The Christian Message as Vision and Mission : Philosophical Considerations of its Significance [1 ed.] 9781527502635, 9781443895842

Citation preview

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

OTHER BOOKS BY SANTIAGO SIA God in Process Thought: a Study in Charles Hartshorne’s Concept of God Process Thought and the Christian Doctrine of God Charles Hartshorne’s Concept of God: Philosophical and Theological Responses (with Marian F. Sia), From Suffering to God: Exploring Our Images of God in the Light of Suffering (with André Cloots), Framing a Vision of the World: Essays in Philosophy, Religion and Science (with Marian F. Sia), The Fountain Arethuse: a Novel Set in the University Town of Leuven Religion, Reason and God: Essays in the Philosophies of Charles Hartshorne and A.N. Whitehead Philosophy in Context: Dharma Endowment Lectures 2005 (with Ferdinand Santos), Personal Identity, the Self and Ethics Ethical Contexts and Theoretical Issues: Essays in Ethical Thinking (with Marian F. Sia), From Question to Quest: LiteraryPhilosophical Enquiries into the Challenges of Life (with M.F. Sia), Those Distant Shores: A Narrative of Human Restlessness (with M.F. Sia), That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom: A Tale of the Human Thirst for Knowledge Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society (with M.F. Sia), This Deep Pierian Spring: An Account of the Human Quest for Meaning

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission: Philosophical Considerations of its Significance By

Santiago Sia

Foreword by: Dr Antonio M. Pernia, SVD Former Superior-General of the Society of the Divine Word

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission: Philosophical Considerations of its Significance By Santiago Sia This book first published 2017 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2017 by Santiago Sia All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-9584-9 ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-9584-2

To The Divine Word Missionaries A Tribute

SOME COMMENTS ON THE BOOK

“Informed by philosophy and theology, and committed to the complementarity of faith and reason, Santiago Sia articulates the power of the Christian message in a world beset by challenges and loss of meaning. Neither dogmatic nor doctrinal in emphasis, the essays in this volume highlight the rationality of the Christian message in terms of love, hope, and redemption. With insight and even-handedness, Professor Sia powerfully illustrates the enduring relevance of basic Christian themes for various aspects of modern life and culture, including education and technology.” —Brendan Sweetman, Professor and Chair of Philosophy, Rockhurst University, USA “Santiago Sia has devoted much thought and time throughout his philosophical career to examining some of the fundamental issues in the Christian religion and their relevance to contemporary society. In times of progressive modernization, such as ours today, these issues have become more relevant than ever. And in this book Santiago Sia shows himself to be well-equipped to be an excellent guide.” —André Cloots, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium “In this new work Santiago Sia deals with a number of enduring philosophical themes with characteristic erudition. Sia conveys the richness and complexity of the Christian tradition as it engages with questions of meaning and ultimacy. He challenges the dichotomies that have marked much of the western philosophical and theological traditions, and makes the case for a faith that is multidimensional, creative and hope-filled.” —Linda Hogan FTCD and Professor of Ecumenics, University of Dublin, Ireland

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword .................................................................................................... ix Dr Antonio M. Pernia, SVD Preface ...................................................................................................... xiii Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 Part One: Philosophical Thinking and Religious Faith Chapter One ............................................................................................... 11 Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 29 Religion in Human Life and Thought Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 43 Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research Part Two: The Christian Message and its Significance Chapter Four .............................................................................................. 65 Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message Chapter Five .............................................................................................. 85 Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message Chapter Six .............................................................................................. 101 The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey Chapter Seven.......................................................................................... 119 From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life Chapter Eight ........................................................................................... 139 Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS

viii

Table of Contents

Chapter Nine............................................................................................ 155 The Christian Message at Journey’s End Part Three: The Christian Message and Education Chapter Ten ............................................................................................. 181 “Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”: A View on Education Chapter Eleven ........................................................................................ 197 Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education: Challenges and Issues Concluding Remarks ............................................................................... 211 Appendix ................................................................................................. 217 Process Thought as Conceptual Framework: A Philosophical Odyssey Selected Bibliography ............................................................................. 239

FOREWORD

I am honoured to write the Foreword to a book that is destined to have a major impact both on philosophy and on Christian theology. For the book, as its title indicates, is a serious and insightful philosophical reflection on the significance of the Christian message as vision and mission. The book is philosophically rigorous in its consideration of the Christian message as vision, and theologically creative in its treatment of the Christian message as mission. Combining references to works in philosophy, theology and literature, the book is written in a language that is easy to read and thus is accessible both to the specialist in philosophy and theology and to the educated lay person. While the book is arranged in three parts, the discussion and reflection it undertakes actually come in two parts, namely, the discussion of the Christian message as vision and the reflection on it as mission (where Part III of the book is actually an application of this second part in a specific area of mission). The first part is a rigorous examination of the philosophical underpinnings of the Christian message as vision. Here, Professor Sia exhibits a mastery of the main philosophical thinking connected with the topic, especially process philosophy and, in particular, the philosophy of A. N. Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne. He convincingly shows that, even if one does not agree with its specific content, the Christian message nevertheless implies a vision of a response to a fundamental human need. However, the significance of the Christian message lies not just in recognizing this human longing but also in deepening people’s awareness of the human quest. For this human quest is what makes us human and defines our fulfillment as human beings. Thus, the Christian message is shown not as an alien or esoteric message imposed from the outside, but as one that arises from and is rooted in human nature. And this becomes a point of encounter between those who subscribe to, and those who do not agree with, the Christian message. The second part is an insightful proposal that vision must become mission. Here, Professor Sia manifests a wide-ranging familiarity with theology in general and with the basic doctrines of the Catholic Church in particular, resulting in a sympathetic view of the Christian message. The book makes three very helpful proposals in reflecting on the Christian

x

Foreword

message as mission. First, viewing human existence as a journey, it proposes to treat the Christian message as MAP in life’s journey (it makes life Meaningful if it is Actualized in one’s journey, enabling one to enter into a Personal relationship with God). Secondly, comparing the Christian message to a mission statement, it interprets the Christian message as PASS in the journey (Pointing the way, Accompanying and Supporting us on the journey, and leading to the Salvation of all creation). Thirdly, emphasizing that mission be understood as giving witness to the Christian message, it underlines the implications of the task of mission as SOCIUS (Sharing the message, Opening oneself to the otherness of the other, offering Companionship, Invoking and turning to God, participating in Uplifting humankind, and Serving the community). Translating vision into mission through understanding human existence as a journey is another point of encounter between those who are already inspired by, and those who are critical of or even are opposed to, the Christian message. A theological appreciation of the book cannot fail to note the challenge to theology that it entails; namely, the challenge for theological reflection to be attentive to the two dimensions of the Christian message underlined by the book; that is, the Christian message as VISION and MISSION. This implies undertaking the task of theological reflection both as “fides quaerens intellectum” (to clarify the significance of the Christian message as Vision) and as “fides quaerens linguam” (to explore the implications of the Christian message as Mission). First, fides quaerens intellectum, or “faith seeking understanding.” This is the classical task of theology as enunciated since the 11th century by St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109). This is the task of reflecting on the Christian faith in the light of human reason in the conviction that faith is not incompatible with reason, that believing is not a perversion of human nature, and that therefore the teachings of the Christian faith do not demean, but rather enhance, human life. As Professor Sia shows in the book, there is a synergy between faith and reason. And even if at times their relationship was expressed in terms of faith versus reason, there were also times when that relationship was seen in terms of faith and reason. One approach to the reflection on the Christian faith in the light of reason is precisely the one exemplified by Professor Sia in the book; namely, investigating the philosophical underpinnings of the Christian faith and showing that the Christian message is rooted in human nature and provides a vision of a response to fundamental human needs. Some years ago, it was said in jest that, in response to an announcement saying “Christ is the Answer,” someone scribbled underneath “But what is the Question?” The challenge to theological reflection as fides quaerens intel-

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

xi

lectum is precisely to show the relevance of the Christian message as vision by reflecting on the profound questionings of the human heart. For, as one writer puts it: There is within us a fundamental disease, an unquenchable fire that renders us incapable, in this life, of ever coming to full peace. This desire lies at the center of our lives, in the marrow of our bones, and in the deep recesses of the soul …. At the heart of all great literature, poetry, art, philosophy, psychology, and religion lies the naming and analyzing of this desire …. Whatever the expression, everyone is ultimately talking about the same thing—an unquenchable fire, a restlessness, a longing, a disquiet, a hunger, a loneliness, a gnawing nostalgia, a wildness that cannot be tamed, a congenital all-embracing ache that lies at the center of human experience and is the ultimate force that drives everything else.1

Secondly, fides quaerens linguam or “faith seeking expression.” This is the task which, I personally believe, should complement fides quaerens intellectum. It is the task of reflecting on the Christian faith that stresses its missionary dimension. It underlines the fact that the Christian faith is not, in the first place, a body of truths that we need to understand, but an experience of the Good News that we need to share with and proclaim to others. This is faith seeking to be communicated or proclaimed—a fides quaerens proclamationem. Naturally, proclamation presupposes understanding. For we cannot properly proclaim what we do not understand. But it can also be said that we come to understand the faith better, and more fully, in our very act of sharing it with others. Additionally, fides quaerens linguam underlines the need for theology to be inculturated in the language and culture of a people. Today, we no longer speak simply of the possibility but of the necessity of inculturation. As Pope John Paul II once put it, “A faith that does not become culture is a faith which is not fully accepted, not wholly believed, and not faithfully lived”. So, this is faith seeking to be expressed in the culture of a people— a fides quaerens inculturationem. Here, too, true inculturation requires an authentic understanding of the faith, just as a profound understanding of the faith can only be the fruit of genuine inculturation. And finally, fides quaerens linguam signals the plurality of contexts in which theology needs to be done today. For, by saying fides quaerens linguam, one immediately adverts to the fact that in times past it used to be fides quaerens intellectum, or that in other places today, it may be fides 1

Ronald Rolheiser, The Holy Longing: The Search for Christian Spirituality (NY: Doubleday, 1999), pp. 3-4).

xii

Foreword

quaerens justitiam (“faith seeking justice,” as in Latin America) or fides quaerens pacem (“faith seeking peace,” as in Africa) or fides quaerens vitam (“faith seeking life,” as in Asia). This, then, is faith seeking to dialogue with other local Churches, other Christian communities, and other religions—a fides quaerens conversationem. Also, here, a genuinely fruitful dialogue necessitates a true understanding of the faith, while an enriched understanding of the faith results from respectful dialogue with others. It is here, in the task of theological reflection as fides quaerens linguam, that the book’s proposal of seeing mission in terms of giving witness to the Christian message as SOCIUS becomes immensely helpful, as well as the proposals of treating the Christian message as MAP of the journey and PASS to the journey’s destination. These proposals can serve to provide the necessary philosophical grounding to fides quaerens linguam. I am grateful to Professor Sia for writing this very important book. I recommend it wholeheartedly to all those who take seriously the Christian message as “an enlightening vision and a challenging mission”. The book can truly be our “SOCIUS,” our companion, on the journey of life.

—Antonio M. Pernia, SVD Former Superior-General of the Society of the Divine Word Dean of Studies Divine Word Institute of Mission Studies Tagaytay City, Philippines

PREFACE

The idea for this book started with the invitation to give lectures at Christ the King Seminary, Quezon City and at the Divine Word Seminary of Tagaytay City, both in the Philippines. The first of these is a philosophy college while the second is a theological seminary. The nature of these academic institutions and their respective fields of study served as the specific context and topic of my lectures: the first one was on philosophical thinking while the second was on a more theological theme. But in both of these lectures I was anxious to show the relevance of one field to the other, a concern that I have tried to maintain throughout this book. My visits to both of these colleges, owned and administered by the Divine Word Missionaries, gave me the opportunity to learn more about the education, training and work of these missionaries. It also facilitated the growth of this book since the time I spent in their company led me to focus more closely on its theme: the Christian message. I was particularly interested in how it served as vision and mission not just for these religious communities but also for others. My own field of study and personal research interests dictated how the book would eventually develop. The publication of this book gives me the opportunity to express once again my gratitude to those who organized and hosted my visits to these venues, particularly to Dr. Raymun Festin, SVD. That their initiative prompted the writing of more essays which eventually led to the development of this book is a process that I truly appreciate. The book is dedicated to this religious missionary order, but honours all those who dedicate themselves to a certain understanding of the vision and a specific implementation of the mission of the Christian message. The initial reflections on the theme of this book were inspired by our experiences as we toured the devastated areas of Tacloban, Guiuan and other towns in Eastern Visayas, Philippines, following the onslaught of super-typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda on 8 November 2013, and as we listened to the narratives of the survivors. While our first visit a few months after it hit these places opened our eyes to a truly desolate situation, even then we heard from the people their determined voices that they would rise again (Tindog Tacloban and Bangon Guiuan). On our subsequent visits we witnessed the developments that came about because of their resilience. We admired their stout devotion to their Christian faith, especially since they believed that it gave them genuine reason to hope for a recovery. The ap-

xiv

Preface

pearance of this book is another occasion to pay tribute to the inspiring courage and determination of the Taclobanons and Guiuananons and to express our continued solidarity with them. This is also a gesture of immense gratitude to all those who, irrespective of backgrounds, came to their aid and continue to do so. Working on this book was a welcome time for me to re-focus on its theme, which had occupied my scholarly interests in earlier times. It also enabled me to draw together and revise/update previously published writings on various aspects of the topic. I would like to thank the editors and publishers of journals and books for their permission to include those essays which originally appeared in their publications. Details of these are included in the relevant essays. I want once more to express my appreciation of the invitations extended to me over the years by academic institutions and scholars in various parts of the world to give lectures and to dialogue with them. These have resulted in some of the essays included in this book and in my other publications. My publishers, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, deserve my immense gratitude for their continued support of and confidence in my work. Working with such professional and efficient staff-members has been a pleasure for me. I am grateful to Dr Antonio M. Pernia, former Superior-General of the Society of the Divine Word, for graciously accepting my invitation to write the Foreword. His election to that office, as the first Asian member of his missionary order, was a vote of confidence in his dedicated leadership and an appreciation of the important role of the Philippine SVDs. He now brings that administrative and global experience to bear on his academic work as Dean of Studies at the Divine Word Institute of Mission Studies in Tagaytay, Philippines. Several years ago Ambrosio Nitural had generously sketched for me the illustration that now appears in this book. I am very pleased—and thankful to him—to be able to use it once again this time for a much wider readership. The sketch graphically depicts the theme of the book. As usual, I am enormously indebted to my wife, Marian, for her companionship and assistance in every aspect of my intellectual and personal journeys, for which I am most thankful. My extended family in the Philippines also deserves my continued gratitude for their support and hospitality throughout the years.

INTRODUCTION

The Christian Message To claim that our world today is inundated with messages in different forms and from various sources is no hyperbole. The increasingly complicated development and sophisticated advance of information technology and the hard-to-resist and addictive lure of social media have brought about this situation. We welcome the tremendous benefits derived from faster and more efficient communications which have improved our lives and society in so many respects. Not only are we more informed but we are also better positioned by them to be able to respond favourably. Unfortunately, we also have had to cope with the many negative consequences of this new development, such as the clogging of our days with unnecessary and constant information, the spread of fake news or misinformation, and the incitement of unrestrained passions and hatred. There is need somehow to filter out these messages, to show some restraint and to maintain constant vigilance. But what is of even greater concern are the types and forms of messages which are being fed—uploaded, if one were to adopt the new terminology—into our senses. Again, many of these messages, especially if these are accompanied by graphic images, have admittedly enabled us to have a clearer and more direct view of distant events. They have even strengthened human relationships insofar as it has become easier to stay in touch with one another. At the same time, however, there are messages which, without the new developments in transmission, would not have reached the vulnerable or caused them so much grief and distress, and in some cases even driven them to suicide. Thus, regarding the messages themselves which have proliferated, we also do have to exercise some caution. It is a daunting challenge that will need our constant monitoring and vigilant attention.1 In the midst of all these messages and technological developments, one wonders about the status of the Christian message of love, hope and 1 See my “Images, Reality and Truth: Some Philosophical Considerations,” New Blackfriars, 96, 1063 (May 2015), pp. 295-310.

2

Introduction

redemption. Will it become just another message among so many others? Will it be left unheard and unheeded? Does it still have an importance that ought to be recognized in today’s society? What does it have to offer to enable us to meet the various challenges which beset present-day living? Such questions indicate that there is now an even greater and more urgent need to re-focus on the Christian message and how to share it around. Fortunately, those who have committed themselves to taking that concern seriously have harnessed the power of these recent technological developments and have updated their communication skills to meet the news of new generations. At the same time, efforts have also been made to reflect on the meaning and significance of the Christian message and how it can address the fresh challenges in the multi-faceted and fast-changing world that we live in today. Needless to say, it is an enormous responsibility, one that is bound to continue to increase as further developments in this area take place. Christianity is, of course, much more than what is stated here in terms of the message of love, hope and redemption. In presenting the Christian message in this way, I am focusing on what I regard as the essential tenets in Christian teaching. Since the Christian message, as I have already stated, is not a simple message we are confronted with a multidimensional challenge. The task is not merely to relay information because the message is also intended to be lived—a way of life. Neither is it only an exhortation since it also holds out a definite goal. Consequently, any attempt to answer the concerns expressed above must take into account the complex nature of this message. Moreover, in addition to the proliferation of messages with which it seems to have to compete, it must also take on board criticisms and even opposition. How to manage those adds to the complexity of understanding and the application of its teachings. Nonetheless, if one believes in that message, particularly as regards its vision and its mission, and wants to share it with others, one would have to face up to those challenges. The present book complements a recent fictional work, titled This Deep Pierian Spring: an Account of the Human Quest for Meaning2 where we have tried to capture both the benefit and the challenge of text messag2

M. F. Sia and S. Sia, This Deep Pierian Spring: an Account of the Human Quest for Meaning (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016, 2017). This book is the last in a trilogy of philosophical novels, the first two being Those Distant Shores: a Narrative of Human Restlessness (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014) and That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom: a Tale of the Human Thirst for Knowledge (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014).

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

3

es, the use of mobile phones, and news broadcasts on TV and the internet. The context, based on a real situation created by the onslaught of supertyphoon Haiyan/Yolanda in the Philippines, is an urgent request received by the main character, Prof Enrique de los Reyes, from Fr Rodrigo, another fictional character, to “pray”. The text message is abruptly interrupted and thus makes Enrique wonder how to interpret and respond to it. In the ensuing narrative, as he attempts to decipher that message, he draws on his research and experiences about the quest for meaning exemplified by other fictional characters. In addition, he reflects on what the Christian message of love, hope and redemption can teach him about the situation.

Philosophical Considerations While the focus of this work is on the Christian message, it is with a specific view: examining certain philosophical considerations which underpin its teaching. Aware of its richness and complexity, the different chapters discuss that message only insofar as it provides a vision for humanity and articulates a mission to implement it. Despite this intended limitation, it hopes nevertheless that the discussion here of some of the philosophical issues will contribute to the ongoing reflection by those who believe in that message as well as to the debates with those who oppose it. The aim of this work is to establish points of encounter, rather than points of departure. The assumption is that despite the seeming gulf due to differing perspectives, there is a common ground on which all of us stand; namely, our nature and concerns as human beings. There has always been a connection between religious belief and philosophical thinking. Even if at times it has been faith versus reason, there is also a history of reflecting on faith and reason. The book is a collection of essays written at different times and on varied occasions.3 Consequently, there is some inevitable repetition. But this has been kept to a minimum and retained only when essential to the integrity of each essay. Despite the seeming variety of the topics and styles, there is a common theme and approach in the whole discussion, which hopefully is evident when one reads each chapter and pursues the argumentation. In addition, there is constant referencing in the footnotes to 3

See among others, James Richmond, Faith and Philosophy (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1966); M.J. Charlesworth, Philosophy of Religion: the Historic Approaches (London: Macmillan, 1972); Jerry H. Gill (ed.), Philosophy and Religion: Some Contemporary Perspectives (Minneapolis, Minn.: Burgess Publishing Co., 1970); Monica MeruĠiu (ed.), Reason and Faith at the Beginning of the Third Millennium (Cluj Napoca: Editura Fundatiei Pentru Studii Europene, 2011).

4

Introduction

relevant essays in the collection in order to show the continuity of the discussions. In putting together these essays, I am taking up once again the question that has concerned me throughout my academic career: namely, the contribution that philosophical thinking can and does make to clarifying, understanding, and interpreting issues which arise from concrete living.4 Despite contrary views which are aired in various quarters and in diverse ways, I have become convinced that, even if philosophers themselves are not necessarily the best strategists, pace Plato, their intellectual tool can be of tremendous use in prying open many of the problems which beset society today as it has done so in the past.5 An argument can be made that an important consideration in addressing the problems is focusing on what underpins them. In many cases, these problems and the attempts to confront them may benefit from uncovering the assumptions—or “mindset”, a more contemporary term—that inform them. This was the stated intention and the consequent development of the themes in my recent book, Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society.6 I have tried to do that, too, with this book. The book is divided into three sections. Part I: Philosophical Thinking and Religious Faith (Chapters One to Three) tackles the relationship, perceived or imagined, between philosophy and religion, and between reason and faith. Part II: The Christian Message and its Significance (Chapters Four to Nine) discusses various aspects of the Christian message with particular reference to its message of love, hope and redemption. The emphasis of Part III: Christian Mission and Education (Chapters Ten and Eleven) is on a particular field with which the Christian message is closely identified. Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context” is primarily a reflection on the relationship between the art of philos4

Cf. Appendix: “Process Thought as Conceptual Framework: a Philosophical Odyssey”. 5 In ancient China, rulers and emperors turned to the wise men or philosophers for political and social advice. 6 Santiago Sia, Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society with a Foreword by the former President of Ireland Mary McAleese (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014, 2015). This book is the last in the trilogy which includes: Ethical Contexts and Theoretical Issues: Essays in Ethical Thinking (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010); and with Marian F. Sia, From Question to Quest: Literary-Philosophical Enquiries into the Challenges of Life with a Foreword by Prof David Jasper (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011).

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

5

ophizing and the pursuit of philosophy. I start with the claim that philosophizing, i.e. asking questions, is a human activity. It arises because of who we are as human beings. In our pursuit of answers to our questions, particularly the fundamental ones, the study of philosophy is an important resource, given that philosophers have preoccupied themselves with a more protracted and intense pursuit of these important questions. I then turn to the religious context, arguing that it is a significant setting both for understanding, appropriating and responding to the human act of philosophizing and for the resultant questions and answers. This essay provides the background and the direction of the development of the various essays in this book. Chapter Two: “Religion in Human Thought and Life” is a philosophical exploration of Alfred North Whitehead’s conception of religion. Unfolding Whitehead’s understanding of religion which can be traced throughout his many writings, the essay also provides a systematic discussion of its significance. It argues that Whitehead’s conception of religion results in a clearer understanding of the role of religion in human life, including how it arises. Finally, it shows that his notion of religion also indicates the need to transcend our experiential starting point through rational thinking and to integrate the doctrinal expression with concrete human life. Chapter Three: “Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research” documents how the Catholic Church continues to support and even provide impetus to philosophy while reflecting on the nature of that support. Basing myself on relevant papal and other documents, I explore the Catholic Church’s influence on philosophy over the years and its contributions, as articulated in these official publications, to the shaping and advancing of the present state of philosophy. In the latter part of this essay I offer philosophical observations of some of the criticisms leveled against that support and make suggestions as to how the Catholic tradition could contribute even more to philosophical research. Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”. In his influential book, The Art of Loving, Erich Fromm regrets the disintegration of love in contemporary Western society. He maintains that its culture is counterproductive to the development of love. It is an alarming comment on a society that has been very much influenced by Christianity whose fundamental message is one of love. This essay sets out a philosophical interpretation of an interconnected reality, including humankind, which underlies all forms of love and points out that it needs, however, to be actualized and nurtured. Next, it suggests that the Christian message is an acknowledgement and a distinctive development of that understanding of

6

Introduction

reality’s relatedness insofar as it provides a “charge”: empowering love but also setting out a mission of love. Chapter Five: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message” is a philosophical interpretation of hope with specific reference to the concept of creativity (creative synthesis) as developed by Charles Hartshorne. In this essay I discuss its challenge for all humankind. The issues are explored insofar as they impinge on a number of concerns arising from the atheistic and Christian perspectives regarding our understanding and appreciation of hope. It does so with the intention of establishing a point of encounter between the two camps while respecting their differences. Claiming that the Christian message does not replace what one can know about the reality of hope from a more philosophical perspective, the essay also outlines what gives the Christian message of hope a certain distinctiveness; namely, that it reminds, reinforces and responds to, in a significant manner—because of its particular vision and its special mission—the hope that is imbedded in the whole of reality. It then suggests that the specific call to the Christian mission is a challenge to focus on that vision. Chapter Six: “The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey”. This essay puts forward and examines the suggestion that the Christian message can be a map of life. Likening life to a journey for which maps are particularly useful, it considers from a philosophical perspective how the Christian message provides a sense of direction in our lives. It uses the acronym MAP, claiming that it can make life meaningful but that we need to actualize it for it to be of value in our life journey and to fulfill its distinctive aim of enabling us to enter into a personal relationship with God. In making the case for the Christian message as a map of life, this essay turns to the philosophical insights of a number of philosophers to elaborate on these notions. Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. Comparing the Christian message in some respects to a mission statement, this essay discusses some philosophical considerations not only as regards what is involved in the concepts of vision and mission but also what is entailed when the vision, that is to say, the original insight or teaching, is translated into a mission and lived. I follow up the discussion with a suggestion of a possible interpretation of the Christian message in our journey through life: I claim that, given that Christianity teaches that life is a journey towards a particular destination, the Christian message can be interpreted as PASS; namely, that it points the way, accompanies us on the journey while supporting us. It is also intended to lead to the salvation of all creation.

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

7

Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS.” This essay presents and discusses a philosophical understanding of what is entailed in giving witness to the Christian message of love, hope and redemption. In line with the description of life as a journey, it suggests, as a way of unpacking the implications of the task, the acronym SOCIUS (sharing the message, opening up oneself to the otherness of the other, offering companionship, invoking and turning to God, participating in uplifting humankind and serving the community. This suggestion is more of an attempt to provide philosophical underpinnings, rather than an extended development, of the concept and practice of giving witness to the Christian message. Chapter Nine: “The Christian Message at Journey’s End” reflects on the Christian message insofar as it assures redemption, a specifically Christian belief, because of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In dealing with the topic, this essay makes use of Christian theological insights to bring out the significance of Christ’s death which is believed to be a salvific event for all of humankind. In addition, it turns to two poems, Donne’s “Good Friday” and Herbert’s “Easter”, which capture the meaning and sentiments of these two events for them. In this sense they act as guides in disclosing the Christian meaning and significance of the journey’s end. Finally, I turn to Aristotle’s discussion of ethos (together with pathos and logos in his Rhetoric) as a way of articulating the challenge of credibility for those who subscribe to the Christian message and who wish to share it with others. Chapter Ten: “Seeing the Wood for the Trees”: a View on Education”. Arguing against the prevailing educational policies to prepare the learners primarily for the marketplace, I defend—while also acknowledging the validity of the concerns regarding the marketplace—the view that education is fundamentally about developing the total person. In this sense the philosophical perspective and the religious vision have an important role to play. Chapter Eleven: “Developments in Contemporary Society and Faithbased Higher Education: Challenges and Issues.” This essay sketches some developments in contemporary society which present specific challenges and raise particular issues, such as secularization, mechanization and globalization, for a faith-based higher education. It offers a suggestion as to why and how, precisely because of the distinctiveness of the Christian vision and mission, it can respond to these. The Concluding Remarks consist of a reflection on the book’s overall theme and its development in the various essays. In examining the philosophical underpinnings of the Christian message, the methodology

8

Introduction

adopted in this work hopes to contribute to the discussion of its significance by setting out points of encounter. It also elaborates and defends further the claim made throughout the book that the Christian message can be appreciated even more as a vision and a mission that remind, support and fuel the human aspiration to reach fulfillment. The Appendix titled “Process Thought as Conceptual Framework: a Philosophical Odyssey” charts the development of my philosophical thinking as I searched throughout my academic journeys in a number of countries for a more adequate way of understanding, articulating and communicating my experience as a Christian Filipino philosopher. It unpacks, in a more historical manner, many of the themes and issues which are discussed systematically in the essays in this collection. There is a Selected Bibliography at the end of the book.

PART ONE: PHILOSOPHICAL THINKING AND RELIGIOUS FAITH

CHAPTER ONE PHILOSOPHIZING, PHILOSOPHY AND THE RELIGIOUS CONTEXT1

Questions and Question Humans continually ask questions.2 Some of these are routine or even trivial. Others are more pressing or significant. But now and then, as we conduct our daily business, interact with one another or are caught up in specific situations, thought-provoking questions, in various guises and contexts, do arise and challenge us. This observation in turn leads us to the rather fundamental consideration: Why do we ask questions in the first place? What enables us to raise questions? Why does it matter that we seek answers? What kind of answer can we expect? And then curiously, people sometimes answer a question with yet another one: Who wants to know? they ask before they undertake to provide an answer. There is something curious about the process of such fundamental questioning. While the intended goal is normally to move ahead from the original situation—with an answer that one expects to a question in most cases—it is also a challenge to move back, as it were! The symbol of the question mark, in the English language, is particularly appropriate in this instance. It curls back—?— as if to invite one to look at its foundation. And the Latin word for this movement (reflectere) feeds into the whole 1

Given as a lecture at Christ the King Mission Seminary, Quezon City, Philippines, March 2016. This is a shortened version of my essay originally published as a Postscript in Brendan Sweetman (ed.), Philosophical Thinking and the Religious Context: Essays in Honor of Santiago Sia (N.Y. and London: Bloomsbury Academic , 2013 and 2014), pp. 171-189 and republished in DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XLI, 1 & 2 (May & November 2016), pp. 1-21. 2 Chapter One: “The Art of Questioning” in Raymun Festin, SVD, Beliefs and Certitudes (Manila: Logos Publications, 2008), pp. 5-14. See also his Response to this essay in DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XLI, 1 & 2 (May & November 2016), pp. 22-26. On the importance of asking questions in various contexts, cf. Frank Sesno, Ask More: the Power of Questions to Open Doors, Uncover Solutions and Spark Change (N.Y.: AMACOM, 2017).

12

Chapter One

idea of “re-flecting”—thinking again, re-examining, or taking a second look. The word itself, “reflection”, indicates some “mulling over”. There is an expectation of a return to the basics in the hope of throwing some light on the present situation. Additionally, although not immediately apparent, if one were to analyze another meaning of the English word, “reflection”, i.e. “an image on a surface”, one realizes that the mere glimpse of the original source could be a motivation to seek it out again—and search deeper. The same claim could probably be made if by “reflection”—as in “it is a reflection on one’s education”—one passes a comment, positive or negative. There is more than a hint that to understand the present situation one needs to trace it back to the past. An equally curious feature of a question—and this has implications for the fundamental process of questioning—is that somehow it already contains implicit knowledge. It is not a betrayal of pure ignorance. Rather, it arises because one already knows something, however vague, confused or distorted that initial knowledge is.3 While receiving an answer is a step further in the process, the raising of the question itself is possible only because there is some background information already possessed.4 In other words, it is does not arise from a tabula rasa. Another observation that can be made in this regard is that it shows that the questioning process indicates something about the nature of the questioner.5 The process of fundamental questioning does reveal something about the nature of the source of the question if one were to uncover its root. Questions, and the kind of questions raised, do provide some information about the questioner. While the process of questioning may take place in the present—and as has already been mentioned, it does return us to the past, so to speak—it also urges us onwards. It is not surprising that the word “question” is allied to “quest” as if the nature of this activity is to lure us, to prod us on, or to put us on track. This is particularly true of the more fundamental questions we ask about life.6 Somehow, for instance, the question “Does life have any meaning?” is meant to unsettle us and to set us off on a search for adequate answers. And the answers are not necessarily straightforward, 3

This reference to what is implicit in human beings will be explained and developed further in the various essays in this book. 4 In this regard, I disagree to some extent with the axiom: Si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses. 5 This claim is particularly relevant in the context of the Christian message. 6 This approach to fundamental questions is illustrated in Marian F. Sia and Santiago Sia, From Question to Quest: Literary-Philosophical Enquiries into the Challenges of Life (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011).

Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context

13

not because there are not any, but because such answers are not solutions to a problem but rather mere responses that demand even more probing on the part of the questioner.

Question in Context Fundamental questions, such as the ones cited above, do not just arise. They are not merely posed to keep the conversation going even if at times, admittedly, these questions and suggested answers are mentioned only in passing. They emerge because one finds oneself in a particular situation, now and then even in dramatic form. Sometimes, they come to one’s serious attention in the silences of life or with the beauty of nature.7 In other words, this kind of questioning takes place in a context. A very good example of this is the questioning that occurs because one finds oneself faced with suffering or evil. Tragedies and misfortunes leave us bewildered not just as to how they happened but, even more importantly, why they occur in the first place. It is a question that continues to haunt thinking beings. Furthermore, could they have been prevented? Other examples are the unjust situations as well as the admirable acts of many— which cause deep-rooted questioning of the behaviour of individuals, of groups and of society in general. It makes one wonder, for instance, about the nature of ethics and of an ethical judgment. Inasmuch as religion in contemporary society continues to spark off debate and controversy, it remains both an enigma and a problem. In this context, religious belief too (and other aspects of religion) is likewise an issue that demands quite a thorough probing. The word “context” and its use here need some explanation. The word itself can be equated with “background” or “setting”.8 When one maintains that to understand a comment it has to be put in its context, for example, one is expecting a more accurate understanding of the comment as a result of doing so. Or if one insists that it is crucial to contextualize the debate or the discussion, one is indicating that there is a wider setting within which it is occurring and that it must be taken into consideration. Moreover, the historical context of an idea, just as much as that of an 7

In an article (with Marian F. Sia) titled “Punctuating Life’s Message: a Grammatical-Philosophical Exercise on the Quest for Meaning,” Santalka (Co-activity), XVIII, 4 (2010), pp. 81-92; http://www.coactivity.vgtu.lt/en/ we refer to these moments as “comma moments” as they help us punctuate life’s message to enable us to read its message. 8 This meaning of “context” is also applicable to philosophical thinking, a point that will be treated later in this essay.

14

Chapter One

event, lends itself to a better grasp of the nuances and complexities of that particular idea or event.9 But “context” has also been employed—and is so used here—to suggest the concreteness of the situation.10 Whereas philosophical thinking is very often dismissed as too abstract and too generalized to be of use in practical situations, in actuality the basis of much philosophical thinking is none other than the concrete situation in all its details and particularity. Often it is in such a situation, in its specific context, that one begins to wonder and ponder.11 It is useful to keep this in mind as we address the what and why of philosophy.12 Contrary to popular misconception, the reference to the ivory tower which philosophers allegedly inhabit is misplaced. Its home base is more akin to what the poet W. B. Yeats in his “The Circus Animals’ Desertion” describes graphically when he states: “I must lie down where all ladders start,/In the foul rag-and-bone shop of the heart.” Philosophical thinking does start from and end in the same “shop”; that is, concrete life.

Philosophizing and its Source This leads us to a consideration of the source of all this questioning. Why do questions, particularly fundamental ones, come to the surface in the first place? What triggers off the quest for answers? Who is asking the questions? As was already noted, the symbol of the question mark “curls back”, seemingly to suggest that we take a good look at the base. Indeed,

9

This insistence on the context of one’s answer or comment is not always popular in media circles which prefer soundbites. It will grate on the ears of those who demand straightforward answers, typically a “yes” or “no” or at most “dos palabras”. 10 This is particularly true in process philosophy—a philosophical perspective which has considerably shaped my thinking in various areas. Cf. Appendix: “Process Thought as Conceptual Framework: a Philosophical Odyssey”. 11 Philosophy has been presented as “starting with wonder”. It is as if the exclamation point of wonder—to resort to the language of punctuation marks—needs to turn to itself (reflectere) to ponder. 12 Whitehead’s well-known reference to the flight of the aeroplane is particularly appropriate here: it starts on the ground, soars up into thin air but lands back on the ground. Speculative thinking, he maintains, is embedded in the concreteness of life, but lifts off into abstract thinking only to return to the ground of life with renewed vision and energy. The same sentiment, it seems to me, is poetically described by T.S. Eliot in his “Little Gidding”: “...we arrive where we started/ And know the place for the first time.”

Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context

15

an examination of the questioning process inevitably brings us to the nature and status of the questioner.13 In raising questions, the questioner has already started to philosophize.14 Even the child or the untutored is already engaged in it. At that stage, it is an activity that is tentative and probably unstructured. It may even be confused and confusing. Sometimes it is spontaneous— occasionally in conversation, one is said to be “philosophizing”—but more often one philosophizes in response to certain situations. In such situations one wants to “make sense” or one needs “to know”. Accordingly, one is motivated to press ahead with an enquiry. This is when questions surface as an initial step forward. Questioning is a process that is in quest of answers. Questions arise because of the sort of beings that we are. Philosophers have frequently referred to human nature as rational. Endowed with rationality, humans are equipped to think intelligently and to act freely. The process of questioning or philosophizing is possible because the questioner has the ability to know reality. Moreover, the questioner does not just perceive or sense (and accept) reality but also, and more importantly, conceives and even constructs it. The questioner is capable—and has the will to so do—of laying out a different reality. The questioner is gifted not just with the ability of sensing reality but also with the talent for reshaping what is there. And for all that to happen, one starts on the quest for understanding through asking questions, probing into reality, in the hope that it will lead to its transformation. That transformation of reality, brought about through questioning, also inevitably changes the questioner. Curiously, the more we humans ask questions and the more intense the quest for answers is, the more we develop our own nature as human beings. Philosophizing, i.e. the questioning process, takes place at different levels, from the more mundane to the highly specialized. It would be rather presumptuous to hold that insofar as one is raising a question, one’s activity can already be labelled as seriously “philosophizing”. There is a certain amount of competence and skill required. Moreover, not everyone has the leisure or the pleasure to engage in this activity. Nonetheless, it lies within every human being’s reach precisely because it is a human activity; that is to say, “in accord with our nature”. At the most elementary level, 13

In more philosophical language, one could say that the effect reveals something about the nature of the cause. 14 There is a distinction between “philosophizing” (which I believe is more generally practised) and the “study of philosophy” (which only a few are in a position to pursue).

16

Chapter One

philosophizing is simply “wondering”. The higher levels of this activity are merely a matter of strengthening, deepening or sharpening that sense of wonder. Philosophizing is usually associated with the intellect. For this reason it is classed as an intellectual activity of which only rational beings are capable. There is much support for this observation, particularly at the higher levels of this activity. But philosophizing itself should not be interpreted so narrowly either. The process of questioning occurs not because we possess an intellect—although it is what enables us to follow through with our quest for answers—but because we confront reality, including ourselves, in all our humanity. And this nature of ours includes our feelings, our sense experience, our imagination and other such traits and gifts.15

Question and Context Earlier in this essay, there was a reference to “context” meaning “background” or “setting”. This complementary meaning of the word has added significance here, and it would be helpful to examine it further. While questioning (and philosophizing) may and indeed does take place in specific situations or contexts, it is equally important to “contextualize” it; that is to say, to situate the question (and the possible answers) against the backdrop of the larger picture.16 There is a need to set the particular or the detail against a so-called horizon in daily life. The same can be said in philosophizing.17 This is because one asks a specific question only because there is an implicit more general knowledge. And that implicit general 15

The distinction held, for example, between “the mind” and the “heart” is, I believe, a false one. It is important, of course, to make a “conceptual distinction” but the reality itself is one. 16 This claim would be challenged and dismissed by postmodern thinkers—which, I believe, is a mistake on their part and of those who subscribe to that view. There is the presumption that such a claim is an attempt to return to the metaphysics of the past. Process metaphysics, however, would reject that misconception. It seems to me that it is important to distinguish between metaphysical thinking itself and specific metaphysical systems which illustrate it (some of which are indeed to be rejected). 17 Many have commented that the financial crisis that has gripped society at large and the lacuna experienced by many in their lives can be traced back to the lack of an over-all vision. See Chapter Ten: “Economic Crisis and Accountability” in Santiago Sia, Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014, 2015), pp. 189-206.

Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context

17

knowledge has a way not only of broadening our knowledge but also of directing the focus of our enquiries. Thus, it needs not just to be made explicit but also scrutinized more thoroughly.18 This second meaning of “context”, and its significance for an understanding of the process of questioning, can also be traced back to our reality. To appreciate this point, we need once again to return to home-base, as it were; that is to say, to our make-up as human beings. As was already noted, we are beings who can and do ask questions. But we are also beings who can, and in different ways and in various degrees do, transcend our specificity and particularity.19 In a figurative and literal way we are capable of “going beyond” what is immediate or singular. In fact, more often than not, we have the natural tendency to generalize, to ignore the uniqueness of the situation, and to stretch a point to cover what has been perceived somehow as a comparable case. While it is true that usually it is indicative of our preference for simplification in our thinking, it is also the case that it betrays our natural sense of the interconnectedness of reality.20 Admittedly, the judgment coming from this natural sense to generalize is not always accurate. In fact, it often results in questionable conclusions. But what is relevant, for our purposes here, is that it is the immediate source of what has been described as the contextualization of our questions. This particular meaning of “context” and the need to recognize its significance in the questioning process can also be explained in terms of a “vision” of reality.21 There is a difference between having a mere perspec18

I do not mean just examining presumptions or assumptions which can colour one’s views but, rather, evaluating the conceptual framework within which one operates. 19 Cf. Fergus Kerr, Immortal Longings: Versions of Transcending Humanity (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997). 20 Although the interconnectedness of reality referred to in the text is in the abstract sense, it nevertheless has implication for our understanding of human nature. Our identity as human beings is not just comprised of our individual traits but also, and in an important sense, constituted by our connectedness with ourselves, with one another, and with the whole of reality. Referred to sometimes as our social nature, this dimension of our reality is more than just—as analyzed and interpreted by psychologists or anthropologists—the need to live together. It also differs from a mere behavioural pattern although it is recognized more explicitly in this way. See Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”. 21 In a related sense, institutions, among others, have come to see the need for a “vision statement” to direct their activities. It provides some kind of framework, within which these institutions conduct their business. Cf. Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life.”

18

Chapter One

tive or view and possessing a vision. The former indicates a standpoint from a certain angle while the latter refers to a more fundamental understanding. A.N. Whitehead supplies us with a fertile image: “seeing the wood by means of the trees”.22 Whitehead makes use of this imagery in making a distinction between wisdom and knowledge.23 However, it can be used for our purposes here since “vision”, just as “wood”, looks at the totality composed of the individual realities. At the same time, however, “vision” is not just a picture of the whole of reality in the same way that “wood” is not simply all the trees put together even if it is in the trees and because of them that we can see the wood.24 The importance of contextualization is highlighted by some literary critics, although admittedly rejected by others. According to the former grouping, to understand the meaning of a text, one should not isolate the text from its proper context; otherwise, one runs the risk of interpreting it from an outside point of view. Textual analysis requires that one “gets into the thinking” behind the text. By doing so, the hidden meaning is revealed and it enriches one’s understanding of the text. While interpretations of a text, which reveal more of the thinking of the reader, can be exciting and even refreshing, they could cloud the real intentions of the writer or author and therefore lose the intended significance of the text. This observation is particularly helpful in the questioning process insofar as setting it in its proper context is essential to a fuller appreciation of the questions.

Turning to Philosophy as Resource So far, this essay has focused on the questioning process as a natural activity engaged in by human beings. Questions, it has been claimed, are raised in context, by which is meant that they (1) arise from concrete situations (2) but against a background of implicit general knowledge. It had also been stated that questions have a way of spurring us on, in quest of answers. In seeking answers to questions, depending on the kind of questions and information being sought, the questioner has various resources to

22 Cf. A.N. Whitehead, The Aims of Education and Other Essays (The Free Press Paperback Edition, 1967), p. 6. 23 Cf. Chapter Ten: “‘Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees’: a View on Education”. 24 One may see some connection here to the distinction between Being and beings. However, “vision” or “context” would have more subjective connotations since these refer to the questioner’s knowledge of reality, rather than to reality itself.

Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context

19

hand.25 One such resource—relevant to our present purposes—is the study of philosophy. There is no claim here that it is the best one or the most important one. Even those who regard it as a valuable resource will have varying reasons and disparate views. But given what has been discussed in this essay, one will perhaps appreciate that there seems to be something congenial about turning to the study of this academic subject.26 Despite its sometimes esoteric connotations and misconceptions, the pursuit of philosophy and its heritage does follow rather naturally from the first step of asking fundamental questions. After all, philosophers down through the ages have dealt with these questions in a protracted and often systematic manner. One can expect to learn from the results of their intellectual quests. There is also something interesting, and even helpful, in the way that they have addressed the fundamental questions and provided some answers. At times, even the very questions are re-phrased in such a way that they can pry open new windows, unlock different doors and point to unexpected paths that can lead to another direction, thus facilitating one’s quest for answers. It is inevitable that when one turns to the study of philosophy, one’s choice is often dictated by the questions with which one is concerned.27 While one cannot generalize, insofar as circumstances vary, there is nevertheless some substance in the claim that in any intellectual quest in the context of an academic subject, one’s personal interest in a particular topic or specific issue is crucial. In the study of philosophy, this is especially true.28 It is as if one’s academic curiosity is nurtured by one’s own questions and sustained by an affiliation with a philosophical topic, a philosopher(s), or a philosophical school of thought.29 25

One has to be sensitive to the lack—for whatever reason—of such opportunities for innumerable individuals and groups. The point that is being made here is simply that human beings do, in various ways and in different capacities, utilize resources that will help improve their knowledge of themselves and of the world around them. 26 As used here, philosophy is the academic study taken up at institutions of learning or in private. The word is sometimes used more colloquially and means different things, depending on what the speaker is trying to communicate. 27 I have in mind the study of philosophy following either undergraduate work or foundation work which provides an overview of the history and the expanse of philosophy. 28 Arguably, this is also the case with the great thinkers themselves. Several of them develop their original insights in dialogue with other thinkers in history or in their lifetime. 29 This is illustrated in the Appendix: “Process Thought as Conceptual Framework: a Philosophical Odyssey”.

20

Chapter One

Philosophy is sometimes described as the study of ideas. Indeed when one peruses the writings of philosophers, one could readily agree. There is even something familiar about what they are saying even if one is not always clear about or conversant with the sources. Ordinary conversations as well as serious discussions—on the streets or in the media, in classrooms or in public debates—are laced with references, mostly passing, to ideas that have been the subject of much attention by philosophers. Today, for example, there is much talk about the urgent need for ethics and ethical thinking—given one reason for the collapse of the world economy. Debates about religion have been interspersed with the call for more rational thinking, on both sides of the debate, sometimes with references to particular philosophers. Educational policies call for greater attention to the knowledge-society for which educators are preparing future citizens— a task that has been of immense interest to philosophers.

Philosophy in Context But while the study of ideas itself can attract, the philosophical treatment of such ideas can also deter. There is the tendency to regard philosophical thoughts as lofty ideals, divorced from the practicalities and complexities of life. That observation is even supported by some philosophers themselves, who relegate its pursuit solely to those who have the leisure and therefore not for others who have to be preoccupied with their daily lives and work. It is not surprising, therefore, that philosophy is indeed regarded as “academic”, and its own discussions are brushed aside as “abstract”. The use of rather uncommon vocabulary among some philosophers lends itself to the accusation that philosophy is in a world of its own.30 Such a perception can isolate those who study it and cast the subject in a negative light. Somehow even if the claim that philosophy is the love of wisdom may seem alluring at first, it can nevertheless sound hollow. Such negative perceptions of philosophy are regrettable but understandable. Abstract thinking, as is carried out in much of philosophy, has a price to pay. Not only does it demand much closer and more prolonged attention, but it also loses some grounding in concrete experience. Charles Hartshorne distinguishes between the concrete and the abstract dimensions 30

This observation has certainly been made of Whitehead’s philosophy. On the other hand, he has rightly defended coining a new vocabulary to avoid the connotations (which he wished to distance from his philosophy) associated with words, terms or labels in common or traditional usage.

Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context

21

of reality. Philosophical thinking always runs the risk of concentrating on the abstract dimension to the neglect of the concrete dimension of reality. Returning to the previous discussion on the “context” of the question and its two meanings as used here, one can perhaps appreciate more what the pursuit of philosophy can offer if one notes that it can facilitate the questioner’s examination of the larger picture or vision of reality that often remains implicit. It will be recalled that the nature of the questioner is not only the basis for the raising of the questions but it also provides the ability to “transcend” his or her particularity. Exposure to the philosophical ideas of philosophers down through the ages, in different parts of the world and from various backgrounds, enables one to investigate much more thoroughly and critically the context from which one is pursuing the questions. Martin Buber, the eminent Jewish thinker, maintained that he had no philosophy as such; he merely opened the window to share the view that he was seeing, with the invitation to his readers/listeners to join him in looking at reality in that way.31 The questioning process, described earlier as the act of philosophizing, is an initial stage in the quest. One can of course remain there. After all, insights, opinions and viewpoints—formed in the act of philosophizing—are valuable. They do contribute to knowledge and provide information. But the challenge always presents itself to advance further as well as to dig deeper in our thinking or, to borrow Alexander Pope’s imagery, to drink deeply rather than to take mere sips from the Pierian spring. It is a challenge that one cannot ignore with impunity. One needs to scrutinize the larger or general picture.32 Otherwise, one can easily be swayed by what is fashionable or what is acceptable. Sometimes trends or conventions do not just mislead; they can also be dangerous. False ideas have, unfortunately, a way of leading one astray. Piecemeal or ad hoc responses, while understandable and even appropriate in some circumstances, can be limited and limiting.33 Restricting oneself to the fragmentary details, so essential in various branches of knowledge in order to make progress, can 31 Buber is also known as an existentialist. The existentialist philosophers certainly showed the significance of the questions about life and the importance of one’s decisions in life. His challenge of “hallowing ordinary life” vivifies one’s routine. The “life of dialogue” which he practiced and taught has a way of enabling one to value relationships and one’s place in society. 32 See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. 33 Changing situations, e.g. medical ones, many times demand immediate or quick thinking if one is to respond not only to the situation but also to the ethical issues which present themselves there and then. The challenge then is how to form an ethical basis that will facilitate decision-making.

22

Chapter One

nevertheless blinker one’s quest for truth. Indeed as Pope articulates it, “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” Philosophical thinking for its part goes beyond the trivial, the superficial and the transitory and stretches out towards the important or substantial in the hope of arriving at the truth. It is of course to be admitted that the attempt to heed the demands of generalization and conceptualization— as a further stage in the questioning process—can be frustrating and even pointless. In fact, one would have to accept that it has its critics, even among philosophers themselves.34 But as Charles Hartshorne puts it, the problem is not generalization itself since we naturally engage in it; rather, it is how we generalize that should occupy our attention. For this reason, one’s context in which one is engaged while philosophizing should also be the subject of close scrutiny.35 Otherwise, insofar as the background or the setting of any query can also colour one’s point of view, one can easily be directed to questionable or even wrong conclusions.

Religion as Context Given the theme of this book, let me say something about religion. After all, a very good example of the importance of scrutinizing one’s context is the position that religion occupies in the lives and thinking of many. Despite some valid criticisms as well as misinterpretations, religion nevertheless provides many with a valuable context in this instance, particularly since the various religions do concern themselves—in their scriptures, teachings and practices—with, among others, fundamental questions. But at the same time, the beliefs and practices within that context require close and critical examination not just to substantiate one’s appreciation of them but also to avoid false or untenable ones. In what way can the religious context be of help in the task of philosophizing? Some theists have regarded religion as adding depth to our understanding. But the word sounds very much like a negative judgment on non-religious interpretations. It would also be quite difficult to show, given the complexities of validating the belief in a God, that religion really deepens our understanding. A less contentious word, it seems to me, is vision. This means then that despite admitting that the quest for answers is a human one, the theist can still claim to be influenced by a vision not shared by secularists of what it means to be human. Because religion holds 34

This is particularly true with postmodernists and positivists. This is really to engage in metaphysical thinking (to be distinguished from subscribing to a metaphysical system). 35

Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context

23

that creation stands in a relation with God, the theistic perspective is shaped by that conviction. It is on this very point that the scriptures, be they Christian, Jewish, Islamic, Hindu, or Buddhist, play a significant role. For the scriptures capture and express in written form that religious vision. What they offer is this vision of creation standing in a certain relationship to God. There are insights and themes which bring out this understanding. The sacraments or the rituals and worship of the different religions highlight this relatedness to God because these do not make sense apart from this belief. To a great extent, the sacraments are a celebration of the theist’s awareness of being related to God. For many, religion as a context can and does make a difference to our quest. Some of the modern critics of religion attack religion for preying, as it were, on such experiences. Freud, tracing religion back to the need for emotional comfort, especially relief from disasters, accidents, sickness, and other natural evils that surround us, accuses religion of perpetuating human immaturity through its teachings and practices. He regards religion as an infantile neurosis that ought to be cured before we can grow into mature, healthy adults. Once cured of such a sickness, human beings, he alleges, can achieve maturity as a race. It will then no longer be necessary to invent fanciful beings personalized by religion for us to be able to face this impersonal and, at times, brutal world of ours. Marx criticizes religion for enslaving people through its preaching of acceptance of one’s miserable lot in life and its championing of the virtues of patience, humility and self-denial. Religion, he claims, misleads us in not recognizing the real causes of our alienation and suppresses our desire to improve the economic and political conditions of life. The human experience of longing and searching, in the view of Freud and Marx, is being misinterpreted and misled by religion. Furthermore, any hope that religion offers is for what they regard as a “pie-in-the-sky”. But these experiences of life, as our pre-reflexive starting point, are part and parcel of human life itself. While agreeing with Freud that religion is based on emotional needs, Jung rightly faults him for not taking into account that they are basic to human nature and that we cannot deny them without inducing neurosis. What is called for therefore is not the abandonment of religion as demanded by Freud. Rather, it is our response to those needs that is really in question.36 It will determine the kind of religion that we have in mind. Our response to human longing or yearning for

36 Chapter Five: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message” addresses this issue more fully.

24

Chapter One

something more does not have to be, and should not be, in the form severely criticized by Freud and Marx. Many religious practices and customs have arisen in response to specific life-situations. Religion cannot ignore deep-felt hunger or yearning for “something more” despite its being at times unclear as to what that “something more” is or even if the expression of this desire is simplistic or unreflective. It is in the midst of everyday life, experienced in various fashions and expressed in concrete ways, that we begin to ask questions which take us beyond the particular situation that we find ourselves in and lead us to a sense of transcendence. And our reaction, also part of human living, to that sense shapes religious thought.37 Our further attempts—our quest, as it were—to make sense of our experiences of life and in life lead to something more general and more complex as we yield to the urge for something more. There is in human life what Whitehead calls “a noble discontent”, which is “the gradual emergence into prominence of a sense of criticism, founded upon appreciations of beauty, and of intellectual distinction, and of duty.”38 Such a discontent distances us from particular experiences and inevitably prods us to seek conceptual expressions and rational support.

