Some of you may be familiar with Brian McLaren, a leader of the post-modern “emerging church” movement. I stumbled across a somewhat old (March 2009) article of his about contemporary worship music. I’ll spare you another post on that topic, and just share some thoughts about this little blurb from his article:
Many of us believe that we are entering (or well into) a significant [t]heological/cultural/spiritual transition period, very possibly as significant historically as the reformation period, when the medieval world gave way to the modern world. Now, as the modern gives way to the postmodern world, we should expect to see a revolution in theology (in the end, helping us be more Biblical, more spiritual, more effective in our mission—and, please God, more clear about what our mission is).
McLaren’s contention that this era may be as significant historically as the Reformation is intriguing. We’d all like to believe that we live in a significant time and place, and that the things we say, write and do will have lasting effects. That’s heady stuff. Let’s assume, for the moment, that McLaren is on to something here. Is it possible that the theological revolution to which he refers is actually a philosophical one? What if, instead of returning to the religious superstitions of the past, humankind is turning – increasingly, incrementally – toward scientific rationalism, humanism or something along those lines? Like humankind’s lurch from medievalism to modernism, such a transition wouldn’t be easy. Those with significant interests in maintaining the status quo would fight such progress at every step. Sad to say, there are many such people. Will they find, as those with interests in maintaining medieval social, political and economic structures did, that a transition is inevitable? Will humankind ever reach a post-religious era? One thing I’m sure of is that it won’t happen in my lifetime.
The realist in me doesn’t think that humankind will ever outgrow religion completely. It seems more likely that, just as humanists, rationalists, etc., always lived in past ages of superstition and ignorance, even if rationalism does one day outstrip religion, superstitious remnants will always survive. Perhaps the best we can hope for, then, is that such people will be tolerated accepted as quaint, quirky “village theists,” somewhat akin to their historical atheistic forebears. Such a future may not be ideal, but I think I could live with it. Could you?
– the chaplain
Davo
November 18, 2010 at 5:19 pm
I actually think it’s likely that humanity will eventually outgrow theism for some form of humanism/rationalism/atheism. After all, our theological consciousness has evolved from tribal shamanism to polytheism to monolotry to monotheism. If we can avoid an apocalypse, it seems reasonable to me that we will eventually make the next step to an god-free worldview. At least, it’s possible for the developed world. Considering tribal shamanism still exists in more remote places of the world, I doubt we’ll have a global atheistic consensus.
Tex Taylor
November 18, 2010 at 6:15 pm
I see that Hippie’s passing had no effect on you to reconsider your decision(s).
I don’t have time to hunt and peck, so I would be curious as to how you left your previous life. Is there something here that explains in some detail your own personal “epiphany”?
———
It may surprise you that I believe both you and Brian McLaren correct. One would have to be blind to not see a profound transition occurring.
Though I believe there is nothing new under the sun concerning man’s nature, never before has the world been as interconnected, as globalized as now, and the process continues to accelerate. We are obviously drawing to an imminent climax. How long that takes is anyone’s guess.
What results thereafter, I’ll leave it to your own conclusions.
I say you’re both correct because I believe what you are witnessing is the separation of the wheat from the chaff.
the chaplain
November 18, 2010 at 6:43 pm
Davo:
I’d like to see humankind enter a global post-religious phase. Maybe you’re more optimistic than I am. We seem to agree that the first condition, in either case, will be avoiding an apocalypse.
Tex:
There’s a lot in this blog that explains my deconversion. Pointing out a handful of posts merely to save you the trouble of “hunting and pecking” would trivialize the years of thought, prayer and searching that preceded, and followed, my deconversion. If you’re really interested in my story, you’ll just have to browse your way through the archives.
Spanish Inquisitor
November 18, 2010 at 7:06 pm
I actually think it’s likely that humanity will eventually outgrow theism for some form of humanism/rationalism/atheism.
Yes. But all the theists will give God credit for it.
Kagehi
November 18, 2010 at 9:10 pm
I love how, as those “strict” in their Biblical view become increasingly difficult to separate from the very enemies they claim to be fighting, whether it be imaginary new Nazis, or imaginary Satanists, or very real radical religious people from other faiths, this joker thinks that the trend for religion to have become less Biblical, more muddy, more humanist, and less strict, is going to lead to some “great transition”, apparently, right back to the very “more Biblical” view that is increasingly looking more and more insane.
