For those who are unfamiliar with Ignatian spirituality and would like to learn more, I have written a brief summary, along with some practice guides, The Spiritual Exercises and the Examen, in my blog “Koan Conversations.”

———

Towards the End

In the Spring of 1974 Claudio decided to introduce the Enneagram to a wider audience outside SAT. He asked Kathy Speeth to organize a series of presentations about the Enneagram aimed at psychologists and mental health professionals. He told me that he wanted to design a presentation for people who already had ability and training in self-observation. Bob asked me to represent Point 7 in the panels where SAT members described the fixed way of being, inclinations and behaviors of each of the nine points. Claudio acted as moderator, and, when the need arose, interrogator, always keeping us true to our lived experience.

This series of panels was the source of another line in the dissemination of the teaching, and the results are beyond dispute. Helen Palmer attended these sessions, and the panels may be the origin of what she calls the Oral Tradition. She also had access to some of our private notes about Claudio’s presentation of the Enneagram as well as extensive notes from Oscar’s talks in Chile from another source. She was never in a SAT group or Bob’s Enneagram courses, but she did psychic readings with almost every member of the early SAT group, often multiple sessions. It was in a large part through these readings that she became aware of the Enneagram, and got a taste of the system’s power. When I did a reading with her, one of her first questions was the number of my fixation on the Enneagram.

Whenever Bob was unclear about a particular course of action, he consulted the psychic Ann Armstrong as well as Helen Palmer who was offering clairvoyant readings. He would often start a conversation with some prediction about the future that he thought entirely implausible. Although he himself knew his role in introducing the Enneagram to Christians, I don’t think he could have ever imagined how large an audience he’d reach. And he was not at all confident that he could measure up to what he imagined people would ask of him. He was not afraid to confront his insecurities, and while he tried to project a confidence in everyone’s innate abilities despite failings and missteps, he didn’t experience that certainty himself. This responsibility would be a daunting prospect for anyone, but especially for a One. It haunted him. Perhaps his reliance on psychics was an antidote.

In the Berkeley of the 70’s, reading past lives, psychic healing, consulting astrologers, I Ching and Tarot readers were as common as brushing your teeth. My SAT group was the first to experience what was then known as Fisher-Hoffman Process of Psychic Therapy. Bob Hoffman was a gruff, uneducated tailor from Oakland who claimed to have received the key to the underpinnings of our relationship with our mothers and fathers from a respected Viennese psychiatrist who had been dead five years. I was skeptical, but, following Claudio recommendation I worked with Hoffman, entrusted my psychological well-being to him, and worked with the Process for many years. I experienced some freedom but also some very painful personal consequences, including a sexually abusive relationship with Hoffman, which I’ve written about in several blog posts.

Bob and I both began to separate ourselves from ordinary Jesuit life. He followed me to the faculty residence of the American Baptist Seminary of the West, a small rudimentary building on Hillegass Avenue across from Peoples’ Park, where I’d found two small rooms. I remember how much he thanked me—finally he was able to have the kind of privacy that is not possible in a close knit religious community. Both Bob and I both had many non-Jesuit friends, mostly members of the SAT group, and although we could of course have invited them to visit us at the Jesuit residences, every move would have been scrutinized, questioned and, sadly, become fuel for gossip.

And it was not just friendships with SAT members which might have raised suspicion. I had filed a meticulous expense report to a crusty Irish priest for review. I remember a call from Boston asking me about money that I spent on Shiatsu massage in San Francisco. I blamed it on Bob, explaining that the kinds of meditation we were learning required us to become aware of our physical bodies. Joe Scerbo, the Franciscan who was also a member of SAT, gave message workshops. This was way outside the normal course of studies for a Jesuit seminarian.

Soon after I left the Jesuits, Bob ended his active career in the theology faculty, and retreated to the seclusion of a small basement apartment in a quiet suburb north of Berkeley. He became terribly concerned about his lack of energy. A homeopathic practitioner diagnosed allergies and mineral deficiencies, and he adhered to severe dietary restrictions with a healthy regime of supplements. Among other things, he was entirely gluten free before it became a fad. We could only eat at certain restaurants.

I recall a vivid conversation at a Peruvian restaurant he liked on Mission Street in San Francisco. He told me about corresponding with Idries Shah, claiming that letter writing was a revered form of spiritual instruction among Sufis. After Shah died in 1996, Bob tried to initiate a correspondence with Shah’s son, because Bob was certain Tahir had been designated as his father’s spiritual heir. When Tahir replied that he was just a writer, not a Sufi teacher, that his father had not designated him to teach, that actually he was not interested in the job, Bob said to me, “He’s supposed to say that. It’s his job to put me off.”