The Quest as Pursuit of Wisdom Returning to philosophy itself, we will recall that it has been traditionally defined as the love of wisdom.39 In this essay, I have suggested it to be a valuable resource in the pursuit of wisdom. Today there is a tendency in academic institutions, one that is particularly evident in our market-driven and technological society, to stress the acquisition of knowledge and the development of skills. This is not only understandable but also crucial if the education an institution provides is to be found appropriate and relevant.40 Nonetheless, something is amiss if the entire fo37

See Chapter Two: “Religion in Human Life and Thought”. A.N. Whitehead, Adventures of Ideas (Cambridge University Press, 1942), p. 12. 39 This understanding of wisdom was more holistic in ancient times, both in the West and in Asia. The later development of philosophy, particularly in the West, has made it into more of an intellectual exercise. While the intellectual is an essential element in one’s quest, human rationality which is the source of one’s questioning and quest should not be limited to it. The integral connection to the whole of one’s humanity cannot be overlooked. 40 The Guardian (20 Nov., 2007) carried an article tantalizingly titled “I think, therefore I earn” claiming that philosophy graduates are suddenly all the rage with employers. According to the writer, “It is in the fields of finance, property devel38

Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context

25

cus of one’s pursuit becomes narrowly directed at this consideration, important though it may be. Moreover, as Alfred Lord Tennyson puts it, “Knowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.” The pursuit of wisdom—with which philosophy has been closely associated—understood as the active participation in our full development as human persons, highlights certain essential features that need to be repeatedly stressed these days. While taking into account contemporary needs, we should not ignore these features either as we reflect on contextualizing the fundamental questions that we ask.41 The term “wisdom” itself is understood in different ways, so it is essential to explain more carefully its usage in this essay. The pursuit of wisdom, as has been pointed out already, is not just the acquisition of knowledge or the development of skills and talents although these are an integral part of it. These interpretations fail to take into serious account the fullness of our humanity, which—one will recall—is the basis of the question and the quest. Wisdom ultimately is rooted in our nature as human beings and the various dimensions of our humanity: intellectual, emotional, ethical, spiritual, aesthetic, social, creative and others. The pursuit of wisdom is the attempt to recognize, integrate and develop all those dimensions. It is also an awareness that our identity as human persons is shaped by and nourished by the community to which we belong. In turn our own activities, decisions, commitments have an effect on the community. Plato, opment, health, social work and the nebulous category of ‘business’ that those versed in Plato and Kant are most sought after.” Why? Here are a few quotes from that article: Lucy Adams (human resources director of Serco, a services business and consultancy firm) states that, “We need people who have the ability to look for different approaches and take an open mind to issues. These skills are promoted by philosophical approaches.” Fiona Czerniawska (director of the Management Consultancies Association’s think-tank) claims that, “A philosophy degree has trained the individual’s brain and given them the ability to provide managementconsulting firms with the sort of skills that they require and clients demand. These skills can include the ability to be very analytical, provide clear and innovative thinking, and question assumptions.” Deborah Bowman (associate dean for widening participation at St. George’s, University of London) observes that, “Graduates of philosophy who come in to graduate-entry medicine, or to nursing courses, are very useful. Growth areas in the NHS include clinical ethicists, who assist doctors and nurses.” It is good indeed to hear from that sector of society regarding what we are doing in philosophy and how it can indeed enrich our lives. Recently, much has been made of the fact that the newly-elected President of France is a philosophy graduate. 41 See Chapter Eleven: “Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education: Challenges and Issues”.

26

Chapter One

Confucius, Buber, and Martha Nussbaum, among others, draw our attention to this understanding of wisdom when they write about the importance of the development of one’s moral and social character and sense of responsibility in connection with the search for wisdom. The pursuit of wisdom is thus a holistic process because the goal and its foundation are themselves holistic.42 The pursuit of wisdom is truly a journey or an exploration whereby one addresses the questions that one is asking, evaluates their significance and draws on various resources—including philosophy—for possible answers. Moreover, the process of questioning and the consequent search for answers are just as important. Any answer one may arrive at in the very act itself of pursuing wisdom already enhances one’s development as a human being. The process is also important because hopefully it transforms one into a better human being inasmuch as one has taken the time to delve deeper into those questions and to face up to their implications.43 If wisdom is indeed the development of the whole person, then the transcendent dimension—which one can become aware of when one goes beyond the questions themselves—cannot be ignored. If one is to do the human person justice, then the transcendent side becomes an important factor in the pursuit of wisdom.44 In fact, it is what sets one on the quest. The pursuit of wisdom, it must be repeated, is not a purely intellectual activity. It also implies another fundamental question: how should one live?45 In fact, for many philosophers, seeking wisdom is intended to lead towards living a meaningful life. It should result in changing not just the way one understands but also how one acts, feels, imagines, and relates to others. It is a vision and a mission. It makes one conscious of oneself as a unique individual46 and as a responsive and responsible member of the greater whole. It is a lifetime preoccupation. Since it involves all of one’s human nature and its full development, then it does indeed transform one.

42

See Chapter Ten: “‘Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”: a View on Education”. 43 The same can be said about love. See Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness, and the Christian Message” and Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”. 44 The “transcendent” is not necessarily equated with “religious” although there are close links between the two. 45 This is associated with the ethical enquiry; but as used here, it refers to the more general one of conducting one’s life. 46 Being “a unique individual” should not be confused with promoting individualism. Cf. Chapter Five: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”.

Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context

27

In short, philosophy, as the love and pursuit of wisdom, does not just facilitate the questioning process but it can also, and more significantly so, enrich one’s life and that of others. In this sense it is a valuable resource in one’s quest that has its source in our human nature.

Concluding Comments In this essay, I have shared a point of view in the form of a reflection on the topic at hand. In developing it, I have claimed that the art of philosophizing, i.e. asking questions, is a human activity. It arises because of who we are as human beings. In our pursuit of answers to our questions, particularly the fundamental ones, the study of philosophy is an important resource, given that philosophers have preoccupied themselves with a more protracted and intense pursuit of these important questions. The religious context, I have claimed further, is a significant setting both for understanding, appropriating and responding to the human act of philosophizing and for the resultant questions and answers.47

47

It is in this sense that the Christian message of love, hope and redemption can be said to have a significant role for humankind.

CHAPTER TWO RELIGION IN HUMAN LIFE AND THOUGHT1

The Notion of Religion At the outset of this discussion on the place and role of religion in human life and thought, it will be worth our while examining the notion of religion itself. Moreover, given the complexity of its meaning and use of the term, some clarification must also be introduced. A popular illustration of this complexity can be seen in discussions as to whether Buddhism should be regarded as a religion insofar as—at least as generally understood—it does not believe in a transcendent god. Compounding that difficulty of classifying Buddhism as a religion is the fact that there are different kinds of Buddhism. Again, as is well known, there has been some claim that Marxism, because of its demands on its followers, is a religion, except in name. Additionally, the sophistication of the more established religions such as Christianity or Islam has led at times to the suspicion that native religions found in Africa or Asia are nothing more than superstitious beliefs—to the annoyance of those who regard them as genuine, if undeveloped, religions. More recently, we have been faced with the rise of what are labeled as “cults” rather than religions despite the fact that in some cases their present development appears to parallel the early stages in the growth of the more established religions. It is not surprising therefore that Wilfred Cantwell Smith would question the validity and the helpfulness of the concepts “religion” and “religions”. Because the concept of religion in the West has evolved and because religion itself has been reified, he claims that these concepts are not only unnecessary but also much less serviceable and legitimate than 1

Originally titled “The Function of Religion in Human Life and Thought,” paper presented at the International Research Colloquium: Identity and Change in the Christian Tradition, Universiteit Utrecht, The Netherlands (October 1997) and published in Marcel Sarot, ed., Identity and Change in the Christian Tradition. Studies in Philosophical Theology 2 (Frankfurt: Peter Lang Publishers, 1999), pp. 57-71.

30

Chapter Two

they once seemed.2 The existence of many general interpretations of religion leads John Hick in his book, An Interpretation of Religion, to opt for dividing them into “naturalistic”, i.e. religion as a purely human phenomenon, or “religious”, i.e. confessional. In contrast to these two groups Hick offers what he considers to be a theory of religion that is not confessional but one that acknowledges its plurality of forms. Focusing on belief in the transcendent, he bases his interpretation on “a family-resemblance understanding” of religion.3 Likewise, the variety of competing definitions of religion and the difficulty of judging their correctness make Peter Clarke and Peter Byrne turn to the “family-resemblance definition” of religion. They regard it as a looser one, a more informal mode. They believe that there can be no finality in the definition of religion because the phenomenon of religion keeps developing as illustrated by the New Religions, which have disclosed fresh insights into the relationship between religion and our present culture.4 The “family-resemblance understanding or definition” of religion, in contrast, can be useful in stressing the commonality amidst the diversity of religions. In their view, at a time when inter-religious dialogue is particularly called for, such an understanding of religion can help set the appropriate context. It is also important in distilling what is essential in the different religions.

Whitehead’s Understanding of Religion It seems to me that Alfred North Whitehead’s understanding of religion has the advantage of being more directly relevant to the topic under discussion. As Dorothy Emmet observes, religion for Whitehead has great significance for the ordering of life: it inevitably issues in propositions with a bearing upon the conduct of life.5 Whitehead’s account of religion is contained principally in his Religion in the Making. But this is complemented by shorter discussions in Science in the Modern World, Adventures of Ideas and other writings. Commenting on Whitehead’s discussion of religion, John Cobb notes that Whitehead depended heavily on secondary 2

Wilfred Cantwell Smith, The Meaning and End of Religion: A Revolutionary Approach to the Great Religious Traditions (London: SPCK, 1978), p. 121. 3 John Hick, An Interpretation of Religion: Human Responses to the Transcendent (Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1989). 4 Peter B. Clarke & Peter Byrne, Religion Defined and Explained (Basingstoke: Macmillan/N.Y.: St. Martin’s Press, 1993). 5 Dorothy Emmet, Whitehead’s Philosophy of Organism 2nd ed. (Basingstoke: Macmillan/N.Y.: St. Martin’s Press. 1966), p. 245.

Religion in Human Life and Thought

31

sources with which he had limited familiarity. Nevertheless, he adds that Whitehead’s discussion is valuable not only because it throws light on his philosophy but also because he develops his understanding of the relationship between philosophy and religion, a point that will be of particular interest to us here.6 Cobb also observes that Whitehead was not really preoccupied with religion, despite returning to this topic again and again. Whitehead’s attention was more focused on what have become known as penultimate questions. But religion remains in the background, securing the importance of these questions; however, it is rarely itself at the centre of the stage.7 Thus, it seems even more worthwhile here to explore further his conception of religion so as to assess its significance. Religion, Whitehead writes, is “what the individual does with his own solitariness”.8 He states that the essence of religion is to be discovered, not in public dogmas, practices, or institutions, but in confrontation with “the awful ultimate fact, which is the human being, consciously alone with itself, for its own sake.”9 This association of religion with solitariness will no doubt strike many as highly suspect and therefore unlikely to be of much help to us after all. Indeed, in an article developing this definition of religion, Donald Crosby observes that Whitehead’s description of religion has been frequently quoted and usually disparaged. However, he argues— and I agree with him—that it is seldom understood in anything like the way Whitehead intended.10 Whitehead’s understanding of religion is comparable to that of Paul Tillich. It will be recalled that Tillich regards religion in the largest and most basic sense as ultimate concern.11 He explains further, “If we abstract the concept of religion from the great commandment, we can say that religion is ultimately concerned about that which is and should be our ultimate concern.”12

6 John Cobb, Jr., A Christian Natural Theology: Based on the Thought of A.N. Whitehead (London: Lutterworth Press 1966), p. 216. 7 Alfred North Whitehead, Religion in the Making (Cambridge University Press, 1926), p. 17; also, p. 47. Compare this with Erich Fromm’s conception of loving as overcoming one’s sense of separateness. See Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”. 8 Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., p.16. 9 Ibid. 10 Donald A. Crosby, “Religion and Solitariness,” in Lewis Ford & George Kline (eds.), Exploration in Whitehead’s Philosophy (New York: Fordham University Press, 1983), p.149. 11 Paul Tillich, Theology of Culture, ed. Robert C. Kimball (N.Y.: Oxford University Press, 1964), pp. 7-8. 12 Ibid. p. 40.

32

Chapter Two

One of the misconceptions of Whitehead’s definition of religion is that he is championing an individualistic interpretation of religion, which seems to contradict the teaching of many an established religion. Admittedly, Whitehead does place great importance on individuality insofar as he maintains that religious consciousness does not arise until one has risen above what he calls “communal religion”, that is, beyond the stage in one’s development that is informed by the myths, collective rituals, emotions and beliefs of one’s society. As Whitehead puts it, “The moment of religious consciousness starts from self-valuation.”13 One becomes “religious” when one stands out as an individual, breaking out of the confines of the traditions and mores of inherited culture. One needs to loosen the strong grip of tradition upon oneself, thereby removing the sense of being at the mercy of arbitrary power.14 Only then will that individual be confronted with the concerns which are of utmost importance and depth. Only then will he or she become aware of the inadequacy of social custom and authority to answer the most fundamental of questions and be forced to turn elsewhere. Stripped of one’s sense of belongingness, experiencing solitariness, one begins to ask: “What, in the way of value, is the attainment of life?”15 One discovers then one’s uniqueness rather than one’s society as the focus and source of freedom and value. For Whitehead religiosity, it would seem, really stems from the exercise of one’s individuality, particularly as experienced in solitariness. It is important, however, to contextualize what Whitehead says regarding solitariness.16 Although Whitehead does stress that religion is primarily “a standing apart”, so to speak, the solitariness that one experiences is due to the detachment from one’s immediate surroundings. This in turn leads one to search for something permanent and intelligible to throw light on one’s immediate environment.17 Religion expresses, according to Whitehead, “the longing of the spirit that the facts of existence should find their justification in the nature of existence.’18 The detachment or disconnection from immediate surroundings is thus a prerequisite for “the emergence of a religious consciousness which is universal, as distinguished

13

Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., p. 59. Ibid. pp. 39-40. 15 Ibid. p. 60. 16 It seems to me that that the term “distinctiveness” rather than “solitariness” actually serves better what Whitehead has in mind in the light of his over-all metaphysics. 17 Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op.cit., p. 47 18 Ibid. p. 85. 14

Religion in Human Life and Thought

33

from tribal, or even social.”19 Whitehead, in fact, sees a close connection between solitariness and universality. Although the moment of religious consciousness starts from self-valuations, as we have noted already, “it broadens into the concept of the world as a realm of adjusted values, mutually intensifying or mutually destructive.”20 Whitehead denies that there is such a thing as absolute solitariness: “Each entity requires its environment. Thus man cannot seclude himself from society… But further, what is known in secret must be enjoyed in common, and must be verified in common.”21 Elsewhere Whitehead describes religion as “the reaction of human nature to its search for God.”22 I will return to Whitehead’s conception of God later. But at this point, it is worth noting, by way of explaining the phrase “reaction of human nature”, that Whitehead does not believe human nature to have a separate function which could be regarded as a special religious sense. Nor does he hold that religious truth is something other than the highest form of knowledge, which had been first acquired with our ordinary senses and then developed by our intellectual operations. As he puts it succinctly, “religion starts from the generalisation of final truths first perceived as exemplified in particular instances.”23 What follows then is the amplification of these truths into a coherent system and their application to the interpretation of life. This interpretation serves as the criterion for the success of these truths. Although in this manner religious truths can be judged like any other truth, they are peculiar in that they explicitly deal with values. By this claim Whitehead means that religious truths make us conscious of what he calls the “permanent side of the universe which we can care for”. In this way religion enables us to discover meaning in our own existence against the background of the meaning of the wider scheme of things.24 Inasmuch as Whitehead’s description of religion as “a human reaction” involves knowledge, it invites comparison with Plato’s. Plato, it will be recalled, regarded religion as the culmination of the search for truth. 19

Ibid. p. 47. Ibid. p. 59. 21 Ibid. pp.137-138. It should also be borne in mind that in Whitehead’s metaphysics (as it is in Hartshorne’s) “relatedness” or “the social” is more fundamental and inclusive than individuality. See Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”. 22 Whitehead, Science in the Modern World (Cambridge University Press, 1926), p. 266. Also, his Religion in the Making, op. cit., p. 124. 23 Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., p. 124. 24 Ibid. 20

34

Chapter Two

Plato differentiated and distanced his conception of religion from the more anthropomorphic versions, which were prevalent in his time. In contrast, Whitehead, while regarding “communal religion” with its myths, practices and beliefs as merely a stage in the development of religious consciousness, nevertheless prefers to discuss religion in the context of what he refers to as “the great rational religions”. For him these religions are “the outcome of religious consciousness which is universal, as distinguished from tribal, or even social”.25 Furthermore, Whitehead’s definition needs to be qualified by what he says elsewhere; namely, that the immediate reaction of human nature to the religious vision is worship.26 In this sense it is much closer—and further removed from Plato—to Charles Hartshorne’s conception of religion as essentially worship by which Hartshorne means “devoted love for a being regarded as superlatively worthy of love”. Hartshorne maintains that what distinguishes true religion from primitive ones is the worshipful attitude which it inspires.27 Although the definitions from Whitehead provided thus far do not explicitly mention human life, there is no doubt but that Whitehead sees an intimate link between it and religion. In fact, Whitehead claims that “justification” is the basis of religion. By justification he means that one’s character is developed according to one’s faith. For him this is the preliminary inescapable truth. “Religion is force of belief cleansing the inward parts.”28 Consequently, he maintains that sincerity is the primary religious virtue. In terms reminiscent of Kant, Whitehead holds that even the doctrinal side of religion, i.e. the system of general truths, will transform one’s character so long as these truths are sincerely held and vividly apprehended. Religion also promotes the transformation of society through its moral energy.29 On the other hand, unlike Kant, Whitehead also maintains that while religion is valuable for ordering one’s life, conduct is merely an inevitable by-product. It is not the mainstay of religion. In fact, for him the overemphasis on rules of conduct can be detrimental to religion. What should emerge from religion is individual worth of character. But Whitehead warns us that worth is positive or negative, good or bad. Thus, in a rather startling observation, but perhaps a more realistic one, he points out that religion is by no means necessarily good and therefore that it may be

25

Ibid. p. 47. Whitehead, Science in the Modern World, op. cit., p. 192. 27 See, among others, Charles Hartshorne, A Natural Theology for Our Time (La Salle, III: Open Court, 1967). 28 Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., p. 15. 29 Ibid. 26

Religion in Human Life and Thought

35

evil.30 Whitehead’s conception of religion also clearly establishes its link with human thought not only because of his constant recourse to the word “rational” but also because of his distinction between religion and mere sociability. Religion, he says, emerges from ritual, emotion, belief, and rationalization. But it is only when belief and rationalization are well established that solitariness itself is discernible as of essential religious importance.31 Without these, religion is in decay and returns to mere sociability.32 Thus, religion as a human reaction is a conscious reaction. Furthermore, it is a conscious reaction to the world we find ourselves in. While religion appeals to the direct intuition of special occasions and emanates from what is special, it encompasses everything through conceptualization.33 This is accomplished with the help of human reason. Progress in religious truth, Whitehead tells us, is “mainly a progress in the framing of concepts, in discarding artificial abstractions or partial metaphors, and in evolving notions which strike more deeply into the root of reality.”34 For this reason, Whitehead shares the tendency, rooted in Western philosophical tradition but criticized in some quarters, to connect religion with a metaphysics. It must be noted, however, that metaphysics for Whitehead is understood and developed differently from the dominant metaphysical schools of thought in the West. He describes metaphysics as “the science which seeks to discover the general ideas which are indispensably relevant to the analysis of everything that happens”.35 Whitehead argues that rational religion—and as we have already noted, rationality for Whitehead is an integral part of religion—must have recourse to metaphysics. Metaphysics enables religion to scrutinize itself. Whitehead regards the dispassionate criticism by metaphysics of religious beliefs to be of the utmost necessity. “Religion will not regain its old power” he points out, “until it can face change in the same spirit as does science. Its principles may be eternal, but the expression of these principles requires continual development.”36 He strongly insists that the foundations of dogma must be laid in a rational metaphysics which criticizes meanings, and endeavours to express the most general concepts adequate for the all-inclusive uni30

Ibid. p. 17. Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., pp. 18-19. 32 Ibid. p. 23. Also, his Adventures of Ideas (Cambridge University Press, 1942), p. 207. 33 Ibid. p. 32. 34 Ibid. p. 131. 35 Ibid. p. 84. See also, pp. 88-89. 36 Whitehead, Science in the Modern World, op. cit., pp. 189. 31

36

Chapter Two

verse.37 Moreover, for Whitehead the dogmas of religion are “clarifying modes of external expression”, signaling the return of individuals from solitariness to society. Since there is no absolute solitariness, everything taking place in an environment, religious dogmas as modes of expression are thus important. The interaction between religion and metaphysics is regarded by Whitehead as one great factor in promoting the development in religion of an increasing accuracy of expression, disengaged from adventitious imagery.38 At the same time, however, metaphysics can benefit from its connection with religion by taking into account the evidence furnished by religion. While religion must reckon with metaphysics in formulating and developing its teachings, it makes its own contribution of immediate experience to that pool of knowledge.39 In this way, metaphysical knowledge becomes truly all-inclusive. Thus, metaphysics and religion are not only related but also, and more importantly, mutually beneficial. Whitehead offers yet another definition of religion, which incorporates what has been presented so far and adds another dimension: Religion is the vision of something which stands beyond, behind, and within, the passing flux of immediate things; something which is real, and yet waiting to be realised, something which is a remote possibility, and yet the greatest of present facts; something that gives meaning to all that passes, and yet eludes apprehension; something whose possession is the final good, and yet is beyond all reach; something which is the ultimate ideal, and the hopeless quest.40

John Cobb explains that religion for Whitehead is not a means to any end beyond itself, not even to the good of society. Instead religion is a vision of that whose possession, although unattainable, is the final good. Cobb adds that the reason for worshipping—we have already heard that the reaction to this vision is worship—is not to achieve some good, but because that which one dimly apprehends evokes worship.41 In other words, religion is the attempt to see beyond the ephemeral; and what one sees, although not too clearly, inspires a worshipful attitude. This last definition also gives us an indication of how Whitehead conceives the object of religion to be. God is the object of that vision. Yet 37

Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., p. 83. Whitehead, Science in the Modern World, op. cit., p. 266. Whitehead adds that the interaction between religion and science also promotes religion’s development. 39 Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., p. 79. 40 Whitehead, Science in the Modern World, op. cit., pp. 267-268. 41 Cobb, A Christian Natural Theology, op. cit., pp. 217-217. 38

Religion in Human Life and Thought

37

Whitehead, not just in this passage but generally, is quite reluctant to refer to God in his discussions on religion. Lewis Ford offers an explanation: “Whitehead accords great importance to religious vision, but at the same time finds a great hindrance in the particular image of God being proposed in the existing religious community, on two grounds: it stifles the adventure of inquiry, [and] it perpetuates an outworn psychology of tyranny.”42 Ford observes that Whitehead presumably did not yet have a clear idea of God at the time of his writings. Consequently, Whitehead’s description is “an intuitive, proleptic statement of what he was searching for, deliberately couched in paradoxical terms since he did not yet have the conceptual warrants to justify these claims.”43 But, Ford points out, they serve as a lure towards which his thought was moving.44 This “vision” that Whitehead mentions in the quotation above has an effect on one’s life. John Cobb makes the observation that Whitehead’s own general mood in life was of quiet confidence in the worthwhileness of living. But this confidence was not derived from any assurance about history or about nature.45 Indeed, Whitehead maintains that the worship of God, which is the outcome of this vision, is “not a rule of safety—it is an adventure of the spirit, a flight after the unattainable. The death of religion comes with the repression of the high hope of adventure.”46 He accepted that there is perpetual perishing, loss as well as gain, sorrow as well as joy. In rather poetic terms, he refers to human life “as a flash of occasional enjoyments lighting up a mass of pain and misery, a bagatelle of transient experience.”47 And yet, whatever may be its temporal outcome, what guarantees the worthwhileness of life for Whitehead, remarks Cobb, is the vision of God. When we respond positively to that vision, contributing our share to the world, then it is a vision that indeed can give meaning to life. “The vision of God was for Whitehead,” as Cobb sums it up, “the basis for all reality of meaning and all depth of feeling.”48

42

Lewis Ford, The Emergence of Whitehead’s Metaphysics 1925-1929 (New York: SUNY Press, 1984), pp. 107-108. 43 Ibid. p. 108. 44 See the last chapter of Process and Reality titled “God and the World”, op. cit. 45 Cobb, Christian Natural Theology, op. cit., p. 218. 46 Whitehead, Science in the Modern World, op. cit., p. 276. 47 Ibid. p. 275. 48 Cobb, Christian Natural Theology, op. cit., p. 223

38

Chapter Two

Religion, Experience and Philosophical Thinking No doubt, Whitehead’s conception of religion raises some important questions: To what extent is this helpful in determining what could be classified a religion? Does it nullify the claim that special experiences are themselves religious? Is religion a merely human phenomenon? Does this mean that while the experience of solitariness is universal, religion itself is not so insofar as one may not reach, for whatever reason, that state of doing something about one’s solitariness? How does this conception of religion relate to the major religions of the world?49 These are fundamental concerns which need to be addressed carefully. However, in exploring Whitehead’s understanding of religion, my present interest has to be limited to dealing with the specific issue as to how religion can help in our attempts to grasp the meaning or significance of human life. Although Whitehead accepts that there are special occasions which can lead to religious consciousness, religion as far as he is concerned, emerges from ordinary human experience.50 He refers to “the human search” or “the longing of the spirit” for something which transcends everything; but the search or the longing for it is deeply rooted in mundane matters, in everyday experience.51 As was already noted, this search or longing results in solitariness. Solitariness, however, is more than just the common experience of loneliness. Instead, it enables one to become aware of one’s individuality, which is a further stage from one’s previous preconscious experience of sociality and relatedness. Since for Whitehead religion is a response to solitariness, it means that solitariness itself is actually “pre-religious” despite being a further stage in one’s search for the transcendent. Strictly speaking then, religion is not to be equated with individuality as commonly understood. And unlike the sense of solitariness, religion is more than a stage. There has been an evolution in one’s experience and not just a prolongation. In addition, there has been a development 49

See also, D.Z. Phillips’ comments on this essay in his “Introduction: Reflecting on Identity and Change” in Marcel Sarot and Gijsbert van den Brink (eds.), Identity and Change in the Christian Tradition. Contributions to Philosophical Theology 2, op. cit., pp.15, 22. 50 Whitehead provides a brief analysis of experience in his Symbolism: Its Meaning and Effect (Cambridge University Press, 1928), p. 19f. For a more extensive and technical discussion, see his PR, particularly Part III. 51 This is comparable to what Plato observed in a slightly different setting: “For the true way of going, of or being led by another, to the mysteries of love, is to begin with examples of beauty in this world and to keep climbing for the sake of that absolute beauty, using them as steps.” Symposium 211E.

Religion in Human Life and Thought

39

since there is an active element: religion after all is what one does with one’s own solitariness. It is the response to one’s search or longing. There is a purposeful consciousness in religion that is merely latent in solitariness but is developing as one becomes aware of one’s individuality.52 Our further attempts to make sense of our experiences of and in life lead to something more general and more complex as we yield to the urge for something more.53 There is in human life what Whitehead calls “a noble discontent”, which is “the gradual emergence into prominence of a sense of criticism, founded upon appreciations of beauty, and of intellectual distinction, and of duty.”54 Such a discontent distances us from particular experiences and inevitably prods us to seek conceptual expressions and rational support. Whitehead outlines the process in this particularly helpful passage: Our consciousness does not initiate our modes of functionings. We awake to find ourselves engaged in process, immersed in satisfactions and dissatisfactions, and actively modifying, either by intensification, or by attenuation, or by the introduction of novel purposes. This primary procedure which is presupposed in consciousness I will term Instinct. It is the mode of experience directly arising out of the urge of inheritance, individual and emotional. Also, after instinct and intellectual ferment have their work done, there is a decision which determines the mode of coalescence of instinct with intelligence. I will term this factor Wisdom. It is the function of wisdom to act as a modifying agency on the intellectual ferment so as to produce a self-determined issue from the given conditions.55

Whitehead reminds us that “religion is concerned with our reactions of purpose and emotion due to our personal measure of intuition into the ultimate mystery of the universe,” and that here we must “not postulate simplicity.”56 Rational thinking has a major contribution to make to reli52 See “Religion as Context” in Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”. 53 Fergus Kerr refers to this as “immortal longings”. See his Immortal Longings: Versions of Transcending Humanity (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1997). 54 Whitehead, Adventures of Ideas, op. cit., p. 12. 55 Ibid. p. 58. Whitehead sets this out for the purpose of understanding social institutions, but I have used it in this context because it also shows how he understands the process from experience to conceptualization. He does add that this division must not be made too sharply. 56 Ibid. p. 207. Whitehead maintains that history and common sense have testified that systematic formulations are potent engines of emphasis, of purification, and of

40

Chapter Two

gion. Situations in life have a way of pressing challenging questions on us, and for the sake of intellectual credibility in religion, these questions cannot remain ignored. While religion is not, and should not be, a purely rational enterprise, it does involve careful, deliberate and logical thinking. Whitehead frequently uses the phrase “rational religion”. On this point his reference to the obvious link between religion and metaphysics is especially notable. It is obvious not in the sense that the link is generally accepted since there are those who do not wish to associate religion with metaphysics or with any other kind of philosophical trappings but even argue that such an association is detrimental and dangerous. Rather, there is a clearly recognizable tradition which closely connects the two even if the kind of connections is variously interpreted.57 As we have already seen, Whitehead, following in that tradition, accepts and defends that linkage. For him both religion and metaphysics are based on human experience and represent a common search for ultimacy. They help shape human thought and influence human life. Whitehead’s understanding of the relationship between the two indicates that for him the formation of religious thought is inevitably connected to a metaphysical view of reality.58 One area where metaphysics features in religion is in the development of religious doctrines.59 We have seen that Whitehead maintains that progress in religious truth comes about “in the framing of concepts, in

stability. Without resorting to reason, Christianity would have sunk into superstition. 57 See Chapter Three: “Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research”. 58 It is also grounded in his theory of knowledge. Whitehead rejects “mere knowledge”. He claims that knowledge is always accompanied by accessories of emotion and purpose and that there are grades in the generality of ideas (Cf. his Adventures of Ideas, op. cit., p. 5). All knowledge, according to him, is derived from, and verified by, intuitive observation. All knowledge is conscious discrimination of objects experienced (Ibid. pp. 227-228). He regards ideas as “explanatory of modes of behaviour and of inrushes of emotion dominating our lives. Although ideas do modify practice, practice mainly precedes thought; and thought is mainly concerned with the justification or the modification of a pre-existing situation.” Ibid. p. 140; also, p. 127. 59 There has been talk of course of the demise of metaphysics, particularly during the era of logical positivism. However, it is probably more accurate to speak of the decline of certain metaphysical ways of philosophizing rather than of metaphysical thinking itself. It should be noted that Whitehead’s notion of metaphysics and his metaphysical view of reality are quite distinctive. Cf. Process and Reality. Because of its emphasis on becoming (as well as relatedness and events), his metaphysical system has been referred to, among other descriptions, as “process metaphysics” although he himself referred to it as the “philosophy of organism”.

Religion in Human Life and Thought

41

discarding artificial abstractions or partial metaphors, and in evolving notions which strike more deeply into the root of reality,”60 all of which are achieved with the aid of metaphysics. But it is also useful to recall that for Whitehead religious truths are generalized truths, which originated in particular instances, expanded into a coherent system and then applied to the interpretation of life. The criterion for acceptance or rejection of these truths is their success in the interpretation of life.61 Whitehead’s wellknown metaphor to describe speculative philosophy as the flight of the aeroplane is equally applicable to the discovery and formulation of religious truths: after taking off from life’s experiences and being borne aloft by rational thinking, religion must touch down in life’s fields again.62 Religious doctrines represent a further stage in the process of making more explicit what one has held implicitly or has experienced. Ideally, they should express faithfully these pre-reflexive experiences. If they do, then one’s appreciation of religion becomes richer and possibly more profound. But sometimes the process of conceptualization does not do justice to the earlier stage; hence the need to rethink and re-interpret doctrines. As Vincent Brümmer observes, “Changes in the circumstances and demands of life bring about changes in cultural and hence also in the conceptualisation forms that people find adequate, including the concomitant beliefs that they hold to be true. Because of changes in the demands of life, our conceptual forms cannot remain eternally adequate.”63 This is why the task of formulating religious doctrines is an on-going one. It is not surprising then that an urgent challenge today is to formulate religious doctrines which are not only based on concrete life but also, in an intellectual and systematized manner, express adequately the realities of life. What is called for therefore is the integration of religion with both human thought and life. The following quotation from Whitehead is particularly appropriate here:

60 Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., p. 131. Cf. my “Process Thought as Conceptual Framework,” Process Studies 19, 4 (Winter 1990), pp. 248-255 included in the Appendix. For a very useful discussion, based on Whitehead’s thought, on the relationship between doctrinal beliefs and experience, see John B. Cobb Jr. & David Ray Griffin, Process Theology: An Introductory Exposition (Belfast: Christian Journals Ltd., 1977), pp. 30-40. 61 Whitehead, Religion in the Making, op. cit., p. 124. 62 This is the objective of this book on the Christian message as vision and mission. 63 Vincent Brümmer, Speaking of a Personal God: an Essay in Philosophical Theology (Cambridge University Press, 1992), p. 20.

42

Chapter Two Religion is an ultimate craving to infuse into the insistent particularity of emotion that non-temporal generality which primarily belongs to conceptual thought alone. In the higher organisms the difference of tempo between the mere emotions and the conceptual experiences produce a life-tedium, unless this supreme fusion has been effected. The two sides of the organism require a reconciliation in which emotional experiences illustrate a conceptual justification, and conceptual experiences find an emotional justification.64

Despite some questions which will remain, Whitehead’s conception of religion does, in my view, result in a clearer understanding of the role of religion in human life by showing how religion arises. It also points to the need to transcend our experiential starting point through rational thinking and to integrate the doctrinal expression with concrete human life.

64

Whitehead, Process and Reality, op. cit., p. 16. Italics added.

CHAPTER THREE CATHOLIC TRADITION AND PHILOSOPHICAL RESEARCH1

The Catholic Context In this essay I would like to look at philosophy within the context of the Catholic tradition.2 Throughout history the Catholic Church, which could be said to embody Catholic tradition, has strongly endorsed philosophy both in its teachings and in its practice. One has merely to turn to various papal encyclicals and documents for the official Church’s view on this particular matter.3 And inasmuch as philosophy features in the curriculum of Catholic academic institutions and seminaries, one can also readily conclude that there has been solid support for the study and teaching of philosophy. On the other hand, such close connection between the Catholic Church and philosophy has not always been viewed in a positive light for various reasons. Some, including those who count themselves as belonging to that religious tradition, would even go so far as to lament any association between philosophy and the Catholic religion. For while one can readily accept that it has indeed shaped philosophy, the nature of that influence would be, at least to some, rather a bone of contention.4 The dispute gains intensity when one examines any future association between the Catholic tradition and philosophical research. I shall be concerned both with showing how the Catholic Church continues to offer support and even provide impetus to philosophy and with reflecting on the nature of that support. Basing myself on relevant papal documents I shall explore the Catholic Church’s influence on philosophy over the years. In many ways the Catholic tradition as concretized 1

An earlier version of this essay was presented at the international conference on “Catholic Traditions in History, Literature and Philosophy” organized by the Erasmus Institute of Notre Dame University, USA, and the Catholic University of Lublin, Poland (September 2004) and subsequently published in Christopher Garbowski et al. (eds.), Catholic Universities in the New Europe (Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL, 2005), pp.179-207.

44

Chapter Three

in these writings has helped to shape and advance the present state of philosophy. To clarify this point I need to examine not just the stated support of the Catholic Church for philosophy but also the reasons for it.5 In the latter part of this essay I shall offer some philosophical observations and suggestions with a view to indicating how the Catholic tradition could contribute even more to philosophical research.

The Catholic Church’s Support for Philosophy Documentation on the Catholic Church’s support for philosophical research is readily available. Among various official documents two immediately come to mind: Aeterni Patris of Leo XIII promulgated August 1879 and Fides et Ratio of John Paul II published in September 1998. These two specifically address the question of the relationship between faith and reason and the role played by the Catholic Church in fostering that relationship. Although not in the same extended way other papal writings throughout history—a point drawn to our attention by both documents themselves—testify to the strong backing by the Catholic Church of the pursuit of philosophical thinking. As is well known, the Catholic tradition has always upheld human reason, the main source and tool of philosophical thinking, as a legitimate and credible avenue to truth. In the philosophical debate between empiricism and rationalism, it has to a large extent sided with the latter. And 2

The question of what constitutes “Catholic tradition” is rather problematic. I am interpreting it here in the specific sense described in the text. 3 During his Wednesday catechesis on November 21, 2012, Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed that faith is eminently reasonable. Properly understood, according to him, there is no opposition between faith and reason. He emphasized that the Catholic tradition “has always rejected the so-called principle of ‘fideism’, that is, the will to believe against reason”. 4 Pope Benedict XVI stressed this point in his lecture titled, “Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections” at the Aula Maxima of the University of Regensburg, Germany, 12 September 2006. 5 It should, however, be noted that in emphasizing the close association between the Catholic Church and philosophical research, I am not necessarily endorsing every interpretation of that link between the two in the past or in the present. Another rather controversial issue in this respect is whether we should focus on the distinctiveness of the “Catholic” tradition; instead, we are urged to consider the “catholicity” of our tradition. This seems to me a valid observation, but it ignores an equally important question: Does the Catholic religion as Catholic religion not have a specific contribution to make?

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

45

even in the theological context, it has constantly maintained that reason, among other resources, provides us with some knowledge about God and facilitates our attempt to reach out to the divine. The Catholic Church has always been aware of how reason drives human beings to attain goals which make human living more valuable and of how philosophy facilitates that pursuit.6 She realizes that the advantages to human life offered by such a pursuit comes from God, and if properly used, leads back to God with God’s grace 7 On this point, the Catholic Church could be said to be endorsing the philosophical view that what distinguishes human beings from every other creature is rationality and that the exercise of that rationality is the highest human act.8 The teachings of the Catholic Church have also acknowledged and valued the indispensable help provided by philosophy for a deeper understanding of faith and for communicating the truth of the Gospel to others.9 This can clearly be seen in the Church’s continued insistence on the need for philosophical training in the study of theology, and re-affirmed by Pope Benedict XVI in his lecture at Regensburg. The Church advocates the study of philosophy which, in the words of Leo XIII, “responds most fitly to the excellence of faith, and at the same time is consonant with the dignity of human science”.10 Here Leo XIII singles out, citing several advocates of philosophical studies, the example of Aquinas’s philosophy in his call for the practical reform of philosophy.11 John Paul II develops this observation on the importance of philosophy for theology—in the light of current philosophical interests—when he remarks that a specific contribution of philosophy to theology is “in preparing for a correct auditus fidei with its study of the structure of knowledge and personal communication, 6

Fides et Ratio, par. 5. It is interesting to note that this encyclical makes specific reference to the common human quest for meaning in both East and West, cf. Ibid. par. 1. 7 First Vatican Council, ch. 4, par. 11. As the encyclical Fides et Ratio puts it: “Men and women have at their disposal an array of resources for generating greater knowledge of truth so that their lives may be ever more human. Among these is philosophy, which is directly concerned with asking the question of life’s meaning and sketching an answer to it. Philosophy emerges, then, as one of the noblest of human tasks.” par. 3. 8 There is, of course, a more nuanced philosophical debate on this issue insofar as some philosophers regard rationality as the human intellect (to be distinguished from the will) while others include in that term the human will. This has resulted in the debate between rationalism and voluntarism. 9 Fides et Ratio, par. 5. 10 Aeterni Patris, par. 1. 11 Ibid. par. 25.

46

Chapter Three

especially the various forms and functions of language.”12 Referring to intellectus fidei John Paul II maintains that the innate intelligibility of the divine truth contained in the Sacred Scriptures and rightly interpreted by the Church’s teaching benefits from the logical and conceptual structures provided by philosophy in expounding and making these truths more explicit.13 Thus, far from hindering the development of human arts and studies, including philosophical study, the Church actively assists and promotes them.14 Moreover, the Church does not forbid these studies to employ, each within its own area, its own proper principles and method.15 According to Leo XIII, it would be a serious injustice to accuse the Church of being opposed to the advance and development of natural sciences.16 One can detect the practical support given to the study of philosophy by the Catholic Church in the curriculum that has been presented in pontifical institutes in Sapientia Christiana. This document outlines the objectives of the study of philosophy: in the basic cycle, philosophy is to be taught so that students arrive at a solid and coherent synthesis of doctrine, learn to examine and judge the different systems of philosophy, and also gradually become accustomed to personal reflection while in the second cycle when specialization takes place, these objectives are to be perfected through a deeper grasp of the determined object of philosophy and of the proper philosophical method.17 The articulation of these objectives illustrates well a concerted and systematic support on the part of the Church for the study of this subject. 12

Fides et Ratio, par. 65. Ibid. par. 66. He goes on to state, with specific reference to dogmatic theology and moral theology, that “without philosophy’s contribution, it would be impossible to discuss theological issues.” 14 Vatican Council I, ch. 4, par. 11. 15 Ibid. ch. 4, par. 12. 16 Aeterni Patris, par. 30. “For, when the Scholastics, following the opinion of the holy Fathers, always held in anthropology that the human intelligence is only led to the knowledge of things without body and matter by things sensible, they well understood that nothing was of greater use to the philosopher than diligently to search into the mysteries of nature and to be earnest and constant in the study of physical things.” This sentiment was echoed by Pope Benedict XVI in his lecture titled “Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections”: “… the faith of the Church has always insisted that between God and us, between his eternal Creator Spirit and our created reason there exists a real analogy, in which—as the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 stated—unlikeness remains infinitely greater than likeness, yet not to the point of abolishing analogy and its language.” 17 Sapientia Christiana, art. 59. 13

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

47

This preoccupation with the study of philosophy extends to the Catholic university.18 In Ex Corde Ecclesiae the Catholic university is described as having the honour and responsibility to unreservedly consecrate itself to the cause of truth. In this way it serves simultaneously human dignity and the good of the Church, convinced that truth is a real ally and that knowledge and reason minister to faith. While championing the acquisition of useful knowledge, a Catholic university—as described in this document—is distinguished by its free search for the whole truth about nature, man and God.19 The document points out at the same time that a Catholic university should seek the dialogue between faith and reason so that it will become more evident that these bear harmonious witness to the unity of all truth. In this way such an academic institution will promote greater love for the truth and will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the meaning of human life and God’s purpose in creation20 and the person and message of Christ.21 A Catholic university has the responsibility, just like any other university, to respond to the search for meaning but fulfills that need in a particular way: “its Christian inspiration enables it to include the moral, spiritual and religious dimension in its research, and to evaluate the attainments of science and technology in the perspective of the totality of the human person”22

Philosophy and Reason The Catholic Church’s position on the study of philosophy is rooted in her trust in reason. Various papal documents insist that philosophy, as an academic discipline, must obey its own rules and be based upon its own principles. Fides et Ratio states that “the content of Revelation can never 18

In his article in the New Catholic Encyclopedia, 2nd ed., E.A. Maziarz observes that “in the U.S. Catholics manifest their interest in philosophy by requiring it not only in seminaries but also in collegiate education.” p. 280. In Jesuit universities and colleges, as well as in other Catholic academic institutions, courses in philosophy form part of the core curriculum or general education for all undergraduates, irrespective of majors or kinds of degrees. 19 Ex Corde Ecclesiae, par. 4. A Catholic university is said to be “a place of research, where scholars scrutinize reality with the methods proper to each academic discipline, and so contribute to the treasury of human knowledge. Each individual discipline is studied in a systematic manner; moreover, the various disciplines are bought into dialogue for their mutual enhancement.” 20 Ibid. par. 17. 21 Ibid. par. 21. 22 Ibid. par. 7. See Chapter Eleven: “Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education: Challenges and Issues”.

48

Chapter Three

debase the discoveries and legitimate authority of reason”23 while Aeterni Patris exhorts philosophy to make use of its own method, principles, and arguments.24 Fides et Ratio maintains that the Church makes no claim to, or has a preference for, any particular philosophy. It gives as the underlying reason for this reluctance the Catholic Church’s view that philosophy, even when it engages theology, must remain faithful to its own principles and methods.25 Catholic tradition holds that reason, with which every human being is endowed, has the capacity to rise beyond the contingent towards the infinite.26 Philosophy, with its specific tools and scholarly methods, articulates and enhances that human capacity.27 Fides et Ratio traces this trust in reason to an important Pauline text, Rom. 1:20, citing Paul’s affirmation that this capacity of human reason to transcend sensory data to the Creator himself is part of the original plan of creation.28 In the document from Vatican Council I, we read that “God, the source and end of all things, can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason: ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made.”29 Aeterni Patris refers to the right use of philosophy as chief among the nat-

23

Fides et Ratio, par. 4. Aeterni Patris, par. 4. 25 Fides et Ratio, par. 49. “Otherwise there would be no guarantee that it would remain oriented to truth and that it was moving towards truth by way of a process governed by reason. A philosophy which did not proceed in the light of reason according to its principles and methods would serve little purpose. At the deepest level, the autonomy which philosophy enjoys is rooted in the fact that reason is by its nature oriented to truth and is equipped moreover with the means necessary to arrive at truth.” The encyclical considers the term “Christian philosophy” but provides the following explanation: “In itself the term is valid, but it should not be misunderstood: it in no way intends to suggest that there is an official philosophy of the Church since the faith as such is not a philosophy. The term seeks rather to indicate a Christian way of philosophizing, a philosophical speculation conceived in dynamic union with faith.” Ibid. par. 76. On the other hand, the encyclical insists that Christian thought, because of its tradition, has a major contribution to make to the development of philosophical thought today: “The close relationship of continuity between contemporary philosophy and the philosophy developed in the Christian Church is intended to avert the danger which lies hidden in some currents of thought which are especially prevalent today.” Ibid. par. 86. 26 Ibid. par. 24. 27 Ibid. 28 Ibid. par. 22. 29 Vatican Council I, ch. 2, par. 1. 24

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

49

ural helps endowed by God on the human race.30 The same encyclical speaks of how reason prepares the human mind for the fit reception of revelation,31 how it is rounded and finished by philosophic studies,32 and how philosophy enables one to defend the truths.33 The high regard in Catholic tradition for human reason can be also be traced back to the conviction that reason, properly trained, is able to demonstrate with certainty the existence of God, to establish that divine signs are credible foundations of the Christian faith, to express the natural law properly to guide all humankind, and finally to help understand religious mysteries.34 Along with science and revelation and in harmony with them, philosophy is considered an instrument of truth.35 This high regard for reason is complemented by the belief, according to Fides et Ratio, that there exists a body of knowledge which may be judged a kind of spiritual heritage of humanity, a kind of an implicit philosophy, which all humankind shares in a general and unreflective way.36 The encyclical adds that, “As a search for truth within the natural order, the enterprise of philosophy is always open—at least implicitly—to the supernatural.”37 The Catholic Church, on the other hand, has always been cautious in her view of the status and significance of reason. There is talk of discernment and of the distinction of the Christian faith from reason or philosophy. In the New Testament, especially in the Letters of St Paul, one thing emerges with great clarity: the difference between “the wisdom of this world” and the wisdom of God revealed in Jesus Christ. As John Paul II puts it, “The depth of revealed wisdom disrupts the cycle of our habitual patterns of thought, which are in no way able to express that wisdom in its fullness.”38 And in the Pauline text, Rom 1:20, drawn to our attention by Fides et Ratio and cited earlier, there is the added observation that “the 30

Aeterni Patris, par 2: “For, not in vain did God set the light of reason in the human mind; and so far is the super-added light of faith from extinguishing or lessening the power of the intelligence that it completes it rather, and by adding to its strength renders it capable of greater things.” 31 Ibid. par. 4. 32 Ibid. par. 6. 33 Ibid. par. 7. 34 Humani Generis, par. 29. 35 The Proofs for the Existence of God in the Light of Modern Natural Science, Address of Pope Pius XII to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Nov. 22, 1951, par. 52. 36 Fides et Ratio, par. 4. 37 Ibid. par. 75. This line of thinking is followed through in the discussion of the significance of the Christian message in the various essays of Part II of this book. 38 Ibid. par. 23

50

Chapter Three

coming of Christ was the saving event which redeemed reason from its weakness, setting it free from the shackles in which it had imprisoned itself.”39 Thus, while the capacity of reason to question is welcomed, there is nevertheless an insistence in Catholic tradition that it also needs to be questioned since it does not have absolute and exclusive value.40 Thus, while the Catholic Church, as has already been noted, respects philosophy’s valid aspiration to be an autonomous enterprise, obeying its own rules and employing the powers of reason alone—an aspiration that should be supported and strengthened—she also reminds us that reason is seriously handicapped by inherent weaknesses.41 Despite the external signs which confirm the divine origin of the Christian religion, human reason can be hampered nonetheless from accepting it whether because of prejudice or bad faith.42 Given this observation, it is understandable that the Catholic Church would be quite solicitous in ensuring that reason, in its exercise of its just freedom, does not make claims that are contrary to divine teaching or that, by overstepping its limits, intrude on matters of faith.43 The valid autono39

Fides et Ratio, par. 22. Aeterni Patris also alerts us to this when it recalls that “as it is evident that very many truths of the supernatural order which are far beyond the reach of the keenest intellect must be accepted, human reason, conscious of its own infirmity, dares not affect to itself too great powers, nor deny those truths, nor measure them by its own standard, nor interpret them at will; but receive them.” Aeterni Patris, par. 8 40 Fides et Ratio, par. 4. 41 Ibid. par. 75. Humani Generis points out: “For though, absolutely speaking, human reason by its own natural force and light can arrive at a true and certain knowledge of the one personal God, Who by His providence watches over and governs the world, and also the natural law, which the Creator has written in our hearts, still there are not a few obstacles to prevent reason from making efficient and fruitful use of its natural ability.” par. 2. 42 Ibid. par. 4. Quanta Cura puts it even more strongly: “If human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion, there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling.” par. 3. It is imperative, it seems to me, to seek points of encounter rather than points of departure. 43 Vatican Council I, ch. 4, par 12. Fides et Ratio explains the reason clearly: “The search for truth, of course, is not always so transparent nor does it always produce such results. The natural limitation of reason and the inconstancy of the heart often obscure and distort a person’s search.” par. 28. Aeterni Patris also warns of the dangers of false reason in matters of conduct: “For, since it is in the very nature of man to follow the guide of reason in his actions, if his intellect sins at all his will soon follows; and thus it happens that false opinions, whose seat is in the under-

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

51

my of reason is therefore not equivalent to a self-sufficiency of thought.44 Thus, the Catholic Church has always insisted that philosophy should be open to all avenues to truth, including revelation. This is because in Catholic belief, revelation “introduces into our history a universal and ultimate truth which stirs the human mind to ceaseless effort; indeed, it impels reason continually to extend the range of its knowledge until it senses that it has done all in its power, leaving no stone unturned.”45 The claim is made that by being open, reason itself, far from being damaged, becomes more aware of the universality of truth.46 And even when acknowledging that in the case of doctrines graspable by human intelligence philosophy should make use of its own method, principles, and arguments, Aeterni Patris teaches nevertheless that it should not be done in such a manner as to withdraw from divine authority because “those things which become known by revelation have the force of certain truth, and that those things which war against faith war equally against right reason.”47 It is not, of course, surprising that this view of human reason and of the limitations of philosophy would have its critics.48 standing, influence human actions and pervert them.” par. 2. The same point is made in Quanta Cura: “But who does not see and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasures and interests?” par. 4. Cf. also Vatican Council I, par. 7. 44 Fides et Ratio, par. 75. 45 Ibid. par. 14. 46 As Fides et Ratio explains it: “Of itself, philosophy is able to recognize the human being’s ceaselessly self-transcendent orientation towards the truth; and, with the assistance of faith, it is capable of accepting the ‘foolishness’ of the Cross as the authentic critique of those who delude themselves that they possess the truth, when in fact they run it aground on the shoals of a system of their own devising.” par. 23. 47 Aeterni Patris, par. 8. The same point is made in Qui Pluribus, par. 7: “In order not to be deceived and go astray in a matter of such great importance, human reason should indeed carefully investigate the fact of divine revelation.” 48 The encyclical Qui Pluribus notes this criticism: “We know that there are some who, in their overestimate of the human faculties, maintain that as soon as man’s intellect becomes subject to divine authority it falls from its native dignity, and hampered by the yoke of this species of slavery, is much retarded and hindered in its progress toward the supreme truth and excellence” but responds, citing the example of the Scholastic teachers, that those “who to the study of philosophy unite obedience to the Christian faith, are philosophizing in the best possible way.” par. 9. Cf. also Humani Generis, par. 18.

52

Chapter Three

Catholic tradition has always held that faith does not threaten but rather enriches reason. “Faith therefore has no fear of reason, but seeks it out and has trust in it. Just as grace builds on nature and brings it to fulfillment, so faith builds upon and perfects reason.”49 Reason divorced from faith, just as faith without reason, is impoverished and enfeebled.50 Fides et Ratio observes that this joint mission towards the truth “on the one hand makes the believing community a partner in humanity’s shared struggle to arrive at truth; and on the other hand it obliges the believing community to proclaim the certitudes arrived at, albeit with a sense that every truth attained is but a step towards that fullness of truth which will appear with the final Revelation of God.”51

Revelation and the Magisterium To understand more fully the Catholic Church’s defense of its position regarding reason and faith, we need to explore further the Catholic tradition’s view of revelation and of the Church’s own role. It has always held that there are two kinds of knowledge: natural reason and revelation, distinct not only as regards its source but also as regards its object.52 The insufficiency of human reason is supplemented and complemented by revelation, a supernatural way to the truth.53 According to this religious tradition, the truth, which God reveals to us in Jesus Christ, is not opposed to the truths which philosophy perceives. On the contrary, the two modes of knowledge lead to truth in all its fullness.54 Consequently, the encyclical Fides et Ratio speaks of two complementary forms of wisdom— philosophical wisdom, which is based upon the capacity of the intellect, for all its natural limitations, to explore reality, and theological wisdom, 49

Fides et Ratio, par. 43. Fides et Ratio explains this claim in some detail: “what matters most is that the believer’s reason use its powers of reflection in the search for truth which moves from the word of God towards a better understanding of it. It is as if, moving between the twin poles of God’s word and a better understanding of it, reason is offered guidance and is warned against paths which would lead it to stray from revealed Truth and to stray in the end from the truth pure and simple. Instead, reason is stirred to explore paths which of itself it would not even have suspected it could take. This circular relationship with the word of God leaves philosophy enriched, because reason discovers new and unsuspected horizons.” par. 73. 50 Ibid. par. 48. 51 Ibid. par. 2. 52 Vatican Council I, ch. 4, par. 1. 53 Ibid. ch. 2, par. 1. 54 Fides et Ratio, par. 34.

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

53

which is based upon Revelation and which explores the contents of faith, entering the very mystery of God.55 It stresses that the truth made known to us by Revelation is neither the product nor the conclusion of an argument devised by human reason. Revelation is gratuitous and is anticipatory of the ultimate and definitive vision of God.56 In Ecclesiam Suam, revelation is described as the history of salvation, a “long and changing dialogue which begins with God and brings to man a many-splendored conversation.”57 This conversation with God occurs most fully in Jesus Christ and through him God discloses something of God’s nature and of God’s love for us.58 The encyclical also notes that the dialogue of salvation takes on many forms and chooses appropriate means, adapting itself to the concrete situations.59 Dei Verbum takes up this theme.60 It adds that as time moves on, the Church constantly moves forward towards the fullness and fulfillment of God’s divine truth in her.61 This understanding of revelation leads the Catholic Church to claim a particular role in the pursuit of truth. Having received “the charge of preserving the deposit of faith and the apostolic office of teaching, she has the right and duty of condemning what wrongly passes for knowledge, lest anyone be led astray by philosophy and empty deceit.”62 In Humani Generis, one will read that the authentic interpretation of this deposit of faith has been entrusted not to each of the faithful, not even to theologians, but only to the Magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church.63 And it

55

Ibid. par. 44. Ibid. par. 15. 57 Ecclesiam Suam, par. 70. 58 It adds that “the dialogue of salvation normally experienced a gradual development, successive advances, humble beginnings before complete success.” Ibid. par. 77. 59 Ibid. par. 85. See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. 60 Dei Verbum, par. 2: “This plan of revelation is realized by deeds and words having an inner unity: the deeds wrought by God in the history of salvation manifest and confirm the teaching and realities signified by the words, while the words proclaim the deeds and clarify the mystery contained in them. By this revelation then, the deepest truth about the salvation of man shines out for our sake in Christ, who is both the mediator and the fullness of all revelation.” 61 Ibid. par. 8. 62 Vatican Council I, ch. 4, par. 8. The term “charge” as used here will be taken up in Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”. 63 Humani Generis, par. 21. In papal documents there is a certain wavering in the description of revelation between “deposit of faith” and “salvation history”. The reference in this essay to the Magisterium of the Church is merely to show how the 56

54

Chapter Three

insists that “because aberrations from the truth persist, even in the field of philosophy, the Teaching Authority of the Church has to keep watch over the philosophical sciences themselves, in order that Catholic dogmas may suffer no harm because of erroneous opinions.”64 The Church’s role, vis-à-vis philosophy, is clarified by Fides et Ratio: “The Magisterium’s role is not to intervene in philosophical disputes but to respond clearly and strongly when controversial philosophical opinions threaten right understanding of what has been revealed, and when false and partial theories which sow the seed of serious error, confusing the pure and simple faith of the People of God, begin to spread more widely.”65 In the light of what has been revealed by God, the Magisterium therefore believes it to be its duty to authoritatively exercise what it describes as “a critical discernment of opinions and philosophies which contradict Christian doctrine.”66 John Paul II, himself a noted philosopher, is careful to add that this discernment in the form of interventions ought not to be understood as negative but rather as prompting, promoting and encouraging philosophical enquiry. He notes that “besides, philosophers are the first to understand the need for self-criticism, the correction of errors and the extension of the too restricted terms in which their thinking has been framed.”67 And here we are given some indication of how the Magisterium actually promotes philosophical research. With specific reference to Aeterni Patris this encyclical states that “the Magisterium does more than point out the misperceptions and the mistakes of philosophical theories. With no less concern it has sought to stress the basic principles of a genuine renewal of philosophical enquiry, indicating as well particular paths to be taken.”68 The encyclical Fides et Ratio itself illustrates very well this aspect of the Magisterium’s role since in Chapter VII it discusses at some length current requirements and tasks for philosophers and theologians today.

claim to, and the exercise of, the teaching authority of the Catholic Church has contributed to philosophical research. 64 Ibid. par. 34. 65 Fides et Ratio, par. 49. 66 Ibid. par. 50. Cf. also par. 63. For this reason, Humani Generis, par. 9 exhorts Catholic philosophers and theologians to study and rebut erroneous opinions. 67 Ibid. par. 51. 68 Ibid. par. 57.

