In The Age of Trumpism Should We Retire the “Bebbington Quadrilateral?”

Should We Retire the

“Bebbington Quadrilateral?”

https://thewayofimprovement.com/2018/01/04/should-we-retire-the-bebbington-quadrilateral/

by JohnFea

January 4, 2018

Timothy Gloege, author of Guaranteed Pure: The Moody Bible Institute, Business, and the Making of Modern Evangelicalism, thinks that we should.

Historian David Bebbington has suggested that evangelicals believe in conversion (being born-again), biblicism (the need to base one’s faith fundamentally on the Bible), the theological priority of the cross (Jesus died for sinners), and activism (the need to share one’s faith with others).

Gloege writes:

"When proposed thirty years ago, Bebbington’s definition was a valuable steppingstone. It pushed historians to ask new questions and research new groups. But the findings of that research also revealed the definition’s flaws. Its characteristics simply do not translate into identifiable patterns of belief and practice. (If they did, why isn’t evangelical Wheaton College’s statement of faith exactly four points?) It’s not a definition, but a prospectus for a theological agenda."

Consider the definition at work. To be evangelical, we are told, is to believe in “conversion.” But is conversion a uniquely evangelical idea? It’s not even uniquely Christian; Muslims convert too. Rather, they are appealing to a particular experience of conversion. And how is an evangelical conversion measured? That’s the rub. It’s been the cause of evangelical consternation for two centuries.

click to link

But conversion’s unmeasurable quality is what makes it useful for insiders. It allows them to state (or strongly infer) that only unconverted, ‘nominal,’ evangelicals supported Trump. Apparently, a vote for Trump is evidence enough? Meanwhile, evangelical Trump voters declare that by withholding support, never-Trump evangelicals have demonstrated their faithlessness. Liberal evangelicals also have a calculus of conversion that excludes their conservative rivals. “Conversion” acts as a theological weapon that muddies the definitional waters; it’s not an analytical category.

“Biblicism” functions similarly. Imagine a political scientist defining Republicans as “those who take the Constitution seriously.” Who would accept this transparently partisan statement? And yet many people today accept that evangelicals are “biblical,” while everyone else…isn’t? This is how former megachurch pastor Rob Bell and popular author Rachel Held Evans ceased to be evangelical: not because they quit the Bible, but because they came up with “wrong,” (thus “unbiblical”) answers about hell and being gay. “Biblicism” is evangelical gerrymandering.

Like using water to define Kool-Aid, Bebbington’s definition confuses common, ill-defined, features of Protestantism or Western Christianity for evangelical particularities. Evangelicals love it because they can do theology—make theological claims—under the guise of analysis.

Gloege adds:

"A definition should connect to a movement’s most salient features (what sets it apart), and help us understand how they developed. Does “the theological priority of the cross” capture something uniquely evangelical? (It doesn’t.) Does it explain why white evangelicals tend to harbor a deep suspicion of the federal government and embrace free-market capitalism? Why policing sex and sexuality is such a priority (except when it isn’t)? Does it connect the dots?"

https://scriptureandmission.com/2013/09/15/are-churches-of-christ-evangelical-a-semantic-question-part-5/

The Bebbington Quadrilateral does none of these things; rather it offers theological slogans that make respectable evangelicals feel better about themselves. Rather than spur self-reflection, it lets evangelicals ignore hard questions, while the movement they helped conjure burns down the country.

I am probably one of those “respectable evangelicals” who want to “feel better about themselves,” so I guess I should keep thinking about this some more. Whatever the case, I appreciate Gloege’s attempts to historicize the term.

In my forthcoming book Believe Me: The Evangelical Road to Donald Trump, I assume the Bebbington Quadrilateral is the best way of defining evangelicals. On one level, Gloege is right. Conversionism, biblicism, crucicentrism, and activism, when considered alone, are features that one can find in many religions and Christian traditions. But when you bring them all together it still seems like you do have something that is unique.

Moreover, people who believe in conversionism, biblicism, crucicentrism, and activism have taken all kinds of positions on social issues. Gloege knows this. They have been abolitionists and slaveholders, socialists and capitalists, supporters of strong government and defenders of states rights, defenders and opponents of gay rights, revolutionaries and reactionaries. Is there room in American evangelicalism for Roy Moore and Jim Wallis (21st century politics)? William Wilberforce and Robert Dabney (slavery)? John Wesley and John Witherspoon (American Revolution)?

