As we saw in the previous post, God does not pre-determine life. Such a belief is not consistent with Process Theology or Process thought. Of course the Divine seeks to infuse the human spirit with love, compassion, justice and all the other values which nurture and build life, but not through a process of pre-determination.
I've always found the colouring book to be a good metaphor. The pictures are already pre-determined for the child. The freedom lies in the colours to be used, that's all, but the child must colour within the lines. The child plays no role in the creation of the picture. She simply enhances what is already there. People tend to think like this when it comes to God and life. God gives the picture and we colour between the lines and dare not go beyond them.
Process Theology sees it differently. The relationship between the Divine and humanity is not simply one of colouring in between pre-determined lines, but also of participating with the Divine in the creation of the picture itself. That's the beauty and uncertainty of the unfolding vision, and that's why some have called our walk with God a holy and creative adventure filled with infinite possibility.
Even though there may be some difficulties here, I must confess that I am far more comfortable with this than with the other. God's vision is not something written in stone which God forces everything into. Rather, the Divine vision is something which is flexible and creative, responding with flexibility and change when necessary. The Old Testament is right when it speaks of the changing mind of God.
A natural question is, how does this process work itself out in our lives?
Well, it's true that God seeks beauty, compassion and truth in every experience and every moment of our lives. In other words God has a vision for such experience and moments and we are free to choose that vision or not. If we don't, our lives in that moment, move on in a way that is different from what the Divine originally sought for us; but Divine grace and flexibility persists in expressing itself through us in the change that our decisions bring. God goes on to present a new vision in a new set of circumstances with new possibilities of choice, and so it goes, on and on. Grace is never exhausted.
In the life of Jesus we see a human being participating in a unique way in God's vision for him and for the world. He discerns and lives out God's ideal in a way that is beyond anything experienced, so much so that in him we experience the very essence of Divine and human union and participation. It's the living out of this ideal which ultimately takes him to the cross. The cross was not a predetermined means of sacrifice that had to happen in order to appease God and to forgive sin. Rather it was the natural outcome of a life lived in complete union with God, in a world that does everything to live contrary to that ideal.
Perhaps at this stage we're beginning to ask, but what about evil? More of that and the cross later.
Let's end with some words from Bruce Epperly's "Process Theology: A Guide for the Perplexed:"
"In an open system universe, our creativity and freedom is not necessarily a fall from grace, but an adventure in action and imagination that enables God to do new things."
NB - If you're interested, you may want to look at these two short reflections on the Genesis Creation stories. They speak in to what is said in this post. You may be shocked by these interpretations, but they are part of the Christian Tradition. We've just not placed any emphasis on them. One of the finest theologians of the 20th century, Paul Tillich, held to this, and there were others. It's just so sad that we are never given the opportunity to be exposed to them. Just another example of one particular interpretation being held up as the only true one - which is nonsense.
Genesis Creation stories Part 2 and Genesis Creation stories Part 3
I've always found the colouring book to be a good metaphor. The pictures are already pre-determined for the child. The freedom lies in the colours to be used, that's all, but the child must colour within the lines. The child plays no role in the creation of the picture. She simply enhances what is already there. People tend to think like this when it comes to God and life. God gives the picture and we colour between the lines and dare not go beyond them.
Process Theology sees it differently. The relationship between the Divine and humanity is not simply one of colouring in between pre-determined lines, but also of participating with the Divine in the creation of the picture itself. That's the beauty and uncertainty of the unfolding vision, and that's why some have called our walk with God a holy and creative adventure filled with infinite possibility.
Even though there may be some difficulties here, I must confess that I am far more comfortable with this than with the other. God's vision is not something written in stone which God forces everything into. Rather, the Divine vision is something which is flexible and creative, responding with flexibility and change when necessary. The Old Testament is right when it speaks of the changing mind of God. A natural question is, how does this process work itself out in our lives?
Well, it's true that God seeks beauty, compassion and truth in every experience and every moment of our lives. In other words God has a vision for such experience and moments and we are free to choose that vision or not. If we don't, our lives in that moment, move on in a way that is different from what the Divine originally sought for us; but Divine grace and flexibility persists in expressing itself through us in the change that our decisions bring. God goes on to present a new vision in a new set of circumstances with new possibilities of choice, and so it goes, on and on. Grace is never exhausted.
