The Future of Christianity, Atheism, and the Origins of Civilization

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve been on vacation for the past few days, getting caught up on my reading and sleeping. A number of things that caught my eye on the internet have me reflecting on my work, the work of the church, and the nature of religion.

Bishop Greg Rickel of the Diocese of Olympia (Washington) parallels much of my thinking about the future of the church:

… churches do not yet know how to measure what this means. “What denominational metrics people are asking—how many people are in church on Sunday, for example—may not be the right measure for today. The measures that contemporary churches need may be more intuitive and more spiritual in nature.”

Rickel points to a small church in his diocese that is located along the Columbia River. The population of the area is declining, and membership growth is not a realistic goal. Never­theless, the congregation is a dynamic and important part of the community, because it is a community and service center. Rickel likens it to a base camp—a place along the journey where people stop to receive nourishment, training, basic supplies and encouragement.

“We’ve only been paying attention,” Rickel said, “to the people who stay. But maybe that’s not the purpose [of the base camp]. Maybe we’ve been treating base camps as permanent residences.”

In order to operate as base camps, Rickel said, congregations need not give up their identity or cease offering a challenging “rule for living.” In fact, he said, young adults are eager for such a challenge. But churches need to be able to witness to the gospel when they have only a few chances to reach any one person.

The article by Amy Frykholm is insightful and challenging. She details the cultural changes taking place, highlighting the work of sociologists like Robert Wuthnow and Wade Clark Roof, as well as pastors who are experiencing these changes in their ministry. At the same time, she reminds us all about the importance of community, and the central NT idea of membership.

Then, thanks to  Counterlight’s Peculiars, I read this thoughtful post from an atheist who attends church regularly:

So, I remain a non-believer in the pew. I don’t make a point of it, because after all I’m choosing to be there. I’m sure most of the folks in church don’t know or notice. Those that do, may think I’m simply “earlier on the journey” than others. (I think some people think I’m Jewish, based on the occasional question. This is a frequent assumption because I’m dark and strong-featured.)

Instead, I tend to think that I’ve gone much further. I’ve gone past being religious, through my religion-bashing phase and to some extent am post-religious. Now I can find the common ground with my socially progressive instincts and faith groups who articulate it on the ground.

Besides the music is great.

I find this perspective hopeful, much more so than that of the New Atheists or even this.

There was also this article from the National Geographic yesterday. Based on excavations in Turkey, Klaus Schmidt concludes:

The construction of a massive temple by a group of foragers is evidence that organized religion could have come before the rise of agriculture and other aspects of civilization. It suggests that the human impulse to gather for sacred rituals arose as humans shifted from seeing themselves as part of the natural world to seeking mastery over it. When foragers began settling down in villages, they unavoidably created a divide between the human realm—a fixed huddle of homes with hundreds of inhabitants—and the dangerous land beyond the campfire, populated by lethal beasts.

While he is open to changing his interpretation of the data, Schmidt concludes: “I think what we are learning is that civilization is a product of the human mind.”

More on Hawking and Science and Religion

Posted on by
1

N.T. Wright v. Hawking: In the Washingon Post. Wright points out that the view of heaven Hawking rejects is neither biblical nor is it particularly Christian. Wright calls his view “low-grade and sub-biblical.”

From an interview with Rolf-Dieter Heuer, the director of the European Organization for Nuclear Research and oversees the vast CERN laboratories in Switzerland.

We separate knowledge from belief. Particle physics is asking the question of how did things develop? Religion or philosophy ask about why things develop. But the boundary between the two is very interesting. I call it the interface of knowledge. People start asking questions like “if there was a Big Bang, why was it there?” For us physicists, time begins with the Big Bang. But the question remains whether anything existed before that moment. And was there something even before the thing that was before the Big Bang? Those are questions where knowledge becomes exhausted and belief starts to become important.

And:

But the more we investigate the early universe, the more people are trying to connect science to philosophy. That is a good thing. Since we are struggling with the limits of knowledge, maybe philosophy or theology struggle also with our research. I think it is important that we open a constructive dialogue.

Divers Diseases: Or why I don’t lament the passing of the KJV

Posted on by
Reply

As this past Sunday was the Fourth Sunday of Easter, Good Shepherd Sunday, we read, as we do every year, Psalm 23. At the 10:00 service, the choir sang a setting of it. At 8:00, we read the BCP version. It stuck in my craw, as it did for most of those in the congregation, our average age being well over 50. We wanted to recite the version we had memorized: “The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want…”

This is the 400th anniversary of the KJV, something I have already mentioned more than once on this blog, and an anniversary deserving of attention. There’s a great site here, with profound essays by the likes of Robert Alter. I agree with those who praise the beauty of the translation, the power of the words. But the Bible is also meant to be understood. And I, for one, am grateful for modern translations that bring the language and ideas of 2000 or 3000 years ago to life for people in the 21st century.

For all of the power and beauty of the KJV, what I remember most as a child is listening to people trying to read it out loud and make sense of it for themselves and convey that meaning to a congregation. More often than not, it came across as a foreign language. The words I remember best after forty years are hearing farmers struggle to read Paul to a congregation. I puzzled then, and I’m sure everyone else did, over Paul’s list of afflictions that included “divers diseases.” I wondered what they were, and how he acquired them by diving into the Mediterranean.