In the evangelical church I attended thirty years ago there was much diversity on social issues. The same thing is true about the evangelical church I attend today. But in both churches our differences were (are) aired under the umbrella of a shared understanding of a faith defined by something very close to Bebbington’s Quadrilateral. I know there are people in my evangelical church today who supported Donald Trump from the moment he came down the escalator in Trump Tower and announced his candidacy. I also know that there are people in my church who would have voted for Roy Moore if they lived in Alabama. All of these people believe in the tenets of the Quadrilateral and some of them lead lives of devotion to God that put me to shame. Some of my readers might wonder how this is possible. I do as well. But I have hope that because my fellow evangelicals believe in an inspired Bible, or a conversion (“born-again”) experience that results in holy living, or the command to share their faith with others, they can be persuaded that racism or nativism or Trumpism may NOT be the best way to be “evangelical” in this world. Perhaps they can be convinced, with the Holy Spirit’s help, that they have ignored large chunks of the Bible that don’t conform to their political views. Perhaps they can be convinced that personal holiness is something more than just casting the right vote. Perhaps they can be convinced that rabid support for Roy Moore or Donald Trump hurts their Christian witness.

This Sunday I begin a course at my church titled “Christian Politics?” It could get ugly. But I chose to teach the course, and I am hopeful it will be civil and productive, because most of us in the classroom will share a common approach to faith. Many of those who attend the class will trust me to lead them in a discussion of such a sensitive topic because, like them, I believe in the tenets of the Bebbington Quadrilateral. We will differ on a LOT of things, but most of us will have a common commitment to faith and practice because we can point to a conversion or born-again experience, we believe Jesus died on the cross for our sins, we affirm the Bible as the word of God, and we think it is important to live our faith in an active way in the world that includes not just social action but evangelism as well. This shared faith will provide a kind of subtext for my class. I call this subtext evangelical Christianity. It is not a subtext I can expect when I teach in mainline Protestant churches or Catholic churches or in secular arenas. It is not even a subtext that I can expect any more at the Christian College where I teach history. In those places, I need to understand my audience in a different way and argue in a fashion that makes appeals to universal ideas or a broader understanding of Christianity.

OK, I am rambling now. I may return to this later.

- JohnFea

Related Articles

Link to - The Future of Evangelicalism, Part 1

Link to - The Future of Evangelicalism, Part 2

Click for PowerPoint discussion

John Cobb - Whitehead's Process & Reality, Part I

As we begin the study of Alfred North Whitehead I should mention several introductory posts I had developed previous to this study. I would consider them helpful and would encourage further reading in them as we proceed here in John Cobb's thoughts and observations. They are as follows:

Saturday, August 12, 2017

Process Studies - Introduction To Process Philosophy

Friday, September 1, 2017

Alfred North Whitehead - Process and Reality: An Introduction

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Course Outline: Whitehead's Process and Reality, by Jay McDaniel


Friday, February 21, 2020
Celebrating the Life & Legacy of Process Theologian John B. Cobb, Jr.


Tuesday, March 10, 2020
Alfred North Whitehead's "Process & Reality" - Content Chapters


Thursday, March 19, 2020
John B. Cobb - Understanding Whitehead


Thursday, March 19, 2020

John Cobb - Introduction to Whitehead's Process & Reality

    

Schedule of weekly readings from Process & Reality

• Session 1 - pp xi-xv and pp 3-17

• Session 2 - pp 18 - 36

• Session 3 - pp 39 - 60

• Session 4 - pp 61-82

• Session 5 - pp 83 - 109

• Session 6 - Conclusion

For those of you who do not own Whitehead's tome here is a link to the table of contents for the content being covered; below I've listed the front page of the copy edition we are using and at the link seven photos of the table of contents which may be printed out as you read along.

Alrred North Whitehead's "Process & Reality" - Content Chapters

STUDIES WITH JOHN B. COBB

Alfred North Whitehead, Process & Reality

Notes from Session 1


*Disclaimer. These are my notes from reading and listening to
John Cobb which may not truly reflect his learned positions or sentiments
built over a lifetime of study and interaction with historic material.

PART I - THE SPECULATIVE SCHEME

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Editors' Preface v

Preface xi

Chapter I. Speculative Philosophy

• I. Speculative Philosophy; Coherent, Logical, Necessary System of Ideas; Interpretation of Experience.

• II. Defects of Insight and of Language; Conditions for Observation; Rigid Empiricism, Imagination, Generalization; Coherence and Incoherence; Creativity, the Ultimate. 

• III. Rationalism and Dogmatism; Scheme as a Matrix, False and True Propositions, Use of the Matrix; Experimental Adventure. 

• IV. Philosophy and Science, Grades of Generality; Dogmatic Influence of Mathematics; Progress of Philosophy.

• V. Defects of Language; Propositions and Their Background; Metaphysical Presupposition; xxcessive Trust in Language; Metaphysics and Practice; Metaphysics and Linguistic Expression.

