Fingerprints of God

I just completed Barbara Bradley Hagerty’s The Fingerprints of God: The Search for the Science of Spirituality (Riverhead Books, 2009). Hagerty is NPR’s Religion Correspondent and offers a chatty introduction to current scientific research into religious experience—everything from peyote to near-death experiences. I learned some things about new directions in neurological research, but in the end, I found the book rather slight.

There are several problems with it. For one, she says that she is writing about the existence of God, but that’s not accurate. She is writing about religious (or spiritual) experience, and whether there is a physical basis for that. Both are interesting questions, but you can’t answer the first one by means of the second. When she does attempt to link the two, she raises some interesting speculations about the universal nature of religious experience, but then seems immediately to jump to the question whether all religions are true. If the brains of Tibetan Buddhist monks and Roman Catholic nuns do the same thing when meditating, that must lead to the question of the truth claims of religions. But it needn’t. It only shows that human brains are similar and certain types of religious experiences share certain physical characteristics.

The thing that bothered me the most was that while she interviewed all of the leading researchers in the field, the scientific data and analysis were sophisticated, but the religious scholarship was almost non-existent. For example, she referred more than once to St. Teresa of Avila’s “spiritual orgasms.” That’s a prurient and sophomoric description of Teresa’s experiences. More problematically, she begins with a discussion of “brokenness” as an important precondition for many people’s experiences and says more about stages, but her analysis would have been much more effective had she drawn on the research of scholars of mysticism.

The question of the relationship between religious experience and the body/brain is a fascinating one. I find it not at all surprising that people experience similar things and that the brain does similar things in certain circumstances. What I do find interesting is that people process these experiences in different ways, and indeed religions process and interpret them differently, too. Of course, those things are interesting to scientists. They should fascinate scholars of Religious Studies.

One comment of hers stands out:

Every person I interviewed who had traveled to the brink of death returned with a new definition of God. I had first noticed this when I talked with people who had enjoyed spontaneous mystical experiences, and I saw the pattern repeat with those who experienced other transcendent moments as well. I realized that after encountering the ‘Other,’ people no longer clung to religious distinctions.

She continues

Now I am not saying I agree with the view that all of the world’s great religious traditions hold, at their root, the same view of the nature of reality I am simply reporting what spiritual adepts told me.

Here’s one of those places that a little depth in the study of mysticism would be illuminating.

On the bodily resurrection (and Bishop Spong)

John Shelby Spong will be speaking at First United Methodist in Madison this weekend. The retired Episcopal Bishop of Newark, Spong has made a name for himself as a fearless of advocate of what he calls “progressive Christianity” and the need to reinterpret scripture and tradition in light of what he understands to be contemporary modern world-view, dominated by science. He also rails against fundamentalists.

I’ve heard him speak over the years,, had a conversation or two, and read at least one of his books. I don’t find his approach or his conclusions particularly helpful or insightful, although I’ve been told by more than a few people that reading Spong has saved Christianity for them.

As an example of what I find problematic, here’s an essay of his from 2003 on the resurrection. He goes through the New Testament evidence for the resurrection, mentioning Paul’s discussion in the opening verses of I Corinthians 15, and the fact that Mark records no resurrection appearance.  He concludes:

When these biblical data are assembled and examined closely, two things become clear. First something of enormous power gripped the disciples following the crucifixion that transformed their lives. Second, it was some fifty years before that transforming experience was interpreted as the resuscitation of a three days dead Jesus to the life of the world.

In order to make that case, he has to claim that Paul never asserts Jesus was raised on the third day. But that’s nonsense. He does it right there in I Corinthians 15, the text Spong cites in favor of some sort of spiritual vision. True, Paul equates his own experience of the Risen Christ with that of the other disciples; that’s his claim to apostleship, but in order to do that he has to assert that his experience of Christ was the same qualitatively as that of the other disciples as well.

Moreover, Paul is using the fact of Jesus’ Christ bodily resurrection from the dead to defend the belief in the bodily resurrection of all believers. To claim that Paul did not believe Jesus Christ was bodily raised from the dead is utterly wrong. We may not like that he did, we may have a hard time believing it, but it is crucial to Paul’s theology, crucial to the faith of the writers of the New Testament, to Christians down through the ages to our own day.

The resurrection, whether we like it or not, believe it or not, accept it or not, is crucial to Christianity, because it says something about human being (that we aren’t just disembodied souls, but enfleshed). It is linked to the Incarnation because we believe God became flesh and dwelt among us. If you want to reject the resurrection, you might as well toss the Incarnation out as well. The resurrection is also ultimately linked to Christian notions of the nature of God and of creation itself, that the material world was created good by God and is capable of and included in, redemption.

More about Spong’s visit to Madison here. I won’t be going, but then I won’t be going to hear  N.T. Wright either (Anglican Bishop of Durham, England and a prominent conservative New Testament Scholar). Info on his talk is here.

