[Oe List ...] A review of Charles Taylor's "The Secular Society"
LAURELCG at aol.com
LAURELCG at aol.com
Wed Jul 10 13:15:53 PDT 2013
Thanks, Randy. Now I remember why I liked the book so much, and Connie and
Michael's course.
Jann
In a message dated 7/10/2013 3:10:02 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
rcwmbw at yahoo.com writes:
Friends,
I'm fresh off having finished Dowd's book. Like most writers on this
subject these days, from my perspective he gets a lot of it right, a lot of it
wrong, ignores a lot of what I consider pertinent, and overall raises some
very good questions to ponder. I have no interest in, nor basis for,
defending Dowd, but here are some of his points that particularly resonated with
me.
For one, David, I believe he does exactly what you suggest in your last
statement, he reconciles the conflict between religious faith and scientific
knowledge. It is no particular leap for me to say, for example, that the
story of creation is stated in one genre in the Bible (which Dowd would call
"night language") and another way scientifically (which he would call "day
language"), the latter expressed with the word "evolution," but that both
are talking about the same reality. I personally prefer words like
"emergence" or "unfolding" in place of evolution but believe they are pointing to
same thing. And a key part of his message is that what all this points to
is still going on and forever will be. I harken to the words in
Revelation, "Behold, I make all things new," present tense with future implied.
Another, I have no difficulty with Dowd's calling God "Ultimate Reality"
and find that not too far from Tillich's "ground of being." Both insist
that God is not one reality or one being among others, but the basis,
foundation, context, etc. for all. And the faith question in relation to that
ultimate groundedness is not, "What do you believe?" but rather "What do you
trust to the point that are you willing to stake your life on it?"
Jack, to your point about rationalizing away mystery, my reading of Dowd
(perhaps because this is what I want him to say) is that once you have
explained scientifically how something in the religious arena works or happens,
that need not take the mystery out of it. My example--child birth. I have
a layman's knowledge of how this happens scientifically, but it is no less
mysterious and awe-filling each time it occurs. I could say the same
about death. Hence in his talk about "public" and "private" revelation and
about rational, factual language and about mythical, metaphorical language,
the use of one does not cancel out the need for the other. While I am not
as ready as he appears to be to discount the role and impact of scripture
and tradition as being obsolete, my Wesleyan heritage puts me right with him
in affirming that revelation is sourced not only through scripture and
tradition but also through reason and experience. One of the ideas he pushes
at hard is that God's evolutional, revelatory, creative activity did not
stop and the end of the sixth day in Genesis or the day the last writer of the
New Testament, or some other wisdom literature, put down his pen.
Other points that caught my attention: that emergence happens through us
in partnership with God; service to the Whole a big part of what we would
call profound humanness; the dominant metaphor is changing from a mechanical
to a nested, networked world, etc. etc. etc.
Thanks, Herman, for prompting this conversation (again) and to all who are
participating in it.
Randy
From: "jlepps at pc.jaring.my" <jlepps at pc.jaring.my>
To: Order Ecumenical Community <oe at lists.wedgeblade.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Oe List ...] A review of Charles Taylor's "The Secular
Society"
How could I stay out of this conversation???
There are at least three essays in my forthcoming book that address this
issue. 2 are reviews of naive "theological" statements by Steven Hawking,
and one is an essay on Faith. The latter is particularly pertinent here,
since much of the controversy is about mis-understanding of language. Briefly,
Faith seeks understanding, Faith seeks action, and Faith seeks expression.
It's the expressions of faith that are sometimes confused with
understandings of faith, and this leads to grossly flawed (and "unscientific") beliefs.
It's as if one were to take Humpty Dumpty as a historical account rather
than a mythological statement of profound truth!
Anyway the book is called "The Theology of Surprise: Exploring Life's
Mysteries." It should be out around the first of August through Resurgence
Publishing. Should be available through Amazon soon.
John
At 04:19 PM 7/9/2013, you wrote:
On Jul 9, 2013, at 3:49 PM, Herman Greene <_hfgreenenc at gmail.com_
(mailto:hfgreenenc at gmail.com) > wrote:
Now this is an incomplete response and there is much more to be said,
including some positive things about Michael's approach. By the way, in some
senses I am a religious naturalist, but along the lines of process theology.
See
_Reenchantment without Supernaturalism: A Process Philosophy of Religion
(Cornell Studies in the Philosophy of..._
(http://www.amazon.com/Reenchantment-without-Supernaturalism-Philosophy-Religion/dp/0801486572/ref=sr_1_10?ie=U
TF8&qid=1373406412&sr=8-10&keywords=David+Ray+Griffin) by _David Ray
Griffin_
(http://www.amazon.com/David-Ray-Griffin/e/B000APTCK4/ref=sr_ntt_srch_lnk_10?qid=1373406412&sr=8-10) (Nov 16, 2000). In the process approach
there's plenty of transcendence as well as immanence, and religious knowledge is
not only what can be known through the five senses and logic. There are
other ways of knowing.
I think of myself as an avid scientist. What I believe is secondary and
derivative of what I experience, with gratitude to the RS-I and Frank, Amy,
Lyn, et al. I find myself thinking these days, "I don't believe in God, I
have a God Hypothesis."
I observe in more ways than I can name a mystery, depth, and greatness in
the world (and dozens of et ceteras that I'll lump under the category
gracious and holy mystery) that come at me in the form of relationships and
events, inside me and outside me. It's all sustaining and energizing, etc., etc.
My God hypothesis (for which read: narrative of what to expect) gives me
eyes to see. My hypothesis is a narrative about trinitarian dynamics
(limits, possibilities, freedom) and it has been uniformly and reliably predictive
for over 40 years now. It's saved my life, one might say.
Rather than "do you believe in God?" I prefer to ask, "What are our images
of God? Are they predictive of life experience? Do they give us eyes to
see?"
I toy with images of myself as contemplative or mystic or inveterate
listener or ceaseless questioner. All of them, really, are about constantly,
unobtrusively observing, testing my hypothesis, refining my images of the way
life is, and looking again, to see if I can see more of what is there and
what is real.
I think I'd better read Dowd, Griffin, and Brooks, to see what all the
energy is about.
I go a bit berserk at the endless, mindless contraversy about conflict
between religious belief and scientific knowledge.
David
---
David Dunn
740 S Alton Way 9B
Denver, CO 80247
720-314-5991
_dmdunn1 at gmail.com_ (mailto:dmdunn1 at gmail.com)
_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
OE at lists.wedgeblade.net
http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
_OE at lists.wedgeblade.net_ (mailto:OE at lists.wedgeblade.net)
http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
_______________________________________________
OE mailing list
OE at lists.wedgeblade.net
http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/oe-wedgeblade.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe-wedgeblade.net/attachments/20130710/ee5f7533/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 149b35.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 19325 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wedgeblade.net/pipermail/oe-wedgeblade.net/attachments/20130710/ee5f7533/attachment.jpg>
More information about the OE
mailing list