Chris Dierkes at Indistinct Union writes:

The Spirit of the Lord, blowing where it will, renews not only the face of the earth but the faces on the earth, the faces of the earth.  This is worthy of adoration. 

There is renewal of that which has been forgotten and should never have been.  Renewal of that which is held in oppression when the yoke is lifted and that which was enslaved returns to its pristine natural vigor.  There is renewal as new creation, re-newing everything that was prior to the truly new. 

Christian Ethics and the spiritual/religious path more broadly conceived should fundamentally be about renewal and re-creation.  It is too often about power, prestige, and place.  Far too often concerned not with renewal–which may mean letting things die a natural death so others can take its place–but rather with conservation (in the negative sense).   Holding on past time. 

But renewal without adoration becomes too easily the false idolatrous spirit of progressivism and worse revolutionary fervor and worse still violence.  Change for change’s sake, meeting the new boss whose the same as the old boss, is no answer, no virtue, religious or otherwise. 

Few progressives would recognize themselves as advocating change for change’s sake, nor with wanting a new boss the same as the old. Yet too often social change movements have turned against individual liberty, towards fascism, repression, and an impoverishment of the human spirit. Religious social movements have fared no better, so far as I know.

What I think Chris is getting at is that the impulse to change what’s wrong with the world must be balanced by an impulse to bless what’s right about the world. Whether that blessing impulse comes from a religious sensibility or not, I think it makes a huge difference in the real world. Progressives who fail to bless frequently find themselves consumed with bitterness, cynicism, and ultimately hypocrisy. Progressive movements which fail to bless may inadvertently destroy the meaning-giving, structure-producing, and discipline-enforcing contexts in which human development naturally occurs. Renewal is half blessing, half inspiration for change.

Technorati Tags: Christianity, progressivism

Andrew Sullivan sums up his argument with the Social Gospel variety of Christianity — which he equates with a cooptation of Christianity by socialism and redistributionism, a position towards which Obama leans, he claims – in this way:

[I]t isn’t about encouraging charity; it is about the enforcement of “charity” by the strong hand of the state. And in so far as it forcibly takes people’s property from them, it also diminishes their capacity for real charity.

Now, saints are very rare.

And the kind of voluntary communism of which Merton speaks likely only in monasteries and religious orders. In the world as it is, there should be some mandatory public provision for the poor, the sick and the indigent. But it should be a safety-net to avoid specific social evils, not a system of redistribution to construct some notion of “social justice” (see Chapter 6 in “The Conservative Soul”). In the end, the social Gospel can make Christianity less, rather than more, likely. The state cannot experience faith; and it cannot express charity. Only individuals can. One by one. (emphasis mine)

Is it really so self-evident that only individuals, and not collective entities, are capable of “experiencing faith” or “expressing charity”? And that Christianity is essentially a religion concerned only with the individual soul, the I-Thou relationship between One Supreme God and The Individual Soul? Andrew Sullivan, like many Christians, thinks so. But this assumption has been fundamentally questioned by many Christian theologians at least since the late 19th century (including the early but not the later Reinhold Niebuhr), and is explicitly disavowed by liberation theology, arguably the most significant paradigm shift in theology in the past 40 years. Today, many Christians believe that groups as well as individuals embody the Spirit and have a role in salvation (Matthew 18: “For where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them.”)

It may be literally true that a collective cannot “experience faith” or “express charity”, but can’t a collective embody greater or lesser degrees of cohesion, integration, and self-awareness? In fact, social scientists since Jean Gebser have argued that societies progress from archaic to magical to mythical to mental to integral stages of consciousness. Political structures, too, seem to range from those which enfold low to high degrees of consciousness (anarchic to tribal to authoritarian to democratic to social-democratic). One needn’t be an orthodox Hegelian–believing in the inevitable triumph of Absolute Spirit–to observe that some societies appear to experience and express greater complexity, harmony, and humanity than others. When a liberation theologian says that God is the force of expanding freedom and goodness in history, or when an integral theologian says that some social arrangements “enfold” more consciousness than others, they recognize God (or consciousness) as present in the empowering group, the virtuous neighborhood, the charitable organization, and–yes–the good state.

Christian Individualists will never look for God anywhere other than an individual’s own “personal” soul, and so they will never see God’s presence in and beyond individuals. More transpersonal thinkers–shifting from instrumental reasoning (orange) to vision-logic reasoning (green to turquoise)–know that God is neither strictly individual nor collective. We see that salvation is irreducibly relational and therefore Christian virtue expresses itself necessarily in individuals and groups. Government is, therefore, not an enemy of the soul, but a partner in the arising of the Christian vision of a “shining city on a hill” and “new heavens and new earth”.

