Quotes & Sayings


We, and creation itself, actualize the possibilities of the God who sustains the world, towards becoming in the world in a fuller, more deeper way. - R.E. Slater

There is urgency in coming to see the world as a web of interrelated processes of which we are integral parts, so that all of our choices and actions have [consequential effects upon] the world around us. - Process Metaphysician Alfred North Whitehead

Kurt Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem says (i) all closed systems are unprovable within themselves and, that (ii) all open systems are rightly understood as incomplete. - R.E. Slater

The most true thing about you is what God has said to you in Christ, "You are My Beloved." - Tripp Fuller

The God among us is the God who refuses to be God without us, so great is God's Love. - Tripp Fuller

According to some Christian outlooks we were made for another world. Perhaps, rather, we were made for this world to recreate, reclaim, redeem, and renew unto God's future aspiration by the power of His Spirit. - R.E. Slater

Our eschatological ethos is to love. To stand with those who are oppressed. To stand against those who are oppressing. It is that simple. Love is our only calling and Christian Hope. - R.E. Slater

Secularization theory has been massively falsified. We don't live in an age of secularity. We live in an age of explosive, pervasive religiosity... an age of religious pluralism. - Peter L. Berger

Exploring the edge of life and faith in a post-everything world. - Todd Littleton

I don't need another reason to believe, your love is all around for me to see. – Anon

Thou art our need; and in giving us more of thyself thou givest us all. - Khalil Gibran, Prayer XXIII

Be careful what you pretend to be. You become what you pretend to be. - Kurt Vonnegut

Religious beliefs, far from being primary, are often shaped and adjusted by our social goals. - Jim Forest

We become who we are by what we believe and can justify. - R.E. Slater

People, even more than things, need to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed, and redeemed; never throw out anyone. – Anon

Certainly, God's love has made fools of us all. - R.E. Slater

An apocalyptic Christian faith doesn't wait for Jesus to come, but for Jesus to become in our midst. - R.E. Slater

Christian belief in God begins with the cross and resurrection of Jesus, not with rational apologetics. - Eberhard Jüngel, Jürgen Moltmann

Our knowledge of God is through the 'I-Thou' encounter, not in finding God at the end of a syllogism or argument. There is a grave danger in any Christian treatment of God as an object. The God of Jesus Christ and Scripture is irreducibly subject and never made as an object, a force, a power, or a principle that can be manipulated. - Emil Brunner

“Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh” means "I will be that who I have yet to become." - God (Ex 3.14) or, conversely, “I AM who I AM Becoming.”

Our job is to love others without stopping to inquire whether or not they are worthy. - Thomas Merton

The church is God's world-changing social experiment of bringing unlikes and differents to the Eucharist/Communion table to share life with one another as a new kind of family. When this happens, we show to the world what love, justice, peace, reconciliation, and life together is designed by God to be. The church is God's show-and-tell for the world to see how God wants us to live as a blended, global, polypluralistic family united with one will, by one Lord, and baptized by one Spirit. – Anon

The cross that is planted at the heart of the history of the world cannot be uprooted. - Jacques Ellul

The Unity in whose loving presence the universe unfolds is inside each person as a call to welcome the stranger, protect animals and the earth, respect the dignity of each person, think new thoughts, and help bring about ecological civilizations. - John Cobb & Farhan A. Shah

If you board the wrong train it is of no use running along the corridors of the train in the other direction. - Dietrich Bonhoeffer

God's justice is restorative rather than punitive; His discipline is merciful rather than punishing; His power is made perfect in weakness; and His grace is sufficient for all. – Anon

Our little [biblical] systems have their day; they have their day and cease to be. They are but broken lights of Thee, and Thou, O God art more than they. - Alfred Lord Tennyson

We can’t control God; God is uncontrollable. God can’t control us; God’s love is uncontrolling! - Thomas Jay Oord

Life in perspective but always in process... as we are relational beings in process to one another, so life events are in process in relation to each event... as God is to Self, is to world, is to us... like Father, like sons and daughters, like events... life in process yet always in perspective. - R.E. Slater

To promote societal transition to sustainable ways of living and a global society founded on a shared ethical framework which includes respect and care for the community of life, ecological integrity, universal human rights, respect for diversity, economic justice, democracy, and a culture of peace. - The Earth Charter Mission Statement

Christian humanism is the belief that human freedom, individual conscience, and unencumbered rational inquiry are compatible with the practice of Christianity or even intrinsic in its doctrine. It represents a philosophical union of Christian faith and classical humanist principles. - Scott Postma

It is never wise to have a self-appointed religious institution determine a nation's moral code. The opportunities for moral compromise and failure are high; the moral codes and creeds assuredly racist, discriminatory, or subjectively and religiously defined; and the pronouncement of inhumanitarian political objectives quite predictable. - R.E. Slater

God's love must both center and define the Christian faith and all religious or human faiths seeking human and ecological balance in worlds of subtraction, harm, tragedy, and evil. - R.E. Slater

