Monday, April 22, 2013

God is the Love in which I forgive

Lesson 46 in A Course In Miracles begins with a Universalist message if there ever was one. It begins, "God does not forgive because He has never condemned. And there must be condemnation for forgiveness to be necessary."

If God is unconditional love how could such a God condemn the people He/She has created?

A Course In Miracles turns the misinterpreted Christian message that Jesus died for our sins upside down. Would God, the Father, Abba, want to see his son suffer?

It is human projection onto God borne out of the guilt of separation from God that leads humans to believe that God must be angry with them. This illusion has created most of the problems in the world and given rise to dysfunctional beliefs that cause great suffering and misunderstanding.

It was the Universalists who challenged what Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh called Crossianity, the belief that Jesus submitted himself to torture and death to appease an angry God and spare us from God's wrath and condemnation. This insane belief has lead to what Walter Wink has called the theology of redemptive violence which has caused great harm in human relations.

Lesson 46 in A Course In Miracles teaches that God is the Love in which I forgive myself for the illusions I believe about my own condemnation by God, and for the anger and condemnation I exercise in my thoughts and relations with others.

Questions:

If God would not have you condemn others as He does not condemn you, who should you forgive so that you can save the world from this insanity?

How can you change your mind about those you would attack because of your fear and come to love them instead?

How can our church of Unitarian Universalism help people to relate to each other soul to soul rather than as objects of judgment?




Sunday, April 7, 2013

Lesson one - The mystical life as a love story

"The Tao that can be told of is not the Absolute Tao."

Tao Te Ching

"Revelation is intensely personal and cannot be meaningfully translated. That is why any attempt to describe it in words is impossible. Revelation induces only experience."

A Course In Miracles, T-1.II.2:1-3

The Bagwah Shree Rajnesh latter called Osho said in his talks on the Tao Te Ching on June 11, 1975,

" If you don't know how to be silent, it becomes heavy. ....You can talk, and you can create a screen of words around you so that your real situation cannot be known by others. You clothe yourself through words."

All the scriptures from various faith traditions, from the religions of the world can do is point you to the experience of God, the experience of God which A Course In Miracles calls revelation. As Bhagwan says, these scriptures awaken a curiosity, a thirst, a search for a spiritual experience which is clouded over by our daily lives in the ego dream of separation from God from whence we have come.

"Revelation is literally unspeakable because it is an experience of unspeakable love."
T-1.II.3:7

Unitarian Universalism is a very young religion and has no mystical tradition of its own other than what it draws from its six sources to which I now add a seventh, A Course In Miracles. ACIM is a manual for returning to  a relationship with God here on earth. Properly understood and practiced it brings joy and peace to its practitioners and to those in relationship with them.

From now on many of the articles on UU A Way Of Life will reference A Course In Miracles and readers are invited to study ACIM and contribute to the discussions here that will occur in the comment sections of the articles. Articles may be appearing a little more often than just on Mondays, but the Monday articles will be the main articles that set the focus for the study for the week.

The focus this week is on the mystical life as a love story.

Questions for the week:

1. Have you experienced revelation in your life and if so, what has that been like for you, how has it affected how you have functioned, and what, if anything, have you done with that experience?

2. What factors or circumstances if any have contributed to this experience of revelation? Have you been able to re-create the experience again?

3. Bhagwan says that silence, which allows one to go within, is an important factor in facilitating the experience of revelation, but there are other spiritual practices such as the whirling dervishes in the Sufi tradition which are used to achieve a flow state of revelation. Others say that drugs such as LSD is a short cut while others dismiss this as just a pharmaceutical alteration of brain chemistry and not a genuine mystical experience. What do you think?

4. Unitarian Universalism seems to be more focused on social justice values than facilitating revelatory experiences with one's Higher Power. Is this why UU has remained a small, marginalized religion without much influence in the increasing consciousness of humanity? Would the development of a mystical tradition give Unitarian Universalism a more solid core and foundation for its work in transforming the world?

Please leave your comments.


Friday, March 22, 2013

Comment moderation has been turned on because of spam attacks

I have set the comment moderation on because of all the spam this blog has been receiving. Appropriate, relevant comments are most welcome. I apologize for the inconvenience. If you have questions and/or concerns you can reach me at davidgmarkham@gmail.com.