The KJV, for all of its beauty is as alien a language to the twenty-first century, as Latin was to the people of England in the 16th.

Stephen Hawking says heaven is a fairy tale–why is anyone surprised?

Posted on by
Reply

Perhaps the only thing more surprising than his rejection of heaven is that it continues to get press. More interesting is why someone who is obviously brilliant lacks the imagination to explore the human quest for meaning and purpose.

Hawking:

“I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark,”

Rabbi Brad Hirschfield’s response in Huffington Post seems to emphasize that it is impolite for someone to denigrate another’s beliefs; although he also makes the distinction between knowledge and belief.

Mark Vernon reports on a rather more interesting exchange between Rowan Williams and A.C. Grayling. The atheist and the ABC agreed on a great deal in their debate:

  • – that an engagement with life begins with wonder;
  • – that there is a natural law which reveals a minimal amount required for our flourishing;
  • – that happiness is not a feeling but has to do with entering deeply into the relationships that surround us;
  • – that the passions need educating, not least passions like anger;
  • – that the stoic aim of becoming attuned with life is key – even or especially when it demands of us a noble response to suffering.
  • Grayling was even content to use a word that comes naturally to Williams, spirituality, when spirituality has to do with the remarkable sense that we owe something of ourselves to life because of all life has given us.

But there were differences. Apparently someone asked about love:

Williams was at last on territory he would have chosen. Religion is not like obeying a code of conduct that governs the relationships between a high god and subservient human beings, he explained. Rather, it is about coming to see yourself in a radically fresh way, as a result of seeing yourself as made in the image of God. We are all alienated from this truth, but can be brought back to it, he continued, explaining he’d witnessed as much just the other day in a prison, when a man who had committed terrible crimes had come to a moment of repentance and had been surprised at seeing ‘me as me’ for the first time.

Here’s Vernon’s account of Grayling’s response:

Grayling responded that the ancient injunction to know thyself is certainly vital, and that caring for even the most violent of our fellows in prisons is a profoundly hopeful mark of the humanity of our civilisation. Absolutely. But that didn’t quite seem to capture the hope of being drawn by love back to love which came through in Williams’ answer.

Are you ready for the Rapture?

Posted on by
Reply

Killing the Buddha just might be the best way to follow this week’s Rapturemania. It’s a great site overall and their coverage on Harold Camping is great.

KtB editor Nathan Schneider has an essay elsewhere. In it, he admits to his own youthful apocalyptic fervor, including ritual listening to Harold Camping’s radio show. He has been following Camping’s movement and has this to say:

Some of my encounters with the 2012 crowd, however, have actually made me more tolerant of apocalyptic date-setting. While reporting on colonies of American expatriates in Costa Rica, I met 2012 adherents who dared to live quite impressive lives off the grid, growing their own food and pioneering new kinds of sustainable living. The prospect of an impending end can paradoxically motivate people to work toward a better future.

Ted Cox reports on his visit to the offices of Camping’s Family Radio and interviews Tom Evans. Money quote:

What will he do if he wakes up May 22? Grab coffee? Come in to work?

“No, it’s far more serious than that,” he replies. “I’ve said if you boil everything down it’s really trusting the Bible. If you can’t trust the Bible, then you got nothing. There’s no truth.”

I used to tell my students that of all Christian doctrines, the one for which their was incontrovertible proof of its falsehood was the belief that Jesus Christ was coming back soon. A close second is all of those people over the centuries who have given a certain date for Jesus’ return. They have all been proven false. Still, the apocalypse lures us in.

On a lighter note:

Moral advice for those who expect to be raptured:

And if you’ve got nothing planned for the day after:

The sheep know his voice–A homily for the Fourth Sunday of Easter

Posted on by
Reply

May 15, 2011

I’m sure that most of you have figured out by now that I am fascinated by the changing scene of religion in America. I have been for many years but the transition from the Christ-haunted South, as Flannery O’Connor put it, and Madison, where Grace Church is practically neighbors with the Freedom from Religion Foundation, has given me much to reflect on, intellectually and pastorally. We live in an increasingly secular world, where, in spite of the prominence of Christian rhetoric in the political sphere, religious language and religious institutions, a religious world-view, is on the wane. More people identify themselves as non-religious, and many of those who still claim religious affiliation, are less and less connected to communities of faith. And then I read about the study that was published in the last couple of days that claimed to prove that to be human is to be religious, that is to say, that human beings, everywhere and always, have had religious quests.

Continue reading →

Religious Belief is Human Nature?

Posted on by
Reply

Yes, according to a recent, massive study done at Oxford. Here’s the report from CNN; here’s another account from The Telegraph.

Given the widespread presence of religious notions, the study concluded that religious belief is not likely to wither away: “The secularization thesis of the 1960s – I think that was hopeless,” one of the study’s authors said.

If that’s the case, one wonders what he thinks about the announcement that Pfizer College (in California) will establish a Department of Secular Studies.