• VI. Speculative Philosophy and Overambition; Overambition, Dogmatism and Progress; Interpretation and Metaphysics; The Higher Elements of Experience, Subjectivity and the Metaphysical Correction; Morality, Religion, Science, Connected by Philosophy; Contrast between + Religion and Science; Conclusion.

pg xi

A philosophy of organism is essential to Whitehead's view of process philosophy. By "organism" he refers to the idea of connecting everything with everything. There can be no reality without relationships. As such, all events are formed by relationships and can only be defined through relationships with other things. This is substantively different from previous centuries of philosophical thought thinking in terms of materialism, mechanism, and reductionism, which isolate things from things, events from events. In these philosophical formations the idea was to define a system by its most elemental parts much like the idea of a philosophical monad. To Whitehead, this was the absolute opposite to how reality should be describe. That a philosophy of organism must always connect to its environment, its past, its future, and to all possible things within and without this environment. That it's metaphysic is inextricably a metaphysic of relationship. It is the key essential to process philosophy.

By this sublime surmise of organic relationship it changes everything regarded as absolute and eternal devolving from the Platonic world of the transcendent other. Further, the elements of organism have always been part of previous philosophical systems because of its comprehensiveness. Yet because of its very expansiveness it lay profoundly unseen, hidden, disconnected, from previous philosophical thought much like the illustration of describing an elephant by its parts without seeing its whole. The relatedness then of our deep organic experience lies so vast above, around, and in us, that even if another subject, such as mechanism, is brought in, the philosopher will yet inadvertently discuss some part of organism as reflective to the system he is developing. It can therefore be said that the history of Western philosophy from Descartes to Hume have not connected organic relationships to the observed objects.

pg xii - xiii

Part 1 - Introduces Cosmology

Part 2 - Relates all academic pursuits into Cosmology

Part 3 - Categorical groupings within Cosmology

Part 4 - Continues Part 3 using pure and abstract thought (most may skip this section)

Part 5 - Summation of Cosmology as Organism

Being familiar with Kant and his successors Whitehead determined at the outset to build on pre-Kantian thought. Why? Because, in Kant's words, "The human mind structures the world." To Whitehead's thinking this was not correct. The pre-Kantian position stated, "The world (of reality or organism) structures the human mind" and not the other way around. By this Whitehead can be described as an unqualified realist, meaning, "the world is" whether we know it or not. It had existed eons before humanity's arrival to comprehend and systematize it, and will go on existing when we have left this Earth. That humanity is but a very recent anamoly within its hoary history.

As such, its history of organic relationships is profound, disturbingly so, as we venture within our meager moments of existence to comprehend and systematize its eternal unfolding or "becoming" from moment to moment. This last is the very reason why we can never state absolutely with certainty whether reality is this-way-or-that as reality-in-itself is a living organic actuality perfusing infinite relationships between things from one moment to the next. It's reality is never static but a living dynamic bound in relationship with the entirety of its living corpus dynamically expounding its "being with events" leading towards newer "becomings." The best we can do is to approximate its organic metaphysic by stating such an organism may be this-way-or-that but not always, nor forever.

Adverse Influences on Philosophy

1 - Distrust of speculative philosophy

2 - The inadequacy of language

3 - The inability to state comprehensively a philosophical system

4 - Expression always steers us to the subject-predicate form of understanding

5 - The experience of reality is informed by our past and present

6 - Actuality is never fully defined

7 - Misleading idealisms separate us from actualities

8 - Ex absurdo arguments are misleading

9 - Neither rationalism nor mysticism are sound philosophical foundations

      on which to speculate, imagine, or create a testable system.

Beginning with item 1. Imagining is necessary for science, philosophy, and theology. Whitehead called imagining "speculation" in his day. What he wished to point out was the need to rethink systems profoundly. Conversely, empirical / rational philosophy differs from speculative philosophy in those disciplines quest for certainty. But the quest for certainty can never be arrived at in a process world of becoming by its very nature of "process becoming".

Item 2. Propositions are always ambiguous because of the nature of language itself with its imperfect means of communicating strictly, exactly, systematically. Language is always in the process of becoming coherent. It is never fully adequate in a world of process-based becoming. It's aftermath of meaning can vary widely between those reading or thinking through a communique's or system's iterations.

Item 3. Simply, "What is heard may not be what was intended." Dialogue allows for creating a closer understanding with one another but can never reach a point of completeness as events of becoming change its intentions, observations, inferences, and deductions over time and space.

Item 4. Seeing and experiencing is always fuller than reflective language in hindsight of the event. As we analyzed observation empiricism influences the senses; causes demand the conscious or nonsensuous; relationship to the event influences succession of the event and its processes; and, among other things, idealism or the need to find coherence, and thus to systematize, can cloud experience. Going back to item 3, language is powerfully shaped by our senses and consciousness; at times we allow one sense to overtake the others. Being a predominantly visual species we may miss the auditory sense of hearing, olfactory sense of smell and odor, the sensual of touch and feeling, and so on. Like language, even our physical being influences interpretation and comprehension.