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

55

Some Observations and Comments So far I have attempted to deal with the topic of this essay by presenting what I consider to be the Catholic Church’s stance on philosophy based on my reading of relevant papal encyclicals and documents. I have also discussed the nature and direction of that support arising from the position taken by the Catholic Church in its teaching and practice. In this section of the essay I should like to offer some observations on the relationship between the Catholic tradition and philosophy and to make some comments on the suggestions for the future as presented in the encyclical Fides et Ratio.69 Given the Church’s documented interest in philosophy itself, as well as in its recognized importance for theology, one cannot but accept that such a situation will lead—as indeed it has done—to promoting philosophical pursuits. With any pursuit, no matter in what discipline, the volume and quality of support, material or otherwise, go a long way towards advancing it. This advantage is compounded when the pursuit serves a certain goal—in the case of philosophy, its special service to theology— because, though secondary, the benefits may be important enough to stimulate more interest in the subject.70 Both history and actual results can confirm the developments in philosophy which have occurred because of the Catholic tradition. But the Catholic Church’s patronage of philosophical research and the link between philosophy and theology have led some to question the kind of philosophy that has resulted.71 It might even make one compare the situation to the suspect beneficence of patrons that artists enjoy. Centuries ago, the Athenian stranger in Plato’s Laws had bemoaned the practice in Italy and Sicily of leaving the judgment of poets in the hands of the spectators. Such a practice spelled the destruction of the poets since they were in 69

For a more extended discussion, see my Religion, Reason and God (Frankfurt: Peter Lang Publishers, 2004). 70 One can perhaps draw a parallel here with the teaching of philosophy courses in a core curriculum. In my experience of teaching these courses in the USA to nonphilosophy students (who need these courses to graduate), a number have become quite interested in the subject even to the extent of switching their major or taking a minor in philosophy. 71 I have limited my exploration to the relationship between philosophy and theology. The encyclicals, particularly Fides et Ratio, also discuss the relationship between philosophy and culture, cf. par. 100. It is important likewise to bear in mind that Catholic tradition has always held that philosophy plays an important role in enabling believers and non-believers to engage in dialogue with each other.

56

Chapter Three

the habit of composing their poems to suit the taste of the judges. Or one may have serious reservations with a philosophy that has been endorsed by a Church body in the same way that there are those who frown upon any corporate sponsorships for various activities. The suspicion is not just about the motives but extends also to the end-product. Similarly, a philosophy that meets with the approval of ecclesiastical bodies runs the risk of being isolated or largely ignored. Worse, it could be dismissed as being subservient and therefore lacking in integrity. The papal documents which we have examined have addressed this criticism. But it is worth adding that the criticism itself seems to be founded on a certain questionable assumption; namely, that philosophical thinking occurs or should occur in a vacuum. It does not. The act of philosophizing always takes place in a specific context, and every philosopher brings into it personal, as well as communal, presuppositions and assumptions.72 In addition, one’s motives as well as intended goals always colour one’s pursuit of the truth, whether one does this in the religious or nonreligious context. Autonomy is never absolute, nor is freedom of thinking. The encouragement and support of philosophy by the Catholic Church do not in themselves constitute restrictions that would prevent it from attaining standards which would otherwise be possible. We need to distinguish perception or isolated cases from the total reality. My point is not to deny that philosophical research has at times become parochial because of the Catholic Church’s attempt to oversee it, but rather to reject the claim that such cases constitute a general adverse effect on philosophical thinking. The criticism is also grounded in another suspect assumption; namely, that philosophy must be entirely accountable to its own standards, methods and terms. Hence, any association with faith would be seen as an unacceptable crossing of boundaries.73 Again, we have already encountered the Church’s response to this point. But perhaps it is not out of place to note that in alerting us to the demands of faith on philosophy,74 we are actually being reminded that human experience in its reality, which includes a certain awareness of transcendence, is much wider than its conceptual or its intellectual expression.75 Thus, no philosophical conception 72

See Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”. This strict separation between disciplines runs throughout the academic curricula, but is fortunately being countered by interdisciplinary studies. 74 “The truths of faith make certain demands which philosophy must respect whenever it engages theology,” Fides et Ratio, par. 77. 75 It would be instructive to compare this point with what some contemporary European philosophers have become aware of in their philosophical thinking; namely, the need to incorporate the imagination. 73

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

57

can exhaust experience, simply because its expression is merely one, albeit probably the most important, feature of the human reality.76 In distancing philosophy from faith, some philosophers mistake the important conceptual distinction between reason and faith for the reality of human experience.77 Moreover, this criticism takes a rather narrow interpretation of human rationality to be the exercise of reason whereas the latter arises from, is grounded in, and serves human rationality. The two are not the same. This means that philosophy, which employs reason, must be more open to its wider base which gives us more access to the truth than that which human reasoning alone can achieve.78 In his encyclical Fides et Ratio John Paul II draws our attention to an important relevant consideration. He distinguishes between philosophy as a system and philosophy as human aspiration: “Every philosophical system, while it should always be respected in its wholeness, without any instrumentalization, must still recognize the primacy of philosophical enquiry, from which it stems and which it ought loyally to serve.”79 And he contextualizes that comment by observing the changed role of philosophy itself in modern culture. “From universal wisdom and learning, it has been gradually reduced to one of the many fields of human knowing; indeed in some ways it has been consigned to a wholly marginal role”80 In other words, it seems to have forgotten the wider basis.81 76

In Chapter One, a similar distinction is made between the act of philosophizing and the pursuit of philosophy. See also Chapter Nine: “Concretizing Concrete Experience” in Religion, Reason and God, op. cit., pp. 141-158. 77 The separation of reason and faith, or philosophy and religion, is more evident in Western compared to Asian thought. I believe that the task is not to re-think but to reconstruct the relationship between reason and faith in more holistic ways. Cf. my “Faith and Reason: a Process View” in Religion, Reason and God, op. cit., pp. 1-9. To me, the reality is the one human experience, interpreted and acknowledged differently by the religious believer and by the secularist. Faith thus is awareness and acknowledgement of transcendence. Religious faith develops when that takes place within the context of a religious community. See Chapter Two: “Religion in Human Life and Thought”. 78 This is, of course, an epistemological question which gives rise to the debate between rationalism and empiricism. The point I am making does not side with either but is inclusive of both. 79 Fides et Ratio, par. 4. In a certain sense, such an observation could well be expressed in Shakespeare’s words: “There are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy”! 80 Fides et Ratio, par. 47. This unfortunately has influenced the goals and objectives of education. We have been asked to specify learning outcomes in terms of “knowledge, skills and competence”. While this is crucial in meeting the demands

58

Chapter Three

Regarding the relationship between faith and reason I would refer to it as the “exercise of reason within the context of religious faith” because the starting point for reflections, whether one is a theist or a secularist is the common starting-point of any thinking being: our own humanity and our experience of it as we interact with one another. What distinguishes the theist is that the use of reason is done within the context of religious faith. Religious beliefs, therefore, are an acknowledgement and articulation of that context. It is a context that of course can be challenged by anyone insofar as the theist makes claims. But challenge and dispute by anyone who does not operate from the same context is possible only because there is a common starting-point to which I have just referred.82 This proposed understanding of the relationship between faith and reason is different from fides quaerens intellectum because in that interpretation religious faith is already the starting point. Nor should this understanding be described as intellectus quaerens fidem because, for me, it is experience rather than an intellectual act that grounds the intellectual process. Philosophy thus is not regarded as ancilla fidei. Instead, I regard the same human experience as occurring in different contexts, one of which is described as “religious”.83

The Tasks Ahead How may the Catholic tradition shape the future of philosophical research? To some extent this question has been dealt with, albeit implicitly, when we examined the support and the kind of influence that the Catholic tradition has given to philosophy. The continued support will no doubt stimulate further scholarship and teaching of this subject. Aside from individual interests in specific issues or schools of thought, the shape of such philosophical research will also be influenced by the response to official guidance or directives. We have a very good example in John Paul II’s Fides et Ratio where he outlines what he considers to be the current requirements and tasks for and needs of the market place, the functionality of this approach can make one wonder about the overall purpose of education—an issue that could well make the encyclical’s challenge a particularly relevant one. See Chapter Eleven: “Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Higher Education”. 81 See Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”. 82 Throughout this book I refer to this as “points of encounter”. See Chapter Five: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”, for instance. 83 Cf. Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context.” Fides et Ratio uses the symbol of “two wings”.

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

59

philosophy. Although addressed specifically to Catholic thinkers, he has a wider audience in mind. The context in which he presents his suggestions is the acknowledged relationship between faith and reason, and for this reason he turns to the Christian vision as expressed in Sacred Scripture. For some philosophers, it is probably neither the source nor even the vision itself but the possibility of having a vision (a metaphysical as well as an epistemological issue) that will be of interest to them. And here John Paul II touches on an issue that should indeed concern contemporary philosophers—even if it runs counter to much of the work that is done presently in philosophy. Noting the fragmentation of knowledge in various fields, including philosophy, and its consequences, one of which is the crisis of meaning, he speaks of the need for philosophers to retain and develop a vision of reality. He wants us to recover what he calls “the sapiential dimension” of the pursuit of truth, reminding us that “a philosophy which no longer asks the meaning of life would be in grave danger of reducing reason to merely accessory functions, with no real passion for the search for truth.”84 The encyclical bemoans the loss of metaphysical thinking that characterizes much of contemporary philosophy, and in doing so illustrates well what had been averted to earlier; namely, that the Magisterium does more than just point out lacunae but also, perhaps more importantly, sparks off a renewal, and in this case, in the study of metaphysics. John Paul provides us with the reason: “If I insist so strongly on the metaphysical element, it is because I am convinced that it is the path to be taken in order to move beyond the crisis pervading large sectors of philosophy at the moment, and thus to correct certain mistaken modes of behaviour now widespread in our society.”85 It is a call worth heeding.86 Another issue touched upon by the encyclical that hopefully will be pursued by those engaged in philosophical pursuits, is the nature and status of human reason. According to John Paul II, this is “one of the tasks which Christian thought will have to take up through the next millennium of the Christian era.”87 Given the fact that this is the very tool of philosophers, it should be of interest to contemporary philosophy, particularly since its capabilities have been largely curtailed by—of all people—

84

Ibid. par. 81. In Veritatis Splendor, he refers to the crisis of truth and its consequences. 85 Ibid. par. 83. 86 In response to this call a major conference, “Metaphysics in the Third Millennium International Conference,” was held in Rome in September 2000. 87 Ibid. par. 85.

60

Chapter Three

philosophers themselves.88 Variations of Kant’s view on faith abound in the writings of many contemporary philosophers. In contrast, the encyclical states emphatically the conviction that humans can arrive, having been endowed with reason, at a unified and organic vision of knowledge.89 Since in some ways the future of philosophy is very much linked to our claims regarding reason’s capabilities,90 this topic certainly merits much closer attention. John Paul’s own words provide us with a fitting summary and conclusion: I appeal to philosophers, and to all teachers of philosophy, asking them to have the courage to recover, in the flow of an enduringly valid philosophical tradition, the range of authentic wisdom and truth— metaphysical truth included—which is proper to philosophical enquiry. They should be open to the impelling questions which arise from the word of God and they should be strong enough to shape their thought and discussion in response to that challenge. Let them always strive for truth, alert to the good which truth contains. Then they will be able to formulate the genuine ethics which humanity needs so urgently at this particular time. The Church follows the work of philosophers with interest and appreciation; and they should rest assured of her respect for the rightful autonomy of their discipline. I would want especially to encourage believers working in the philosophical field to illuminate the range of human activity by the exercise of reason which grows more penetrating and assured because of the support it receives from faith.91

88

There is a certain irony here when one takes into account that the tool being called into question is the very one used to question it! The same observation can probably be made of those who reject metaphysics. One wonders whether they are merely substituting one kind of metaphysical thinking for another. Or sometimes the debate develops into a linguistic one: what one means by “metaphysics”. 89 John Paul refers to this topic also in more specific terms: “How can one reconcile the absoluteness and universality of truth with the unavoidable historical and cultural conditioning of the formulas which express that truth?” Fides et Ratio, par. 95. Here I believe that the metaphysics developed by the philosophers Alfred North Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne has much to offer with its distinction between the abstract and the concrete. See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. 90 It seems to me that an even more crucial issue is re-thinking the Western conception of reason. 91 Fides et Ratio, par. 106. This call has a special relevance to the present attempt of this book to draw out the significance of the Christian message.

Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research

61

His successor, Pope Benedict XVI echoes and supports this appeal, noting that success in the pursuit of truth will come about only “if reason and faith come together in a new way, if we overcome the self-imposed limitation of reason to the empirically falsifiable, and if we once more disclose its vast horizons.”92 Likewise, Pope Francis affirms the intimate relationship between faith and reason and the importance of the dialogue between them.93

92

Pope Benedict XVI, “Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections,” op. cit. 93 Pope Francis, Lumen Fidei (29 June 2013), pars. 33-34.

PART TWO: THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE

CHAPTER FOUR LOVE, RELATEDNESS AND THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE

Is Love Lost? In his influential book, The Art of Loving,1 Erich Fromm maintains that, contrary to certain assumptions about love, loving is actually an art; and like any other art, it requires knowledge and effort. The popular reference to “falling in love”, he argues, is misleading because love is not a sentiment open to anyone simply to indulge in, nor is it a matter of chance for those lucky enough to be included in its embrace. While he accepts that all human beings possess a craving for love, and therefore that it is part and parcel of what being human is, he insists that we need to deepen our understanding of that need if we are to fulfil it most adequately. Accordingly, he devotes most of the book to discussing what he calls the theory of love, one that is grounded in what he considers to be a well-rounded understanding of human nature. Further on in the book and in the light of his theory of love, he expresses regrets over its disintegration in contemporary Western society. Since, as he explains throughout his work, love is a capacity of the mature, productive character and since culture has an impact on the formation of character, he laments the fact that the culture of contemporary Western society is in this regard, despite many advantages and benefits, counterproductive to the development of love. To substantiate his claim, he provides his observations and analysis of various developments in this society.2 It is an alarming comment on present-day society, and its message needs to be heard if we care enough to prevent its further disintegration. Unfortunately, his is not a lone voice, particularly if we tune in to what is 1

Erich Fromm, The Art of Loving (London: Unwin Books, 1972). See Chapter III: “Love and its Disintegration in Contemporary Western Society” and Chapter IV: “The Practice of Love”, Ibid. pp. 62-95.

2

66

Chapter Four

happening not just in our society today but also throughout the world. The messages which filter through various modes of communication or shared in the social media would seem to confirm as happening in our midst what Fromm already observed much earlier. In fact, one could even state that there has been a further deterioration given the multiplicity of wars in various parts of the world, the constantly growing migrations for various reasons, the rapid increase in the number of lonely and alienated individuals and groups—and so many other such happenings. What is also startling— and therefore is more challenging—is that the Christian message, which is essentially a message of love, has been embedded in much of Western society for a considerable length of time. In fact, Christianity in its various forms is part and parcel of its history. One wonders then why, if Erich Fromm’s comment is well-founded and borne out by recent events, such a situation as he describes it has arisen. Does this indicate a failure in the way the Christian message has been delivered? Has there been a gap between the teaching and the practice of that message? Could it also be that the message itself has been rejected or at least ignored? Is it love that is lost in our midst, or have we lost our way? These questions require a thorough investigation of the situation before one can attempt to respond to Fromm’s comment. But that is not what this essay aims to undertake presently. My objective here is not so much to provide a detailed factual analysis of the causes and reasons for this predicament, by way of a follow-up to Fromm, but rather to probe into the underpinnings of the existence of love in all its forms and to enquire into how the Christian message, with its special vision and mission, has a role to play in this instance. Moreover, insofar as this is a philosophical consideration, my intention therefore is less on reflecting on the actual content and basis of the Christian message so as to articulate its richness—as one would expect if this were a theological piece—or on arguing for and justifying its status and importance—as one is wont to do defensively in a debate. Instead, in focusing here on what I believe can be claimed about the basis of love and of the role of the Christian message, I hope to show that there is a commonality to the understanding and practice of love between those who subscribe to and those who reject the Christian message. At the same time, however, I will claim that the Christian message as set out in its vision and carried out in its mission has its own contribution to make.

The Basis and Practice of Love Any discourse on love, despite delineated parameters like the above, is inevitably fraught with difficulties. One of the most controversial ones is

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message

67

actually how to define it in such a way that it incorporates all the variations and forms of love. After all, not only are there good reasons to distinguish one form from another, but somehow we have even differing expectations of what love truly means. Fromm’s discussion of this topic, after distancing itself from more popular notions of love, centres on setting out and elaborating on what he calls specific forms of love based on the different objects of love. He rightly points out that these variations determine how one should understand the kind of love involved. Much earlier, Plato and Aristotle had also listed and had discussed various kinds of love which were referred to variously as philia, eros and agape. They had alerted us that, despite a common foundation, these should not be confused one with another insofar as they differ as to their nature and to their objects. Christian theologians had taken over and developed the last of these to mean what Christian love is all about, particularly with reference to God’s love for all. They, too, distinguish such a love from ordinary human love. Agapeic love or caritas is gratuitous and all-embracing, unlike other kinds of loving relationships. Another bone of contention, which naturally leads to more controversies and complications, is how to determine what its nature is. Does love have a reality, or is it merely a phenomenon? Is it essentially a sentiment or a feeling? Does it even exist, or is it merely imagined? Realists and idealists, among others, offer contradictory answers to these questions. In classical mythology, love as it was understood then was in fact seen as antimony to reason; and the disparity between these led to love being regarded as restraining humans from being able to think clearly. Then of course there are the popular versions of what love is—which Fromm dismisses—but which nonetheless make more sense to some people compared to a rather dry definition of what it is. In their view, one “falls in love”, is inexplicably “attracted to the other”, or “carried off on a cloud”. For them love is felt, not thought about and certainly not discussed. Accordingly, poets, literary writers, lyricists and lovers are better attuned to tell us about it, so it is alleged. Despite those difficulties and others besides, it is still worthwhile nonetheless to examine from a philosophical perspective—the stated aim of this essay—the basis and practice of love itself, irrespective of the form that it takes. This is because, as in other instances, arguments and controversies result because of differing starting points. This is not to say, however, that we can avoid being embroiled in further disputation by first settling on these points. That would be a false expectation. And even if we do adopt a common point of departure, we cannot be assured that no differences in perspectives would arise at some stage. Nevertheless, it is worth

Chapter Four

68

our while to take a closer look at what love itself is. Fromm himself maintains, despite referring to the differences between types of love based on the objects of love, as was already noted, that love itself “is not primarily a relationship to a particular person; it is an attitude, an orientation of character which determines the relatedness of the person to the world as a whole, not towards one ‘object’ of love.”3 Besides, by probing into the basis and practice of love itself, rather than by devoting our time differentiating its various forms, we may be better positioned to appreciate and assess any role that the Christian message may have in the context of Fromm’s observation of the deterioration of love in society. Given this focus, therefore, the questions here are: firstly, what is the foundation of the human act of loving, and secondly, what distinctive role does the Christian message have in this regard?

Love and Human Nature Human nature, according to Fromm, is the basis of love. He writes, “Any theory of love must begin with a theory of man, of human existence.”4 Like several other philosophers, including Aristotle, Fromm explains that humans are gifted with reason, and this enables them to become aware of themselves and of their plight in life. He continues to explain, but taking a somewhat different direction from that of Aristotle, that this selfawareness includes an awareness of being separate from others, an awareness which is the source of shame, guilt and anxiety. He adds that overcoming this separateness is the deepest need of human beings. Discussing how that need is met in various cultures and by different individuals, often mistakenly or even destructively, he then states that love—he is referring to true love—is what overcomes the human sense of separateness. And in being in a loving union with another, unlike the other ways of dealing with separateness, one’s integrity or individuality is not destroyed. The following passage from his book is worth quoting in full: “Love is an active power in man; a power which breaks through the wall which separates man from his fellow man, which unites him with others; love makes him overcome the sense of isolation and separateness, yet it permits him to be himself, to retain his integrity. In love the paradox occurs that the two beings become one yet remain two.”5 Since he regards loving as an art, he maintains that overcoming the sense of separateness requires the 3

The Art of Loving, op. cit., p. 38. Ibid. p. 13. 5 Ibid. p. 21. 4

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message

69

personal involvement of the individual. Loving, according to Fromm, requires knowledge and effort on one’s part. Fromm’s account of love is informed and enriched by his observations of human behaviour. Behaviour is the “acting out”, as it were, of who we are in the first place. To understand this point more fully we do need to retrace our steps, so to speak, to ask what we are as human beings. Fromm does this when he enquires into what differentiates human beings from animals. But his enquiry centres on what distinguishes human behaviour from animal instinct. Accordingly, he describes how human beings stand out in reality in terms of what they have done as a race and what we do individually: “What is essential in the existence of man is the fact that he has emerged from the animal kingdom, from instinctive adaptation, that he has transcended nature—although he never leaves it; he is part of it—and yet once torn away from nature, he cannot return to it.... Man can only go forward by developing his reason, by finding a new harmony, a human one, instead of the prehuman harmony which is irretrievably lost.”6 Based on this observation of basic human behaviour, Fromm then develops his theory of love as an art, which as he puts it, we need to work on like any other art if we wish to master it. This observation of human behaviour by Fromm seems to be based on the common assumption that we are fundamentally and primarily individuals. He describes how our awareness of individuality is an emergence from a rather primitive connectedness. Such a view finds support in much of Western philosophical thinking and in the democratic processes valued in some Western societies. For instance, phrases such as “standing up for oneself”, “defending the rights of the individual”, “upholding personal liberty and freedom” and many others articulate the understanding that in these societies, what is extolled is the status of each and every one of us. There is recognition of the dignity, and not just the value, of each and every individual, irrespective of any contribution he or she makes to society. This is paramount in the mindset of such societies, even if not always put into practice, and is a fundamental basis for ethical behaviour.7 Likewise, Emile Durkheim makes an important observation in insisting that the cult of the individual can bring about new moral values based on a division of labour.8

6

Ibid. p. 13. This is more true of societies influenced by the thinking of philosophers like Immanuel Kant rather than by the tenets of utilitarianism. 8 Emile Durkheim, The Division of Labor in Society, trans. W.D. Halls (N.Y.: The Free Press, 1984). 7

70

Chapter Four

It is, nevertheless, a value-system that has also led to a depreciation of our interrelatedness such that, as Fromm observes, it has resulted in a culture where relationships are not as highly appreciated or even encouraged. There is always a tension between the personal and the social; but in Fromm’s view, certain developments in contemporary Western societies do not just favour the latter to the detriment of the former but they even encourage individualism. The unwelcome consequence is the inability of love, insofar as it is about developing and nurturing personal rather than functional relationships, to prevail. Fromm’s criticisms of the behaviour which is a consequence of a particular set of values in much of western European society invites comparison with traditional Asian thinking, particularly in societies which are steeped in Confucian philosophy. Confucius never claimed that he was an original teacher. He maintained, rather, that he was merely reminding his people of the teachings of their ancient rulers and was exhorting his contemporaries to return to and heed their wise counsel. Confucius extols a way of life that puts the primacy on relationships rather than on individuality and the goal of all human strivings to be harmony instead of conflict. He therefore talks of the importance of filial piety, respect for others, compassion, being in tune with the Tao and so on, all of which indicate that belongingness (that is, relatedness) instead of individuality is what matters more. With this way of thinking, admittedly, one risks elevating the group, whether it is family or the community—unfortunately, this has been one such consequence that has resulted in the deprivation or suppression of individual rights. But the relevant point here, in the present contexts, is that relatedness is what is considered to be the core of our humanity. Even if this is not developed in a philosophical way by Confucius himself, he advocates a way of life that takes for granted the primacy of belongingness. It is a way of thinking and a value-system that is sometimes overlooked or rejected in much of Western society. Given the ambiguity in the two sets of values which seem to dominate Western and Asian cultures respectively9, it is important to explore further whether and to what extent our sense of relatedness, the basis of love, can be promoted as an antidote to individualism. Furthermore, if a basic human need is, as Fromm identifies it, overcoming our sense of separateness, we need to ask whether our efforts should then be directed more towards the enhancement of our relatedness in the first place rather than

9

These are generalized observations, of course; and we must not overlook the fact that certain pockets or sectors holding the contrary set of values do exist in these societies.

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message

71

merely overcoming that sense of separateness. If so, what role does the Christian message have in this task?

Relationships Love, writes Fromm, is about the development of our sense of interconnectedness. Seemingly, this has been cut off by present-day developments in our society. It is probably more accurate, however, to interpret his observation and view of love instead as our attempt to regain it since, having been somehow disconnected, we feel the need to reattach ourselves to that which is outside ourselves. But some philosophers would maintain that such interconnectedness lies at the very heart of reality and is never really lost even if it is unintentionally unrecognized or deliberately ignored. In other words, from their philosophical perspective, love is not so much an attempt to overcome separateness, as Fromm puts it as a psychologist, but rather an appreciation and a development of that relatedness. Love itself may not be immediately evident but its basis is never absent. But we should note that this alternative interpretation does not necessarily put these two perspectives at odds with one another. In both of these love is regarded as the result of our activity. To love is to act. Nonetheless, as we consider the role of the Christian message, there is something significant in directing our attention to a further examination of this differing stance on the nature of reality and of humankind as essentially interconnected or related. One such philosophical perspective is opened to us by Martin Buber, the Jewish philosopher, theologian and mystic. He holds that relationship rather than individuality is fundamental. Starting from concrete experience rather than abstract thought, he finds human beings as always in a state of relatedness. As far as he is concerned, relatedness is an existential reality. He describes it as the “primary word” which we human beings speak; that is to say, relationship is what constitutes who we are essentially. He explains, “The primary words do not signify things, but they intimate relations. Primary words do not describe something that exists independently of them, but being spoken they bring about existence.”10 Like other existentialist thinkers such as Gabriel Marcel, the “we”, not the “I”, is what provides each and every one of us our basic nature. This recognition of what constitutes our essence differs from the view of other philosophers like René Descartes for whom the “I” who thinks, an individual subject, is 10 Martin Buber, I and Thou, trans. Ronald Gregor Smith 2nd ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1966), p. 3.

72

Chapter Four

the I who enters into a relationship, loving or otherwise. In contrast, for Buber, the primacy of relationship is such that it is what constitutes the kind of I that becomes. What he describes as the I-Thou relationship is what determines the kind of individual that the I becomes. The more such relationships dominate, the more personal that I turns out to be; whereas the I-It relationship, the functional one which Fromm criticizes, results in the impersonal I. Buber does not, however, disregard the importance of the I-It either since without such relationships there would be no progress: economic, scientific, cultural, and so on. According to him, history attests to the progressive development in the world as a result of the I-It relationship fostered by human individuals. This has its own rewards and benefits. He even admits, more so than Fromm would probably do, that I-It relationships can also contribute to the advance of humankind itself. He maintains that many times “we have to look on men with whom we have to deal not as bearers of the Thou that cannot be experienced but as centres of work and effort, whose particular capabilities are our concern to estimate and utilize.”11 However, he would agree with Fromm that the predominance of this kind of relationships would threaten the very nature of society, inasmuch as it would extol the individual rather than the personal, and would therefore diminish the possibility of I-Thou relationships.12

Relatedness and the Self The interconnectedness of reality and the nature of relationships also lie at the core of Charles Hartshorne’s philosophical thinking. He maintains, in agreement with the findings of contemporary physics, that reality is not only constantly changing but is also interrelated rather than merely conjoined.13 In other words, insofar as human beings exemplify what reality is, it is more correct to say—metaphysically, that is—that each and every one of us is a network of relationships. Strictly speaking, we do not enter into a relationship with others; we are, in fact, in ourselves a “relationship”. A so-called individual, like Tom, is really “a fragment” of such relationships rather than a separate entity. Admittedly, this is not how we 11

Ibid. p. 47. The reference to Buber’s insights is specifically to the issue of relatedness as a primary word. Buber does point out, and which would make his view slightly different from Fromm, that the I-Thou relationship “happens” as a result of our general attitude rather than is specifically “sought” or “laboured”. 13 See Charles Hartshorne, “The Compound Individual,” Philosophical Essays for Alfred North Whitehead (N.Y.: Russell and Russell, 1936), pp. 212-215. 12

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message

73

ordinarily regard or experience ourselves; but for Hartshorne and those who follow his argumentation, individuality is more a “part” of, rather than the actuality, of what and who we are. Individuality is therefore not what determines who we are. Our essence is not primarily the independent rationality upheld by some philosophers, an interpretation that has dominated much of Western thinking and which arguably can lead to individualism. Hartshorne and Buber—and Confucius— would be in agreement on this point.14 It is essential to add that Hartshorne does not reject our sense of identity which gives us our individuality. According to him, any changing yet enduring thing has two aspects: the aspect of identity (what is common to the thing in its earlier and later stages) and the aspect of novelty. A being which changes through all time has an identical aspect which is exempt from change. It is in this sense immutable. However, this unchanging identity is abstract, unlike the substantial soul in Cartesian dualism. He writes: “The self-same ego is an abstraction from concrete realities, not itself a fully concrete reality.”15 This is not to say that it is unreal, but it is real within something richer in determination than itself. Hartshorne explains that the “I” spoken by me is distinct from the “I” uttered by someone else because there is a different referent of the pronoun in each case. In the same, though subtler, way the “I” which I say now has a different referent from the “I” which I uttered earlier. The reason for the difference is that the pronoun “I” (or any of the personal pronouns) is a demonstrative and is context-dependent or token-reflexive; that is, the meaning and referent change each time it is used. There is, of course, an enduring individuality or a specific subject with definite experiences. But each new experience which the subject undergoes means a new actuality for that subject.16 The persistent identity itself is abstract while the actual subject having these experiences is concrete. Thus, there is a new I every moment, and the “I” really means not just “I as subject here” but also “I now”. In short, spatial and temporal considerations are intrinsic to one’s concrete reality. The concreteness of the subject is due to the society or sequence of experiences of which the subject is composed. The referent of “I” is usually some limited part—“a fragment”—of that sequence of experiences. As Hartshorne himself puts it, “Personal identity is a partial, not complete 14

It seems to me that Hartshorne’s thinking supplies the metaphysical backing for Buber’s existential perspective. 15 Charles Hartshorne, “The Development of Process Philosophy,” in E.H. Cousins (ed.), Process Theology: Basic Writings (N.Y. Newman Press, 1971), p. 56. 16 Compare this with Martin Buber’s assertion that the I of the I-Thou and the I of the I-It are different and are developed by the specific kind of relationship.

74

Chapter Four

identity: it is an abstract aspect of life, not life in its concreteness.”17 This is why it would be erroneous to hold that each of us is always simply the same subject or the same reality even if we must admit that we are the same individuals. We are identical through life as human individuals, but not so in our concreteness. Concretely, there is a new man or woman each moment. To recognize the sameness of that man or woman, we must disregard that which is new at each moment. Hartshorne furthermore differentiates personal identity from strict identity. Identity in its strict meaning connotes entire sameness, total nondifference, in what is said to be identical. If x is identical to y, then “x” and “y” are two symbols with but one referent. The difference between them is only in the symbols or the act of symbolization, not in the thing symbolized. It follows that “x” does not have any property which “y” does not have and vice versa. Personal identity, on the other hand, is literally partial identity and therefore partial non-identity. Personal identity is the persistence of certain defining characteristics in a very complex reality which constantly changes.18 The self, according to Hartshorne, is primarily a society of eventactualities linked together across spatiotemporal lines. Causality, as interpreted by Hartshorne, shows how the past influences the present thus making it possible for him to hold that we are related, first to our more minute “parts”—the cells that make up our bodies and which are genuine others to ourselves,19 then to our past selves which are likewise real others to us.20 What we experience here and now are not experiences we simply constitute ourselves; they are, rather, experiences of “selves” truly different from us and whose experiences which we “house”, here and now, belong completely to the past. A human self is thus a special type of society of selves, a personal society in which there is a nexus—to use a Whiteheadian .

17

Charles Hartshorne, “Beyond Enlightened Self-Interest: a Metaphysics of Ethics,” in Harry James Cargas and Bernard Lee (eds.), Religious Experience and Process Theology (Paulist Press, 1976), p. 302. 18 Charles Hartshorne, “Strict and Genetic Identity: an Illustration of the Relations of Logic to Metaphysics,” in H.M. Kallen et al. (eds.), Structure, Method and Meaning: Essays in Honor of Henry M. Sheffer (N.Y.: Liberal Arts Press, 1951), p. 26. See also his “Personal Identity from A to Z.” Process Studies, II (1972), pp. 209-215. 19 Charles Hartshorne, Whitehead and the Modern World: Science, Metaphysics and Religion (Boston: the Beacon Press, 1950), p. 36. Here Hartshorne decries the neglect of this fact by a majority of philosophers. Causality for Hartshorne is described as creative synthesis—a concept explained more fully in the next chapter. 20 Cf. Charles Hartshorne, “The Compound Individual”, op. cit., pp. 212-215.

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message

75

term—forming a single line of inheritance of the defining characteristic.21 “Nexus” is a technical term used by Whitehead to describe the ultimate fact of the togetherness or unity of actual entities22—a unity that the older concept of an enduring substance intended, but ultimately failed, to articulate and safeguard.23 Hartshorne’s conception of the self as actually a society of selves thereby leads him to claim that the self is essentially relational. The concrete subject is shot through and through with a dynamic relationality.24 The self here and now is not simply a self existing in splendid isolation from the rest of the world. At every single moment, one is also related in a most intimate way with other-selves which are co-constitutive of one’s reality in space and in time.25 Spatially, one is related first and foremost to the minute constituents of one’s internal environment, i.e. the body as made up of genuine others whose experiences one immediately “feels”. Secondly, one is related to the external environment to which one belongs, from the lowest to the highest level events that comprise one’s world. There are genuine others as well, irreducible to an “I” which is both different from as well as like them. In other words, I do not constitute, but am actually co-constituted by them.26

21

Cf. A.N. Whitehead, Process and Reality, corr. ed. by David Ray Griffin and Donald W. Sherburne (The Free Press, 1978), n. 51, p. 34; his Adventures of Ideas (N.Y.: Macmillan, 1961), p. 206. 22 Whitehead, Process and Reality, op. cit. n. 30, p. 20. 23 Of course, even Hartshorne admits that in normal everyday use, the idea of an enduring individual is not only perfectly acceptable, it is likewise scarcely dispensable as a way of putting what the event-terminology analyzes into eventsequences or “societies”. Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method, op. cit., p. 204. 24 Cf. Charles Hartshorne, “Lewis’s Treatment of Memory,” in Paul Arthur Schilpp, (ed.) The Philosophy of C.I. Lewis, The Philosophy of Living Philosophers, Vol. 13 (La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 1968), p. 407. 25 That which genuinely “individuates” us; namely, our relationality, is genuinely spatio-temporal. Cf. Charles Hartshorne, “Personal Identity from A to Z,” p. 214. 26 For the relation (continuity) between these two forms of relationality, see Part III: “From Physiological Data to Environmental Knowledge,” Charles Hartshorne, “The Organism According to Process Philosophy,” in Ernest Wolf-Gazo (ed.), Process in Context: Essays in Post-Whiteheadian Perspective (N.Y.: Peter Lang, 1988), pp. 74-76. It is interesting to compare this point with Buber’s concept of intersubjectivity.

76

Chapter Four

Hartshorne thus speaks of the primacy of relatedness.27 It is the core of his account of personal identity, and is also the most central concept of an ethical discourse in his philosophy. And foundational to this theory of relatedness is the structure of personal identity, which enables us to regard ourselves as a society of innumerable individuals, each of which could be regarded in its uniqueness, as another self.28 A person, in her deepest and innermost being, is truly altruistic. And by this we do not mean that a person is always and immediately selfless, or that because her nature is to be other-regarding, she will, in fact, act accordingly. Instead, what is meant by this altruism is that the nature of personhood is to be other-oriented, a person being a “society of past and future experiences bound together by a mode of sympathy which, in a specifically different but generically similar way, unites us also to the experiences belonging to the temporal societies constituting other personalities.”29 Hence, there can be no absolute independence of the self from other selves, both those belonging to its own sequence, as well as those not its own. And it can no longer be held, as did substantialistic theories of extreme individualism, that if all others were annihilated, the essential self would remain the same.30 For the identity of a person, as against a substance, is—from the perspective of Hartshorne’s philosophy—increased by its relations. As Whitehead says of an atom that it is a system of all things, we can say of self-identity, that it is a relational system of all selves. Personal identity is achieved by relationship. No entity is self-contained or absolutely unique in the sense of being unrelated to other entities and sharing nothing with them. This constitutes the most comprehensive and far-reaching statement that is an offshoot of the mode of philosophizing peculiar to this philosophy.31 Each person, like the world itself, is an indefinitely extended plenum of interrelated events, stretching all the way back to the events now shrouded in the mists of history, and all the way to the indefinite future which is the ever-growing concrete (consequent, in Whitehead’s terminol-

27

See Charles Hartshorne, “Martin Buber’s Metaphysics,” in Paul Arthur Schilpp (ed.), The Philosophy of Martin Buber, The Library of Living Philosophers, Vol. 12 (La Salle, Illinois: Open Court, 1967), p. 50. 28 Ibid. p. 55. 29 Charles Hartshorne, Reality as Social Process, op. cit. p. 64. 30 Lynne Belaief, Towards a Whiteheadian Ethics (Lanham, MD: University of America Press, 1984), p. 56. 31 It is also what, I would like to think, can philosophically ground the Christian understanding of altruistic love.

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message

77

ogy) nature of God.32 It is the nature of the person to be relational; and the account of this nature as it is offered by Hartshorne’s metaphysics constitutes its most radical and comprehensive explanation.33

Relatedness and Love What contribution does this way of thinking which regards relatedness as fundamental, in the way Buber and especially Hartshorne describe it, make to this discussion of love? Does it provide philosophical backing to Fromm’s assertions about the basis and practice of love? It seems to me that, despite its abstractness, it is a forceful reminder that it is not so much that love is lost—since interconnectedness or relatedness lies at the very core of who we are—but that we may have lost our way, as it were, in our attempts to develop ourselves as individuals. Fromm talks of the walls which we have erected around ourselves, cutting off our connectedness, and our various attempts, including loving, to regain it. The philosophical explanation provided by Buber and Hartshorne somehow directs this train of thought even further. These two philosophical perspectives assert that in recognizing and appreciating our individual selves we ought not to put aside the more fundamental basis of our human nature; namely, that we are not “islands”. We are, at the bottom of it all, connected and remain connected, to one another in a more basic way than we probably realize. Erich Fromm’s observation about the human need to overcome our sense of separateness and our feelings of loneliness should mean discarding those walls that we have put up, consciously or otherwise, to prevent our basic relatedness from developing any further. Individualism, in theory and in practice, is one such barrier, pace Durkheim. Furthermore, it is a mistaken interpretation of what will really develop each and every one of us. In contrast, if we continue in and with our relatedness, we will progress to becoming more truly our personal and social selves—what we are in the first place. That is, of course, merely the initial step. The next and more crucial one is—to use Fromm’s terminology—the art of loving itself. It is a step that all human beings need to take further since, if Fromm is right, it is 32 In Hartshorne’s philosophy, God’s nature is conceptualized as “dipolar”, i.e. with an abstract, immutable pole, and a concrete, changing pole. Cf. my God in Process Thought: a Study in Charles Hartshorne’s Concept of God (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1985) 33 For a fuller discussion of this topic, cf. Ferdinand Santos and Santiago Sia, Personal Identity, the Self and Ethics (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007) from which this section of the essay has been derived.

78

Chapter Four

what will promote and develop our very humanity, individually as well as collectively. To enable us to understand that assertion, we need to consider the context in which love, particularly given the developments in our society which Fromm is criticizing, can be enhanced further. But how? It will be recalled that Fromm’s observation about the culture in contemporary Western society is said to be alarming given that Christianity has been integral to its development. The questions that we need to turn to presently are: Granting that human nature is essentially a relatedness, as Buber and Hartshorne explain it, in what way can the Christian message, fundamentally one of love, be interpreted as enabling love to develop and prosper? What resources does it have to offer to assist us on our way to full development as truly human beings?

The Power of the Christian Message of Love In addressing these last questions, I share Fromm’s reservations about offering an answer regarding the actual practice of love. He admits that that is a more complex issue and can only be dealt with in a personal manner since each of us loves in a specific way. Besides, it is a daunting task to suggest particular strategies that would lead to a more positive outcome for anyone and everyone who wants to love. One would have to possess full knowledge of the concreteness of the situation in question. I do wish, however, to put forward—staying within the parameters of this essay—an interpretation as to how the Christian message of love can be said to have an important and distinctive role in this regard in the hope that it would throw some light on its significance. We have already seen how Buber and Hartshorne provide a philosophical lead in our deliberation with their assertion and defence of our fundamental relatedness as human beings. The Christian message in fact, it can be argued, acknowledges and recognizes our relatedness as a central teaching. In putting much emphasis on love, it is affirming first of all that it is a foundation of truly human living. Hence, it uses terms like “neighbours” to describe our primary relationships with one another. It urges us to love others as oneself. It praises acts which bring out that connectedness to others, like the good deed of the Samaritan who put it above his other duties. The Christian message of love conveys to us that love abides in us and in our surroundings, and it continually draws our attention to this situation. It affirms and maintains that our essential relationship to one another—and to the whole of creation—remains no matter what. The sayings of Jesus Christ which describe our nature and place in life are rooted in that understanding. We are made to understand that not only have we been

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message

79

created by God in a loving relationship but that we have also been placed in that kind of relationship right from the beginning. Pope Benedict XVI’s encyclical Deus Caritas Est firmly affirms this teaching.34 Likewise, Pope Francis states in his encyclical on Christian love that in the “Christian vision of the Trinity, God is contemplated as Father, Son and Spirit of love”.35 But the Christian message does more than that. It does not just proclaim love, it also continues to support and strengthen it. How does it do this? I should like to suggest that it provides power to that relatedness that is imbedded in all of us, but which we seemingly have lost thereby leading to our feelings of abandonment, isolation and loneliness. To explain this point further, I shall borrow terms from technology. After all, since we are surrounded incessantly by messages, whose transmission is vastly facilitated by all the technological developments, it would seem to be an appropriate way of describing the support offered by the Christian message. I will employ a term that features considerably in information technology; namely, charge.36 As we know, for successful messaging, our gadgets must be constantly charged. We cannot operate them unless we have taken the trouble of ensuring that they remain continuously “powered”. Sending messages is hampered when the electrical power is low or lost. Another recent term that has captured the attention of many of us as we try to get and remain in touch with one another is connectivity. Without such connectivity as a basis, any further attempts at messaging would be futile. Not only is this term used in the context of sending or sharing messages but it also alerts us, even if in a seemingly impersonal way, to the concept of relatedness as discussed previously. There is a definite connectivity in our lives, as it were, which has always been there. The claim which I want to make in connection with the Christian message of love is that, in a somewhat comparable even if rather unexpected way, it provides a “charge” in two ways; namely, that its vision provides power to our practice of love and its mission sets for us a specific charge or task.37 Briefly, then, borrowing from technological vocabulary, the Christian message charges that connectivity by its stated vision and implemented mission. To put it in another way, it recognizes and empowers our relatedness. 34

Pope Benedict XVI, Deus Caritas Est (25 December 2005). Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia (March 19, 2016) provides a detailed statement on the Christian vision of and mission on love with specific reference to families. See also his Misericordia et Misera (November 20, 2016). 36 See note 62 in Chapter Three: “Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research”. 37 See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. 35

80

Chapter Four

That claim could still be upheld even if one takes into account the Christian doctrine of the Fall and original sin which would appear to contradict this assertion. Such basic connectivity is not lost despite the Christian belief in the necessity of baptism to restore us to grace. The situation can be compared, again rather surprisingly, to the way that solar lights are actually pre-charged but need further and longer charging by sunlight for them to be fully operational. In a similar manner our relatedness is not lost (because it has been “pre-charged”, as it were, by God’s love) but it does require our full co-operation to activate it. Just as solar lights have to be located facing the sunlight, we need to turn to God at all times to draw on God’s love fully. The Christian message, it can be said, anticipates our need for love by teaching the constancy of God’s love for us. Its power does not just come to our aid in moments of loneliness or separateness. It is ever-present. But we need to explore further the concept of power as used in this context if we are to answer more adequately the question posed earlier, especially since it might be surprising to talk about power here. After all, power would seem to be at opposite ends from love. Loving someone is perceived as significantly different from exercising power over another. Ordinarily, when we describe someone as having power, we mean that an individual has some control over another. It is a unilateral relationship such that whoever has the power dominates the other. There are of course variations in kind and in degree of this relationship—John Locke reminds us of this—but what is common according to this way of thinking is that there is an imbalance between the two parties. Whoever has power takes over the other to the extent that the other is rendered powerless or at least is debilitated. Love, on the other hand, acknowledges, respects and thereby empowers the other. So how is one to equate love with power, as is being claimed here? But power—even if this other conception of it does not easily come to mind—can also be exercised differently. In this case there is another type of relationship between two individuals. In the following conversation (its context is a dialogue regarding our understanding of God’s power) Aisling explains to Richard, two characters in That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom, this different understanding of power: “…But have you ever thought of the power of the helplessness of a baby?” Richard shook his head. So Aisling continued. “In your books that’s probably a contradiction. But have you ever seen how the helplessness of a baby will get the undivided attention of everybody? I always tell the students during one of my lectures that I

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message would bet that no matter how interesting somebody’s lecture may be, if somebody brought a helpless baby into the lecture hall, everyone’s attention would be directed to that cooing baby. There’s power in that. It’s a different kind of power. It doesn’t dominate, it attracts. It doesn’t threaten, it influences.” …. “God, a helpless infant? And to think that I’ve been defending God’s almighty power in my research!” “But it doesn’t make God any less powerful. Only that it’s a different kind of power.” “You mean, God like a helpless baby attracts, influences, doesn’t dominate or threaten.” “… Let me try to explain it. I’m not sure whether this would make much philosophical sense to you. But as a mother responding to my baby’s needs, I realized that often it is up to me to fulfill that need. I have that responsibility. And it’s a responsibility that I’ve come to cherish. It seems to me that God allots to us the responsibility to make this world more livable for you and me and for everyone else. God doesn’t monopolize that responsibility.” …. “And how does that tie in with the way you described power?” “That God, because God has chosen to share the responsibility, appeals to us to exercise that responsibility. God doesn’t force us. Just as a helpless baby does not and cannot. But when a baby looks up to you, you know through those teary eyes or smiling face, the baby is exerting an influence on you. The baby wants you to do something.” “Doesn’t that make God weak?” “Is someone weak who enables you to do something? Is a teacher less powerful for inspiring others to accomplish more? Is a poet or an artist any less effective than a tyrant? Is a Muse irrelevant?” “Answered like a good teacher. Answer a question with another question.” “Don’t we help our students think better that way?” “I should really answer that with another question ... but yes, you’re right. Where does that leave us?” “That God works through us. And God is as effective or as powerful, in the sense that I have described it, as we allow God to be. It really took me a while to realize this. It was only when I started to appreciate the love that surrounded me, my family’s, my friends’ and most of all, Philip’s” …. . “God was showing me goodness and care in the people I love. It was through them that I could feel God’s compassion, as they wept with me over Seán’s loss, rejoiced with me when Philip took his first step, felt hurt when I was victimized. God is in people, God is in nature.”

81

82

Chapter Four “Sometimes that’s hard to believe.” “It is, that’s why we need to look. That’s why I am still struggling to live by that—how did you put it?—idealism. And that’s why, as teachers, we need to unveil the beauty that surrounds us and show it to our charges.”38

This alternative way of conceiving power regards the development of the relationship between parties in terms of appealing to or influencing, rather than by controlling, the other.39 It is this conception of power that can assist us in expounding on the assertion made earlier that the Christian message provides power to the human act of love. As was noted previously, the power of the Christian message—the charge—is supplied by its vision and is channeled through its mission. Like the electrical charge that energizes our gadgets for communication, its power motivates and enables us to love. And like the solar lights which come pre-charged, it encourages us to activate that underlying love with our co-operation. The Christian vision views reality in a specific way. It sees all of creation as standing in a personal relationship with its creator. Even before all talk of redemption through the particular action of Jesus Christ, the message of love in the Christian context is a reminder that God so loved the world as to create us in God’s image. It is a religious belief that can inspire us to respond to it creatively. It is a message that can uplift, urge and comfort. Like the electrical charge in our gadgets, it can “push us on” or “make us light up”. Admittedly, critics may balk at this statement as one that cannot be demonstrated or proven. That may well be the case, if demonstrating or proving a statement or assertion is limited to being able to show physical evidence to back it up. But the relevant point here is that it can motivate us positively even if that belief does require probing and challenging as to its veracity—a task that indeed demands attention. Nevertheless, it opens up for us a different window to reality. As Buber says of his philosophy, he wants to point the way in the hope that others would share his vision. He does not set out to convince but to share. Others can and should debate it or criticize it. But even if they do so, it does not lose its lustre if it lights up one’s view of reality. Similarly, criticism or disagreement with this Christian belief does not militate against its power to motivate. It is real even if 38

M.F.Sia and S. Sia, That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom: a Narrative on Human Restlessness (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015), pp. 223-225, 39 Process thought refers to God’s action on the world as “God’s lure” rather than God’s control.

Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message

83

not always evident. The above criticism does have some merit, admittedly. One can and should find fault with what motivates us. After all, living out a lie, even if the results are welcome, may perpetuate a compromising or even evil situation.40 On the other hand, what motivates us, even if it is a religious belief rather than a scientific fact, can also be subjected to a scrutiny that can test its status. The results of the motivating factor can be seen or heard, and thereby evaluated. It is a different way of testing it, but it can still remain a convincing one. The Christian belief in God’s love for all of creation, it seems to me, belongs to that category. Its credibility rests on how those who take it on and live by it can be judged.41 Do their lives and conduct make God’s love for humankind and creation transparent and credible? The truth of the Christian message of love can be tested in how the vision is lived by those who take it to heart. It is in this context that, I believe, the Christian message of love provides a charge in another way. Charging our gadgets or solar lights enables them to work or to function properly so that they will produce the results expected. Similarly, the Christian vision needs to be translated into a mission. Because it maintains God’s love to be universal, it challenges those who subscribe to it to take on the responsibility of keeping that love alive in their dealings with one another, with others, and with the whole of creation. Jesus Christ gave this injunction to those who wanted to follow him: “Love one another as I have loved you”. It is not merely about how one conducts one’s life, it is also—and even more importantly so—about sharing that love with all. Fromm reminds us that, “Love is an activity, not a passive effect’ it is a ‘standing in’, not a ‘falling for’, In the most general way, the active character of love can be described by stating that love is primarily giving, not receiving.”42 Even if, as was asked at the start of this essay, love is not lost but instead we may have lost our way, the Christian message of love can light up our journey43 if we are accompanied by those who live by it.44 That is, 40

This point reminds me of the ethical issue raised in the film, Jakob the Liar. The main character, Jakob, manages to keep up the spirits of his fellow prisoners in a concentration camp by perpetuating a lie that the Allied soldiers were about to rescue them. In this way, he succeeded in saving them. 41 The issue of credibility is taken up further in Chapter Nine: “The Christian Message at Journey’s End”. 42 Erich Fromm, The Art of Loving, op. cit., p. 22. 43 See Pope Francis’s Lumen Fidei. 44 See Chapter Six: “The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey” and Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”.

84

Chapter Four

in my opinion, a crucial challenge to all those who want to take the Christian message of love seriously. It is in this second sense that the Christian message of love “charges” them.

CHAPTER FIVE HOPE, CREATIVITY AND THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE1

Hope as an Issue Our contemporary world has certainly witnessed many advances in science, medicine and technology, to name but a few. To a great extent these have improved the entire world, the general human condition and countless human lives. Nonetheless, we have also experienced in our times much hardship, constant struggles and increased conflicts not just in our own individual lives but also throughout the world. The much improved channels of communication have alerted us to all the advancements achieved indeed but also to the misery, poverty, abuses, wars and so many atrocities which appear to be very much on the increase.2 Given such a world, where there are so many troubling situations despite all the welcome progress, can one still speak of better times ahead for all? Is there credible evidence to believe that our world and human lives will improve such that one could claim that, while we cannot completely eliminate all tragedies, whether natural or human-made, there will really be a marked improvement? These questions are obviously complex. After all, assessing what is on hand and even more so what is to come requires not just full knowledge 1

This was the text of the lecture given at the Divine Word Seminary, Tagaytay City, Philippines and originally published in DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XLI, 1 & 2 (May & November, 2016), pp. 27-41. It had been prompted by the events in Tacloban and Guiuan, Eastern Visayas, Philippines, following the devastation caused by super-typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda on 8 November 2013. The resilience of the people articulated in their slogan “Tindog Tacloban” and “Bangon Guiuan” and their ongoing recovery attest, it seems to me, to the reality of hope. 2 For a detailed discussion of the challenges of living in contemporary society, cf. my Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society, Foreword by Mary McAleese (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014, 2015).

86

Chapter Five

of the present state of affairs in the world but an even more astute and confident grasp of future developments. That is obviously a daunting, and may even seem to be an impossible, task. And yet these challenging questions do need our serious attention even if only for us to ask whether we can entertain some hope for us all. We need to consider to what extent we can look for some reassurance that the future is indeed an advance rather than a mere repetition of the past or worse still, a deterioration of the present. On what can we pin our hopes for the future? These fundamental questions have been addressed in the past. But because they are so pressing they continue to occupy the attention of many of us. And they should do so. Here I wish to take up the issue of hope from a philosophical perspective. However, I propose to consider it in the context of the criticisms leveled by some philosophers against the Christian message and its close association with hope; namely, that its eschatological message of hope is an illusion, a debasement of our human capabilities and a rejection of our responsibilities to this world. In dealing with the topic, I will firstly set out the metaphysical category of creativity, develop its implications and will then attempt a philosophical interpretation of the Christian message, one which lays out an important role that it can play in underpinning hope, both in its reality and in our understanding of it.

Freedom and Creativity Human beings have been distinguished from the rest of creation because they possess what has been known as free will.3 The existence of free will, like the presence of intelligence, gives human beings their dignity and not just value. Aristotle is helpful in identifying this feature as intrinsic to our nature. In his view, shared by countless others, we are the kind of beings who are able to choose, accept or reject alternatives. In short, we can decide.4 This is not to say that we are always in such a position because our ability to do so can also be restricted by ourselves, by others, by circumstances and various other factors. Even then sometimes it 3

The discussion here should not be confused with the debate between determinism and indeterminism. Cf. Chapter Eight: “Human Freedom, its Power and Limits: Some Implications for Life in Society” in Society in its Challenges, op. cit., pp. 149-165. 4 For Aristotle and those who share his view, only humans possess free will. In process philosophy following contemporary physics, as will be explained in the text, all reality possesses a certain amount of creativity that allows for unpredictability. This does not, however, detract from the uniqueness of human creativity (or freedom) since their form of creativity is distinctive.