In the life of Jesus we see a human being participating in a unique way in God's vision for him and for the world. He discerns and lives out God's ideal in a way that is beyond anything experienced, so much so that in him we experience the very essence of Divine and human union and participation. It's the living out of this ideal which ultimately takes him to the cross. The cross was not a predetermined means of sacrifice that had to happen in order to appease God and to forgive sin. Rather it was the natural outcome of a life lived in complete union with God, in a world that does everything to live contrary to that ideal.
Perhaps at this stage we're beginning to ask, but what about evil? More of that and the cross later.
Let's end with some words from Bruce Epperly's "Process Theology: A Guide for the Perplexed:"
"In an open system universe, our creativity and freedom is not necessarily a fall from grace, but an adventure in action and imagination that enables God to do new things."
_________________________________
NB - If you're interested, you may want to look at these two short reflections on the Genesis Creation stories. They speak in to what is said in this post. You may be shocked by these interpretations, but they are part of the Christian Tradition. We've just not placed any emphasis on them. One of the finest theologians of the 20th century, Paul Tillich, held to this, and there were others. It's just so sad that we are never given the opportunity to be exposed to them. Just another example of one particular interpretation being held up as the only true one - which is nonsense.
Genesis Creation stories Part 2 and Genesis Creation stories Part 3
Hi Don,
ReplyDeleteHave you come across any connections between process heology and eastern philosophy?
I must say I would be hesitant to comment on this. I really don't know enough about a connection like this. A friend of mine, Peter Woods, would be far more capable of answering this. I'd love to hear him on this. Perhaps he'll comment.
DeleteHi Don,
ReplyDeleteI am enjoying your articles on Process Theology, first introduced to me by James Massey and your good self a number of years ago. I remember the feeling of freedom and belonging in discovering something which expressed what I was already thinking and experiencing at the time.
I think the big thing was it helped me to move the life of Jesus out of the "supernatural" and to see that God revealed in Jesus is revelation through the natural process of life. It is the only way that the cross and resurrection have made absolute sense to me. It has awakened me to the same incredible creative transformative power at work in my life and in the lives of those I have come into contact with.
Looking forward to more.
Lyn
Thanks Lyn.You're so right about moving Jesus out of the supernatural. I believe we have lost the human Jesus and in the process we have created a kind of supernatural aberration that just can't relate to the natural human condition. Appreciate your comment. Glad you're enjoying the study.
DeleteShort answer, "Yes" there are comparable ideas in the Easter religions. However, who was it who said, "Comparisons are odious"?
ReplyDeleteThere are points of contact but they are informed by the "contexture" of the religion. Every World religion has to wrestle with the questions of determinism versus freedom or chaos.
So in the East(Advaita) you have the dance of Shiva bringing all into being and approximating modern chaos theory which Process Theology also prefaces.
At the same time, in the East, issues of karma and having to process/redeem/burn off consequences of past actions also attempt to answer issues of free will and destiny.
With regard to questions of time which Process Theology addresses, the Eastern religions have the benefit of a vastly larger format for time.
An aeon or kalpa, of which there are said to be many, is determined as lasting as long as it takes an eagle to fly over a mountain once a year dragging a silk scarf over the summit. When the mountain has worn away completely, an aeon has passed. See http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalpa_(aeon).
If Eastern religions do equate to process thinking we can see they give themselves the benefit of more time for the "process".
Hope this helps?
Thanks Peter - you've certainly given me a lot to think about. Appreciate your comment.
Deletei like what you say. but i'm hesitant about us creating the picture with God. don't you think thats going to far. we are called to be obedient to God and his vision, not to create it.
ReplyDeleteAlf, I can understand your hesitancy, but for too long our relationship with God has been seen to be a kind of a childlike obedience and submission thing. This has tended to keep us in a perpetual state of spiritual infancy.I think process thought moves out of that kind of relationship with God in to a more mature one where we are more free to express ourselves, participate and take responsibility. Of course we can never be on a par with God, but I have no problem with God sharing God's vision and drawing me in to that vision and enabling me to help build that vision. I can relate to a God like that instead of one who imposes a vision on me and tells me to be obedient and submissive to that, or else. I think there's a real difference here.
DeleteI do not wish to be divisive but I have to ask whether Process Theology can be applied so broadly. Millions of people have no food, no security, no education, no power to influence even their own lives, let alone partner God in His creation. Victims of holocausts and ethnic cleansing are wasted lives for whom The Plan never came together. Nature itself is wasteful and the continuation of the species seems to rule over the fate of the individual. The extent to which I personally am part of the Plan remains a mystery to me.