In Whitehead’s process ontology, we can think of the experiential ground of reality as an eternal pulse whereby what is objectively public in one moment becomes subjectively prehended in the next, and whereby the subject that emerges from its feelings then perishes into public expression as an object (or “superject”) aiming for novelty. There is a rhythm of Being between object and subject, not an ontological division. This rhythm powers the creative growth of the universe from one occasion of experience to the next. This is the Whiteheadian mantra: “The many become one and are increased by one.” - Matthew Segall

Without Love there is no Truth. And True Truth is always Loving. There is no dichotomy between these terms but only seamless integration. This is the premier centering focus of a Processual Theology of Love. - R.E. Slater

-----

Note: Generally I do not respond to commentary. I may read the comments but wish to reserve my time to write (or write from the comments I read). Instead, I'd like to see our community help one another and in the helping encourage and exhort each of us towards Christian love in Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior. - re slater

Showing posts with label Love - What is It?. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Love - What is It?. Show all posts

Monday, October 13, 2025

Choosing Post-Evangelical Theology: Moving Towards a Relational, Open, and Healing Theology of Faith and Love



A Theology of Love

Choosing Post-Evangelical Theology:
Moving Towards a Relational, Open, and
Healing Theology of Faith and Love

by R.E. Slater & ChatGPT-5


✍️ Preface: A Love That Rewrites the Story

For many of us raised within evangelicalism, theology was taught as something fixed, something we inherited rather than questioned — a set of guarded truths rather than a living conversation with a hurting world. Evangelical theology, as it took root in the 20th century, often placed its energy in drawing lines rather than building bridges: lines against contemporary science, lines against evolution, lines against non-heteronormative identities, lines against other faith traditions, and even lines within Christianity itself.

I, too, inherited those lines.

But over time, the gaps became unsustainable, even unbearable. Those lines were not just drawn on paper; they were drawn through lives to cross-out lives. They created exclusions that harmed and wounded; doctrines that threatened of hell more than they promised healing hope; they created rigid systems that excluded unwanteds; and silenced love when love did not fit their terms and beliefs.

Then one day I discovered a new theology, a new and gracious vocabulary — one based upon a living and relational philosophy: process thought. It offered a cosmology where God is not distant but present in every becoming; not coercive but persuasive; not static but alive. It gave language to what I had felt all along: that love is not merely a command but the very structure of divine reality.

This newer theology does not attempt to “save” evangelicalism. It seeks to transcend and transform theologies of unlove and exclusion — to offer something truer, wider, more humane. A theology centered not on control but on mutual becoming; not on fear but on love.

This “Healing Theology of Love” is both a response to harm Christians have created over the centuries as well as a vision for the future. It is rooted in process philosophy, (open and relational) process theology, and the conviction that love must be the first and last word, the alpha and omega, in every theological reflection - if not the very hermeneutical driver/life of the bible itself.

It is also a theology that refuses to leave behind those the old systems have deemed disposable: transgender and gay people; women who have been sidelined; minorities and racialized communities; those abused within rigid dogmatic systems (such as the Nones and Dones); and the ailing, compromised earth itself (theo-ecology).

This is, in short, a theology which dares to love without apology across all boundaries the church has constructed, maintained, and defined as the gospel of Jesus Christ.


🌿 Introduction: Healing Theology

What we wish to do as Christians of the 21st Century is not simply write a new theology but a healing theology. By taking a faith that has too often been used as a weapon — shaped by fear, control, and exclusion — and re-grounding it in love as hermeneutic and relationship as an ontology. That is no small task.

The work of this website reflects a larger movement many thoughtful people are experiencing and putting into effect today — a quiet, inclusive, challenging revolution of faith. It requires:

  • Leaving static, brittle, evangelical frameworks that deny complexity and difference;

  • Discovering process thought with its dynamic vision of a relational God, open co-creation, evolving (cosmic) meaning, and a cosmos alive with possibility and co-generation; and,

  • Reimagining a faith that liberates rather than imprisons; that welcomes science rather than fears it; that embraces human diversity as part of the divine flow rather than a deviation from it.

This kind of theological turning is not about rejecting faithbut deepening faith. It’s a movement from:

  • Judgment ➝ Hospitality

  • Certainty ➝ Openness

  • Hierarchy ➝ Mutuality

  • Fear of difference ➝ Reverence for multiplicity

A hermeneutic of love does something evangelical literalism could never do well: it listens  by teaching itself to unlearn and relearn before it judges. It understands Scripture as a living conversation, not a frozen codebook. It makes room for transgender people, for evolution, for science, for societal and religious pluralism — and for grace to be larger than human boundaries.

In Whiteheadian terms, this is picturing theology as “an adventure of ideas” — it is co-creative, participative, emergent, ever widening, and centered in transformative value. In Christian terms, it is a theology which takes the Incarnation of Christ very seriously: that divine love is-and-can-be embodied, relational, and present in the legitimacy of our becoming.

