“God’s creativity is expressed through the evolving cosmos”

December 17th, 2010   by   Andrew

Part Three of this series: What do you mean by God?

Bruce Sanguin is minister at the Canadian Memorial United Church in Vancouver. I did a review of one of his books earlier (Part 1 and Part 2).

A line from a Bruce Cockburn song at the begins this article:

O Love that fires the sun, keep me burning.



Bruce Sanguin sees the love that fired the 13.7-billion year old universe into being as an evolutionary process that can be considered the divine.

His objective understanding of being outside or apart from the universe has changed to something much more subjective. “I am the presence of the universe in human form — the conscious face of evolution.” Sanguin thinks of his soul as the self within that chooses to live as a manifestation of this fire in everything.

“The two fundamental characteristics of God are creativity and love.” The evolving cosmos and evolutionary history of life on our planet is divine creativity finding it’s ongoing fulfillment and expression. Sanguin believes the story of evolution, as he phrases it, is itself a sacred text. Human beings are able to become conscious parts of this process through the realization of love.

As a Christian, he sees it as his spiritual practice to situate himself in this same creativity and love that took form in Jesus of Nazareth. When he is in this “blessed unrest to be the incarnational presence of God’s love and creativity, I experience the joy of deep purpose.”

Sanguin also brings up Mary’s role as consenting to the invitation to give birth to an incarnation of this spirit in our world. He also finds importance in what he calls an ‘identity shift’ — “the realization that we are occasions of the divine creativity and love coursing through the cosmos.” Sanguin sees us as called to be the new thing that is eternally springing forth from the heart of God.

My two questions:

1. What do you think of this description of God? Is this a useful description for God today? Is this meaningful for you?

2. What does this mean for the Bible? Would the Bible be an authority-text under such an understanding of God? Would the Bible have to be edited? (I realize I’m using the Bible somewhat exclusively and maybe should change this to the more general ‘sacred texts’.)

What do you think?

- – -

Source article here. (you’ll need to scroll  down to Sanguin – again sorry, but I found no anchors)



The Ebb and Flow of Religion

October 18th, 2010   by   Andrew

The last time I did a month of book reviews, the general theme was Looking at Religion from Contemporary Eyes. I learned three personal lessons from that exploration. Interestingly enough, I may have learned those lessons but I’m not sure about how successful I’ve been at practicing those lessons.

This time, the theme has been Change in Religion. What can Harvey, Cox, Joan Chittister, Bruce Sanguin and Thich Nhat Hanh teach us about change?

The lesson from  Harvey Cox is that religions are not static and are not necessarily controlled by creeds or authoritative structures. Even Christianity is changing due to outside and inside influences, moving away from dogma and instead focusing on social change and community-growth. The Christianity of the next few decades cannot look like the Christianity of the past. But it takes time. Lots and lots of time.

The lesson from Joan Chittister is that the individual’s spiritual quest for a holy life can be rewarding. However, it can also just simply re-confirm the individual’s core beliefs and prejudices. There are valuable insights within the accepted, institutionalized religions of the world that uplift and bind us with humanity. And those insights can be found in the people and the stories outside the sacred texts of religions. But, if you are unwilling to do the hard work of challenging your own most trusted, strongly-held beliefs, then things like change and growth and understanding may simply remain elusive.

The lesson from Bruce Sanguin is about just how malleable some people’s beliefs and worldviews can be once new information is brought to light. Once you learn something valuable, something that can change the world for the better, how do you convince people of its importance? How do you inspire change in people who have no interest in changing their minds or attitudes or beliefs? With new knowledge comes responsibility, but also comes challenge.

The lesson from Thich Nhat Hanh is that although we may have many incompatible beliefs from person to person or worldview to worldview, the practice of empathy and respect for one another is still quite simple. In today’s world, that practice is all the more necessary. The simplest acts of our every-day are saturated with meaning for us, whether we are conscious of that meaning or not. If we can get in touch with that meaning and consciously think of the consequences of our actions, then we can choose a path that changes the world for the better.

Oh, also from Thich Nhat Hanh — hugging can be a meditation. And so I dare you. I plead with you. I ask you. Please. Will you give someone a mindful hug today? Don’t make it weird. Don’t surprise a stranger on the street or anything. That’s not exactly mindful. Just think about the people you are close to.