Item 5. Perception of past and present event informs our world and beliefs. Though senses our important they may grossly affect or exaggerate reality's perception.

Item 6. Referring to vacuous actuality - seeing or thinking an actuality is fully defined when by definition of a processed based world it cannot be as reality shape-shifts through interminable relationships moment by moment.

Item 7. Kantian idealism separated from experience leads to (negative) adverse speculation or erroneous imagination. In essence, idealism cannot inform reality but reality informs idealism to allow for fully speculation, or imagining, of a subject.

Item 8. Ex absurdo arguments persist in false tautologies, deductions, or inferencing. By such logics we can state anything absolutely whether it be correct or not. As such, they become traps of falsely arranged (constructed) rationalisms.

Item 9. Refers to logical inconsistencies. Rationalistic propositions made by "popular philosophies and theologies" can be misleading. They are not a good vehicle from which to proceed. Neither can reliance on "mystery" form any adequacy of explanation as it can not be tested, observed or argued in its ethereal space of proposition. As such, a good philosopher or theologian rejects both rationalism and mysticism as proper foundations for philosophy and theology.

pg xiv

Whitehead believes we don't know anything certainly or dogmatically. That these sentiments run counter to a process world of becoming. We may explore, test, attempt to comprehend, and find coherence in a supposition as we search of clarity, knowledge or re-imagine what we are trying to discover. But in the end, the best we can do is to approximate reality without fully explaining its "being" of event driven relationships.

Whitehead sums up his preface as follows

1 - If one deconstructs then one must also reconstruct. The world of the organism demands this.

2 - The philosopher is to frame and explore what was reconstructed from what was deconstructed
giving the whys, wherefores, and hows of his suppositions.

3 - In exploring, on one is attempting to discover the hidden or unspoken scheme lying whatever portion of reality being research in extrapolating from this exploration a philosophical truth which may, or may not, be coherent to that discipline of science, philosophy or theology.

4 - There can never exist any dogmatic certainty, ever. Nothing is ever certain. All discoveries, assumptions, theories, or axioms, must be held loosely when forming coherency to a matter.

pp 3 - 5

Alfred North Whitehead's experience at the University of Chicago, which at one time had held a process philosophy department, noted two forms of process, neither of which he agreed with. Form 1 was led by the process philosopher Charles Hartshorne who preferred the rational approach. Form 2 was led out by the university's Divinity School arguing for the empiricist position. For Whitehead, neither form was sufficient as each neither completely informed experience or understanding of process philosophy as a cosmology.

Conceive ----> Test -----> Reimagine

Whitehead thus observes that speculative science and philosophy proceed mostly along the lines of either rationalism or empiricism. One holds to coherency and logic, the other to application and adequacy. Bound together they attempt to remove ambiguity but are not fully accounting for the nature of process reality's continually changing relationships between events and things moment by moment. Imagination then must have its affects over the approaches of coherence and logic. That is, between the interplay of induction, observation, and deduction, imagination (or speculation) must be at the core of this triangulation of scheme.

Induction

 -                    -

 -      Imagine     -

 -                             -

               Deduction ------------ Observation           

pg 7

Whitehead observes that the progress of though uses past discoveries to move forward. From Plato onwards the disciplines of philosophy, science or theology review their progenitors, then either keep  their thoughts, reform their thoughts, syncretize it, or throw it out to begin a forward discussion of new iterations, ideas, and discoveries. For Whitehead, the one constancy of error throughout all of this process he calls "the fallacy of misplaced concreteness" meaning, making certain (or rigid) ideas of fact without questioning, doubting, or testing them thereafter. In this sense, Whitehead wishes to hold a "fact" loosely so as not to allow it to overlook at future approach or observation later. A thing should never be looked at as fully understood. Nor should its fact filled existence prevent future exploration beyond its sense of concreteness.

pg 8 - 17

Logic may only achieve certainty within the construct of perfect communication. Yet language can never achieve this but only approximate perfect communication through dialogue. Accepting or assuming a certainty may have been helpful at one time but can it remain helpful now when set within a different framework of perception? As example, the difference between enlightenment's classic world of physics and modernity's posture of the quantum world presently.

Skipping over the last several pages John Cobb moves to Whitehead's Philosophical Matrix.

1 - We may agree to a conclusion

2 - We may disagree to the details of the conclusion

3 - Yet a conclusion may be incomplete and in disagreement with "the facts"

4 - Therefore, always remain open to ideation, conjecture, speculative imagining

By this is meant that theories may approximate an observed reality but the nature of a process-based evolutionary creation of cosmogeny, nature, and civilization must always move forward unfixed.