This post-evangelical project stands in a long and courageous lineage of reformers to the Christian faith. In the contemporary era, Process thinkers are walking in the paths shared with many of the great transformative theologians of the last century — Tillich, Cobb, Keller, Suchocki, Cone, Moltmann, and others — but we are doing so in a post-evangelical and processual context, one of the most critical theological terrains of the 21st century.

This is the hard and holy work of turning faith from fortress ideology to Eucharistic (table) communion/fellowship. It is the transformative choice (among other elections) to center transgender dignity, human diversity, and the ethics of love into the heart of this post-theological re-visioning making it not only potent, but profoundly future-facing.

“Love is the greatest hermeneutic because love doesn’t ask, ‘Is this correct?’
Love asks, ‘Who is being welcomed, embraced, healed, or harmed?’

This Theology of Love seeks to be structured, layered, historically informed, and open to the pluriverse of human and cosmic experience. It is an architecture built not on fear, but on the most enduring foundation of all: Love.


Transition: From Healing to Building

Every movement of reimagining requires not only courage but structure. Healing theology is not simply about unlearning the harmful; it is also about building the bountiful, the beautiful. Love is more than a sentiment — it is a framework capable of holding doctrine, ethics, science, embodiment, and hope together.

To move from fortress to table, from boundary to belonging, theology must be architected anew:

  • with love as its hermeneutic (its way of envisioning),

  • with relationship as its ontology (its understanding of being),

  • with justice and dignity as its ethic (its way of valuing),

  • and with a shared, open future as its God-wide, cosmic energy (its way of purpose).

This is not a project of dismantling faith, but of re-centering it in the living heart of Love itself as Jesus had shown the church — it is a theology of love that listens, lures, captivates, motivates, recreates, and transformatively calls forward.

Here, theology ceases to be a system of control and becomes instead a movement of life.

The following five-layer framework offers a way to give this vision shape: not as a rigid system, but as a living architecture — flexible, dynamic, relational, and rooted in divine Love. Each layer builds upon the last, forming a theology capable of embracing plurality without losing its center.


🏛 I. Love as Hermeneutic — The First Principle

“Love must be the lens through which every text, tradition, and theology is interpreted. If a doctrine harms, excludes, or diminishes dignity, it is not of God.”

Evangelical theology often begins with Scripture as the ultimate authority, interpreted through inherited doctrinal grids. But this has too often made Scripture a blunt weapon rather than a living word.

Here, we invert the order. We begin with love as the primary hermeneutic — the interpretive key through which all other theological claims must pass.

Core Claim:

  • Love is the relational force through which God participates in the world.

  • Love is theologically prior to every text, creed, or system imposed by the church.

  • The measure of truth is not how tightly it conforms to tradition, but how deeply it expands dignity and relational flourishing.

Implications:

  • Any biblical interpretation that diminishes human worth is theologically deficient.

  • Theologies built on fear, exclusion, or domination are not neutral — they are deformative.

  • Scripture is read through the grammar of love, not love through the grammar of Scripture.

📌 “Love first” does not negate Scripture. It transfigures how Scripture is read.

This hermeneutic gives you a north star:
Every doctrine must answer this question —

“Does this idea, practice, attitude, or action widen love’s embrace or narrow it?”


🌿 II. Philosophical Ground — A Cosmos of Becoming

Process philosophy provides the ontological scaffolding for this theology. The universe is not a static machine ruled by a distant deity but a living, relational, evolving reality.

Core Concepts:

  1. God as Relational

    • God is not omnipotent in the classical sense but omni-relational: God is present in all experiences, luring each moment toward beauty, harmony, and creative advance.

  2. Reality as Process

    • All things are in a constant state of becoming, not just existing.

    • Each moment emerges from prior moments in a complex network of participatory interdependence.

  3. Love as the Structure of Reality

    • Love is not an attribute added to God; it is the very mode of divine activity.

    • God relates to the world not through control but through persuasive love.

  4. Creativity as Divine Gift

    • Every actual entity participates in the unfolding of creation — a shared, co-generative process.

Why this matters:

Traditional theology often frames God as outside the world, intervening at will. Process theology reframes God as within the world, always in relationship with it. Love is not divine sentiment — it is the energetic patterning of existence itself.

“Love is the grammar of becoming. Everything else is commentary.”


📖 III. Theological Core — God, Scripture, Humanity

Here is where a loving theology can take shape - not as a top-down system of control - but as a web of healing, helping intrapersonal and extrapersonal relationships.

1. God

  • Dipolar in nature: both eternal (the ground of reality's being) and temporal (the cosmic companion of becoming).

  • Not the cosmic puppeteer but the intimate co-creator of life itself.

  • God suffers with creation (immanence); God does not simply rule over creation (transcendence).

  • Divine power is persuasive, not unilaterally coercive.

2. Scripture

  • Is a record of evolving human encounters with God; it is not a closed, infallible codebook for life.

