Frequently Asked Questions

If "the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao," how can one say that Jesus Christ is the eternal Tao?
What do you think of the book Christ the Eternal Tao by Hieromonk Damascene?
What do you think of the book Jesus and Lao Tzu: the Parallel Sayings edited by Martin Aronson?
What do you think of the book The Jesus Sutras: Rediscovering the Lost Scrolls of Taoist Christianity by Martin Palmer?
What do you think of the book The Lost Sutras of Jesus: Unlocking the Ancient Wisdom of the Xian Monks edited by Ray Riegert and Thomas Moore?

Q.1 If "the Tao that can be named is not the eternal Tao," how can one say that Jesus Christ is the eternal Tao?

A. This question misunderstands Christianity, and is best answered by the first chapter of Dionysios Aeropagite's The Divine Names (available in Paulist Press' Pseudo-Dionysius: The Complete Works). Among other things, Dionysios explains that "Nor can any words come up to the inexpressible Good, this One, this Source of all unity, this supra-existent Being. Mind beyond mind, word beyond speech, it is gathered up by no discourse, by no intuition, by no name. It is and it is as no other being is. Cause of all existence, and therefore itself transcending existence, it alone could give an authoritative account of what it really is.... the theologians praise it by every name --and as the Nameless One...." Jesus Christ is the God Who transcends every name, yet as the Cause of all things He is also praised by every name. More teaching along these lines is available on the More Musings page.

Q.2 What do you think of the book Christ the Eternal Tao by Hieromonk Damascene?

A. Hieromonk Damascene's beautiful book grew out of the work of Chinese philosopher Gi-ming Shien and his great student Eugene (Father Seraphim) Rose. It was favorably reviewed in The Empty Vessel: A Journal of Contemporary Taoism (Winter 1999) and Parabola (Winter 1999) for good reason: it is a marvelous book, and I highly recommend it.

Though authored by different people, the purpose of the book Christ the Eternal Tao and the purpose of this website are the same: (1) to show that Lao Tsu's Tao Te Ching foreshadows the revelation of Jesus Christ, who is the Eternal Logos/Tao incarnate, and (2) to reintroduce Jesus Christ through the humble and prophetic vision of Lao Tsu. Christ is the inner heart and meaning of the Tao Te Ching, so the two are mutually revelatory.

The book has three main parts:

1. "The Gospel According to Lao Tzu" looks at Christ through the eyes of Lao Tsu and Lao Tsu's teaching in the light of Christ. This section is, like the Tao Te Ching, composed of 81 (3x3x3x3) poetic chapters in 9 (3x3) enneads; draws on the timeless wisdom of Asian philosophers and Christians throughout the centuries; and might be best understood as a "New Testament to the Tao Te Ching."
2. "The Unfolding Revelation of the Tao in Human History" explains history in the context of different spiritual horizons: the original pristine simplicity, the primordial departure from the Tao, early knowledge of and human seeking for the Tao, and the incarnation and incomparable revelation of the Tao.
3. "Uniting Oneself to the Incarnate Tao through Watchfulness and Prayer," drawing on the teaching of hudreds of years of Eastern Christian saints, provides a substantial guide to new life in Christ the Tao, especially through the personal communion of prayer. (Prayer is an essential element of what I call the "Gracious Threefold Way of Life in Christ." The other two are reception of the glorious, life-creating Mysteries [Sacraments] and sharing and living Christ's virtues.)

Sadly, the Russian Orthodox St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, to which both Fr. Seraphim Rose and Hieromonk Damascene Christensen belong, is historically very antagonistic toward the Catholic Church. (This is, perhaps, why the book rarely recognizes Catholic influences, contributions, and sources --like the Fu-Jen University artists whose paintings appear in the book-- as Catholic.) This pains me very deeply, because I love both the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches, and my inmost heart passionately yearns for their future reunion.

Fr. Seraphim Rose

Until the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches are reunited, I recommend these Catholic ecumenical resources:

• Orientalium Ecclesiarum - "Eastern Churches," Vatican II Council document on the Eastern (Catholic and Eastern Orthodox) Churches
• Unitatis Redintegratio - "Restoration of Unity," Vatican II Council document on the Ecumenism
• Slavorum Apostoli - "Apostles to the Slavs," Pope John Paul II's celebration of Sts. Cyril & Methodios
• Orientale Lumen - "Light of the East," Pope John Paul II's appreciation for Eastern Christianity (both Catholic & Eastern Orthodox) and commitment to pursue full unity in diversity
• Ut Unum Sint - "That All May Be One," Pope John Paul II's ecumenical commitment
• Joint Declaration of Ecumenical Commitment - by Pope John Paul II and Patriarch Bartholomew I
• Joint Declaration of Ecumenical Commitment - by Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras I

As you peruse this website, you will find recommendations for further reading from both Catholic (Western & Eastern) and Eastern Orthodox sources.