Speculative theories can never be concretely finalized. This would go

against the idea of "eventful becoming" of "being and relationship". - res

Theologic Observations

Christianity has failed to answer the questions of loss and pain. A comprehensive process theology would sufficiently reconcile theodicy with being and event. - res

"God" as an explanation for everything is not a sufficient explanation of reality. We must think about God  through coherent approaches to life's many faculties. God = Truth. Fine. Yes. But "God" as an explanation for life's many questions is not sufficient enough to comprehend  creation's infinitude of mechanisms. What we "see or observe" may be God's consequential nature through creation but in the observation we must avoid the static metaphysics of a non-process based theology resting on Platonic platitudes of the "eternal object" as versus the scientific discovery of creational dynamisms unfolding between being and event. - res

As philosophy modifies religion so too religion modifies philosophy. - John Cobb

The useful function of philosophy is to promote the most general systematization of civilized thought. There is a constant reaction between specialism and common sense. It is the part of the special sciences to modify common sense. Philosophy is the welding of imagination and common sense into a restraint upon specialists, and also into an enlargement of their imaginations. By providing the generic notions, philosophy should make it easier to conceive the infinite variety of specific instances which rest unrealized in the womb of nature. - ANW, last paragraph, pg 17

John Cobb - Introduction to Whitehead's Process & Reality

As an introduction to a six week study (March - April 2020) presented by John Cobb on Alfred North Whitehead's magnum opus, Process and Reality, I have listed here a video by our teacher and a general listing of videos and discussions on the subject of process philosophy and theology. Enjoy.

R.E. Slater

March 19, 2020

Saturday, August 12, 2017

Process Studies - Introduction To Process Philosophy

Friday, September 1, 2017

Alfred North Whitehead - Process and Reality: An Introduction

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Course Outline: Whitehead's Process and Reality, by Jay McDaniel


Friday, February 21, 2020
Celebrating the Life & Legacy of Process Theologian John B. Cobb, Jr.


Tuesday, March 10, 2020
Alfred North Whitehead's "Process & Reality" - Content Chapters


Thursday, March 19, 2020
John B. Cobb - Understanding Whitehead


Thursday, March 19, 2020

John Cobb - Introduction to Whitehead's Process & Reality

A Six Session Course Introducing Alfred North Whitehead’s PROCESS AND REALITY
Link - https://homebrewedchristianity.lpages.co/processandreality/

In these lectures John Cobb will provide an introduction to one of the most compelling and challenging philosophical texts of the Twentieth Century. Process and Reality is a notoriously difficult text, but the goal of this course is to enable students to not only skim the surface but probe its deeper dimensions. With his decades of experience as a scholar and teacher of Whitehead, Cobb will elucidate the major themes and illuminate the major concepts in a way that is accessible to anyone.

Why Whitehead?

by John Cobb

Introduction to Whitehead's

Process & Reality

John Cobb taught theology at the Claremont School of Theology from 1958 to 1990. In 2014 he became the first theologian elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences for his interdisciplinary work in ecology, economics, and biology. He has published over 30 books including the first full length text in eco-philosophy.

In 1973, with David Griffin, he established the Center for Process Studies. In retirement he lives at Pilgrim Place in Claremont, California. Throughout his career he has contributed to Whitehead scholarship and promoted process-relational programs and organizations. Most recently, he helped found the Claremont Institute for Process Studies, and has been heavily involved in supporting work toward the goal of China becoming an ecological civilization.

The Process Metaphysics of Alfred North Whitehead

(*1861, †1947)

A short introduction to the process philosophy & process theology of Alfred North Whitehead (*1861, †1947), containing several photos and 4 speakers, describing some core hypotheses of Whitehead's metaphysics. The speakers are: John B. Cobb, David Ray Griffin, Charles Hartshorne and Rupert Sheldrake.

Process Philosophy Explained

What in the World Is Process Theology?

Joseph A. Bracken

How Would You Explain Process Philosophy?

Alfred North Whiteheads Process Metaphysics

* * * * * * * * * * * *

John B. Cobb, Jr.

Today on Carry the Fire Podcast we are joined by the esteemed professor John Cobb Jr. Dr. Cobb is an American theologian, philosopher, and environmentalist. Dr. Cobb is often regarded as the preeminent scholar in the field of process philosophy and process theology. He is also the author of over 30 books and he just celebrated his 95th birthday. He was the first theologian elected to the prestigious American Academy of Arts and Sciences for his interdisciplinary work in ecology, economics, and biology.

