Crucially, if we embrace Schelling’s perspective, this process of re-appraisal does not put into question the perception a religion has of its own symbols as complete. In this respect, from a Christian perpspective, the symbol of the Trinity as such, as the broad description of the one God as triune, is complete once and for all. However, what may happen in a situation of interreligious dialogue is that such a symbol is enriched unfolding new implications of it and may get substantially reinterpreted, as we come to read it in the light of a new situation. More specifically, what happens in this process is that, thanks to dialogue, we are able to reach for the roots of our tradition and be enriched in the process. As we know, all the aspects of our religions are the result of a development of what lies in the three potencies in co-operation with our consciousness. Thus, if we develop …show more content…
This, according to Schelling, is to "regain it [the truth about God's nature] in a stable way […] [in a way] reinforced through experience, and now impossible to lose again". In other words, humanity will learn to imagine God as triune and come to consciously appropriate this vision in a thorough way. This, will bring the whole of humanity in communion with God in a condition of spiritual union. Crucially, claims Schelling, the spiritual character of this union indicates that the reconstituted unity of the potencies will not eliminate but instead include the previous moments of the development of this union. This happens as, as we have seen in the first chapter, Schelling understands spirituality as the ability to become something else without losing oneself. This means, that the spiritual unity of the three potencies is achieved as the expression of each potency finds communion in God without because of this any of the autonomous objectification of the divine losing its