Monday, March 11, 2013

The Curious Case of Open-Source Religion

By John Maguire

For this essay I will explore the rationale for an offshoot of the Open-Source paradigm known as Open-Source Religion. I will also refer to it loosely and interchangeably as Open-Source Philosophy.

Open-Source Religion can be summed up as the individualized practice of mixing various religious teachings with a diversity of non-religious ideas and beliefs to form a coherent spiritual framework for oneself. A person is free to be as creative as they so choose in this process, as long as their beliefs do not violate the golden rule: do no harm. For example, if you believe that a three-eyed race of telepaths from the Sirius star-system seeded the earth with intelligence, and at the same time believe in the philosophical teachings of both Jesus and Buddha, then more power to you. Theoretically your conclusions can be grounded in nothing more than pure intuition, but I believe decisions are best arrived at through critically-minded research and employing the scientific method. The danger in relying strictly on intuition is that you may end up adopting some type of intellectually-bankrupt and exploitative alternative such as Scientology. The choice however is yours.

In contrast to Open-Source, traditional, proprietary religious practice insists on rigidity, standardization, and the collective deferment of authority to an elite priesthood. Open-Source Religion integrates horizontally and promotes integrity by stressing thoughtful analysis; Closed-System Religion integrates vertically and promotes a lack of integrity by propagating dogmatic adherence. 

The bureaucratized and hierarchical Religions of the present day eat away at the social fabric and sunder the inherent interconnectedness of humanity. I’m not saying there are no good people trapped within these systems, or that localized religious institutions cannot serve as community-touchstones; there are, and they can. But the reality is that mainstream religious ideology operates by and large as a rationale for war, genocide, poverty, and general divisiveness in the world. For all practical purposes, MSR single-handedly embedded the imagined threat of an external other into popular consciousness; a satanic boogey-man that we must unite against no matter the cost. We have seen this mentality play out in the twentieth-century during WWII and Vietnam respectively during which the American public was easily frightened into blind acquiescence, and brainwashed American soldiers proudly mailed back the bones of dehumanized enemies to their families and wore their victims’ body parts as trophies. We see this continuing today in the contrived War on Terror, as we condone and commit war-crime after war-crime, all in the name of chasing our own shadow. On top of this, MSR(main stream religion) also perpetuates the cultural epidemic of sadomasochistic addiction to self-hatred. The self-loathing person can never self-actualize, and the writhing emptiness within can only be satiated by self-destructive behavior such as mindless consumerism, or the demented urge to exert power and control over others.

Moving beyond these stark issues, I see value in discussing OSR because I feel that all human beings, on a very deep level, require a self-inspired, logical, and optimistic philosophical framework for life that helps them transcend their familiar five-sense reality. To quote Logicist author David Jack, “I believe that everybody, in a sense, has a God. We [all] have something that we believe in as supreme.” I agree wholeheartedly, and believe this concept extends to all people, even agnostics and atheists. Guiding principles are in essence a Religion; just as Religion in essence is a set of guiding principles. Therefore, whether we admit it or not, we are all religious creatures at heart. In that respect, we all have a stake in the development of the OSR paradigm. 

I myself was baptized, raised, and confirmed as a Roman-Catholic. In time I got over the trauma of it. I studied hard, I meditated, and in the process discovered a holistic philosophy that helps me stay balanced, focused, and answer that all important question: What is life all about? You can do the same if you are courageous enough to ditch your psychological baggage, leave your ego at the door, and move forward with integrity and an open-heart. I will likely take time in a future video to outline my own personal belief system for those who are interested.

I ask that you take a brief moment to reflect, and to not misinterpret what I’m saying. Just because I insist on the need for a religious philosophy grounded in Open-Source, does not mean that we should ignore reality and engage in magical thinking; nor should we pretend all is well and wear disingenuous Prozac smiles on our faces. In the words of philosophical giant Ervin Laszlo, “We should apprehend this remarkable world with our heart as well as with our intellect… [we must adopt] a vision that is imaginative but not imaginary.” 