[NB: Saint Herman of Alaska Brotherhood is now Serbian Orthodox. As a former resident at a Serbian Orthodox Church, I hope this bodes well for their future relationship with Catholicism.]

Q.3 What do you think of the book Jesus and Lao Tzu: the Parallel Sayings edited by Martin Aronson?

A. This can be a very interesting and good book, but I really think you can do just as well or better with your own New Testament, Tao Te Ching, a pen, and perhaps a notebook. Aronson detects similar sayings, but it is unclear whether Aronson understands Jesus' teaching about himself, that Jesus Christ is himself the Eternal Tao. By all means enjoy this book, but please do not use it as a "short cut" for seeing the parallels and their meaning. I think you will only cheat yourself if you do not "make it your own."

Q.4 What do you think of the book The Jesus Sutras: Rediscovering the Lost Scrolls of Taoist Christianity by Martin Palmer?

A. This book is a somewhat romantic adventure story about the author's personal discovery of ancient Christian presence and artifacts in China, most notably the ancient Da Qin monastery and writings called "the Jesus Sutras" (previously known by others, but new to Palmer).

The earliest known Christian missionaries in China were members of the Assyrian Church of the East, often unfairly characterized as "Nestorian." These Christian missionaries arrived in China around the early 7th century A.D.

The best parts of Palmer's book are the complete translations of the "Sutras" and the photos of ancient Chinese Christian artifacts. It is well worth checking out the book just for these. The worst parts of the book involve Palmer's weak understanding of Christian history, theology, and iconography. Some of his key points and conclusions are, unfortunately, based on bad information. Many examples are possible, here are a few.

• Palmer quotes the Sutra of the Teaching of the World-Honored One concerning "women who first told the truth about what happened, to show all that the Messiah forgave women and wished them to be treated properly in the future" and calls it "a most unusual gloss." I would suggest, based on other texts of the patristic era, that it was not so unusual. This sort of contrast between Eve and faithful women, especially Mary the mother of Jesus, was quite common in ancient biblical interpretation:

  As Eve by the speech of an Angel [Satan] was seduced, so as to flee God, transgressing His word, so also Mary received the good tidings by means of the Angel's speech [Gabriel], so as to bear God within her, being obedient to His word. And though the one had disobeyed God, yet the other was drawn to obey God; that of the virgin Eve the virgin Mary might become the advocate. And as by a virgin [Eve] the whole human race had been bound to death, by a virgin [Mary] it is saved, the balance being preserved: a virgin's disobedience by a virgin's obedience. (St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.19.1)

  Through Eve the beautiful and desirable glory of men was extinguished, but it has been revived through Mary. (St. Ephrem of Syria)

  It is a great sacrament that, whereas through woman [Eve] death became our portion, so life was born to us by woman [Mary]; that in the case of both sexes, male and female, the baffled devil should be tormented, when in the overthrow of both sexes he [the devil] was rejoicing; [the devil's] punishment [would have] been small, if both sexes had been liberated in us without our being liberated through both. (St. Augustine, On the Christian Struggle)

  The debt had its start from a woman [Eve], and the remission had its start from a woman [Mary]. (Nestorius, First Sermon Against the 'Theotokos')

  The contrast between Eve (who brought sin and death into the world) and faithful women (who bring truth, life, and salvation into the world) is not so "unusual" in ancient Christian biblical interpretation; in fact, it was such a commonplace that by St. Jerome's time it had become proverbial: "death by Eve, life by Mary."

• When Palmer compares St. Patrick's creed (a passage appearing early in his Confessions) to a creed from the Anglican/Episcopal Book of Common Prayer, he calls the latter "the Athanasian Creed." It is not the Athanasian Creed, however, but an English version of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (commonly called "Nicene Creed") with the Western filioque addition. The creed commonly called "Athanasian" is the Quincunque Vult, a creed actually composed later than St. Athanasius' time. Though Palmer's comments might lead the reader to believe otherwise, the Nicene Creed is (and always has been) prayed and believed by both Celtic Christians and the Church of the East (and does not preclude other wonderful creeds or symbols of faith, like St. Patrick's personal variation of the Nicene Creed which is only partially quoted by Palmer).