How did it feel?

Or is there someone you give a mindful hug to each day already?

All blessings.



Darwin, Divinity, and the Dance of the Cosmos Part 2

October 6th, 2010   by   Andrew

Quotations

I am really trying to cut and cut and cut these quotations sections. I guess I’m just more ruthful than ruthless. Please forgive, and scan as you wish. Recommendations and Final Thoughts are below.

I have discovered, during the last ten years in Vancouver, Canada, a vibrant and dynamic spiritual community composed of New Agers, Buddhists, Sikhs, Wiccans, and Sufis, to name a few. But without question it is the Christians who are most deeply distrusted and discounted among these spiritually inclined people.

There are ways to update our faith, of course, but unfortunately these can’t be downloaded directly to our neocortex. Updates in the life of the Christian tend to be far more unsettling. (Note – the riddle of time, always, when trying to facilitate change. Will technology actually help us change more quickly, do you think?)

For Jesus, taking a rain check really wasn’t an option.

To follow Jesus is to follow not just his first-century teachings, but also his pattern of updating his tradition. (Note – Jesus 2.0!, or Jesus Beta!)

The DNA of the church contains the sacred gift of our tradition. Going forward we will need both a healthy DNA and a resilient membrane in order to contain the new wine of God’s future.

The “laws” of nature may be more like cosmic habits. (Note – I do like this. It feels more accurate and removes the prescription/ordination ideas behind the word ‘law’)

Any good gardener knows that there is a genius particular to each piece of land, which determines what will flourish. Unilaterally imposing our will upon the landscape will lead to disappointment. Our best gardeners operate not as masters over the garden, but as one intelligent source of creativity among other centers of creative intelligence, the plants.

Order and chaos are flip sides of the same coin. There is no external agent acting on a system to bring order to it. The order emerges from within. (Note – this may be in part an allusion to the start of Genesis, but for me it reveals something much more about how the term ‘agency’ gets used)

Rabbi Abraham Heschel:
Forfeit awe and the world becomes a marketplace.

Ancient chants have been replaced with corporate jingles.

… when science and engineering are dissociated from spirit, morality, and ethics, the important questions don’t get asked. What ends are we serving with this technology? What is the cost to the planet, and to human and non-human life forms, and who is benefiting from this technology?

In a postmodernist worldview, my meaning, a white, heterosexual, middle-class, university-educated, prairie-raised, Christian male, cannot be imposed as authoritative for anybody else. No single meaning can prevail as “the truth.” (Note – this made me think of a potential book title – “The End of Authority”)

… it is reasonable to talk about science’s version of the creation story as a modern myth. In a thousand years, scientists will read with profound interest, but perhaps amusement, how their earlier colleagues cam up with the evidence for their version of the story. Our scientific version of the story is based on a solid and growing body of evidence. Still, it is undoubtedly partial. Evolution in human consciousness means that we will never stop discovering more comprehensive contexts and perspectives from which we do our science.

… scientists have discovered that the descendants of our primal bacterial cousins constitute 90 percent of our cellular structure; only 10 percent of our cells are distinctly human. The myth of the rugged individualist simply does not hold up in the new cosmology.

How then, are we to understand an evolutionary God? This God would need to be immanent in the process of evolution, not as a controlling presence but as the cosmic urge to self-transcendence. This God would be the hidden wholeness, the non-coercive intelligence nudging hydrogen and helium molecules to organize into galaxies to birth solar systems; and cells to cluster together in formations of increasing elegance, beauty, and diversity. (Note – and so the concept of God becomes all the more complex. Just how complicated does our concept of the inconceivable have to get before it bursts upon our expectations?)

We can literally re-member ourselves; we can locate ourselves as members, not as rulers, of a great procession of life.

… scripture, like nature, reflects an evolutionary dynamic. (Note – I do appreciate the honesty in this.)

Creating zoos to make sure animals don’t go extinct while we decimate their habitat, is a symptom of our profound dissociation from the earth.

E.O. Wilson:
If habitat conversion continues at present rates, half the species on the planet will be gone by the end of our century. Climate change alone will wipe out one-quarter of the species. (Note – Just as an aside, I think Wilson is quoted by Nicholas Wade as well in the Faith Instinct)

It is one of the greatest ironies of history that the predominant meaning of Jesus’ death on a cross in our age is precisely the one he most opposed. Like the Jewish prophets 600 years before him, Jesus railed against the priestly meaning of religious sacrifice.