While Dr. Cobb is well versed in process philosophy much of his work has been as a process theologian. Process philosophy and theology provide us a means for retaining values such as the good, the true, and the beautiful as well as explaining God’s agency in the world all without denying what we learn through science. And, often aligning more with what we learn through science vs what we learn through strict materialism. This is a bit of a heady conversation but, John is wise and a delightful human. I believe you will all enjoy this.

Monica A. Colemann & Tripp Fuller

Why Go Process?

Carry The Fire with John Cobb Jr.

What is Whitehead's Most Important Contribution to Philosophical Theology?

A History of Process Philosophy

John Cobb_An Introductory Introduction_01

John Cobb_An Introductory Introduction_02

Audio Streams

Stream 1 - JC on JC: a conversation with John Cobb and Tom Oord

https://trippfuller.com/2020/02/22/jc-on-jc-a-conversation-with-john-cobb-and-tom-oord-on-jesus-barrelaged/

This is a super special conversation between two preeminent scholars and dear friends. Two friends of the podcast gathered in Claremont a few years back as part of the Emergent Village Theological Conversation on Process Theology and this gem of a conversation happened! John Cobb and Tom Oord discuss Jesus and a number of other goodies.

Stream 2 - John Cobb: Process & Christology

I am beyond excited about the upcoming class with our guest in this episode – John Cobb.

This is the very first interview I ever recorded with Cobb and in it we discuss a proces

account of the incarnation, Kin-dom of God, and other Christological goodies. You will

likely notice how my accent has changed in the last 12 years of podcasting and moves

from North Carolina to Los Angeles and then to Edinburgh.

 https://trippfuller.com/2020/02/03/john-cobb-christology-and-process-theology/?fbclid=IwAR0uT8EYI-oVTAUaNh4KcWRX6MPF8Az14CCVYvJmzbDDBIrw2crsuPEX_ag

Stream 3 - Secularizing Christianity by John Cobb

John Cobb give a theo-philosophical sermon on the materializing trajectory of Christianity.

Then liberal Reformed Theologian, Paul Capetz, joins me for the conversation in which

we discuss the trinity, Religious Pluralism, The importance of the Incarnation, Discuss

fall of the Mainline Churches, Liberalism? Progressive?, and the Mission of the Church.

https://trippfuller.com/2020/03/15/john-cobb-secularizing-christianity/

Alfred North Whitehead's "Process & Reality" - Content Chapters

For John Cobb's Process Class

Additional correspondent links here

 

Saturday, August 12, 2017

Process Studies - Introduction To Process Philosophy

Friday, September 1, 2017

Alfred North Whitehead - Process and Reality: An Introduction

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Course Outline: Whitehead's Process and Reality, by Jay McDaniel


Friday, February 21, 2020
Celebrating the Life & Legacy of Process Theologian John B. Cobb, Jr.


Tuesday, March 10, 2020
Alfred North Whitehead's "Process & Reality" - Content Chapters


Thursday, March 19, 2020
John B. Cobb - Understanding Whitehead


Thursday, March 19, 2020

John Cobb - Introduction to Whitehead's Process & Reality

12 Environmentalists You Should Know

A Personal Introduction

As of today there is one week left from completing four quarter-term college classes before starting the next term of classes. For those in my area who were interested I had encouraged them to join me in reading the poetry of Wendell Berry, an environmentalist, anti-industrialist, activist, and author. I had read his biography of short stories last fall in his book, "That Distant Land," and I suspect he will be as profound this time around in his poetry as he was in his prose last year.

Today, as I attended an Aldo Leopold seminar we ended class with a short walk around an adjoining preserve enjoying the warm spring weather while embracing the many new growing things beginning to emerge. Our host was an ecological biologist who invited the preserve's land manager last week, and resource educationalist today, to co-host with him of Leopold's life ethic as he developed from an industrial mindset of usury and utilitarianism to perceiving the then unseen flora and fauna biotic web of interconnected life in all its complexities. In simpler terms we know this as "the circle of life" aka the Disney film, "Lion King."

Of course, had he known of the early 20th century philosopher Alfred North Whitehead and his work on process philosophy in the early 1900s this would have helped him immensely. However, let us not fault Aldo as the entire corpus of cosmology had by then been disregarded and forgotten nearly two hundred years ago after Immanuel Kant (c1724-1804) and Soren Kirkegaard's (c.1813-1855) summary cosmological work engaging what the ancients knew to how it was understood in their late enlightenment centuries. From their observations philosophy took several directions across the European and Western continents.