He became infatuated with the work of Doris Lessing. “Infatuated'' is not too strong a word. Idries Shah had introduced Lessing to Sufi teachings, and she was also apparently interested in the Gurdjeiff school although I have no clear knowledge that she actually worked with any of Gurdjeiff’s longtime English students. But she was very conversant with what is known as “the Work” and its alleged connections to the long spiritual tradition of the Sufi orders. The link here is twofold: Bob was as obsessed with discovering Enneagram’s esoteric roots as he was frustrated in his attempts to create what he considered an adequate language to describe the teaching.

By this time Bob’s relationship with Claudio ended, Enneagram studies had become big business. He was amazed at the deluge of Enneagram books, and although he never talked pejoratively about the career path of teachers who wrote books to build a client base, he did criticise their books. He felt that as the person in many ways responsible for the widespread of Enneagram work outside SAT, he had an obligation to speak, but he could not, at least not in the larger public forum where he might have had some impact. He spoke about his frustration—What shape would the writing take? Would there be illustrations to point to the chief characteristic of the nine points? Could he use public figures as examples? What would Claudio think? He also told me that his superiors were pushing him to write, that he’d explained withdrawal from the Jesuit community as a writing retreat. However I have no real knowledge about Bob’s relationship with his Jesuit superiors.

Then came the very public feuds between the various threads of Enneagram teaching. Ichazo sued Palmer in a case that attracted a lot of attention. Oscar tried to argue that the Enneagram was a rational, objective system, and the courts turned a blind eye. Claudio had serious disagreements with Palmer, Hudson, Riso, and Rohr. The names of the fixations, the descriptions of the traits and underlying motivations were modified as more and more people, in Claudio’s view, misdiagnosed themselves and their students.

In the end there was no book, no reconciliation with Claudio, and very little acknowledgement of Bob’s contribution from the huge number of Enneagram enthusiasts who trace their understanding and practice to his courageous immersion in the Enneagram.* And I failed. By the mid 90’s he wasn’t returning my calls promptly, and I stopped calling. I had also started a downward spiral of drug abuse which would last 10 years. Two years ago when I started working with the Enneagram again, I realized how much I owed Bob. After several attempts to reconnect, I discovered that he had died.

The formal notice of his death in the Midwest Jesuit publication didn’t match his contribution. I had to express my love and admiration myself.

———

The Wild Elephant

Writing about Bob is a daunting task. Mystics have been seeking, talking and arguing about the experience of freedom from time immemorial, or least since they invented language, but they cannot even really define the goal. It is not a fixed destination. There is no objective truth revealed by using the Enneagram system.

I have a Tibetan tanka in my study that represents the Samatha path to Enlightenment. As the elephant trudges up the path towards the highest goal, bit by bit grey smudges sluff off and the animal becomes luminous. I’ve ridden an elephant, a trained one, and even that was difficult.


The Enneagram teaching sprang from a distant source, passed on through Gurdjeiff, Ichazo, Naranjo, Ochs, Palmer and many more, and now it has been handed to us. Some have tried to domesticate the fixations by creating names that were more palatable to a wide psychological audience—a kinder, gentler way of naming our dense barriers to seeing reality. Others tried to calm the elephant’s unruly behavior through a series of carefully formulated descriptions of uncomfortable behaviors. Many taught and wrote tirelessly to explicate the most profitable way for people to use the tool in a careful and rigorous project of self inquiry, but their work is tossed around in the swirl of hundreds of books and seminars from varying perspectives.

The wild elephant has escaped the pen. Along with its monk mahoot, it’s on the Path. They are the Path. The clear, orderly and systematic portrayal from a Tibetan instruction manual reflects the way that many people would like the Enneagram to exist, a fixed point that grounds us in our searching. But the reality is that this Teaching, no matter how pure its origin, despite the most diligent application of the best psychological tools, does not come from the world of immutable truth. Just like ourselves, our teachers, our lovers and friends, it is impermanent. The wild elephant will not play circus tricks. It follows its own more primitive nature. The only thing that we can control, the only consistency possible, is our own rigorous self-inquiry and attempts to see the world as it really is.

I say enjoy the ride. Thank you Bob.

———

*Some of the Enneagram teachers who are linked to Ochs as the source of their practice include: Father Richard Rohr of the Center for Action and Contemplation in Albuquerque, New Mexico; Jerome Wagner at Loyola University in Chicago; Joanna Quintrell at the Journey Center in Santa Rosa, California; Sr. Suzanne Zuercher at the Institute for Spiritual Leadership at Loyola University; Father William Meninger of St. Benedict’s Monastery in Snowmass Colorado; Don Richard Riso, a former Jesuit, (d.2012) and Russ Hudson of the Enneagram Institute, Stone Ridge, New York; Paul Robb, S.J., the founder of the Institute for Spiritual Leadership; Tad Dunne, S.J.; Maria Beesing; Robert Nogosek, C.S.C.; Patrick O'Leary. Father Mitch Pacwa, S.J., a very vocal opponent of the Catholic adoption of the Enneagram, was also Bob’s student in Chicago.