The sun burns four million tons of hydrogen every second in the service of life. The sun dies and is reborn in a caribou, in the smile of a toddler, and in the passionate embrace of lovers. Plants capture the light of the sun, and for millions of years human beings have been feasting on converted solar energy, in wheat and corn, and in the animals that feast on these. Every meal we ingest is a solar sacrifice.

On Spirituality:
The spiritual life is not about what we accumulate, but rather about what we allocate. It’s about divestment, a stripping down of ego, not a fortifying of it.

To be a servant of God is to repent of the ethic of domination.

If you’re a peasant, when the Bible speaks about the poor it’s talking about physical poverty, not spiritual impoverishment.

… the kingdom of God is an oppositional metaphor. It gets at the truth of things by intentionally setting itself up alongside the dominant cultural metaphor of the day, and by shocking listeners out of their allegiance to it.

The metaphor of kin-dom is a family metaphor. To be kin is to belong, no questions asked. In an evolutionary universe, I’m interested in kin as a metaphor that includes “all of us”, not just “us”.

Insects, with their puny brains, annually outsmart our brightest chemists.

Our dignity as an honoured species has been compromised.

Given the imminent danger global warming presents, and the degradation of our biosystems, we who have showed up late at the evolutionary party and yet have assumed the seat of honour, may indeed find ourselves displaced by lowly bacteria… The survival of the planet takes precedence over human egos. God may act through bacteria to usher a new creation should we destroy this one. The meek may indeed inherit the earth.

A re-writing of the Lord’s Prayer:
Loving Presence,
luminous in all creation,
hallowed by your name.
Thy kin-dom come.
May we reflect on earth the yielding perfection of the heavens.
Help us to receive an illumined measure from the earth this day.
Forgive us when we trespass against others, human and other-than-human,
as we forgive others who trespass against us.
Keep us on the path of wisdom when we are tempted to take the selfish path.
May it be your rule we follow, your power we exercise,
and your radiance that endures.
May this be the truth that guides our lives,
the ground from which our future will grow,
until we meet again.

How we conceive of God will define what matters most to us, who we think we are, and what in the world we think we’re suppose to be doing.  Our images and metaphors do concretize reality for us. (Note – there is a kind of religious honesty in this statement that seemed worth examining. This is the inevitable problem when combining a literary source and a literal mind.)

God as a male authority figure has had a good 10,000 years now to sort things out. Perhaps it’s time we give Sophia a shot.

God is not an individual being, but rather Being itself in mutual relation. (Note – Wow! Not even the Ground of All Being anymore, but instead the relationship we have with things like the ground and each other?)

Reality is relationship.

Ilya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers:
Whatever we call reality, it is revealed to us only through an active construction in which we participate.

Remembering is an act of salvation.

Our ego is quite attached to the version of reality it has helped us construct.

It’s impossible to dump raw sewage into a river or an ocean if the river or the ocean is a source of wonder and inspiration for us. (Note – true, maybe to a point. Depends on what is being inspired in us I think.)

To really listen to Jesus is to walk the path of the banana peel, never knowing when we are going to lose our footing on his subversive wisdom. (Note — a fun new way to look at the fall?)

Creation is waiting for all of us to show up, ready and willing by the grace of Sophia, to set creation free. (Note – does this mean we are maybe setting Sophia free from us as well?)

Recommendations and Final Thoughts

Christians looking for an introduction to an ecological dressing upon their faith might find this book very useful. Sanguin’s  final suggestions for change don’t necessarily change very much though, and so this is a call for a shift in attitude and interpretation first more than behaviour or belief. He makes a justification for meditation, sacred community ritual and Sabbath-keeping which are parts of the Christian tradition already. He offers the idea that Christians can look to the natural world as well as the Bible for sacred information, but he doesn’t seem very worried about how conflicting these two sources can be. He is willing to even see one of the Genesis creation myths as no longer redeemable. However, I sense there is still lot of work to do in the minds of the congregation in terms of facing the consequences of such statements.

To an extent, he is taking the tough material of some contemporary scientific dialogue and trying to shape it into a narrative that will be accessible or understood by people who may otherwise have no exposure or care for such ideas. It’s the delicate work of the preacher, after all, to inspire and guide the growth of the community while not getting in the way too much, right? To make available what may not be known or looked for.