Weekly Anglican Covenant Round-Up

Posted on by
Reply

The Church of Ireland “subscribes.”

The Church of SE Asia “accedes.”

Last week, the Diocese of Quincy said no.

Episcopal News Service points out the wiggle-room in the language used: “The original request to the communion’s primates and moderators was that the member churches should consider the covenant and decide ‘on acceptance or adoption’.”

Last week, Tobias Haller had some useful reflections on the notion the Anglican Communion and the Covenant. He concludes:

since only those who adopt the Covenant have any chance to help guide it in a productive, rather than a destructive, direction; and further, since at this point among the most vocally opposed to it are those who also most wished to employ it in this surgical fashion, this may present a reason for those who really do want to encourage the communion to stay together in spite of disagreements — at least among those who wish to self-select togetherness over institutionalized schism — to adopt the Covenant with the understanding that Section Four shall never be appealed to or employed, and perhaps to move for its amendment or removal.

More on GLBT inclusion

Posted on by
Reply

Wow! It’s been an eventful week!

First, there was the spat over Sojouners decision not to run an ad. I posted about that here.

Then we learned that the Presbyterian Church (USA) voted for full inclusion of GLBTQ clergy.

The same day came the news that chaplains in the US Navy could perform same-sex blessings. That was walked back later.

And in Uganda, continuing confusion over the progress of the anti-gay bill, that would allow capital punishment. Episcopal Cafe has the rundown on the on-again, off-again debate.

To follow up on the Sojourners issue, my friend Brian Maclaren, who served on Sojourners board of directors, shares his pilgrimage on full inclusion. In Part I he writes:

But at this point I was a pastor and had to deal with the conflict between two commitments: first, one of my primary job requirements – to keep together rather than divide my congregation on the one hand, and second, to stand up with integrity and be counted as an advocate for people I had become convinced were being treated with neither justice nor compassion. I negotiated this tension by speaking up when I could and by seeking to use my influence to increase sensitivity to people whom I felt were being treated by Christians in a truly sub-Christian way.

But at every turn I felt that I couldn’t speak out too strongly too fast without dividing the church that I was called to serve. At times I probably pushed too far too fast – and got angry letters and emails about it, and at times I didn’t lead strongly enough – and got angry letters and emails about that too, just from other people.

In Part II he writes:

If I were to boil down messy contemporary reality to an equation, here’s what it would be:

– You can’t lead a coalition of progressive Christians without being an outspoken leader on LGBTQ issues.
– You can’t lead a coalition that includes mainstream Evangelical and conservative Catholic Christians if you are an outspoken leader on LGBTQ issues.

For progressive Christians, it is often difficult to comprehend the excruciating problem for conservative Christians to move toward a position that fully includes Gays and Lesbians, what the toll is personally, and what the toll is for their relationships. Brian’s two posts on the topic may help others comprehend.

For a profound theological perspective on the Christian argument for same-sex blessings, Eugene Roger’s piece in Christian Century is breath-taking.

Christians duking it out

Posted on by
Reply

There’s quite the dust-up going on over Sojourners Magazine’s decision not to run an ad from Believe Out Loud urging congregations to welcome gay families to worship.

Here’s the response from Episcopal Cafe. Here’s Susan Russell’s take 1 and take 2.

Religion Dispatches never misses an opportunity to comment on religious conflict (especially when it involves Evangelicals, even “progressive” ones).

whether Wallis actually represents a movement that could be described as the religious left is highly doubtful. First, Wallis himself has rejected the “religious left” label. Moreover, many who would consider themselves on the religious left reject Wallis as their leader.

I find all this rather amusing. Jim Wallis, to my knowledge, has never claimed to be a voice of progressive Christians or a leader of the Religious left. His roots are in conservative Evangelicalism and Sojourners has consistently opposed abortion, to take one example. Sojourners has distributed bumper stickers that shout: God is not a Democrat or a Republican.

Quite apart from the merits of the ad campaign and the importance of the inclusion of GLBT individuals and families into churches, it should not surprise anyone that Sojourners refused to run the ad. The issue of inclusion is as hot-button in more conservative denominations as it is in mainline ones, and we Episcopalians have reached no consensus on it. To see how it is playing out in one such denomination, check out gaymennonite.wordpress.com.

More importantly, I think it is important to admit that “progressive” Christians were quite willing to accept Jim Wallis as their spokesperson, because he high visibility and access to the halls of power and the media. They were happy to downplay significant theological differences and ethical/moral differences (a woman’s right to choose) and let Wallis speak for them because of his visibility. Wallis tries to make clear his reasoning here. Here’s another piece from Sojo, written by Tim King.

Such conflict provides media outlets with something more to write about. Controversy sells–witness the Rob Bell phenomenon. At the same time, the whole incident reminds me of the controversy a couple of weeks ago having to do with the law firm that was going to represent the House of Representatives defending DOMA in court. We have a tendency to want to damage, destroy, or silence those with whom we disagree. Whether or not one supports the Sojourners editorial decision, one ought to recognize their right to make it and hope that it is consistent with their editorial and theological positions. We should also hope and pray that in time their positions will evolve to what we believe are ones more in keeping with the Gospel and the Love of Christ.