Religion Confronting Science

by Donivan Bessinger

Chapter Eight

SUMMATION:

And there was Light

I think it must be impossible to draw a picture of light. Light is the medium in which and by which a picture must be viewed. A picture may only reflect light, but imperfectly, according to its shades and colors.

If I were teaching art appreciation, and had a whole semester at my disposal, it would be nice to bring an artist and her easel into the classroom, and watch with the class as she mixed colors and painted, detail by detail, daub by daub, until the whole became clear.

But if I had only a day, the problem would be much different. I would have to ask her to bring the finished painting, to let us look at it whole. We would undoubtedly have less appreciation of the skills required to bring out the detail, but, if the light were right, we could nevertheless benefit from the experience of her work.

The problem in attempting a brief synthesis of religion and science is similar. I realize that I have abandoned both scholarly and artistic caution, to draw in broad strokes a crude sketch that by no means conveys the exquisite detail of the scientific and spiritual work of centuries, from which it derives.

But here it is, such as it is, a personal harmonization of spiritual with rational experience. If its picture seems incomplete (as it is), I can only plead in defense that my profession often requires writing prescriptions with conviction and hope, even when the diagnostic picture is less rigorous than one could wish.

Let us review the picture briefly, and consider some of its implications. It is an image of a material creation-in-progress, radically contingent on the existence of a multi-dimensioned non-material reality from which it cannot be separated. Similarly it is an image of human persons whose material existence cannot be separated from that of all other creation, but who also are "radically tangent" to (radically touch) the non-material reality through an unconscious psyche. That psyche ("soul", "spirit") seeks to draw the human toward reconciliation of the material and the non-material ("spiritual") realities.

Despite the historical gap between scientific and religious interpretations of their respective realms, there seems no reason to think that the non-material "non-local" reality of quantum physics is other than the divine reality discovered within the most sacred experiences of mystic religion. That is the unifying theory on which this synthesis rests.

In order to avoid conflict between scientific and religious views of reality, we have moved away from systematic doctrine based on literal interpretations of scripture. We have relied instead on a reaffirmation of the mystical tradition of direct experience of the divine. Yet doctrine is valuable as a common interpretation and expression of a religious community's faith experience, and is essential for holding the community to its common purpose. The problem, of course, is how not to confuse and substitute the expression for the experience.

Exhibit 18. The collective challenge. Sustaining the world system requires all sectors of society (subsystems) to work together (A). Operating in defiance of the interest of the whole leads to injustice and suffering, and places greater strain on groups devoted to sustaining the "wholiness" of the system (B). When religious (or other) groups place more emphasis on sustaining themselves against each other than on working together toward "salvation" of the whole system, the system deteriorates even further (C). The transition from A to C is the transition from life to death.

A doctrine is not a "truth" but a pointer to the truth which must be revealed anew in each of us, in our own encounter with the divine. Though we may share the same doctrines, as members of the same "Religion", and though we come to the same altar rail in accordance with a common liturgy, in a very real sense each of us has a different religion.

The word religion, after all, derives from Latin words which convey the idea of binding up sheaths of grain. As each of us gleans the fields of life, we tie up our bundle of truths differently, according to our own life experience. That understanding has the potential to enrich our lives in religious community, for thus we come to understand that each of us may be an apostle to the other.

We can never individually come to a complete picture of divine truth; "some truths are non-computable" even in church, for there are limits to human understanding. Collectively, however, through shared experience, we may perhaps come closer than we could individually.

What we are discussing is not a "new Christianity" but a renewed one. When we as a people stop gleaning, and refuse to harvest new information about God's work of creation as revealed in science, we are left with a stale sheath which no longer nourishes us individually or as society.

Christianity must renew itself in each generation. The early church fathers had to interpret the symbols and experiences of Jesus' life according to the world view afforded by the best "science" of their own time. So, too, must we. We can not, in the twenty-first century, live with the world view of the first and expect to be "apostles" ministering to a world of material and spiritual need.

At the end of the twentieth century, Christianity is a global religion which has many different interpretations of Jesus' message and many different liturgical styles and views of ecclesial order. Christianity has interacted with all cultures. In some technical sense, we have met the requirements of the Great Commission that we "bear witness" to the "ends of the earth" (Acts 1:8) and "make disciples" and "baptize everywhere" (Mt. 28:18-20, Berkeley Modern English). However, after two thousand years of authoritarian style and sometimes imperialist strategies of witness, we are still far short of the vision of the Gethsemane payer (Jn. 17) and Jesus' desire to draw all unto himself (Jn. 12:32).