Obviously the world, and the human race, is in turmoil. That is not a valid excuse to indulge in narrow-minded cynicism. If you find yourself unable to muster up a sense of optimism and elevate your thinking beyond your own ego-driven existence, it is my opinion that you are ignorant of certain fundamental truths. Something is logically amiss in your approach to problem-solving. Put plainly, you are lacking in awareness, and that is a byproduct of both conditioning and intellectual laziness. To change this, you must make the choice to engage in honest interdisciplinary research. By integrating up-to-date findings from a broad spectrum of scientific and metaphysical fields of study, you would arrive at some very liberating and encouraging conclusions. For example, systems theory, non-linear thermodynamics, shamanism, quantum physics, astral-theology, entheogenic pharmacology, and naturalistic philosophy are all critically important subjects. Yet how many of us know even the slightest bit about them, let alone how to organize them into a coherent framework? This epitomizes the challenge at hand; a challenge that nobody can undertake for you. 

Almost all classical belief systems are irreconcilably flawed, as has been historically demonstrated by the countless contradictions and inaccuracies they have given rise to. Consequently, none of them deserve our full allegiance. To borrow a quote from Ayn Rand, “Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.” In my opinion these belief systems had their chance, and failed to deliver. Open-Source sense making is the future starting now.

We already exist in an era of Open-Source Religion. All we have to do is come to terms with it. The truth is that everyone, even those who consider themselves strict orthodox, selectively constructs their own constellation of beliefs. If this was not true, supposedly strict adherents of the Christian Bible for example would all be stoning their disobedient children to death, and condemning themselves and others to hell for wearing clothing made of two different fabrics. So obviously people everywhere are already engaged in Open-Source spiritual sense-making. But they are too proud, too ignorant, or too afraid to take off their masks and jump ship from their sinking institutions.

I sincerely believe the materialistic, Newtonian paradigms of the past centuries are coming to an end. Compartmentalization is going out of fashion. We need to regain our sanity by reclaiming the lost wisdom of our indigenous forerunners. I think the incomparable Joe Bageant put it best when he said, “There is a spiritual side of man…a moral side. I’m not a Christian, but it’s there, and it’s there for us to share as a people, together.”

 Editor's note: 

John Maguire was born in 1985 and raised in Upstate New York. He attained his undergraduate degree in History Education from the State University of Brockport in 2007. Disillusioned, he successfully dropped out of graduate school in 2009 to pursue a happier and more authentic life. Slowly at first, he initiated a program of autodidactic learning and self-exploration that has been ongoing since. Believing truth and authenticity are the only things worth pursuing, most of his days revolve around such aims. When necessary, he pays for the ego-driven demands of life by way of substitute teaching and coaching poker. He currently lives in North Carolina with his ever-patient girlfriend Nikohl."

John can be reached at foks0904@gmail.com


I met John and Niki when they both worked as book sellers at Lift Bridge Book Shop in Brockport, NY


Interview with John Maguire about his essay on Open Source Religion by David Markham

David: John your essay about Open- Source religion made me wonder about a couple of phenomena currently observed in the United States: the rise of the “nones” who are people upon survey that say they have no religious identification and affiliation, and the decrease in church attendance. You mention in your essay that “Open-Source Religion integrates horizontally” as compared to “Closed system Religion integrates vertically”. To what extent do you think the availability of the world wide web since the mid 90s and the mushrooming availability of information has contributed to the decrease in influence of organized mainstream religion especially in your generation, the so called “millenials” who no longer have to rely on hierarchial religious institutions for information and interpretation of religious ideas?

John: Quite a lot I would say. If a person is computationally literate, or even semi-literate, the cracks in the wall of established institutions are laid bare for anyone to see on the web. Information that used to be hidden away in libraries and academia, that required huge blocks of time to discover and synthesize, is now a thousand times more streamlined and accessible. This definitely accounts for the acceleration of skepticism in our society, and is reflected in decreased church attendance as you’ve noticed, as well as a rise in economic justice movements like Occupy Wall Street.
People I believe are naturally resistant to the idea of becoming cogs in a machine; which is why you see so much rebellious/aggressive behavior in most school environments for example. In these dogmatic, hierarchical environments we are told what the truth is and told not to question it. This is completely antithetical to human nature. We need to explore and discover our own “truth” to be truly happy in this life, and a vast majority of institutions simply stifle this outright through propaganda and hierarchical authority. 

David: During your stay in Brockport did you see examples of this phenomenon where young people turned to each other and the internet rather than to their pastor, priest, rabbi?