As for Christian music. Every thing that could be done, without making theology look like Gansta Rap (i.e., throwing in all the crazy, insane, murderous, bits) has been done. Worse, what few pieces are decent, I would argue, for example, Creed’s “One Last Breath”, is fairly decent, but can be interpreted, like all halfway good songs, with a generally spiritual theme, it “can be” loosely interpreted other ways, which don’t absolutely *require* Christianity, or the Bible. The ones that do, are total crap. And, its nearly impossible to make one that isn’t, and still be *sure* that everyone knows it derived solely from Biblical source, instead of something else, or even humanism.
I mean, unless they plan to release every one of them **named** after the passage, and line, used to derive them, or something…
Tex Taylor
November 18, 2010 at 11:51 pm
If you’re really interested in my story, you’ll just have to browse your way through the archives.
Not interested enough as I find nothing redeeming in your writing or message. Certainly not enough to read through your history. It was simple curiosity.
Your tacit arrogance tells me all I really need to know.
the chaplain
November 19, 2010 at 8:49 am
SI:
LOL!
Kagehi:
I’m amused that McLaren is still trying to clarify the church’s mission. Christians have only had 2,000 years to do so. As for Christian music, a lot of it, like a lot of pop music generally, is commercialized, formulaic crap.
Tex:
Have you ever heard of a psychological phenomenon called projection? Re-read all the nasty little turds you’ve left on my blog and think about who’s behaving more arrogantly here – me, the blog owner, or you, the comment writer who keeps coming in and shitting on my carpet.
Moe
November 19, 2010 at 9:09 am
Interesting post – just spent the weekend in Miami with my brother, who in fact is a theologian and teaches philosophy at a university. We had a very similar conversation.
He’s a genuine hair splitter in the way of some academics (i.e., “no Moe, you can’t just say post modern; it’s end stage capitalism!!”) which can make conversations a bit like talking in circles. He’s also, in spite of his education, a bit of a conspiracy theorist (although gotta admit to sharing some of his pet beliefs – he thinks it’s hidden; I think it’s right out in the open)
That being said though, he was in fact saying the same thing as McLaren – we are in a post modern religious conversion; he thinks it will revert more to a pre Christian, more organic, earth centered set of beliefs and rituals.
But then he also thinks that we are also moving away from the ‘state’ and toward a more cultural/tribal society.
Not that any of us can know – change is always with us; certainly the western world is beginning to leave behind a millenium of religious tradition. Like you, I would hope for a deeply humanist/secular future for us.
Spanish Inquisitor
November 19, 2010 at 9:22 am
Your tacit arrogance tells me all I really need to know.
Jesus Fuckin’ Christ! You go to someone’s blog, ask them to recap their personal history for your personal edification, and when she refuses and politely asks you to simply read what she’s already written, you call her arrogant?
Let me guess. You’re a Christian.
Moe
November 19, 2010 at 11:26 am
Inquisitor, when Tex says “Your tacit arrogance tells me all I really need to know.”, I’m thinking he’s just rude and lazy.
PhillyChief
November 19, 2010 at 11:53 am
I think what guys like McLaren are actually dealing with is how to cope with trying to sell a product that used to sell itself, but now less and less are buying. Does he sincerely believe this is a “[t]heological/cultural/spiritual” challenge and not a challenge of product reinvention and marketing? I can’t say. I would liken the whole thing to the collapse of the American auto industry. There are better solutions than cars, but most people prefer having a car. GM failed to adapt to the change in consumer demands for their cars, so GM went bankrupt and now is reinventing itself (thanks to a government bailout).
Will we as a whole give up theism? It seems as unlikely as giving up cars. Whether it makes sense or not, most want a car or some kind of religious belief, so manufacturers of each need to keep their products fresh and new or lose out to other manufacturers who will. Cars become more efficient, religions become more efficient, dropping ridiculously hateful intolerances and burdening their subscribers with less shit.
Still, I doubt any American would stick with GM if their Buick sodomized their child, yet we still have millions of Catholics so concerned people like Brian needn’t worry too much about selling their product in America, but it’s wise for them to not be complacent like GM was for decades.
Davo
November 19, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Chap
I’d probably be classified as an optimist. At the very least, I’m a hopeful person. (This probably explains my continued participation in religion).
Moe
Perhaps you and your brother are both partially right. The growth of civilization’s moral consciousness requires drawing larger and larger circles of inclusiveness. We’ve grown from tribes to chiefdoms to nations to empires. Perhaps the next step is a moral consciousness that extends across differences in nation, race/ethnicity, religion, and even species.
If humanity can take that ideological step, I think it’s likely we would see a greater influence of pre-Christian philosophies. They would obviously be reinterpreted and modified. Parts of them will be scrapped and parts will be kept.