Be that as it may, process philosophy has evolved to include many new forms of cosmology including process ecology. Yet this tool Aldo did not have when studying forestry at Yale University under America's first forester and conservationist, Gifford Pinchot. This he would have to learn on his own as he moved from post to post examining and re-examining what he had been taught from differing eyes and viewpoints. Actually, had we as a nation listened to the native Americans whom we disregarded as ignorant savages we would have learned about nature's centrality much more quickly, and I believe, with a much more thorough appreciation, empathy and love for the land we have not loved, destroyed and plowed under as a simple thing unworthy of care and appreciation

Alas, our history abounds with societal / cultural shortsightedness even as our recent years of abusive politics and Christian form of religion has displayed contempt for non-majorities and non-nationals we use and throw away. Human history has not been so very kind to those different from us in color, complexion, thought or speech. Nor have our passionate presumptions been true guides for conduct and civilization which usually have proven wrong, misguided, and ultimately harmful.

Be that as it may, as we grow older, those of us who are willing to unlearn what we think we know to relearn what may become a fuller comprehension of life are the better for it. Aldo Leopold was one of those late disciples even as I suspect John Muir, Henry David Theoreau, and a host of other early ecologists who similarly learned to unlearn perceptions and relearn wisdom. As we know, this happens more commonly than we care to admit with people from all walks and experiences of life. To some, this whole being and life process becomes more profound than for others. It is more complete, more expressive, even more expansive. It can upset an entire life when relizing the errors one is making in judgment, contact, or perception. As a simple example, I would point to the many testimonies from young to old who come to Jesus when finally perceiving what his atoning death and resurrection really means to this life we live. Like the renewing rains of winter's end spring comes to a life in need of growing, birthing, blooming, and regenerating future lives ahead of itself.

Lastly, I have put together a very, very brief introduction from another contributing source portraying the lives and passions of those early conservationists of the past mid-American century. I think of them as America's first generation of environmental apostles speaking the gospel of nature to a modern society which had lost its hearing and its ears to the songbird on the wing, the whisper of the pine in the winds, and how one thing affects another thing so delicately as to affect all things. Follow the link below to discover what these men and women had to unlearn to be able to see aright again.

R.E. Slater

March 10, 2010

Marco Bottigelli / Getty Images

12 Environmentalists You Should Know

https://www.thoughtco.com/environmentalists-you-should-know-1709040

by Marc Lallanilla

Updated November 15, 2019

Environmentalists have had a big impact on our lives, but most people can't name one famous environmentalist. Here's a list of 12 influential scientists, conservationists, ecologists, and other rabble-rousing leaders who have been central founders and builders of the green movement.

John Muir, Naturalist and Writer

Conservationist John Muir

John Muir (1838–1914) was born in Scotland and emigrated to Wisconsin as a young boy. His lifelong passion for hiking began as a young man when he hiked to the Gulf of Mexico. Muir spent much of his adult life wandering in—and fighting to preserve—the wilderness of the western United States, especially California. His tireless efforts led to the creation of Yosemite National Park, Sequoia National Park, and millions of other conservation areas. Muir was a strong influence on many leaders of his day, including Theodore Roosevelt. In 1892, Muir and others founded the ​​Sierra Club "to make the mountains glad."

Rachel Carson, Scientist and Author

Ecologist Rachel Carson | Photo: JHU Sheridan Libraries/Gado/ Getty Images

Rachel Carson (1907–1964) is regarded by many as the founder of the modern environmental movement. Born in rural Pennsylvania, she went on to study biology at Johns Hopkins University and Woods Hole Marine Biological Laboratory. After working for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carson published "The Sea Around Us" and other books. Her most famous work, however, was 1962's controversial "Silent Spring," in which she described the devastating effect that pesticides were having on the environment. Though pilloried by chemical companies and others, Carson's observations were proven correct, and pesticides like DDT were eventually banned.

Edward Abbey, Author and Monkey-Wrencher

https://www.theinertia.com/environment/edward-abbey-desert-solitaire-environment-relevant-50-years-old/

Conservationist Edward Abbey

Edward Abbey (1927–1989) was one of America's most dedicated—and most outrageous—environmentalists. Born in Pennsylvania, he is best known for his passionate defense of the deserts of America's Southwest. After working for the National Park Service in what is now Arches National Park in Utah, Abbey wrote "Desert Solitaire," one of the seminal works of the environmental movement. His later book, "The Monkey Wrench Gang," gained notoriety as an inspiration for the radical environmental group Earth First!—a group that has been accused of eco-sabotage by some, including many mainstream environmentalists.

Aldo Leopold, Ecologist and Author

Conservationist Aldo Leopold of The Land Ethic

Aldo Leopold (1887–1948) is considered by some to be the godfather of wilderness conservation and of modern ecologists. After studying forestry at Yale University, he worked for the U.S. Forest Service. Though he was originally asked to kill bears, cougars, and other predators on federal land because of demands of protesting local ranchers, he later adopted a more holistic approach to wilderness management. His best-known book, "A Sand County Almanac," remains one of the most eloquent pleas for the preservation of wilderness ever composed.