John: You know not so much, because I think a lot of my friends in general fall into that “none” category. This is not an indictment of them, I certainly understand that rebellion and I have a lot of the same ambivalence toward the word “religion” myself.
I think to the extent that people are dialoguing on the internet, they likely keep this part of their life compartmentalized from the rest. No one wants to face criticism from their selected peer group because they don’t want to be seen as “un-cool” or “anti-science”. And let’s face it; a lot of younger people nowadays are drowning in apathy and materialism without much guidance for how to pursue a “higher-life”. This is of course largely a byproduct of our disempowerment brought about by out-dated and broken cultural memes (i.e. materialism, rejection of afterlife experience, shallow pursuit of self-interest at the expense of others, etc)

I would say a good swath of the younger generation is moving toward a more indigenous form of spirituality: in other words a return to non-coercive group ritual. You see this most in the surge of “club kids”, and at other huge gatherings such as Burning Man Festival. Whether you agree with some of their lifestyle choices, or views on psychedelics or not, these movements by and large are an attempt at rediscovering community infused with indigenous/shamanic sensibilities. So by and large I see people turning to shamanic spirituality in some way shape or form, whether they realize it or not.

David: You write about the role of “satanic boogy-man” which has led to the demonization of the other who is characterized as an enemy justifying war and other forms of attack. How would an Open source religious orientation undermine or counteract this tendency?

John: Open-Source, in principle, rejects the idea of absolutes. Absolute evil, absolute good, these are polarizing terms grounded in static dogma. Open-Source models are modular, ever-evolving. Open-Source respects diversity, whereas traditional systems emphasize only “one true way”, and anyone in violation of that “one true way” must be labeled evil. Look at the passing of the recent NDAA where basically anyone can be labeled an “enemy combatant” and a “terrorist” just because you disagree with certain government policy. This is yet another reflection of absolutism and narrow-mindedness that can be found in fundamentalist religion.

David: You write “…MSR (Mainstream religion) also perpetuates the cultural epidemic of sadomasochistic addiction to self-hatred. The self-loathing person can never self-actualize, and the writhing emptiness within can only be satiated by self-destructive behavior such as mindless consumerism, or the demented urge to exert power and control over others.” This reminds me that after 9/11, Americans asked in a plaintiff way “Why do they hate us so?” and President Bush’s response was to go shopping so the terrorists didn’t win and disrupt our economy too much. Are you implying that the materialistic capitalism endemic in the United States is actually fueled by Main-Stream religion’s doctrine of original sin and the defective nature of the human being, and if so, how do you see this as working?

John: By and large yes. While I’ll admit there is not an exact 100% correlation, whether we want to admit it or not there is an undercurrent of religious extremism/absolutism within our government today and there has been for a long time.
 
Since ancient times, leaders have been perverting the philosophical underpinnings of spiritual doctrine (which at its heart is meant to liberate people) in the pursuit of personal power. First leaders claimed divine right to rule, then men like Emperor Constantine warped and dogmatized decentralized cults like Christianity to unite the various Pagan peoples he was conquering. While government nowadays takes on a more secular character at first glance, the underpinnings of its motivations flow from that merger of personal-power pursuit with spiritual/psychological warfare.

David: You seem to point out that as human beings we all are religious in some way whether we are consciously aware of this or not. You write, “Guiding principles are in essence a religion: just as religion is a set of guiding principles. Therefore, whether we admit it or not, we are all religious creatures at heart. In that respect, we all have a stake in the development of the OSR paradigm.” Can you say more about what that stake is and the expectations and requirements such a stake implies can be satisfied?

John: I think anyone that looks at the world honestly realizes we are in an absolute quagmire. There are literally holocausts going on all over the Middle-East, Africa, and elsewhere. Meanwhile, here in the States depression, apathy, disease, poverty, crime, fascism, and tensions are rampant. This is all reflective of that “Closed-System Paradigm” that pervades both our institutions and our thinking processes.

We feel isolated, helpless, fearful, sad, and so on because most of us have accepted the Newtonian, Cartesian, and Institutionalized-Religious view that this world is a pitiless, meaningless, scarcity-driven and competitive jungle where it’s everyone for themselves, and we have no power as individuals. Whether institutions that leverage this paradigm label themselves as “scientific” or “religious”, they are in general agreement that we need to simply suck it up, do what we’re told by the “experts”, and go along with the program.

I think by participating in the Open-Source movement we are helping to support new ways of thinking and new ways of living. By learning about horizontal integration, shared decision-making, individualized sense-making, and rediscovering what it means to exist in a real community with real responsibilities, we can overcome all this pointless war and despair in the world.

