January 31st, 2010
John Shelby Spong was the Episcopal Bishop of Newark until his retirement in 2000 and he has been an outspoken critic of Christianity (while remaining one) for many years. His book, Why Christianity Must Change or Die was somewhat life changing for me in that it confirmed my discomfort with Christianity. I resonated with Spong’s term, “Christians in Exile”.
I left the church right after I read Spong’s book. It gave me permission, I suppose. But for whatever reason, after 10 years of being “out”, my husband and I just joined a mainstream United Methodist Church in November of 2009. I’m not yet sure exactly why it is I’m back at church. The idea of a personal God no longer works for me nor do I believe any church is an authority on God. Both ideas seem absolutely ridiculous to me, now. As far as I can tell, however, the United Methodist Church continues to insist upon the existence of a personal God and continues to describe itself as an authority on God. But since I’ve never heard of excommunication in the Methodist Church, I suppose it’s OK I’m there even if I disagree with some of its fundamental precepts. Several of the people I most admire, who sit very far outside mainstream Christianity, continue to be a part of their Methodist communities, so I’m probably safe. I’m just not exactly sure why it is I’m back, yet. I read an excerpt from Spong’s Eternal Life: A New Vision, which seemed like the book might actually provide some insight into my return to church. I checked it out and read it cover to cover. But it didn’t help at all. Guess I’ll just have to figure that one out on my own. 
That said, I’m not exactly sure what to make of Spong’s book. Spong says we have to be able to probe religion as an outsider in order to see through it. I’ve been on the outside of religion for over a decade, and personally, I wonder if its ever possible to truly be on the outside of it once heavily immersed within it? All of Western society has been immersed in religious ideology for thousands of years, so none of us can exactly claim to be immune to religious immersion, no matter how many generations of atheists our family can boast. The Enlightenment itself came out of a religious world view. To this day, there are elements of original sin that remain within the scientific world view that are very difficult to tease out. Plus, the idea that there is some sort of absolute truth that can be discovered through scientific inquiry is directly related to the Western religious view that meaning can be “found”.
Spong asks:
Does religion, as it has been practiced in human history, actually make us more human or less human? Is it possible that religion, rather than transforming reality, enables us to hide from reality, a reality which we are not emotionally equipped to embrace? Is religion in all its forms, as Marx suggested, an opiate for the people? Is the very function of religion calculated to provide us with a believable denial of the angst that accompanies self-consciousness? Beyond those questions is the deeper probe into religion’s origins. Was the development of the various religions a human inevitability? Is the anxiety of self-consciousness so great that only the belief in the existence of an external supernatural deity, who has the power to come to our aid, will ever quiet our fears? Is God, or is religion now revealed as little more than a human creation? These are the tough questions which we must now pursue.
I think Spong is right. It is high time we pursue these questions. When I started asking such questions 10 years ago, I started with my minister friends and one of them has never talked to me again. It was too threatening. But it’s ten years later. We’ve lived through 9/11 and all of the questions and divisions that created, and I think we have potentially grown up, at least a little bit, since then. Maybe we are more ready to face these questions now than we were 10 years ago? Sometimes I wonder if my desire to return to a church setting (besides the bizarre loyalty I feel toward Methodism) has to do with easing the transition? I know how difficult and isolating it is to face these sorts of questions. But face them we must! And if we could face them as a community, all the better!
What I’m not convinced of, however, is Spong’s idea that the only reason religion was created was to provide a means to hide from reality. I think it is definitely true of the failed attempt to merge abstract Greek rationalism and Jewish individualism. Nietzsche said (through the madman in Zarathustra) that God is dead and that it is we who killed him. But alas, the madman realized he had come too soon, and he prophesied that it would take 300 years for people to finally realize that God is dead. Nietzsche was including the atheistic rationalists in this prophecy, not just those who still maintained a belief in God. Mankind attempted, long ago, to merge the Jewish God with the idea of an abstract absolute from Greek rationalism. That which cannot be named became a Greek value (an idea/noun) rather than the integral part of life (a process/verb) that YHWH had been for the Jews. Nietzsche saw that God, understood as an abstract value, is not sustainable because it inevitably creates narcissism, division, and eventually nihilism. (Think of literalist fundies who look forward to end of world times so they can go to heaven.) God is dead, and it is we who killed Him. And we cannot go back and fix it. That understanding, however faulty, is now and forever a part of our heritage. It is part of what makes us us – whether or not it was a “necessary” idea in the first place.
