Searching for God # 108

For those accustomed to spending a few minutes here, they will have noticed a distinctly different kind of ‘copy’ and intent in the last few posts. Quotes about spiritual theology from two professional instructors in the subject, from different theological perspectives, and in different denominationally-founded-and-operated colleges, are, in part a form of reviewing and enriching the learning and the experience of this scribe, hopefully along with those readers who find  the subject interesting.

There is a unique perspective, purpose and intent to the various disciplines associated with spiritual theology, from the perspectives and purposes and intent of such contemporary subjects and activities as ‘yoga’ and ‘meditation’ and ‘retreat’ in a secular context. While there may be overlap and some common threads, trends and perspectives, the theological foundation retains, no, actually emphasizes the search for God….not psychic and emotional harmony and peace for its own sake. And the question of God, evokes, indeed even begs the question, ‘what is theology?’

Britannica.com says this in answer to that question:

Theology: study of the nature of God and the relationship of the human and divine. The term was first used in the works of Plato and other Greek philosophers to refer to the teaching of myth, but the discipline expanded within Christianity and has found application  in all theistic religions. It examines doctrines concerning such subjects as sin, faith, and grace and considers the terms of God’s covenant with humankind in matters such as salvation and eschatology. Theology typically takes for granted the authority of a religious teacher or the validity of a religious experience. It is distinguished from philosophy in being concerned with justifying and explicating faith, rather than questioning the underlying assumptions of such faith, but it often employs quasi-philosophical methods.

Attending church services as children, accompanied by parents and/or guardians, was, ‘once upon a time,’ considered a ‘normal’ and ‘expected’ activity that was an essential aspect of ‘child-rearing’ especially by those parents who had, themselves, been through a similar regime. Whatever might have been the motives of parents/guardians that might have included:

 moral discipline, social interaction, social respectability, transmission/inculcation of cultural stories and myths of the faith and culture, some link of the child to God and the universe, learning to sing in a choir, even perhaps learning to lead….there might have been any combination of these and other motives, whether they were ever articulated or remained silent, they had to under gird the family ‘activity’ and routine.

Words in hymns, biblical verses, homilies, prayers, and liturgies comprised the basic language of the experience of the child and the parent, along with the rhythms and melodies, the moods and atmospherics and the ‘ceremonial’ aspects of what was clearly an attempt to ‘create’ what might be called ‘a closeness’ to God, that was designed to be different than the atmosphere, mood, language, images and perceptions and attitudes of ‘business, schools, hospitals, courts, and political institutions.

The subjects of the words, thoughts, perceptions, attitudes and inherent ‘beliefs’ or shared attitudes, perceptions and opinions were significantly different from the subjects of all other human activities and seemed to have an ‘over-riding’ perhaps ethereal or ephemeral presence ‘in the air’ of all the other human activities, at least for those who considered themselves ‘participants’ of the religious framework.

Those early years of regular participation, irrespective of the degree of attention, concentration, interest, comfort and assimilation of the young person, like a kind of ‘soil-preparation’ for a building or some architectural/infrastructure erection, lie deeply buried in the unconscious of each young person. Consider the experience to be ‘church experience’ as opposed to other kinds of experience, such as participation on a sport team, or a part-time job, or a personal hobby, or even ‘dinner-time at the family meal. Of course, each of these experiential settings carried with it a kind of ‘sensate, as well as perceptual and cognitive/intellectual/emotional impact. On reflection, perhaps we could say that a kind of ‘gestalt’ of images, ideas, personalities, notions, attitudes, words, songs, tunes and rhythms began to flow into something akin to a contemporary ‘soft-ware’ program, overlaid on the innate natural biological, psychological, emotional, and ‘spiritual’ hardware with which each of us is born.

Sophomoric questions like:

·      ‘Is there a God?’

·      Do I believe in evolution?

·      Is there a Hell? A Heaven? And afterlife?

·      What is the meaning and purpose of death?

·      If there is a God, why is there so much pain inflicted by some people on others? Why does God permit such evil?

·      What is the relation between God and evil?

·      Does believing in God make me ‘more righteous’ or more highly judged?

·      Is God part of a collection of myths?

·      What is the difference between myth and history?

·      Does God ‘hear’ me when I pray? …how could I tell?

                                                                                      …….etc….

The innocence, naivety and immaturity of such questions is implicit in their design. And as they continuing to linger whether in our conscious thought, or under-the-surface of consciousness somewhere in our unconscious, we continue, to a greater or lesser degree continue to ponder them as an intimate part of our journey….or at least some of us do.

The issue of science versus religion, emerged for some of us at the time of the Watson and Crick discovery of the DNA molecule when the Zoology professor assured us that such a discovery was not antithetical to a belief in God. Similar scientific ‘discoveries’ have seemingly easily and invariably been accommodated by, or adapted to, whatever fundamentals of whatever form and substance of Christianity seemed to be evolving within, at least in the case of this scribe.

Reading the Bible, which seemed somewhat normal, if not expected, while ingested and digested at an adolescent stage, nevertheless, offered a kind of ‘image’ and perspective that seemed to endorse compassion, empathy, curiosity,  enthusiasm and tolerance, if there was/is any meaning and truth and validity to the notion that God is love. And that concept seemed to be such a basic cornerstone and touchstone to someone seeking love in all of its iterations, faces and places. Such a basic premise, whether it ranks at the top of the values ascribed to God or not, had a prominent place in my perceptions, attitudes, and apperceptions. And, to repeat the narrative, when I listened to a ‘Christian clergy’ utter the unthinkable, “If you are Roman Catholic, you are going to Hell,” I revolted, physically, emotionally and intellectually. This did not come close to comporting with or being congruent with what I had understood from my reading. In short, at sixteen, I unequivocally deemed such a statement ‘heretical’ and unacceptable. I refused to attend henceforth (without a peep of objection, as I recall, from my parents!)