I will probably go to hear Elaine Pagels, however.  Not that I’m in any closer agreement with her than the other two. Her lecture is both local and free. Info here.

Surprised by Easter

Surprised by Easter!

Easter Day

April 4, 2010

Grace Church

Alleluia! Christ is Risen!

How many times has it happened to you? You’re driving down a road you’ve driven a hundred or a thousand times—perhaps it’s a commute you’ve made every day for years—and one day, for whatever reason, you look out the window and see a house, or building, or sign that you’ve never seen before. How long has it been there? You have no idea.

Continue reading

Good Friday, 2010

I approach Good Friday with awe and fear. The liturgy of the day and the day itself are full of raw emotion and powerful imagery. Reading the Passion according to St. John with its virulent anti-Judaism is deeply problematic and offensive. Then the solemn collects and the veneration of the cross seem to draw us into the crucifixion, bringing all of our emotional turmoil to the surface.

When crafting the liturgy for the day, I always struggle with finding the right tone: allowing us to recognize our sinfulness but also inviting us to experience the love of Christ. I sometimes think that we overdo it. As a layperson, I often experienced the emotionalism and emphasis on Jesus’ suffering as off-putting. Perhaps the epitome of that was once at All Saints’ Chapel in Sewanee, after the Stations of the Cross that took us up University Avenue. Soloists sang the Tomas Luis de Victoria setting of the Solemn Reproaches. It was beautiful but bone-chilling. The anti-semitism of the text, coupled with the historical context of its composition (16th century Spain, during the Inquisition) almost turned my stomach.

Still, there are things that must be there for me on Good Friday. Bach, for example, specifically, “O Sacred Head, Sore Wounded.” The German text, with English translation, is available here. The origin of the text is quite interesting. Paul Gerhardt, a German Lutheran pastor in the seventeenth century, adapted a Latin hymn from the fourteenth century. In some respects it is full of Medieval sensibility. The original focuses on aspects of Christ’s suffering. Gerhardt refocuses the hymn on the individual, for example, in this stanza (Alexander translation):

What language shall I borrow to thank Thee, dearest friend,
For this Thy dying sorrow, Thy pity without end?
O make me Thine forever, and should I fainting be,
Lord, let me never, never outlive my love to Thee.

Whatever else Good Friday is about, the concluding prayer is a powerful message on this day:

Lord Jesus Christ, Son of the living God, we pray you to set your passion, cross, and death between your judgment and our souls, now and in the hour of our death. Give mercy and grace to the living; pardon and rest to the dead; to your holy Church peace and concord; and to us sinners everlasting life and glory; for with the Father and the Holy Spirit you live and reign, one God, now and for ever.

Amen.

Now my tongue the mystery telling

Now, my tongue, the mystery telling,
Of the glorious body sing,
And the blood, all price excelling,
Which all mankind’s Lord and King,
In a virgin’s womb once dwelling,
Shed for this world’s ransoming.

Given for us and condescending
To be born for us below,
He, with men in converse blending,
Dwelt the seed of truth to sow,
Till He closed with wondrous ending
His most patient life below.

That last night, at supper lying
’Mid the twelve, His chosen band,
Jesus, with the law complying,
Keeps the feast its rites demand;
Then, more precious food supplying,
Gives Himself with His own hand.

Word made flesh, true bread He maketh
By His word His flesh to be;
Wine His Blood: which whoso taketh
Must from carnal thoughts be free;
Faith alone, though sight forsaketh
Shows true hearts the mystery.

Therefore we, before Him bending,
This great sacrament revere;
Types and shadows have their ending,
For the newer rite is here;
Faith, our outward sense befriending,
Makes our inward vision clear.

Glory let us give, and blessing,
To the Father and the Son;
Honor, might and praise addressing
While eternal ages run,
Ever, too, His love confessing,
Who from Both with Both is One.

He loved them to the end: Homily for Maundy Thursday

April 1, 2010

Grace Episcopal Church

From time to time, I share with you some pieces of my Mennonite background. I do it occasionally, because it both helps you get to know me a little bit better, and because the very different Mennonite tradition from which I come is an important witness to the depth and breadth of the Christian tradition. Mennonites have a great deal to teach the larger Christian tradition.

Continue reading

Collect for Wednesday in Holy Week

Lord God, whose blessed Son our Savior gave his body to be whipped and his face to be spit upon: Give us grace to accept joyfully the sufferings of the present time, confident of the glory that shall be revealed; through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.

Amen.

Before 1662, the Book of Common Prayer did not include special collects for the weekdays of Holy Week. The collect for Palm Sunday was used throughout the week. This collect first appeared in the American 1928 Book of Common Prayer. The references to being whipped and spit upon point our attention forward to the events following Jesus’ arrest. The collects for Tuesday and Wednesday seem to be reflections on the passion. They connect Jesus’ suffering with our own.

I’m tempted to see a “modern” turn in this development; modern in the sense of modern individualism and emotionalism.