Andrew Sullivan’s version of Christian Individualism says that the virtue of groups is likely in monasteries and religious orders, not civic institutions, and certainly not the dreaded federal government! His greatest fear, it seems, is Christianism–the ideology of wielding the Christian religion as a political force, conflating church and state. His criticism really only stings when it’s applied to pre-rational (amber or lower) ideologies: the Christian right, or Islamism, for example. Andrew thinks his critique of Christianism is damning also for the political left–Social Gospel Christians, Barack Obama, and so forth–but this misses the importance of the distinction between prerational and transrational religion. In its transrational forms, religion grasps the necessity to separate church and state by assuring an individual’s freedom of religion. But the spiritual left also sees that individual rights are best protected when they are legitimized and grounded in a theology of a liberating God (or a philosophy of evolving consciousness/Spirit). The spiritual left doesn’t want to impose its religion on everyone else. It respects religious freedom because it sees the arising of individual liberty itself as a reflection of the divine.

Christian Individualists will have none of that. They malign efforts to create a more virtuous government or a just society as somehow getting in the way. If government makes health care affordable, this is bad because it denies good people the ability to cultivate their individual virtue by giving charity to the less fortunate. If government does anything to address the “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” nature of human existence, then this is bad because it makes faith in an otherworldly God and an otherworldly salvation less pressing. As Andrew says, “in the end”, Christianity becomes “less likely”. Or something like that.

Will solving America’s health care crisis really make Christianity less likely? Will making our taxation progressive? Will regulating carbon emissions? Will protecting children from toxins and overseeing food safety? Will enacting Barack Obama’s progressive agenda? I guess if any of these things will actually make Christianity less likely (and I see no real evidence), then that’s a price this Christian is willing to pay. Because in the end, a Christianity that is rendered unnecessary by an evolving social consciousness is no form of the religion worth keeping around.

Technorati Tags: Andrew Sullivan, Christianity, integral, liberation theology, Obama, politics, religious right, social evolution, Social Gospel, social justice, spiritual left

Reading from Joe Perez’s Soulfully Gay:

Wednesday, Dec. 31

Did Jesus really rise from the dead? For the first time in many years, my answer to this question is Yes, I do believe. What changed? Part of the answer involves a story of a riddle from my past: a troubling breakdown and spiritual experience at age 30, confinement in a psychiatric ward for a time, visions in a hospital room, and an unexpected sight outside my room. I told this story in my journal (see entries on June 8 and June 15), and I’ll have a bit more to say about it. And part of the answer involves a topic I’ve written about: my encounter with the integral philosophy. But for now, here’s how the story ends: my mind accepts the reality of the resurrection….

Technorati Tags: Christ, Christianity, integral, Jesus, Joe Perez, resurrection, Soulfully Gay

A variety of studies have shown that religion is linked to positive mental health and reduced mortality rates, but a new study suggests that the type of congregation makes an important difference. Catholic, Mainline Protestant, and Evangelical congregations are positively associated with increases in longevity, but Fundamentalist and Pentecostal congregations are more problematic. The implications of the study, according to Science Daily:

Because religious congregations play such an important role in shaping community well-being, Blanchard and his co-authors believe that the orientation of Catholic, Mainline Protestant and Evangelical congregations have important lessons to teach us about what it takes to improve community health and longevity.

“Policymakers and citizens, whether religious or not, should realize that socially engaged faith communities can enhance the well-being of society,” said Blanchard. “In this era of faith-based initiatives, our findings highlight the critical importance of religious organizations to the social service infrastructure.”

It appears that the study only included Christian churches. What would be very interesting is how different world religions compared in terms of contribution to mental health. If the critical factor is the degree of other-worldliness, then one would expect many Islamic congregations to contribute negatively to health, but worldly religions such as Confucianism and Shintoism would probably make a positive impact.

Thanks to The Lead for the link.

Technorati Tags: Christianity, mental health, religion

The Eucharist is a bread wafer, and–I believe–a real symbol of the presence of Christ, the ever-present Alpha and Omega. But believers don’t look at the world the same way: there are fundamental differences in levels of consciousness. So of course the Eucharist doesn’t look the same to every person.

A true story today as shared on Monastic Mumblings:

In my understanding, the Eucharist is real, Christ is Present, and He infuses our lives with His Presence during the Sacrament. It is the most profoundly holy time in my week, when I am touched by the Sacred.

I believe that Christ is Present in the Sacrament, I believe that we are invited by Christ Himself to touch and be touched by the Holy. We take Christ Himself into our bodies, and our lives, leaving and being sent into the world, carrying Christ within us.

That being said, this week we had a little ‘event’ during the Eucharist. In my tradition, there is a point during the Eucharistic prayer (called the Epiclesis), during which the Celebrant invokes the Holy Spirit to bless the bread and wine so that it may be to us the Body and Blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. Then the Priest Boys and girls for Jesus elevates the Host, showing Christ to the faithful for veneration. At that most sacred, profound moment a little girl of almost two years old looked up and with her innocent, shrill voice yelled “cookie”!!