David: You seem to imply a sense of urgency when you write, “Open-Source sense making is the future starting now.” If you look at the sociological data  it seems you are right that Open-Source sense making on religious and theological ideas has already begun. What will be further signs that it is progressing? Also, some commentators say that Pope Benedict resigned because he is aware that the Catholic Church is a failing institution and that he is not up to the task of leading the church in this new age. You were a Catholic yourself. Can you imagine an Open-Source Catholic church? If so, what would it look like?

John: Well you’ll never find out what’s developing by watching the mainstream media, that’s for sure. I think we can only know by A) tapping into alternative media, and B) reaching out to others and searching for ourselves. Visiting web-sites, dialoguing with others in forums, watching videos, visiting alternative communities, communicating via Skype; all of these are important. I think only by reconnecting with each other and opening up to one another can we ever really know “what’s going on”. When people are willing to engage in respectful and intelligent dialogue with one another without scoffing at the others beliefs, and arrive at core issues they can agree on moving forward, we will know we are making progress. Also the closer science and religion come to reuniting is another surefire sign that evolution is progressing. Unfortunately it is not some miraculous, over-night transformation. We all have a part to play in this unfolding story.

To answer your second question, I think Benedict resigned for a number of reasons. Pedophilia scandals, failing health, institutional-politicking, power-games; all of these likely had a hand in his historic resignation. I am sorry to say I don’t have much faith in the Catholic Church “opening up” as long as it’s tied to the Vatican. And even if it were simply to split with the Vatican, we would simply have another branch of Protestantism which is still entrenched in biblical teachings/history that is deeply bias, corrupt, and misrepresentative of the true story.

 If any religion keeps perpetuating the myth that it has the “one true story”, they can’t call themselves “Open”. Open respects diversity, but also embraces our similarities, our wholeness. Take for example the story of Noah’s Ark; there are literally dozens of flood/ark stories from cultures all over the world. This blows up the whole notion that there is “one true religion” brought down from on high. So if any religion is to evolve and call itself Open, it must not only move away from centralized/dogmatic authority, it must also adopt that principle that our mythologies may have a common source.

David: Over all I found your essay remarkable in many ways. Your idea about a burgeoning Open-Source religion is very powerful and profound. What are you hoping that your readers will take away from your essay?

John: My main hope is that people begin to engage in true self-evaluation and critical thinking. We take a lot for granted, and just assume certain histories, events, philosophies, etc, are “true”, even though we’ve never researched them thoroughly ourselves. I hope people stop accepting what they’re told from authority figures, and seek truth in their own way and on their own terms. Personal empowerment is my endgame I suppose.

From this new consciousness I think people’s actions will take on a new character and we can reshape not only our own lives, but our neighbors’ lives, and our communities as well. I am a true believer in global-thinking and local-action. Reshaping our local government structures, our education systems, monetary systems, our food-distribution systems, our business-structures; all of this is possible with a new consciousness, so that is what I hope to foster and nurture.

David: It seems like Open Source religion will be the contribution of the Millenials who have come of age in the internet age. It is not the religion of their parents, grandparents, and previous generations. It is something that your generation is using to transform the world in a more positive way. Who do you see the major leaders as being, or if that is not the right way of looking at the phenomenon what will continue to develop it as the religious orientation of the future?

John: I think we are moving away from traditional cults of personality. This is not to say we won’t have “leaders”, just not leaders in the traditional sense of the word. Often we think of leaders as these strong-men, rally-around types who talk tough and inspire others through charisma alone. The new generation of leaders will be more willing to share decision-making equitably, rely on the advice of their cohorts and communities, and will speak through their actions rather than through their words. The next generation of leaders will also be defined by integrity.

In general it will be a collective endeavor. As Buckminster Fuller used to say we exist within a global game. Because we’re all in this together when one of us loses, we all lose. Contrary to Darwinian thinking, evolution does not move forward due to mindless competition and “survival of the fittest”. Systems Science and men like Alfred Russell Wallace teach us that Evolution advances through the cooperation and coupling of species. To evolve, we must unite.

