Click here to download this page in PDF format.

CHUCK’S THEOLOGY: FOUNDATIONS

INTRODUCTION: FIND YOUR MYTH

“I got rhythm, I got music, I got my man, who could ask for anything more...” That is the religion of Gershwin (and of Winnie the Pooh) as well as the Taoist. Idealization of the simple, natural life. Earlier this month we heard a Buddhist monk recommend this kind of religious theme. It is also a myth, because old man trouble shows up all too often. But, like any religion worth its salt, it gives meaning and purpose to life, and it has some sustaining power in hard times. However it doesn’t offer answers to the really hard questions: Where did we come from? Why are we here? What should we do with our lives?

All religions are myths. Their answers to the hard questions are spiritual—not empirical. They cannot be proven scientifically, but they play an important role in life. Every sane person has a myth. Even most insane persons have a myth: one that appears absurd to other people. To well educated folk, fundamentalists seem to be a little crazy. However, to a fundamentalist who believes that his religion is absolutely true, everyone else appears to be abysmally ignorant, if not insane. Crafty politicians seek votes from the faithful by shanghaiing God. This spring the leader of a major political party told the Texas state convention, “The true chair of this convention is not me, it’s God Almighty.”

The Judeo/Christian tradition of God as the omnipotent ruler who protects those who believe in Him, while still very popular, is currently on the defensive because of the problem of evil. Why does He allow bad things to happen to good people? How does He justify tsunamis, suicide bombings, child abuse, etc., etc? Apologists suggest that God has reasons for what appears to be evil to us. The tribulations of this world are tests of faith. Furthermore, much suffering is the consequence of poor human choices. After all, the first woman (and man) violated God’s rules; they broke the world so we have to live in it. They urge us to have the patience of Job and prepare for a heavenly after life. However, as more and more phenomena are discovered to have purely natural causes, magical explanations become less and less credible.

JUST BEFORE THE BIG BANG

Intuitively we understand cause and effect. We live by it. What happens if we don’t breathe, eat, drink, and eliminate wastes? We know we would die. This is the living experience of cause and effect. We have to accept the causes necessary for the effect: survival. So we believe everything has a cause. One of the biggest questions we can ask is, “What caused this world of space and time and we who people it to exist?” Every religion has tried to answer this question. According to Genesis, “God said ‘Let there be light’ and there was light.” More recently, scientists have discovered very convincing evidence that something like that happened. We have evolved from a cataclysmic event, the “big bang.” It appears that we are living in a cosmos of rapidly dispersing energy and particles from an unimaginably dense, hot coalescence of “stuff” that exploded and has been regrouping as galaxies, suns, planets, gases, liquids, solids, and living, self perpetuating creatures. We humans--especially scientists--are creative, clever, and persistent. Scientists will continue to come up with more hypotheses about the stuff that caused the big bang. They will declare how hot that stuff was and how primitive its structure, but they will never explain it away. Nothing comes from nothing. Those of us with a spiritual nature, who ponder the big questions and realize that there are things beyond the reach of human observation and experiment, traditionally have called that stuff “god.” Without “god” there is nothing.

A dominant secular myth in our times has been called “scientism.” Let us face up to this myth that is popular among scientists who, after all, are as susceptible as any to the occupational hazard of myth makers: the belief that they will find the ultimate, true explanation of everything. These busy folk relish stomping bugs, smashing atoms, and dissecting psyches. They are enamored with their magnificent technology and complex mathematical thought processes that produce powerful predictions at every level of the cosmos from atoms to genes to neurotic complexes, to nuclear fission, to galaxies (but not subatomic particles). Since the big bang messed up the structure of the stuff existing at that time and started the brand new world in which we live, there is no way to observe and discover what was going on before. Even if you could get a little leverage on it, how could you deal with what came before that? This kind of infinite regress is unmanageable and therefore repugnant to scientists.