Now a new synthesis of spirit and reason gives us fresh insight into the essence of Jesus' message, which, after all, was given some years before disciples were even first called Christian (at Antioch, Acts 11:26), and centuries before our credal councils (e.g. Nicaea, forth century). This same synthesis leads us to a new strategy of witness, which can bring us closer to a global expression of oneness in the divine spirit inherent in Jesus' message.

The tests of a "true religion" must be that (1) its symbolism accords with creation's reality, (2) its ethical dimension supports survival, (3) it draws humans toward unity with the divine and with each other, and (4) it fosters humility in the face of our obvious limitations in defining the mystery of the divine. I hope that it is clear in my call for a new strategy for our relationships with other peoples and faiths that I consider the religion of the Christ to be the Way which meets those tests, notwithstanding the special difficulty we as Christians have had with the fourth test.

I return to a prescription metaphor. Truth is generic. It is not the brand name on the prescription that leads to healing, but the healing agent in the capsule. In this context, healing is that achieving of wholeness and unity with the divine reality which we call salvation. In our tradition, we identify Jesus as the way to that healing. However, people of other traditions have felt themselves also to be in touch with the divine reality.

If we believe that there is only one divine reality within which all matter and all spiritual experience meet, and if the "image of God" within us does indeed touch that ultimate reality, and if "the kingdom of God is within" as Jesus taught (Lk 17:23), then we must be prepared to accept that God, in the creative act, has provided a healing way for all of us, by whatever language we describe it, or by whatever symbol we depict it.

I believe that the best evidence currently available, which we have reviewed in these essays, supports all of those "ifs". The evidence suggests that God has "marketed" (the prescription metaphor again!) the way of wholeness under various names and thus has left many opportunities for peoples of diverse traditions to be "apostles" to others. My own understanding of Christianity, and my sense of committment to it, have been considerably enriched by encounters with Buddhism, Hinduism, American Indian religion, and Haitian vaudouism. We must be prepared to hear God's voice speaking to us in many languages.

The divine reality names the Godself as "I AM", as pure existence, and no longer as merely a tribal god. I have indicated that this new vision of material and spiritual reality calls us to move away from literalism in doctrine. I believe that it also calls us away from tribal fundamentalisms, to share spiritual experience in the globally broad human community.

However, this may be done without seeking an organizational ecumenism. Life-system lessons call us to protect and celebrate the diversity of life. In organizational unity we would tend to loose the diversity of expression and experience through which we are challenged to learn deeper realities. We contribute most meaningfully to ecumenism by cherishing what we have while respecting and sharing with, rather than proselytizing or even fighting, those who are secure in other "faiths".

But why is that so difficult? The world is seeing an expanding "grand evolutionary synthesis" in which cosmology, biology, and human systems sciences are being brought toward unification. However, at the same time there are also increasingly shrill and increasingly rigid political positions by fundamentalists, Christian, Jewish, Muslim alike, across the globe. Is this fundamentalist rigor evidence of a new vitality, or is it a spastic rigidity predicting a final rigor mortis? If fundamentalism is to continue to promote tribal wars, we could hope for the latter.

We usually seem to have no difficulty seeing a collective aspect to evil, whether we have described it as the work of Satan or of the psyche's Shadow. We readily recognize that evil is akin to evil, wherever found. Yet somehow it is more difficult to see the collective good in the same perspective. Nor do we as readily acknowledge that spiritual experience in other faiths also "radically touches" the divine reality with the potential to effect good in human affairs.

In such times as these, we especially need to find ways to coalesce our energies and our witness toward global healing. If we are to learn how to remove the barriers between peoples, we must first remove the barriers between doctrine and knowledge. Only thus may we work toward the fulfillment of the Gethsemane prayer, that we may all be one, that we may all be whole.

It is the light which we must see, not merely a picture.

In the beginning God said, Let there be light.
and there was light.
And God saw the light, and it was good.

[ Previous ] , [ Next ]

[ Exhibit 18. The collective challenge ]

[ Notes and References ] , [ Glossary ]

[ Contents: Religion Confronting Science ] , [TOP]