What We Fear

Within every perceived problem the lies the implicit question, why? And in our pursuit of truth it is in the succession of whys we find the opportunity for growth. It is not the truth that holds us back, but error, misperception, lack of perspective and ignorance. It is so interesting to me that it is not the error itself that most condemns us, but the fact that we so often are unwilling to admit the possibility that we are wrong, or go to such great lengths to cover-up the error in judgment or moral lapse. And this reality is no less true of institutions and group consciousness than it is of the individual.

Thus it is no mystery why civil discourse is so rare on topics that touch on the areas of religion and politics. And by extension it is therefore not surprising that the nations, cultures, and religions of the world are, and always have been, sharply divided. So we might ask, does this mean that human civilization is forever trapped in the cycle of ignorance, attack, and recriminations? From the macro perspective, and in the light of human history, it does indeed seem the situation is hopeless.

And so we ask why? What is it in human nature that prevents the vast majority of individuals, institutions, religious communities, and societies in general from real progress and growth? My view is that it is the emotion of fear that is the primary factor underlying the failure of individuals and societies to advance. While lack of trust and moral virtue are very significant factors, it is arguably the case that even these are symptoms of fear.

In our discussions on the subject of religion and faith the element of fear therefore should not be underestimated. One might reasonably argue that the fear of death is the foundation of all other fears, and it follows that any perceived threat to the ways and means that human beings use to cope with this fear will be vigorously opposed.


Our worldview is the primary mechanism that we use for deriving meaning from the chaos and uncertainty that are cold realities of the world. Our worldview is consists of the whole structure and array of belief that we as individuals construct for these purposes. This system of belief is, in a way, like a house of cards. Even a slight disruption of one or two cards can create a state of instability in the entire system. Thus, in practical terms, if any of our political or religious views are called into question, the stability of our entire system of belief is potentially at risk.

Is this fear of the stability of our belief system based on a realistic assessment of the facts or is it primarily a fear of the unknown?

Now what?

Oh crap, I forgot to check my assumptions. There are a bunch of them now that I think of it. Many of these are key to the idea of mission and purpose from my perspective.

1. Is there is a lack of a deep community in the institutional churches? If so is this due to fear of the potential for massive dissagreement if we unravel the truth of what others actually believe?

2. Is it fear of a loss of belief, on the part of some, that prevents them from an honest examination of the challenges to faith? Is this examination beneficial or necessary?

3. Is it possible that there are a statistically insignificant number of people who are truly interested in exploring the issues of meaning and purpose?

4. What practices, beliefs or state of consciousness are requisite to a claim to authentic Christian discipleship?

5. Is it possible that all are on a spiritual quest, regardless of whether they realize it or not?

6. How are we to truly understand the great commission? Is a shared vision of discipleship for more than very small group of people possible? If not - how can we begin to imagine, in the broader context, anything like a community of faith?

7. If certain of our assumptions prove to be in error does this bring into question whether anything meaningful at all can be articulated in terms of mission by those who claim to be disciples of Jesus Christ?

8. In light of the preceding is it possible that nominal Christianity is adequate for most people?

9. In the broader context is it possible or beneficial to even try to convey, or to any meaningful degree confer with others regarding the reality and texture of spiritual consciousness?

10. Given significance, number, and difficulty of these questions, is it realistic, in the context of Christian community and dialog, to hope for anything more than a general state of chaotic ambiguity?

11. Is it realistic to make the assumption that we can sufficiently undestand these questions, and in a way that justifies any vision of mission in a broader social context ?

Mark

Exploration

Exploration is a major subtext of my life. And yet it has not been exploration as an end in itself, but as a means for experiencing the unknown first-hand, and as a result obtaining a piece of the meaning puzzle.

At the age of 22 I abandoned the version of Christianity that dominated the lives of my parents, and for the next 15 years my view of the Christian perspective was generally one of critical skepticism. During all of this time I searched and struggled to make sense of the world as I found it. Though it was nearly imperceptible to me then, I did make steady progress as I explored and examined a wide range of philosophical and theological approaches. An unexpected result of this somewhat arduous, and for many years a quite liminal philosophical state, was the discovery of something that might be described as Christian enlightenment.

Having arrived at an internally consistent sense of meaning and understanding has for me been a great blessing, and yet one that is virtually impossible to convey to others who have not themselves arrived at a similar point of view.

And then I learned about the emergent church. At the last Sierra Pacific ELCA synod assembly I was introduced to these ideas and a light went on. As a result I took the initiative to learn about the viewpoint, values, and philosophy of the emergent church and to explore the meaning and relevance of postmodern culture.

For me there was an immediate sense of resonance with the things I was learning. However, as I attempted to convey this new understanding to the other members of my ELCA church I found the response was frequently one of skepticism and even scorn. Nonetheless the pastor and spiritual gifts minister were receptive so I initiated a weekly seminar to study the ideas and implications of postmodernity, the end of Christendom, the decline of the institutional church, and the dominant philosophy of the emergent church.

After about 8 weeks there continues to be regular attendees at this seminar and a level of genuine interest, albeit mixed with some confusion and apprehension. While it has been a little sobering to see these ideas received with such reticence, I am at the same time encouraged to see what seems to be slow but yet steady progress in communicating what I have learned.

This is one of the benefits of experience. I know what it is to struggle and grow in ways that are virtually imperceptible in the short term.