Caveman scientists were inspired by the realization that with a long and strong enough lever and a fulcrum to lean it on, you can lift anything, no matter how heavy. Applying the basic principle of breaking down a problem into simpler parts and dealing with each step at a time has led to the scientific picture of the world as an amazingly complex, but highly predictable, machine. The resulting technology has provided access to the power to benefit human life--and also to destroy it. It has also led to the “scientistic” myth. Riding the crest of the modern wave of knowledge and technology, some scientists claim that we must not think about what came before because it is unknowable and beyond human understanding. Besides, their myth goes, since our cosmos is a machine that runs by itself and evolves by chance without any guidance, all ideas about anything else are irrelevant. Therefore we are left with a concept of human life as just another mechanical process. Everything obeys physical laws, wears out, breaks down, and dies and so do we. We are garbage at the cosmic level.

Trained to be objective, many scientists say with Gershwin, “Don’t worry about it,” be an atheist (cf. Dawkins, 1986). However, we do not have to accept the scientistic myth that everything that came before the big bang is irrelevant. That belief cannot be proven, therefore it is not the “truth.” Indeed, there is much more to existence than creatures such as we will ever know. Friedrich Nietzsche first blatantly proclaimed “God is dead.” However, he also believed that science is incapable of discovering the absolute truth about the foundations of our world. Scientists who believe that they will eventually be able to explain everything are an example of megalomanic pride--the hubris of classic Greek tragedy.

Each of us is left to find our own myth to deal with the hard questions. The answers we come up with help determine how we live. As Clinton Lee Scott said, “Religion is a tool...the plummet sounding the depth of soul, and the compass by which one steers in the darkness as in the light” (1976, p. 76). Citing the view of a foremost twentieth century theologian Paul Tillich in The Courage to Be(1952), John Haught (2003), says “the idea of ‘God’ [can be] the depth and ground of our courage to continue life’s striving in the face of fate, death, guilt, and the threat of meaninglessness.”(p. 185) According to The New York Times (July 30, 2006), “The Rev. Gregory A. Boyd was asked frequently to give his blessing--and the church’s—to conservative political candidates and causes...he finally became fed up...and preached six sermons...in which he said the church should steer clear of politics, give up moralizing on sexual issues, stop claiming the United States as a ‘Christian Nation’ and stop glorifying American military campaigns...[T]he role of Christians [is] not to seek ‘power over’ others,,,[but] to have ‘power under’ others—‘winning people’s hearts’—by sacrificing for those in need, as Jesus did.” He has retained eighty percent of his 5,000 Baptist evangelical members in St. Paul.

It was a memorable time in my life when Susan Sontag briefly appeared during my first year at the University of Chicago. By chance I was assigned to a social sciences class taught by Philip Rieff, a foremost sociologist, who was giving us the low down on Sigmund Freud. An incomparable teacher, he had an overflow crowd standing in the doorways and sitting on the window ledges. A class mate pointed out a beautiful coed who was alleged to be engaged to this potent professor. Ultimately we both got a lot from Phil Rieff. She got the man, but I think what I got was better. For instance, two words scribbled on a book report that said either “good writing” or “poor writing.” (I never had the guts to ask which, but I was motivated to keep writing.) More importantly he pointed me toward a love of philosophy and a career in psychology.

Susan Sontag went on to a brilliant career as an author and literary critic. Yet, in spite of her superb education (Berkeley, Chicago, and Harvard) and wide ranging knowledge (including science), she did not die happy. In a recent University of Chicago Magazine, her son, David, reported that she was terrified of death. She had sunk her roots deeply into life and dreaded giving it up. She demanded the most extreme, painful treatments when she had cancer. She had a too brief remission, and the cancer returned with a brutal vengeance. As evident in the first reading today, her cynical, critical bent convinced her that she was headed for the garbage heap. Her myth doomed her to misery in her last days.