If Christians need to put God in something in order to respect it, then Sanguin’s ideas may very well be what the people in the pews need to hear. I personally welcome any source that fosters the growth of respect towards the connections of all things of this world. But at the same time, I do worry about the time and the reworkings needed to present and re-present information that is meant to encourage change.


Darwin, Divinity, and the Dance of the Cosmos by Bruce Sanguin

October 1st, 2010   by   Andrew

Author

Bruce Sanguin is a minister serving Canadian Memorial United Church in Vancouver. This book (I’ll shorten the title to DD at D ot C) is the second of his three books.

According to his blog, he is uncomfortable with the term Progressive Christian and wouldn’t call himself one. And he would likely shy away from being called a New-Ager also, although he does talk about his hot yoga class in the book. Instead, he embraces what he calls Evolutionary Christian Spirituality. In this book he is sounding the call for an update in the Christian world towards a more ecologically-based and scientifically-based manifestation of the Christian Spirit.

Please check out his website for more information on his message and his theology.

Technical Bits

DD at D ot C is a curious exploration of how to change a religion from the inside. Bruce Sanguin is not an apologetic in this book (although he could wear that cap if he had to). He is not trying to justify or reason out or champion the rightness of his religion. Instead, this is a kind of massaging of the church direction and the scientific information of the present day. Before any hard work, it is good to warm the body and stretch the muscles and prepare the joints. He is calling the congregation to the proverbial exercise mats and cross-country hikes, warning them that pain is ahead, but he is also loosening them up for the sweat and change that is inevitable.

His intended audience is certainly Christian. More specifically, this is for Christians that hear the call of change, willing to take up the ecological gardening and toiling needed to make a better world.

The book is less than 270 pages in length with eight chapters and divided into two parts. He is quite friendly with commas and carefully balanced sentences. Personal asides and illustrations break up some of the heavier material covered in the book with the practiced pace of a working preacher.

Part 1 is a kind of description of the present situation from cultural, evolutionary and even scientific viewpoints. Sanguin confesses that there are some things in the faith, even biblical descriptions of our world, that are just irredeemable now, considering what is known, how we know things, and how we transmit information. However, he is just as critical of the supplanting culture that now dominates our lifestyles.

He uses the biblical Eden story as a backdrop to discuss differentiation versus dissociation. He uses some helpful diagrams from Richard Tarnas which I have reproduced below. Now, it would probably be better to discuss the diagrams in another post, but I will put them below to illustrate the dramatic shifts in how we view the self and the world. (Also, they reminded me a little of Sabio’s fascination with images of self from a little while ago.)

Before, the self was defined as part of the world and the border between self and world was permeable. In the modern worldview, the self was separate and apart from the world, ruggedly individual.

In the late modern worldview, the self is separate, isolated and potentially even insignificant. This is all a kind of consequence of the modern worldview.

Within the Western Religious worldview the self is separate, but also the Divine is separate and distant. Instead of connecting by the world with the Divine, the self must find another way to connect with the Divine. But it must be pointed out that the self is always defined in relation. This is an important point for Sanguin and he uses this idea throughout the book in order to illuminate where we might find his God in the present day –  in our relationships with each other, in our relationships with this world,  and in the emerging knowledge we share.

Sanguin is suggesting that instead of detaching the Divine from the world, the Divine can be found in everything of this world. “When Jesus taught his disciples to pray the words “on earth as it is in heaven,” he was reflecting a premodern cosmology.” (p. 59). “In a disenchanted world, a salmon is an “it” and not a “thou”, to use Martin Buber’s distinction.” (p. 70)

Sanguin also suggests that Christians have two sacred texts, and both can be seen as kinds of witnesses to their faith. One is of course the Bible, and the other is the great book of creation itself, this very world and the universe. He borrows from Brian Swimme the idea of a universal ethic that is found in almost everything we know:

Communion – The universe can be looked upon as a single dynamic event in which attraction at all levels plays a pivotal part.

Differentiation – Diversity without dissociation. To be is to be a unique manifestation of existence.

Autopoiesis – Self-Renewal. Within the nature of each being is the next step to take in order to be a player in the ongoing evolution of life.