• Palmer claims that "[Manichaean] dualism influenced the young St. Augustine of Hippo, and through him left its mark on Christianity, which since that time has had problems with the physical body and denigrated it as sinful and inferior to the spirit" (c.f. further comments on p. 175). St. Augustine, however, did not "denigrate the body as sinful." On the contrary, he wrote: "all nature, that is, every spirit and every body, is naturally good" (Concerning the Nature of Good, Against the Manichaeans ch. 2). Palmer's claim is common, so he is probably repeating someone else's mistake, but I believe it is based on an anachronistic reading of St. Augustine. I mean this: to the 20th century Christian ear, largely unfamiliar with other ancient writings, St. Augustine's understanding of body and soul does seem dualistic (though far more Platonic than Manichaean). But when his writings are read in their historical context, compared to those of his own predecessors and contemporaries, we can actually discern a strong trajectory toward an integrated understanding of the human person.

  I am not the only person who reads St. Augustine this way. Consider, for example, Peter Brown's The Body and Society, especially chapter 19. The "ascetic" readers of Genesis all characterized life in Paradise prior to the Fall as "angelic," excluding marriage and sexual intercourse as well as death. St. Augustine's understanding of Paradise, by stunning contrast, included God's intention that men and women should be married in friendship and charity, experience sexual desire as a good undisrupted by sin, have children through sexual intercourse, and build a society. Though certainly created with a capacity for God and the supernatural, Augustine's humans are very human. (Some theologians, like Henri de Lubac, would argue that their supernatural capacity is, paradoxically, what makes them so human. I agree.) In Augustine's interpretation, their "catastrophe" is not due to the body, marriage, sexual desire, sex, childbearing, nor human society, because all of those were intended by God and must therefore be good. Augustine believed that the problem with humans is, instead, a twisted human will which selfishly distorts those goods. In other words, he believed the root of the human problem was spiritual, not bodily. (A twisted will does have negative consequences for the body, of course, because it causes psychosomatic dis-integration.) For another book which helps put St. Augustine in historical context, see Sr. Prudence Allen's The Concept of Woman: The Aristotelian Revolution 750 B.C. -- A.D. 1250.

• Palmer's contrast between "original nature" and "original sin" does not take into account two very different uses of "natural" common in Christian theology. "Natural" can refer to either the prelapsarian (pre-sin) condition of humans or the infralapsarian (post-sin) condition of humans. When used in its prelapsarian sense, "natural" generally means the human condition as God created it in his own image and intended it to be, prior to any sin, without any defect or privation, "as it should be" (or at least "as it should begin"). In this context, theologians say things like "sin is unnatural, contrary to nature, even anti-natural," "humans are naturally inclined to God," and "humans should follow their natural desires." When used in its infralapsarian sense, "natural" often refers to the conditions in which humans are now born, after sin has entered the world, a condition in which we find ourselves conflicted, spiritually weak, and subject to alienation, disintegration, suffering, and death. In this context, theologians (even the very same ones) may say things like "we are 'naturally' inclined toward sin," "humans 'naturally' avoid God," and "humans should either rein in or avoid their 'natural' desires." So the same theologian could say "the desire for revenge is profoundly anti-natural" (contrary to what humans are created to be) and "the desire revenge is natural" (we find that our wills are weak in the face of this temptation, we fear what might happen to us if we do not take revenge, etc.). The statements may be paradoxical, but they are not contradictory because "natural" refers to something different in each set.

  Both senses are used in the New Testament. The book of Romans condemns certain actions as "against nature" (in the prelapsarian sense: what humans are created to be and do, the way things should be) while the book of Ephesians condemns the condition humans are in "by nature" (in the infralapsarian sense: the conditions humans are born into now).

  When these two senses of "natural" are distinguished, I think no Christian --no matter what his understanding of the first sin and its consequences-- would object to "returning to our original nature," which clearly refers to the way God intended us to be. (Though they would probably add that our ultimate goal is even greater: the theosis of our original nature.)

• Palmer presents the content and meaning of Pelagius' theology in the vaguest of terms, skipping over its negative implications and shortcomings, and then implies that the Sutra of Returning to Your Original Nature is Pelagian. In fact, many portions of the sutra make it clear that people are not saved by their own power ("he couldn't," "but in vain"), and that Christ acts on their behalf as far more than a mere model of upright behavior ("he levered and pushed the sick man up until he reached the summit," "He is the scaling ladder and the steps"). The author of the sutra is --thankfully-- no Pelagian. The realization of our goal is not one-sided, do-it-yourself Pelagianism, but a relationship of interpersonal self-giving.