Perhaps that experience of what God was not (implying what God is), that touchstone to which I had ‘attached’ my faith image, has provided fuel for the continuing search for the ensuing seven decades. And almost as if both an inflection point had occurred as well as a ‘trajectory’ for continuing search for the thoughts of others who, themselves were engaged in a similar journey, I seem to have been turned toward more of this ‘searching….for God, for love, for understanding, for integration, for individuation, for meaning, and for whatever might be ‘behind’ whatever the world was talking or writing about.

Moralizing, as compared with foundational political understanding and rhetoric comprised much of the editorializing that went into newspaper columns and radio editorials….although there had to be some hints of a political perspective hidden somewhere therein. Questions too as to whether or not to seek a similar path for our children after they were born, to the one I had experienced from my parents, (about Christian education and church attendance) surfaced as relevant, if not as compelling as decades earlier. Discussions with clergy of various faith backgrounds accompanied and supported my curiosity, and again ‘my experience’ in their company was quite different (at least in my perception) from associating with other professionals including teachers and municipal politicians.

On reflection, it may have been that these men were open to, even enthusiastic about, discussions that explored perspectives, opinions, sentiments, and the intimate relationship between ideas and the human being. Of course, ideas about God were integral to those conversations. Their individual paths, strengths, perceptions, attitudes and even beliefs were like orchestral music to me over coffee, whether in their study or the coffee shop.

Have I been ‘experiencing’ God in these environments? I have and had the perception, and even the attitude that I am/was at least in a search for whatever God might be….without knowing, concluding or certainly not being ‘manipulated’ by or into those experiences. Poems like Paradise Lost, and novels like Canticle for Leibowitz, among others, posed both existential personal questions and similar existential questions for the planet and human race….all of them somewhat and somehow ‘gripping’ in their significance. Was it the epic nature of the Milton poem, and the scope of the Miller novel that grabbed my attention? Have I been, all this while, seeking the unfindable, the unfathomable, the ineffable as a kind of highly attractive (addictive) pursuit that demands more than my mind, my body, my brain, my spirit and my imagination?

It seems as if my mind and perception have a kind of ‘funnel’ into which all of my sensate, ideational, emotional and imaginative experiences are nudged into the ‘processor’ that continues to ask, ‘what does God want of me?” It is not only an intellectual question, or a psychological or philosophical or even a literary question….it includes and exceeds all of those ‘branches’ and even trees of human experience. I rarely, if even, use “God talk” in my personal encounters. I find that both offensive and presumptive. I have never sought to ‘convert’ anyone, either prior to or while engaged in active ecclesial ministry. Nor have I ever engaged with a person whose faith was so ‘offensive’ or objectionable that I felt I had to confront. Once, when asked by another clergy to engage in a penitential for her, after she considered it necessary after having dismissed Mormons calling at her door, I refused, on the premise that her confrontation was both authentic and spiritually and religiously appropriate. Her Christian discipleship had prompted and supported her confrontation, in my view.

I continue to seek the perceptions, attitudes and beliefs of indigenous peoples, as well as those of other world faiths, especially the Abrahamic faiths, from a perspective that seeks to find common ground, without ignoring or dismissing the points of contention. Indeed, I have, in this space,  urged all Abrahamic faiths to join in a world-wide project to rescue as many refugees, migrants, victims and homeless as they can. Jointly, rather than in competition, seems much more appropriate, especially today, than for each to attempt to ‘compete’ and to ‘out-gun’ the recruitment process, as if these faiths were little more than religious corporations.

And while the notion that God speaks to individuals, it is my firm ‘conviction’ that the notion of ‘saving the world’ as a mandate from whatever ‘God’ one worships has never been more front-of-mind, inescapable and ethically, morally, spiritually, religiously. From a ‘faith’ perspective, inspired and motivated by whatever relationship we all consider we have with God, human beings are, it seems without rational proof, to be the case that we are all inherently religious.

Perhaps without in any sense being conscious of wanting to be part of something to which every other human being is an integral and intimate component, I have inherited what Karen Armstrong expresses in her phrase ‘homo religious’. Here are some of her words, from her work, The Case for God:

Religion was not something tacked on to the human condition, an optional extra imposed on people by unscrupulous priests. The desire to cultivate a sense of the transcendent may be the defining human characteristic. In about 9000 BCE, when human beings developed agriculture and were no longer dependent on animal meat, the old hunting rites lost some of their appeal and people ceased to visit the caves (Laseaux). But they did not discard religion altogether. Instead they developed a new set of myths and rituals  based on the fecundity of the soil that filled the men and women of the Neolithic age with religious awe.  Tilling the fields became a ritual that replace the hunt, and the nurturing Earth took the place of the Animal Master. Before the modern period, most men and women were naturally inclined to religion and they were prepared to work at it…..Like art, the truths of religion require the disciplined cultivation of a different mode of normal consciousness. The cave experience always began with the disorientation of utter darkness, which annihilated normal habits of mind. Human beings are so constituted that periodically they seek our ekstasis, a stepping outside the norm. Today people who no longer find it in a religious setting resort to other outlets: music, dance, art, sex, drugs, or sport. We make a point of seeking out these experiences that touch us deeply within and lift us momentarily beyond ourselves. At such times, we fell that we inhabit our humanity more fully than usual and experience an enhancement of being. (Armstrong, op.cit. p. 9-10)