*The first SAT group included Charles Tart, PhD., Hameed Ali and Donovan Bess. Marlys Mayfield, Daniel Shurman, Fr. Joe Scerbo, S.A., and Michael Smith, were also among Claudio’s early students and my friends, all of whom I kept in touch with over many years.

K. L. Ireland, ©Kenneth Ireland, 2020

Here is a list of my other writing about the Enneagram, and a Bibliography.

An Open Letter to Hans Küng

Originally posted May 18th 2011

This post is a response to Fr. Küng's open letter to the Bishops of the Roman Church published in the Irish Times [reposted in full on Orate Fratres]. The cover of Time was on June 7th, 2010 issue. It took me more than a few hundred words to say half the message of this graphic.

 

Dear Father Küng:

 

I want to tell you how much I appreciate your stand against the thousand-year-old tradition of priestly celibacy in the Latin rite. I admire both its eloquence and urgency.

 

However, I would be uncomfortable if you were to take the lead in the effort to reverse this policy of mandatory celibacy.

 

It is not that I don’t find your arguments cogent. They are.

 

It is not that I disagree with your overall assessment that the insistence on papal infallibility is a huge blunder. It was and will continue to be. I admire your conduct after you were disciplined for arguing against the declaration of Vatican I and refused to back down.

 

It is not that I disagree with your analysis that the insulation of the priestly class has resulted in a massively dysfunctional organization that relies on secrecy, manipulation, and force to preserve its power. The current crisis has demonstrated that beyond any shadow of a doubt.

 

It is not, as some may argue, that you might appear to have an ax to grind with the current leadership, Benedict and his Curia. You have never denied that you do, but have always maintained an admirable level of civility. Too many revolutionary leaders have stepped out of prison and sounded the call to arms when the political winds change.

 

It is not that you might appear to be fanning the winds of scandal. The world is dong it; the press is doing it; religious leaders of other churches are doing it; rank and file members of the Latin rite are doing it; the elite leadership in Rome themselves are doing it through their defensive, strident, and often just plain stupid pronouncements.

 

If the Latin rite's leadership in Rome refuses to take responsibility, no one can force them to. No one can force them to do anything. They have insulated themselves against any outside moral force. Even if we could tell them how to resolve the untenable situation they have created—if those who have been gravely injured and those who are rising up in indignation could agree on a remedy—that would still only satisfy those groups. It might be a good first step, but it does not address the root problem.

 

It is the failed leadership itself that has to decide what they must do to take responsibility for the crisis. As far as I can see, the only solution is for them to make themselves accountable to the Teaching of Jesus. What they’ve done so far has not measured up. They will use their authority to claim that it does. Their professional class, priests and lay people in their employ, will claim that it does, but so far, public reaction indicates that few people believe them. I don't believe them. Please keep pointing to the failure of their argument.

 

In 1517 when Luther nailed 95 good reasons why the papal Ponzi scheme devised to finance the grandiose rebuilding of the mother church of the Latin rite was not in accord with the Teaching of the Gospel, the revolt that ensued was not just about money. Luther unleashed a complete reexamination of the Christian life: how to live a good life, your “works," and what constitutes sin and failure when faith counts on the Gift of God’s grace and forgiveness.

 

So far, the public debate, the accusations and recriminations, the posturing have all been about the role of the church’s leadership in a cover-up. The fact that the crimes themselves touch human sexuality at its core is only spoken of very carefully and obliquely. No one yet dares examine the perversion of Church teaching on sexuality. Luther began a revolution in the way humans were able to view their relationship with the transcendent. I hope to see a powerful movement that will free us from the tyranny of onerous teachings on sexuality that are steeped in denial and negativity.

 

Hans Küng by David Levine

And that is why I hope that you, Father Küng, do not assume the leadership in ending the 1000-year-old celibate stranglehold on Latin rite.

 

Let a whole new generation of powerful, thoughtful, skillful, faithful Christian leaders emerge. Let them begin to analyze the structures of our economic and political systems and find ways to make every voice heard, especially the ones that Jesus loved, the poor and disenfranchised. Let men and women assume equal leadership roles in the church so that every person who asks for grace, blessing and forgiveness is welcomed. Let them envision a new spirituality of sex so that every man and woman can enjoy its mystery, grace, and wonder in love and freedom. And that might be only a small beginning of the list of their accomplishments. Our God is generosity and love.

 

There are some who think that the role of religion in our 21st century lives is far less powerful than 500 years ago, and this crisis will fade away. I hope it doesn’t. If it does, we will lose an opportunity to find God once again in our lives.

 

The early followers of Jesus were very clear about one teaching: the Kingdom of God is at hand. And when it didn’t appear in any recognizable way, they transformed their hope, looked for the Kingdom with fresh eyes, and took action. They realized that this process itself was as endless and as boundless as the love they saw in Christ Jesus. They began to see the Kingdom wherever and whenever it appeared, and they made it appear when only they could envision It. That place is always right here. That moment is always right now.

 

 

For another article by Fr. Küng, go to http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2010/apr/01/why-celibacy-should-be-abolished/