• Palmer's implications that the Church of the East some kind of loose "confederation of Churches" without creeds or unified organization and structure are misleading. The Church of the East is --and always has been-- very similar to the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches in doctrinal theology, sacraments, and organizational structure. Like Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians they believe in the holy Trinity and the Incarnation, the divine truths revealed in sacred Scripture and symbolized in the Nicene Creed. They worship with a similar Eucharistic liturgy and share the same seven Sacraments. Their Church is, like ours, guided and served by a Catholicos-Patriarch (currently Mar Dinka IV) and a general synod of Metropolitan-archbishops and bishops. For more information, please refer to their website.

• Palmer says that "The Church of the West dismissively labeled the Church of the East Nestorian, therefore heretical and not really a Church. This dismissal continues to this day." While I would agree that the Church of the East has, at times, been dismissed --and even unfairly criticized and maligned-- by Western theologians in the past, it is not the case that "dismissal continues to this day." Catholicos-Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV of the Church of the East and Pope John Paul II of the Catholic Church, for example, signed a joint christological statement on 11 November 1994, providing substantial evidence that differences were never so great as many people once assumed. A joint international committee for theological dialogue between the Church of the East and the Catholic Church was formed shortly thereafter. In 1996 Patriarch Mar Dinkha IV and Chaldean Catholic Patriarch Raphael I Bidawid committed their churches to several cooperative efforts including a common catechism, a common seminary, and a joint commission for unity. In 1997 the Church of the East also established a bilateral theological dialogue with the Syrian Orthodox Church and, as an overture to the Oriental Orthodox Churches in general, removed all the anathemas against other Christians from their liturgy. You can read more about mutual ecumenical efforts between the Assyrian Church of the East and the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox Churches on the Assyrian Church of the East's own website. They don't seem to think they're being "dismissed." Palmer must not be aware of this.
  • Assyrian Church of the East's Catholic dialogue sources
  • Catholic Church's Assyrian Church of the East dialogue sources

• In his comments about "Tatian's Gospel" (a.k.a. the Teachings of the Apostles or Diatessaron by Tatian) Palmer suggests "Tatian created, in effect, a Gospel that might have become the definitive book alongside or even instead of the Four Gospels, had Church history worked out differently." Palmer's commentary might lead many readers to believe Tatian's Diatessaron is an independent, original book. I suspect he has not read it himself. In fact, the Diatessaron ("the combined") is composed entirely of directly quoted passages from the four Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John) which Tatian "harmonized" into a single narrative, as if told by one person rather than four. In the words of the 9th century Syriac biblical commentator Isho'dad of Merv: "Tatian, the disciple of [Saint] Justin, the philosopher and martyr, selected from the four Gospels, and combined and composed a gospel, and called it Diatessaron, i.e. The Combined." Out of 3780 verses in the four Gospels, the Diatessaron quotes 2769 and omits 1011. Clearly there would be no point in canonizing Tatian's Diatessaron "alongside" the four Gospels, and any reasonable person would prefer a canon containing four Apostolic Gospels to a canon containing a single, secondhand "harmonization" of those four. A book like Diatessaron could probably be useful to people, but unnecessary to anyone who has a copy of the four Gospels.

  See and read Tatian's Diatessaron online:

  • Diatessaron
  • Diatessaron (without citations)
  • Diatessaron
  • Diatessaron (buy a hardcopy)

• On p. 170 the outline of a painting discovered in the Dunhuang cave is reproduced. The figure's right hand is extended to the right with the first finger pointing, the second curled in to cross the thumb, and the third and fourth fingers pointing. On p. 172 Palmer comments on the figure's hand gesture: "Given that the hand position on the banner shows the mudra of debate, of teaching, and that this is the only hand mudra also used in the Orthodox Church but solely for Christ, it is possible that this figure is Jesus." Actually, figures in Eastern Christian iconography (whether Eastern Orthodox or Catholic) may assume one of many meaningful hand gestures (or mudras, if you prefer); the two most common are orans and the blessing/preaching hand. Christ often extends the blessing/preaching hand in icons, but so do many saints, especially men known for their preaching (including Apostles, Church Fathers, and some Prophets).

  The blessing/preaching gesture is made with the figure's right hand. The first finger points up, the second finger is curled a little, the third finger is curled to touch the thumb (preferably with the tips crossed), and the fourth finger is curled over. Each finger represents a letter in the four-letter Greek abbreviation of "Jesus Christ": IC XC. From the viewer's perspective, the first finger is an I, the second a C, the third crossed with the thumb is an X, and the fourth is a C. Regardless who gives the gesture, it is clear that Jesus Christ is the origin of the blessing and Jesus Christ is the content of the preaching.