Monday, February 4, 2013

My Kind Of Church Music - Like A Prayer, Madonna



"Like A Prayer"


Life is a mystery,
Everyone must stand alone
I hear you call my name
And it feels like home

[Chorus:]
When you call my name it's like a little prayer
I'm down on my knees, I wanna take you there
In the midnight hour I can feel your power
Just like a prayer you know I'll take you there

I hear your voice, it's like an angel sighing
I have no choice, I hear your voice
Feels like flying
I close my eyes, Oh God I think I'm falling
Out of the sky, I close my eyes
Heaven help me

[Chorus x2]

Life is a mystery, everyone must stand alone
I hear you call my name
And it feels like...

[Chorus x2 (with Choir)]
(Just like a prayer, I'll take you there
It's like a dream to me) 
Editor's note: Madonna sings that life is a mystery and when people speak to us and we hear their voice sometimes it is like an angel sighing. Have you ever had that experience?

UUs covenant to affirm and promote a respect for the interdependent web which makes us alert to our interdependence which draws our attention to synchronicities, coincidences, and the Spirit of Life speaking to us in a myriad of ways.

Monday, January 28, 2013

Reading Buehrens/Parker - On what do we base our faith?

In part four of A House For Hope: The Promise of Progressive Religion for the Twenty-first Century, Rebecca Ann Parker and John Buehrens write about "Foundations" the basis for belief in God.

There is the story of John Buehrens asking atheists "What God is it that you don't believe in?" that seems to get to the crux of the issue. People of the books say that God is "revealed" in the scripture and that very scripture warns against idolatry.

The psychologists tell us that everyone believes in something whether they are aware of it or not. Everyone has a motivating understanding of life that gives their lives meaning whether it is money, sex, family, drugs, work. As humans we have our gods which we worship and devote our lives to.

On Beliefnet where there is the "Belief - O - Matic", the 20 question quiz which helps people select a religion which best matches his/her beliefs, the first question is:


What is the number and nature of the deity(ies)?
1. Only one God - a corporeal spirit (has a body), infinite, supreme, personal; the Creator.

2. Only one God - a incorporeal spirit (no body), infinite, supreme, personal; the Creator.

3. Multiple personal gods (or goddesses) regarded as facets of one God, and/or as separate gods.

4. The supreme force is the impersonal Ultimate reality (or life force, ultimate truth, cosmic order, absolute bliss, universal soul), which resides within and/or beyond all.

5. The supreme existence is both the eternal, impersonal, formless Ultimate reality, and personal God (or Gods).

6. No God or supreme forces. Or, not sure. Or, not important.

7. None of the above.

My guess is that most Unitarian Universalists will pick 4, 6, or 7.

Parker supports North Whitehead's  ideas of God which are called process theology. She writes on page 105, "Rooted in science, reason, and intuition, process theology provides a way of understanding the existence of God that progressive theology can embrace in the twenty-first century". Process theology sees God as the force working for creation in an ongoing way. It focuses on becoming rather than being.

Parker writes a little further on page 106 "God's beauty shimmers, dances, melts, and flows. The angels circle up and down on Jacob's ladder. We set up marking stones at the epiphany places and build our theological houses. Meanwhile, God invites us to open the door and cross the threshold into mystery."

As Jesus asked his disciples "Who do you say that I am?" the number of people, especially young people, skip the question by replying that they are "spiritual" and not "religious". The so called "nones", the fastest growing segment of the population in the United States deny any religious identification and affiliation. The mythic stories told by the mainline denominations and religions fail to gain their allegiance and adherence. There is nothing there that they can identify with. These mythic stories are considered irrelevant to their experience and so they eschew participation. 

So what do these "nones" believe? My guess is that they believe in a moral life that is secular and humanistic and their fellowship is derived from being sport fans, music fans, and consumers of a materialistic culture which constantly tells them that their search for immediate gratification can be met with a pecuniary purchase. This is the American way, a way they deeply believe in, it having been preached to them by politicians and corporations since the days of Ronald Reagan in the 1980s.

What is it, if anything, which Unitarian Universalism has to offer them that is relevant, meaningful, empowering? The perennial theology of Unitarian Universalism drawn from the six sources is too pedantic, and the seven principles too pedestrian. Unlike Parker's endorsement, it seems that process theology doesn't quite capture the heart with sufficient inspiration either. What will be the foundation for a vibrant, viable faith in the Twenty-first century is yet to be defined and described. The meta-narrative is yet to be developed and disseminated. It will have something to do with Love of all living things and stewardship of the planet.




Print Friendly and PDF