  • Reflects both divine lure, the human experience, and human limitations.

  • To read the bible faithfully is to read it through the hermeneutic of love, sifting out what reflects divine compassion from what reflects human fear, religious imposition, folkloric superstitions, and ancient mythologies. It is a narrative of humanity's spiritual  and religious journey of becoming one in purpose and love with the God of the universe.

3. Humanity

  • Is inherently/intrinsically valuable — every human being participates with God in divine becoming and creativity without exclusion.

  • The "Image of God" is not a fixed form but one of relational capacity.

  • Gays, trans, neurodiverse, disabled, racialized, and marginalized lives are not exceptions to the divine image but reflections of its richness and diversity.

4. Sin

  • Reframed as relational rupture — is any act or system that fractures love and mutual flourishing.

  • Not a legal infraction, but a wound in the relational fabric.

5. Salvation

  • Not rescue from a fallen world, but healing of relational ruptures and participation in the ongoing creation of a more just, loving reality.

  • Found not in exclusion but in communion's diverse fellowship.

📌 This theological core is where the post-evangelical shift becomes structural: It eschews a punitive deity, exclusionary doctrines, and dualistic systems of fear.


🌍 IV. Ethical Outworking — Love as Praxis

Theology that does not touch the ground of our being is not theology; it is an aberrant abstraction and unloving practice. A theology of love must be incarnated in practice.

1. Love as Social Architecture

  • Justice is not separate from love; it is love made public.

  • Inclusion is not charity; it is the test of fidelity to divine love.

2. Communities of Belonging

  • Faith communities must be radically hospitable — especially to those most often harmed: LGBTQ+ people, immigrants, disabled people, racialized communities, the poor, and the earth itself.

  • Love is measured by who is welcomed, not by who is excluded.

3. Nonviolence as Ethical Posture

  • Divine love persuades, it never coerces. Our ethical posture mirrors that persuasion.

  • Political, social, and religious systems that depend on fear and control are counter-testimonies.

4. Ecological Love

  • Creation is not a backdrop to salvation history — it is part of it.

  • Environmental justice is a theological act, not an optional extra.

📌 In short: Love is praxis. If it does not act, it is not love.


🕊 V. Eschatological Vision — Hope as an Expanding Horizon

Evangelical eschatology often narrows hope to “who goes to heaven.” A theology of love widens it to the entirety of the cosmos.

1. The Future Is Open

  • God does not control the future but calls creation toward it.

  • Eschatology is relational, participatory, and creative.

2. Love as the Arc of History

  • Love is not a fragile feeling but a cosmic trajectory: from fragmentation to integration, from domination to mutuality.

3. Salvation History as Transformation

  • Hope is found not in escape but in the transfiguration of creation through ongoing acts of love.

4. Co-creating the Future

  • Humans are not passive recipients of divine will but partners in shaping the world.

  • This includes political, ecological, social, and spiritual dimensions.

📌 Love gives us an eschatology big enough for everyone.


✨ Conclusion: Theology "in the Key of Love"

What began for me as an act of deconstruction became something far more: a personal reconstruction of Christianity radically rooted in love. Process philosophy gave me the language of becoming; the gospel gave me the vision of incarnational love. Together, they form a theology capable of holding science, difference, embodiment, and hope.

This is not a theology for a church fortress.
It’s a theology for a shared table.

“Love is the truest hermeneutic,
the strongest ethic,
the most enduring hope.”

In this theology:

  • God is love — relational, evolving, ever-present.

  • Scripture is a living witness to love’s unfolding.

  • Humanity is co-creative, diverse, and sacred.

  • Justice is love’s non-oppressive, public face.

  • The future is open and can be made more beautiful by our participation in love’s work. When we withdraw from this attitude we allow harm and suffering to go forward as we are witnessing today under "maga" influences.

This is the story we can choose to live into. Not as a reaction to fear, but as a reorientation toward life.


🪶Below is a prayer, a manifesto, or an invocation that may be used at the beginning of any invocation, in public gatherings, worship settings, or essays. This text can be used as a responsive reading for congregations, a poetic preface for a manuscript, or a closing litany in public presentations or services. The language is intentionally layered — accessible, resonant, and theologically rich.


🕊️ Invocation: A Theology of Love

Leader: In the beginning, before all words, there was Love.
All: And Love is still the first word.

I believe in Love —
not as ornament, but as origin.
Love is the lens, the language, the living breath.
What does not widen Love’s embrace
cannot bear the name of God.

I believe in a world alive with becoming,
where each heartbeat, each star, each whisper of wind
is woven in a living tapestry of relationship.
Love is not an afterthought —
it is the deep structure of reality.

I believe in a God who does not coerce but companions,
whose power is persuasion,
whose nature is relationship,
whose name is Love.
Scripture is not a cage but a conversation —
a record of humanity’s trembling encounters
with a Love too vast to be contained.