Hope, Creativity and the Christian Message

87

is still possible to break free from such restrictions or to overcome the barriers. Aristotle clearly points out that being free makes human beings unlike other living creatures who are led by mere instinct and distinct from physical objects which can only be moved by others. Moreover, our freedom as humans is innate rather than bestowed on us. Jean Paul Sartre, too, asserts that human freedom is what defines human nature; but he goes further by asserting, in dramatic existentialist style, that humans have been “condemned” to radical freedom. He explains that there is no limit to our freedom, except that humans cannot choose not to be free. Humans, as conscious beings, are “being-for-itself”, different from non-humans which can be grouped together as “being-in-itself”. Consciousness in humans is always “other than itself” and has the ability to distinguish itself from its object. To be conscious, in his view, is to be completely free. For Nicolas Berdyaev, human freedom is also understood as the fate of humans. He adds that: “This fated freedom is the most mysterious phenomenon of human existence.”5 But he maintains, too, that it is nevertheless a curse, alleging that nothing is more tortuous and unbearable for humans than freedom.6 This innate ability of human beings also enables them to fabricate7 things—hence, the description of the nature of human beings as homo faber. Humans are not merely passive recipients of, but are also active participants in fashioning, reality. They can, and often do, shape their destiny. For this reason human freedom is intrinsically associated with creativity. In the same way that the ability to think and reflect singles human beings out from all other creatures this aspect of human nature makes them stand out in creation. In fact, it enables them to “stand over” creation, both in the sense of mastering it but also in the less often used sense of being held accountable for creation. In this context, unfortunately, there has been much talk of dominating or “lording it over” creation; but we are now beginning to realize that this particular human ability, and others besides, involves using them responsibly to enhance and transform creation. There are many aspects of human creativity, including the aesthetic, the literary, and the musical; hence, it is associated with the arts. For this reason it is closely identified with the imagination. But creativity is much 5

Cf. his Truth and Revelation, trans. by R. M. French (New York: Harper and Bros., 1953), p. 56. 6 Cf. “The Worldview of Dostoevsky,” in Dostoevsky, trans. by Donald Attwater (London: Sheed and Ward, 1934; New York: Meridian Books, 1957), p. 203. 7 The English term “fabricate” carries certain connotations which imply “imagined” or “false”. It is used here to link it with the Latin term faber (worker).

88

Chapter Five

more than just imagining or imaging reality; that is to say, it is not merely the talent to “make up” reality but, more importantly, to create reality in the literal sense of bringing it forth into existence. Human beings are, so to speak, creators in their own way. Significantly, it enables them to create values for themselves. Because they are creative, they can put worth on their activities as well as on reality as a whole. This ability is traceable to human free will. As Nicolas Berdyaev expresses it, only one who is free, creates. He maintains that creativity is not just producing a work of art but transforming oneself and the world. He states that, “In every artistic activity a new world is created, the cosmos, a world enlightened and free.”8 It is each person’s highest purpose and fulfillment, rather than self-devolution or evolution which is governed by necessity. He adds, “True life is creativity, not development: it is the freedom for creative acts, for creative fire, rather than necessity and the heaviness of congealing self-perfection.”9 Human freedom in its creative aspect—which is of interest to us here—enables human beings to attach significance or worth to reality. It facilitates an appreciation of reality by their attaching some importance to it. Thus, human creativity does not only make it possible for human beings to contribute to the whole of reality, it also allows them to transcend their present situation. Admittedly, at times it may involve imagining (in the sense of “making it all up”) rather than plainly describing reality. It may also lead to seeing more than what is, in fact, there. But the point is, human creativeness adds to what is there, even if only subjectively, rather than merely receives it. It is what prompts us to go beyond merely recognizing or discovering what is but even to appreciating it as well. It is what enables humans to be truly active as well as discriminating participants. Correspondingly, creativity facilitates the human ability to look towards the future. Its exercise is inevitably associated not just with what has been accomplished but also with what can be done. It leads us to consider the real challenge of facing the openness of the future. While the past continues to be influential in all human lives, the human outlook can truly be described as one of “looking out” or “looking towards”. Human beings can anticipate what is to come and incorporate it into their thinking and behaving. Accordingly, planning ahead and having foresight are closely associated with human activities or traits.

8

Nicolas Berdyaev, The Meaning of the Creative Act, trans. Donald A. Lowrie (London: V. Gollanz, 1955), p. 225. 9 Nicolas Berdyaev, The Destiny of Man, trans. N. Duddington (London: G. Bles, 1937; N.Y.: Scribner’s, 1937), p. 140.

Hope, Creativity and the Christian Message

89

The Future and Creativity We ordinarily understand the future in temporal terms; this is to say, in relation to the past and the present. It is generally regarded as being about what is yet to come. But the future, like the past and the present, is more than just marking time. It is reality even if it is in the realm of possibilities and probabilities. In other words, it is not nothing although it is not yet realized. So in looking to the future, we are not merely gazing towards a distant period in time. We are truly anticipating a possible or probable reality. It is more than just a mere figment of the imagination or wishful thinking. This is because the reality of the future is already somehow imbedded in what has been and what is. Its reality, details of which are not yet actualized, is nevertheless already in transit because of its connection with the past and the present. In short, the “not-yet” is real even if not fully actual. Past events, although not tangible in the way that physical entities are, continue to exist nonetheless in the present. They are not gone even if we say so in colloquial terms. In fact, the present comes into existence because of these past events which to some extent determine how it comes to be. In a comparable way, the anticipated future is regulated by what has happened in the past and in the present. It may or may not come about in all its details, however. If it does, it is largely, but not entirely, because previous past events, including the present which has become past too, remained in existence. We may not always remember the past, but it never ceases to exist. In other words, it is not lost. For this reason, any future events will always bear its influence. At the same time, however, the future can be said with some justification to be truly anticipated, even if not fully so, precisely because of the past. One can understand human creativity in the same way. Humans, like the whole of reality, inherit the past in all its forms which become an integral part of the present. On the other hand, human creativeness, can and does break through even if not totally. And it is for this reason that it is intimately connected with human freedom. As has been pointed out already, the past shapes the present—in causal terms, it is the effect of previous causality—and in turn, when it, too, becomes past, it shapes the future.10 But the future is not totally dependent on the past. It is not fully determined since there is always a certain amount of unpredictability or leeway. Indeed the future is future precisely because there is something 10 See my, “Creative Synthesis: a Process Interpretation of Causality,” ĭȚȜȠıȠijȚĮ: International Journal in Philosophy, Vol. 36, No. 2 (May 2007), pp. 213-221.

90

Chapter Five

unforeseen and unforeseeable. Creativity is rooted in this state of affairs, and human creativity is an integral part of this partial openness of the future. In short, human beings, shaped by the past, live in the present and look towards the future.

Human Creativity and Hope The reference to future, it has been claimed here, is not just about measuring the passage of time. It has also been described as potential reality, shaped by the past and rooted in the present. Considering its nature as what-is-to-come and what humans can do, given their creativity, one may argue further that there is reason and justification for hope. After all, while the past is indeed closed, and persists in the present, it does not shut off the future entirely. The very openness of the future means that there are always options or alternatives. Although some doors in life may be sealed off, there are others—and sometimes precisely because certain doors have been closed—that inevitably open up for us. Humans, as free beings, can duly pry them open even more. And these can lead to other routes and to different destinations. And because human creativity, as described earlier, enables humans to put value into what they choose or decide, it does allow us to be renewed11 and thus to look ahead in hope. There is much truth in the ancient adage: Dum spiro, spero. Hope, unlike a simple wish or an illusory desire, is real in the present precisely because of this rootedness in the past, the very openness of the future and the exercise of human creativity. What grounds hope is the nature of reality itself as well as the human ability to add significance to what we do.12 What implication does this seemingly abstract philosophical discussion have for our present consideration? To what extent can it deal with the issue of hope? Human creativity provides us with a further challenge; namely, that we can create meaning and not just find it. We have the ability to do so precisely because of our nature as free beings. Furthermore, as was already noted, we are the sort of beings that can put value on whatever we choose or create. The object or activity to which humans attach value may be different from one individual to another. But the point remains that humans as humans, irrespective of background or traits, have it in their power. In this way, whatever is valued can provide significance to one’s 11

Given the developments in technology, perhaps a more relevant analogy would be, that the human situation is such that we can always push the “refresh” button. 12 See also, Otto Friedrich Bollnow, “The Meaning of Hope,” Universitas, IV (1961), pp. 263-273.

Hope, Creativity and the Christian Message

91

life. It can help one get along and get on with life. It is important to bear in mind that it is our human nature primarily, rather than any development on our part or by others, that enables us to do so. But, in various and varying ways, we do need to actualize that ability in order for us to appreciate life. In doing so, we move from searching for its meaning to adding significance to it.13 But there is yet another even more important challenge of creativity. Again this goes back to its very nature. Its exercise is never a “solo flight”, as it were. Because one’s creativity is influenced by past events and activities as well as by actual realities, both past and present, it owes its actualization to countless other creativities. Returning to the concept of causality, we will recall that creativity is also an effect of previous causation, and its actualization is influenced and partially determined by past creativities as causes. What this means is that we cannot isolate our exercise of creativity from what has happened in the past and from what is happening in the present. There is some truth in the claim that every present situation— circumstances as well as every individual reality—is a product of the past. It means that its actualization owes a great deal to others in the distant as well as in the immediate past. In short, how it shapes up is dependent on them, although not that it happens. That is why it is truly, even if not totally, creative. Again, this seemingly theoretical discussion does have a bearing on the present topic. Hope must be facilitated and supported by the community. It is not and cannot be a solitary pursuit. The creativity of others—in the real and symbolic sense—is required to facilitate and realize each one’s endeavours. We are interdependent in various ways, but probably more so in this task. Each one’s creativity supports the other’s creativity. In this sense, the role of society includes providing support in different ways. We are interdependent not just in the physical sense but also in the emotional, psychological and in the many other ways of developing our human nature. The nature of human creativity is such that it is not just about the ability of each one to find meaning or add significance to life but also in the important sense of enabling others to do so. Since it is our own creativity that can open doors for ourselves and for others (unfortunately, also slam them closed), society has an important role to play. It is society, and the kind of society, that provides the context of individual living. But it is much more than that. It is also the appropriate environment to facili13

Cf. Marian F. Sia and Santiago Sia, “Meaning and Significance: a Fundamental Challenge to Human Living” Appendix C in Society in its Challenges, op.cit. pp. 265-278. In this sense, it is comparable to love—it needs to be actualized. Cf. Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”,

92

Chapter Five

tate the quest for meaning and significance. The creativity of society, as constituted by its members, enables it to provide support, guidance and hope to each individual search for meaning. That is an important challenge for each of us. It is also a non-negotiable responsibility.

Creativity as a General Description of Reality So far, my discussion of creativity focused on its human form. This is because this is what we are most familiar with. But creativity is in the whole of reality. Contemporary physics, as distinguished from modern physics influenced by Newton, shows us that in the whole of reality there is always a certain amount of unpredictability or openness. Human freedom is a more advanced form of this creativity, but at no level of reality and at no stage of development is there a total absence of freedom or indeterminateness. A.N. Whitehead maintains that creativity is so fundamental and so pervasive that it is truly a metaphysical category. The reference to metaphysics here requires some explanation given the reluctance and even abhorrence of some philosophers to engage in anything that smacks of metaphysics since it is closely but wrongly associated with transcendent reality about which, in their view, nothing can really be said meaningfully. For Whitehead and those who follow his thinking, the term “metaphysical” is, in contrast, a description of whatever can be said about the whole of reality. It expresses whatever is true of all reality, rather than a segment of it. It is therefore universal rather than partial; and metaphysical truths are empty of particulars and so are necessarily true. Charles Hartshorne refers to this metaphysical category of creativity as creative synthesis, a description which is helpful in indicating that creativity is both undetermined (creative) and determined (synthesis) but in different aspects.14 That is to say, in the exercise of creativity in all its forms, it has been partially caused by previous creativities yet never fully controlled by them. The amount of freedom or leeway varies but is never totally absent. Correlatively, no exercise of freedom, including the human form, sheds off past occurrences, 14

Charles Hartshorne, Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method (University Press of America, 1983) various editions. His last book, published after his death, was edited by Donald Wayne Viney and Jincheol O and is titled Creative Experiencing: a Philosophy of Freedom (SUNY Press, 2011). According to the editors, Hartshorne considered this collection of essays his final contribution to “technical philosophy”. In Chapter Eleven: “Categories, Transcendentals, and Creative Experiencing,” pp. 113-128 and Chapter Twelve: “The Higher Levels of Creativity: Wieman’s Theory,” pp. 129-136, he returns to the concept of creativity.

Hope, Creativity and the Christian Message

93

i.e. preceding creativities. Because every creative act is also a synthesis, it means that it emerges from what previous creativities have inputted into it. That is true for all of reality, but especially with all human beings. What this entails is that there is an active as well as a passive dimension to it. What we inherit is determined not just by what we do but also, and more significantly for society, by how we individually and as a whole use our creativity. It is important to acknowledge this as we address the challenges of society in the context of our consideration of hope. Earlier there was a reference to the environment provided by society. This is because the kind of society that we live in does matter as it is the context or environment in which we live and thrive. But it must also be said that any society is the result of what its members do. Creative synthesis means that every action of each and every one of us contributes to the build-up and make-up of society, locally as well as globally. We always leave behind traces, tangible or otherwise, of our efforts and deeds. And they determine the kind of society that we live in and leave behind. More importantly, they qualify society’s advance and measure our expectation of hope for the future. This philosophical understanding and interpretation of the whole of reality and its activity are therefore a strong reminder of our responsibility to ourselves, to one another and to the whole universe. Those who have followed the “is-ought” philosophical debate will recall that a popular view has been that one cannot derive an “ought” from an “is”; that is to say, from an examination of reality one cannot validly and justifiably conclude a consequent duty. This argument was used to critique the naturallaw theory, for example. The counter-argument which I am making here is that the awareness of responsibility (rather than a specific action) becomes explicit when one examines what is actually imbedded in the very nature of creativity (or creative synthesis). The specific activity or course of action can be fully determined only in the concrete situation. That is to say, an “ought” does follow from “is” but only in the abstract sense. As agents we are creative not just in the sense of being able to do something but more importantly in the sense that whatever we do affects everyone, including ourselves, and everything else. The same philosophical category of creativity (creative synthesis) also underlines the importance of enabling, protecting and supporting every effort by everyone to make that contribution as positive as possible. It is within our ability, because of our creativity, to support one another and to ensure that society is not thwarted from, but instead encouraged towards, a positive goal. Put in another way, society does advance creatively, hence there is reason to

94

Chapter Five

hope. But its forward movement—and its quality—is dependent on what each of us contributes to it. It is important to point out, however, that the philosophical category of creativity as a description of the workings of reality does not guarantee that at every stage, because of the action of its members, society’s transformation will always turn out to be a positive one. Society’s creative advance is not always or necessarily towards what is truly desirable and wholesome. As was noted already, there is a certain amount of unpredictability in the whole of reality. We witness this especially with the human form of creativity. The coming together of various creativities, some of which are beyond anyone’s control, can lead to progress but also regrettably to deterioration. In so many ways society has been transformed for the better; but sadly, history and contemporary times can testify to the opposite as well. Many of the tragedies in human living can be attributed to the misuse, abuse or just unfortunate use of freedom (human creativity). Creativity does not and cannot, therefore, lead to a utopian society. In that sense it does not provide reason for us to be definitely optimistic about society’s advance or about the future itself. On the other hand, it does—and does so more realistically—give us the ground for hope and therefore the incentive for action.15 Optimism is an outlook or a view, which should of course be cultivated in that it can help us regard reality and its challenges positively. It can energize and even strengthen us, particularly in troubled times. Psychologists and our own ordinary experience attest to its efficacy in combating many problems in life, great or small. But optimism can be personal and even subjective. It may also be short-term. Unfortunately, at least from someone else’s point of view, it may even be ill-informed, unrealistic or groundless. In contrast, in order to have hope one must have a basis in something real, lasting and universal. Otherwise, it is merely an illusion. Hope, unlike illusion, is an openness to what is yet to come with the realization that what has passed is not all that can happen.16 Despite and in spite of what has transpired in the past, hope alerts us to the fact that the future is not a complete repetition. 15

In his well-illustrated and enlightening lecture “Don’t Panic: The Truth about Population”, Prof Han Rosling presents information on the impact of the world’s population growth on the world situation and on the challenges ahead. He concludes that while he is not optimistic, he is nevertheless positive about the future of our world. BBCThisWorld, aired on BBC2, 7 Nov. 2013. 16 Gabriel Marcel in his Homo Viator: Introduction to a Metaphysic of Hope trans. Emma Crawford (N.Y. Harper Torchbooks, 1962) maintains that hope, unlike optimism, is the realization that something is beyond us. Creative synthesis as the basis for hope would insist, in addition, that it motivates us to action.

Hope, Creativity and the Christian Message

95

Creativity (or creative synthesis) shows that.17 In hope while we look towards the promises of the future, not only do we have to stand on the legacies of the past but we should also avail of the opportunities of the present. In this way the realism of hope truly facilitates the pursuit of good and the overcoming of evil and harm. Hope is thus a stronger ally in facing up to the challenges of society compared to optimism.18 The hope for society’s advance in the philosophical vision of Whitehead and Hartshorne is rooted in the very nature of creativity (or creative synthesis), especially in its human form. The aspect of synthesis shows us that we form society by our membership and participation in it. But the aspect of creativeness challenges us since it is within our power to contribute to it and thus reform society. In this way creative synthesis points the way for us to really transform society. In other words, it is a vision of society that forges and substantiates a mission for all of us. It presents us with a challenge—and the capability—to meet the challenges of living in society.19 It has been suggested that although our human creativity may and does result in clashes, it can also be the source of a solution. It is integral to our nature not just to inherit the past and incorporate it into our present actuality or situation but also to be able to move forward; in short, as has already been noted, the synthesis is also creative. Hartshorne uses the category of creative synthesis to explain the occurrence of evil in the world as the consequence of a clash of creativities. But at the same time he argues that the elimination of the cause of evil is also the removal of the possibility of good. Thus, creativity (or creative synthesis) is what also accounts for all the good in the world even if it must be recognized, following Hartshorne, that it is what explains the existence of evil.20

17

It is interesting to note that this point is also made by Viktor Frankl in his Man’s Search for Meaning: the Classic Tribute to Hope from the Holocaust (Rider, 2004). See also his Man’s Search for Ultimate Meaning (Rider, 2011). 18 In his tribute to Nelson Mandela on news of the latter’s death, then President Barrack Obama said that Mandela showed how we can move forward when driven by hopes rather than by fears. He developed that point further in his speech at the Memorial Service in Johannesburg, South Africa, adding that “nothing that he achieved was inevitable”. 19 Victor Frankl, arguing for what he terms “tragic optimism”, puts it this way “For the world is in a bad state, but everything will become still worse unless each of us does his best.” Man’s Search for Meaning, op. cit., p. 154. 20 Santiago Sia, “Suffering and Creativity,” Ultimate Reality and Meaning, XII, 3 (Sept. 1989), pp. 210-220.

96

Chapter Five

The Christian Message Does all this sound familiar to Christian believers? Yes, even if some specifics would not be well-known, because Christianity is not just a teaching about love but is also a message of hope.21 In its specific development, however, Christian hope would be rooted in and interpreted differently insofar as it takes its cue from the teachings and promises of its founder, Jesus Christ, rather than from any human reflections. It does not just nurture hope but it also provides an indication of the object of that hope. It finds strength in proclaiming hope from its strong belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Its eschatology can be traced back to this basis rather than from what it regards as merely human resources. It should not be surprising that such a teaching would regrettably incur criticism and even antipathy from some atheistic philosophers and humanistic thinkers who have regarded the Christian message of hope as a “pie-in-the-sky” solution to the human situation and human problems. This criticism is even made starker by the accusation that Christian eschatology is not just baseless but it is also contributory to perpetuating the miserable lot of humans. Christian theology, of course, has replied to these criticisms and has even developed the Christian message much further by deepening its own understanding of it as well as by interacting with the critics. A significant development in this regard is the attention given to how the specifically Christian understanding of the future actually enriches our present existence.22 It seems to me that the critique by atheistic philosophers of the Christian message of hope is actually rooted in a false dichotomy which separates the human from the divine, past and present times from the future, this world from the next and so on. Such dichotomizing which insists on an either-or understanding and interpretation of reality and the human situation unnecessarily pits what is actually one aspect or dimension of reality with another, in this instance the human versus the divine, the physical in opposition to the spiritual. It is not surprising, therefore, that there would be antipathy or opposition between the one and the other.23 Such dualistic thinking results in separating rather than distinguishing aspects of the same 21

In this respect see Pope Paul VI’s Gaudium et Spes: Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (7 December 1965). 22 In this regard, cf. Antonio M. Pernia’s response to this essay in DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XLI, 1 & 2 (May & November 2016), pp. 42-46. 23 For a more detailed discussion of this point cf. Chapter Three: “Distinct, Not Separate: A Critique of Dualistic Thinking of and in Society,” in my Society in its Challenges, op. cit., pp. 45-64.

Hope, Creativity and the Christian Message

97

reality.24 The consequent dichotomy emphasizes one to the neglect of the other. Secondly, the atheistic criticism fails to take into consideration an important distinction between claiming that we can and should hope and describing what we can hope for. It fails to note the difference between the abstract and the concrete in our grasp of reality. There can be many interpretations of the concrete since our knowledge of it is always coloured by a number of factors. The multiplicity and variation of these factors can result in disagreements—an inevitable consequence. The Christian message of hope is one such concrete understanding and should be understood in the context of its concrete realization of its basis and beliefs.25 But the abstract knowledge, that is to say, the realization of hope itself is one that it holds in common with a non-religious understanding of hope. The atheistic critique of what Christians can hope for, with its particulars, does not necessarily apply to the Christian understanding, which is a fundamental issue, of the reality of hope. As was already claimed, this is confusing the concrete with the abstract. If this critique of the atheistic standpoint is right, I should like to suggest instead that the Christian message of hope does not replace the human reality of hope itself as discussed here. In other words, what Chris24 David Hume perpetuated the thinking that what is distinguishable is separable, which is regarded by Whitehead and Hartshorne to be a fallacy. The word “religion” from its Latin root of religare does not help either since it does indicate, unfortunately, that it is a “binding again of what has been separated”. Some religious adherents would indeed decouple religion from the secular. Whitehead and Hartshorne, in contrast, maintain and defend the view that there is only one reality whose various aspects can be rightly distinguished. Hartshorne develops the logic of ultimate contrasts to defend this holistic way of thinking. Cf. Charles Hartshorne, Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method, op. cit., particularly Chs. VI and X. Also his Wisdom as Moderation: a Philosophy of the Middle Way (N.Y.: SUNY Press, 1987), Ch. III. 25 Pope Francis on the 29th of October 2013 on Vatican Radio explained that the Christian meaning of hope is much more than simple optimism for Christians, maintaining that it is a constant expectation insofar as it is a gift from the Holy Spirit. For this reason it is a miracle of renewal that never lets us down. In his homily at the beatification of Pope Paul VI, October 19, 2014, he reminded his audience that God is “continually surprising us, opening our hearts, and guiding us in unexpected ways”. See also the interview with Pope Francis by Antonio Spadaro SJ, Studies, vol.102, no.407 (Autumn 2013). An interesting article on how the Pope conveys an expectation of hope to the world was written by Robert Draper, “Will the Pope Change the Vatican or will the Vatican Change the Pope?” National Geographic (August 2015), pp. 30-59.

98

Chapter Five

tianity offers is not the setting aside or displacing of the view that we humans have reason to hope for the future even if we have also to accept the unchangeableness of the past and even of the present. It seems to me that the creativity that is rooted in the entire creation is such that all of us, even if we differ as to what can be hoped for, can accept it. What the Christian message offers, as I understand it, is a different vision of that hope and the motivation for action, rather than a rival one.26 The difference, an important one, lies in the further development rather than the fundamental issue itself. It is a significant difference but not a rival one. If this is true, then I should like to propose further that the distinctly Christian message, whatever its origin and basis may be—an issue that would need further attention in another context—reminds, reinforces and responds to that hope that is imbedded in reality itself. By doing so, it is not therefore what its critics have interpreted it to be in its essential understanding of hope, whatever one may say about its teaching regarding the object of hope. Nor does the Christian standpoint demean, contrary to the atheistic claim, what can be drawn from our human resources regarding the reality of hope itself. At the same time, what makes the Christian message distinctive in the tasks mentioned above is also a challenge to it. By proclaiming that the Christian message is about what is to come as well as what has been and what is, it does not intend to mislead us about or blind us to the past or the present. Rather, turning to what can be hoped for as it reflects on its distinctively Christian interpretation of what is ahead of us is placing for our close attention—again— the truth that the future is partially dependent on how we have shaped the past and how we are responding to the present. By turning to its own distinctively Christian resources, Christianity rightly alerts us once more, for example, through its proclamation of the scriptures and its teachings, that hope is not an illusion. It thereby advocates repeatedly in its teachings and proclamation that we can and should hope despite the trials and tribulations which afflict all of us in the past and in the present. But the Christian message is more than just a reminder. It also aims to strengthen that message of hope through its specific way of life. Because it firmly believes that what is to come is worth achieving, it offers resources such as the sacraments and the liturgy to enable us to work towards and for it.27 It is for this reason, among others, that there is a distinc26 See Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”. Viktor Frankl would add trust in that message as marking religious belief and faith. Cf. his Man’s Search for Ultimate Meaning, op. cit, p. 17. 27 Compare this point with the reference to “charge” in Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”.

Hope, Creativity and the Christian Message

99

tively Christian way of life marked by its interpretation of what is implied by being a follower of Christ. It provides all these, by way of strengthening hope itself rather than suppressing that which is available to all of us, irrespective of our background or affiliation. How those who proclaim and live by the Christian message respond to the reality of hope is really how it translates its vision into a mission.28 As indicated earlier, there is a distinctively Christian vision or understanding of reality; namely, the belief as taught by its founder Jesus Christ that creation stands in a personal and loving relationship with its Creator. As I see it, responding to that vision is one of its greatest tasks as the Christian message of hope entails more than merely developing a perspective but actually acting on it. There is some persuading force in the claim that what marks out a Christian follower is not so much what he or she believes in but how that same person acts. Responding to the reality of hope is bearing witness to it. A specifically Christian response does entail a uniquely Christian witness. It is therefore more than just accepting the Christian message of hope but living it in such a way that marks out its distinctiveness. And how does believing in the Christian message of hope mark one out in terms of one’s conduct? It is a consideration that merits close and constant attention as society changes and the developments in the world increase and multiply.29 Responding to the reality of hope as a Christian rests on the shoulders of everyone who professes to be one, irrespective of background, culture, upbringing or state of life. Each Christian is tasked with the responsibility of contributing to the effectiveness of the Christian message of hope to deal with the various challenges in our world. I am aware, however, that the audience at this lecture is particularly oriented towards proclaiming and promoting the Christian message through its missionary activities. So to what extent does this calling differ from the general witness that is expected of all Christians?30 I should like to suggest that missionary activity whether here or abroad provides a significant focus of what has been said about the distinctiveness of the Christian message of hope. In the art and act of focusing on the Christian vision by those charged with its mission by their missionary activity, the specifically Christian witness to hope becomes sharper and clearer. It becomes an actuality and not just a promise. 28

See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”. 30 Fr Antonio Pernia, former Superior-General of the Divine Word Missionaries offers a helpful interpretation and discussion in his “The State of Mission Today,” DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XXXIX, 1-2 (November 2014), pp. 78-92 29

100

Chapter Five

It provides greater credibility that the message of hope found in all of reality is indeed true. To accomplish that is a great challenge and an enormous responsibility.31

Concluding Comments I have offered what is purportedly a philosophical interpretation of the topic of this lecture. My concern here has been to set out and consider the reality of hope with specific reference to the concept of creativity (creative synthesis) as developed by Charles Hartshorne and to discuss its challenge for all humankind. In doing so, I have explored the issues insofar as they impinge on a number of concerns arising from the atheistic and Christian perspectives regarding our understanding and appreciation of hope. My intention in pursuing the topic was to establish a point of encounter between the two camps, rather than a point of departure.32 A point of encounter, as far as I am concerned, implies that both sides stand on common ground while retaining their distinctive differences arising from their respective perspectives. Claiming that the Christian message does not replace what one can know about the reality of hope from a more philosophical perspective, I have also endeavoured to outline what gives the Christian message of hope a certain distinctiveness; namely, that it reminds, reinforces and responds in a significant manner—from its particular vision to its special mission—to the hope that is imbedded in the whole of reality. Finally, I have suggested that the specific call to the Christian mission is a challenge to focus on that vision.

31

See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”. In the lecture I made no mention of providence as a religious concept. I am grateful to Fr Antolin Uy, SVD, for affording me, during the ensuing discussion, the opportunity to link it, from a Christian point of view, to God’s providence. For a philosophical treatment of this concept, see Michael J. Langford, Providence (London: SCM Press, 1981). 32

CHAPTER SIX THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE AS MAP IN LIFE’S JOURNEY

Introduction Life is often depicted as a journey; in fact, it is regarded as the most important of the journeys we make. Accordingly, we speak of different stages of life just like the other trips we undertake for one reason or the other. It is as if, after we are born into this world, each day thereafter seems to be a matter of moving on from one point in time and place to another. Sometimes it is a matter of acting and reacting to whatever arises. But at other times we seek some kind of a routine or an over-all plan, comparable to following an itinerary. In such situations, having some kind of a map to guide us as we traverse life becomes an asset since from experience we all know that a travel map enables us to identify crucial points or key sites and ultimate destinations, thus making a difference as to how rewarding or enriching our journey will turn out to be. Indeed, as with all the journeys which we undertake, having a map to direct our very life can provide us with a sense of direction. We have a need, and often do look, for a map of life, too.1 In this essay, I should like to suggest that the Christian message, among others, can be regarded as a map in life’s journey. My concern here, however, is not so much to argue for its suitability—many of its critics would dispute that for various reasons—but to indicate how, even if one rejects its usefulness for oneself, one could still understand and even appreciate that the Christian message of love, hope and redemption can indeed illumine one’s route in life. I intend to show that there is something in that message that is universal because it concerns a human need. What it communicates is fundamentally a response to what humans as humans are searching for. But that message, in my view, is also distinctive because it 1

A recent development in this regard is the popularity of a life-coach, possibly replacing religious confessors and spiritual guides of former years.

102

Chapter Six

sets about the task of fulfilling that human need in a special way. Thus, even if that claim will not necessarily be accepted by all, it may still be worth exploring its philosophical underpinnings in the hope of establishing a point of encounter with those who dissent. Utilizing the acronym MAP, I intend to explain firstly, that the Christian message is about meaningfulness in life. Irrespective of our differences as to what gives meaning to our own lives, as human beings we nevertheless share a common desire to see some sense in living. Without it, there would appear to be no point in continuing on with life’s journey. I believe that the Christian message addresses that fundamental human need. Moreover, I will attempt to show that that same message, given its import, is an invitation to all to use it as a guide in life. In this way it is actualized in our lives. After all, while a map provides an orientation it is only as good as when it is followed correctly. What provides meaning needs to become meaningful. This implies whole-hearted involvement in the message. But there is a further consideration, one that distinguishes the Christian message from other messages: it is finally about a personal relationship with the source of that message. As a map in life, the Christian message is ultimately about developing and deepening that relationship—a lifelong endeavour. What it does, as it lays out the terrain of life in front of us, is to provide signposts which are intended not merely to provide us with a sense of direction but, more importantly, also an indication of the final destination.2

Going on a Journey But first, let us turn our attention to the ordinary experience of going on a journey. In most cases there is something exciting about it. One would consult maps, read some information on the various spots to be visited and sights to be seen, check out the weather forecast, plan one’s essential wardrobe and so on. An important part also of the planning is the gathering together of information regarding one’s destination; the more prepared we are, the better are the chances that the journey will be fruitful and even pleasurable. Guide books have always been particularly helpful in this regard. Part of the excitement comes from reading these and similar material in the hope that the more we know beforehand the more we will find ourselves ready to leap into action, so to speak, when we get there. Today, we have also the added resource of the internet cluttered with websites of var2

See Chapter Nine: “The Christian Message at Journey’s End”.

The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey

103

ious spots and a choice of travel advisors. As one dutifully turns to these sources for information, one cannot help feeling that all this attention to details will definitely compound the enjoyment of the trip. In addition to thinking about what one will experience and see along the way and at one’s planned destination, there is also the active imagining of what could turn up unexpectedly. Indeed, at times one’s imagination goes wild, thereby adding to the excitement. In some instances, the unplanned and unforeseen may, in fact, make the trip definitely unforgettable. Surprises, especially the pleasant ones, have a way of making such journeys more worthwhile. At the same time, however, despite all the preparation and advance information one can understandably feel some apprehension that there could be a glitch in one’s planning. An unforeseen disaster, for instance, could occur. Seasoned travelers would, of course, incorporate that possibility into the planning. Accordingly, they take out insurance to cover them in cases of necessity. They try to forestall anything that could ruin the journey. Yet even for them, as indeed one hears in the news now and then, mishaps do happen; and the trip turns out to be a misadventure after all, with everything ruined. It would be easier of course if one could simply put that experience aside, but certain situations have a way of lingering on after the trip. It is then not simply a matter of “putting it all down to experience”. In fact, in such cases, one would even have regrets that one went on the trip in the first place. Turning now to life as a journey, if we are lucky, we may experience—like in the many journeys we undertake—exciting moments and events. They give us reasons to celebrate. We may succeed in setting goals, no matter how small they are, to be achieved; and they make our journey in life more significant. There may even be accomplishments attained, marking the progress made. As we negotiate life’s paths, we may realize that, like going on any trip, it pays to be prepared and to make plans. In fact, such preparation and planning can make a difference as to how we actually view our journey in life. In this way, as we deal with the present, it is with satisfaction that we can glance back at the past and look forward confidently towards the future. But like the mundane trips we undertake, the journey of life is not always, as it were, smooth sailing or turbulence-free. One must admit that it is, after all, a rough and at times bumpy road that we tread on in our daily lives. In fact, the experience of life of some people is such that they would even begrudge anyone who talks to them of its meaningfulness. Sartre’s work, Nausea, expresses that sentiment dramatically. Not surprisingly, each one of us, in fact, has had a share or two—and for some, even

104

Chapter Six

many more—of the bitter side of living. For others, because of their various experiences, getting on with life translates into an indifference so much so that it is really simply a matter of putting up with it rather than relishing it. Living, for a number of us regretfully, is accompanied by these troubling emotions. It is an unfortunate situation indeed that one cannot ignore in any attempt to speak of the meaningfulness of life.3

In Search of a Guide to Life If indeed life is a journey that results in both pleasant and unpleasant experiences, sometimes overwhelmingly so, how can we face up to this challenge? When we are caught up in the maelstroms of life what can we think about that would dispel these negative feelings and comfort us? On the other hand, if we are experiencing life to the full, are there ways of enabling us to be grateful but also to be realistic? Furthermore, what useful information can we pass on to other life-travelers so that for them the journey in life becomes more meaningful to them?4 Such questions, and many others, are worth addressing simply because they could make a difference as to how we view and live our lives. For some it seems to be sufficient to move on from day to day. Somehow the routine of the day and the fullness of their schedule are enough to get them engaged with life. Others spend their lives chasing one goal after another, and their achievements may truly give them a sufficient boost to continue in life. Somehow we admire these successful individuals. We even seek guidance from, or follow the example of, those who seem to lead what to us appears to be a fulfilled life. Following in their footsteps does assist us sometimes in our own journey in life. At the same time, however, we soon learn that identifying any object or any goal in life or emulating others will not necessarily bring us satisfaction due to our differences as individual beings. Moreover, as Aristotle points out, one should distinguish between “the ends” and the “final end”, only the latter leading to one’s fulfillment as a rational being. He strongly encourages us to see these “ends” as merely transitory sources of pleasure. Now and then we even wonder whether there is “more to life” than what passes as “moments of satisfaction”. Ecclesiastes describes the feeling 3

Appendix B: Marian F. Sia and Santiago Sia, “Meaning and Significance: A Fundamental Challenge to Human Living,” in Santiago Sia, Society in Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015, 2016), pp. 265-278. 4 Self-help books appear regularly with offers of advice. Some internet sites, like TripAdvisor, have tried to meet a similar need for travelers or holiday-makers.

The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey

105

well: “Seeing there be many things that increase vanity, what is man the better? For who knoweth what is good for man in this life, all the days of his vain life which he spendeth as a shadow?”5 These questions in different guises and at intermittent times prod us on to pursue the matter more steadily in the hope of finding a more satisfying answer. One suspects that lurking behind the differing perspectives on life and the variations in satisfaction is the more deep-seated need that we as human beings feel: for something that connects the various pieces in life together, something that will provide some sense to it as a whole.6 Writing about this human experience, Harold S. Kushner, the Jewish writer, aptly titles his book, When all you’ve ever wanted isn’t enough. Philosophical thinking has constantly been preoccupied with this general concern. Sages throughout history have offered advice to their followers, which at times did succeed in enabling them to live a fuller life. But it seems that what we do require in life are not just pieces of advice, necessary though they may be, but an over-all scheme of things. As had been noted earlier, we human beings seem to be on the look-out for some general plan that we could follow. There is something in us that makes us somewhat restless and somehow unsatisfied if we are not getting the “full picture”, so to speak. It seems that we are in need of an overall-plan after all. This need of ours for the general picture or an overall-plan is shown in various and uneven manners. Those of us who are involved in administration appreciate getting an agenda for meetings or a general plan of action to inform us what lies ahead and to ensure a more organized set of directives. Institutions take pride in articulating and communicating their vision as this allows others to get an over-all view of their status and activities while spelling out their mission. We know from putting jigsaw puzzles together, that as we put our finger on individual pieces, it is in the hope that it will fit in because it is only when the total picture comes into view that we feel some sense of achievement. We appreciate summaries, even if they do not and should not replace the detailed narrative, not just because of lack of time on our part but also because they can be effective in putting us “in the picture” more readily, so to speak. We can observe the 5

Eccleiastes, 6:11-12. See M.F. Sia and S. Sia, “Punctuating Life’s Message: a GrammaticalPhilosophical Exercise on the Quest for Meaning” in Janez Juhant and Bojan Žalec (eds.), The Art of Life, Theologie Ost-West, Europäische Perspectiven 14 (Berlin and Münster: Lit Verlag, 2010), pp. 79-89; (in Slovenian) trans. Rok Blažiþ “Postavljanje loþil v sporoþilo življenja: gramtikalno-filozofska vaja v iskanju smisla,” Tretji dan, Letn. 39, št. 3/4 (Mar/Apr 2010), st. 23-31.

6

106

Chapter Six

difference between the specific strategies being implemented in particular cases and the fundamental principles which are supposed to inform these, and can thereby assess those strategies in the light of the principles. In short, we usually do give ourselves scope in our daily lives for what is general and practical. From these rather mundane observations we should be in a position to appreciate the importance of what is general, including how it can also illumine what is particular. Charles Hartshorne argues, defending the development of a metaphysical view, that the problem is not the process of generalization since, as humans, we are prone to doing that—the examples above attest to it— but rather the kind of generalization that we are engaged in. It is this human tendency that alerts us to the human need for general guidance in life. It is not merely an interest in a detailed itinerary through life; but it also involves, and more urgently so, a search for a lifemap. Postmodernist thinking which rejects the importance of the larger picture as we examine details ignores, it seems to me, the implicit but key role played by such a general picture (or context) whether in understanding texts or life itself. Not recognizing it, however, does not necessarily mean its absence. But it does involve paying closer attention to it. The same can be said about a map of life. Because of our make-up as human beings, we are in need of it. With this in mind, as we ask whether there is any sense to life or if there is an over-all scheme of things, we could indeed take our cue from our experiences in travelling and in other areas of life.7 It was observed earlier that a travel map can greatly assist in our trips as they provide not just significant details but even more so, they open up for us an over-all view of our itinerary. Such information greatly helps with planning. The details are crucial, as was pointed out earlier, but so is an over-all view. Similarly, as we undertake our journey in life, we are in search of—even if not always in such an explicit way—a guide to life; that is to say, a map in life.

The Christian Message as a Map of Life Assuming then that we human beings are in need of, and do search for, such a map in life to guide us throughout our life’s journey, the question now arises as to what it is. Also, where does one turn to get it? After 7

For a more narrative development of this point, cf. See M.F. Sia and S. Sia, This Deep Pierian Spring: An Account of the Human Quest for Meaning (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press, 2016, 2017).

The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey

107

all, there are competing views as to how one should view life and its significance. How does one judge which is the most suitable one? These are leading questions which require tackling, but it would be rash to single out any answer right away as the most suitable or most adequate. This is because identifying any of these as fulfilling that criterion is compounded by our own innate differences as human individuals. After all, although much stress has been laid so far in this philosophical consideration on the importance of recognizing what is general about human nature, it should not mislead us either into putting aside the status of the particular. Again it should be stated that we do have significant differences which distinguish us from one another. This is also true in how we as individuals view life itself and what makes it worth living. It is worth recalling the old adage: De gustibus non est disputandum. On the other hand, it is not as if these views of life are on a shopping list, and the task is merely to tick one or two off. In this more fundamental issue it is not merely a matter of tastes or preferences. It is a more profound consideration. This is because to find the most appropriate map in life is a concern for us as human beings and not merely as travelers in life. So in what sense can one appreciate the Christian message of love, hope and redemption as a map in life? To what extent can one claim that it is worth relying on it to guide us throughout life? These questions pose a challenge to those who are tasked with explaining, reflecting on and developing this message. Christians throughout history have accepted that challenge even if not always satisfactorily. Continual theological reflection has helped make that message come alive and has contributed to its development. But again one has to confess that it has not always been consistently so. Christian life as exemplified by many followers has enriched it even if, it has also to be accepted, that is not always in an obvious manner. The task of facing up to these questions is a continuous one and an awesome responsibility which cannot be passed over, despite difficulties and obstacles, if the Christian message is to be truly appreciated and profoundly incorporated into people’s lives.8 But one philosophical consideration that demands our attention here and now is: why and how can the Christian message can be regarded in the first place as indeed a map in life? Accordingly, we have to address these pertinent questions presently. What reason could be provided for giving it closer attention? In what way does it provide meaning to those seeking guidance in life? And if so, how does it enable those who wish to take that message to heart enrich their lives? By dealing specifically with these 8

See Chapter Five: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”.

108

Chapter Six

questions, we will arguably be better positioned to examine the additional challenge mentioned above of unpacking the actual content of the Christian message and thus to contribute to theological reflection and to Christian living.9 An immediate reaction to these antecedent questions is to turn to the notion of religious faith as described by philosophers.10 Indeed, various philosophers have given their interpretation of religious faith which they understand to be a fundamental option. So is it a simple acceptance of the truth of the Christian message based on the total credibility of its source in the way that Thomas Aquinas finally explains it? Or is it ultimately a matter of “taking a leap in the dark” as the Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard suggests? Is it rather an option chosen based on “weighing up” alternatives as Blaise Pascal implies? Is it instead a “seeing-as” in the way Ludwig Wittgenstein seems to describe faith? Given these variations in standpoints, we can see that the nature of religious faith itself is a particularly difficult one to understand from a philosophical point of view. Furthermore, there seems to be a discrepancy and even a discontinuity with human reasoning which requires clear, logical and systematic development of an issue. Nevertheless, as the philosophers cited above illustrate, the significance and challenge of the Christian message are such that it is imperative that philosophers also continue to give it their attention, particularly if it is meant to be a map in life.

MAP: A Philosophical Consideration The concern of this philosophical consideration, to state it once more, is the question as to how the Christian message of love, hope and redemption can serve as a map in life rather than the question as to its truth or validity, issues which do merit their own substantial discussions. The route I wish to take in pursuing this task is to utilize the word “map” as a convenient, even if not an exhaustive, way of assessing its significance for human living. This acronym, aside from its appropriateness in the present context, can facilitate a philosophical consideration of the issue of the meaningfulness of the message, the importance of the actualization of that message, and finally the goal of a personal relationship with the source of 9

The hope here is that such consideration will feed into a more theological reflection on the subject. 10 Given that Christianity refers to the theological virtues as “faith, hope and charity”, it may appear as an omission that no chapter in this book is devoted specifically to faith. The discussions in the various essays, however, do provide philosophical considerations of aspects of religious faith.

The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey

109

that message, all of which may help us deal with the questions which need addressing in the stated context.

Meaning and Meaningfulness The issue of meaning is of particular interest in philosophy since it is a consequence of rational thinking. The pursuit of meaning has therefore been a concern among philosophers throughout history, and not just as illustrated by contemporary linguistic analysis whose focused preoccupation with this issue dominates their philosophical analyses.11 In fact, given that ancient philosophy tended to be more attuned to human living itself and not just to abstract speculation, the examined life that Socrates promoted, did concern itself with this topic. Ancient Chinese and Indian philosophies, too, dealt with it in their investigation of deep-seated human concerns and provided strategies for resolving those. In pressing ahead with our philosophical enquiry, we need to recall earlier observations. First, the source of this quest for meaning is no other than human nature itself. Because we are human beings, our nature is such that we are—even if not always explicitly shown to be the case—on the lookout for a view of life that makes sense. Human beings seek meaning precisely because they are rational beings. Certain situations in life, like crises or even truly satisfying experiences, can heighten or sharpen this human need. When pursued even further, that need becomes a quest for ultimate meaning—expressed in different and not always explicit ways. Second, while we share this general need as human beings, we do differ as to what gives meaning due to our individualized ways of thinking and because we have varied backgrounds, interests and concerns. In addition, even if we can agree on a number of points in this regard, such as the need for happiness or contentment, we may disagree on what will bring that about. We will recall Aristotle making this very observation. Some philosophers, as was pointed out previously, even regard the quest—although not the need itself—as something futile, concluding that in the end life is utterly meaningless. Unfortunately, there are many in the world who because of their respective experiences have come to the same conclusion. In this context, it may even seem pointless to consider whether anything can still provide meaning to their lives. 11

What is rather puzzling, although probably understandable given their reluctance to deal with a more comprehensive view of life, is that philosophers who subscribe to linguistic analysis as a philosophy do not seem to be interested in tackling the issue of the meaning of life.

110

Chapter Six

On the other hand, these observations make one wonder whether the issue as it relates to the Christian message is, after all, possibly misplaced; that is to say, it is not so much whether it has any meaning at all but whether it can be meaningful for anyone. That distinction may appear too subtle to be of use, but I would argue that the debate as to whether meaning can or cannot be found in the Christian message is a further consideration of the content of the message, a task which theological reflection does get involved in insofar as it is regarded as revelation. But asking whether it is meaningful is a prior issue. Doing so, in effect, shifts the attention to the attitude and openness of the receiver of the message without ignoring the content of message itself. This is because unlike other messages, whether written or oral, the Christian teaching of love, hope and redemption is not mere information. It is not simply transmitted and received. It is neither a code to be deciphered nor a set of instructions to be followed. It is therefore not the kind of message that one merely reads—or unpacks, as linguistic analysts are prone to say—for its meaning. Because it is a message of love, hope and redemption—fundamental human concerns—it carries some kind of valuation such that it involves the receiver of the message right from the start. It is about human living itself; hence, the issue of meaningfulness, as I see it, precedes that regarding its meaning. This proposed re-routing of our philosophical consideration does not make it less onerous, however. In fact, it becomes more complex because it risks the charge of subjectivism, an observation that would attract much philosophical concern. Does situating the judgment of the meaningfulness of the Christian message on the receiver, as is being proposed here, make it thus a subjective judgment? In a way, the answer has to be a positive one since it does involve putting the emphasis on the receiver. There is some truth in the observation that as far as messages such as the Christian one are concerned much depends on the receptivity of the recipients of the message. For this reason, the significance of that message should involve taking into account the context and all that this implies. Hence, there is indeed an essential subjective dimension to it. The philosophers cited above seem to have identified this in their understanding of religious faith. Their definitions and descriptions bring out that factor clearly. On the other hand, the concern with the meaningfulness, rather than with the meaning, of the Christian message which directs us to the receiver and not merely to the message itself is not a totally subjectivist manoeuvre if by that is meant that there is no objective basis to it. It is a realization, instead, that its import is such that one cannot merely impart its alleged truth or significance divorced from the concrete situation. In fact, since it is a message of love, hope and redemption it is a reminder that from the

The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey

111

beginning the receiver cannot be absent from our considerations. This is particularly the case when we are considering whether the Christian message makes sense such that it can serve as a map of life for anyone. We have to be sensitive to and concerned about how the Christian message is received and not just what the Christian message is about or where it is coming from. Moreover, this turn towards the human subject and not just to the message itself in this philosophical consideration is meant to alert us to another significant factor; namely, that the quest for meaning is in effect an attempt to go beyond what life offers. It reveals the human ability to transcend the situation and to provide value to, rather than merely accept, the situation.12 This ability to do so, which is a human trait, is at times referred to as human transcendence. As used here, that description is not necessarily a religious one even if there is a close association with it, including by philosophers. But whether or not one believes in a God or subscribes to a religious viewpoint is not the main point here. Rather, reference to human transcendence is a recognition that human nature is distinct because unlike other beings, at least to our knowledge, it alone can “see and seek out” what is beyond the present situation. Victor Frankl in his autobiography refers to this as “the self-transcendence of human existence” explaining that the human being always points to and is directed to something or someone outside himself or herself.

Actualization of the Christian Message If indeed we do not want to risk the danger of subjectivism in our attempt to focus on the meaningfulness of the Christian message, it is necessary to consider another point regarding the Christian message; namely, that it needs to be actualized. This claim requires some elaboration since it is not obvious that actualization itself frees us from the charge of subjectivism. Actualization is the act of making actual what is merely potential. Potentiality may or may not be made actual, however. A child, for instance, is a potential adult, or is an adult in the making. However, the child may never reach adulthood for whatever reason and therefore will not realize his or her potential. But the potentiality of its becoming an adult was already there even if its form of existence was different. Similarly, the proposed consideration of the actualization of the Christian message as a way of understanding how it can be a map in life implies that the reality of love, hope and redemption is already present in every human life because 12

See Chapter Five: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”.

112

Chapter Six

he or she is a human being. But it needs to be activated, as it were. The Christian message is both a reminder of this truth as well as a stimulus to its development. It challenges us to make what is potential reality an actuality. To do that requires the participation and the co-operation of the receiver of that message. The ancient Chinese philosopher, Mencius, can be of assistance in understanding this point. His master Confucius had taught that “by nature, men are very much the same, it is through practice that they drift apart”.13 Developing that insight, Mencius argues that humans are naturally good, an innate quality that needs to be developed, however. Like Aristotle, Mencius starts with what humans have in common with non-humans; but unlike him, Mencius singles out the heart, rather than rationality, as the distinguishing feature of humans. By “heart”, however, is not simply the biological organ that living beings possess. For Mencius, it is the source of morality. Moreover, he holds that the function of the heart is to think, not conceptually, but morally. Mencius maintains that the essentially moral nature of the human heart, is bedded in four incipient tendencies: “compassion”, “shame”, “courtesy and modesty”, and “right and wrong”. Compassion is the germ of benevolence; shame, of dutifulness; courtesy and modesty, of observance of the rites; and right and wrong, of wisdom. Mencius is careful to point out that these tendencies, while containing the germs of moral activity, do need to be nurtured and developed. He maintains that human nature is, at heart, good. Since humans have the built-in capacity, it is within their reach to exercise benevolence and to train themselves to make the correct responses.14 But that requires the personal input of every human subject. This digression into Mencius is not intended to be an argument for the validity of the claim made about, but rather an explanation of what is involved in, actualizing the Christian message. Effort has to be made by the human individual. The subject has an important part in seeing its meaning unfold. That is a determining factor in the process of grasping its meaningfulness. At the same time, Mencius’s view dating back to ancient China seems to indicate that the teaching of the Christian message, with particular reference to love, is more of an affirmation of what is known by human reason simply because it is about the human situation. Love or compassion, among other qualities like goodness, is much more universal 13 Confucius, The Analects trans. Raymond Dawson (Oxford University Press, 1993), xvii, 2. 14 Mencius, Mencius (Penguin Books, 1988). See also Chapter Six: “Ethical Thinking and Formation: a Challenge for Life in Society,” in Society in its Challenges, op. cit., 113-128.

The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey

113

than some believe. These enable us to develop more truly as human beings. The more we actualize them, the more we are enabled to see some sense in life.

Towards a Personal Relationship This philosophical consideration of the Christian message has so far indicated that it can guide us in life, like the map we use in our travels. It deals with a fundamental human concern—meaningfulness—and invites us to use it—actualize—as we face the challenges of life. Since other teachings and exhortations can be understood as doing the same, what is distinctive about the Christian message after all? What can make it appealing for those who wish to commit themselves to it? Let us turn our attention now to the last letter of the acronym MAP. As was set out previously, the Christian message is an exhortation to enter into a loving personal relationship with the source of that message; namely, Jesus Christ. Unlike other maps of life, including those of other religions, the aim of the Christian message is more than the mere attainment of wisdom, enlightenment, liberation, nirvana or annihilation. Here we enter into a specifically Christian teaching that requires a committed theological elaboration and development to do it justice. But one can still venture a philosophical consideration of the nature of that personal relationship inasmuch as that is also human experience. I propose to do that by noting firstly, that the nature of human beings is such that it is deeply embedded in, and flourishes in, a multitude of relationships. We are social beings and our identities are formed as we interact with others throughout our lives. Philosophers such as Gabriel Marcel and Martin Buber and many others, have focused on this dimension of human existence. Others, of course, have also claimed that humans are isolated individuals and therefore would reject the suggestion that relationship is a fundamental human concern. In making a reference to the nature of a human being as related, my interest here is to indicate how the kind of relationship that one enters into and nurtures can open up the route to that to which the Christian message leads; namely, to a personal relationship with God.15 Martin Buber’s existentialist philosophy is particularly helpful in this instance. As is well known, he understands human beings to be essentially related. He maintains that human existence is fundamentally a We rather 15

This is a further development of the considerations made in Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”.

114

Chapter Six

than an I. We do not step into a relationship, as it were. Instead, in Buber’s way of thinking, human existence is itself relatedness. What determines the kind of development that ensues depends on whether what he calls the I-Thou or the I-It dominates. It is the type of relationship that forms either a personal or an impersonal I. It is interesting to note that—as we consider the last letter of the acronym MAP—Buber’s insight regarding the relationships also opens up a route to God and thus can show how the Christian message can be understood philosophically.16 Let us now examine his philosophical insight. As Buber puts it, the IThou—a philosophical notion that helps clarify the essence of love—is what enables us to get to know God, the eternal Thou as a Thou. The I-It relationship, in contrast, indicates God to be an object that personifies that type of relationship. While the I-Thou makes life one of dialogue and meaningful relationships with others, our encounter with the eternal Thou actually starts with the realization that all finite I-Thou relationships are indeed finite no matter how vivifying and fulfilling they are. Buber refers to this experience as an “existential disappointment”. It is important, however, to add that he does not maintain that we turn to the eternal Thou only because we have existentially become disappointed. He insists that that the life of dialogue—based on the predominance of I-Thou relationships—is already an openness to the eternal Thou, whether the existential disappointment has set in or not. Rather, since it is the nature of a relationship with a finite Thou to be limited, we seek more. Although the relationship was real, we come to realize that “every relation is consummated in the interchange of actual and potential being, every isolated Thou is bound to enter the chrysalis state of the It”.17 We then seek a Thou that will remain a Thou. We crave for a pure relationship with an eternal Thou which because it will always be a Thou, will never leave us existentially disappointed. Buber goes on to say that the life of dialogue reveals a reality full of meaning. But it discloses much more than that. He means that it directs our attention to the very speaker, even if only what he describes as a “moment God”.18 But out of these moment Gods there arises for us “a sin-

16

Buber was a Jew, but his philosophical insights are, in my opinion, particularly germane to the point I am making regarding the Christian message. 17 Martin Buber, I and Thou, trans. Ronald Gregor Smith, 2nd ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1966), p. 100. 18 Martin Buber, Between Man and Man, trans. Ronald Gregor Smith (N.Y.: The Macmillan Press, 1966), pp. 14-15.

