Theology, Ethics, and Spirituality centered on the Trinity and Incarnation, experienced through Theosis, in Sacramental Life, leading to Apokatastasis, explored in maximally inclusive ways. And other random stuff.
A recent article in the Church Times worries that we are failing the next generation of Christians by not handing down the great ideas and ideals of Anglican spirituality in an effort to "simplify" Christianity so it can be more easily digested to those who are un-churched or de-churched. In the name of compassion and inclusion, we often fall into the trap of ignoring our distinctive ideas and practices to be more "user friendly". The truth is, if we do not preserve and transmit our distinct spiritual, theological, and ethical concepts, we will have nothing to include people into. When you tear down all the walls in an effort to remove barriers between people, you cease to have a house that can protect people during life's storms.
I have encountered several attempts to derive moral values from empirical observation, from "The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values" by angry atheist Sam Harris, to the Lobster hierarchies of neoconservative hero Jordan Peterson. Most of these attempts revolve around the mundane rhetorical strategy of "we observed these behaviors consistently in nature, which means they must be ethically normative for humans". Which of course is the very definition of the naturalistic fallacy in logic. Furthermore, most of the attempts to collapse the fact/value distinction depend on a metaphysics of eliminative materialism, while sneaking in a transcendent value for “life” or “actualization” without acknowledging it. For instance, the argument is often made that “ought” is simply a function of “could”, and “could” is simply a function of “is”. The way things are implies certain possibilities about how they could be, when extended through a causal chain of events. “Ought” simply takes one or more of these potential states and designates it as preferable to other potential states. Generally, the preferable states are those that maximize life and health and creative capacity. Why are these states preferable? Because in evolutionary biology we see that creatures seek to maximize survival through adaptation, therefore the universal drive to maximize life is something like an empirical fact. Thus the “ought” of maximizing life is dissolved into the “is” of evolutionary observation. But notice the transcendent value that has been assumed and snuck in: That life ought to be preserved and maximized. Why?
In the modern era, there seems to be two major ways of teaching Scripture: As Oracle and as Literature. The Oracle view treats one set of Scriptures as an entirely Divine product which overrules any human contribution to the text. The Literature view is the opposite. Scriptural texts are entirely human products, and any Divine involvement (if there is such a thing) must be bracketed and excluded to truly understand them. Note that these labels are my way of quickly labeling two trends I have found in my experience as a student and teacher of Scripture and Religious Studies. I don’t know if anyone else uses these labels, but I do know that the phenomena which these labels describe occurs all the time in religious studies classrooms across the Western world.
I thought I would end 2019 with hope: A review of the book “That All Shall Be Saved: Heaven, Hell, and Universal Salvation” by Orthodox Theologian David Bentley Hart. This book was given to me this Christmas by a dear friend who had challenged me to expand my view of God's grace and Christ's atonement back in 2005. At that time we were reading Emerging Church authors such as Brian McLaren and Rob Bell, who were flirting with the idea that Christ would eventually save everyone who ever lived. I had first encountered hints of this idea in CS Lewis and George MacDonald, but I was still a Skeptical Universalist: I believed Christ could save all, but probably wouldn't. But, upon pondering these things deeply, and learning about the doctrine of Apokatastasis found in many of the earliest Christian theologians from Origen to Gregory of Nyssa to Julian of Norwich, I became a Hopeful Universalist: Christ could save all, and probably would save all. Upon reading this book by Hart, I think I have shifted once more. I am now a Convinced Universalist: The Good News is that God will save and heal all things in Christ. The reason why I have evolved from being skeptical to hopeful to convinced comes from the central problem that Hart's book wrestles with. And that problem centers around the vision of God we find revealed in the person of Jesus Christ:
Four seductive myths beguile us, and five persistent illusions blind us to the Reality of Love that we live and move and exist within: Ownership, Separation, Time, Death, and Self.