THE ETHICS OF SAVAGERY

There are savage implications inherent in the scientistic myth. If you believe that survival of the fittest is the meaning and purpose of life, you adopt a competitive attitude that aims to out perform, out live, and out propagate every one else. The consumerism of our modern culture reflects a desire to have more and better goods and experiences so you will feel like you are winning the game of life. Children also become material evidence of your prowess or lack of it. “Come away with me Lucille, in my merry Oldsmobile” was an anthem of consumerism in my childhood. The underlying awareness that death is the ultimate payment due leads to other materialistic myths. One is hedonism: just do whatever feels good at the moment, maximize pleasure as long as you can because the ultimate consequences are inevitably fatal. This is the religion of the mall junkie, the thrill seeker, the Don Juan, the alcoholic, and all kinds of addicts. Remember the good old hymn, “Glorious, glorious, one keg of beer for the four of us,” popular when I was a teenager in Indiana? A different orientation reflects the sense that ours is a dog eat dog world. If that is true, then other people become primarily means to achieving ones own ends. Lip service is given to fair play and justice. That’s fine for everyone else, but I will attempt to maximize my power and control over everyone and everything. Of course you suspect that many others follow this ethics of savagery, so you can’t trust anyone.

We see examples of the ethics of savagery everywhere in our world. Poor (or bored) kids join gangs and battle for territory. Intimidation is the theme in international relations with tariffs and dumping, terrorism and pre-emptive war. Consumerism is promoted with false advertising and pornography. Over population continually degrades our planet. The abuse of power has polluted our environment and political system. Remember Tom Lehrer’s Pollution of four decades ago, “Don’t drink the water and don’t breathe the air.” Everyone has their laundry list of behaviors that should be declared illegal and punished, but violence is a big money maker for the entertainment industry. In a crisis it is becoming more common to rely upon violence. Some want to bring back that old time religion in the service of a vengeful god. The descendents of the Semitic tribes who continue to live by the law of Hamurrabi--an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth—daily prove that it creates more problems than it solves. We see the same futility in Ireland, Sri Lanka, Kashmir, Africa, the Balkans, etc. Still, our penal system emphasizes punishment over rehabilitation.

THE WONDER OF LIFE

Yet there is much that is good, beautiful, and hopeful in life. In fact our world is full of marvelous gifts. Mountains, sunsets, a baby’s smile, your favorite music, the warmth of fire, a cooling breeze, chocolate, corn on the cob, the experience of love--they are endless. There are also miracles that defy reason. How can it be that, like all other liquids, water becomes denser as it cools until it reaches about 33 degrees and then becomes lighter so it floats on itself as a solid? A theologian, Nancey Murphy, and a scientist, George Ellis (1996), point out “If physical laws were altered by a remarkably small amount, no evolutionary development of living beings would be possible; so these laws appear fine-tuned to allow the existence of life.”(p. 4) Why did inorganic molecules, which form gases, crystals, acids, etc., form clusters that became self sustaining cells that reproduced themselves? If dog eat dog is the law of the universe, why didn’t the original living cells engage in endless mutually destructive combat? (As Pete Seeger sings, “When will we ever learn?”) Was it simply by chance that simple cells began to aggregate and develop specialized functions and then reproduce these combinations? This is hard to believe. We know how violent and persistent hostile bacteria and viruses can be. The original “god stuff” must have provided another force capable of countering the violent, destructive effects of raw power. This force leads to the attraction, organization, and reproduction of materials at many levels. We can see it in gravity which produces stable solar systems. We see it in magnetism. We see it most dramatically in the myriad life forms produced by evolution, including many cooperative, parasitic relationships. Closest to home are the hundreds of species of bacteria in our intestines that enable us to digest our food. We experience this fundamental life force directly as love. “I love you, hums the April breeze...” wrote Cole Porter.

THE REALITY OF LOVE

Knowing that it is impossible to find verifiable, experimental evidence for where or why the world comes from, we seem to have a world that involves the interplay of two dynamic forces: power and love. We encounter love in many aspects of life: couples, families, friendships, programs for health and education, for the poor, disabled, and aged, and random acts of kindness. As our UU Christian brethren remind us, the message of Jesus continues to inspire millions. Love your neighbor as yourself--and we are all neighbors. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Paul proclaimed it in a whole chapter on love in Corinthians. In sum, “Now abide these three, faith, hope and love, and the greatest of these is love.” This theme can be found in many religions and cultures, along with stories about people who are revered for their generosity, compassion, and sacrifice.