The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey

115

gle identity, the Lord of the voice, the One, the eternal Thou”.19 The main portal to such a God is the I-Thou relationship that we have with one another and complemented by a similar relationship with the world generally. Furthermore, to be open to the eternal Thou, “is not to disregard everything but to see everything in the Thou, not to renounce the world but to establish it on its true basis. To look away from the world or to stare at it, does not help a man to reach God but he who sees the world in him stands in his presence.”20 According to Buber, we meet the eternal Thou in the very life of dialogue for all that is needed is the “removal of the barrier of separation, not by precepts, alleged preparations, practice or meditation but by a full acceptance of the present,”21 that is, by bringing our whole selves in every encounter we make here in our everyday world.22 For, as has been pointed out, this opening up of ourselves in dialogue is already an openness to God. It is already a speaking to and not just about God. This is how we can encounter the personal God, not above our struggles with reality but in daily life—a common theme in Buber’s philosophical thought. Buber’s words are particularly striking: “If you explore the life of things, and of conditioned being, you come to the unfathomable; if you deny the life of beings and of conditioned being, you stand before nothingness; if you hallow this life you meet the living God”.23 Our sense of the Thou awakened in, but not satiated by, finite relationships leads us to what he calls “the endless Thou”. Buber maintains—and here we are brought back to the idea of actualizing what is implicitly present—that this Thou is present to us from the beginning, “the presence only had to become wholly real to us in the reality of the hallowed life of the world”.24 Instead of being alienated therefore from our day-to-day existence since we do not lose contact with reality, we are given certainty that the meaning of our existence—a point that brings us back to the meaningfulness of the

19

To explain what he means, Buber makes use of a comparison: “When we really understand a poem, all we know of a poet is what we learn of him in the poem, no biographical wisdom is of value for the pure understanding of what is to be understood: the I which approaches us is the subject of this single poem. But when we read other poems by the poet in the same true way their subjects combine in all their multiplicity, completing and confirming one another, to form the one polyphone of the person’s existence.” Ibid. p. 15. 20 Martin Buber, I and Thou, op. cit., pp. 78-79. 21 Ibid., pp. 77-78. 22 These days there has been much attention paid to the related practice of “mindfulness”. 23 Ibid. p. 79. 24 Ibid., p. 80.

116

Chapter Six

Christian message itself—is to be open and accessible to the actual lived concrete experience of ours. It was claimed earlier that the Christian message is ultimately about a personal relationship with God. It is meeting a personal God.25 For Buber, God is the eternal Thou, not in terms of the philosophical notion of a being who is without a beginning and an end, but in the realization that this God will never ever become an It. God, according to Buber, confronts us always as Thou. He warns that in our encounter with God, we have to be concerned not with God’s side but with ours since we can easily reduce God to an It.26 We can objectify God by singling out God’s qualities. Our awareness of being loved and accepted by God can easily be reduced to mere intellectual assent to a set of truths about God. In contrast, God will always be near as long as we stand in a direct and personal relationship with God rather than in the security of a set of truths or rituals.27 These will still be alive so long as the relationship vivifies them. Otherwise, when there is too much objectification of God, we will find it too difficult to speak Thou to God. Buber adds a significant observation to what has been said so far, which is particularly relevant to us in the present context. It is not intended, according to him, that our meeting with God should make us concerned with God but rather that we confirm the meaning in the world. For relation with God, as he puts it, is a summoning but also a sending.28 For turning to God—or “reflexion” as Buber phrases it—is actually moving away from God whereas God remains present to us even when we have been sent forth. A “missionary” has always God before him or her; and the truer the mission is, the stronger and the more constant is God’s nearness. We may not be directly concerned with God, but we can converse with God. For “God’s speech to men penetrates what happens in the life of each of us and that happens in the world around, biographical and historical, and makes it for you and me into instruction, message, demand.”29 Alt25

Regarding our philosophical conception of God in the light of the Christian message, cf. my God in Process Thought; a Study in Charles Hartshorne’s Conception of God With a Postscript by Charles Hartshorne (Martinus Nijhoff Publications, 1985). 26 See Martin Buber, Eclipse of God: Studies on the Relation between Religion and Philosophy (N.Y.: Harper and Row, 1957). 27 In Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message” this point is described as “charge” and in Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS” it is referred to as “invoking” God. 28 I and Thou, op. cit., p.87. 29 Ibid.

The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey

117

hough we may seem to turn away from God because of our mission, we are actually moving towards the eternal Thou. When we grasp this then we are at home in the universe. There is, he says, meaning in the world, and we have perceived it because we have met God. We have been summoned, now we are sent.30

Glancing Back As travelers, we value the assistance of a map to make our trips more enjoyable and fruitful. In the same way, insofar as life is indeed a journey, we human beings need some guidance to provide us with a sense of direction and a glimpse of the destination. Otherwise, we are left groping for some sense to life. The suggestion made in this essay is that the Christian message of love, hope and redemption could be such a map of life. Utilizing the acronym MAP, it was claimed that the Christian message can make life more meaningful but that it needs to be actualized for it to be of value in our life journey. Unlike other maps of life, it is one that aims to nurture and deepen a personal relationship with God. In making a case for the Christian message as a map of life, this essay turned to the philosophical insights of a number of philosophers to elaborate on these notions. To what extent the Christian message itself is credible and defensible remains a continuous challenge to be taken on.

30

See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”.

CHAPTER SEVEN FROM VISION TO MISSION WITH PASS FOR LIFE1

Introduction It has become common practice for institutions, organizations and various other bodies to draft and issue a mission statement setting out their respective understanding of themselves, their aims and their practices. A mission statement is intended not only to express the aspiration of the group but also to set out a challenge both for itself and for others to see. Thus, it serves the purpose of crafting together a self-understanding as well as the need to enlighten all those whom they serve. Accordingly, it acts both as a springboard for their own activities and as a gauge for others to evaluate their accomplishments. Since a mission statement not only articulates and elucidates but also concretizes the status and the purpose of the institution, organization or relevant body, it can in this way be held up as a measure of its accountability. For these groups a mission statement therefore has a valuable role in guiding their thinking and their activities. Elsewhere2 I made the claim that what is distinctive about the Christian message is its vision: unlike other religions, Christianity envisions and understands creation as standing in a personal relationship with its creator. Given this understanding, its mission as carried out through its various activities and its support systems are specific ways of deepening and developing that personal relationship. Focusing more particularly on its message of hope, I also made the claim that the Christian message is a reminder and a reinforcement of, as well as a response to, the hope that all humans as human beings entertain in different ways. It does not replace nor

1

I have used “for life” instead of “in life” to bring out the two meanings; namely, that it is “for use in life” and that it is “for one’s entire life”. Originally published in DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XLI, 1 & 2 (May & November 2016), pp. 47-64. 2 Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”.

120

Chapter Seven

reject this truly human aspiration but provides a distinctive context for that hope.3 Here I would like to develop further this perspective on the Christian message. Likening it in some respects to a mission statement as described above, I should like to offer some philosophical considerations not only as regards what is involved in the concepts of vision and mission4 but also what is entailed when the vision, that is to say, the original insight or teaching, is translated into a mission, by which is meant the particular plan of action. I do wish to stress that my perspective in the development of the topic of this essay is philosophical, rather than theological or religious.5 My hope, nevertheless, is to contribute to the discussion on the Christian message, in whatever contexts it arises. After all, despite some difficulties and objections from various quarters, philosophical thinking can be and often has been an ally, and at times even an asset, in much theological and religious thinking.6 My interest in this instance is not so much to unpack or to elaborate on that message—a task that is more suitable in a different setting—but rather to set out some relevant epistemological issues attending one’s understanding of the Christian message.7 I will nevertheless follow up, in line with the preceding philosophical discussion on vision and mission in this essay, with a personal suggestion of a possible interpretation of the Christian message in our journey through life.8 Given the particular focus of this essay, therefore, the specific question that I should like to pursue here is: Can the metaphysical vision of Alfred North Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne—one that is fully developed and defended in the writings of these two thinkers and their adherents—serve as resource for appreciating what Christ has bequeathed to his followers?9 In light of the claim that what is distinctive about the Christian 3

Chapter Five: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”. The discussion here parallels my treatment, published in different writings, of the two senses of “context”: “context” in the wider sense and “context” in the specific sense. 5 This essay therefore is not primarily about Christianity as an organized religion or about its specific beliefs, teachings and practices. In focusing on the Christian message, which I believe is one of love, hope, and redemption, I wish to consider philosophically what is involved when one regards its status, as it were, to be that religion’s mission statement. 6 See Chapter Three: “Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research”. 7 Like any other message, the Christian message does need to be pondered upon and developed if it is to be instructive and salvific. 8 See Chapter Six: “The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey”. 9 The philosophies of Alfred North Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne have been the foundation of what is called process theology, which is associated with the 4

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

121

religion is its specific vision and mission, the further consideration then is: What can we learn for our philosophical considerations of the Christian message from both of these thinkers as well as from other philosophers?

The Christian Message as Vision One of the traits associated with charismatic leaders or magnetic personalities is their vision of life and in life. This vision that comes across in their teachings or other similar communications is shared in different ways, directly or indirectly, in simple or in more elaborate terms. Irrespective of how it reaches others, however, it is always one that enlightens inasmuch as it attracts others and somehow also illumines the paths that they take in their own lives. The vision of these individuals is normally regarded as far-reaching as well as comprehensive, helping others to make sense of life and enabling them to deal with its manifold challenges. One can readily think of numerous such personalities throughout history and in contemporary times, whether religious or secular, whose vision has been influential. It touches others, makes disciples of them and enriches their lives. As a whole, the world we live in has certainly benefitted from such individuals and from their view of life and their teachings. But in the present context what is more relevant for our purposes is the nature and power of the vision itself whether shared or handed down. What are the features of a vision? Why does it play such a significant role so that it somehow transcends certain boundaries? Unlike a mere perspective on life, a vision, despite its association with “seeing” is not just seeing reality or life “as”. It is for this reason that Ludwig Wittgenstein’s description of faith as “seeing-as”, while helpful in many ways in showing that faith affirms the same reality as from a non-religious perspective, is rather limited in understanding what is meant by vision here. Nor is vision to be equated in the present context with merely “taking a stand” on certain matters. While one must indeed take a particular stand because of one’s vision, it is a consequence of, rather than the same reality as, a vision. In contrast, a vision takes everything into account and yet in such a way that it does not ignore the particular either. A vision, contrary to some expectation, is not subjective even if it does have some subjective features, as will be explained later. In fact, it is rather comprehensive inasmuch as it is wide-ranging and inclusive. In addition, it is predominantly objective, de-

thinking and writing of theologians like John Cobb, Jr., David Griffin and many others.

122

Chapter Seven

spite an initial inspection of it, insofar as it is rooted in true reality rather in mere interpretation. Having a vision implies being able to see the entire context, i.e. behind and not merely the actual scene. Rather than just “seeing-as”, to take up Wittgenstein’s phrase again, a vision as used in the present context is actually “seeing-through” even if it does not entail predicting a detailed and clear future but instead providing some encouragement about the future. To elucidate further how the concept of vision is being used here and how it can be associated with the Christian message, it would be helpful firstly to turn to the concept of a metaphysical vision as formulated by A.N. Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne.10 Contrary to the then antimetaphysical bias in philosophical thinking fostered by positivism and empiricism, these two thinkers argued that these ways of thinking about reality ignored the need to recognize the universal and necessary features of reality.11 In their view, the criticisms leveled against metaphysics were more applicable to those who espoused and defended transcendental reality, understood to be “above or beyond” physical reality. It was claimed by the critics of metaphysics that such a reality could not possibly be known or described; hence, any attempt to engage in metaphysical talk is really to be bogged down in obtuse claims. According to them, what is non-sensible is nonsensical. Linguistic analysis, too, with its emphasis on clarity accused metaphysical thinking of clogging our thoughts with ponderous and confusing claims based on speculation. What is needed, according to its proponents, is to break down these claims into clear and intelligible statements which could be open to a more detailed analysis. In this way, we could, as it were, “dissolve” rather than attempt to solve age-old philosophical problems. Postmodernism, associated with deconstruction and post-structuralism, added its own skeptical voice stating that we have to put aside grand theories and narratives that have been inherited from the past. We need to be more distrustful of the claims of traditional rational10

This reference to the metaphysical vision of these two thinkers is merely to help our understanding of the characteristics and role of a vision as it relates to this interpretation of the Christian message. For further discussion and justification of this metaphysical vision, see Chapter 3, “Hartshorne on Describing God,” pp. 3950 and Chapter 7 “Religion, Science and Hartshorne’s Metaphysics,” in my Religion, Reason and God: Essays in the Philosophies of Charles Hartshorne and A.N. Whitehead (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2004), pp. 39-50, and 101-123. 11 See A.N. Whitehead, Process and Reality, corrected edition by David Ray Griffin and Donald F. Sherburne (N.Y and London: The Free Press, 1978) and Charles Hartshorne, Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method (Lanham: University Press of America, 1983). There are other editions of Hartshorne’s book.

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

123

istic thinking. These anti-metaphysical points of view were therefore in opposition to any attempt to arrive at a universal and necessary knowledge about reality. The metaphysical way of thinking that had been forged by Whitehead and Hartshorne, however, is actually rooted in experience and lived reality. It is not a foray into super-sensible realities such as was done in the previous metaphysical systems targeted by the critics. In fact, both of these latter-day thinkers were in dialogue with contemporary physics and other empirical sciences. What they had arrived at in their metaphysical systems is knowledge of reality, known initially and primarily through sense experience and tested eventually by sense experience. Their so-called philosophical pursuit, which Whitehead called speculative thinking and Hartshorne described as metaphysical thinking, is the search for universal and necessary truths about the reality that we experience through our senses. It is making more explicit what is only implicit in our knowledge of reality itself. Rather than being merely in contact with reality in a fragmentary manner through specific sense experiences, human knowledge is capable of broadening and deepening its grasp of reality, these philosophers argued. The further systematization of the original experiences, as is done in metaphysical thinking and discourse, is to ensure coherence and consistency in the general scheme of ideas. The focus on what is abstract and seemingly theoretical, however, does not ignore the particular or the contingent which continues to be the basis of claims about reality. For Whitehead and Hartshorne, a metaphysical vision of reality therefore provides us with knowledge of the here-and-now but at the same time stretches out to consider the necessary and the universal. In doing so, it confronts the claim that such sensory and particular knowledge of reality is not a full description of it. It is this philosophical consideration, coming from these two thinkers, that challenges us, when face to face with actual reality, to “see through” and not just “see as”. It raises the possibility of our venturing to an even wider horizon and examining a deeper foundation.12 There is another important consideration about a metaphysical vision as envisioned by Whitehead and Hartshorne that serves our purposes here; namely, that our understanding and formulation of such a vision is not the same as the vision itself. That is to say, while metaphysical truths are universal and necessary by definition, our knowledge of these is not. Hartshorne puts it succinctly when he states that our knowledge of the absolute is not, itself, absolute. There are absolute truths, he reckons, since even the 12

In more colloquial language, one could state that a metaphysical vision reminds us that, as it were, there is “more than meets the eye” and that we should “think outside the box”.

124

Chapter Seven

contrary claim that everything is relative, as relativists insist on maintaining, is itself to regard that claim to be an absolute truth. But Hartshorne also warns that there is a certain amount of “relativity” in human knowledge because of our nature as knowers in general and as individual knowers in particular. Thus, even if the vision itself, being metaphysical as explained earlier, is complete and unchanging, our grasp of it is by no means the same. There can be change, development and revision as regards our understanding of the vision. We are cast in space and time, and this human situation limits the nature of human knowledge Nevertheless, we can break out of that limitation even if only in a rather guarded manner. This is why a metaphysical pursuit is possible and metaphysical truths are attainable. But Whitehead and Hartshorne emphasize that metaphysics is the search for necessary and universal truths. This is the reason for returning constantly to experience to check whether our conclusions about reality are indeed confirmed by other experiences. The metaphysical vision, in Whitehead’s and Hartshorne’s philosophy, must be in constant contact with particular experiences. To what extent does this understanding of a metaphysical vision enable us to regard the Christian message as a vision? In what sense is Jesus Christ’s teaching of love, hope and redemption one that embraces everyone and everything? How valid is its universal appeal, a claim made by those devoted to him? Would the identification of the Christian message as a vision throw some light on its significance? Could it be a point of encounter among those who, despite their specific differences, are willing to engage in dialogue?13 These are on-going questions which invite continuous reflection not just by the Christian community, particularly those charged with reflecting on his words, but also by those belonging to other traditions who wish to assess their significance. For our present purposes, however, an important implication regarding our knowledge of the Christian message as vision requires further consideration; namely, that even when a case can be made regarding the sources and nature of that vision, thereby making it distinctive and original, our knowledge of it does involve some interpretation and further development on our part. Here a philosophical axiom that can be of particular significance in this regard is: quidquid recipitur recipitur ad modum recipientis. There is a strong tendency, especially among religious believers, to insist that religious truths should not be regarded as mere human knowledge and that they have thereby the authority and status which put them beyond human characteristics. These have special status due to the 13

See Chapter Five “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”.

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

125

divine authority of the originating source. Furthermore, according to this view, these religious truths have been preserved in recognized forms and have been entrusted to specially-appointed teachers. But while one may indeed understand this particular viewpoint, it remains nevertheless a crucial consideration that one needs to take due regard of the distinction between the religious truths themselves and our knowledge of these truths just as Whitehead and Hartshorne make the distinction between metaphysical truths and our understanding of those truths. Furthermore, one may even point out that an interpretation and development of such truths, even when care, respect and reverence are shown, cannot entirely escape a human element in the entire process. Hence, a certain amount of subjectivity and relativity will inevitably creep in. That is simply the reality of the knowing process of human beings. If the above observation and argumentation are right, then one should bear in mind that when one refers to the Christian message as a vision, it is in itself an interpretation even if one recognizes that it is possible to trace it back to its origins. The more we realize this, the more one would have respect for the authentic message which will continue to be the source and basis for our appreciation of the vision itself.

The Christian Message in its Mission Let us turn our attention now to the Christian message in its mission. The word “mission” is understood in diverse ways, including the particular usage of it within Christianity when it talks of its missionary work. The injunction of its founder to his disciples to set forth and spread the gospel to other nations has been continued by the Christian community throughout the ages. Various groups, such as some religious orders, have also adopted this challenge as their specific way of life throughout history. In the spirit of their respective founders, they have carried the Christian message far and wide.14 Others too, individually or collectively, have heeded the call to carry out the Christian message in their own lives as well as in those with whom they are in contact. For them “mission” is personalizing

14

Among others are the Divine Word Missionaries, whose religious society together with two female religious congregations was founded by St Arnoldus Janssen. They work as missionaries in several countries, including the Philippines. See Antolin Uy, SVD (ed.), Witness to the Word: Society of the Divine Word Philippines 1909-2009 (Manila: Logos Publications, 2009); DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XXXV (2010) and XXXIX (2014).

126

Chapter Seven

that message.15 There are indeed a number of ways of demonstrating this concept. But in this essay “mission” is being used in the context of what has been referred to as a mission statement. In this context “mission” thus refers to the development and implementation of a vision contextually. Since the concern here is to develop philosophical considerations of the Christian message, in referring to “mission” particular attention will be given to discussing a possible use of Whitehead’s and Hartshorne’s metaphysics as a resource as we enquire further into how the Christian message in line with its vision can be translated into its mission. The main focus is once again less on an interpretation of the mission itself and its practical implications but more on certain epistemological and metaphysical issues associated with it. With this in mind, it will be useful to bring in an important consideration that takes its cue from Hartshorne’s distinction between existence (that something is rather than is not) and actuality (how that something is). It is the correlative distinction between the abstract and the concrete. According to him, the abstract is a partial description of actuality while the concrete is its fullness. These are dimensions of the same reality, rather than separate entities. Furthermore, the relationship between these two dimensions is asymmetrical; that is to say, one-way. The concrete incorporates the abstract but not vice-versa. To illustrate this point, Hartshorne talks of John as existing (that is to say, he is not nothing). There is a John rather than no John. But his actuality includes his height, weight, state of mind, interests, activities and so on as well as the fact that he exists. His existence is abstract while his actuality is concrete.16 It is important that we do not confuse or separate these two dimensions. Otherwise, we would be guilty of what Whitehead terms the “fallacy of misplaced concreteness”, when what is abstract is regarded and developed further as concrete. Not only does it lead to much confusion—and Whitehead maintains that there is much in the history of philosophy to illustrate this—but it also leads to confused and confusing views about reality and life itself. Resorting to this distinction between the abstract and the concrete and applying it to the Christian message, one could claim that the vision is 15 I have in mind the numerous individuals throughout the world, religious, clerical or lay, who live out their Christianity in various contexts or professions. Their mission is to live their lives in accordance with the Christian gospel. 16 Hartshorne also uses this distinction with reference to God’s reality and what we humans can know about God. See, among others, his Man’s Vision of God and the Logic of Theism (various editions) and Divine Relativity: a Social Conception of God (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1948).

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

127

abstract and the mission is concrete. One could also state that the vision is, at it were, theoretical while the mission as the concretization of the vision is practical. It is, however, more than just the difference between the theoretical and the practical. In this case there is a necessary and logical connection insofar as the abstract cannot exist without its concretization and the concrete has to have an abstract dimension. What is of importance to note here is that there is one reality but is viewed from different angles. Reference was previously made to confusing the vision with an interpretation of our own making of that vision. It was claimed that as we seek to understand, interpret and develop the vision, as humans we are prone, irrespective of intentions, to inject subjective features into it. This is inevitable given the nature of human knowledge. Similarly, with the concretization of that vision in its mission, this tendency is even more acute. We tend to equate a particular mission that we have identified with the vision itself. For instance, a long-held practice and custom can often be deemed to be the proper way of implementing the vision. This identification of one with the other leads to some resistance in the face of changing circumstances or context. Furthermore, we may even give it the characteristics of a vision itself and thus justify our entrenched position. This is fallacious and unhelpful. So how is “mission” as used in this instance to be distinguished from vision yet accepted as an integral part of it? We will recall that a mission statement provides certain indications of how the vision is intended to be implemented. Certain directions or specific objectives inevitably arise from the vision. But it is also taken for granted that these are intended, as one pursues them, to take into account the changing scenario. In fact, mission is understood to be more like pointers for those involved in implementing them and intended to be used together with their own initiative. The discharge of a mission has to be contextualized. This is because not every circumstance or specific scenario can be fully anticipated. At the same time, however, it is to be remembered that the vision acts not only as the source of the mission but that it also provides the touchstone against which the authenticity and the reliability of the mission are to be judged. This will help ensure that one’s appraisal of the particular mission is made in line with the original vision. Otherwise, that particular mission cannot and should not be regarded as genuine. The challenge of carrying out a mission, if it is indeed an integral part of the vision, is in effect paying attention to the present while looking forward to the future, but always with more than a glance at the past. How does all this relate to the Christian message of love, hope and redemption? Insofar as it is a vision that promotes love, inspires hope and

128

Chapter Seven

assures redemption, as a vision it is the very foundation of any later teaching or doctrine in the Christian tradition. The task ahead is primarily to examine what the vision truly means and what it entails while keeping in mind what has been asserted earlier regarding the vision itself and our understanding of the vision. To reiterate the point, human elements inevitably creep into our understanding, no matter what the source is. Developing it further so as to implement it is a further stage and should therefore encourage even more caution on our part.17 As Whitehead and Hartshorne have stated regarding the contextualization of metaphysical truths, one should not confuse one with the other. How the Christian message is to be interpreted, advanced and communicated has to take into account the concrete context in which the task is to be carried out. And all along it is the authority of the original Christian vision itself, just as it is the truth of the metaphysical vision, which serves as the criterion for implementing the specific mission. Additionally, Whitehead’s and Hartshorne’s insistence that one must also “land back on concrete ground” means that the assessment of the Christian mission entails that one needs to examine continuously whether various other attempts or practices throughout history to implement the Christian message do indeed fulfil the Christian vision. In this sense continuous reference to and examination of its past history as well as of its current practice in other contexts can be made for support and/or re-thinking. No doubt, this is not only an enormous task but also a continuous challenge if one were to truly ensure that the mission, whatever it is, follows truly from the original vision, the Christian message itself.

The Christian Message as PASS So far I have set out relevant aspects of Whitehead’s and Hartshorne’s metaphysical systems with a view to showing in what way they can be of use in understanding and appreciating the Christian message as vision and mission. Additionally, I have attempted to show how with the 17 Pope Frances shows sensitivity to this point in his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetitia (19 March 2016): “Unity of teaching and practice is certainly necessary in the Church, but this does not preclude various ways of interpreting some aspects of that teaching or drawing certain consequences from it. This will always be case as the Spirit guides us towards the entire truth (cf Jn 16:13), until he leads us fully into the mystery of Christ and enables us to see all things as he does. Each country or region, moreover, can see solutions better suited to its culture and sensitive to its traditions and local needs. For ‘cultures are in fact quite diverse and every general principle…needs to be inculturated, if it is to be respected and applied’” (par. 3).

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

129

aid of their philosophical insights, one can see a connection between vision and mission. In fact, these two concept should really be understood as vision/mission just as reality is absolute/relative, existence/actuality and abstract/concrete since there is an integral connection. Hopefully, the discussion above has shown the reason and justification for this further claim. In this section of the essay, I should like to present a personal suggestion as to how one could explore further the Christian message in the light of the previous discussion. It seems to me that the Christian message, like a mission statement, provides a particular vision to enlighten us all and issues a challenging mission for us to implement in all aspects of life. Since my perspective is philosophical, the discussion will focus once more on the underpinnings of the message rather than explore its content. Essentially, I will claim that, given that Christianity teaches that life is a journey towards a promised destination, the Christian message can be interpreted as PASS; namely, that it Points the way, Accompanies us on the journey while Supporting us. It is also intended to lead to the Salvation of all creation.18 The description of life as journey is a recurring theme in Christian thinking and is therefore familiar to Christian believers.19 Humankind is seen as set on finding its way back to its Creator. It resonates, too, with what many other religions teach about life; namely, that it is fundamentally a pilgrimage. It is not surprising therefore that religious believers indeed go on pilgrimages during their lifetime to seek ultimate fulfillment. Such pilgrimages instance the most fundamental one in life and rehearse somehow their final trip. However, life as journey also features in other contexts, like philosophy.20 One will recall Gabriel Marcel’s reference to a human being as homo viator and a fulfilled human existence as constantly living an authentic life to enable us to reach our final goal. Indeed, human restlessness, experienced in different ways and in various contexts, seems to indicate a deepseated human desire to reach out and to travel to “distant shores”, as it were. Augustine refers to this restlessness as an intrinsic part of human nature while giving it a specific religious interpretation. Human beings, it 18

To differentiate it from other uses of the term and their varied connotations, I have opted for capital letters. The term is used in the essay in the context of going on a journey, an important consideration in Christian thought and life. It also has an educational connotation since passing at the end of an educational endeavour indicates that work has been done and a certain standard has been achieved, relevant considerations in the present context. 19 Chapter Five: “The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey”. 20 Literature, too, is rich in its depiction of human existence as a journey.

130

Chapter Seven

would seem both in the religious and philosophical senses, are essentially “on the move”; and human existence is about searching for and finding sources of meaning that will motivate us towards our destination— interpreted variously. In suggesting here that the Christian message can be understood as PASS, I am indicating that its vision and mission are intended to ensure a meaningful passage through life towards a specific fulfilled destination, unlike Heidegger’s version of human existence as merely “unto death”.21 Moreover, the term PASS will probably remind the reader of the role of symbols in religious discourse.22 As is well known, throughout history theologians and philosophers have been concerned with the status of religious language or with God-talk, as it has been termed more recently.23 The attempt to engage in it was always fraught with difficulties. It was assumed that it involved speaking at two separate levels. Bridging the gap between the human and the divine challenged those who wanted to be able to discuss what was regarded as outside the human sphere, the so-called transcendental level. Among many such investigations into this topic and attempts at a credible and defensible methodology was the recognition of the status of a symbol in comparison to a sign. A sign, it is said, is arbitrarily chosen unlike a symbol which participates in the reality of the symbolized. Religious symbols, carefully chosen, are thus interpreted as somehow enabling us to touch base with the divine.24 Turning specifically to the suggestion of the Christian message as PASS, one could indeed compare it to a symbol. The Christian message understood as vision indicates that first of all it emanates from the source, Jesus Christ. In this sense it is comparable to other symbols in somehow participating in the reality of the symbolized. However, it is arguably more 21

This point is descriptive rather than argumentative. It is merely an explanation of what is meant by the Christian message “pointing to” as described in the text. 22 Cf. Antonio M. Pernia, “The Stranger and the Poor: Two Challenges to the Missionary Church in Evangelii Gaudium,” Missio Inter Gentes, Vol 1, No. 1 (January 2015), p. 37. 23 See M.J. Charlesworth, Philosophy of Religion: the Historic Approaches (London and Basingstoke: Macmillan Press, 1972). 24 In Hartshorne’s metaphysics, however, the claim is made that it is possible to talk of God in a literal and positive way. See Chapter 3: “Hartshorne on Describing God”, in Religion, Reason and God, op.cit. pp. 39-50. My interest here lies more in discussing certain philosophical considerations of the Christian message rather than in engaging in God-talk itself while accepting the difficulties with that task. It seems to me, however, that a fundamental issue even in such religious language is the dubious separation, as discussed in the text, of the human and the religious. While they are distinctive, they are not separate.

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

131

than that because it also makes us aware of, and attentive to, a goal. This is because the Christian message is intimately connected in this respect with alerting us to a specific destiny. While it is a reassurance first and foremost that it comes from Christ himself it is simultaneously pointing to a particular destination, which is redemption. Furthermore, and once again differing somewhat from the illuminating but restricted role of a symbol, it is demonstrating a specific way of life, one that should be characterized by love and hope as the right path to be taken. It is therefore a message that strongly involves, rather than simply reminds, its listeners. They are not to be merely passive hearers of Christ’s words. Unlike the case with a religious symbol, they are called to be active participants in “concretizing”, as it were, that message. In this sense like a mission statement, the vision actually incorporates the mission insofar as it is pointing to redemption as the destination. In other words, the Christian message also indicates the route to be taken. That is why the message maps out a certain way of life.25 This claim will not necessarily convince everyone, particularly if he or she does not accept the validity or the soundness of the Christian message in the first place. Moreover, the specification of the destination is, in the minds of many, open to question. Nevertheless, what is significant in the Christian message, as far as it is understood here, is that it offers a “sense of direction”. That is worth noting. Psychologists—and common sense—would agree that this is crucial to be able to progress in human living, as it were. This does not necessarily mean that it spells success in life or that it guarantees contentment with life, but it does offer a challenge to anyone to take it seriously enough even if one does not always concur with all its aspects. Having a direction in life—even if the goals are varied—matters tremendously to human beings precisely because they are human beings. We are the kind of beings who are not just on the move but are constantly searching for something. In pointing to the destination, the Christian message urges us to look towards the future—to envision it— and to take it seriously enough to live a particular kind of life—a mission in life. The ordinary human experience of, and lessons in, undertaking any trip would support this consideration of the Christian message even if one does not concur with identifying the destination it has named. Getting lost on our trips, particularly in unfamiliar cities, on threatening mountains or out in the open seas can be unnerving, but losing our sense of direction in life is far more unsettling. It is not just about making sense of our daily

25

See Chapter Six: “The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey”.

132

Chapter Seven

activities as we move on in life but rather of making sense of life itself. That is by far a weightier consideration. But the Christian message is not just oriented towards the destination and prescriptive of a manner of life. Although it reveals the goal and prescribes the way, it also accompanies the travelers throughout their journey. In one’s efforts to reach that destination and to live the life that will make it possible, the Christian message is a constant companion, enlightening as well as nourishing all those who travel that way. And as many a weary traveler will readily agree, such provisions are not just welcome but are also essential. But in what sense does the Christian message accompany us on the journey in life? As with any other journey for whatever purpose, companionship can make a lot of difference. Although at times, there is much satisfaction and comfort from a solitary walk, particularly when one needs to be on one’s own, the realization that each step that one takes and every stage that one passes when confronted by life’s challenges is not a solitary pursuit can be crucial in arriving more refreshed at one’s destination. In communicating a message of love—despite several versions of love, some of which would be questionable while others are more lasting26—the Christian message makes explicit all along that the journey is always “with others and for others”. It is a realization that, as existential philosophers have been talking about, one’s existence is a “co-existence” and as process philosophers have insisted, all reality is a relatedness. The “unpacking” of that message and the “wearing” of its implications as one undertakes the journey in life does not always make the trip comfortable— there are after all the inevitable bumps and obstacles—but the message and reality of love itself can be reassuring. Martin Buber is particularly well-known for identifying and articulating what he calls the I-Thou relationship. His description of it and the contrast he draws between this type of relation and what he refers to as the I-It relationship is helpful in making one appreciate the concept and types of relatedness and parallels much of what Christianity upholds. In claiming that the Christian message of love accompanies us on our journey in life, I am suggesting that it is more than just how we relate to one another—in an I-It or in an I-Thou relation—but that it is making explicit what is already in reality. Reality itself is bound up in relatedness and not just because we have entered into that type of relationship. This is why Buber regards the I-It and the I-Thou as primary. Hartshorne puts it more strongly: existence 26

See Erich Fromm, The Art of Loving (London: Unwin Books, 1972). The very first lines of Chapter 1 speak of love as an art—and therefore requires knowledge and effort. Similarly, the Christian message is a vision and mission, which involves understanding it and putting it into practice.

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

133

is social, not in the sense of individual realities coming together in a grouping or in society but in the stricter sense that it is the most fundamental truth about reality. But the question still remains: even if one were to agree with Buber and Hartshorne about the make-up of reality, in what sense can one claim that the Christian message of love accompanies us? To appreciate this claim, we need to return to the earlier discussion in this essay. What was stated about the concreteness of reality (as distinct from its abstract feature) becomes more relevant since the journey for those who wish to listen to and implement the Christian message is not an abstract idea or a vague plan but a concrete undertaking. It is to take seriously social relatedness in the concrete manifestation of love. But this can only be so if indeed those who heed that message “concretize” what is involved in love.27 In other words—using the terminology of Whitehead and Hartshorne—the abstract side of the message can only be appreciated if one witnesses along the way its concrete actuality. Perhaps given the technological advances, one could explain this observation to the mindset current in our times that the “power” of love is there alongside us but it needs to be “switched on”—by us. It is necessary “to plug in” or “to download it”. Then and only then will we be “connected” and realize its importance. It seems to me that, despite the seeming strangeness of the comparison, the Christian message alerts us to this point: the vision is best seen—and experienced—in the mission of love itself. It is not just a statement, therefore; it is most definitely a challenge. The point just made takes us to the next letter in PASS; namely, that the Christian message supports the travelers on their journey.28 As it accompanies them, the Christian message of hope also offers the necessary support that will enable them to reach their destination. While there may be legitimate criticisms of the Christian understanding of hope as based on a promise—as well as unfounded observations arising from a misunderstanding of it—the crucial point for our philosophical consideration here is

27

Turning to Hartshorne’s metaphysics can also be of help in appreciating God’s immanent presence in all of reality. Process thought claims further that God’s compassion means that God is not just a companion but also a co-sufferer. God is truly and really involved with us. See God in Process Thought, op. cit. 28 One can also use another word beginning with ‘s’ to make the same point; namely, serves. This word and its usage have a particular genuine ring in certain Christian circles. I have opted for “supports” as a stronger consideration in the present context since it implies the provision of resources, e.g. the sacraments, worship, teachings and so on.

134

Chapter Seven

that there is a realistic basis for hope in life.29 Hope as an aspiration, like love as relatedness, can only come to fruition if indeed it is allowed to develop. That depends very much on the travelers themselves. The Christian message, put into practice, is a reminder of that truth; but it can be confirmed only by what they themselves do. In addition, supporting one another as they face the trials and tribulations of life or as they celebrate the joys and surprises of life can test but also strengthen them. The vision as set out in the Christian message illumines the way; but it is really the mission of hope, especially if it is inspired by love, as brought about by the travelers themselves, which energizes them as they journey on. The supportive role of PASS is made actual in the service of the community or society. Finally, the Christian message as PASS is not just about undertaking a journey in love and hope towards a destination that has been pointed out. It is about reaching the desired destination; otherwise, it is merely going to a transitory phase or a resting place, like the lay-bys on motorways. This is why the Christian message is emphatically one that claims to save. In its proclamation it insists that it is not just about love and hope but ultimately about redemption. Christian life in all its phases is about fulfillment. It is finding out finally what one has been searching for; it is appreciating fully what one has been hoping for.30 For some, such a claim is preposterous or illusory. Critics have targeted not only its effects on its followers—reaching out for a pie in the sky—but also its very basis which is that the Christian message is about the redemption of all creation brought about by the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. How that can be a source of salvation has been raised repeatedly by these critics. Christians understandably have responded to this criticism insisting, among other observations, that its message has been misunderstood. But for our purposes here it is worth stating that a crucial philosophical consideration of the Christian message which is not always taken on board by the critics is the more general truth: namely, the redemptive power of the past itself and not just the particular theological basis for the Christian belief in redemption.31

29 This claim is discussed further in Chapter Five: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”. 30 This point is discussed in more detail in Chapter Nine: “The Christian Mission at Journey’s End”. 31 I am aware that this issue in theological and philosophical controversies is much more complex. My intention here is merely to provide some basis for understanding the Christian message as one that saves.

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

135

The Salvific Effect of the Past We ought to take up this point further. It seems that in appraising the Christian message as one of redemption for the travelers on life’s journey, which is a future event for them, it may be surprising but actually worth our while to examine the status and role of the past itself. The past is not, as is often seen in ordinary usage, an event that is over, done with and hence “gone”. There is a metaphysical basis for the claim that what has happened in the past can have a salvific effect on the present and the future. Hartshorne argues that the past is immortal. Once an event has taken place, it cannot be undone even if it is forgotten. It lives on and continues to have an impact.32 The first relevant point to consider therefore is that that past event in Christian history, like any other event in history, is not lost but continues to be part of our present times. But how can the past generally redeem us? In what sense does the past have a redemptive factor? From the perspective of Hartshorne’s metaphysics, the question can be re-phrased in this way: if indeed the past is immortal, how can it save us? To answer these questions, it is necessary to bring in the metaphysical basis for Hartshorne’s claim regarding the status of the past. According to him, the whole of reality comes about because of creative synthesis. Reality in his philosophy is a series of events, rather than composed of isolated bits. These events, themselves brought about by previous events, come together into a “synthesis” which results in and is actualized by the present event. That means therefore that it is an effect of the action of the various preceding causes. Accordingly, these continue to exist and impact the present. It is in this sense that the past is never lost and remains to some extent influential. All past events therefore— including the bad ones, unfortunately—are never lost insofar as they all continue to exist in the present and have a bearing on how the future shapes up.

32

Hartshorne argues that the immortality of the past can be defended from both a metaphysical and a logical point of view: there has to be a referent to any statement about it. Illustrating it with a historical reference to the crossing of the Rubicon, he argues that it would always be true that Caesar had crossed the Rubicon. To argue otherwise, i.e., that that event is lost since it is in the past, is to ignore the reality that there would be no referent for such a statement if that argument were right. See Chapter 6: “Hartshorne’s Interpretation of Human Immortality,” in my Religion, Reason and God: Essays in the Philosophies of Charles Hartshorne and A.N. Whitehead (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2004), pp. 83-99.

136

Chapter Seven

But this synthesis is also “creative”; that is to say, it is never completely predictable. Because it is not fully determined, it can be partially influenced or partly changed. That is why there is reason to hope, as was suggested earlier. The significant point here is that the past event, unlike a mere deposit of realities which one can leave aside, has to be “utilized”. In the context of our present philosophical considerations, it means that one has to participate in the whole process. There is a given but there has also to be “an active receiving”. Regarding the issue of salvation, one is not merely “saved” by a past event. Rather, one needs to “participate actively” in the whole process.33 From a philosophical perspective, informed by Hartshorne’s metaphysics, this means that the salvation in PASS is achieved only when the vision becomes part of one’s own mission. The Christian message as PASS is indeed a ticket in life, inasmuch as one receives it or hears about it; but its meaning and significance, can only be appreciated if one were to “use” it, as it were, for life itself.34 As train travelers will attest, it is not enough to have the ticket, one must validate it. It is in this sense that the Christian message is truly salvific.35

A Final Consideration In this essay, my concern was to provide and discuss some philosophical considerations of the Christian message which has been compared to a mission statement. The claim was made that like any other mission statement, the Christian message contains a vision and a mission: one of love, hope and redemption. Making use of the philosophical insights of A.N. Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne, the discussion revolved around how their metaphysical vision can enable us to understand and appreciate that message as a mission statement. The focus, however, was more on discussing the underpinnings of that message rather than on expanding or assessing the message itself. The suggestion was offered that the Christian message as vision and mission can be understood as PASS; that is to say, 33

This point is reminiscent of the “faith versus good works” controversy which has divided the Christian community. From the point of view of this essay, what was stated in the texts means that it is indeed “good works” informed and nourished by “faith” that can lead to salvation. 34 One can also think of the Christian message as a key that needs to be turned to unlock the path to one’s destination. 35 Christian theologians could rightly insist that the Christian belief in the redemptive power of Christ’s act is much more profound than the way it has been set out in this essay. My intention here is merely to provide a metaphysical basis for it. See also, Chapter Nine: “The Christian Message at Journey’s End”.

From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life

137

it points the way, accompanies us on the journey while supporting us as we head towards salvation. There is a further task ahead of us; that is, to deepen and develop our understanding of the Christian message itself. This is of course an ongoing task if one wishes to do it justice. In this essay I set out certain epistemological considerations. In the endeavours to undertake this task, it has been suggested that we should not mistake an interpretation and development for the original vision itself. History and contemporary times should alert us to the dangers when that happens. Moreover, one is hardly doing justice to the original vision itself if it does not serve as the actual source and the criterion for what one understands by it. We live in a world characterized by the speed, proliferation and diversity of messages. It is easy to be confused about the genuineness of the message and the reliability of its source, especially given the proliferation and circulation of fake news. Since the vision does need to be translated into a mission if it is to be of service to humankind—after all, the Christian message is a message to them—this essay also put forward philosophical considerations of what is involved in doing so. Unlike vision which is more abstract, the task of implementing it—the task of mission, that is—should take into account that change and development are an integral part of reality. The concreteness of mission requires openness, rather than subservience, to the diversity of those who are to hear the message and to the changing society they live in.36 It is important to bear in mind that “openness” is not a simple acceptance either of the other since it also involves accountability to one’s message. A message is a communication. In some instances, it is meant for a specific recipient or a group of them. The Christian message, on the other hand, is meant to be shared. That was the charge given by Jesus to his apostles and handed over by them to the Christian community. The task of doing so continues to our day. It is a privilege but also an ongoing responsibility.

36

See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”.

CHAPTER EIGHT GIVING WITNESS TO THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE AS SOCIUS1

Introduction Recently, I came across the book published on the occasion of the centenary celebrations of the Divine Word Missionaries of the Philippines describing and chronicling the work the Society has done since the time of the arrival of the first missionaries there. The title of the book is Witness to the Word.2 It is an impressive record of the variety of tasks, projects and other activities carried out by them as they set about their mission of witnessing to the Word. Of particular value were the reflections of various members regarding how they understood the meaning, impact and challenges of the Christian message entrusted to them. The title and contents of the book reminded me of the conversation between two of the fictional characters in the philosophical novel, This Deep Pierian Spring. Having visited the Philippines, particularly the devastated places of Tacloban and Guiuan following the onslaught of the strongest ever typhoon—code-named Haiyan/Yolanda—to make landfall, the main character, Enrique, asks his wife Maria what the meaning and significance of their visit were. Given the brevity and nature of their visit, he confessed his uneasiness about their so-called “solidarity” trip. What had they accomplished? Comparing it to Wittgenstein’s description of faith as a “seeing-as”, he wondered whether indeed it was merely a changed perspective on their part that was the outcome, as was initially suggested. Her response was: Perhaps. By a changed perspective, however, I do mean something more than merely seeing something and describing it accordingly. It is more akin to what Rodrigo had said in his lecture about the Christian 1

To be published in a forthcoming issue of Missio Inter Gentes. Antolin Uy , SVD, et al. (eds.), Witness to the Word: Society of the Divine Word Philippines 1909-2009 (Manila: Logos Publications, 2009). 2

140

Chapter Eight message: that it is a vision and a mission. It is acting out what is entailed by one’s understanding of the situation. That is why his term ‘giving witness’ is particularly apt here. You see, as I understand it...there is a difference between merely witnessing and giving witness to something. Witnessing is experiencing a spectacle while giving witness to, in contrast, is becoming part of it and then carrying out what is entailed.3

In this essay, I should like to take up further the idea of “giving witness to” the Christian message. This is, of course, a topic that should invite a more theological reflection in order to capture and unfold the richness of that message.4 Nevertheless, in offering a philosophical version of it, I hope to contribute to its discussion and even to provide a distinct interpretation of the concept of mission. The significance of the Christian message is such that it affords plenty of scope for varied and, hopefully, productive, perspectives. My main intention here is to offer the suggestion that the Christian message, which I interpret to be that of love, hope and redemption, challenges anyone who wants to give witness to it to be a SOCIUS.5 By this acronym—taking up once again the idea which I had developed in another essay that the Christian message is linked to our journey in life6—it seems to me that the challenge is much more than just to proclaim or spread that message, popular and apt as these descriptions may be. It is certainly different from being merely a “conversation partner” who entertains or informs fellow travelers as together they trek towards their destination.7 To be a “socius”, as the Latin term indicates, implies some personal involvement. It means that in wanting to share with others the richness of the message, one is asked to be open to their otherness as one goes about that 3

M.F. Sia and S. Sia, This Deep Pierian Spring: an Account of the Human Quest for Meaning (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016, 2017), p. 201. 4 In this respect, see Pope Francis’s Evangelii Gaudium: Apostolic Exhortation on the Proclamation of the Gospel in Today’s World (24 November 2013). 5 In Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life” I provide an interpretation of the Christian message as PASS (it points, accompanies, supports and saves) in life’s journey. In Chapter Four: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message” I indicate that missionary activity is a significant focusing on the Christian message and its challenges. The concept of SOCIUS, from its Latin origin, as an interpretation of “giving witness” is a further sharpening of that focus and a widening of its scope. 6 See Chapter Six: “The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey”. 7 One inevitably thinks of the characters on pilgrimage in Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales.

Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS

141

task, to be a companion to them, to invoke constantly the source of that message, to uplift the human situation and the entire creation and finally to serve all in their respective journeys in life.

Giving Witness to the Christian Message Ever since humankind came on the scene there has always been the need to communicate with one another, and human beings have been rather inventive in how they did so. As humankind developed so have the types of messages and the manner in which they are relayed. Not surprisingly, therefore, there have been different kinds of messages relayed in varied ways and an accumulation of these has materialized with the passage of time. But present-day developments in the speed, the ease, and the variety of messages which come through increasingly innovative methods of communication are truly startling. We hear these days of text messages, the social media, e-communications of previously unimaginable sorts, Facebook, Twitter and so on. And then there is the alert that something has gone “viral”. One can only wonder and be astonished at these new developments in our world. The “global village” described by McLuhan is indeed interconnected, but in a manner that he himself or others may not have dreamt of. In this scenario proclaiming or spreading the Christian message becomes a challenge.8 It is after all, in the eyes of many, primarily a message as far as its content is concerned. Rightly, much attention has been given firstly, to understanding it more profoundly—a challenge to theologians and all concerned members of the Christian community—and secondly, probably rather more urgently, to more effective ways of spreading the word. But those who reject the comment that the Christian message is just another message out there are confronted with the enormous job of articulating the significance of its content and of finding more innovative ways of making it known. Traditionally, phrases like “proclaiming” or “spreading” and similar words were, and are still, used. They have served a very useful purpose, and continue to do so. But it seems to me, that the phrase “giving witness to”, as used in the references noted in the Introduction of this essay, highlights more successfully what the traditional words do not. One could even assert that it is more than just a choice of words insofar as “giving witness to” belies a more personal involvement in the message on the part of the bearer where8 Pope Francis addresses this issue in his encyclical Evangelii Gaudium (November 24, 2013).

142

Chapter Eight

as the other terms do not, at least explicitly. A closer examination of the nature of that message, and not just its content, reveals that one is not just communicating or transmitting information.9 There is the important issue of credibility.10 “Giving witness to” means that one has a personal stake in it. Ordinarily, a message contains information. It could also carry an instruction. Or it could be an expression of various types, depending on the mood of the sender. But what probably makes the Christian message stand out is that to some extent it is all of these and yet not simply any one of them. It is more than mere data which can be uploaded. It is definitely a commandment inasmuch as it expects a kind of behaviour in line with its teaching. It raises all kinds of emotions in the sender and the receiver depending on how they respond to it since a response is called for. More importantly, the Christian message is one that immediately signals to others that those who are aligning themselves with the message personally believe in its importance. They have, if one were to resort to businessspeak, “invested in it”. Accordingly, they are “giving witness to” it.11

SOCIUS: A Philosophical Version How then should one interpret the meaning and import of “giving witness to” the Christian message? What is implied by this task? In the next few paragraphs I should like to address these questions by making use of the acronym: SOCIUS and detailing the assigned meaning of each let-

9

In a comparable context, educators are faced with this question: What are we doing when we are teaching others? Is it merely transmitting information? See Part III. 10 This issue of “credibility” is taken up further in Chapter Nine: “The Christian Message at Journey’s End”. 11 In Misericordia et Misera, par. 3, Pope Francis articulates that mission in this way: “In a culture often dominated by technology, sadness and loneliness appear to be on the rise, not least among young people. The future seems prey to an uncertainty that does not make for stability. This often gives rise to depression, sadness and boredom, which can gradually lead to despair. We need witnesses to hope and true joy if we are to dispel the illusions that promise quick and easy happiness through artificial paradises. The profound sense of emptiness felt by so many people can be overcome by the hope we bear in our hearts and by the joy that it gives. We need to acknowledge the joy that rises up in a heart touched by mercy. Let us keep in mind, then, the words of the Apostle: “Rejoice in the Lord always” (Phil 4:4; cf. 1 Thess 5:16).

Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS

143

ter. To do this, I will be turning to relevant philosophical insights and views. Sharing. Developing further, as well as providing some philosophical underpinnings to, the idea of “giving witness to the Christian message”, I should like to suggest that the concept of “sharing” the Christian message can be helpful here. The term itself makes explicit, it appears to me, that one not merely hears it but listens to it, and more importantly, that one realizes its significance to the extent of “giving a hand” to make it go further by acting on it. “Sharing” is a “giving of oneself” even when what one is sharing is in effect a material possession. In sharing one does not give up oneself; instead, one extends oneself in the act of acknowledging the other. This is even more true in the case of the Christian message. In sharing with others the message of love, hope and redemption, one is, in fact, enriched rather than impoverished by so doing. Despite certain expectations, one does not lose—and if I may add, should not lose—oneself in the act of sharing the Christian message. Let us delve further into this suggested term and its explanation because the ordinary usage of “sharing” does not always bring the above claims to the surface. At times, we are even led to believe that when we share something with others, we have become bereft of the fullness of whatever it is that we are sharing. Of course, we have not been totally deprived either since sharing is quite different from giving or donating when we do suffer the loss of what has been given or donated. At other times, there is even a sense of relief on our part when we give something away or of delight in being able to help others. In contrast to this usual understanding of this term, it could be said that when we share something, we are also signaling to others its importance to ourselves. It is precisely for that reason that we are sharing it. This, of course, entails that we have undertaken the important task of— once again, making use of business terms—“assessing its value”, so to speak, in the first place. In wanting to share anything with others, we are indeed testifying its importance to us.12 Martha Nussbaum, well-known contemporary American philosopher, says that it is because one cares about something that one wants to share it with others. Although she was referring to friendship, her observation is quite relevant here. Nussbaum makes another important observation about the act of sharing; namely, that in turn, we ourselves thereby get a better understanding of that which we want to share. As regards the Christian message, this aspect of the act of

12

The term used in religious circles, i.e. “commitment”, is particularly apt here.

144

Chapter Eight

sharing it with others, in fact, enables us to appreciate even more what Christian love is about by putting it into practice. There is yet another point worth considering about the act of sharing. Earlier I had referred to how the act of sharing what we value with others does not leave us bereft but rather has a positive effect on ourselves while extending some benefit to others.13 There is of course the satisfaction we feel when we do so. There is also contentment on our part when it truly and clearly transforms others for the better. But despite the fact that we ordinarily maintain that selfless giving in contrast has greater value than what is sometimes sarcastically dubbed “charity with a hook”, we cannot escape from the reality of sharing: we ourselves become better persons. There is something about the act of sharing that makes a difference to both parties to it. Martin Buber’s insight can be useful here even if he was really referring to what he termed the primary relations of I-Thou and I-It. According to this Jewish thinker, the kind of relations which dominate our lives determines the kind of I that we become. The more we are personal in all our dealings with others, the more we become truly personal ourselves—in the true sense of the word—while the reverse is also true. Similarly, sharing the Christian message with others also makes us become what the Christian message is about precisely because we are sharing it. In this sense, even if primarily “giving witness to the Christian message”— interpreted as “sharing”—is about the message itself and the act of sharing, it is worth noting its corollary. It is also about the messenger, as it were. Openness to the other. Granted that giving witness to the Christian message is sharing it, with that understanding of the task another important consideration comes to the fore: the need to pay attention to the recipient. There is the important challenge of being “open” to the other. Emmanuel Levinas couched it even better when he included the idea of “other”. It is not just the presence of the other that we should focus on here but the very nature of the other as “an other”. Giving witness to the Christian message, we ought therefore to add now, is “being open to the otherness of the other”. Previously, there was mention of the act of sharing as acknowledging the other. Indeed this is so insofar as we share something not just because we ourselves value what we are sharing but also because we accept the presence of those with whom we are sharing it.14 The “other” is a real 13 Portia in Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice makes a similar point about mercy; namely, that it is twice blest: “It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.” Act 4, Scene 1, line 184, 14 In the USA there was a trend to introduce one’s spouse as “the significant other”. In some ways, although that may not have been the real intention, the phrase

Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS

145

presence, not merely a recipient. The “other” is not just at the receiving end, so to speak. What this claim entails is that we share the Christian message with the other as other. As Levinas puts it, we are summoned by the other and we respond to the other. We recognize the so-called “alterity” of the other.15 There is an implication here for anyone who is “giving witness to the Christian message”. After all, it should not be equated with merely delivering the message or uploading the text or the information.16 In contrast, sharing generally implies that one pays attention to the recipient, as was already noted. But with regard to the Christian message there is the added consideration, that one should be sensitive to, and accepting of the other, in his, her or their very “otherness”. This is a difficult challenge that should not be summarily dismissed if one were to respect the Christian message itself.17 There is a tendency to be so convinced of the truth and importance of one’s message that one can easily ignore the “otherness” of those with whom one wants to share it.18 We are inclined to neglect that important dimension. Fortunately, we have now become much more aware of the variety and richness of those who differ from us, and what they can contribute to our own understanding.19 In fact, there is much that we can learn about the Christian message itself from those others.20 What is further called for in this regard is such an openness: a greater respect for and response to the distinctiveness of others. Those of us in education realize that the process of educating others is not primarily about offloading information on them. It is more about

does convey not only that one acknowledges the presence of the other person but also that that presence has an importance in that person’s own right. 15 In this respect, see also the very helpful article by Felix Baghi, SVD, “Ricoeur’s Ways of Recognition,” DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XXXIX, 1 & 2 (May & November 2014), pp. 11-33. 16 Even in these situations, however, there are important considerations that the sender or the texter/uploader of a message should take into account. See Chapter Seven: “Images, Reality and Truth: Some Philosophical Considerations,” in my Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014, 2015), pp. 131-148. 17 The early Christians were faced with this challenge when they sought to bring the Gospel to the Greek-speaking communities. 18 Cf. Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. 19 In this respect, the choice of “missio inter gentes” is preferable to “missio ad gentes” when one is describing missionary work today. 20 See Chapter Three: “Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research” which acknowledges the implicit presence of the Christian message in these others.

146

Chapter Eight

eliciting what is already there and nurturing it further.21 The Latin word educere (more so than educare) shows us that it is about a “leading out”. While Plato interprets the opening of the eyes and minds of the prisoners in the cave as indeed leading them out of the cave of darkness and ignorance into the sunlight, one can provide a variation here in the context of what has already been asserted about giving witness to the Christian message. Education—and the same has been said already about giving witness to the Christian message—involves respecting what the other already possesses even if not yet in a transparent manner.22 It is, to borrow a phrase from transcendental Thomism, albeit used differently, making “explicit what is already there implicitly”. But is openness to the otherness of the other in the context of giving witness to the Christian message not a “watering down” of the message itself?23 This is an understandable concern and should not be dismissed too quickly. Nevertheless, we should remember that the Christian message, like any other important message, has to be contextualized.24 In accepting the otherness of the other, one is, in fact, testifying to the universality of the message, too. Furthermore, it is a realization that the message is also about the other and not just to the other. It entails opening our minds and hearts to others—and that is arguably what the message itself is about. It is realizing that the message of love, hope and redemption is already contained in the experiences of even those who have not yet heard the Christian understanding of it. It is enabling the “other” to realize and appreciate what he, she or they have already been gifted with. In this way, one stands on common ground with the other.25 Again, it is worth re-iterating that the 21

In Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context,” I have used the distinction between “philosophizing” and “philosophy” in making a similar point. 22 Paul’s reference to the “unknown God” of the Athenians is a helpful illustration of respecting “the otherness” of these others. Aquinas’s turn to Aristotle’s philosophy was also an acknowledgement by him of the merits of the Greek philosopher’s thoughts as he himself sought to articulate Christian beliefs. 23 Missionaries have often to wrestle with this dilemma when confronted by traditional cultures in countries where they serve. 24 In this regard I have some reservation with the term “inculturation” since what I mean here is not about inserting, so to speak, the Christian message into the culture of the people. Rather, as the discussion in the text explains, it is about recognizing the worth of what is implicit in other cultures or experiences—which seems to be how the term is actually understood theologically. 25 This usage of the phrase does not necessarily mean a “level playing field” since the argument being pursued is that the Christian message does have a distinctive contribution to make and that it should be heeded.

Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS

147

important issue here is looking for points of encounter rather than points of departure. And we do have those since we have much in common as human beings despite our important differences.26 Companionship. This brings us to the third consideration of this philosophical version of “giving witness” to the Christian message. It is about offering “companionship” in the journey of life. It is a particularly appropriate description, one that has been of interest among those wanting to interpret the Christian message. In seeking to understand philosophically what is involved in giving witness to the Christian message, it is useful to be reminded that companionship, more than a mere “travelling alongside one another”—as many of those who go on a journey for varied reasons will attest to—can provide the necessary “ingredient” that can make the experience much more palatable and even memorable. Companionship, in any context, is not a one-way traffic between those concerned but an interaction. It is a “give-and-take” since the companions, if indeed they are companions and not merely co-travelers, have something to contribute to the common experience of traveling together. It is, as was stated already, a recognition of what “the other” can contribute. Companionship is an acceptance of the otherness of one’s fellow travelers in the pursuit of the meaning and reality of the Christian message of love. Aristotle discusses different types of relating to others in a loving way: agape, eros and philia. Each of these has its distinctive nature and respective place. Christian love has been closely identified with the first of these. And with its message it is underlining its importance to everyone. Erich Fromm, for his part, points out that love takes different forms; but in each case, as an art it needs to be nurtured and developed. Similarly, companionship, especially as an off-shoot of the Christian meaning, is active loving. The Christian message is an important reminder to those who want to give witness to it. But companionship, especially as regards the Christian message, involves much more than that. It also means offering what a true companion provides throughout the journey: namely, support. Being supportive means stopping and not merely looking, pausing to listen to the needs of the other, comforting while reassuring, and indeed seeing as well as attending to whatever is required by the other. At times it may even necessitate going

26

A lawyer who was interviewed on Irish radio made a similar point in a different but relevant context when she stated that engaging with those whose views are opposite to one’s own does not mean endorsing those views.

148

Chapter Eight

out of one’s way, as the Good Samaritan did.27 If one wants to maintain the credibility of the Christian message of love, lending support is to be expected. It is, as Enrique and Maria in the quoted passage described their visit to the typhoon-devastated areas of Tacloban and Guiuan, about establishing solidarity with others.28 After all, it indicates that the message to which one is giving witness is truly worthwhile in its meaning and in its application.29 It is a claim that obligates those who wish to understand the Christian vision and pursue its mission. It is a further call to attend to, and not just recognize, the other. This is a particular feature of Christian teaching—even if it cannot be claimed that it is exclusive—insofar as it exhorts us to treat others as our neighbours. There is a further consideration in this regard. Companionship makes communities of groups or of societies. It binds them together, just as a tie around several sticks gives them an identity, strength and a reality different from their separate existences. With the rapid development of staying in touch due to all the technological advances, one would expect that companionship would come much more easily. Indeed, this is the case insofar as responses to urgent calls are more efficiently and rapidly monitored and answered. But true companionship—a human need—does not come that easily despite this welcome progress. In fact, sometimes one is left wondering whether the “personal touch” is lost as people text one another, converse on the mobile, or transmit e-mails. It seems that the process of communicating alone is not sufficient to establish companionship. Giving witness to the Christian message includes establishing communities through companionship—and it is an integral part of it. Invoking. The point just made leads us to the next stage of spelling out the acronym, SOCIUS; that is to say, the importance of staying in touch with the origins of the Christian message. Witnessing to the Christian message carries with it some responsibilities, one of which is ensuring that it is indeed the Christian message.30 In addition to reflecting on it and 27

The image of the Good Samaritan immediately comes to mind, but it seems to me that the Biblical version of the Good News spells out this observation even more. 28 For how these two fictional characters came to understand this point further, see Epilogue of This Deep Pierian Spring, op. cit., pp. 207-211. 29 Pope Francis’s emphasis on Christian mercy and compassion is particularly timely to remind us of this feature of the Christian message. 30 The religious term “vocation” comes to mind if one were to consider the special calling in life regarding this task. The Christian message, however, is the responsibility of anyone who wants to heed it, irrespective of one’s state in life. We are all “called”, so to speak, in different ways.

Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS

149

acting on it, therefore, “giving witness to the Christian message” encourages one to “invoke” the help of the source of that message.31 Sharing the message of love, hope and redemption and being open to the otherness of the other is no mean task. Here “invoking” is really “praying”.32 Giving witness to the Christian message is aligning oneself with it in the specific sense of actually “standing in a direct line” with it. That involves contact with the source. Praying takes different forms, but in the present context I am merely suggesting that whatever form “invoking” takes, what is important is that one should not lose touch with the origins of the message.33 To “invoke” is to call upon, to seek help, to refer to—but in all of these the main consideration is the connecting line being kept open. In our daily life we have come more and more to appreciate the importance of “freeing up” the lines of communication. In fact, when they are shut down or when they are disrupted even if only temporarily, we are somehow unnerved and even alienated. We are after all the kind of beings that need “to be in contact with” others even if there are variations of this need and the way it is met.34 “Invoking” in the sense of “praying” can probably be explained using the Latin root of the word; namely, “vocare”. It means “calling” someone not just for assistance but also for partnership. It is not necessarily an admission of weakness on one’s part—even if that may well be the case at times— but a realization of the importance of the message to which one is giving witness. It is an endeavour to stay focused and caring.35 It is, more-

31

One can usefully employ, in this regard, the situation faced by those charged with deliveries: they need to stay in contact with their office to ensure that the process goes smoothly. 32 Admittedly, “invoking” can have different meanings. One of these is when one invokes authority to support one’s contention. It is not in this sense that I am using the term here. On the other hand, it does mean realizing that in “witnessing to the Christian message” one must ensure not just the authenticity of the message but also the support of the original source. 33 For an interesting philosophical discourse on prayer, see D.Z. Phillips, The Concept of Prayer (N. Y.: The Seabury Press, 1981). See also, Michael J. Langford, Providence (London: SCM Press, 1981. 34 For some—and in keeping with all the developments in our highly interconnected world of mobile phones, computers, laptops, tablets and so on—it is probably more instructive to claim that we need to “regularly charge” ourselves so that we can continue to receive the messages. Despite the seeming bizarreness of this suggestion, “praying” is like “plugging in”. See also Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”. 35 Contemplatives certainly answer this call in an emphatic way.

150

Chapter Eight

over, an expression of the desire to remain motivated—“charged” as those more technologically-inclined are wont to say. Elsewhere, I have suggested the need for “comma moments” in life. Just as commas in a sentence can enable us to make sense of the combination of words in a sentence, so can such moments help us find meaning in and of life.36 Or if one prefers another way of expressing it, “invoking” can also be described as keeping oneself open to the quietude that surrounds us but which is not always attended to, a quietude that can energize us. It is unblocking the lines so that the energy can flow in. With this interpretation Lao-tzu, the ancient Chinese philosopher, can lend us a hand here even if he himself certainly does not employ the term “invoking” or “praying” as used here. He taught his disciples the importance of quiet moments to enable the Tao to penetrate and vivify their lives.37. Some poets also alert us to the need to listen to the rhythm that is in the universe. All these explanations, whether religiously understood or otherwise, can elucidate for us what “invoking” as used here entails.38 Invoking the source of the Christian message in the specific sense here of continuing the partnership with its source is at the same time testifying to the importance of that message. This is because one does not cut off an important message from its source if one wants to retain its import. It is precisely because one recognizes this that one feels the need to remain connected. “Praying” is not, contrary to what atheist philosophers like Karl Marx and scientists such as Richard Dawkins have asserted it to be, a sign of weakness. Even if one is imploring help, it is essentially maintaining contact. And it can turn out that one realizes one’s strength because one is connected, as it were. One is functioning more efficiently, like those electrical gadgets, because one is constantly “charged”. Giving witness to the Christian message—and “invoking” or “praying” makes this clearer—indicates moreover that one has a personal rela36

Cf. This Deep Pierian Spring, op. cit. An interesting interpretation is offered by Aliman Sears with his development of the notion of “surrender”. See Appendix B: “Suffering and Surrender in the Midst of Divine Persuasion “in M.F. Sia and S. Sia, That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom: a Tale of the Human Thirst for Knowledge (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015), pp. 255-285. 38 What is important is that we take “pauses” in life, like commas in sentences, to enable us to grasp the meaning of life’s message. See Erich Fromm, The Art of Loving (London: Unwin Books, 1972), p. 22 about the significance of “sitting quietly and contemplating”. See also, Raymun J. Festin, SVD, Mindfulness (Manila: Logos Publications, 2012). 37

Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS

151

tionship with the source of the message, unlike the attempts of a Buddhist through meditation to attain enlightenment or by a Hindu through various acts to seek union between one’s atman and Atman. The source of the Christian message is a God of love, and praying is renewing that personal relationship with such a God. Like any relationship, it remains alive and meaningful when attempts, such as “comma moments”, punctuate the relationship regularly and in a timely fashion. Uplifting. The Christian message is about transforming our lives. Witnessing to the Christian message, therefore, is to join forces to “uplift” the human reality to its fullness. For this reason it is not the same as merely improving it in the physical, material or social sense. It does, of course, involve that, too; otherwise, the criticisms of the critics who accuse Christians of neglecting their responsibilities to this world and to the present human situation would be valid. After all, while the Christian message is a message of hope it is not just for the future or in the next world. It is one that should be seen as grounded in the present reality, in the here and now—because it is so after all. Hope, including its Christian interpretation, is not merely pointing to the future; it has the future in sight indeed but it seeks and works towards it by concentrating on the present while learning from the past.39 There are different ways of “uplifting” the human situation, and the methods that one chooses should be determined by, among others, the actual needs of people as individuals and as a society. Accordingly, one would be well advised to listen to and heed those. It is important to meet particular needs in dealing with the immediate. But it should not replace and, in fact, ought to be the result of reckoning with the long-term situation.40 Coming to the aid of those who have to be attended to urgently is necessary, but doing so does not absolve us from the more fundamental obligation to address the general human situation whatever that is. This is true with all social policies just as it is true generally. A piece-meal approach to dealing with human problems leaves us with indeed a piecemeal solution to the problems whereas a more general plan that takes into account not just the effects but also the causes and future improvements has a better chance of providing a long-term solution. In this sense the Christian message is no exception. It is about looking out for and dealing with immediate needs. But more importantly, and essentially, it provides a long-term solution insofar as it is addressing the 39

This is discussed more fully in Chapter Four: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”. 40 This is well expressed in the ad for PICTET: “A long term view improves our view of the short term” in The Economist (June 17th -23rd 2017), p. 7.

152

Chapter Eight

basic question that humanity needs to focus on in order to lift itself up. It wrestles with the questions that haunt human beings precisely because they are human beings and not just material objects.41 It reminds us strongly that there is more to human living than just fulfilling all our immediate wishes and passing desires. It lifts us up inasmuch as it turns towards the transcendent dimension of human reality and living. It promises redemption in the end while backing up that promise by the supports it provides along the way. In short, the Christian message deals with the total fulfillment of humanity. The tension—and it is a real one—between the Christian vision which points to our final destination or fulfillment and its mission in the here and now challenges all those who are giving witness to it. Not surprisingly, it has incurred much criticism among those who simply are unconvinced about the truth of the claim. Even among those who subscribe to that vision there are some who are at times left wondering about the credibility of its mission. Consequently, the task of “uplifting” humanity is a constant one both in terms of defending the Christian vision and of implementing its mission. But it cannot be put aside if witness to the Christian message is to remain credible. It demands vigilance, sensitivity and care. This observation brings us to the next consideration. Serving. If witnessing to that message involves participating in that act of uplifting the human situation then it entails that for those who are giving witness to it, there is a call to “serve”. There are many meanings of this word,42 and thus it is paramount that those who are giving witness to the Christian message would want to reflect on it so as to assess its application to their particular situation. How should those giving witness to the Christian message serve, and whom should they serve?43 Fortunately, it has become a key topic, backed up with specific strategies, in contemporary discussions on this subject.44 After all, “serving” has always been 41

See Gabriel Marcel, Problematic Man (N.Y.: Herder and Herder, 1967). Some of the connotations of the term “serve” are rather problematic, e.g. servitude or subservience. These are not part of the sense in which “serve” is being used here. 43 Liberation theology has answered these questions in a remarkable way by its “preferential option for the poor”. Not only does this phrase identify whom Christians should serve, but it also indicates the strategy to be followed. It is an example of translating the Christian vision into a mission. 44 Cf. Antonio M. Pernia, SVD, “The Stranger and the Poor: Two Challenges to the Missionary Church in Evangelii Gaudium,” Missio Inter Gentes, I, 1 (January 2015), pp. 37-56. Also, his “The State of Mission Today,” DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, XXXIX, 1 & 2 (May & November 2014), pp. 78-92. 42

Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS

153

associated with the Christian message of love, hope and redemption and continues to be as relevant as ever. So, irrespective of strategies chosen, how should those giving witness to the Christian message serve in general? Some answers to this question were already implicit in the discussion above: sharing the Christian message, being open to the otherness of the other, offering companionship and participating in the uplifting of humanity. But this can be summed up by the concept of “enabling others”. Serving others—particularly true as regards the Christian message—is in the final analysis “assisting these others to stand up”.45 Enabling others, while being sensitive to their needs, is being respectful of them. It identifies the weakness, acts to strengthen it, and more importantly, opens up the possibilities. It seeks to restore lost or misplaced dignity. All these are contained in the Christian message, and for those giving witness to it this is their challenge. After all, it is about love—and hope. The last part of the Christian message, however, is even more important in this context: redemption. The final stage in serving others is to enable them to find final fulfillment. As was noted previously, for a number of critics, however, this religious belief is confused. More crucially, in their view, it misdirects the people. They are vociferous in denouncing it, claiming that Christians are deluded about the nature of this fulfillment. But whatever about the reality of the Christian description of human fulfillment and the basis of their belief—issues that demand further attention46—what is ignored by these critics is that what lies at the bottom of the Christian message of redemption is none other than the human quest for ultimate meaning. It is a human concern seeking an answer. It is a plea for a sense of direction.47 Those who are giving witness to the Christian message seek to serve others by acknowledging that concern and heeding that plea. They are testifying to the Christian message as an important map in our journey in life.48 But at the same time, sharing that message with others and interacting with them, with a view to “enabling” them involves the important task of dialoguing with, but also challenging, other viewpoints and other ways of life. After all, the Christian message has something distinctive and val45 The difference between doling out “handouts” to the needy and giving them a “hand-up” instead is a helpful one in understanding the point being made here. 46 See Chapter Seven: “O Death, Where is Thy Sting: the Quest for Deliverance,” and Chapter Eight: “’You Shall Live—Forever More?: the Quest for Immortality” in From Question to Quest, op. cit, pp. 115-137 and 139-168. 47 See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. 48 See Chapter Six: “The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey”.

154

Chapter Eight

uable to offer. One does not do anyone justice by watering it down. Accompanying others in the journey of life may include—as is the case with other trips we make—a change in direction or perspective and urging others to do so. For this reason we need to listen to one another despite our differences, but we also must enlighten others. The exchange of viewpoints is necessary but so is the common search for the truth which may include abandoning entrenched viewpoints.49 That is true for both parties in a dialogue. What is important is that we all strive to enable each and everyone to find total fulfillment. That would be true service indeed.

A Final Comment This essay which aims at engaging with those discussing “mission” was prompted by the title of a book. Offering a philosophical interpretation of what is entailed in the challenge of giving witness to the Christian message, it developed the acronym SOCIUS which seems to fit in with the description of journeying in life. It showed that giving witness to the Christian message of love, hope and redemption is about sharing that message, being open to others in their otherness, providing companionship along the way, invoking the source of that message constantly, participating repeatedly in the task of uplifting humanity and finally serving one’s fellow travelers to enable them to reach their destination. Although the focus of this essay has been on humankind—after all, one immediately thinks of them as being the travelers in life—it should not be forgotten that the Christian message of love, hope and redemption is for all of creation. We have become, thankfully, more aware of reality as a whole and of our obligations towards the entire universe.50 In this respect, those who are giving witness to the Christian message should also direct their gaze and apply their minds and hearts to this challenge. After all, the whole universe is a home to us and the setting of our life’s journey. How we care for it and how we leave it behind are our responsibilities.

49

The same can be said about the educational task: it is about bringing out the best in each and every individual. This necessitates paying close and caring attention to the students and their respective needs, but it also entails guiding them towards a goal. See Chapter Ten: “’Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees’: A View on Education”. 50 Pope Francis’s encyclical Laudato Si is an important call to heed this challenge.

CHAPTER NINE THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE AT JOURNEY’S END1

Introduction The Christian message is about love and hope. In this respect it is comparable to what many other teachings on life uphold. However, as the journey in life draws to an end, it also promises those who subscribe to its vision and carry out its specific mission redemption and salvation brought about by Jesus Christ.2 In his book Joseph Owens writes that “The hope held out in Christian faith is for an everlasting life of beholding face-toface the infinite beauty and everlasting riches of the triune God. It is a vision to be possessed in eternal security, and in a way that satisfies to the full the tendencies and desires of a soul elevated through supernatural grace.”3 In focusing on this last part of the Christian message, understood throughout this book to be a message of love, hope and redemption, I will be drawing on the interpretation of redemption by certain Christian theologians and other thinkers. I will also enlist the help of two Christian poets, John Donne and George Herbert, who reflect on the significance of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ in their poems. Finally, in trying to come to grips with Kant’s third question: What can we hope for?, I will 1

A shorter version of this essay, co-authored with Marian F. Sia, was originally published as “Death and the Christian,” New Blackfriars, Vol. 72, No. 848 (April 1991), pp. 172-177. 2 There are two interpretations in Christian theology regarding the significance of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ for humankind: one, an individual resurrection; and the other, a general resurrection. In this essay, the focus is directed simply at the Christian belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ and how it provides meaning and guidance in life rather than in the particular form of resurrection. 3 Joseph Owens, C.Ss.R., Human Destiny: Some Problems for Catholic Philosophy (Washington, D.C: The Catholic University of America Press,1985), p. 3.

156

Chapter Nine

turn to Aristotle’s thoughts on ensuring the credibility of a message and show their relevance in drawing out the challenge of the Christian message on redemption.

Attitudes to Death and Deliverance What is troubling about the moment of death, thereby causing much distress and anxiety, is that we all know that one day each of us will die; yet, there is much uncertainty about death itself. Consequently, the thought of it grips our whole being, leaving us bewildered.4 Ernest Becker, in his Pulitzer Prize winning book, describes it graphically. He writes that “the idea of death, the fear of it, haunts the human animal like nothing else.” He explains that “it is a mainspring of human activity—activity designed largely to avoid the fatality of death, to overcome it by denying in some way that it is the final destiny of man.”5 Elisabeth Kübler-Ross maintains that despite the passage of time, “death is still a fearful, frightening happening” adding that, “the fear of death is a universal fear even when we think we have mastered it on many levels.”6 It could be the parting with loved ones or perhaps leaving behind an unfinished task which makes death a sad and unwelcome moment. John Keats’s poem “Terror of Death” certainly expresses the tragedy of being separated from them or being unable to complete a piece of work. Maybe it is the fact that there is no turning back after one has—to use Alfred Tennyson’s words— “crossed the bar” that terrifies us. Dylan Thomas’s advice, therefore, is: Do not go gentle into that good night, Old age should burn and rave at close of day; Rage, rage against the dying of the light.7

We are afraid that death may reveal our lives to have been a sham, and it would render us powerless to change them. 4

Norman Pittenger interprets “the contemporary uneasiness to talk about death and the frequent refusal to reckon with it as a welcome, perhaps necessary, reaction from the morbidity of an earlier age.” His After Death: Life in God (London: SCM Press, 1980). 5 Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death (N.Y.: The Free Press, 1973), p. ix. See particularly Chapter Two: “The Terror of Death,” pp. 11-24. 6 Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, On Death and Dying (N.Y.: Macmillan Company, 1971), p. 8. 7 “Do not go Gentle into that Good Night,” lines 18-20.

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

157

On the other hand, there are some for whom death is welcome. Just as there are varied reasons for fearing it, there appear to be different reasons for welcoming it. To a significant few perhaps, death will be the longed-for break from life’s toils. As Shakespeare puts it: Fear no more the heat o’ the sun Nor the furious winter’s rages; Thou thy worldly task hast done, Home art gone, and ta’en thy wages:8

It will be like the respite to which one looks forward after a hard day’s work. Plato describes it as “the release of the soul from the chains of the body”. The assurance of a resurrection for being faithful to the laws of their fathers consoles the seven brothers who were under threat of execution by the king as mentioned in the Book of Maccabees.9 Those who are martyred or who sacrifice their own lives for a cause believe that death is their passage to a longed-for reward in the next life.10 Then again there are some individuals for whom death marks the end of an absurd existence, enabling them to slip into oblivion. For these life has had no meaning; what better end than to have it cut it short? Camus would probably endorse that view since he held that suicide is the only genuine philosophical question. Others will have a rather indifferent attitude towards death. Epicurus is known to put it somewhat bluntly; namely, that it is of no concern to the living or to the dead since for the former it is not the case and for the latter they are no longer around. Stoics like Seneca taught that to overcome our fear of death, we must think of it as simply part of our nature. The proper attitude to adopt, therefore, is to be like actors in a play: to leave the stage graciously or when our acting time is over as set out in life’s script. Caesar in Shakespeare’s play reflects: “Of all the wonders that I have heard,/It seems to me most strange that men should fear;/Seeing that death, a necessary end,/Will come when it will come.”11 Humans are destined to die; hence, the best that one can do, it is claimed, is to put up with it. 8

This song is from Shakespeare’s play Cymbeline, Act IV, Scene 2. 2 Maccabees 7: 1—2, 9-14. 10 This is true throughout history up to the present. 11 Julius Caesar, Act II, Scene 2. In his book Human Immortality and the Redemption of Death (London: Darton Longman and Todd, 1990), Simon Tugwell discusses various ancient attitudes to death and mortality found in a number of literary and philosophical writings. He also traces the evolution of Christian eschatology from its beginnings up to the end of the Middle Ages. 9

158

Chapter Nine

Still others, like John Donne in his poem “Death, be not Proud”, challenge death and maintain that it does not in fact have power: “One short sleepe past, wee wake eternally,/ And death shall be no more; death, thou shalt die.”12 Some philosophers, like Heidegger and Sartre, maintain that death should be a motivation instead to live more fully, not in the Epicurean sense, but to let the fact of death urge us to live an authentic life. Similarly, Hartshorne writes about what he calls the aesthetic meaning of death, stating that “to understand death, we must know what life is; for death is the absence or cessation of life….to understand life we must know what death is.”13 There are also those who, nearing the end of their life’s journey, would identify with the sentiments expressed by Prospero as he voices his wish for deliverance at the end of his exile on the island. Having renounced his charms, he is left with minimal strength of his own while awaiting his fate. He had forgiven his enemies and recovered his dukedom, but now he seeks some form of release and asks for assistance: But release me from my bands With the help of your good hands. Gentle breath of yours my sails Must fill, or else my project fails, Which was to please.14

He turns to the spirits to deliver him from his plight. He invokes them for mercy and freedom from all his faults: Now I want Spirits to enforce, art to enchant; And my ending is despair Unless I be relieved by prayer; Which pierces so, that it assaults Mercy itself, and frees all faults.15

His last wish is even more telling: “As you from crimes would pardon’d be,/ Let your indulgence set me free”.16 It is a sentiment which some would share. 12

“Holy Sonnets” 10, Lines 13-14. Chapter Four: “The Aesthetic Meaning of Death,” in Charles Hartshorne, Wisdom as Moderation: A Philosophy of the Middle Way (N.Y.: SUNY Press, 1987), pp. 51-62. 14 Shakespeare, The Tempest, Epilogue. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 13

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

159

The Death of Jesus17 But what about the Christian believer? The fact that Jesus died on the cross seems to make a difference to the way Christians view death. They believe that Jesus’ death enables them to see meaning in their own deaths and this gives them hope. For them part of the significance of that historical death some 2000 years ago lies in their being able to untangle some of the knots that surround death. Because of that event, death for the Christian is not a plunge into the unknown or a leap into the dark. The reality of death assumes a meaning which comes from Christ’s meritorious death on the cross: the process of dying becomes a participation in Christ’s saving act. And because death is made meaningful, then life itself is seen as an important challenge since it is the situation where the Christian is given all the opportunities of fulfillment at death. It is in this sense that contemporary Christian theology talks of life as “death in anticipation”.18 The Irish theologian, Dermot Lane sums it up in this way: What happened in the life of Jesus was experienced and perceived to have absolute significance for understanding the meaning of life, of death and the future of history and creation. In effect what happened in the life of Jesus is understood to have significance for the self, society and the world. Consequently Christian eschatology is about the application of the Christology to the future of the individual, the community and creation.19

17

In this reflection the death of Jesus is seen in its soteriological significance. For an account on what is discovered about God from the fact that Jesus was executed, see Jon Sobrino, “The Epiphany of the God of Life in Jesus of Nazareth” in his The Idols of Death and the God of Life: a Theology (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis Books, 1983). pp. 88f. See also, Dermot Lane, “The Cross of Christ as the Revelation of God” in his Christ at the Centre: Selected Issues in Christology (Dublin: Veritas Publications, 1990), pp. 53-79. Also, William A. Beardslee et aI., “Preaching on the Death of Jesus” in their Biblical Preaching on the Death of Jesus (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1989), pp. 75f. 18 In pointing out that Christ’s death gives meaning to our own since it gives us a focus and a participatory role is not to imply that we should be obsessed with death the way that some people in the past were. Cf. Norman Pittenger, After Death: Life in God (SCM 1980), p. 2. Michael Wheeler writes about the literary and theological evidence of the Victorians’ obsessive interest in death in his Death and the Future Life in Victorian Literature and Theology (Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 25-68. 19 Dermot A. Lane, Keeping Hope Alive: Stirrings in Christian Theology (Dublin: Gill & Macmillan, 1996), p. 113.

Chapter Nine

160

To regard Christ's death as giving meaning to our own death is not, however, to ignore the deep-seated dread of death that Christians share with other people.20 The Irish poet W.B. Yeats describes this feeling graphically: “An aged man is but a paltry thing,/A tattered coat upon a stick, unless/ Soul clap its hands and sing, and louder sing/ For every tatter in its mortal dress,”21 Death, more than anything else brings before us the radical finitude of our existence. It threatens to nullify everything. In fact, for Miguel de Unamuno it is not so much death itself but nothingness that he dreads. The idea that one has been totally wiped out from reality and blotted out from memory is truly frightening. In the document “Church in the Modern World” Vatican II stated that “it is in the face of death that the riddle of human existence becomes most acute. Not only is man tormented by pain and by the advancing deterioration of his body, but even more so by a dread of perpetual extinction.”22 W.B.Yeats again expresses this feeling in rather poetic terms: .... Consume my heart away; sick with desire And fastened to a dying animal It knows not what it is; and gather me Into the artifice of eternity.23

There is, after all, a seemingly instinctive desire in every one of us to want to live forever.24 We feel restless and anxious as we become painfully aware that like everything else, we also must pass away. Death is the most 20 John Donne captures this sentiment well. In his “To Christ” (also known as “A hymne to God the Father”) he expresses the ultimate fear that he would not be saved: “I have a sinn of feare, that when I have spunn My last thred, I shall perish on the shore; Sweare by thy self, that at my Death thy Sunn Shall shine as it shines now, and heretofore; And, having done that, Thou hast done. I feare no more.” (lines 13-18) 21 W. B. Yeats, “Sailing to Byzantium,” (lines 9-12) in The Works of W. B. Yeats (Wordsworth Editions, 1994). 22 W. Abbot (ed.), The Documents of Vatican II. “The Church in the Modern World,” art.18. 23 W.B. Yeats, “Sailing to Byzantium,” (lines 21-24). 24 See Paul Edwards (ed.), Immortality (N.Y. Macmillan, 1992). Cf. also Chapter Eight “You Still Shall Live: the Quest for Immortality,” in From Quest to Quest, op. cit., pp. 139-168.

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

161

tangible expression of human finitude, also for Christians. It is as much a real threat to them. No wonder it has been described as life’s sharpest contradiction, the absurd arch-contradiction of existence. How should Christians view the significance of Christ’s death in the light of their own attitudes toward death itself? To what extent does it ameliorate the situation for them?

Good Friday and Easter Two poets who meditate on the Christian understanding of the death and subsequent resurrection of Jesus are John Donne and George Herbert. In a poem entitled “Good Friday, 1613, Riding Westward” Donne reflects on the meaning of that event while Herbert brings out the significance of Christ’s resurrection in his poem “Easter”. Both of these works are replete with images of the God they believe in and of their relationship to that God. In this consideration of the end of life’s journey for Christians, it is worth listening to their voices as they express their sentiments. The title of Donne’s meditation “Good Friday, 1613, Riding Westward” arrests our attention for a number of reasons. The poem commemorates the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ, but the date “1613”—so prominently positioned in the title—reminds us that Donne is concerned with his own observance of the anniversary of that event and its implications for him rather than with the actual historical occurrence.25 The phrase “Riding Westward” implies a journey but one in the opposite direction from that expected in relation to Good Friday and its Eastern connections.26 The first line of the poem sets up a hypothetical analogy: “Let man’s Soule be a Spheare” (line 1). As a sphere, the soul is subject to the principles which govern the other spheres—here we are introduced to Donne’s “conceit” which sees the movement of the soul in terms of the movement

25 Cf. Murray Roston, The Soul of Wit: A Study of John Donne (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974), p. 205. 26 Commenting on the poem itself, Barbara Kiefer Lewalski writes that Louis Martz in his Poetry of Meditation notes that “it is a classic Ignatian meditation: the extended comparison in the opening lines presenting the preparatory stage; the long central section constituting an intellectual analysis of the crucifixion in terms of its manifold paradoxes; and the final lines containing a heartfelt colloquy or prayer to Christ emerging from the meditative exercise.” Protestant Poetics and the Seventeenth-Century Religious Lyric (Princeton University Press, 1979), p. 278.

162

Chapter Nine

of the spheres.27 The human soul, like the other spheres, has a guiding Intelligence. Devotion should be its guiding principle. Its movement should be towards devotion (especially on Good Friday); but, like the other spheres, the soul is also subject to “forraigne motions” (line 4) which cause it to lose its own direction.28 The soul as sphere is buffeted everyday and rarely obeys its “naturall forme” (line 6). The next lines state clearly what interferes with the progress of the soul towards devotion: namely, pleasure or business. Distracted from its true course, the human soul gets caught up in the attractions and demands of this world and is no longer moved by devotion to God. In thus likening the soul to a sphere, subject to the movement of other spheres, Donne has given us a striking comparison. This comparison also explains the direction of his journey. Like a mathematical problem clearly demonstrated—if we have followed his argument so far—Donne’s reason for taking this direction becomes explicit: “Hence is’t, that I am carryed towards the West/This day, when my Soules forme bends toward the East.”(lines 9-10). Today of all days (emphasizing the significance to Donne of Good Friday, and his wish to observe it properly) his “Soules forme bends towards the East” in devotion and gratitude to his Saviour. Yet, he is moving towards the West. Temporal attractions exert a great force on him (he is going to Montgomery Castle in Wales) preventing the soul from obeying its “naturall forme”. Donne knows what he should see at Calvary in the East: There I should see a Sunne, by rising set, And by that setting endlesse day beget;

27

According to A. C. Partridge, this conceit is based on the Ptolemaic cosmology with the ultimate support of Plato’s Timaeus: “In Plato’s cosmology the Creator imposed on his universe a certain order, the first being a division of heavens into inner and outer spheres, namely, those of the planets, and those of the supposedly fixed stars. The earth was regarded as the centre around which all moved, once in twenty-four hours. The orbits of the fixed stars took a different direction from those of the planets. The sphere of the fixed stars (called the Same) moved in a circle from left to right; the seven planets (called the Other) had contrary motion from right to left.” John Donne—Language and Style (Andre Deutsch, 1978), p. 143. 28 Helen Gardner explains the basis for the comparison: “The spheres had more than one motion. Their own natural motion, each being guided by an Intelligence, was from West to East; but the motion of the Primum Mobile hurled them against this, from East to West, everyday. Other motions, such as the trepidation of the ninth sphere, prevented the separate spheres from obeying their ‘natural forme’, or directing Intelligence.” The Metaphysical Poets (Penguin, 1970), p. 87.

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

163

But that Christ on this Crosse, did rise and fall, Sinne had eternally benighted all. (lines 11-14)

Through his use of paradoxes he shows his Christian belief that the salvation of human beings was brought about by the setting of a “Sun”.29 The imagery of the sun is effective in depicting what Jesus Christ accomplished by his death and resurrection: he begot “endless” day and immortality for mortal humans. The absence of the sun is conveyed by the words “eternally benighted” stressing that without Christ’s death on the Cross (setting sun) and his resurrection (rising sun) we would not have been redeemed, and sin would have permanently covered all in darkness. Here again Donne is contrasting East and West (rising and setting sun), thus connecting the second movement of the poem (lines 11-32) with the first. Yet Donne is almost glad not to see the crucifixion. It is a “spectacle of too much weight” for him (line 16). He would not be able to face up to the horrifying spectacle of the tortured, crucified Jesus. To look at God’s face is tantamount to death: “Who sees God’s face, that is selfe life, must dye;” (line 17—a reference to Exodus 33:20). But how much worse to view God die: “What a death were it then to see God dye?” (line 18). It is not surprising that Donne finds “that spectacle of too much weight” (line 16) for him since it had such profound consequences on nature, as seen in this metaphor: “It made his owne Lieutenant Nature, shrinke, /It made his footstoole crack, and the Sunne winke.”(lines 19-20).These lines are reminiscent of Isaiah 65:1 and Matthew 27:5155. The enormity of the event (crucifixion) is mirrored in disturbing phenomena—an earthquake and eclipse of the sun. The difficulty he experiences in facing the crucifixion is further brought out in his rhetorical question: could Donne look on “those hands which span the Poles,/ And turne all spheares at once” (lines 21-22) and witness the marks of the nails in Jesus’ hands stretched out on the Cross? Once again the idea of opposites and extremities (North-South poles and the right-left arm of the Cross) and the movement of the spheres are kept before us. God is given the role of turning all spheres. Thus, this section of the poem is linked with and reinforces the opening movement (lines 1-10). Donne wonders whether he could bear to look on Jesus Christ—humbled, suffering the ignominy of the crucifixion. It is a terrifying contemplation. Donne focuses on the shedding of Christ’s blood and its mingling with the earth and on the tortured state of Christ as his flesh is injured and mutilat29 This pun on Sun/Son is also seen in “To Christ” (also known as “A Hymn to God the Father”).

164

Chapter Nine

ed by human beings—paradoxically, for their salvation. In his meditation Donne considers next the possibility of reflecting on the suffering of Mary “Who was God’s partner here, and furnish’d thus/ Halfe of that Sacrifice, which ransom’d us?” (lines 31-32). Perhaps he can relate to Mary and appreciate her suffering (as parent) and the sacrifices demanded of her as Mother of God. Her sufferings also helped to win our salvation. Throughout the second section of the poem (lines 11-32) we are kept aware of the religious implications of Good Friday and of the paradoxical notion that the West (setting sun-Christ’s death) leads to the East (rising sun-resurrection and immortality). All the ideas and images are thus held together. Donne then informs us that since he is riding westward, he cannot actually see these sights (suffering, crucifixion, resurrection) before him; nevertheless, he is mindful of them. Thus, he can make an appropriate act of meditative devotion even as he rides westward. The sights which are “present yet unto [his] memory” (line 34)—traditionally located at the back of the head, according to A. C. Partridge30—enable him to contemplate his sinfulness and the ever-watchful presence of Christ. His “memory” is looking East even as he rides towards the West. Therefore, God (in the East) is looking towards him. It is at this stage in the poem that God becomes personal for Donne. He feels unworthy. Maintaining the metaphor of his movement to the West, Donne points out that his back is towards God, not because he is rejecting God but because he wishes to expose his back to receive God’s punishment which will clear him of his unworthiness. Donne wishes to suffer his own scourging personally from God to atone for his wrongdoings.31 He wants to be punished so that he can get closer to God. He realizes that he is tarnished by sin and that unless he is cleansed and purged he cannot be united with God.32 Only when 30

A. C. Partridge, John Donne—Language and Style, op. cit., p. 145. As Donne puts it in another work, “They killed once an inglorious man, but/ Crucifies him daily. “ (“Holy Sonnets” 11, lines 7-8). 32 In another work of his, Donne makes the same point: “That I may rise, and stand, o’erthrow mee, and bend /Your force, to breake, blowe, burn, and make me new” (“Holy Sonnets” 14, lines 3-4). The same sentiment is expressed by Ben Jonson: “Use still Thy rod,/ That I may prove/ Therein, Thy Love” (“A Hymn to God the Father” lines 4-6). This poem illustrates the significance of Christ’s death and resurrection, as Jonson sees it, for humankind but also raises the question of human sinfulness despite God’s generosity. This reference to Donne and Jonson on this point does not mean agreement with their image of a God who punishes. One of the reasons for exploring our images of God is precisely to bring out not only what is tenable but also what must be rejected. See, the Introduction of Marian F. 31

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

165

he is made free of sin through punishment will he be able to turn his face towards God. This turn at the end of the poem reiterates the conceit of the movement of the sphere (soul) obeying its “naturall forme” and turning to devotion—he will turn his face from the West to the East. The poem’s thought has, as it were, gone full circle: just as West meets the East, the human individual who emanates from God returns to God. George Herbert’s poem “Easter”, beautifully complements Donne’s poem since in Christian thought Good Friday and Easter are not separated. Thus, Herbert’s reflections can be said to develop further the significance of Jesus Christ’s death.33 The structure of the poem is worth a mention. The poem consists of thirty lines, grouped in six stanzas. The first three stanzas, comprising six lines each, form the first movement of the poem while the remaining twelve lines, divided into three 4-line stanzas, form the second movement of the poem. The line-length is irregular: long and short in the first movement, and the lines rhyme in couplets. In contrast, the line-length is much more regular in the second movement, and the lines rhyme alternately. It is no wonder that in some editions of this poem it is printed in two separate parts as “Easter I” and “Easter II”.34 A probable reason for this is that the two movements or parts of the poem look distinct, at least on first sight. But a closer examination of the poem reveals a certain unity: the second movement answers the first. That is to say, “Easter II” is the speaker's response to the call in “Easter I” for his lute to awake.35 Furthermore, both appear to be hymns, making it more credible to refer to the underlying unity in this work.36 Sia and Santiago Sia, From Suffering to God: Exploring our Images of God in the Light of Suffering (N.Y.: St. Martin’s Press/London: Macmillan Press, 1994), pp. 1-15. 33 In fact, in another poem “Love (III)” George Herbert shows the significance of the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ. In the final stanza of that poem Herbert offers assurance that Christ’s sacrifice redeems us. 34 In John Wall’s edition, the two parts are separated. However, he explains that in 1633 (i.e.1633 edition of Herbert’s religious poetry) the two are printed as one poem. This editor favours the division found in MS Jones B., 62 (in Dr. Williams’ library, London) since critics agree that the second part is the speaker’s response to his call in the first part. Cf. John Wall, George Herbert: The Country Parson and the Temple (Paulist Press, 1981), p. 155. The argument for regarding the two as really one is precisely that the two parts (call-response) form a unity. 35 Ibid. p. 63 36 There is another sense in which one can see a connection between the two movements thus pointing to a much closer unity of the two parts than Wall is prepared to acknowledge. From the content of the first movement, one can imagine it to be the preparation and tuning up of the musical instruments for a performance

166

Chapter Nine

The first movement begins with a formal call to praise. Herbert bases this movement on Psalm 57, one of the Proper Psalms for Easter matins. According to Chana Bloch, in the first stanza of his poem, Herbert transforms the biblical sequence of verbs, “awake, awake, I will awake” into a new Christian sequence—“Rise heart, thy Lord is risen, thou mayst rise”. Herbert’s use of the word “rise” takes on three different senses: wake up, Christ has been resurrected from the dead, you may be reborn to a new life of the spirit.37 The reason for singing and giving praise is that Christ’s saving deeds in the Crucifixion and Resurrection guarantee immortality for us mortals. We are restored to eternal life and have just cause to celebrate and sing. Mere “dust'” has been transformed into “gold”. Christ has justified us. Now that the heart is ready to sing, Herbert calls—at the beginning of the second stanza—on the lute: “Awake, my lute— and struggle for thy part/With all thy art.”(lines 7-8). It is not an easy task. Because of the importance of the event, one needs to exert effort to celebrate this Easterday in an appropriate manner. Christ’s sinews were stretched taut on the Cross. Likewise, the strings on Herbert's lute must also be stretched to the correct tension to achieve the proper key.38 It was by his suffering—“stretched sinews on the cross”—that Christ conquered death. However, Herbert focuses not so much on the pain but on the results of it: the liberation, resurrection, eternal life. Consequently, Easter is a time of joyous celebration. Herbert proclaims that the wood of the cross has shown how all wood, including the wooden bridge of his lute, should give praise to God. For his own part he will use his talent to praise God. In the opening line of the third stanza of this first movement of “Easter” Herbert joins the “heart” of stanza 1 and the “lute” of stanza 2 together: “Consort, both heart and lute, and twist a song/Pleasant and long:” (lines 13-14) He also announces the song, which seems to extend from line 19 to line 30.39 Music is made up of three parts; if he is to pro-

and the second movement as the recital itself. 37 Chana Bloch, Spelling the Word: George Herbert and the Bible (University of California Press, 1985), p. 249. 38 This comparison is particularly striking since Herbert played the lute and used it to achieve the musical quality, so obvious in his poems. In fact, many of his poems are sung and have been set to music. For instance, the first 18 lines of “Easter” have been set to music by George Jeffreys in “Rise, heart, thy Lord is risen: Verse anthem for Easter day” for STB soli, SSATB chorus and organ. See, also, Vaugh Williams’ musical settings for Easter. 39 Structurally, this is an important development as it helps to summarize stanza 1 and stanza 2, thus preparing for the conclusion (in this stanza) of the first move-

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

167

duce such music, a third part must be supplied. This third part is the “blessed Spirit”, often associated with inspiration: “O let thy blessed Spirit bear a part,/And make up our defects with his sweet art.”(lines 17-18). Human efforts are not sufficient; hence, God’s role remains essential. This third “component” takes our “dust” and once again turns it into “gold”. The three stanzas taken together thus form what Anthony Low calls a “paean celebrating the most joyful of the Church’s feasts”.40 The first movement of the poem, with its three stanzas, is somehow evocative of the Trinity, especially due to the reference to the Spirit. Moreover, the movement resembles a musical arrangement. In the first stanza the heart rises and sings while in the second the lute enters, playing counterpoint to the singing heart. In the last stanza the Holy Spirit, like another musical instrument, plays his part, thus completing the three-part harmony to round off the concert. As Low again observes: “The poem, constructed on this musical metaphor, seems also to provide us with a program for its musical setting.”41 The second movement of the poem begins with line 19 and runs to the end of the poem. This movement also consists of three stanzas, thus linking it to the structure of the first movement. But the regularity of the lines by contrast is immediately noticeable. Low refers to this part of the poem as “the simplest and most lyrical of Herbert’s songs”.42 The measure, four lines in tetrameter or Long Meter, could be sung to many established tunes and was thus a favourite of hymn and psalm writers. Its simpler style, compared to that of the first part of the poem, meant that music would bring out the harmonious contrast.43 The fourth stanza, which initiates the second movement of the poem, opens with the following lines: “I got me flowers to straw thy way;/I got me boughs off many a tree:”(lines 19-20). It is clear that Herbert is anxious to do something, to do his part. But God does not need the flowers or

ment (it also introduces the second movement). 40 Anthony Low, Love's Architecture: Devotional Modes in Seventeenth-Century English Poetry (New York University Press, 1978), p. 85. 41 Ibid. p. 86. 42 Ibid. 43 In describing this second movement, Low says that Herbert appeals to more than one of the senses. The poet, he claims, employs a meditative technique by situating his singer in the Palestinian landscape where he gathers flowers for his offering. There is no conscious effort or strain such as that which characterize a “Holy Sonnet” or a formal Ignatian exercise. Instead, it is done with ease, allowing the meditation to blend with harmony. The result is a small but perfect specimen of the meditative hymn. Ibid. pp. 86-87.

168

Chapter Nine

the boughs. These lines echo Mark 16:1-6: the women had brought sweet spices to anoint Christ’s body in the tomb, only to find that he had risen from the dead. Richard Strier notes that in this same stanza one can see that the shift in pronoun emphasis—from I, to thou and thy—is significant because it puts the focus on Christ, his Resurrection, his independent nature.44 The fifth stanza contrasts the rising of the Sun with the Resurrection. The difference is immense: the Resurrection is unlike the rising of the sun and everything else in nature. The Sun and the East mentioned in the first line of this stanza are united in the “they” of the third and fourth lines. The rising of the sun in the East ushers in the day; but the Resurrection, which brings about the first and last everlasting Day, is far superior to the sun’s day. It would be presumptuous of them to think that they could outshine the Resurrection. The sixth and final stanza clarifies this point by asking: “Can there be any day but this,/Though many sunnes to shine endeavour?” (lines 27-28). The answer is, of course, No: “There is but one, and that one ever” (line 30). Our futile efforts and calculations are again referred to: “We count three hundred, but we misse:” (line 29). Herbert’s “I” and “they” become joined in “we”. He, like many sons (suns), endeavours to shine, only to realize that human attempts are finite and fallible.45 Our notion of time, punctuated by sunrise, is not able to make us comprehend the essential magnificence of the Resurrection and the Infinite, Infallible One.46 The chords of Herbert’s hymn have, as it were, struck a chord as it dawns on him that “There is but one, and that one ever” (line 30). That one everlasting day is the Resurrection. Richard Strier maintains that “this ending is one of the most astounding moments in Herbert. A vista opens up in relation to which all our ‘countings’ like all our acts of ‘natural piety’ (getting flowers) fail, but we are here left contemplating the vista itself rather than our failures in relation to it.”47 In this poem then, which consists of two movements, Herbert unites himself with God. The first stanza is devoted to the heart, the second to the 44

Cf. Richard Strier, Love Known: Theology and Experience in George Herbert’s Poetry (Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 1983), p. 59. 45 Along the same lines he bemoans in his poem “Miserie” (lines 31-36) the fact that imperfect humans are not capable of praising the perfect God. 46 Interest in the phenomenon of the resurrection of Jesus Christ was recently manifested in Kristen Romey’s article, “Unsealing of Christ’s Reputed Tomb Turns Up New Revelations,” National Geographic (October 31, 2016), 47 Richard Strier, Love Known; Theology and Experience in George Herbert’s Poetry, op. cit., p. 60.

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

169

lute. In the third, the heart and the lute unite with the Holy Spirit. Having completed the first movement with an expectation of a song on our part, Herbert introduces the second movement. This movement is also composed of three stanzas— “since all musick is but three parts vied/ And multiplied;” (lines 15-16). With God’s help the song is complete. Herbert contemplates the Resurrection in stanza 4. In stanza 5 he considers how the Sun and the East cannot rival the glory of the Resurrection. Finally, he proclaims the mystery of the Resurrection.

Death, Sin and Christian Hope So far we have been listening, as it were, to the poets, who despite their fears and anxieties continue to express their Christian hope and expectation.48 The significance of the work of such poets for theological reflection is well brought out by David Jasper: “The poet speaks in metaphor and analogy; theology itself cannot abandon the language of similitude and speak of the mystery of God in the language of science and analysis, for God is no analysable system. The poet is always there to remind theology of this, and of the reticence, obliquity and indirection of its Truth.”49 On the other hand, there is a sense in which poetry needs theology for “theology meanwhile works upon the language of religious faith, straining in its careful way beyond poetic analogy and poetic inspiration .... Poetry itself then finds in doctrine and the language of belief a precise means by which to apprehend the human mystery.”50 Donne’s and Herbert’s poems reflect Christian theological tradition which regards death as the consequence of original sin affecting all people and leading to their fall from the gift of immortality. Death in Christian terms is punishment for sin. “Death spread to all men because all men sinned.” (Rom 5:12), an interpretation echoed by Augustine. Edward Schillebeeckx describes death as “a sentence of doom that man because of his sinfulness called down upon himself and all mankind.”51 Since it was 48 For a more philosophical treatment of the topic, cf. Emmanuel Levinas, trans. Bettina Bergo, ed. and annotated by Jacques Rolland, God, Death, and Time (Stanford University Press, 2000). 49 David Jasper, The Study of Literature and Religion: an Introduction. Studies in Literature and Religion (London: Macmillan, 1989). p. 35. 50 Ibid. pp. 35-36. 51 E. Schillebeeckx, “The Death of a Christian,” Vatican II: The Struggle of Minds and Other Reflections (Dublin: Gill and Son, 1963), p. 68. This chapter explores the Christian meaning of death. For a discussion on how death is viewed by different religious traditions, see John Bowker, The Meanings of Death (Cambridge

170

Chapter Nine

sin that brought about death, we have a genuine reason to be afraid of dying. For death may unveil our lives to have been lived in falsehood, thus sealing us off in a monument of folly. But there is another side to the reality of death as a consequence of sin, one that is not clearly brought out in the Christian interpretation presented above but of particular relevance to the human quest for deliverance. In many places one cannot but speak of a situation of death caused by what has been referred to as “sinful structures”. Certain structures or policies have directly or indirectly contributed to the utter wretchedness of life so much so that people get no chance at all to participate in what life has to offer. Sometimes even the opportunity to hope is taken away from them. It is not surprising then that we hear of individuals, governments or societies being given the label of “perpetrators of death”. In an ironic twist the Christian explanation of death as the consequence of sin, whatever its theological interpretation may be, is certainly true since it is their sinful actions which result in the horrible and unnecessary deaths of many. But Christians also believe that the tragic aspect of death is not everything about it because Christ’s death has conquered sin. Indeed Christian theology clearly affirms that by overcoming sin, Christ has won over death which is the result of sin. What Christ has achieved was victory, not in the sense that humans will no longer die, i.e., not that we will no longer undergo physical death, but in the sense that our death has taken on a new meaning. The punishment attached to death because of sin becomes meritorious penance. Schillebeeckx explains: “So by the fact that Christ as a holy man who is God entered lovingly into it, death has obtained a redemptive worth. Death remains a punishment for and a consequence of sin as a result of which Christ died; but the punishment now becomes reparation, satisfaction and meritorious penance. The punishment is now a constructive, salutary punishment; it receives something that of its own self it could not possess and has got only through God’s merciful intervention— a positive saving worth.”52 Thus, Christ’s death has given us hope. In the same tone Karl Rahner writes: “What was the manifestation of sin becomes, without its darkness lifted, the manifestation of an assent to the will of the Father which is the negation of sin. By Christ’s death his spiritual reality which he possessed from the beginning and actuated in a life which was brought to consummation by his death becomes open to the whole world and is inserted into this whole world in its ground as a per-

University Press, 1991). 52 Ibid. p. 74.

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

171

manent determination of a real ontological kind.”53 In other words, Christ’s death has radically altered our own. His acceptance of death has turned a natural phenomenon into a significant one. It has led the Christian to reject the claim made by people like Sartre that our death is the absurd last chapter of our absurd book of life. Christ’s death gives meaning to our own in that our own deaths could be the culmination of our daily attempts to turn to God. Instead of being merely the end of our existence, it could be the very occasion of our meeting with God. Death, Christ has shown us, could be looked upon as our final encounter with God. Christians regard Christ as the fulfillment of all the Father’s promises to us. Salvation history sees in him the fullness of God’s actions on God’s people. All along it was Christ who had been foretold by the prophets of old as the Messiah, the One who would bring redemption to his people. He accomplished this through his death: by his death and subsequent resurrection we are saved. As St. Paul puts it: “But God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us. Since, therefore, we are now justified by his blood much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God” (Rom. 5:8-9). Paul saw the death and resurrection of Jesus as the work which freed us from slavery to sin and death and raised us to new life in the Spirit. Thus, according to Christian thinking, Christ’s death removes the meaninglessness of our deaths and of our lives. But in what sense is it liberating? Donne and Herbert have shared with us their interpretations. We have also looked at a theological answer. These have shown us that Christ’s death gives us a purpose, a goal to work for. Those of us who have had the experience of grappling with the senselessness-of-it-all, of searching for answers to the existential questionings which inevitably are raised by thinking animals and of discovering some of those answers will know how liberating that last step is. It is more than a passing relief. There is nothing more pitiful than a serious questioner for whom an answer is fundamentally necessary but who is left with a question mark. He or she is like a clock which continues to tick but has lost its hands, or a person who extends a hand in anticipation of a handshake which never comes. To Christians, these situations do not arise because of Jesus’ death. This is not, of course, claiming that it is only the Christian who finds meaning in life or in death. Rather the death and resurrection of Christ provide meaning to the Christian, and this is liberating.54 It is their form of redemp53

Karl Rahner, “Death,” Sacramentum Mundi: an Encyclopedia of Theology (Herder and Herder, 1969), p. 61 54 Christian theological thinking on the significance of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is much more profound than what we can discuss here. The limita-

172

Chapter Nine

tion.55 Within the Christian context, the decisions one makes in life—and this is where the Christian message is particularly strong—can participate in Christ’s redemptive act because life has been thoroughly transformed by his death on the cross. Furthermore, it is an invitation to us to also participate in the process of liberating others from a meaningless existence and death-causing situations. To the Christian, the world as a whole and as the scene of personal human actions has become different from what it would have been had Christ not died.56 Genuine possibilities have been opened up for the personal action of humans, individually and collectively, which would not have existed without that most eventful death. Although that death happened at a given time in the past, it continues to save us at all times so long as the possibilities he has bestowed on us are genuinely appropriated by us. Christ’s act is continually being made present so that it happens, not literally or factually but nonetheless truly, over and over again in the experiences of people throughout history.57 We are saved by our actualizing within us those possibilities provided to us by Christ when he died on the cross.58 Pope Francis sums up the Christian perspective on death and on the afterlife: Here too, we see the particular importance of the moment of death. The Church has always experienced this dramatic passage in the light of Christ’s resurrection, which opened the way to the certainty of the life to come. We have a great challenge to face, especially in contemporary culture, which often tends to trivialize death to the point of treating it as an illusion or hiding it from sight. Yet death must be faced and prepared for as a painful and inescapable passage, yet one charged with immense meaning, for it is the ultimate act of love towards those we leave behind and towards God whom we go forth to meet. In all religions, the moment of death, like that of birth, is accompanied by a religious presence. As Christians, we celebrate the funeral liturgy as a hope-filled prayer for the soul of the deceased and for the consolation

tion in this essay is dictated by the approach adopted in this work. 55 Edmond Robillard, O.P. distinguishes between the Christian belief in the resurrection and the Hindu belief in re-incarnation and defends it against criticisms in his Reincarnation: Illusion or Reality? Trans. K.D. Whitehead (N.Y. Alba House, 1982). 56 Cf. “Religion as Context” in Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”. 57 Donal Dorr, “Death,” The Furrow (March, 1968), p. 146. 58 See Chapter Six: “The Christian Message as MAP for Life”

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

173

of those who suffer the loss of their loved one.59

Thus, the Christian, despite experiencing the uneasiness of knowing that he or she must die or that loved ones will die, believes that dying is not really “a sailing into unknown horizons”. Moreover, the Christian realizes that dying may after all be the final affirmation of a life in which one has responded affirmatively to the many invitations Christ has offered us so as to save ourselves and others—the fulfillment of the Christian message.