I believe every human being
is made of sacred becoming —
trans, cis, gay, straight, disabled, neurodiverse,
Black, Brown, White, Indigenous —
each a reflection of Love’s unending creativity.
Sin is not a stain but a rupture,
and salvation is the healing of the wound.

I believe Love builds tables, not walls.
It has hands that welcome,
feet that march for justice,
arms that lift the fallen,
and eyes that see what fear refuses to look at.
Justice is Love speaking in public.
Hospitality is Love made flesh.

I believe the future is not closed but open,
an ever-widening horizon of holy possibility.
Love lures us forward, never forcing, always inviting.
Hope is not wishful thinking —
it is Love dreaming the world toward beauty.

And so we confess with heart and breath:

  Love before all things,
  Love within all things,
  Love beyond all things.
  
  Love listens.
  Love interprets.
  Love heals.
  Love creates.

Leader: In the end, as in the beginning, there is Love.
All: And Love shall have the final word.

R.E. Slater
October 14, 2025

@copyright R.E. Slater Publications
all rights reserved

Monday, May 9, 2022

Thomas Jay Oord - Free Will is an Experiential Nonnegotiable





9 Reasons to Affirm Free Will




Free Will is an Experiential Nonnegotiable

by Thomas Oord
March 22nd, 2020


There are strong reasons to believe humans have genuine but limited free will. I believe this, in part, because I experience freedom every day.

In a previous post (click here), I listed 9 reasons it makes sense to affirm that humans have genuine but limited free will. In this post, I address perhaps the most powerful reason: freedom as an experiential nonnegotiable.


Our Freedom is Always Limited

Some people think “freedom” means “the ability to do anything.” So they reject the view. Few if any scholars who affirm free will believe this, however.

Human freedom is always limited. It’s constrained, conditioned, or framed by many sources, both internal and external to the actor. But all humans act as if they are free, even if some deny this verbally.

To be free is to choose, in a particular moment, among a limited number of relevant options. We freely choose as a source or cause of our actions. Free creatures could have chosen something other than what they chose; they could have done otherwise.[1]

I don’t know with certainty that all humans have limited but genuine free will. Absolute certainty about such matters is illusory. Certainty is rare!

But I’m more confident about my freedom than I am about descriptions of humans or even of existence. I’m confident about about free will, because I experience it personally. And I presuppose its veracity in the way I live my life.


We Should Start with the Data We Know Best

We often make mistakes and don’t know much if anything with certainty. So we should have some method in our attempts to make sense of life.

The philosopher Roderick Chisholm recommends what he calls “epistemological particularism.”[2] This method privileges experiences we know best when trying to makes sense of life. It begins with ideas that seem most obvious.


Amazon Link

Epistemological particularism doesn’t claim we can be certain descriptions of our experience are 100% accurate. But we can be more confident in first-person data — especially data inevitably expressed in our living — than data we know from a third-person perspective.

This method should lead us to affirm the reality of human freedom. Of course, some people interpret studies in neuroscience (and other sciences) as indicating humans are not free. For several reasons, I think such interpretations mistaken. But my first step in addressing claims about determinism is to argue we should feel more confident of the truthfulness of first-person data – our inescapable personal experiences – than the data of neuroscience. Scientists obtain neuroscience data through third-person perspectives.

I’m not rejecting neuroscience as a discipline. In my view, neuroscientists should pursue their research with passion. The discipline has generated helpful insights, and I have friends contributing in this field. But we must avoid conclusions the data does not and, I think, could not in principle support. For an accessible philosophical defense of freewill in light of neuroscience research, see Alfred Mele’s work.[3] 


Is Free Will Just Common Sense?

Some call those beliefs that are self-evidently true and inevitably expressed in our actions “common sense.” Philosophers such as Thomas Reid, GE Moore, and Alfred North Whitehead argued for commonsense ideas.[4] In terms of freedom, common sense says we all act freely — at least sometimes.

We use “common sense” to describe ideas that are not inevitably expressed in our lives, however. To some people, for instance, it’s common sense black men should not marry white women. Others think it’s common sense that the New England Patriots are the greatest football team. Some think common sense tells us God controls our lives. Because these ideas are not truly common nor expressed inevitably in our actions, the phrase “common sense” can be misleading and then dismissed as unhelpful or dangerous.

David Ray Griffin distinguishes between ideas some call common sense and what he calls “hard-core” and soft-core commonsense ideas.[5] We inevitably presuppose hard-core commonsense ideas in our practice. We don’t inevitably presuppose soft-core commonsense ideas. Soft-core commonsense ideas might include the (wrong) belief that black men and white women shouldn’t marry, the (debatable) belief that New England has the best football team, or the (arguably harmful) belief that God controls creation.

We can deny soft-core commonsense ideas and still live consistently. Hard-core commonsense ideas cannot consistently be denied in our practice.