I guess I’m just not convinced that it’s necessary, healthy, or even possible to completely leave behind the ideas that grew out of religion. Certainly, some should be reinterpreted. Some do need abandoning. However, I don’t know that we can or should chuck the whole lot of them.
I’m not arguing that religious views are Truth. I’m just arguing that they’re not invaluable.
Moe
November 19, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Davo – I agree that our progess is to larger and larger identification so one may hope our goal is to be a species – to be the human race with common needs and desires. The way governments and treaties and alliances (think UN, WHO etc) have been going, some sort of world government – maybe a world federation – seems to be where we’re heading. Of coure, whether we get there without wiping each other out is another matter.
Religions did bring a lot of good – Catholicism in particular pretty much created the common culture of the western world and art and literature and of course literacy. Many eastern traditions did that as well of course.
Even if secularism is our future, there’s no need to abandon spirituality. But we urgently need to leave behind the ‘great gods in teh sky’ and ‘my god is better than your god’ stuff And we need to leaave behind the overly hierarchical nature of Catholicism.
PhillyChief
November 19, 2010 at 1:00 pm
I would disagree with the praise you’re giving Catholicism. Literacy wasn’t encouraged, it was frowned upon for the masses. Protestants were the ones who encouraged reading the bible rather than having it read and interpreted for you, but they didn’t encourage reading anything else, necessarily. The church were the only ones capable of paying for the creation of art, but that began to change by the late medieval period and by the time of the Renaissance, artists began to have the freedom to explore new techniques and reinvent the Classical from the Romans and Greeks. In sculpture and architecture, the West was shaped more from the Romans and Greeks than Catholicism, and then of course there’s mathematics. There I suppose you could credit Catholicism in that it encouraged the Crusades, which allowed the West to be exposed to the advancements in mathematics, as well as medicine, occurring in the Muslim world. Of course had the church not burned the Library of Alexandria in the first place…
Moe
November 19, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Philly, what you say is actually true and I certainly didn’t mean to praise Catholicism. I’m no friend.
The point I was trying to make – and failed -was that as the religion spread throughout Europe, it imposed a layer of commonality on the various states, leading to somewhat cohesive culture that became western civiliation.
PhillyChief
November 19, 2010 at 1:32 pm
And now that job has been taken over by fast food chains and Walmart.
Moe
November 19, 2010 at 3:31 pm
philly – precisely. Exactly.
the chaplain
November 19, 2010 at 3:54 pm
Moe:
I’d love to share a glass or three of wine with your brother. The conversation would be fascinating.
Philly:
Product reinvention and marketing have always been of the utmost concern to religionists. As societies evolve, their religions must evolve too – or die.
I have a bone to pick with you: how could you possibly talk about all that artsy stuff without even mentioning music? The church’s influence on the development of Western music – as both sponsor and opponent (depending on circumstances) – was huge.
Philly & Moe:
Do fast food chains and Walmart count as sacred or secular contributions to society?
Moe
November 19, 2010 at 4:02 pm
Walmart? Sacred. Absolutely.
Spanish Inquisitor
November 19, 2010 at 4:33 pm
Inquisitor, when Tex says “Your tacit arrogance tells me all I really need to know.”, I’m thinking he’s just rude and lazy.
That’s what I said. A Christian. 8)
desertscope
November 19, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Considering the patterns I have noticed, a general loss of theism would have the following results:
1) Grammar and spelling would dramatically improve.
2) People would trust science over quackery.
3) We would be stuck trying to find mock-worthy faults in reasonable people.
I’m against the last one, as I am nearly as lazy as a Christian (hence the short list) and that is hard work. But I am definitely for the first two. It is interesting how the intellectual laziness of Xtians is often (certainly not always, but often enough) reflected clearly in their writing.
the chaplain
November 20, 2010 at 9:12 am
Moe:
I’m more partial to Target myself, even though we occasionally camp at Walmart. Who knows? We may park our RV at a Walmart near you the next time we head to Florida.
SI:
There’s a bit in the book of Galatians that cites rudeness and laziness as fruits of the spirit.
des:
#1 would be wonderful; #2 would make me think I’d died and gone to heaven. Figuratively speaking, of course.
Moe
November 20, 2010 at 10:36 am
[We may park our RV at a Walmart near you the next time we head to Florida]
Chappy: There’s one up the street. Anytime (I’ve got a pool!).
Titfortat
November 22, 2010 at 6:11 pm
I would imagine there will always be some sort of Dogma out there. Afterall, many people just dont have the time or inclination to try and figure some things out, hence the need for preachers or politicians.