An Answer to the Question, a Question to the Answer In drawing on theological reflections and poetic expressions to bring out the significance for Christians of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, we seem to have examined the Christian answer to the philosophical question that was articulated by Immanuel Kant: What can we hope for? It is a profound question—which concerns many of us, even if we do not always phrase it that way.60 It is also one that issues a difficult test to any attempted answer. The same observation can be made about the Christian answer that is the subject-matter of this essay.61 It seems nevertheless that that answer actually provokes more philosophical questions not just regarding the meaningfulness of the actual claim but also some attendant epistemological ones. To Kant’s question therefore, one could add, among others: How do we know this teaching with some certainty? What form does Christian redemption ultimately take? In what sense could it make human life more meaningful? Does one have to subscribe to the Christian message itself to be part of the event of redemption? These questions have not escaped the attention of theologians, particularly those concerned with Christian eschatology. However, if one is to understand it fully and share its teaching with others, it deserves much more attention than is possible at the moment.62 But there is an important philosophical consideration that we should note here, and that is regarding the credibility of the Christian message of 59

Pope Francis, Misercordia et Misera, par. 15. See Chapter Five: “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”. 61 See Chapter Three: “Human Destiny in the Contemporary World” in Joseph Owens, C.Ss.R., Human Destiny, op. cit., pp. 51-78. 62 Dermot Lane observes that despite the long list of theological books published on Jesus, the Church and the Trinity in the past three decades, he notes that little has been written on eschatology. See Dermot Lane, Keeping Hope Alive, op. cit., ix. 60

174

Chapter Nine

redemption.63 In what way can this specific belief be made more acceptable or believable to others? This question is not the same as simply “window dressing” of what may not at first sight be perceived as attractive. Nor is it merely about searching for more effective ways of communicating it. Rather, the question is an enquiry into how its significance can be appreciated more realistically. In light of the questions raised above, one could in fact argue that the issue of the credibleness of any claim, be it religious or otherwise, is even prior to the issue of its validity or truth and therefore should precede any attempt to investigate or establish those important concerns—which also deserve attention as was already acknowledged. This is because if a claim can already be ruled out as unbelievable, there would seem to be no point in going any further to investigate its truth or validity. As an initial fundamental stage, therefore, it appears paramount that one would have to examine its credibility. Furthermore, since here we are examining the credibility of a message with particular reference to the belief in the saving power of Christ’s death and resurrection, we should also enquire about the efficacy of this event. To assist us with this task we would do well to turn to Aristotle’s advice regarding the communication of a message as set out in his Rhetoric.64 For a number of reasons, historical as well as technical, this work does not always feature even in philosophical discussions. There are some doubts about its authenticity and its composition. Our concern here, however, is more to note the content of the advice he gives and its applicability. Admittedly, the context in which he had set out his advice is quite different from the way I am connecting it with this philosophical consideration of the last part of the Christian message. Yet it will still be worthwhile linking them together not only as a possible point of encounter between religious belief and philosophical thinking but also because his discussion of the issue of the credibility of a message may have a bearing on what we are looking into here. The relevant passage in Aristotle’s Rhetoric is worth quoting at some length: 63

See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”. A more contemporary and also applicable discussion is offered by Jürgen Habermas whose theory of communicative action states that in addition to the understandability of a communication, credibility revolves around truth, sincerity and appropriateness. Cf. Jürgen Habermas, trans. T. McCarthy, The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. I: Reason and the Rationalization of Society (Boston: Beacon, 1984); Vol. II: Lifeworld and System (Boston: Beacon, 1987). 64

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

175

Of the modes of persuasion furnished by the spoken word there are three kinds. The first kind depends on the personal character of the speaker; the second on putting the audience into a certain frame of mind; the third on the proof, or apparent proof, provided by the words of the speech itself. Persuasion is achieved by the speaker’s personal character when the speech is so spoken as to make us think him credible. We believe good men more fully and more readily than others: this is true generally whatever the question is, and absolutely true where exact certainty is impossible and opinions are divided. This kind of persuasion, like the others, should be achieved by what the speaker says, not by what people think of his character before he begins to speak. It is not true, as some writers assume in their treatises on rhetoric, that the personal goodness revealed by the speaker contributes nothing to his power of persuasion; on the contrary, his character may almost be called the most effective means of persuasion he possesses. Secondly, persuasion may come through the hearers, when the speech stirs their emotions. Our judgements when we are pleased and friendly are not the same as when we are pained and hostile. It is towards producing these effects, as we maintain, that present-day writers on rhetoric direct the whole of their efforts. This subject shall be treated in detail when we come to speak of the emotions. Thirdly, persuasion is effected through the speech itself when we have proved a truth or an apparent truth by means of the persuasive arguments suitable to the case in question.65

There is something in the way Aristotle sets out the three areas which, in his view, need to be addressed in the art of speaking: ethos, pathos and logos, which deserve a closer look as we consider the Christian message. All three are applicable in this instance. Starting with the last one, logos, what Aristotle says is helpful advice to those concerned with the content of the Christian message and with its reception; namely, that they should pay attention to its reasonableness.66 For this reason, there has been a close connection between religious beliefs and philosophical thinking, at least in the Catholic tradition.67 The Christian message is more appealing to others if indeed it can be shown that the content of the message can be reconciled with reason. Pathos, on the other hand, directs our attention to the listeners of the message. Sharing the Christian message with

65

Aristotle, trans. W. Rhys Robert, Rhetoric, Book I, Part 2. The section in this essay which refers to theological insights deals with the logos regarding the resurrection. 67 See Chapter Three: “Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research”. 66

176

Chapter Nine

them involves a certain sensitivity to the situation of the listeners.68 While for Aristotle this is more a matter of paying attention to the emotional receptivity of the audience, the important point here is that, according to him, the message is more “appealing” if indeed those who are listening to it are placed “in a position”, so to speak, to accept it. The Christian message becomes more attractive to those with whom we want to share it when we realize that the task is not simply about transmitting it or proclaiming it to others but is also about acknowledging the context in which it is being heard.69 It involves acknowledging and learning from the “the other” in their otherness. In both of these areas, logos and pathos, the attention is directed to the soundness of the message itself as well to those who are listening to the message.70 The first area that Aristotle identifies, ethos, is, as I see it, the one that is most helpful as we turn our attention to the Christian belief in the resurrection.71 This follows the earlier suggestion that the philosophical consideration that is relevant here is its credibility even if we must also acknowledge the need for its truth to be established. Besides, there is a difference between the truth of a claim and its credibility. In the present context, philosophically, it would be rather hazardous to venture into a discussion of the truth of the resurrection as this would involve more than logical discourse and empirical fact-finding. Having already ascertained the reason in this philosophical consideration for raising the issue of the credibility of the Christian interpretation of deliverance, we now turn to how to examine it. This issue of credibility, following Aristotle’s advice regarding what he calls ethos, shifts our attention to the messenger or messengers. Is he, she or they trustworthy? Can one rely on what they say or claim? Do their personalities bear witness to the message? Why should we believe what they say? We could of course be accused of reducing the Christian belief in the resurrection to a mere subjective concern. Admittedly, there is a subjective factor indeed; but going in that direction is not necessarily leading us to outright subjectivism. Since the question is about the Christian message of redemption, interpreted by Christian belief as having been brought about by the death 68

The two poets whose poems are explicated in this essay share their sentiments (pathos) with their hearers in the hope of drawing them into the significance of the event. 69 See Chapter Eight: “Witnessing to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”, particularly about paying attention to the otherness of the other. 70 In this task philosophical thinking and theological reflection have important roles to play. 71 This is also true of the entire Christian message.

The Christian Message at Journey’s End

177

and resurrection of Jesus Christ, there is obviously a subjective dimension to that message. Aristotle does take this subjective factor into account in his discussion of ethos. On the other hand, regarding the Christian belief in the saving effect of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to be credible and to mean something it must also be rooted in something other than just what is being claimed. So if we are to avoid the accusation that it is a completely subjective belief, the issue now that needs to be faced is what it is based on. But first, we need to examine further the shifting of one’s focus in this philosophical consideration towards the messenger or messengers, following Aristotle’s advice. Otherwise, doing so may appear a retreat from the important issue. Kant, in fact, has led the way. His first question: What can I know? remained unanswerable to him so long as he concentrated on the object of knowledge. Then it dawned on him that if he reversed the direction—hence, this has been dubbed a Copernican revolution—from the object of knowledge to the knower instead, he would come closer to answering his question. Kant realized that in the knowing process he, as knower, was imposing the categories of knowing on the object of knowledge, and in this way he came to know it as being in space and time and so on. This turn around in his enquiry made Kant see the problem and the solution in a new light. A similar shift in direction towards the bearer of the Christian message as we focus on its credibility is what I am proposing here. While the process of turning to the messenger—admittedly, in this context those who are sharing the Christian message with others are not exactly like Kant’s subject of knowledge or the knower—shifting the focus in this instance is comparable to his “about turn” . What this means is that, following Aristotle’s discussion of ethos, credibility is really more about the speaker (while taking also due consideration of the content of the message and the listeners, as has already been noted). Aristotle was, of course, developing this point with reference to the art of persuasion, but what is notable for the present context is the turn to the speaker. Ethos then in this usage refers to the trustworthiness of the speaker in this particular instance. It implies a real grasp by the speaker of the content and scope of the message, personal experience of it, and relevant knowledge of its extent. Consequently, it is giving witness to the message. What bearing does this have on our philosophical consideration of redemption as believed by Christians? It seems to me that the challenge of drawing out the significance of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is actually being redirected to those who have committed themselves to bearing witness to the Christian message. It means that its appeal and ac-

178

Chapter Nine

ceptability actually rest, to a large extent, on the shoulders of those who subscribe to it.72 In general, how they bear witness to it, with their understanding of the vision and in its application in their mission, in their beliefs and in their practice, is paramount. With particular reference to the redemptive side of that message, the important consideration that should be emphasized is whether they have taken that message seriously to the extent that they are indeed “redeemed”. The biblical phrase “by their fruits you shall know them” is indeed pertinent here. How (rather than what) being “redeemed” truly means is dependent on a number of factors, a consideration that poses a further challenge. But irrespective of how that belief in redemption takes shape, it should be evident in their lives. Kant’s question (what can I hope for?) may be angled towards the future and the Christian answer (redemption by Christ’s death and resurrection) may have occurred in the past. But the Christian message of redemption is also very much about the present. It has some significance for our times. This is because there are some important implications to being the beneficiaries of the resurrection. Since as far as Christian believers are concerned it is not a mere promise but a reality, the Christian answer of redemption—if it is to be credible—is also a continuous question for them: how are they living up to that message? Thus, the Christian answer to Kant’s question is in its turn being asked a serious question. The reply to that new question will determine to a large extent the credibility of the belief that Christ’s resurrection is truly redemptive.73 After all, the philosophical consideration—that is, of credibility—which is particularly relevant in this respect is: exempla trahunt!

72 On how the issue of credibility also impacts those who take on a social or political role, cf. Chapter Nine: “Social Roles, Public Office and Moral Society: Lessons from the Past for the Present? in Society in its Challenges, op. cit., pp. 167-188. 73 See also Chapter Five, “Hope, Creativity and the Christian Message” for a discussion on the redemptive power of the past.

PART THREE: THE CHRISTIAN MESSAGE AND EDUCATION

CHAPTER TEN “SEEING THE WOOD BY MEANS OF THE TREES”: A VIEW ON EDUCATION1

As We Look Out Nature has a way of providing us with appropriate sceneries to facilitate our reflections on various matters. Philosophers, theologians and jurists have observed how nature functions as they formulate different versions of the natural law to guide human conduct. Poets have described the natural world while artists imitated it as they expressed their thoughts in graphic and illuminating ways. Designers at times follow nature in setting the trends for the next season’s fashion. Nature can be a guide, too, when we turn our gaze towards education. For an answer to the question “What is it that we are engaged in as we teach, conduct research, and provide service to the community?” we can draw some help from a nature-inspired quotation from Alfred North Whitehead’s The Aims of Education, which I have used as the title of this essay2. While these words from one of his books take us outdoors, to view nature, it is also an invitation to turn inwards, to look deeper into what nature can teach us about our educational task. We are very familiar with the saying “do not mistake the trees for the 1

This essay is based on the text of my Dean’s Address, Milltown Institute of Theology and Philosophy (National University of Ireland), Dublin, Ireland (October 2005). A version of this essay was originally published in Process Papers: an Occasional Publication of the Association for Process Philosophy of Education, No. 10, New Series (May 2006), pp. 18-27. It has been developed further for this present collection of essays. 2 A. N. Whitehead, The Aims of Education and Other Essays (N.Y.: Free Press, 1967), p. 6. Whitehead is generally regarded as one of the most eminent twentiethcentury philosophers who, having taught mathematics at Cambridge University and later science at London University, then turned to pursue his philosophical interests at Harvard University.

182

Chapter Ten

wood” or “unable to see the wood for the trees.” Whitehead specifically and intentionally sees a different connection between the two: it is by means of the trees that we see the wood. The imagery gives us a glimpse into our educational task by reminding us of the distinction between knowledge and wisdom, both of which feature in any discussion of the goals of education. And it seems to me that what Whitehead’s phrase hints at is that there is indeed a distinction between wisdom and knowledge, just as the wood is not the same as the trees, but that it is through knowledge that one gains wisdom, that it is in the trees and because of them that we can see the wood. At the same time it reminds us that these two should not be confused.

Knowledge, Competence and Skills At a time when we are being asked to specifically state the knowledge, competence and skills that we expect from all our programmes—the so-called “learning outcomes” that somehow have become the objectives of education today—we need to look more closely at how all that relates to what we are doing in education, particularly in our present context.3 When the end-products seem to have become more important than the process itself, then there is a need to take stock. When the success of educational endeavours is measured in terms of empirical evidence, the so-called “hard outputs” said to show that the learning outcomes have been achieved—all of which justify the academic award—one begins to wonder to what extent we are committed to simply ensuring that we reach our targets. All along one would be forgiven for wondering whether education has become too oriented towards producing the right products—as indeed some, whether in the printed media or in academic circles, have already been noting. Those of us who have looked at education as the process that begins in wonder but ends in wisdom—no doubt, influenced by ancient Greek philosophy’s conception of itself—can become disoriented and even aggrieved at the changed focus of education. And if you add to that the claim that education itself, educere, is about “the leading out” of the learner from 3

See, for instance, O.E.C.D., Review of National Policies for Education: Review of Higher Education in Ireland, 2004; Christopher Garbowski et al., Catholic Universities in the New Europe (Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL, 2005); Chapter Eleven: “The Marketplace, Academia and Education: a Philosophical Assessment of the Bologna Process,” in Santiago Sia, Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society, Foreword by Mary McAleese (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015, 2016), pp. 207-221.

“Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”

183

darkness to the light, then one begins to have misgivings about the emphasis on the actual results rather than on the attempts or the efforts of both the educator and the educand. And one will suspect that the destination has become more important than the journey, robbing both of the excitement, the ups and downs as they move towards the light. Nonetheless, there are good reasons for this shift not only because it is called for and even required by the authorities to whom, among others, our educational task is accountable, but also because it is crucial that students are prepared by their academic institutions with appropriate knowledge, skills, and competence to enable them to meet the present demands of society. The task of educating our students today takes place in a society that is fast changing, complex, and diverse, features which present significant challenges to educators. Every society and every generation, of course, have their own set of characteristics and problems that require different responses from educators throughout history. But it seems to me that today’s society, with the values that it upholds, poses a particular challenge to those of us who are involved in educating today’s students. I would strongly defend as the context of our academic work the marketplace (or if you prefer, the agora, just as it was in ancient Greece). The reasonable demand that we take account of the labour market or that we consult our stakeholders whenever we propose or review our academic programmes forces us to remain relevant and competitive. It is very much worth our while truly to keep the end-result in sight. I would also like to align myself with the view that life-long learning, which is what education is really about, should be marked by recognizable stages. Each stage (or in the words of the national framework of qualifications, levels)4 is a definite goal, and a goal is worth pursuing when there are tangible features. In insisting that we clearly identify the learning outcomes for each of these stages, we are recognizing and acknowledging the achievements at each stage of the learning process. Knowledge, competence, and skills are the trees in Whitehead’s vision of education. Without them, there would be no wood. They are important to enable our students to take their rightful place in society. And it is our responsibility as educators to facilitate that process. On the other hand, education is much more than that, the wood is not merely a collection of trees, the whole is more than just the constituent parts. And with all the call for a “knowledge-based society” we are in danger of forgetting that point. I believe—and this is a conviction that comes from a number of decades of being involved in education in Ireland, Brit4

This is with specific reference to the Irish educational system.

184

Chapter Ten

ain, the USA, and in shorter stints in various other countries—that this wider vision of education is just as true for students in the sciences, business, engineering, and other professional schools as it is in the humanities. I firmly believe that education, in whatever form or context, should ultimately be grounded in the development of the human person. I have illustrated and developed this point in an article on “Teaching Ethics in a Core Curriculum” in which I argue that in our exploration of ethical cases, we need to develop our moral sense as human beings and not just as engineers or scientists.5 Whitehead also talks of the need for “the liberal spirit” in technical education and science.6 The introduction of a core curriculum or general education subjects aimed at the development of the human person—as is done in some universities and colleges in the USA—is to me particularly valuable in addressing this need. It is interesting to note that the Bologna Seminar on Qualifications Structures in Higher Education in Europe (March 2003) places personal development as the first purpose of higher education and training (the second, as preparation for life as citizens in a democratic society; the third, as development and maintenance of an advanced knowledge base; and the fourth, as preparation for the labour market).7

The Pursuit of Wisdom Education for me—and I would hazard the assumption that many would agree—is first and foremost the pursuit of wisdom.8 It is a view that requires some qualification as well as clarification. I have already remarked on the present tendency, one that is particularly evident in our market-driven and technological society, to associate college or university education with the acquisition of knowledge and the development of skills. Let me repeat that this is not only understandable but also crucial if the education an institution provides is to be found appropriate and relevant. 5

See Appendix A: “Teaching Ethical Theories in a Core Curriculum: Some Pedagogical Considerations,” and Appendix B: “Teaching Ethical Theories in a Core Curriculum: Revisiting Our Starting-Point,” in Santiago Sia, Ethical Contexts and Theoretical Issues (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010), pp. 229-247. 6 Aims of Education, op. cit., pp. 43-59. 7 There has been some development in this regard leading to the so-called Bologna Process. See Chapter Eleven: “The Marketplace, Academia and Education: a Philosophical Assessment of the Bologna Process,” in Society in its Challenges, op. cit., pp. 207-221. 8 See Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”.

“Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”

185

Nonetheless, something is amiss if the entire focus of the educational task becomes narrowly directed at this consideration, important though it may be. The focus of the OECD report, for example, is on developing a skilled work force for the economy. There is hardly any reference to the role of academic institutions in contributing to the development of the civil, political, social, or cultural institutions of society. The pursuit of wisdom as the educational task, understood as the active participation in our full development as human persons, highlights certain essential features that do not always stand out with the other conceptions mentioned earlier. It is also something that needs to be repeatedly emphasized today while taking into account contemporary needs, as we reflect on what it is that we are doing when we are educating our students. Because the term “wisdom” itself is understood in different ways, I should like to explain how I understand it here. Wisdom, as will have been noted from my earlier comments, is not just the acquisition of knowledge or the development of skills and talents, although these are an integral part of the pursuit of wisdom itself. Nor is it, as is sometimes narrowly interpreted, the development of one’s individuality, particularly when one associates it with the description of “a learned individual.”9 These interpretations fail to take into serious account the fullness of our humanity—which is the basis of education. Wisdom ultimately is rooted in our nature as human beings and the various dimensions of our humanity: intellectual, emotional, ethical, spiritual, aesthetic, social, creative and so on. The pursuit of wisdom is the attempt to recognize, integrate, and develop all those dimensions. It is also an awareness that our identity as human persons is shaped and nourished by the community to which we belong. In turn our own activities, decisions, and commitments have an effect on the community. Plato, Confucius, and Buber, among others, drew our attention to this understanding of wisdom when they wrote about the importance of the development of one’s moral character in connection with the search for wisdom. Education toward wisdom is thus a holistic process because the goal and its foundation are themselves holistic. If indeed the educational task consists in the pursuit of wisdom as described above, I regard the role of an educator as one who enhances —that is to say, evokes, provokes, invokes and convokes—that process among the learners.10 In and outside the classroom, in informal and formal con-

9

On this point and in relation to the development of individualism, cf. Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message” 10 These are the stages in my methodology of teaching: evoke (gaining the interest of the learners), provoke (critically reflecting on possible answers), invoke (open-

186

Chapter Ten

tacts with the learners, in creative and scholarly activity, one should strive to keep that task in mind. For this reason, teaching is neither a “pouring of information” nor merely “an intellectual exercise.” Nor should it be seen as primarily preparing learners for the exams that will lead to an award. Rather, it is a journey or an exploration whereby the learners and the educator address the questions that they are asking, evaluate their significance, and draw on various resources for possible answers. The humanities subjects particularly lend themselves to this task of linking the students’ concrete experiences with the academic study. Moreover, the process of searching for answers is just as important as any answers that we may arrive at because the very act itself of pursuing wisdom already enhances our development as human beings. The process is also important since, hopefully, it transforms us into better human beings because we have taken the time (inside and outside the classroom) to delve deeper into those questions and to face up to their implications.11 If wisdom is indeed the development of the whole person, then the spiritual dimension cannot be ignored. There is a transcendent side to the human person and, if we are to do the human person justice, then it becomes an important factor in the pursuit of wisdom. The various service activities and the active cultivation of an ethos, an integral part of the programme of education, further the pursuit of wisdom. In addition, they contextualize that pursuit as we broaden and implement our vision of what it means to be a human person in the diverse and multicultural community that we find ourselves in and serve today. This understanding of one’s role as an educator should thus inform and substantiate the objectives, the content, and the methodology of one’s teaching. It should therefore enlighten our specific mission. Because an educator has journeyed toward wisdom, and continues to do so, he/she can be an effective guide in the learners’ pursuit of wisdom. Thus, Whitehead talks of the importance of taking into account what he calls “the rhythm of education”12 as well as “the rhythmic claims of freedom and discipline”13. Moreover, that role can be complemented and supported by scholarly, creative, and professional endeavours. The questions we ask and the answers we gather from various sources need to be pursued even further. They need to be investigated with rigour at a deeper level. What prompts scholarly and creative work is similar to that which motivates teaching: the ing up sources of information for them) and convoke (enabling the learners to think through and develop their answers). The acronym is: EPIC. 11 See Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”. 12 Aims of Education, op. cit., pp. 15-25. 13 Ibid. pp. 29-41.

“Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”

187

pursuit of wisdom. According to Whitehead, “it is the function of the scholar to evoke into life wisdom and beauty which, apart from his magic, would remain lost in the past”14. An educator wants to share with others the excitement, as well any discoveries, as he/she undertakes his/her own journey.

Learning Outcomes or Learner Outcome? This leads me to make the claim that in highlighting the need for identifying and achieving learning outcomes at various stages, we should not forget the fundamental reason for this task: the development of the person. So perhaps instead of learning outcomes we should be describing the “learner outcome,” awkward though that phrase may be. The question which I believe should be addressed by academic institutions is: “what kind of a learner” do they want to leave their trusteeship—inasmuch as these institutions have been entrusted with their education? Rather than seek to attract certain individuals to gain greater prestige, academic institutions—if they are really intent on showing their worth—should concentrate on the kind of graduates whose education they have had the responsibility of providing. Lest this be misunderstood, my point is not so much the compiling of graduate data showing the jobs, careers, achievements, or further opportunities of their graduates, or topping the league tables, but rather supporting the kind of persons who have “emerged from their portals,” as it were. An ancient inscription over a library captures my point succinctly: Intra sapiens, exi sapientior. So what does it mean to be a “wiser person” or for that matter a “wise person”? Philosophers will inevitably turn to the answer provided by Socrates: one who knows that he/she does not know. To some ears those words would sound strange; but there is, as is always the case with pithy answers, more to that answer. In this instance, however, I would like instead to draw on the teachings of another wise person: Confucius. After all, while we should act locally, we should think globally. China can justifiably boast of a great thinker whose views on education can be of tremendous value to us, particularly in the context of our line of thinking. In the books associated with his name (Analects and The Great Learning), Confucius describes a chun-tzu—translated into English as a noble person, a superior person, a wise person. Originally, that term referred to a person who was noble by birth, but Confucius argued that nobility comes from one’s effort. To be a noble person is within the reach of everyone; it is the 14

Ibid. p. 98.

188

Chapter Ten

result of one’s constant and determined effort to develop oneself as a moral individual. And it is through education—“learning,” as he puts it—that one succeeds in becoming a chun-tzu. The notion of chun-tzu is very much equated with the development of the whole person—a goal that Confucius kept in mind as he discoursed on the importance of rites, music, knowledge, and participation in the life of society. Unlike another Chinese sage, Lao Tzu, who advised retreating from society and discarding all books and cultural baggage, Confucius taught that it is in everyday life, through interaction with one another, and with the development of the individual’s talents and skills, that we become better persons. In turn, we become valuable citizens. When Confucius was asked by a disciple whether he should enter political life to serve his fellow-men, he replied that the student should develop himself first as a human being. Confucius was concerned with the best society and the virtuous individual, and he saw an intimate connection between the two. A harmonious society promotes the ethical development of its citizens, but such a society is brought about by the moral activities of its citizens. Education, for Confucius, is a way of improving that connection in a practical way. This is why he insisted on the cultivation of virtues and decorum as the essence of education. For Confucius, as I hope it is for us, there is no greater “hard output” than that of facilitating that process and of achieving that goal.15 Time and space separate us from Confucius. Yet there are certain guiding principles which somehow transcend those boundaries. More importantly, perhaps, despite obvious differences and tremendous changes, we are after all dealing with a shared human nature. And it is that human nature that we should not forget as we “re-view,” as it were, education.

The Quest for Wisdom Let me now turn our attention to the role of philosophy in our present context. To some extent I have already addressed this issue inasmuch as my development of the topic has been very much influenced by my philosophical background. This is because what I wanted to illustrate is that in many ways, to engage in philosophical thinking is not just to delve into the thoughts of the great masters of this art. The quest for wisdom—despite its close association with philosophy, inasmuch as etymologically that academic discipline means “the love of wisdom”—is not the prerogative of 15

See Chapter Six: “Ethical Thinking and Formation: a Challenge for Life in Society,” Society in its Challenges, op. cit., 113-128.

“Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”

189

those who have made its study a professional preoccupation. One can justifiably point to much wisdom literature in biblical studies and other academic disciplines. One can even argue that each of us, irrespective of our educational background, by the very fact of asking a question, of wanting to go further in our knowledge, is already taking a step ahead in our quest for wisdom. This is why I have always maintained—to the delight of my students—that there is no such thing as a “stupid question,” although perhaps an idle one or an irrelevant one. But insofar as we ask a question, we are looking for more. The question indicates that we had prior knowledge, no matter how vague or confused it may have been. So in raising the question— which is what we are engaged in as we teach, do research, and serve the community—we have already embarked on our journey towards greater wisdom. But now we need to pursue the question further: what contribution does the study of philosophy make to our common quest for wisdom?16 Here perhaps is what marks the philosophical pursuit of wisdom: namely, the recognition of the human urge to ask fundamental questions and of the need to embark on that pursuit for answers. Yet it can be frustrating since it can lead to more questions when at times all one wants are straightforward answers—the “bottom-line” as they say across the Atlantic, or “yes or no” as those in the legal profession and the media keep on insisting. Worse, to be told by such an influential philosopher as Socrates that wisdom consists in knowing that one does not know is hardly an enticement to study philosophy. What then would make us want to enlist the help of philosophical questioning in our quest for wisdom?17 The same Socrates did provide some kind of an answer: the unexamined life is not worth living, he is known as saying. I would like to put that answer differently: unquestioned assertions or beliefs have a way of leading us astray. Let me explain this point by sharing with you an experience. Years ago as a young student in Ireland (and that was decades ago!), I drove to the West. Inevitably I got lost since the signposts had been turned around—it was a favourite prank of youngsters at that time! I found myself literally, and not just symbolically, going around in circles. Finally, I spotted a farmer leaning on a fence. From the moment I approached him, I could sense that he was eyeing me with more than the customary interest. After all, I was not your 16

See Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”. See also, Peter Gordon and John White, Philosophers as Education Reformers: the Influence of Idealism on British Educational Thought and Practice (Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979), and John S. Brubacher, Modern Philosophies of Education: Foundations of Education, 4th ed. (McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1969). 17

190

Chapter Ten

average Irishman! He must have been wondering what ill wind had blown me to this part of the world. I explained my predicament. His seemingly bewildering reply has stuck with me ever since: “D’you see that road? Well, don’t take that. And that one over there? No, the one further up. Well now, you’d be foolish to take that!” My initial reaction to his instructions was one of frustration until it dawned on me that by avoiding the roads he had warned me not to take, I discovered that I was on my way to my destination. Similarly, the path to the truth is often littered with obstacles that we have to clear away first. Knowing what it is not is a first step forward to knowing what it is. And the process is enormously helped when we ask questions and subject received answers to careful scrutiny. Whitehead warns us of what he calls “inert ideas” which he describes as “ideas that are merely received into the mind without being utilized, or tested, or thrown into fresh combinations.” He maintains that “education with inert ideas is not only useless: it is, above all things, harmful—Corruptio optima, pessima”.18 The philosophical pursuit is a yearning for wisdom, a thirst for, and a commitment to, the truth. It is a declaration of an intention to cast aside superficiality or mere appearances insofar as one wants to penetrate to the essence of things, to reflect on it, and to structure it. It wants to give lie to frivolity or haste because it affirms that genuine satisfaction comes only after a search—sometimes a long one. It expects us not merely to react but also—and even more so—to lay foundations. It implies a way of thinking and even a way of life. Philosophy enables us to evaluate the details in the light of an encompassing vision. And for this reason, philosophy rejects what is merely fashionable because it champions lasting values. And for what? I should like to think that these lines from Ben Jonson’s poem, “An Ode to Himself” could very well apply: Minds that are great and free, Should not on fortune pause, ‘Tis crown enough to virtue still, her own applause. (lines 16-18)

And where does all this take place, this search for true wisdom? For the ancient Greeks, it was the agora, the marketplace, not unlike the social and political arena of Confucius’s search. Contrary to certain perceptions, it is in the concreteness of life, the “raw stuff of life” that philosophical thinking takes shape, not in ivory towers. In philosophy, these concrete 18

Whitehead, Aims of Education, op. cit., p. 1.

“Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”

191

experiences are transformed into ideas. Philosophical questioning and thinking is the process of nurturing, testing, propagating, and communicating these ideas. But it does not end there. These ideas have to be hammered on the anvil of life and tested in the furnace of concrete living. A. N. Whitehead again provides us with an insight when he remarked that speculative philosophy is like the flight of an airplane: it starts on the ground, takes off into the rarefied atmosphere of abstraction but lands back on the ground. It is useful to keep that comparison in mind as we consider the philosophical task. To the motto of bringing scholarship to life,19 I would add that scholarship actually arises from life and should be brought back to life.

Turning to Religion For many people the desire for the ultimate meaning of life, which is part and parcel of the quest for wisdom, is met by religion. In their view, the human urge to go beyond itself, its experience of transcendence, is something that can only be fulfilled by religious faith. The final fulfillment of all creation is finally answered by an explicit reference to God. That is certainly how Thomas Aquinas understood Aristotle’s philosophy regarding the final end of human beings when he stated that Aristotle’s version was not wrong but merely incomplete. Aristotle’s eudaimonia was thereby converted into beatitudo. The quest for wisdom in religious terms is, as St. Paul points out, not for “the wisdom of this world”, but ultimately to know that one is wrapped up in God’s loving embrace. This is not the place to probe much more thoroughly into the essence of religion and its many beliefs and practices.20 Besides, given the complexity and diversity of its meaning, that would not be a fruitful undertaking for us here. Nor is my intention to argue in defense of religion or religious belief. But given that religion is very much associated with education, there is a good reason for turning in that direction, particularly in the specific sense of our being able “to see the wood amidst the trees” as discussed in this essay. What should the educational task consist of? How can the religious vision assist us in this undertaking?21 But first let us turn to Charles Hartshorne, who together with Whitehead, is considered to be a major thinker in process philosophy. He pro19

This is the motto of Milltown Institute of Philosophy and Theology. See Chapter Two: “Religion in Human Life and Thought”. 21 These questions are dealt with more fully in Chapter Eleven: “Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Higher Education: Challenges and Issues”. 20

192

Chapter Ten

vides a philosophical understanding of religion. While Hartshorne’s definition of religion may not win universal agreement, particularly among practitioners, there is an underlying consideration that serves well our purposes here. Maintaining that the content or essence of religion is worship, Hartshorne defines religion as “devoted love for a being regarded as superlatively worthy of love”. He agrees with Paul Tillich that the great commandment to love God with all one’s being amounts to a definition of worship. This formulation may sound Christian, but Hartshorne claims that it also sums up the beliefs of the other major religions since they, too, are concerned with loving God totally. While this definition of religion as worship serves as the basis for Hartshorne’s analysis of the religious idea of God,22 it also draws attention to a certain understanding of human nature, which is of particular interest to us here. A human being, as Hartshorne puts it, is but a fragment of reality.23 In his way of thinking, human existence is only one among many; hence, a human being is to some extent comparable to a mere grain of sand or a passing speck of dust. Like them, humans are limited in space and time and in every other way. We would likely refer to this limitation as being finite, but Hartshorne prefers the term “fragmentary” since in his philosophy God, too, has a finite aspect but is not fragmentary.24 We humans are merely fragments of finite reality, not the whole of it, since each of us is but one localized being among others whereas God in God’s finitude is the whole of finite reality. God, and only God, cannot be a fragment of anything else. Thus, to say that all creatures, including humans are finite, is to say too little. One should describe them, according to Hartshorne, as not merely finite but fragmentary, mere parts of the whole of reality. In short, fragmentariness rather than finitude is the mark of the non-divine.25 22 This claim has been investigated and developed in my God in Process Thought: A Study in Charles Hartshorne’s Concept of God, Studies in Philosophy and Religion 7 (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1985). 23 Hartshorne, “Man’s Fragmentariness” Wesleyan Studies in Religion XLI, 6 (1963-64), p. 17; “The Significance of Man in the Life of God”, Theology in Crisis: a Colloquium on the “Credibility” of God (New Concord, Ohio: Muskingum College, 1987), p. 40; Chapter Six: “Religion as Acceptance of our Fragmentariness,” Wisdom as Moderation: A Philosophy of the Middle Way (N.Y.: SUNY Press, 1987), pp. 83-94. 24 Hartshorne developed and defended a concept of a dipolar God. See God in Process Thought, op. cit. 25 Hartshorne, “The Idea of a Worshipful Being,” Southern Journal of Philosophy, II, 4 (Winter 1964), p. 165. See also, Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”.

“Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”

193

It is one’s reaction to this fragmentariness which characterizes one’s religion. One’s religion is good if one accepts relative insignificance in the best possible way. It is poor or non-existent if one closes one’s eyes to this situation, persuading oneself that the limitation in space and time is only of slight significance or if one considers oneself the centre of the universe, with everything else revolving around oneself, or if one regards a particular group—family, class, race—as that universe to which one should devote one’s entire attention. All of these reactions are, in one way or another, a non-acceptance of the fragmentary nature of a human being Hartshorne considers this self-deification by human beings a chief rival in our time of what he holds to be true religion.26 The two parts of the definition of religion as worship, i.e. total love for God and the human individual’s acceptance of fragmentariness, are thus related to each other. True worship is achieved only when one humbly accepts one’s fragmentary status. Non-worship is either a forgetfulness or a denial of the real situation. But I hasten to add that Hartshorne has no intention of debasing the human with this interpretation even if the emphasis on human fragmentariness apparently points towards something outside which gives it significance and may even convey the impression that one has very little importance in oneself, if any at all. Worship is loving God with all one’s being. It is in the context of love that Hartshorne talks of worship and therefore, far from degrading the human individual, it enables him and her to become aware of some significance in their fragmentariness. After all, they are or can be loving “fragments”. They are also loved, called upon to enter a particular relationship with God. Thus, worship is actually an elevation of humanity and of the universe.27 In short, “fragmentariness” is a metaphysical description, not a value judgment. Of course, not every kind of worship falls within the scope of Hartshorne’s definition. There are many forms of worship such as primitive, idolatrous, and superstitious. With each form of worship a different conception of God emerges. The object of primitive worship, for instance, is a mere superhuman while that of superstitious worship is a magical god. Hartshorne’s definition is intended to exclude these. In contrast, God as the object of worship in Hartshorne’s understanding is a personal God who 26 Hartshorne, “The Modern Word and the Modern View of God,” Crane Review, IV, 2 (Winter 1962), p. 73. 27 This point is well discussed by David R. Mason in his “An Examination of Worship as a Key for Re-examining the God-Problem”, Journal of Religion, LV (1955), pp. 76-94. Mason elaborates on Hartshorne’s use of worship in the context of love and argues that such a conception is far from debasing the human being. Rather, worship enhances self, fellow-creatures and God.

194

Chapter Ten

invites a loving relationship with all. Consequently, Hartshorne offers the following extended definition: “worship is the integrating of all one’s thoughts and purposes, all valuations and meanings, all perceptions and conceptions”.28 Consciousness is the added element here. To worship is to do something consciously. It is to respond with awareness to the situation. With this definition, the response to one’s fragmentary nature is seen as being lifted to the level of explicit awareness.29 The more consciousness there is, the more completely the ideal of worship is realized. Such an account enables Hartshorne to distinguish his definition of religion as worship from other forms of worship which lack that element. Taking up once again the challenge to education to open our eyes to “the wood”, to have an over-all vision of reality, I would suggest that Hartshorne’s concept of human nature as fragmentariness and his definition of religion as worship does that. The starting point is similar to what has already been covered in the discussion; namely, ourselves or “the trees” to use Whitehead’s symbolic language. Getting to know ourselves— as Socrates pointed out—in our fragmentariness—as Hartshorne would add—is the first step towards wisdom and to an openness to the divine.30 Fragmentariness reveals the human need to go beyond its limitation. It is seeing outside of one’s limited status in search of what is unlimited. In this respect, I believe, Hartshorne’s understanding of what underpins religion and what defines its essence are very much along the lines of what Whitehead shows us to be the foundation of education. Whatever about the development or concretization of religion by its respective practitioners in terms of particular beliefs and practices—a later stage—what lies at its foundation is an implicit knowledge of what is outside ourselves even if we do not always interpret that similarly. The educative process is about drawing that out, irrespective of specific affiliation to any religious grouping. In this sense, what is at the core of religion, if one follows Hartshorne’s thinking in this regard, is comparable to what has been discussed earlier regarding the philosophical task—seeing the wood in the midst of the trees.

28

Hartshorne, A Natural Theology for Our Times (La Salle: Open Court, 1967), pp. 4-5. 29 This point parallels the claims made in Part II of this book regarding the significance of the Christian message: it is about entering into a personal relationship with a loving God, a relationship that is implicit in every human being but which needs to be actualized. 30 See also Chapter Six: “The Christian Message as MAP in Life’s Journey”.

“Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”

195

A Final Observation Education has been defined differently throughout history. Its aims and objectives have been interpreted and put into practice in a diverse manner. Educational systems have been set up to accommodate varying needs and demands. But one thing that should be noted in the midst of this diversity is that it is fundamentally about “opening up one’s mind”, having a general vision. Even when we have to take account of changing circumstances and complex demands in a rapidly developing society, we cannot and should not forget that it is about meeting that human need.31 With the help of the philosophers, A.N. Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne, I have shown that the educational process is, in this sense, about enabling us to see “the wood in the midst of the trees”. In other words, it is a specific mission to recognize, and hopefully appreciate, the vision.

31

Cf. Chapter Two: “Education for What?: the Quest for Wisdom” in Marian f. Sia and Santiago Sia, From Question to Quest: Literary-Philosophical Enquiries into the Challenges of Life (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011), pp. 25-42. Also, M. F. Sia and S. Sia, That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom: A Tale of the Human Quest for Knowledge (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015).

CHAPTER ELEVEN DEVELOPMENTS IN CONTEMPORARY SOCIETY AND FAITH-BASED HIGHER EDUCATION: CHALLENGES AND ISSUES1

Challenges to Education Throughout the ages education has been faced with a number of challenges, and these in turn have led to a number of issues with which it has had to cope. Some of these are perennial, but every age ushers in fresh and even unforeseen challenges and issues. This is hardly surprising, however, given the nature, the status and the tasks of education itself. While one has to duly acknowledge its continued importance in society, education is after all a process, rather than merely an institution or an organization; and its role is always in need of constant scrutiny if it is to remain relevant. The expectations regarding higher education are greater inasmuch as it is—at least, for some—the final step taken in the whole process. Among the other tasks of higher education is to facilitate full membership in society; and how it accomplishes this becomes a benchmark for its significance and relevance. Moreover, since full membership in society takes several forms, higher education is also expected to take that variety and diversity into account. Many of these expectations, challenges and issues are also relevant to faith-based higher education. But in addition, it has—to a great extent—to justify its distinctiveness. While it, too, has to address the concerns of higher education in general, whatever they are,2 a faith-based higher edu1

An earlier version of this essay was presented at the Centre for Higher Education Research and Development, University of Debrecen, Hungary and was included in Gabriella Pusztai (ed.), Religion and Higher Education in Central and Eastern Europe (Debrecen, Hungary: Center for Higher Education Research and Development, 2010), pp. 12-23. 2 See Chapter Eleven: “The Marketplace, Academia and Education: a Philosophical Critique of the Bologna Process” Santiago Sia, Society in its Challenges: Phil-

198

Chapter Eleven

cation has, moreover, to articulate, communicate and implement an understanding of education that is unique to itself. But it is also worth noting that at times, it may, and even should, draw on that understanding to critique prevailing conceptions and practices of education and even certain features of society itself. This essay will sketch developments in contemporary society—by no means an exhaustive list—which present specific challenges and raise particular issues for a faith-based higher education.3 It will also offer suggestions as to why and how, precisely because of its distinctiveness, it can respond to these.

A Secularized Society A faith-based higher education today finds itself in what can be described as a secularized society. It is the milieu in which it has to fulfill its role and discharge its responsibilities. Inasmuch as a faith-based education appears to be in contrast, and even in opposition, to such a society, it would seem that even its very existence would need to be justified. In this sense, the challenge to its distinctiveness is particularly acute. The question could very well be posed: what place, if any, does such a higher education have in this kind of society? Furthermore, even if an argument could be made for its place, what positive contribution can it make, given that such a society may well be critical of its influence? Secularization is an epochal movement which marks a change in our understanding of ourselves, of the world and of our relationship to God.4 It has led to secularism, a viewpoint and way of life that concentrate on this world with an explicit denial of God’s existence or relevance. Secularism affirms the radical autonomy of human beings, and the intensified concern

osophical Considerations of Living in Society, Foreword by Mary McAleese (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015, 2016), pp. 207-221. 3 Although challenges and issues are quite different realities, and therefore may deserve separate treatment, I am discussing these together in this essay. In his book, Why Politics Needs Religion (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2006) Brendan Sweetman argues that both secularism and religion must be regarded as worldviews. In this way, both can benefit from each other in a rational dialogue. 4 In his book Charles Taylor distinguishes three senses of secularization: 1) the emptying of religion from autonomous social spheres; 2) the falling off of religious belief and practice and turning away from God and Church; 3) the acceptance that belief in God is no longer axiomatic and that there are other alternatives. Cf. his, A Secular Age (Cambridge & London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2007).

Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education

199

for this world is brought to the point of breaking away from any religious understanding of themselves and of their world. Focusing one’s attention on the here and now, one narrows oneself down to such an extent as to exclude any thought of the beyond. Such a secularist accuses the religious believer of not accepting full responsibility for this world.5 For when life in this world presents problems and sufferings, religious believers are accused of hastening to explain them with theistic principles. Thus, secularism makes one shrug off traditional religion and not bother with it anymore. The secularist prefers to view reality without a, or any, God.6 Related to this phenomenon of secularization is a new understanding of our relationship with nature. Previously humans thought of themselves as merely creatures of God, endowed with dignity no doubt but still totally dependent on the Creator. Much emphasis was placed on human limitations and weaknesses. Human beings had to submit to the order in the world whereas in today’s secularized society, one thinks in terms of human possibilities, not limitations. This is a major shift indeed in our selfunderstanding that seems to open the whole future to human endeavour. “Come-of-age” humans see themselves now as co-creators and not mere creatures, who are entirely subject to the perilous forces of nature. They have come to realize that nature is not complete to the minutest detail but needs their stamp to bring it to its fullness. In discovering that they have been left with the world in their hands, they have come to appreciate their creativeness. Having learned that they do not have to submit to the order of nature, they have become aware that they can change it—without any reference to a Creator. Secularization has also brought about an appreciation that human beings are not a finished product for they have to make themselves. This is their task for they are not just born into the world but they need to “create” themselves, so to speak. To be human is a task, not necessarily a burden but a challenge, a choice. The point is, human nature is essentially a becoming. Humanity is not a static concept, it is a dynamic entity. This is 5

Alasdair MacIntyre makes an interesting observation on the impact of secularization on ethics in his Secularization and Moral Change (Oxford University Press, 1967). 6 There is a challenge here, too, for our concept of God. God was conceived as “gap-filler”, assigned tasks which in our crude knowledge of the world we ourselves could not accomplish. God had been performing the function of “filling the holes” which science at that time had not yet been able to do. Cf. Hubert F. Beck, The Age of Technology (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1970), p. 15. With the growth, however, of our ability to explain the world by itself, this God became redundant.

200

Chapter Eleven

what marks humans off from other animals. Not only are they rational but they can also and do change themselves and the world.7 This concept of human becoming leads us to human historicity, a point strongly emphasized by Karl Marx. Human existence, since it is dynamic, is history in the making. This means that humans do not only have history, but they are history just as they are flesh and blood. In such a secularized society—where God and the religious view have been sidelined and even abandoned—a faith-based higher education finds itself on the defensive. A major challenge to it is to clarify for itself and to share with society its specific role and positive contribution. At the same time, it needs to find a common basis with secularized society that will enable it to enter into dialogue with it and thereby work with and alongside it.8

A Mechanized and Technological Society Another development in contemporary society that presents challenges to a faith-based higher education is the invention of machines, the advancement of technology, and the growth in communication gadgets.9 They have transformed our age into a highly progressive one. While requiring only minimal human labour, machines have enabled us to step up production; hence, meeting more adequately our economic and material needs.10 This tremendous growth of mechanical power since the 18th century—first steam, then electricity, and later atomic and even nuclear power—made possible a great increase of social wealth. While the early stages of the industrial revolution actually impoverished millions, by almost any material standard today’s citizens are better off than were their ancestors. New mechanical power netted in new wealth.11 And this has caused the 7

This understanding should not be confused with the concept of creativity or creative synthesis referred to in various discussions in this book. 8 As some of the essays in Gabriella Puztai, (ed.), Religion and Higher Education in Central and Eastern Europe. Region and Education VI, (Debrecen: CHERD. 2008) indicate, the political and social situation in the region show affinities with the secularized society described here. It is interesting to read how church-related higher education in these countries dealt, and continues to deal, with the challenges and issues in their context. 9 See Chapter Seven: “Images, Reality and Truth: Some Philosophical Considerations” in Santiago Sia, Society in its Challenges, op. cit., pp. 131-148. 10 Hubert F. Beck, op.cit. p.18. 11 Eric Josephson (ed.) “Introduction,” Man Alone: Alienation in Modern Society (N.Y.: Dell Publishing Co. Inc., 1966), p. 20.

Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education

201

lifting up of barriers which hindered progress before and has spurred society to forge its way ahead to develop science and technology even more. Realizing thus the value of machines in creating a more progressive world for living in, contemporary society has learned to channel many of its needs through them. But with the advent of machines and the consequent development of science and technology, a new way of life has been gradually setting in. It is a spectre, as Erich Fromm describes it, stalking in our midst and yet noticed only by a few. It radically differs from what we have known till now since this way of life may actually topple down our former scale of values. What Fromm warns us about is the spectre of “a completely mechanized society, devoted to maximal material output and consumption, directed by computers.”12 In this social process, humans become part of the total machine. They are well-fed and entertained, true; but they lose their feelings and are reduced to passive and unalive caricatures. Though they have harnessed the powers of nature through science, in a mechanized society they are in turn controlled by their own works and organizations. They have become servants of the machine they have invented.13 “Powerless in the face of modern mechanical and social forces,” they have, according to Eric Josephson, “reached a point in history where knowledge and tools intended originally to serve man now threaten to destroy him.”14 As Jürgen Moltmann puts it: “The product of his mind and the works of his hands have gained dominance over and against him. The power of his creation becomes superior to him. He set free technical and political processes which ran out of control by virtue of their inherent laws. The lord of nature becomes the slave of his own works. The creators of technology bow before their creations.”15 And losing mastery over their own system, these human beings that Moltmann describes have no other aims but to produce and consume more. This mechanization of society with the consequent slavery of free and creative humans has been facilitated by a shift in attitude. Many today 12

Eric Fromm, The Revolution of Hope: Toward a Humanized Technology (N.Y.: Harper & Row, 1968), p. 1. See also Chapter III: “Love and its Disintegration in Contemporary Western Society,” in his The Art of Loving (London: Unwin Books, 1972), pp. 62-77. Also, Chapter Four: “Love, Relatedness and the Christian Message”. 13 Or as Gabriel Marcel puts it, they have become so functionalized that they do not even realize the brokenness of their world. 14 Eric Josephson, op. cit. p. 9 15 Jürgen Moltmann, “Christian Rehumanization of Technological Society,” The Critic (May-June, 1970), p. 13.

202

Chapter Eleven

are more intent on improving and developing our world, and are anxious to ensure a stable life. Technology provides them with the means to achieve this end. Centring their concern on this end, they come to think in terms of economic progress and of material benefits. Harvey Cox describes them as “little interested in anything that seems resistant to the application of human energy and intelligence. [They] judge ideas, as the dictionary suggests in its definition of pragmatism, by the ‘results they will achieve in practice’. The world is viewed not as a unified metaphysical system but as a series of problems and projects.”16 This one-sided emphasis of many on technique and material consumption has affected not only their attitude towards this world, but it has also permeated their relationship with fellow human beings. They view their relationship in the light of their concept of the value of a human being. For them a human being’s whole life is geared to the machine, and one’s value is commensurate with one’s efficiency at it. The more one can profit from it, the more valuable one is. No doubt, this stress on the teamwork of human and machine has been very advantageous for our world. It has effected the progress we witness today. But unfortunately, it does have negative repercussions. It can place an immoderate emphasis on that teamwork that even human-with-human will be narrowed down to mere joint effort for profit. Functional relationships will be formed replacing traditional, personal ones. Factually, human-with-human will then become an impersonal alliance. It is a world inhabited and dominated by the I-It according to Buber’s philosophy of relationships. And what is likely to follow? People will be well-supported, as Fromm says; but they will be unalive and unfeeling towards one another. This is why he cautions us against this spectre. We are in danger of becoming—and may already to a great extent have become—a mechanized society which shackles humans by reducing them to mere machines.17 The tremendous advances contributed by technology, transforming it into a highly-developed environment for us can unfortunately create an atmosphere wherein a human being is pitted against the machine and where his or her value is computed by that individual’s efficiency at the machine. We would then have to cope with an existential problem: if a machine can produce more than a skilled worker; if, taking into account that set-up, it is more profitable to treat man or woman as another machine rather than as a person with whom we are to form personal relations, is 16

Harvey Cox, The Secular City: Secularization and Urbanization in Theological Perspective, rev. ed. (N.Y.: The Macmillan Company, 1968), p. 52. 17 See Chapter Four: “Relationships and Communal Living: A View on Types of Relatedness” in Society in its Challenges, op. cit., pp. 65-85.

Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education

203

there sufficient reason still for respecting his or her existence?18 For another machine could easily replace that individual—and more profitably so. There is the real danger of losing humanistic values and overlooking the dignity of the human being.19 This development in contemporary society represents another major challenge to a faith-based higher education inasmuch as the latter has always championed values that enable human beings to develop as human beings. To what extent can those values be upheld today, and how can they be inculcated and communicated to those who will be joining the workforce once their education has been completed? Should a faith-based higher education critique this development in society?

A Globalized Society Still another development in contemporary society that has introduced its own set of challenges to higher education, including a faithbased one, is the reality of globalization.20 Globalization means a number of things, and consequently results in different challenges.21 Its reality,

18

This is also very much an occupational problem and a trade-union issue due to the loss of jobs, sometimes passed off as a re-organizing or re-structuring strategy by management. 19 Additionally, the loss of jobs because of all these developments can de-stabilize families and society. 20 For an informative view on how globalization has positively benefited Europe, cf. Daniel S. Hamilton and Joseph P. Quinlan, Globalisation and Europe: Prospering in the New World Order (Centre for Transatlantic Relations, 2008). For more nuanced reflections and comments, cf. Janez Juhant and Bojan Žalec (eds.), Surviving Globalization: the Uneasy Gift of Interdependence, Theologie Ost-West, Europäische Perspectiven 13 (Berlin: Lit Verlag, 2008). There has been an ongoing debate between those supporting globalization and those defending protectionism. It has become a focal point in politics in the E.U. and has become even more urgent with Brexit. More recently, the 2016 election results in the USA have once again highlighted the issue. Interestingly, while the US President trumpeted protectionism during his inaugural speech, the Chinese President extolled globalization during his speech at the 2017 Davos meeting. 21 The transformation of life and of daily activity in the globalized society created by the internet has resulted in a different understanding of what education means. This situation has resulted in a different challenge and created another set of issues for higher education generally.

204

Chapter Eleven

whether one is entirely convinced of it or not, requires a change in one’s thinking of society and in one’s responses to the fresh issues.22 In this regard, one will note that the phenomenon of globalization is one of the factors behind the Bologna Process. This Process illustrates a climate change in how higher education is to be viewed and implemented. It makes considerable reference to our present society and its needs as well as notes the urgency to attend to these on the part of education at all levels so as to be more competitive. Its communiqués and recommendations have made inroads into academic programmes and academic life generally. The Bologna Process certainly recognizes that this development in the worldwide community means fresh challenges to the education being provided to their learners. It sets out strategies which need to be implemented by academic institutions to address globalization, among other challenges. As a continuing process, it accepts that the ongoing response also means regular reviews of the Process by participating member countries. Ironically, this ever-widening society is nevertheless brought tighter together due to the tremendous advances in media technology. Our globalized society is no longer just the global village created by developments in communications but is now very much an interconnected society. The digital age has truly transformed it and the way we communicate.23 Individual citizens—at least, generally—enjoy a non-traditional closeness with one another by means of their smart phones, tablets and other gadgets. The internet and similar developments have played a significant role in bringing this situation about. We are, with justification, “netizens” of the world. Similarly, the nearness of countries has been enhanced by the fast-growing and increasing sophistication of communications as well as by the ease and speed of communicating with one another. These have indeed made our world seem so much smaller and closer. Such an interconnected society poses great opportunities for enhancing the educational process. Educational institutions can harness these tremendous improvements in social and media technology not just to es22 There is another important and urgent challenge that needs to be addressed because of globalization. See Margarite Walker and Sylvia Marcos, Dialogue and Difference: Feminism’s Challenge to Globalization (Palgrave Macmillan, 2005); M.E. Hawkesworth, Globalization and Feminist Actions (Rowman & Littlefield, 2006); Martha Nussbaum, Women and Human Development: a Global Challenge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). 23 See also “Introduction” regarding the transformation of global society due to the proliferation of messages as a result of the advances made in communications technology.

Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education

205

tablish closer connections but more importantly to create greater opportunities for widening and deepening the educational process. They can truly enrich the educational process and task. At the same time, however, insofar as there is a downside to all these developments, they also pose certain problems and difficulties.24 We are constantly reminded in the media, by hearsay and with surveys, that these developments have even contributed to the lowering of standards in, for example, literary and numeracy. They have also been blamed for the loss of real communication, i.e. human interaction, among both the young and the older populations.25 Despite being interconnected, paradoxically, our society remains divided in certain respects. Even with two World Wars, which were expected to put an end to all wars, we are still witnessing continued warfare between nations as well as conflicts and revolutions within countries. Today one reads and hears about the ongoing violent divisions, all the wars and conflicts constantly raging in countries such as Syria, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, South Sudan and many, many more as well as between countries. The media is full of coverage, replete with protracted coverage, of displaced peoples, refugee camps and the ravages of war and conflict.26 One does wonder whether peace in and harmony among nations in this world of ours are a distant dream. Nevertheless, certain developments have provided opportunities, too, for our globalized society to become more of an international community. A number of initiatives have been a welcome product of a changed mentality regarding world citizenship. For instance, the United Nations Organization came about because the founders wanted to learn from the disastrous effects of warring nations. Moreover, instead of thinking and acting exclusively not merely as independent but also as separate entities, member nations have begun to value the merits of acting as a united front in tackling many of the common problems and issues.27 The record admittedly—which is fodder for sceptics and critics—is marred. But while the UN 24

See Chapter Seven: “Images, Reality and Truth: Some Philosophical Considerations”, Ibid. pp.131-148. 25 One would wonder about the abuse of mobile phones when one observes a group of individuals, including families at a restaurant, more engaged in texting or checking for messages, rather than in conversing with one another during meals. The irony is that while they are communicating with others in such an impersonal way, no personal communication among themselves is taking place at table. 26 The plight of the migrants, including babies and very young children, fleeing from war-torn countries making their way to Europe is truly heart-breaking. 27 Unfortunately, there seems to be the increasing influence of populism and separatism in a number of countries today.