Free Will is an Experiential Nonnegotiable

I’ve come to call the ideas that we inescapably live out “experiential nonnegotiables.” We must accept the truth of experiential nonnegotiables if we want to speak adequately about the way the world works.

We contradict ourselves if we say we act one way and then act differently. We commit what Jürgen Habermas calls “performative contradictions:” our performance in life contradicts our statements about what life is like.[6]

In terms of freedom, we contradict ourselves if we claim we are not free and then live as if we act freely. Our words don’t match our actions; we are experiential hypocrites. At least for most humans if not all, genuine but limited freedom is an experiential nonnegotiable.

I could list other experiential nonnegotiables (e.g., there is a world external to myself). Myy point for this essay is the inevitable experience of freedom in our lives provides strong justification to think humans have genuine but limited freedom.

We contradict ourselves if we claim we're not free and then live as if we act freely. We are experiential hypocrites.


NOTES:

[1] For similar understandings of freedom, see Laura W. Ekstrom, “Free Will is Not a Mystery,” in The Oxford Handbook of Free Will, 2nd ed., Robert Kane, ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 366-380; William Hasker, “Divine Knowledge and Human Freedom,” The Oxford Handbook of Free Will, 2nd ed., Robert Kane, ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 40-56; Timothy, O’Connor, “Agent-Causal Theories of Freedom,” in The Oxford Handbook of Free Will, 2nd ed., Robert Kane, ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 309-328 and “The Agent as Cause” Free Will, Robert Kane, ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 2002); Kevin Timpe, Free Will: Sourcehood and its Alternatives, 2nd ed. (New York: Bloomsbury, 2013).

[2] Roderick M. Chisholm, The Problem of the Criterion (Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press, 1973).

[3] Alfred Mele, Free: Why Science Hasn’t Disproved Free Will (Oxford University Press, 2014).

[4] For a brief overview of commonsense philosophy, see “Philosophy of Common Sense,” New World Encyclopedia. http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Philosophy_of_Common_Sense

[5] David Ray Griffin, Unsnarling the World-Knot: Consciousness, Freedom, and the Mind-Body Problem (Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press, 1998), 34, 210.

[6] Jürgen Habermas, “Discourse Ethics: Notes on a Program of Philosophical Justification,” in Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, trans. C. Lenhardt and S.W. Nicholsen (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1990).


Friday, April 29, 2022

Thomas Jay Oord - Many biblical scholars and theologians fail to affirm the priority of love



amazon link

Obstacles to Putting Love First

by Thomas Jay Oord
April 13th, 2022


Many biblical scholars and theologians
fail to affirm the priority of love.


In this essay, I focus on the final of five reasons why many fail to make love a priority. I’ll simply list the first four before addressing the fifth. Get a copy of Pluriform Love to read the explanations I give to the first four:
1. Love is sometimes equated with sex/romance, self-indulgence, sentimentality, or extreme tolerance.

2. Biblical writers are sometimes unclear about love’s meaning.

3. Biblical writers sometimes portray God as unloving.

4. The Bible has no precise definition of love.

We Need a Definition of Love

The final reason many theologians and biblical scholars fail to affirm the priority of love arises from confusion over what we mean by love. This confusion emerges from a failure to clarify terms. I put it this way…

5. Theologians often fail to define love well.

Most theologians do not define love. Even those who focus on love rarely clarify what they mean. This practice is especially odd, because most theologians know love has diverse and often confusing meanings. There’s a dearth of explicit definitions.

The few theologians who do define love often fail to use their definitions consistently. They’ll say we ought to love the world, for instance, which sounds like we should treat creation well. In the next breath, they’ll say we shouldn’t love the world but should love God instead. Others say God causes or permits evil but also claim God loves everyone. The harmed and hurting doubt this. Theologians will say suffering is a necessary part of love, but they’ll claim heaven is a loving place without suffering. Others say God loves everyone, but God does not love the wicked. Some say God loves us like a friend and then say friendship with God is impossible. Or theologians will say love isn’t about feelings, but then urge us to feel compassion for the needy. Some claim humans are incapable of love but criticize them for being unloving.

Theological claims about love often make no sense!

So… theologians need to define love well. And then employ their definitions consistently. Of course, definitions cannot capture everything that’s true. Just as we will probably never grasp the full meaning of God, we will never grasp the full meaning of love. Words cannot provide all-encompassing explanations.

Despite imprecision and failure to be comprehensive, however, words are meaningful. They can partially describe reality. Words also move us to act, feel, think, and live in particular ways. We often need them to, as the Apostle Peter put it, “make a defense to anyone who demands from you an accounting for the hope that is in [us]” (1 Pet. 3:15). If we thought words useless, we would stop using them altogether. And yet we persist.[1]

Because I think theologies of love should offer clear definitions of love, I devote a whole chapter to defining love and explaining what I mean.

I define love as acting intentionally, in relational response to God and others, to promote overall well-being.

Later chapters in Pluriform Love explore the details and implications of my definition in light of key theologians, doctrines, and intuitions. I aim to put love first in my theology, because I think it’s first in scripture and should come first in everyday living.