But much of religion is more art than belief, isn’t it? As Joseph Campbell said, it is the final mask before reality. As art, it doesn’t so much provide security as it provides inspiration through the imaginative imitation of life. In this sense, it provides the strength and courage necessary to face reality. And it also adds to the enjoyment of life.
Spong says that truth is not religion’s ultimate agenda; security is. When religion is considered to be under the authority of “church” or a literal interpretation of a sacred text, then security is definitely the name of the game. But out of religion have come practices like meditation, contemplative prayer, and other practices that help us face reality, rather than hide from it. There seems to be some proof that communal meditation is more effective than individual meditation in keeping people engaged in the practice. And there is the artistic representation within religion that helps us move out of our ego and into the fuller experience of “oneness”.
My daughter and I just recently finished watching Carl Sagan’s Cosmos which does a beautiful job of making you incredulous that humanity should exist at all. The belief that I was intentionally created by a creator God doesn’t make me feel near as grateful as knowing that my existence occurred by mere chance. What a wonderful gift life is when you know it happened because all of the right elements just happened to be in place at the right time! So I entirely agree with Spong that science has opened our eyes to how unique the human experience is and that it helps us realize how horrific it is to take such a chance event for granted. But hasn’t art (and artistic religious expression) been doing the same thing, in a different way, for much longer?
I agree with Spong that dogmatic religion has come out of political need. No argument with me there. Religion is an excellent way to control the masses. Whenever one religion claims to have a monopoly on God, you can be assured that religion is making the claim for political gain. But do Eastern religions make this claim in the same way western religions do? I have yet to meet a Buddhist who claims to believe in God. In fact, it was through Buddhism that I was able to realize that the question, “Do you believe in God?” is itself a faulty question because it’s based on circular reasoning. Whichever way you answer (“yes” or “no”) can only point back to the question itself – not to any sort of reality. That’s why, I am told, Buddhists don’t “believe in” God. The answer is based on a nonsensical question.
Spong says that we have to stop searching for meaning within religion. Fair enough. But not all religion is about searching for meaning, is it? I remember hearing the Dali Lama say that if we are all evolving from pre-Cambrian sludge, then we might as well affect that evolution in the most beneficial way possible and that religious discipline can help us do this because it helps us acquire awareness. We create all the meaning there is so we might as well create what is beneficial rather than what is harmful. In that sense, it’s not about seeking. It’s about creating. Spong’s correct, however. The typical Western idea of religion is definitely about finding some truth “out there”. But that’s often the basic premise behind many atheistic rationalistic perspectives, too, isn’t it?
Surely we don’t seek meaning so much as we seek the experience of being alive. And perhaps that is Spong’s point? If so, right on! Live the questions!!
But does the use of artistic and religious imagination keep us from living or does it help us live more fully? Maybe the answer depends on the person/society and not an absolute “truth”.
Posted in christianity, non-fiction | No Comments »
I grew up Methodist. When I met my Catholic husband and he wanted me to convert to Catholicism, I said, “That’s fine. But we’re getting married in the Methodist Church, first.”. And so, we did. It took me three full years before I could commit to converting to Catholicism, and then eight more to leave it.
It is very rare that I miss an Ash Wednesday service because Easter has always been my most favorite Christian holiday, even when I haven’t been particularly fond of Christianity. It is Ash Wednesday that sets Easter in motion. The Ash Wednesday service we attended last week was beautiful. We each wrote upon a piece of paper what it is we want to let go. (Or we twisted or folded the paper in some way that was symbolic of what it is we want to let go.) All of these individual pieces of paper were burned and the ashes from each were combined and placed upon our foreheads, collectively, as a symbol of letting go.
A few days ago, a man named Joe Stack flipped out because of money he owed the IRS, an argument with his wife, and disillusionment with the government and big business. He very intentionally flew a plane into a building that houses the IRS which is very close to where we live. I drive by it every day. Joe Stack and one other person were killed. Thirteen people were injured, two critically. It’s amazing there weren’t more injuries when you see the destruction of the Echelon I Building. It’s horrifying! It doesn’t seem possible that a small plane could do that sort of damage!
Perhaps this is an odd connection, but I am going to make it anyway. My daughter and I saw 