  If you compare the drawing on p. 170 of Palmer's book (which may or may not be Jesus) to various icons of Christ and his saints, you will notice that his hand gesture is not actually the blessing/preaching hand. The finger crossing the thumb is the second rather than the third, so the name Jesus Christ is not spelled. I have personally never seen this particular gesture in Christian art. (It is possible that it is simply a mistaken rendering of the blessing/preaching hand.) Ironically, if you look at the drawing of the Buddha on p. 186 you will find that he is making the IC XC gesture correctly!

My purpose is not to condemn Palmer or his book, but to make readers aware of its many shortcomings regarding Christian history, theology, and iconography. Palmer is, according to the Jesus Sutras dust jacket, an expert in Taoist ritual who specialized in Chinese and Japanese studies. Christian history and theology is not his specialty. I do not think his intentions are bad, rather that he was probably misinformed and repeated other people's mistakes. This happens even to the best writers. Let us hope future editions will be improved. In the meantime, enjoy reading the complete translation of the Sutras themselves.

Q.5 What do you think of the book The Lost Sutras of Jesus: Unlocking the Ancient Wisdom of the Xian Monks edited by Ray Riegert and Thomas Moore?

A. A friend recommended this book to me while we were discussing Taoism, Christ, and The Jesus Sutras by Palmer. Both of us think this book is better than Palmer's, even though it relies heavily on Palmer's work and does not contain the complete texts of the known sutras (for complete texts, see Palmer).

This book focuses more on the history of the sutra scrolls than on Palmer's rediscovery of the ancient Christian monastery in China. The authors' grasp of Christian history and theology tends to be better than Palmer's, as well. I would definitely recommend this book, with a word of caution.

The only real problems with this book (fortunately very few) are manifestations of a certain ignorance about and/or prejudice against traditional (and especially Catholic & Eastern Orthodox) Christianity. For example:

• On page 12 the Assyrian Church of the East is contrasted with "Rome," and favored as more concentrated on Jesus' message and less concerned with church doctrine. In reality, neither the Assyrian Church of the East nor the Catholic Church would accept this radical dichotomy between Jesus' message and church doctrine: our doctrines are expressions of Jesus and his message.
• On the following page Aleben and the "Persian Christian" Church of the East are said to believe "Mary was the mother of Jesus the man, not the god." This is a disturbingly misleading way of calling their beliefs "Nestorian," because it not only implies they were heretically Nestorian (they're not) but even more, that they do not believe in the Incarnation of God at all (they most certainly do!).
• The editors' reflections on the sutras unfortunately vary from excellent to ridiculous. On the ridiculous side, sometimes we are implicitly expected to contrast the sutras' teachings with a bad representation of traditional Christianity, then it is suggested we should prefer the sutras over this negative image or impression. Yet on most occasions the authors are pointing to a "contrast" that does not exist in reality, and there is no good reason to believe their negative image of traditional Christian faith. A good example appears on page 96:

  Western theology might say that we are incarnated souls, having a vast spiritual identity while living a fully bodily existence. The Sutras spell out this mystery of incarnation differently. Body is to soul as fire is to the sun. Both are essential.... The Sutras offer a way to get out of [the] splitting of sacred and secular. They insist on the necessity of both body and spirit.

  In truth, the sutras and traditional Western theology are in full agreement regarding the essential necessity of both human body and soul (and spirit); they also agree that any rupture between the sacred and secular is a problem. With regard to the first, consider Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body, which teaches that we are our bodies, that our bodies are an absolutely essential dimension of our persons. We are more than our bodies, but definitely not less: human persons are embodied persons by nature. Our ultimate goal includes the reintegration of the whole human person and glorification of the body. With regard to the second, works like Thomas Howard's Evangelical Is Not Enough: the Worship of God in Liturgy & Sacrament (Ignatius Press; Catholic) and Alexander Schmemann's For the Life of the World (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press; Eastern Orthodox, inspired in part by the 20th century Catholic liturgical movement) make it clear that any sacred/secular dichotomy is a consequence of sin, a rupture the Gospel ethos seeks to reintegrate.

With this caution in mind (i.e. that the book manifests a certain ignorance about and/or prejudice against traditional, and especially Catholic & Eastern Orthodox, Christianity), I would recommend The Lost Sutras of Jesus.

Christ the Eternal Tao
Links
More Musings

John Augustine
Catholic Taoist