How the story ends…

Technorati Tags: children, Christianity, Eucharist

The blogger behind one of the brighest lights in the Episcopal/Anglican blogosphere has decided to move on to new projects. I miss Father Jake’s insight and humor and enthusiasm already, and wish him every success as he retires from blogging.

Sadly, he cites his frustration with the toxic rhetoric in the Church as one important reason for his departure. Here’s how Jake starts his goodbye:

After much thought, prayer, and consultation with others, I’ve decided that it is time to close down Jake’s place.

This is not an easy decision. In some ways, it feels like a part of me is dying.

There’s many reasons for making this decision:

1. I believe that a constant exposure to some of the toxic rhetoric found on the net has had a negative impact on my spiritual health. I find it more difficult to discern the glory of God. Most likely this is because I’ve become too preoccupied with the depravity of man. I need to take care of myself.

2. I’m no longer sure that our conversations here are helpful to the Episcopal Church. We have become as polarized in our responses as those with whom we disagree. The reality is that we are all children of God. There is no “us” and “them.” There is only “we.” I honestly believe that. Continuing to focus on our divisions deepens them, and provides a poor witness to the hope that is in us.

3. I am considering launching a new project, which could be hindered by some of the strident conversations we have had here. I’m passionate about this project. I believe it to be a calling from God. I’m going to follow that call.

I know first-hand that the very act of reading the anti-gay hostility on many of the Christian blogs is spiritually painful. Taking regular vacations from blogging is an essential part of my “burnout avoidance plan”.

Technorati Tags: blogs, Christianity, Episcopal

The experience of Ultimate Reality is ultimately indescribable, ineffable, and irreducibly mysterious. But the theory of spiritual experience is different entirely. Theory translates immediate experience into ideas that can help to orient our mind towards Ultimate Reality. And on the other hand, our theories can impoverish our ability to be receptive to spiritual truths.

Perhaps the most central concept underlying any spiritual worldview is that of the nature of Ultimate Reality itself, and how it is related to the manifest reality. As students of religious thought are well aware, there are three major theories: transcendent (theistic), holding that Ultimate Reality is wholly separate from the world; immanent (panthestic), holding that Ultimate Reality is completely identified with the world; and panentheistic, holding that the world is “in” the Ultimate Reality, and that Ultimate Reality is both immanent and transcendent.

The varieties of religious thought can be categorized according to this threefold distinction. Christianity is usually presented as a theistic (transcendent) religion. Hinduism is polytheistic (transcendent). Paganism is usually said to be pantheistic. Buddhism is usually identified as transcendent (the world is illusion, and Reality is wholly Other). Atheism is a sort of ireverent or indifferent pantheism.

However, these simple stereotypes betray the complexity and richness of spiritual views. A panentheistic thread of one variety or another runs through many of the world’s great religions and even some schools of secular philosophy.

In a series of posts on this Weblog, I’ll argue the merits of the panentheistic philosophy, and its superiority over theistic, polytheistic, atheistic, pantheistic theories of reality. Closely related to this argument, I will contend that a panentheistic worldview is the most Integral way of conceiving of Ultimate World. the essence of these arguments is my contention that panentheism is the most accurate way of describing the nature of religious experience and the most useful way of orienting our intellect towards direct religious experience.

As a Christian, I am interested not only in panentheism in general, but Christian panentheism in particular. There are many ways of conceiving the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, but the most intriguing are concepts of Trinity that are in keeping with panentheism. The traditional notion of “one God, three persons” can be very misleading if the religionist takes the notion of “person” too literally. The more sophisticated view is that the Trinity describes the relationship between the manifest world (Many) and the spiritual world (One).

A highly insightful and wide-ranging discussion of the doctrine of Trinity in relationship to the One and the Many can be found in a recently published dialogue between Brother David Steindl-Rast, a practicing Benedictine monk, and Ken Wilber, the psychological theorist. In “Integral Christianity: Theory and Practice. Part 1. The Relationship of the One and the Many. Brother David Steindl-Rast” , these two thinkers meditate on the Father of Ultimate Mystery, the Christ as the Kosmic Christ, and the Holy Spirit as the orientation of the immanent world towards God. Ken Wilber:

Discovering the One is, in a sense, the first step. But then the relation of the One to the entire manifest world, the whole world of relationships to the world and all manifest world … both One and Many are integral to a full understanding of the world.

I am most impressed by Brother Steindl-Rast’s point that the Trinitarian understanding of God is most clearly distinguished from non-Trinitarian orientations by the importance it places on gratitude. Purely immanentist philosophies have no role for gratitude, because there is no Other to which the believer is related. But transcendent philosophies also have no role for gratitude, because Creation itself is viewed as empty of God, and therefore of little importance (and ultimately seen as obstacles to be overcome). But the Trinitarian view says that the appropriate attitude of the Many towards the One — and the fruit of spiritual practice — is that of gratitude (in other words, praise or worship).

