That Ultimate Reality (which is ultimately One, not Many) has
completely and uniquely revealed itself in Jesus of Nazareth.
What is distinctive about Jesus of Nazareth, in contrast with
other figures of worship? -
He was crucified by human systems. Two in particular - the Domination
System of the Roman Empire, and the closed-system hierarchy of the
Jerusalem Temple of his time.
Religion usually ends up "putting God in a box" - witness the story
of Solomon's building of a temple that his father David was not
permitted to build. The editors of this mega-history place Solomon
half-way on the time-line between creation and 'The End' : he
represents the height of Israel's achievement - and simultaneously the
beginning of Israel's decline into ruin. Because he put God in a box.
Central Message #1 : God always comes as one unknown and unrecognized.
>From *outside* the system. ("Can anything good come from Nazareth?)
Reality, if you like, breaks in from outside. If you don't want the
System to be destroyed, continually listen for the 'voice from outside'.
I suppose I could be dogmatic about that...
Not all religions are closed systems of thought. My own church (the
United Reformed Church) takes its stand on the revelation of God in
Jesus, sure - but that doesn't make it a closed system of thought, as
some contributors have suggested it *must*. The knowledge that, unless
we listen really hard for 'the voice from outside' we too will miss
Messiah's word could actually guarantee openness. Our Basis of Union
explicitly states that we will need to continually reformulate our
beliefs, and indeed, at our last recent General Assembly we chewed
through a completely reworked formulation of our faith in inclusive
language.
Central Message #2 : (and here's the twist) Ultimate Reality "speaks"
to us in our Systems from a position of poverty and marginalization.
God comes to us, not from "above" our systems, but from "below". I think
this may be a particularly distinctive Christian insight, albeit
conveniently forgotten by Christian domination systems down the ages.
Witness this powerful quotation from part of a Statement of Belief
by 'Church Action on Poverty' :
We believe that God's Spirit speaks through the cries
of the poor and the vulnerable to expose our illusions
and break their power over us; calling us to our
proper task of working for the emerging Kingdom, restoring
us to the human story's authentic theme.
Senge's book is great *as far as it goes*. The all-important other
dimension is Whole-System thinking, in which we look and listen
*outside* the immediate system in order to learn. Customers, suppliers,
fine.. but who are the "underdogs" in relation to it? *That's* where
the real learning comes from.
ON DOGMA
Sydney Carter (writer of 'Lord of the Dance' and many others)
once wrote
The function of the Bible, like the function of the world
itself is not to provide us with security but to force us
to create. Faith is the faculty that makes creation possible.
If, as I do, I choose to make the Christian canon of the Bible the
bedrock of my life, that does not deafen me to other voices or stop
me from learning and dialoguing. It *could* do that, sure. In fact, I
find I have to continually dialogue with the Bible itself. It is
certainly not a rule book!
Take a parallel :
I am fortunate in having a happy and secure marriage (I *think*!) - but
it's not secure because I agree with everything my wife says, and she
with me. It's secure because we're both committed to dialogue, and
committed to the way of marriage.
I might even dare to suggest that if you think you can get away
*without* committing yourself to a particular religious path, you're
kidding yourself that you're open to learning.
Truth is either true or it's not, and religious truth is no exception.
It has to be "proven" by faith experience, which comes from prior
commitment. You can't get it second-hand from books. Admittedly human
beings are good at kidding themselves things are true if they really
need to believe them, but I can't go along with some of the posted
suggestions that religious truth is purely subjective individual
experience.
If I believe God is as Christianity claims God is, then that's true for you
as well as me. I may be wrong - the truth must be continually tested; I must
keep learning. Doubtless there is some truth in many philosophical and
religious systems. But to suggest that religions' claims to truth are
equally valid, and it's a matter of 'what works for you' is *actually*
a closed system of thought in itself. Tolerance comes from recognising
that "I may be wrong" whilst having a firm position myself. Relativising
all religion is not tolerance, and undermines the human capacity to learn.
-- Revd Dick Wolff Mission Enabler to the Wessex Province of the United Reformed Church Tel : +44 1865 511798 Fax : +44 1865 310769 e-mail : dickwolff@patrol.i-way.co.uk
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>