When power and wealth are concentrated in the hands of a few, many will be deceived, deprived and exploited. Then love has to get tough enough to challenge and correct the wrongs. The hardest decisions come when the threat of violence appears to be about to cause permanent harm. Then the choice has to be whether to respond with a violent counter attack (thus validating the aggressor’s behavior), or to stand firm, offer to negotiate—and forgive. In The Moral Nature of the Universe, Murphy and Ellis (1996) argue that the natural sciences, social sciences, and ethics can all be integrated by a higher level of discourse, such as philosophy or theology. They deal with the problem of evil by pointing out that in order to allow for the development of intelligent and free creatures, god had to sacrifice omnipotence and omniscience. Thus, they say, rather than tinker with the world, god (like us) could be waiting to see what happens. However, we were launched with important gifts (e.g. a cosmos capable of supporting life) and may experience miracles along the way such as the birth of humans like Jesus, Buddha, Gandhi, M. L. King. Murphy and Ellis quote a number of recent theologians to the effect that self sacrifice, in mirroring this image of god, is the key message of Jesus. If your enemy strikes you on one cheek, turn the other to him. His death on the cross was a powerful political statement. It exposed the illegitimacy of the coercive power of the Romans and the religious leaders of his time and place. Can we afford the luxury of keeping religion out of politics?

FAITH FOR OUR TIME

The traditional concept of god as an omnipresent caretaker to whom we pray for guidance and mercy is appealing but hard to reconcile with the frequent occurrence of crime, injustice, and catastrophes. The mechanical model of the universe seems to dead end in a garbage pile. (Although we do not have time to deal with them here, we note three new books by reputable scientists that embrace religion: Francis S. Collins, The Language of God; Owen Gingerich, God’s Universe; and Joan Roughgarden, Evolution and Christian Faith.) Early in the twentieth century, the Jesuit paleontologist Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1969) was the first to look at evolution and cosmology as evidence that the creation so central to religions is still going on and that we are part of the process. As physical complexity increases in the universe, so does consciousness. In Deeper Than Darwin (2003) John Haught, director of the Georgetown University Center for the Study of Science and Religion, says “there is no reason to suspect that the cosmic journey toward complexity...will now inevitably come to a halt...Indeed our hominized planet is now developing a ‘noosphere’ (a new geological stratum consisting of tightening webs of mind, culture, economics, politics, science, information and technology) thus moving evolution in the direction of a new level of complexity-consciousness (p. 163).” Furthermore “Teilhard was especially concerned to develop a vision of the world in which young and old alike could feel genuinely that their lives and actions truly matter, that their existence is not just ‘killing time’ but potentially contributing to the creation of a cosmos (p. 174).”

People weave myths to try to make sense of what will become of this wondrous and frightening world. You not only may make your own myth, you must make it. That in turn makes you responsible for living by it to the best of your ability. If you want to be morbid, we could just be god’s garbage in some madcap cosmic experiment. However, much about us is god like: consciousness, intelligence, reasoning, creativity, compassion, love, humor. We are capable of horrendous violence, but we are more than just bundles of passions and conditioned reflexes. If we can tune in on the main themes in the process of creation, we are more likely to have a fulfilling life. The Unitarian Universalist commitments that we affirm every Sunday on the cover of the program of the service lead to the path of a free search for truth and meaning with respect for the inherent dignity and worth of every person. These commitments also bring us to reverent awe in the face of the magnificent, evolving universe. It is humbling to realize that a human life is much like a drop of rain, a flash of lightning, a puff of wind as Buddha said. Yet we are capable of comprehending this gift that is ours to enjoy as part of the interdependent web of the cosmos. Additionally, instead of whining about all of the disappointments and suffering we endure, we can accept the responsibilities that come with conscious awareness and personal freedom. It appears that (even though at times we seem to experience miracles), god set an evolutionary creative process in motion and is reluctant to tinker with it. We get to try our hand in making it work well, for example, with justice, equity and compassion in human relations, and working for peace in the world. What do you want to contribute to the cosmos?