Technorati Tags: atheism, Christianity, gratitude, panentheism, pantheism, praise, theism, Trinity, worship

The media frequently discusses all the controversy and potential schism in the Episcopal Church because of its gay-inclusive stance (the election of Gene Robinson as bishop and so forth), so you would think that this is a body in turmoil, at war with itself. But in fact, the Episcopal Church may be gaining a competitive advantage in the Protestant church “marketplace”. More people than ever are aware of the Church and know that it is an open and welcoming community, and one not afraid to take bold progressive stances even at great cost. Father Jake notices this too, and writes in “Positive Fallout From Anglican Crisis”:

In this neck of the woods, when in collar, most folks assume I’m Roman Catholic. When they find out I’m an Episcopal priest, not only do more seem to know what such a creature is than in the past, they are curious to know more about us. Within the congregation, I can never recalled talking so much about the Anglican Communion in response to questions in all of my 18 years as an ordained person.

I know this much for a fact. If it were not because of the Episcopal Church’s courageous stand on homosexuality, then it would be one member fewer. The Church has won over this believer.

Technorati Tags: Christianity, Episcopal, Father Jake, homosexuality

Remarkably good news on the religion front, says an AP article by Eric Gorsky: “Religious Americans: My faith isn’t the only way.” Here’s the point:

“Look, this shows the limits of a survey approach to religion,” said Peter Berger, a theology and sociology professor at Boston University. “What do people really mean when they say that many religions lead to eternal life? It might mean they don’t believe their particular truth at all. Others might be saying, ‘We believe a truth but respect other people, and they are not necessarily going to hell.’”

Luis Lugo, director of the Pew Forum, said that more research is planned to answer those kinds of questions, but that earlier, smaller surveys found similar results.

Nearly across the board, the majority of religious Americans believe many religions can lead to eternal life: mainline Protestants (83 percent), members of historic black Protestant churches (59 percent), Roman Catholics (79 percent), Jews (82 percent) and Muslims (56 percent).

By similar margins, people in those faith groups believe in multiple interpretations of their own traditions’ teachings. Yet 44 percent of the religiously affiliated also said their religion should preserve its traditional beliefs and practices.

The belief in exclusivity of one religion’s claim to truth and supremacy of its believers to all others is the biggest obstacle in the way of the greater adoption of more Integral theologies throughout all the world’s religions. Some religions are naturally more open to universalism than others: the progressive (largley green altitude) Unitarian Universalism, but also liberal Protestant denominations and the (largely amber-to-orange altitude) Roman Catholic Church.

Regardless of the religion’s doctrines, what do the believers in the pews actually think? According to this Pew study, nobody really knows for sure. If soteriologies are complex, so are the ways that people assimilate the religious doctrines into their idiosyncratic belief systems. But it seems clear that more than 6 in 10 Americans are predisposed to believe that there is one tree, but many branches.

Technorati Tags: Christianity, religion, universalism

Originally posted in 2007.
How do Christians in the modern Western nations discuss the rise of a magical-mythic literalistic Christianity in Africa? Not with enough genuine ambivalence, if they’re looking from a green lense, I’m afraid. In “Africa and the Bible,” Father Jones writes:

Africans are generally critical of modern Western approaches to the Bible, including those of the 19th century evangelists who brought them the Bible. Africans identify very much with the worldview of the Bible – finding it reminiscent of their own traditional African worldviews. They believe the modern Western worldview, bereft of mystery, spirits and supernaturalism, doesn’t truly resonate with the biblical worldview. The typical African sees a universe steeped in mystery – a cosmic landscape dotted with spirits, sorcery, animal sacrifice, ancestor worship, and so on – much like the one they find described in Scripture. When Africans were freed from Western interpretations of the text, and Western disparagement of African culture, they could read the Bible themselves. And, importantly, the world Africans encountered in Scripture was closer to their own world than the world of the missionaries. “When they would encounter passages about sacrifice, tyranny, blood, suffering, spirit, healing, etc. – they could deeply grasp it as of their own worldview,” Le Marquand writes. “The African noted how closely connected that their world and the biblical world are.”

In addition to identifying more closely with the Bible’s own supernaturalist worldview, Africans also identify with the Bible’s communal vision of humanity. Africans are surprised by Western individualistic approaches to the Bible. They do not believe individuals are equal to the task of biblical interpretation. Ubuntu is the African notion that a person’s identity depends upon her relationships. Whereas the modern Western mindset seems to be, “I think therefore I am,” the ubuntu mindset is, “I am because we are.”

Technorati Tags: Africa, Christianity, Episcopal, homosexuality