Over the last two decades there have been a vast number of studies which document the effectiveness of mindfulness and meditation on everything from emotional health to recovery from illness. This has been coupled with the rise of "The Mindfulness Industrial Complex" which packages Eastern spiritual practices for Western Corporate consumption. In the last couple of years, I have noted some really good thought pieces and video essays which analyze and critique these trends. I wanted to catalogue these critiques of Westernized forms of Eastern Spiritual practice, ranging from yoga to mindfulness to meditation, offer some of my own commentary on how Consumerism had adapted Eastern practices to its own ends, and suggest where we might go from here. While I see immense value in Eastern spiritual practices and have incorporated several into my journey with Christ, my problem with Consumerized versions of Eastern Spirituality is threefold:
Recently, someone asked me what the Christian view on abortion is, since they find themselves uncomfortable with both extreme "pro-choice" and dogmatic "pro-life" views which are always at war in our culture. I realized I have never written anything specifically on abortion, so here I would like to set out the ethics of abortion in 3000 words or less. Much more can and should be said, but I think this is a kind of limit for quick reading (or a medium length sermon). So please excuse the points I make which could be elaborated on or debated.
The other day I had a conversation with a student and a biology teacher about whether human chins have a purpose. Yes, chins. As in the outcropping of bone beneath your lower lip. That kind of chin. Apparently, humans are the only animals to have a chin, according to this article which was sent to me by the teacher. In this article, it compares the evolution of chins to Spandrels in classical architecture. And since I totally tend to geek out on stuff that interests me, this sent me down a couple-hour-long rabbit hole reading where the idea of Spandrels came from and how they are applied to evolutionary biology, as well as some of the pushback against Spandrels as an analogy to evolution.
I come from a generational fandom of the Terminator movies. My dad loved 1984's Terminator, and took me to see it in the movie theater about a dozen times, where I fell in love with it too. My 11 year old son now loves the Terminator franchise. We have seen all the movies, and regularly tell each other "I'll be back" and "come with me if you want to live". Like the Star Wars franchise, Terminator has had its ups and downs. There are classic episodes, such as 1984’s T1 and 1991’s T2, along with the Terminator equivalent of Jar Jar Binks, such as T3, Salvation, and Genisys. I say all of that to say this:
A fundamental means of controlling any population is “divide and conquer”. Identify those who are oppressed, abused, and excluded, and then get them to hate one another instead of joining together to overcome those who are oppressing, abusing, and excluding them. Teach them to exclude and diminish other powerless people on the basis of race, culture, religion, origin, citizenship, gender, and sexuality. Then all the powerless will be so busy pointing fingers at each other, they will forget all about those who control the levers of power and shape the system that keeps them in bondage. Give them a scapegoat to hate and they will forget all about those who supplied the scapegoat in the first place. “Us versus them” is the first and foremost way that the powerful keep the powerless under control. Because if the powerless realized their shared cause and common struggle together, no force on Earth could stop them from joining in solidarity to create a more just and compassionate society. United we stand, divided we fall.
"Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will." (Romans 12.2) To control a population, control their imagination of what is possible. Because people will not even attempt what they think is impossible. To control their imagination, control the stories they hear and the stories they tell. Because stories paint pictures of identity and possibility which go beyond our everyday experience into what could be. So only allow stories to be told which frame what is possible in a way that is most beneficial to those who want to maintain power.
A Lovecraftian incantation of Hope to banish dark enchantments. A poem for my son who enjoys reading Lovecraft and Poe and creating stories about things that go bump in the night.
What captures my attention most often is what is wrong with the world: The craven and the cruel, the unjust and the outrageous, the hypocritical and the corrupt. But there is a still small voice echoing across history with a different message. And every now and then you can hear it speak clearly. This time through a bereaved brother who has chosen to follow Jesus...