Julia Hill, Environmental Activist

Conservationist Julia Hill | Photo: Andrew Lichtenstein/Getty Images

Julia "Butterfly" Hill (born 1974) is one of the most committed environmentalists alive today. After nearly dying in an auto accident in 1996, she dedicated her life to environmental causes. For almost two years, Hill lived in the branches of an ancient redwood tree (which she named Luna) in northern California to save it from being cut down. Her tree-sit became an international cause célèbre, and Hill remains involved in environmental and social causes.

Henry David Thoreau, Author and Activist

Henry David Thoreau | Photo: FPG/Getty Images

Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862) was one of America's first philosopher-writer-activists, and he is still one of the most influential. In 1845, Thoreau—disillusioned with much of contemporary life—set out to live alone in a small house he built near the shore of Walden Pond in Massachusetts. The two years he spent living a life of utter simplicity was the inspiration for "Walden, or A Life in the Woods," a meditation on life and nature that is considered a must-read for all environmentalists. Thoreau also wrote an influential political piece called "Resistance to Civil Government (Civil Disobedience)" that outlined the moral bankruptcy of overbearing governments.

Theodore Roosevelt, Politician and Conservationist

President Theodore Roosevelt with Conservationist John Muir

It might surprise some that a famed big-game hunter would make it onto a list of environmentalists, but Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919) was one of the most active champions of wilderness preservation in history. As governor of New York, he outlawed the use of feathers as clothing adornment in order to prevent the slaughter of some birds. While president of the United States (1901–1909), Roosevelt set aside hundreds of millions of wilderness acres, actively pursued soil and water conservation, and created over 200 national forests, national monuments, national parks, and wildlife refuges.

Gifford Pinchot, Forester and Conservationist

Gifford Pinchot, Forester and Conservationist

Gifford Pinchot (1865–1946) was the son of a timber baron who later regretted the damage he had done to America's forests. At his insistence, Pinchot studied forestry for many years and was appointed by President Grover Cleveland to develop a plan for managing America's western forests. That career continued when Theodore Roosevelt asked him to lead the U.S. Forest Service. His time in office was not without opposition, however. He publicly battled ​​John Muir over the destruction of wilderness tracts like Hetch Hetchy in California, while also being condemned by timber companies for closing off land to their exploitation.

Chico Mendes, Conservationist and Activist

Conservationist Chico Mendes | Photo: Alex Robinson/Getty Images

Chico Mendes (1944–1988) is best known for his efforts at saving the rainforests of Brazil from logging and ranching activities. Mendes came from a family of rubber harvesters who supplemented their income by sustainably gathering nuts and other rainforest products. Alarmed at the devastation of the Amazon rainforest, he helped to ignite international support for its preservation. His activities, however, drew the ire of powerful ranching and timber interests —Mendes was murdered by cattle ranchers at age 44.

Wangari Maathai, Political Activist and Environmentalist

Conservationist Wangari Maathai | Photo: Wendy Stone / Getty Images

Wangari Maathai (1940–2011) was an environmental and political activist in Kenya. After studying biology in the United States, she returned to Kenya to begin a career that combined environmental and social concerns. Maathai founded the Green Belt Movement in Africa and helped to plant over 30 million trees, providing jobs to the unemployed while also preventing soil erosion and securing firewood. She was appointed Assistant Minister in the Ministry for Environment and Natural Resources, and in 2004 Maathai was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize while continuing to fight for the rights of women, the politically oppressed, and the natural environment.

Gaylord Nelson, Politician and Environmentalist

Gaylord Nelson, Politician and Environmentalist

No other name is more associated with Earth Day than that of Gaylord Nelson (1916–2005). After returning from World War II, Nelson began a career as a politician and environmental activist that was to last the rest of his life. As governor of Wisconsin, he created an Outdoor Recreation Acquisition Program that saved about one million acres of parkland. He was instrumental in the development of a national trails system (including the Appalachian Trail) and helped pass the Wilderness Act, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and other landmark environmental legislation. He is perhaps best known as the founder of Earth Day, which has become an international celebration of all things environmental.

David Brower, Environmental Activist

Envrionmental Activist David Brower

David Brower (1912–2000) has been associated with wilderness preservation since he began mountain climbing as a young man. Brower was appointed the Sierra Club's first executive director in 1952. Over the next 17 years, membership grew from 2,000 to 77,000, and the group won many environmental victories. His confrontational style, however, got Brower fired from the Sierra Club—he nonetheless went on to found the groups Friends of the Earth, the Earth Island Institute, and the League of Conservation Voters.