Sanguin closes Part 1 with many examples from astronomy and biology to show just how vibrant and inspiring the evolutionary progression can be for people of faith.

Part 2 is an attempt to put Bible stories into a cosmic context. He explains how the Bible can be viewed now as an “oppositional” truth rather than a “propositional” truth (p. 134) . It was written, in a sense, by history’s victims.

He takes some time with Marcus Borg’s idea of the overarching narratives of the Judeo-Christian Faith. The story of Exodus (freedom) is contrasted with stories about how the earth is now groaning to be set free. The story of Exile (homecoming) is a narrative for Sanguin on how we need to return to a harmony with nature, especially now that we understand her with less fear and more compassion. The story of the Temple (sacrifice) gives Sanguin a chance to explore his own views on blood sacrifice in the context of new anthropological theories and his own views on the idea of service to another (a kind of sacrifice of the will instead of body and blood). He uses examples such as our sun’s sacrifice of burnt hydrogen in the service of giving life and heat and light to our planet. There is also a brief description of the ironic misunderstandings surrounding Jesus’ own sacrifice.

Also included is the story of Call and Response (allurement) which is important to Sanguin for the responsibility of action once a call is made, or information is discovered. This reminded me a bit of a quote from Emmanuel Levinas: “Scientific knowledge can push the possessor toward a sense of responsibility. It is a signal of transcendence.” Sanguin does not use this quote though, this is just my connection.

An examination of Jesus’ teachings follows this look at narratives but through this new evolutionary lens.  Sanguin puts Jesus’ illustrations from nature alongside information from the present day to contextualize the effectiveness of pesticides and the history of bacteria. There is also a brief explanation of the irony wrapped around the misuse and misunderstanding of the phrase “kingdom of God”.

In order to address some of the changes in perspective and faith, Sanguin offers as an example a reworked Lord’s Prayer,  re-translated for academic merit and ecological inclusion (I will post it with the quotations in a few days.)

The last chapters centre on Sophia as the true parent of Jesus and quantum physics as further evidence of the participatory nature of the universe. Perspective becomes part of the nature of something, and so we must be aware of not just the consequences of our actions but also the consequences of our perspectives. Sanguin then returns to the contemporary culture of consumerism, insufficiency and celebrity. Together these forces solidify the imperial stories so important to today’s economy. When properly updated with new information and exercises, the religious practices of meditation, sacred community ritual and Sabbath-keeping are all still relevant and very needed today in order to redress the problems in our very attitudes, perspectives, and thus our world as well.

Commentary

In some ways this book is Bruce Sanguin’s contribution to a conversation with what appears to be major influences in his life– Brian Swimme, who wrote The Universe is a Green Dragon, John Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar and Matthew Fox who is a strong supporter of Creation Spirituality. He uses Darwin in the title and brings up the naturalist’s work in this book, but Sanguin is looking at the cultural impact of evolution and natural selection more than examining the man or even how Darwin developed these ideas.

Sanguin is being quite creative and drawing a lot of ideas together, but I can’t help but wonder just how much he understands the science in depth and how much he is just using to fit into his own scheme of faith. At one point for example, he talks about gravity being a field of attraction. “But we can call it love.” (p. 163) This is poetic and fun, but can we really equate gravity and love? Really? Maybe on Sunday morning. Maybe in a sound-bite. Maybe to his intended audience only.

It is great to see someone making the plea for awakening, awareness and change in a way that would make the church (and maybe even Christianity) relevant in the present world. Updating worldviews is natural and inevitable. It’s inspiring to see someone in the religious world actually recognize and address this. Even if Christianity just repented a little bit, and demonstrated the self-awareness or evaluation others ask of it, the world  would be filled with open arms ready to embrace the faithful. (Hmm – kind of reminds me of a story I read as a child…)

However, Sanguin seems more interested in using these really neat bits of scientific discovery and breakthrough to further his own belief system rather than address just how much some of this new information challenges his belief system. But then again, his audience is the Christian congregation hearing the call of change and readying their response.

I will continue with Darwin, Divinity, and the Dance of the Cosmos later this week with some quotations, recommendations and a final wrap-up.



What’s on your Cross?

September 30th, 2010   by   zippy

“The desecration of our planet is a crucifixion of Wisdom’s child.”
- Bruce Sanguin