Tonight I re-read CS Lewis’ “Abolition of Man” for the first time in over a decade. I now realize that, just as “Mere Christianity” has implicitly shaped my fundamental assumptions in theology and epistemology, so also “Abolition” has shaped my fundamental assumptions in ethics and education. For instance:
All of them were taken into ecstasy and they glorified God. Indeed they were awestruck and kept saying “we have seen strange signs today!” (Luke 5.26, my translation) Nobody told me there'd be days like these. Strange days indeed! Most peculiar, Mama. Whoa! (John Lennon) We often treat spirituality like a banking transaction: Rational, calculated, with a clear cost-benefit analysis, and no hidden variables. But perhaps spirituality is more like the electric current that gives power to our passion, which we try to contain within neatly organized power cables labeled “religion” and “morality” and “ritual” and “devotion” and “belief”. But every now and then, when we reach deep inside ourselves, we grab ahold of a cable that has not been insulated with respectability and predictability and social acceptability. It is then that we get a great shock, and we feel the power of the Divine surge through our whole being, lighting us up from the inside: A surge of passion that pushes us beyond our ability to comprehend our life, and pretend that everything is “normal”. We are awestruck with the unpredictable wonder and messy beauty of the world just long enough get outside of our own heads for a moment. And that moment of transcendence, that millisecond of grasping the breadth and depth of infinite Love, is powerful enough to fuel our passion for years to come. May we all rip open the fuse box of our soul every now and then and embrace the Divine power within us. If there ever was someone inclined toward seeing spirituality in purely rational, calculated terms, it would be the co-founder of calculus and probability theory, Blaise Pascal. Pascal was not only a famous mathematician, but also a famous defender of the Christian faith, who wrote at length about the most rational way to defend and uphold the Christian faith. And yet, his most powerful spiritual insights came when he reached deep inside and grasped the Live Wire of God's presence within him. The experience was so powerful that he wrote it down in poetry, and had it sewn into his jacket by his heart. His Live Wire experience reads thus: The year of grace 1654, Monday, 23 November... From about half past ten at night until about half past midnight. FIRE. GOD of Abraham, GOD of Isaac, GOD of Jacob not of the philosophers and of the learned. Certitude. Certitude. Feeling. Joy. Peace. GOD of Jesus Christ. My God and your God. Your GOD will be my God. Forgetfulness of the world and of everything, except GOD. He is only found by the ways taught in the Gospel. Grandeur of the human soul. Righteous Father, the world has not known you, but I have known you. Joy, joy, joy, tears of joy. I have departed from him: They have forsaken me, the fount of living water. My God, will you leave me? Let me not be separated from him forever. This is eternal life, that they know you, the one true God, and the one that you sent, Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ. I left him; I fled him, renounced, crucified. Let me never be separated from him. He is only kept securely by the ways taught in the Gospel: Renunciation, total and sweet. Complete submission to Jesus Christ and to my director. Eternally in joy for a day’s exercise on the earth. May I not forget your words. Amen.
What makes someone a “saint” as opposed to someone who is just popular and persuasive and affable? What makes someone genuinely deep rather than merely fashionable? What makes a person inwardly spiritual rather than outwardly religious?
How a person treats their opponents is how they will treat their friends. How a nation treats its enemies is how it will treat its citizens. People will do to us as we have done to others. Therefore, it is not only in the interest of Divine Love, but also in the interest of self preservation, to do to others as we would want them to do to us.
What happens when we read a text in a new way, looking for deeper levels of meaning? How can we take common, everyday words and phrases and find something we've never seen before in them? Once we "take it for granted" is there any way to "take it in a new direction"?
Ultimate Reality and Visions of Truth The goal of our spiritual journey is to explore what is True, pursue what is Good, and practice what is Beautiful. And this journey begins with the question: What is Truth? Some say that Truth resides in a Holy Book of some sort, or a set of infallible statements about Reality. Some claim Truth is found in an inner experience, while others say it is found in evidence gathered from our senses. And then we find great spiritual teachers, such as Krishna who says “no Truth is superior to me”, or Jesus who says “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life”. Despite all of the apparent differences, these visions of Truth share some commonalities: They assume we are part of a greater Reality. And we come to experience Reality, as it really is, through many ways. These ways include books, and our senses, and inner experiences, and relationships with others. Through these ways we find Truth when our inner self conforms to what is really Real, and we are brought into harmony with Ultimate Reality. And in history there are enlightened persons-- like Krishna and Buddha and Jesus-- who are so filled with Ultimate Reality that they claim to be living embodiments of Truth. So what is the greater Reality that we need to conform ourselves to, so we also can embody Truth? What is really Real in the world we experience? What is the Ultimate Reality which is beyond, or within, or underneath, the apparent reality we experience every day?