- TJO

[1] For accessible accounts of the primacy of love, see Jim Burklo, Tenderly Calling (Haworth, N.J.: St. Johann, 2021); Jared Byas, Love Matters More (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2020); Jason Clark, Prone to Love (Shippensburg, Penn.: Destiny Image, 2014); Jonathan Foster, Reconstructionist (Glen Oak, Ca.: Quoir, 2021); Daniel K. Held, Love’s Resurrection (Springfield, Oh.: Higher Ground, 2013); Jacqui Lewis, Fierce Love (London: Harmony, 2021); Andrew Lightbown and Nick Fane, ReDiscovering Charity (Buckingham: UBP, 2009); Brian McLaren, A New Kind of Christianity (New York: HarperOne, 2010); Chuck Queen, A Faith Worth Living (Eugene, Or.: Wipf and Stock, 2011); Niq Ruud, Only Love (Glen Oak, Ca.: Quoir, 2021).


Sunday, September 12, 2021

Carl Glen Henshaw - Simple Acts of Kindness






Simple Acts of Kindness

by Carl Glen Henshaw

The worst college class I ever took was a literature class on short stories. One notable memory from that class was a story we read about a group of kids who conspire to destroy the house of an old man. They befriended the man so they could get into the house, and while there slowly cut through the beams holding the walls up. They did this for weeks and weeks; when they were done, they ran a cable around the house, got the man into the yard, and pulled it down with him watching.

The instructor asked us to write a piece on the story with the topic of “creative destruction”.

At the time, this struck me as deeply wrong, and I refused to write the report the way the instructor wanted and got marked down as a result, which is representative of my entire undergraduate experience. But I didn’t have the wisdom or skill to really say *why* it was wrong.

Now I do.

Shortly after 9/11, Stephen Jay Gould wrote a column about the day drawing on his background as a biologist who studied complex systems. Complex systems tend to be interconnected and somewhat fragile. In order for a complex system to function, nearly all of the parts have to do their jobs. If the system suffers a significant injury, all of its parts have to work in unison to knit it back together.

Society, Gould said, is a complex system, and had just suffered a significant injury. Offsetting this injury took the collective efforts of many. Gould wrote:

“Good and kind people outnumber all others by thousands to one. The tragedy of human history lies in the enormous potential for destruction in rare acts of evil, not in the high frequency of evil people. Complex systems can only be built step by step, whereas destruction requires but an instant. Thus, in what I like to call the Great Asymmetry, every spectacular incident of evil will be balanced by 10,000 acts of kindness, too often unnoted and invisible as the ''ordinary'' efforts of a vast majority. We have a duty, almost a holy responsibility, to record and honor the victorious weight of these innumerable little kindnesses, when an unprecedented act of evil so threatens to distort our perception of ordinary human behavior...

I will cite but one tiny story, among so many, to add to the count that will overwhelm the power of any terrorist's act. And by such tales, multiplied many millionfold, let those few depraved people finally understand why their vision of inspired fear cannot prevail over ordinary decency. As we left a local restaurant to make a delivery to ground zero late one evening, the cook gave us a shopping bag and said: ''Here's a dozen apple brown bettys, our best dessert, still warm. Please give them to the rescue workers.'' How lovely, I thought, but how meaningless, except as an act of solidarity, connecting the cook to the cleanup. Still, we promised that we would make the distribution, and we put the bag of 12 apple brown bettys atop several thousand face masks and shoe pads.

Twelve apple brown bettys into the breach. Twelve apple brown bettys for thousands of workers. And then I learned something important that I should never have forgotten -- and the joke turned on me. Those 12 apple brown bettys went like literal hot cakes. These trivial symbols in my initial judgment turned into little drops of gold within a rainstorm of similar offerings for the stomach and soul, from children's postcards to cheers by the roadside. We gave the last one to a firefighter, an older man in a young crowd, sitting alone in utter exhaustion as he inserted one of our shoe pads. And he said, with a twinkle and a smile restored to his face: ''Thank you. This is the most lovely thing I've seen in four days -- and still warm!''”
---

I also study complex systems. Unlike Gould, my systems aren’t natural; they’re engineered. But my experience mirrors Gould’s. Engineered systems are even more fragile than natural ones. Every piece has a part to play.

Gould’s point, and mine, is that we do not counteract immense acts of evil through immense acts of good. We counter them through hundreds, thousands, millions of small acts. Bringing someone grieving a hot dinner. Comforting a child. Helping someone change a flat. Planting a garden and giving away the produce.

Those of us who try to follow Jesus of Nazareth should understand this, although too often we act like we don’t. Goodness doesn’t lie in enormous sacrifices (although those do occur). It lies in the small things, in how you live your everyday life.