ReplyDeleteRolf, you raise extremely important issues. I hope others would pick up the thread and respond.
DeleteIn response to Rolf...I agree with your thoughts - I often wonder how the completely disempowered are to find any comfort in this particular view of God and how God is working through the lives of those who are starving and suffering?. Recently I was introduced to the idea of sin/salvation (for lack of better words) as a collective state ie. God's vision for "salvation" of is not for any particular individual but for the whole of creation. I don't think this is an excuse for suffering but hopefully our individual awareness of how we should be living (making constructive decisions for our own lives that do not oppress others in the process) will contribute to a future where more people are empowered than not?
DeleteI don't want to sound simplistic because what Rolf says is a reality I myself struggle to understand. I noticed in the first post a strong emphasis on the God who is as I understand it 'within' linking us all in an interdependance which beyond our understanding. If God is within, then he is in the suffering and in the crying out for relief in the very people you speak of. God cries out in them. Their cries are his. but God is also in those who have the capacity to alleviate all that suffering and is working to engender the kind of compassion and response that will relieve that heartrending need. This image of God excites me. As Don has said it makes us responsible - we don't call out to a god to do something about it, It's in our hands and in the hands of God who works through us. as Christine has said - it is collective. I wonder if God has not been far more collective than we have ever realized. Perhaps we have individualized God like we have individualized ourselves. It's all new to me, and its swirling around in my mind. I feel there's something here. I hope this doesn't sound as if i'm not sensitive to all the need around me - I am.
DeleteI've been thinking about the sentence "The Old Testament is right when it speaks of the changing mind of God." - I don't really feel comfortable with it. I am really bothered by the idea of a vengeful OT God - on the brink of destroying some people - but is convinced otherwise by a OT "hero". In cases like this I wonder if it is God or some judgmental writer who is changing their mind? It would worry me if gravity stopped working tomorrow and it would worry me if God - the Holy Being, the Prior Condition That There Could Be Anything At All - could a. be wrong and b. could be dissuaded by some audacious species whose life is the tiniest dot on the great timeline of everything? Yet I love the picture of the flexible, nurturing God who encourages me to participate in decisions and take initiative. On the other hand, I also identify with the Israelites in the wilderness who complained and wanted to go back to Egypt - as exciting as freedom is...it's pretty scary! (I am ultimately my own obstacle.)
ReplyDeleteChristine, what if the changing mind of God is seen within the context of love, creativity and flexibility instead of the vengeful image you give. God is always true to God's nature. Would you not say that "Mind changing" and flexibility done within the bounds of love is absolutely essential to loving creativity?
DeleteI find this thread interesting as it underlines Don Cupitt's point that we so easily forget, "All religion originates and continues within human conversation" As far as we know there is nothing outside of human conversation that we can point to as religion in any form. I offer the above thread as evidence. Each of us using language very competently to capture and communicate our insights and beliefs. If that is so, (and I believe Cupitt is correct) then Process Theology helps us to be attentive to the dynamism of that conversation. Who God is when we are not talking about God is the unknowable mystery for us humans, empowered and yet bounded by our language.
ReplyDelete...these posts and the resulting insightful comments from others have helped me to grasp somewhat the concept of Process Theology..the idea that the will of God for me/my life can be spontaneously created/determined,on the spot so to speak,by my ultimate decision from among any number of choices and decisions that i could possibly have made is a unique way of thinking for me..and if im understanding rightly then in essence it makes me the creative cutting edge of God Himself...i will need to meditate of this further
ReplyDelete"it makes me the creative cutting edge of God 'Himself'..." Marvellous words - certainly gives me something to meditate on as well. Thanks for that.
DeleteDon, I also think that when we try to understand God being within, we must not forget that God is within all of us, and therefore any decision we make, or any conclusion we come to, surely is a collective. Kind of like a movement of thought interlacing and connecting all of us. Lots to meditate on here - thank you. T
ReplyDelete.."Kind of like a movement of thought interlacing and connecting all of us." ...very well put Terry..Powerful..
DeleteTerry, I like what you say. We in the West have become very individualistic and we have lost our sense of collectivity. The opposite can also happen. Whatever happens to the individual has, as you say, collective implications. But again the opposite applies. Healthy spirituality will always seek a balance between individuality and collectivity. I believe that we meet God not just in ourselves, but in others as well, no matter who they are or what Faith they espouse. Thanks for your insight-so true.
ReplyDelete