Communion is also essential in the sense of communicating fully and encouraging spiritual growth in one another. This includes the use of the democratic process within our immediate group and in society at large. Going alone doesn’t work any better for a person than it does for a single cell. However, banding together yields the power of team work. Share joys and concerns, solve problems collaboratively, be unselfish. When you give more than you take, you end up with plenty in the end. Finally, let the spirit of love guide you, having an eye for the long term consequences of your behavior. Go with the flow of this essential force in the universe. As you continue the ongoing process of developing your own myth of the meaning of life, be attentive to

and respectful of the myths of others. But be wary of those who would tell you that their myth is the truth and must be believed. In particular, a myth that justifies violence for anything more than a last resort in the face of imminent annihilation, ignores the supreme value of love. The most important idea at this nuclear moment in history is the realization that many drastic sacrifices must be made in order to support diplomacy and end the escalation of violence that can and will destroy civilization if it continues.

READINGS

Opening Words: Kendyl Gibbons (2006)

The holy is nothing but the ordinary, held up to the light and profoundly seen. It is the awareness of a creativity and a connection that we do not control, in a universe that is always larger, more intricate, and more astonishing than we imagine.

#1. The Challenge: Susan Sontag (1966)

The sturdy Voltairean optimism of the rationalist attack on religion...is possible only to those whom the “bad tidings,” the dysangel of which Nietzsche speaks, that God is dead, have not reached...Most common in our own generation...is a stance that can only be called religious fellow-traveling...This is piety without content. (p. 250)

They stand for no tradition to which they seek to reclaim errant members. They merely collect exemplars of seriousness, or moral earnestness, or intellectual passion, which is what they identify the religious possibility with today. (p. 251)

To be religious is always to be in some sense an adherent (even as a heretic) to a specific symbolism and historic community...not just to give assent to the philosophical assertions that a being whom we may call God exists, that life has meaning, etc. (p.253)

We [should] become much clearer about the attempts which have been made to work out the serious consequences of atheism for reflective thought and personal morality. (p.255)

# 2. The Response: Clinton Lee Scott (1976)

Churches are many, but religion is native to all human kind.
In vanity creeds are drawn by unbending minds and doctrines fashioned like garments to cover the nakedness of the unknown.
Theologies are the guesses of pundits, a contrivance for dispensing with religion.

There is religion authorized by no priest or prelate and resting upon no book of holy writ.
It resides in the tender conscience,
in the ethical quality of thought and action,
in compassion for suffering,
in response to human need,
in moral indignation over wrong.

There is in the world a vast, un-named fellowship of good will, a fraternity of the
well-intentioned.
The members are in all churches, temples, mosques, and in none of these.
Wherever good persons stand is holy ground, and the manner of their lives is their religion.

REFERENCES

Boyd, Gregory A., Disowning Conservative Politics, Evangelical Pastor Rattles Flock in The New York Times, July 30,2006.
Dawkins, Richard, The Blind Watchmaker, 1986, (New York: W. W. Norton)
Gibbons, Kendyl, Human Reverence in UU World, Summer 2006, (Boston: Unitarian Universalist Association of Congregations)
Haught, John F., Deeper Than Darwin; The Prospect for Religion in the Age of Evolution, 2003, (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press)
Murphy, Nancey and George Ellis, On the Moral Nature of the Universe; Theology, Cosmology, and Ethics, 1996, (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress Press)

Scott, Clinton Lee, Promise of Spring, Forty Meditations, 1976, (Boston: Unitarian Universalist Association)

Sontag, Susan, Against Interpretation and Other Essays, 1966, (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux)

Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre, Christianity and Evolution, trans. Rene Hague, 1969 (New York: Harcourt Brace and Co.)

Tillich, Paul, The Courage to Be, 1952 (New Haven: Yale University Press)

_______________________________________________________________
*Presented to the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Mankato on
August 27, 2006. Copyright Charles VanBuskirk III