Because this is not rare, it is often thought of as banal. But it isn’t. Destruction, evil, no matter how grand the scale, no matter how carefully planned, is not creative. It cannot be. Destruction is the ground state of the universe. Entropy gets everything in the end. No matter how it is carried out, it is evil that is banal. All evil does is speed up what the universe will do sooner or later anyway.

It is quiet acts of goodness and kindness that are transgressive, revolutionary. It is loving your neighbor as yourself, it is visiting the sick, tending to the injured, being a peacemaker, showing your love of God through seeing His image in the countenance of the guy in front of you in the grocery store, or the immigrant the next street over, or the screaming toddler kicking your seat on the airplane.

We often mark 9/11 by tipping our caps to the first responders, to the kids who signed up at the Marine recruiting office and went off to fight terrorism overseas, to the passengers who fought back. And this isn’t wrong, but it’s far from complete. We must also remember every kind act, every apple brown betty baked and given away, every hug, every phone call checking in on loved ones — and every one of the million, billion, trillion caring acts since. Because it is those acts that build and rebuild society, that fight against the dying of the light. So when you think about how to best commemorate the day, consider:

The act most alien to evil is kindness.

- Carl Glen Henshaw


* * * * * * * *








* * * * * * * *


“In the Resurrection, the power of Love overcomes all evil."
Easter Letter of the Minister General, 2017


The Power of Love Overcomes All Evil


Posted at April 15, 2017 in
Featured, Letters, Letters & Homilies,
Minister General, News

“If, then, we have died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him. We know that Christ, raised from the dead, dies no more; death no longer has power over him” (Rom 6: 8-9)

My dear Brothers and friends,

Alleluia! In our Easter commemoration, we celebrate the events of the life, suffering, death, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Like the faithful women who stood by Jesus in death and who were the first witnesses to the resurrection, we too recognize in these paschal events the dawning of a new hope for the life of the world, a world torn apart by divisions and conflicts, a world God has chosen to love unconditionally (Jn 3:16). In the resurrection, the power of love overcomes all evil.

We stand as believers and followers of Jesus giving witness to an alternative vision of life, an alternative way of living in this world, guided by the Spirit of God. We recall that it is this same Spirit of God who is present at the moment of the creation of the world. This same Spirit is present in the events of the annunciation of the birth of the Messiah to Mary, the Mother of Jesus. It is the Spirit who accompanies Jesus throughout his life on earth, inspiring his preaching and teaching, his simple acts of kindness and love. It is the Spirit who accompanies Jesus along the road to Golgotha, witnessing Jesus’ suffering and humiliating death on the cross. It is the Spirit of God who remains with Jesus through death and burial, demonstrating unwavering love for the only beloved Son who gives his live in love in order that the world might be reconciled to itself and to God. And it is the Spirit who raises the Son to life anew (Rom 8:11).

This Holy Spirit who was present in every moment in the life of Jesus, from life to death and to new life, is also present in our world today. The resurrection is the definitive sign of God’s fidelity to the Son, to each of us, and to all of creation. We have need of this message today more than ever: God loves us, is walking with us, healing our wounds, calling us to live reconciled lives with all people, called to be messengers of love, mercy, and peace.

The Spirit of God who raised Jesus from the dead continues to carry on the work of the Father and the Son, reminding us that divisions, violence, hatred, destruction, and death do not have the final word; they are not the victors. In the resurrection of Jesus, we receive the final confirmation that love and only love is the final victor, and the ultimate vocation to which we are called. I witnessed this in the lives of our brothers and sisters living in Damascus, Aleppo, and Latakia in Syria these past days. In the midst of death and destruction on a cataclysmic scale, the Christians of Syria who have lost loved ones, homes, and livelihood refuse to submit to the temptation of abandoning God, their faith, and their commitment to pursue a path towards reconciliation and reconstruction. They stand with Mary Magdalene before the empty tomb; they search for meaning in the total absence of all that might seem rational and human; they run to the community of faith where they share stories of discouragement and despair, hope and love, and where in the Eucharist they discover, as did the disciples of Emmaus, the presence of the risen Lord Jesus who never abandons them, never abandons those who have been called into relationship with Him.

My dear brothers and friends, let us take to heart the words from the Sequence, Victim paschali laudes:

“Christians, to the Pascal Victim offer sacrifice and praise. The sheep are ransomed by the Lamb and Christ the undefiled, hath sinners to his Father reconciled. Death with life contended: combat strangely ended! Life’s own Champion, slain, yet lives to reign. Tell us Mary: say what thou didst see upon the way. The tomb the Living did enclose; I saw Christ’s glory as he rose! The angels there attesting; shroud with grave-clothes resting. Christ, my hope, has risen: he goes before you in Galilee. That Christ is truly risen from the dead we know. Victorious king, thy mercy show! Amen! Alleluia!”

He is truly risen! His love and mercy are victorious!

A blessed and joy-filled Easter to all!

Fraternally,

Bro. Michael A. Perry, OFM
Minister General and Servant

Rome, 15 April 2017
Vigil of Easter