Phllip Goff, in Why, The Purpose of the Universe, credited this book by Marcus J. Borg as being the spiritual progenitor for some of his ideas about Panpsychism. That everything in the world is conscious to some degree. In it he proposed a whole gamut of possible explanations for the evolving of consciousness in the universe, none of them particularly orthodox from a traditional Christian God perspective. In this he shares a similar perspective to Borg, who appears to be someone on the free thinking wing of American Christianity. And, if judged by this book, he is also a clear thinker that values clear expression. Presenting what are often quite complex ideas in a remarkably practical straightforward manner.
Borg opens this book with the question - How are we to think of God?, because how we think or imagine God, or Enlightenment for that matter, sets the agenda for how we practice and orient our lives. He spends much of the first half of this book explaining the evolution of his way of imagining, thinking about, and relating to God. Built initially on a childlike view of God as a being 'out there', 'somewhere else,' the God as disapproving 'finger shaker'. The classic supernatural theism of an interventionist God, apparently picky about where, who and how to interact with his 'creation'. There are two major threads in Christianity, that of a transcendent distantly placed God 'out there' and an Imminent closely placed God 'in here.' This dichotomy has over time been replaced in Borg's case with a Panentheistic viewpoint. This is not a mis-spelling of Pantheism, where the universe and God are indistinguishable as one entity. Panentheism posits a God who is both transcendent and imminent, and Borg believes this accords more with what early Christians actually believed. It's a sort of half way position between the unpredictable paternal interventionist on one side and a more diffuse sense of a divinity, the apophatic viewpoint of the unknowableness of God, that can be harder to grasp or directly relate to.
' Running throughout the biblical tradition is a conflict between two different social visions, two different understandings of God, two different theologies. Both claim the same religious tradition, told the same stories,and use the same language. But each told the stories and used the tradition differently. The theology of the elites used the tradition to legitimate the existing order. The passionate champions of God's compassion challenged the present order and dreamed the dream of God.'
Whether it's a Transcendent or an Imminent model of how to view God, has repercussions for how not just God, but the world is related to. How you might view and practice Christian teachings. And Borg is very good at delineating how this division between the Transcendent and the Imminent view of God, also informs how this split in approaches to Christianity appears within the United States. How that manifests as a politics of righteous individualism on the right and a politics of compassionate collectivity on the left. Opposing political standpoints of Christian exclusivity or inclusivity, which we see today in probably their most extreme positions. Though Borg was writing this book in the mid 1990's, that religio-political dichotomy was strongly apparent even then. And since then the gulf between extremely rich and destitute poor has continued to widen, into a bleakly intransigent hostility.
' What does a community commited to a different paradigm (compassion) and living by a different imperative ( the dream of God) do in a cultural situation as our own? Do we dare, in our time and in the church, to talk about elite-driven politics? Are we persuaded that's the case? Do we dare to say that social policies are central to becoming a more compassionate society? Are we willing to consider that economic policy is the central political question of our time? How large do we think the gap between the richest ten percent of our population and the poorest ten percent should be? And is that decision for the community, the body politic, to make, rather than a decision to leave to the elites? Just as we as Christians need to learn how to pray, so also we need to learn how to see and think and live compassionately.'
I personally have always been quietly impressed with how effectively Christianity can muster its resources to campaign and support the development of a social good it believes in. To put compassion readily and practically to work. In a way that, in England at least, Buddhism consistently falls rather short of. How would you manifest the Bodhisattva Ideal in practical policy initiatives? And this too is a result of how we as Buddhist's view and relate to the world, the spiritual work has a distinctly individualistic focus, that is all 'in here' and the extent that it manifests 'out there' is a somewhat less considered outcome.
Borg takes an approach to the whole idea of Christian salvation, that asks, is it salvation within this life or after life? Originally the whole idea of purgatory was to provide extra time for you to perfect your salvation within, before ascending towards heaven. The focus was not on punishment, but a cleansing purgation. Enlightenment and karma can hold a similar dynamic. He is skeptical about firm declarations about the nature of that after life, which we could all do with bearing more in mind.
' I mention these diverse beliefs and puzzlements about the afterlife not for the sake of undermining the notion but to suggest why it is that I am agnostic about the details of an afterlife. I can't imagine knowing the answers to these questions, and choosing to believe one way or the other has nothing to do with how things might really be. We cannot solve not knowing by believing.'
Borg is strong on the communal dimension of spiritual practice and progress, that rampant individualism makes increasingly difficult to relate to. There is a lot in this book concerning the social and cultural consequences of beliefs and perceptions, which I found quite easy to relate to my own Buddhist perspective. I have found reading this book more approachable and comprehensible than some Christian books I've read. His approach felt very human and realistic. He holds a firm understanding of the underlying theology, but does so lightly, and generally translates that theology into practical consequences and outcomes that are readily comprehended. Whilst, I remain fundamentally not a Christian, I found his exposition of it gave me a better understanding of how fundamental Christian beliefs can underpin and feed through into everything else, socially, economically and politically. However you envisage what your goal is, this colours the nature of all your future actions and the landscape you believe you inhabit.
CARROT REVIEW - 5/8
No comments:
Post a Comment