206

Chapter Eleven

and similar ventures have their critics and have received justified criticisms, the interesting point is that there is a growing awareness that our globalized society could, and should, be an international community. Now and then co-operation shines through, and one is given hope. Recently, the overwhelming tsunami in Asian countries, the recent natural disasters in Haiti and the catastrophic devastation of the Philippines due to the super typhoon Haiyan—and there have been various other examples worldwide—prompted several nations to respond on humanitarian grounds.28 There have also been the peace-making efforts of the UN in deploying international teams and armed forces to facilitate and support initiatives and structures to bring about peace in troubled countries and territories. Again there have been both legitimate and also ill-conceived criticisms from different quarters, but the relevant point worth noting here is that such responses to the plight of other nations indicate some sense of belongingness to an international community.29 Inasmuch as the educative process is intended to enlighten people, it would do well if it could also participate more intently and intensely in the transformation of the thinking and action of leaders and citizens alike. The challenge for education generally—and to some extent, more so for a faith-based education that teaches and upholds universality—is how to foster and strengthen that awareness and motivation so that our globalized society as an international community is not merely a geographical description or a strategic vision but also, and more significantly, a living reality.30 28

Despite some limitations and faults noted by critics, there are solid reasons for gratitude to the response of the world-wide community to the tsunami, supertyphoon and other such disasters and some grounds for hope for the future. Listening to the comments aired in the media, perhaps one could suggest that such responses to these disasters should be at two stages. The first one, prompted by the disaster itself should be: quick, co-ordinated, sufficient and caring. The second stage, since it is more lasting, should enable the victims to come to terms with the disaster as well as to stand on their own. It was appropriately described by someone in the disaster area in the Philippines as a “hand-up”, not a “hand-out”. In this sense, international aid is not so much an ad hoc solution to a specific problem but a concretization of the awareness of being members of a truly international community. 29 Very recently Pope Francis urged the United Nations Organization to take the leadership in the light of the growing threat of an international catastrophe due to the nuclear threat between disputing countries. 30 The distinction introduced by the sociologist Ferdinand Tonnies between association (Gesellschaft) and community (Gemeinschaft) can be helpful to our thinking in this respect. Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and former UN High

Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education

207

A Faith-Based Higher Education The questions now arise: What distinctive contribution does a faithbased higher education make? In what way can its specific vision and mission be implemented? Will it be in a position to meet the challenges and address the issues which the developments in contemporary society present to it?31 In light of what has been presented in the previous sections in this essay, it seems that faith-based higher education needs to focus on: (1) dealing with the question of comparability since in education, as in any other area, there is a need to establish common grounds—whether in its objectives, governance or programmes—so as to facilitate and promote dialogue and cooperation; (2) meeting the challenge of competitiveness insofar as certain standards in academia need to be met and upheld; (3) providing a critique of values and practices in society which hinder the full development of its citizens; and, more importantly, (4) establishing credibility so that its presence, role and achievements are acknowledged to be truly positive. To some extent, the questions above and the suggested areas to focus on, are really about whether the religious context—faith-based education is a good example—is a welcome addition to our understanding and practice of life in society generally. How do religious beliefs, practice, and values enliven and enrich our appreciation of what it means to be human and how to conduct our lives in society? That is an important concern and challenge.32 Turning now specifically to faith-based higher education, I should like to suggest that this religious context which provides a distinctive vision and mission is its ethos. But first, given that this word is used in various ways, we need to clarify what is meant by it here and distinguish it

Commissioner for Human Rights, used the phrase “rainbow community” to describe the international community hoped for by Nelson Mandela when she was commenting on his passing away, RTE1 radio, Dec., 6, 2013. 31 See Gabriella Puztai (ed.) Religion and Higher Education in Central and Eastern Europe, op. cit. See also, Sjur Bergan, Not By Bread Alone (Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, 2011) which sets out and discusses the issues and challenges facing higher education in Europe. 32 This is the main concern of Part II of this book insofar as the essays in that section discuss the significance of the Christian message.

208

Chapter Eleven

from how Aristotle originally employed it in his work, Rhetoric.33 Ethos, understood today as a sociological term is “the fundamental character or spirit of culture, the underlying sentiment that informs the beliefs, customs or practices of a group or society, the dominant assumptions of a people or period”. To a certain extent, the mission statement of an institution or organization is intended to capture and articulate its ethos. In a way, ethos is what gives a group its identity. Although ethos may not be tangible in the way buildings, institutions and outward manifestations are, it should be experienced and lived, and not just proclaimed. As it has been said in another context, it is “not taught but caught”. This is not of course to exclude serious reflection on what it means and how it applies to individual cases. In the context of the faith-based university, college or institute, it is important to bear in mind in this philosophical consideration that ethos refers to the general rather than to the specifics. It is first of all about clarifying, deepening and strengthening the vision that makes the institution distinctive. It is that vision that acts as the gauge and guide to what it does. When that vision is translated into its mission by the faith-based institution it will have to attend to the specific demands and challenges in the light of that vision. The problem is that the complexity of the concrete situation makes that task truly demanding. But the main thing to remember is that one should not confuse particular practices, strategies and beliefs, just because they are entrenched or long-held, as necessarily reflecting the vision in the changing times and circumstances. They have always to be assessed and re-assessed against the religious vision.34 The religious ethos of a faith-based higher education is its greatest asset. To some extent it also defines its status and its role. Thus, faithbased educational institutions need to set out a certain educational programme that is meant to abide by, develop and advance that ethos taking into account the four focus areas cited earlier. Given the developments in contemporary society discussed in this essay, the task of providing a distinctive education to learners and of serving the larger community should be characterized by respect for, and care of, humanity and the whole of creation—given its view that these stand in a personal relationship with the Creator. Moreover, it should champion human concerns and values and oppose any dehumanization caused by machines and technology precisely because it gratefully acknowledges and participates in the work of the 33

In this work, Aristotle is more concerned with how ethos is one of three areas (the others are: pathos and logos) to be taken into account by speakers. See Chapter Nine: “The Christian Message at Journey’s End”. 34 See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”.

Developments in Contemporary Society and Faith-based Education

209

Creator that it believes in.35 In this area, the challenge is to co-operate with all those, irrespective of belief-system, who are working towards achieving this goal. Here is also where faith-based higher education can ensure that human concerns are not regarded as exclusive to humanists, atheists and secularists. It ought to convince others that its affirmation of transcendence is not a threat to, but a fuller development of, human nature. Alongside other alternative educational institutions, they should implement a value system that identifies and supports whatever is good in society and creation. Furthermore, faith-based education should facilitate, support and advance the formation of an international global community because it believes that all nations should stand in unison in promoting peaceful and harmonious co-existence since their relation to the Creator makes a community, and not just a society, of all of us.36 Implementing its ethos—by articulating, communicating and living in accordance with it—is the foremost challenge and issue for faith-based higher education.37 It has its own vision and mission to abide by. For Christian educational institutions, it includes the Christian message of love, hope and redemption. If it is successful in meeting the challenge, it will have made an important contribution to, and will have justified its presence in, the secularized, mechanized, technological and globalized society that we live in today.

35

Cf. Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia. See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”. 37 Faith-based higher education has a particular challenge here with the emergence of digital learning world-wide. Given its ethos and the traditional campus environment which helps to promote it, how can it support and utilize such learning? How can its powers help to form an international community? How would one communicate and develop values which are established through more personal contacts? On this point, it would be instructive to learn from the experience of those who have implemented digital learning in their educational task. Cf. Tamar Levin, “Setbacks force new look at mass web courses,” International New York Times, Tuesday, December 12, 2013. The appeal of computer–based learning, such as gamification, has implications for education, too. How can it be harnessed to further the goals of faith-based education as well as education generally? See “Gamification is how we’ll live—and work—in the future,” The Measure of Man GMA News-on-line, January 27, 2014. 36

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Looking Back In this book, we focused on and examined the Christian message. While acknowledging at the outset that this message is much richer and more substantial than the book’s focus on love, hope and redemption, it set its sights on these with the aim of laying out possible points of encounter between those who take that message to heart and those who deny its importance. It is the book’s claim that the Christian message as vision and mission addresses a universal human need, and that therefore philosophical considerations can contribute to a discussion of its significance for all. The Christian message may be religious in its origins but its relevance extends much further and wider. In fact, the stance taken in this work— which was pursued in the various essays—is that it has something worthwhile to contribute to our understanding of humanity itself, irrespective of religious affiliation or none on anyone’s part. For that reason the essays drew on general human experience and on the insights of various philosophers, among others, from diverse backgrounds in the discussions of the issues. After all, there is a large amount of commonality in this area despite distinctive perspectives. There is a long tradition of philosophical thinking on religious faith. The essays in Part I examined that tradition and the practice of turning to philosophy in discussing matters of human interest as well as those of religious concern. There does appear, contrary to what a number of critics say, to be a synergy between faith and reason. The main purpose of this part of the book, in addition to defending that connection between reason and faith, was to pave the way towards a philosophical consideration of aspects of the Christian message. This route was then pursued by the essays in Part II which in turn centred the discussions on the significance of the Christian message of love, hope and redemption. In concentrating on these three areas, the essays offered a philosophical understanding of the Christian message as it impacts on human life, suggesting that it could be a map to guide us as we undertake our respective journeys in life and a pass as we head towards our final destination. At the same time, it made clear the implications of the Christian vision and mission contained in the Christian message insofar as it is not like any other message one receives in life.

212

Concluding Remarks

Giving witness to it—being a socius, as was suggested— assumes and expects a certain amount of well-informed responsiveness. Part III then singled out an area, i.e. education, where the implementation of the Christian message requires close attention to specific challenges and particular issues in the light of its vision. Like philosophizing and religiosity, education was explained and defended as opening oneself to a vision and even to transcendence. In its mission it has a specific contribution to make.1 In the various discussions of the Christian message in this book, one specific line of thought was suggested and followed; namely, the argument that the desire and search for love, hope and redemption is imbedded in each and every human being. As human beings, irrespective of particular differences, we all need love, want to hope, and seek fulfilment or redemption.2 Therefore, sharing the Christian message with others is more a matter of enabling them in their humanity to recognize, actualize and develop this reality rather than of simply bringing the Christian message to them as if it were something completely new and totally alien to their respective human experience.3 The challenge, thus, for those who already subscribe to the Christian vision, in addition to reflecting on it constantly to guarantee authenticity, is to examine attentively how it translates into mission as it encounters particular needs and circumstances. The aim, it has been proposed, is to enable others to make what is implicit explicit, what is potential actual, and what is abstract concrete.4

1

A particularly useful discussion of transcendence in the writings of various philosophers is by Fergus Kerr, Immortal Longings: Versions of Transcending Humanity (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1977). 2 One will also note a similar message of love, hope and fulfillment in the teachings of other wise men, like Confucius. 3 I have been struck by how the Christian message came into being: with the birth of the baby Jesus. He was one of us: starting with his birth; living through childhood and adulthood; and suffering the fate of all humans, death. The philosophical observation made regarding the implicit presence of the message of love, hope and redemption in humanity itself, asserted in the text, is meant to intertwine with what is described as “Christology from below”, rather than “from above”. It also aligns itself with Karl Rahner’s, in contrast to Karl Barth’s, methodological thinking in their respective theologies. 4 In this respect, see paragraph 32 of Pope Francis’s encyclical letter, Lumen Fidei (29 June 2013): “Once we discover the full light of Christ’s love, we realize that each of the loves in our own lives had always contained a ray of that light, and we understand its ultimate destination. That fact that our human loves contain that ray of light also helps us to see how all love is meant to share in the complete self-gift of the Son of God for our sake. In this circular movement, the light of faith illu-

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

213

Lighting the Way The Christian message, the subject of this book, has had a long and varied history. It is a message that has changed the world tremendously and has transformed lives. One can even claim further that society in general as well as individual lives have benefitted from it; and it has, in turn, motivated these to contribute to yet further improvements. Regrettably, there have also been times when one would seriously doubt whether its interpretation and its practice really reflected what its original intention was, such is the awfulness of acts committed in its name. Again, even a cursory glance at history would attest to that. The philosophical considerations discussed in these essays are not intended to convince readers of the truth or the superiority of the Christian message.5 This work, therefore, is not an apologia on behalf of the Christian faith. After all, there is much more to the meaning and import of this challenge than is possible in a few pages of philosophizing. There is also the difficult task of ascertaining how best to share it with others, even if such a stage is the expected one, as one moves from vision to mission. To fulfil that task would require detailed and competent knowledge of concrete situations. This book, however, is an invitation both to those who are already inspired by, and who live according to, that specific message and to those who are critical of, or even oppose, it. They are urged to take more than a second look at the Christian message of love, hope and redemption. In examining its underpinnings this work hopes to pave the way towards some understanding of this particular message as, to a great extent, “lighting the way”. The invitation extends differently but correlatively to the two groups. For the second of these two groups, taking a second look involves coming to grips with the teachings of that message and their application to humanity. After all, as has been argued throughout the various essays, the message of love, hope and redemption is fundamentally about human living. The claim that the Christian message addresses fundamental human needs should incentivize them to scrutinize it more fully rather than simply reject it because of its origins. For the first group—the invitation is also a challenge to them—it entails reflecting more profoundly on the meaning of that message and, more crucially, living by it. In the end, “lighting the way” is not merely a matter of pointing the way to others. It is not simply indicating what it involves. More importantly, “lighting the mines all our human relationships, which can then be lived in union with the gentle love.” 5 It is definitely not a matter of “showing it off” or “showcasing it”, as it were.

214

Concluding Remarks

way” is exemplifying it to the extent that the message is seen as truly credible and liveable. Whether the Christian version of the message of love, hope and redemption can indeed “light up the way” is both a continuous challenge and an urgent task.

Moving On At the start of this book, it was noted that a significant development in today’s society has been the proliferation of messages—coming in various guises and from all sorts of sources. In fact, if one were to judge by what is happening in one’s surroundings, one would be inclined to believe that many individuals seem to think that the day is to be spent, from the time they wake up to the time they retire, being immersed in sending, sharing and reading messages! Being “glued to the TV set” used to be a common description of how some passed their time, but now being “absorbed in all kinds of messaging gadgets” or “switched on to social media and switched off from one’s surroundings” would be more appropriate. Such a situation unfortunately leads to passivity on the part of many, replacing real life and genuine action. In such a setting, one could indeed ask: What role does the Christian message have? How can it support us as we journey in life? Taking these questions as important considerations for all of us today, this book attempts to provide an answer by singling out the emphasis on love, hope and redemption and discussing the significance of that message. As we look around us and listen to the news stories today from various sources, we could indeed be left wondering whether a message of love, hope and redemption is one that all of us ought to heed—rather urgently. There is so much hatred, so much despair and so much emptiness.6 At the same time, however, we must also notice that love is present, hope is alive, and much success is evident. In some instances, there are grounds for some guarded optimism, and even some hope. Indeed, a positive side to all the messaging that is taking place around is to draw our attention to all of these situations. Moreover, in some respects it has even made us much more sensitive to the lacuna as well as to the fullness in people’s lives and in the world generally. If we value our humanity, if we want to get along together in society, and as we move on in life’s journey, we real6 In her article “Feeling Lone? You’re not Alone,” Jennifer O’Connell writes that “loneliness is twice as deadly as obesity, more dangerous than smoking 15 cigarettes a day, and surprisingly common. “ She cites sources which indicate that loneliness has a negative effect on one’s health and well-being. The Irish Times (Saturday, January 7, 2017).

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

215

ly ought to probe much more deeply into what is entailed by the human need for love, hope and fulfilment—and even more crucially, into how to meet it.7 The essays in this book hope to contribute to that crucial task. And in this context, and in such a world as ours today, we need to be reminded that the Christian message is not just a series of tweets, a trail of Facebook entries, a thread of text messages, a recording of phone messages or a stock of YouTube transmissions.8 In great contrast, the Christian message is an enlightening vision and a challenging mission. It has to be lived. For this reason, it does deserve our closer and continued consideration—as this book has attempted to engage in—of its significance.

7

See Chapter III: “Love and its Disintegration in Contemporary Western Society” and Chapter IV: “The Practice of Love” in Eric Fromm, The Art of Loving (London: Unwin Books, 1972), pp. 62-95. 8 These days one is furthermore exposed to messages somehow reminiscent of the world in George Orwell’s 1984 in which Newspeak communication dominated the scene. Presently, there are more and more incentives to store pieces of information to already accumulated data for various uses. See, “Creating a digital totalitarian state,” which describes how the supply of big data is providing Chinese rulers new ways to monitor and control citizens, The Economist, (Dec. 17th-23rd 2016), pp. 2023.

APPENDIX PROCESS THOUGHT AS CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK: A PHILOSOPHICAL ODYSSEY

Introduction This essay consists of two parts, written on different occasions. Part I goes back to the early stage of my career. It was an invited paper presented at the International Symposium on Process Thought, organized by the Japan Society for Process Thought, held at Musashi University, Tokyo, Japan, on November 3, 1989. The theme was “Process Thought: What does it Mean to Me?” Part II was composed, as a follow-up to that paper, on the occasion of the publication of a special issue of DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, several years after the first part of this essay had been published.1 Despite the long interval in time between these two writings, however, there is a definite continuity in the development of the topic of this essay since both parts of the essay deal with my engagement with process philosophy with particular reference to my Filipino Christian background. It also traces and explains the strong influence of the two main thinkers closely associated with this school of thought, Alfred North Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne, on my own thinking on various areas and issues.2

1

I am grateful to the editor of DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, Fr. Randolf Flores, SVD for his invitation to share my reflections on my Filipino background together with the publication of my two other essays delivered as lectures to their academic communities. This essay was published in that journal, XLI, 1 & 2 (May & November 2016), pp. 65-82. 2 The contributors and reviewers of the book, edited by one of my first philosophy students, certainly noted this influence on my philosophical thinking, including on religious issues, cf. Brendan Sweetman (ed.), Philosophical Thinking and the Religious Context: Essays in Honour of Santiago Sia (N.Y. and London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2013, 2014). This is also evident in the essays in the present work.

218

Appendix

Part I3 An Epistemological Stance Since the theme of this symposium is the meaning of process thought for us, my paper will discuss the use that I have made of this mode of thinking to articulate and develop my views, especially in the philosophy of religion. In addition to focusing on specific areas in that discipline which have been of particular interest to me, this paper will also trace certain developments which led me to process thought. As the title suggests, I regard process thought as a “conceptual framework”. Hence, in attempting to address the theme of the symposium, my objective will be to explain the epistemological stance (in addition to the cultural background) underlying my interest in process thought, a standpoint which makes me regard it as a conceptual framework. Let me first of all elaborate on this epistemological stance by dealing with the question of whether there can be any development or innovation in religious beliefs and in their transmission. This is because I view that question as to some extent an epistemological issue.4 That is to say, much depends on one’s understanding of the relationship between human knowledge and revelation. Some people, for instance, regard religious beliefs as propositional truths revealed by God and merely received by humans. Being faithful to God’s revelations means accepting them in their entirety without any alteration whatsoever. In this case the transmission of beliefs involves safeguarding what had been handed down from the past. Orthodoxy is being able not only to repeat the same teachings but also to show their relevance to the new context.5 Other individuals, on the other hand, interpret religious beliefs as merely expressions of the human com3

The first part of this essay was originally published in Process Studies, XIX, 4 (Winter 1990), pp. 248-255. 4 In this section I merely want to show how there can be change and development in religious doctrines since I see the issue as being mainly an epistemological one. William Reiser, on the other hand, states that the problem of doctrinal development is not primarily an epistemological but an ontological one. Cf. his What are They Saying about Dogma? (N.Y.: Paulist Press, 1978), p. 61. It seems to me, however, that such a sharp distinction is unrealistic since one’s epistemological perspective determines one’s ontology. For a discussion of the metaphysical underpinning of this point of view, see Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. 5 This attitude is often described as fundamentalist. It can be found in both ordinary and sophisticated believers.

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

219

munity’s search for some kind of meaning, an accumulated source of information built up over the years as the community reflected on its life and activities. The development and the abandonment of certain beliefs are integral to this view of the status of religious beliefs.6 Such an interpretation is in stark contrast to the first one, inasmuch as it has a different epistemological basis. The position that I take lies midway between the two mentioned above. It acknowledges a human contribution in the formulation and transmission of religious beliefs while accepting the possibility of divine revelation.7 Because God’s communication is being received by humans, there will always be an element in the whole process of understanding God’s revelation that is open to change and development. Being faithful to God’s word involves, according to this view, an acceptance of innovation in, as well as the rejection of, certain forms of expressing God’s revelation. The transmission of religious beliefs is part of a process of reflecting on what has been revealed and a continuous search for more adequate ways of articulating that same revelation. This is because in formulating these doctrines there is the likelihood that certain elements do not (or may no longer) do justice to the original insights or experience. From this perspective then, orthodoxy could entail a more critical look at tradition since what has been passed on may be, in fact, a perversion of the original message.8 Just as there are different ways of expressing what someone has conveyed to us or of communicating a personal experience, so are there various ways of making God’s revelation known to others. Hence, the use of symbols, images, music and other non-verbal forms. But God’s revelation articulated in intellectual or conceptual forms usually results in religious doctrine. Doctrine, therefore, is a further stage in the process of grasping God’s revelation and hence, of religious beliefs. Because doctrine is an intellectual expression, it tends to be more systematized. It is making more explicit what one has held implicitly or what one has experienced.9 Ideal6

This view is usually associated with atheists and humanists, but some Christian theologians, e.g. Don Cupitt, appear to espouse it, too. 7 One of the controversial areas here is what revelation actually means. Does God’s revelation consist of propositional truths or is it a personal religious experience by the believer? While I am more inclined to favour the second view, the discussion in the text takes both into account. 8 See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”. 9 It will be obvious that the approach I am taking here is similar to that which has been described by Reiser as “content versus expression”, Reiser, op cit., pp. 20ff. One of his criticisms of such an approach is that it seems to assume a Platonic

220

Appendix

ly, doctrine should express adequately and faithfully what one grasps at the pre-conceptual stage. If it does, then one’s understanding of God’s revelation becomes richer and possibly more profound. But sometimes the process of conceptualization does not do justice to what one holds at the pre-conceptual level. Hence, there is a need to rethink and re-interpret the doctrine. This is why the attempt to express conceptually what we have received from, or experienced about, God is an on-going one.10 If the formation of doctrines is indeed a process, then one could identify certain stages. It seems useful to think of it as involving the stages of rejection, recognition, adjustment or adaptation, and acceptance. In this way it is possible to liken the efforts of developing our religious beliefs today to the work done by the early Christians who were faced with the task of systematizing their beliefs about God.11 One stage before arriving at a satisfactory formulation of doctrines is the rejection of alternatives. To some extent, it may be a matter of being clearer as to what something is not rather than what something is.12 In the case of the first Christians, they had the important challenge not only of formulating Christian doctrine which was faithful to what had been experienced by the believing community but also of weeding out doctrines which could not be considered part of the Christian experience. For example, they rejected the customary belief in gods since “god” was a severely debased coinage used to refer to popular religious cults of the day. When these Christians spoke of their God, they did not want their concept of God to be associated with the gods of popular religion.13 theory of knowing. However, as I hope the text will show, this is not necessarily so. 10 Cf. my “Charles Hartshorne on Describing God,” Modern Theology, III, 2 (January 1987), pp. 193-203. 11 It may also be possible to understand in this way what many young people and believers from different cultural backgrounds are experiencing when confronted with particular forms or expressions of religious beliefs with which they cannot identify. It is as true in our own societies as it is in mission territories. It is perhaps important to note that rejection of certain doctrinal beliefs does not necessarily mean abandonment of religiosity, but a quest for a different way of expressing it. See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”. 12 See Chapter Ten: “Seeing the Wood by Means of the Trees”. 13 My discussion of the use of philosophy by the first Christians draws heavily on Joseph Ratzinger, “The God of Faith and the God of the Fathers,” Introduction to Christianity (London: Burns & Oates), 1968 and on Maurice Wiles, The Christian Fathers (London: SCM Press, 1977). Ratzinger as Pope Benedict XVI refers to this encounter between Christian faith and Hellenistic thinking in his lecture titled “Faith, Reason and the University: Memories and Reflections” delivered on 12

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

221

Another stage is that of recognizing or becoming aware of the value of a particular conceptualization. Here there is partial acceptance, and some similarities are noted. This stage in the process of understanding God’s revelation reveals the reasons why the early Church opted in favour of a philosophical framework in its attempts to conceptualize its faithexperience. The early Church’s concept of God was very much shaped by the philosophical schools of the day, especially Platonism and Stoicism. The first Christians belonged to the Greco-Roman world and were concerned to speak to it. They wanted to convey the Christian message to their neighbours. Greek philosophy was an excellent medium. Moreover, they wanted to show the reasonableness of Christianity and the ability of Christian teachings to withstand a thorough examination by philosophy. Philosophy was then understood as the search for truth, critical of the mythical interpretation of reality. There was a parallel, therefore, between the philosophers’ task and their own. Both groups wanted to differentiate their beliefs about God from those of popular religions, which they regarded as superstitious. The early Christians, furthermore, found that philosophical categories helped them understand Christian revelation even more deeply than had been possible with biblical images. Philosophy met the need to achieve greater clarification of terms and ideas.14 But one does not simply take over a favoured formulation. There is need for adjustment or adaptation. One has to reshape what one has recognized as helpful. Thus, there is adaptation prior to adoption, of transformation before acceptance.15 Despite aligning itself with philosophy (thereby rejecting popular religion), the early Church did not completely identify its God with the God of the philosophers. The philosophers’ God, in spite of its acceptability as the ground of all being, did not have any religious significance. This God was absolute perfection and the culmination of one’s intellectual pursuit, but one could not pray to nor establish a personSeptember 2006 at the Aula Magna of the University of Regensburg, Germany: “Thus, despite the bitter conflict with those Hellenistic rulers who sought to accommodate it forcibly to the customs and idolatrous cult of the Greeks, biblical faith, in the Hellenistic period, encountered the best of Greek thought at a deep level, resulting in a mutual enrichment evident especially in the later wisdom literature.” 14 See Chapter Three: “Catholic Tradition and Philosophical Research”. 15 “Adaptation” is sometimes taken to mean that particular teachings are merely to be adapted to relevant cultural settings; for instance, re-interpreting Western thought from an Asian perspective. While there is room for taking such a step, one should not ignore the specific contribution made by traditional cultures, too, to the whole process of formulating Christian doctrines. See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”.

222

Appendix

al relationship with such a God. Thus, some transformation was called for. Whether this stage was satisfactorily crossed or not is, of course, debatable. One suspects that the present demand for more relevant and adequate doctrines of God harks back to this period in Christian history. The stage of acceptance of a particular formulation is really a further development. But it should not be regarded as a final stage if by that is meant that no improvement can be expected. As time goes by, certain expressions or formulations become irrelevant or even misleading. Thus, the search for newer formulations is in effect an attempt to recover what has been obscured. The dissatisfaction felt by some with the doctrinal formulations regarding God worked out by the early Church has led to calls for more appropriate and contemporary expressions of the same Christian experience of God. It will be observed then that the standpoint I take regards religious beliefs, including what we believe God to be, as likely to develop.16 This is because they are seen as the results of the continued efforts by human beings to find more relevant intellectual expressions of God’s revelation to them. There is, therefore, the serious challenge to meet the demands for more contemporary doctrinal formulations.17 At the same time, however, reference was made here to doctrine doing, or failing to do, justice to God’s revelation. The position sketched above respects the autonomy of revelation irrespective of whether this is understood as propositional truths or personal and communal experiences. Furthermore, revelation constitutes the more fundamental criterion of accepting or discarding different formulations or expressions. How it is so is, of course, a complex matter, especially given the difficulty of defining what revelation itself is.18 But there are guidelines which can be helpful in our attempts to find the limits of doctrinal innovation. This is because the search for a satisfactory formulation of religious doctrines, while very much a personal matter,

16

See Chapter Two: “Religion in Human Life and Thought”. This is also true of the Christian message, the topic of this book. 17 The concept of “contemporariness” is an elusive one. Nevertheless, in this respect we ought to pay particular attention to present-day cultural and social issues when we formulate religious doctrine today (such as the concerns being brought to our attention by liberation theologians and Third-World theologians). Nor should we overlook the key role played by interreligious dialogue and by gender differences. 18 See Chapter Seven: “From Vision to Mission with PASS for Life”.

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

223

occurs within a specific context.19 That context is the religious community to which we belong. Insofar as that community has a history, we can and should constantly consult it. This is why scriptures occupy an important place in every religious community: they represent early and fundamental expressions of that community’s faith-experience.20 In fact, many religious believers regard scriptures as the embodiment of God’s disclosure to them or to their founder. Moreover, the community’s life and practice over the years have led to certain traditions. These represent that community’s witness to the revelation that it has received. Thus, in formulating religious doctrines we must always consider whether that community’s witness is being honoured and continued.21

A Cultural Experience In the preceding section my attempt to explain the epistemological viewpoint which leads me to regard process thought as a conceptual framework centred on the question of whether there can be development in religious beliefs. I have argued that the answer to that question depends on one’s epistemological standpoint. Accordingly, I have outlined a position which views development as integral to a particular way of interpreting the status of religious beliefs and have illustrated it with the way we image God. It is this epistemological standpoint that led me in search of more adequate conceptual frameworks to understand my experience as a Filipino Christian. Let me now say something about that search. One of the difficulties encountered by many young Filipinos who had been trained in Western classical philosophy (which at that time was probably the only kind of philosophical training that was available in the Philippines) was the inadequacy of such a mode of thinking to articulate fully our experience as an Asian people. For despite our Western-type formal education, we continued to feel, think and behave in a typically non-Western way. At the same time, however, our exposure for several centuries to Western culture (particularly Spain and the USA) made us “un-Asian” in a number of ways. There is some truth in the claim that Filipino culture is much closer to 19 Although I have identified the context to be the religious community, it can also be said that the knowing process itself is contextualized. See Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”. 20 Biblical hermeneutics has rightly alerted us to the problems involved in biblical interpretation. In turning to the Bible for doctrine, therefore, we should have due regard for the findings of biblical scholarship. 21 See Chapter Eight: “Giving Witness to the Christian Message as SOCIUS”.

224

Appendix

Spanish (and American) culture, than it is to Japanese, Chinese or Indian cultures. “Split-level Christianity” had serious negative consequences for one’s life as a Filipino Christian. With Filipino nationalistic spirit growing among the students and professors of the 1960s, the issue of finding our identity as an Asian people deeply influenced by some Western ways of life became very important. Fortunately, some Filipino philosophers and theologians, along with historians, artists and many others, turned to the development of what was considered “Filipino experience”. In other words, we wanted to be able to articulate that experience in a way that did justice to it. For some of these Filipino philosophers and theologians, the classical mould somehow did not fit their experience. Hence, the search for alternative ones became a pressing task. But in a way that same search brought up more problems than solutions. Does one turn to native modes of thinking or to other Western conceptualities (that is to say, other than the classical one)? The first option had the advantage of integrating more realistically concrete experience and intellectual expression, unhindered by foreign categories. That is certainly what many chose to adopt, resulting in the development of Filipino philosophy and theology. But the disadvantage in this case is the difficulty of establishing dialogue with non-Filipinos, who understandably would not be familiar with the intricacies of Filipino culture. Another option was to look for a different Western conceptuality which, despite being removed from our native modes of thinking, would at least be more successful than the classical one that we had been educated in. But which one? Existentialism? Linguistic analysis? Such an option, however, would be immediately open to the criticism that one was trying “to look at Filipino experiences through Western spectacles”. But that weakness could be compensated for by the possibility of dialoguing with non-Filipinos. Besides, there was the sneaking suspicion that one would not be taken seriously by Western counterparts unless one could demonstrate competence in Western modes of thought.22 Hence, some continued their education in Western universities but kept alive the hope of being able to contribute to the efforts of articulating our Filipino identity.23 To what extent either group has been 22

In this task the Japanese philosopher Nishida Kitaro serves as a model for some of us (for the reason that I have already given) since, in reflecting on Japanese culture, he turned to Western conceptualities to enable a dialogue between the two to take place. 23 In Philippine history two of our national heroes stand out as illustration of these two options: Jose Rizal was an outstanding thinker who had been trained in the West while Emilio Jacinto, who remained in the Philippines, was the brain behind

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

225

successful remains to be seen. Unfortunately, political and economic considerations have overshadowed the more cultural ones.24 What is clear, however, is that more work needs to be done—and in my opinion, by both groups.25

In Search of an Adequate Conceptuality That search for more adequate ways of understanding our experiences, including Filipino Christianity, led to my involvement with process philosophy. As a doctoral student in Ireland, I came across the work of Charles Hartshorne while I was exploring suitable research topics. I had become interested in the philosophy of religion, particularly in ways of thinking about God. My initial reaction to Hartshorne’s ideas was one of excitement since my classical theistic background enabled me to understand what he was criticizing (and to identify with some of his criticisms).26 But what was more intriguing was that Hartshorne’s philosophy offered a different way of understanding one’s experience. Was it a more suitable manner of expressing what Filipinos experience God to be? The more I read his writings, the more I could see the gap between experience and conceptuality (as described earlier on) and between my Asian background and my Western education narrowing. My preliminary research into Hartshorne’s concept of God resulted in an article published in The Clergy Review which was a response to a criticism of him by Brian Davies, a British Thomist scholar.27 It appeared to me that Hartshorne’s critics failed to see that his claims about God had to be seen within the overall context of his metaphysics. As I read further into Hartshorne’s philosophy, I became convinced that many of his critics the Katipunan movement. See Teodoro Agoncillo and Milagros Guerrero, History of the Filipino People (Quezon City: Malaya Books, 1970). In my opinion, both were important in the development of Filipino consciousness. 24 This was the case during the period when this part of the essay was written. 25 It is also gratifying to note the growing interest among scholars in the Philippines to develop a truly indigenous Filipino philosophy. 26 Hartshorne’s dialogue partner was classical theism in which I had been trained while Whitehead’s philosophy engages more with, and reacts to, Hume’s empiricism. 27 Another British Thomist, Illtyd Trethowan, replied to my article. The debate which originally appeared in The Clergy Review was published in S. Sia (ed.), Process Theology and the Christian Doctrine of God (Petersham: St. Bede’s Publications, 1986). To the three essays was added Hartshorne’s response to the debate. Essays by John Cobb, Jan van der Veken, Joseph Bracken and John O’Donnell were also included.

226

Appendix

in Britain and elsewhere needed to see the interconnectedness of his ideas. In other words, there was an overall picture behind the details, many of which could only be appreciated if one took the trouble of reading several of Hartshorne’s writings. It was this concern to present Hartshorne’s concept of God systematically that led to the publication of my first book, God in Process Thought.28 Hartshorne, whom I had met at Leuven where he was a guest Professor, read the entire manuscript, made corrections and offered suggestions for improvement.29 He also graciously accepted my invitation to write a Postscript. In this book I had decided not to include my own criticisms of him (which have since been published in separate articles). As John Cobb correctly noted in his review of the book, my aim in that book was to correct the many misinterpretations of Hartshorne that I had come across in my research rather than to provide a critical discussion.30 It seemed to me that too many writers became critical too quickly without giving themselves time to first understand someone else’s claims. Besides, at that time I was already planning another book which would contain critical essays on Hartshorne’s concept of God by philosophers and theologians from diverse backgrounds and different countries. The response I received from those invited to participate in the planned volume on Hartshorne’s concept of God was most encouraging. This collection of essays, Charles Hartshorne’s Concept of God: Philosophical and Theological Responses,31 contains essays written from the perspectives of black theology (Theodore Walker), feminist theology (Sheila Greeve Davaney), Indian thought (Arabinda Basu), Thomism (W. Norris Clarke), Buddhism (John Ishihara) and Judaism (William E. Kaufman). Other essays in the collection compare and contrast Hartshorne’s theism with Latin American liberation theology (Peter C. Phan), with phenomenology and Buddhism (Hiroshi Endo), and with European philosophy (André Cloots and Jan van der Veken). One essay (by Randall Morris) focuses on Hartshorne’s political thought, another (by Piotr Gutowski) on his conception of theology, and a third essay (by David Pailin) on his contributions to philosophy of religion and philosophical theology. One article 28

God in Process Thought: a Study in Charles Hartshorne’s Concept of God with a Postscript by Charles Hartshorne (Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff, 1985). 29 See Appendix B: “Notes on Hartshorne,” in my Religion, Reason and God: Essays in the Philosophies of Charles Hartshorne and A.N. Whitehead (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2004), pp. 187-193. 30 John Cobb, “Review of Santiago Sia, God in Process Thought”, Modern Theology, III, 1 (1986). 31 (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989)

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

227

(by Martin McNamara) examines some of the biblical evidence for process thought, while yet another (by Joseph Bracken) deals with Hartshorne’s interpretation of the God-world relationship and assesses that relationship with particular reference to the doctrine of the Trinity. Unfortunately, a Muslim representative was unable to finish his contribution in time for publication in this collection. Charles Hartshorne generously accepted the invitation to respond to each of these essays, which he did at length. The diversity of countries, perspectives, and cultures represented by the fourteen contributors showed tremendous interest in Hartshorne’s neoclassical concept of God. While I have been generally in agreement with Hartshorne’s philosophy of religion, I have had certain reservations about parts of it. In an article, “Charles Hartshorne on Describing God”32 I argued that while we can appreciate Hartshorne’s reasons for wanting to talk about God in a positive and literal manner, there are certain problematic areas in Hartshorne’s own God-talk. In another article, “Suffering and Creativity”,33 I tried to evaluate Hartshorne’s explanation of the existence of evil. Another area where I have had some difficulties with Hartshorne’s philosophy is his interpretation of human immortality in terms of “being remembered by God”. I also tried to show34 that Hartshorne’s version of human immortality does not satisfy the search for ultimate meaning of human life. Moreover, I argue that despite Hartshorne’s own claims, his metaphysics can be shown to be open to the possibility of post-mortem immortality. While reading Hartshorne’s writings, I also became acquainted with the works of other process thinkers like Whitehead, Cobb, Ogden, Ford, Griffin and Pittinger. The more I read them, the more their ideas stimulated me. Furthermore, process thought has probably become the main conceptuality that is enabling me to develop my own views. The initial interest in looking for more suitable conceptualities to express our Filipino Christian experience remains and continues to challenge me.

32

Modern Theology, III, 2 (January 1987), pp. 193-203. Ultimate Reality and Meaning, XII, 3 (September1989), pp. 210-220. 34 Paper prepared for the “Sixth Biennial Meeting of the International Society for the Study of Human Ideas on Ultimate Reality and Meaning”, Toronto, Canada, 21-24 August 1991 and published as “Is Human Existence in Itself Not of Ultimate Significance?” Ultimate Reality and Meaning (Canada), XVI. 1-2 (March-June 1993), pp. 139-141. See also my “Charles Hartshorne’s Interpretation of Human Immortality,” Bijdragen: Tijdschrift voor Filosofie en Theologie/Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie/International Journal of Philosophy and Theology, LIV (1993), pp. 254-270. 33

228

Appendix

Part II In Retrospect Several years later as I reflect on the continuing influence of process thought on my own thinking I realize that that initial encounter as a young doctoral student with this metaphysical vision of reality certainly provided me with much inspiration and a firm foundation. As is to be expected, my philosophical interests have broadened much further than the initial search for a more adequate conceptuality to articulate my experience as a Filipino Christian on specific areas. Nevertheless, that interest has constantly remained in the background. In more recent times, it has re-appeared in a rather surprising manner. In between those times, my philosophical reflections in various areas definitely benefitted from the strong and persistent influence of Charles Hartshorne and, to some extent, Alfred North Whitehead. As I focused on issues in the philosophy of religion I concentrated on their philosophy not just because it was reminding me of my own experience shaped by my cultural background but also, and more importantly so, their metaphysical vision and its logical development made more sense to me despite some lingering reservations on my part. This situation resulted in a number of essays which were then collected under the title, Religion, Reason and God: Essays in the Philosophies of Charles Hartshorne and A.N. Whitehead. The essays deal with a number of traditional issues in the philosophy of religion such as God-talk, the existence of evil, the idea of immortality, concepts of God and others. This collection had been preceded by the book which focused on the problem of evil which drew on Hartshorne’s explanation of the existence of evil and his concept of a sympathetic and suffering God.35 This earlier work, however, which took as a starting point the experience of suffering (rather than the traditional concept of an all-good and almighty God as is done in a theodicy) pursues the question of what this concrete experience can disclose to us about God; that is to say, how in the light of the reality of suffering we can meaningfully conceive God to be. Hartshorne’s meta35 This work, which has been co-written with Marian F. Sia, deals with the question: What kind of God can we continue to believe in despite the reality of so much suffering? It examines the theoretical issues (regarding God) which are implicit in our practical responses to God. Cf. From Suffering to God: Examining our Images of God in the Light of Suffering (N.Y.: St. Martin’s Press/ Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1994). Hartshorne, having read the entire manuscript, provided favourable comments.

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

229

physics, it seemed to me, can provide a more credible way of thinking about God, not so much by way of a solution to the problem of evil, but as a sensible depiction of a truly caring God. This book also tries to make the case for preserving what Hartshorne would consider “the concrete” experience of suffering. For this reason, it additionally turns to various experiences of suffering, listens to the voices of literary writers and learns from the insights of liberation theologians. The methodology pursued here is an illustration and development of the epistemological stance described earlier in Part I of this essay.

Concrete Experience and Methodology It was this emphasis on the concreteness of experience as the basis of one’s philosophical reflections that enabled me to appreciate even more my cultural heritage as a Filipino, even if it did not always come to the foreground in my philosophical thinking. I did not want to succumb to what was then regarded in the Philippines as “split-level Christianity” mentioned earlier or accept a dichotomy between one’s basic experience and one’s speculative thinking. Whitehead’s metaphor of the flight of the airplane (as starting from the ground before it zooms up into the rarefied atmosphere and lands back on the ground) was fascinating. I wanted to “stay grounded”, so to speak, even when engaged in more abstract philosophical speculation. Here the lines from Yeats’s poem were particularly relevant to me: “I must lie down where all the ladders start,/In the foul ragand-bone shop of the heart”. Hartshorne’s distinction between the abstract and the concrete pointed to me a singularly appropriate direction in my search for an adequate conceptuality that would take into account my experience as a Filipino Christian. The link between concrete experience and abstract conceptuality was seriously noted and included. In another essay I make the distinction between “philosophizing” and “philosophy”.36 Philosophizing is, as explained in that essay, what we as humans are engaged in as we live out our lives in various contexts. As far as I am concerned, that included paying attention to, rather than ignoring, my experience as a Filipino Christian—the way we live it. For me it is an important “source” of my reflections. Process thought, alongside many others, turned out to be my primary “resource” insofar as its conceptual tools equipped me to analyze, clarify and develop my experience. The methodological principle

36

See Chapter One: “Philosophizing, Philosophy and the Religious Context”.

230

Appendix

underpinning the development of the subject-matter of this essay is described more fully in my essay “Concretising Concrete Experience”37 Hartshorne’s distinction between the concrete and the abstract was also crucial in enabling me to work out a distinction between two meanings of “context”. Using Hartshorne’s explanation of concreteness as a description of the particularity or specificity of reality and his explanation of the abstract side to reality, I have maintained the importance of taking into account both the “specific context” (in the sense that one needs to consider the particular context of whatever it is that we want to understand) and the “general context” (the wider picture, as it were) to ensure a proper understanding. I refer to, discuss and illustrate this distinction between the two senses of “context” in different publications but more fully in my books, Philosophy in Context38 and Ethical Contexts and Theoretical Issues39. In the first book I show how important fundamental issues which need to be addressed arise as we probe into the concrete concerns of various academic disciplines. In the second work, I focus on ethics and ethical thinking. Again, rather than start (which is the norm in applied ethics) with an ethical theory which is applied to various areas, in the first part of this book I examine instead various contexts in which ethical issues arise. In the second part, I then work out a way of thinking about these issues, having been informed by the ethical contexts, as one grapples with the theoretical issues involved. In this part of the book I discuss a number of ethical theories, like R.M. Hare’s prescriptivism, Aristotle’s and Confucius’s ethical theories, Aquinas’ natural-law theory, Buber’s philosophy of dialogue, and others but end up with developing the metaphysics of Whitehead and Hartshorne and showing it to be a more appropriate foundation for ethical thinking today. While process thought was serving my purposes of turning to a suitable conceptuality to articulate and develop my Filipino experience, there was still the challenge as to how to understand philosophically my concrete experience itself. This is where my earlier studies in existentialism were of particular advantage. I had written my M.A. thesis on Martin Buber’s philosophy of dialogue. To borrow his own description, Buber opened up a vista for me so that I could look at reality myself. Insisting that all he was doing was pointing the way for his readers, this Jewish thinker enabled me to see and appreciate what being human, with all its 37

Cf. Religion, Reason and God, op. cit. pp. 141-158. Philosophy in Context: Dharma Endowment Lectures No. 9 (Bangalore: Dharmaram Publications, 2006). 39 Ethical Issues and Theoretical Issues: Essays in Ethical Thinking (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2010). 38

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

231

challenges, means. His descriptive philosophy resonated with my own experiences. I have revived that initial exposure to his insights on more than one occasion, but particularly in my essay “Living Fully, Living Responsibly: Buber’s Philosophy of Dialogue”40 For me, Buber’s insights were an expansion of how Filipinos, in various modes and considerations, view life: as essentially a relatedness. Buber also taught me what today we refer to, in more sophisticated language, as the connectedness of life and reality—a point of view that finds philosophical grounding in process thought.41 Preserving the concreteness of lived experience as one communicates it created a further challenge. After all, in articulating it in philosophical categories, one runs the risk of engaging in rather unfamiliar terminology and abstract discussions. This is understandable and is to be expected, given the nature of philosophical thinking. Accordingly, I turned to poets and other literary writers. Time and time again I would hear particular poets and literary authors voicing in more appealing language and providing the “specific context” what philosophers were discussing in more abstract and technical terminology. It seemed to me that literature captures and expresses our concrete experiences more successfully, an articulation which can then be developed more fully by philosophical thinking.42 Following this more recent interest and methodology resulted in the collaborative work (with Marian F. Sia) From Suffering to God and in From Question to Quest: Literary-Philosophical Enquiries into the Challenges of Life.43

Further Methodological Considerations The attempt to understand one’s concrete experience calls for a certain strategy. Again this is to be expected. In this process I found a real 40

Ibid. pp. 141-161. See Chapter Three: “Distinct, not Separate: a Critique of Dualistic Thinking of and in Society,” and Chapter Five: “The Individual and Society: a Philosophical Conception of the Self,” in my Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society, Foreword by Former President of Ireland Mary McAleese (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014, 2015), pp. 45-64, pp. 87-111. 42 A quotation that we find amusing but provocative, given our respective academic interests, is: “Logic will get you from A to B, but imagination will take you everywhere”. 43 From Question to Quest: Literary-Philosophical Enquiries into the Challenges of Life, Foreword by Prof. David Jasper and Message from President Mary McAleese (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2011). 41

232

Appendix

link between Filipino ways of thinking and the logic developed by Hartshorne which he refers to as a logic of ultimate contrasts.44 Intuitively, I had already rejected the either-or patterns of thought prevalent in much Western thinking. After all, the Filipino way of thinking, akin to much Asian and African views of reality, is much more holistic and inclusive. However, it was not merely a matter of casting aside one’s training in the logic developed in Western philosophy—there is much in it, after all, that serves one’s purpose in pursuing the truth—but of assessing the extent to which Hartshorne’s methodological principles facilitated a better grasp of one’s experience and a clearer way of structuring it so that it becomes much more comprehensible. Of particular interest to me in this instance was Hartshorne’s critique of David Hume’s principle that what is distinguishable is separable, a principle that seems to me has led to much dichotomizing and conflict. What was an intuition on my part, partially nurtured by Buber’s way of thinking, became a more developed argument with much help from Hartshorne.45 Methodological concerns made me wonder whether the concreteness of experience could be better served by a different mode of articulating and developing one’s patterns of thought. I had already utilized the literary writings of others and had argued, having been prompted and encouraged by Whitehead’s philosophy, for the importance of seeing a link between literature and philosophy. 46 As it turned out, an academic sojourn in Leuven, Belgium became the stimulus—and the challenge—to engage in a more narrative presentation of philosophical insights. Having completed our research on our scholarly book on the problem of evil, Marian and I somehow felt that there was something about the quest for knowledge by the various scholars in that academically-charged university town that we wanted to “capture” in written form. This sentiment led to the writing of our first novel which we titled The Fountain Arethuse, this title being based on the Fonske then at the centre of Leuven and by John Milton’s

44 Charles Hartshorne, “A Logic of Ultimate Contrasts” in his Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method (Lanham: University Press of America, 1983), pp. 99130. There are different editions of this book. Various chapters in the book develop other features of this logic. 45 See Part One of my Society in its Challenges, op cit., particularly Chapter Three: “Distinct, not Separate: a Critique of Dualistic Thinking in and of Society,” pp. 4565. 46 “Literature and Philosophy: a Whiteheadian Nexus,” in Darren J..N. Middleton (ed.), God, Literature and Process Thought (Ashgate, 2002) and reprinted in From Question to Quest, op. cit., pp. 187-201.

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

233

reference to the Arethusa of the muses in ancient Greece in his poem “Lycidas”.47 The response and reviews from various quarters, including by scholars, encouraged us to follow that alternative route in the communication of philosophical insights.48 We have since then written a trilogy of similarlyoriented books because we wanted to probe into philosophical themes in a more narrative way. The first one, Those Distant Shores, narrates the lifejourneys of three boyhood friends from the Philippines and that of a young man from Spain as they set out to fulfill their dreams in life. It deals with the experience of human restlessness and with the concept of transcendence. The second book, called That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom, focuses on another fundamental craving of human beings. In keeping with their rational nature, they—illustrated by the fictional academic scholars from various countries—search for whatever will bring them closer to wisdom. The third book, This Deep Pierian Spring, is an account of the main character’s quest for meaning, following Alexander Pope’s advice to drink deeply from the Pierian spring, as he reflects on an effective response to the tragedy in the Philippines brought about by the super-typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda. In these narratives the reader will quickly detect strong traces of process philosophical thinking in the dialogues and the reflections of some of the fictional characters while the plots are driven by their respective interests and goals. Once again, this set of writings enabled me to come to grips, imaginatively as well as reflectively, with my Filipino experience (as well as with experiences gained in other settings and countries).49

47

Originally published by the Book Guild in 1997, this novel has been republished as That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom, op. cit. 48 A particularly insightful reading and development of the novel is provided by Aliman Sears in his “Suffering and Surrender in the Midst of Persuasion,” Daren Middleton (ed.), God, Literature and Process Thought, op. cit. and reprinted in From Question to Quest, op. cit., pp. 203-233. 49 See the fictional characters of Rodrigo, Juan, and Pepe in Those Distant Shores: a Narrative of Human Restlessness (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015) and in This Deep Pierian Spring: an Account of the Human Quest for Meaning (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing: 2016, 2017), Fr Fuentes and Jose in That Elusive Fountain of Wisdom: a Tale of the Human Search for Knowledge (Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015) and in This Deep Pierian Spring, op. cit, as they struggle in their personal journeys in life with their Filipino identity and with the concerns of the Filipino people. These books are set mainly in the Philippines and elsewhere. For a more scholarly and comprehensive discussion of the philosophical issue of identi-

234

Appendix

A Metaphysical Vision The anti-metaphysical bias and positivist outlook then prevalent in Western academic philosophy ran counter to much of what process thinkers were pursuing. Not surprisingly, as a metaphysical system of ideas, process thought would hardly meet with favour in that climate. The emphasis on analysis and clarity in philosophy was undoubtedly a welcome benefit to one’s philosophizing, but the rejection of any attention to an overall scheme of reality and to its transcendent dimension threatened and even spelt the doom of all metaphysical pursuits. Logical positivism and linguistic analysis indeed can alert one to the perils of cumbersome, even if weighty, thinking in much of traditional philosophy. As a method in philosophy both of these certainly have definite advantages. But when the method becomes the content of philosophy itself one begins to wonder whether “doing philosophy” is simply all about being clear and logical. One can even seriously doubt whether these schools of thought can do justice to the fullness of human experience. Since Filipino thinking naturally turns to the transcendent—even if this tendency is at times shown and expressed in rather unsophisticated ways50—I continued to appreciate even more, while also learning from the analytic methods of contemporary philosophy, what process thought had to offer, particularly since I had also come to realize that its critics had undervalued and even misunderstood both its aims and its insights. Of particular value to me was Whitehead’s and Hartshorne’s metaphysical vision of reality. As they put it, it was not about dealing with a transcendent reality but with an overall vision of reality. Metaphysical thinking for them is about seriously pursuing the human desire for “more than just the particular and the definite”. Process metaphysics, I had come to understand, is about opening up wider what we can see when we look at the here-and-now. It is dissatisfaction with merely the superficial and the immediate. It is being concerned with the fundamental categories that will facilitate our making sense, not just of specific experiences, but of all experiences as a whole. Somehow, although admittedly in a different way,

ty, cf. Ferdinand Santos and Santiago Sia, Personal Identity, the Self and Ethics (Basingstoke and N.Y.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007). 50 See Bienvenido Lumbera and Cynthia Nograles Lumbera (eds.), Philippine Literature: a History and Anthology (Manila: National Book Store, 1982) and F.R. Demetrio, SJ, Myths and Symbols in the Philippines rev. ed. (Manila: National Book Store, 1990).

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

235

Filipino thinking parallels those concerns.51 Process thought echoed in my Filipino background—and set the scene and the background for the present book on the Christian message. As I tried to show here, the significance of the Christian message is best seen in its vision and its mission. Since for Whitehead reality is process, the fundamental category that enables us to understand it is “creativity”. He discusses this claim in his Process and Reality and in his other writings. Hartshorne’s version of it, developed more fully in his Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method, is “creative synthesis”, which for me, is a better choice of terminology insofar as it avoids the usual connotations of, and associations with, the term “creativity”. “Creative synthesis” expresses how there is constant and ongoing process in reality and indicates that while there is a coming together of past events into the present, there is nonetheless always a freshness about it. The future is not a mere repetition of the past. The fundamental category of creativity or creative synthesis has a way of illuminating aspects of Filipino culture as I had come to realize more recently. This category shows that there are, in all reality as it unfolds, an aspect which is closed and permanent (the past) as well as an aspect that is open and unforeseen (the future). There is causality that determines the results, but there is a creativity that can guide those results even before they happen. Several of my writings refer to this category showing how it can illuminate many of the philosophical discussions on a number of topics. At the same time, I came to appreciate that it has a practical relevance, too, as I grappled with Filipino sentiments and reactions following the tragedy of super-typhoon Haiyan/Yolanda. That attempt to come to grips with this seemingly abstract category in such a context resulted in the narrative, This Deep Pierian Spring, and in the essays included in this book, particularly “Creativity, Hope and the Christian Message”. The victims of this disaster turned to their inner resources as Filipinos when they encouraged one another to “Tindog Tacloban” and “Bangon Guiuan”. To my way of thinking, influenced by process thought, they exemplified what creativity (and creative synthesis) is all about.

51 At this stage I must admit to being a bit unsure as to whether many traditional Filipinos would agree with this observation regarding a general vision or whether my thinking as a Filipino reflecting on my experience has been shaped by my initial exposure to Thomistic metaphysics. Be that as it may, the claim made in the text is grounded on my own experience as a Filipino philosopher.

236

Appendix

Returning to Base Interestingly, Whitehead’s comparison of what he termed speculative thinking with the flight of an airplane noted earlier once again stimulated the writing of my recent book: Society in its Challenges. Since living in society presents a variety of problems to its members, the question of how philosophical thinking can aid in addressing these poses a challenge to those who have spent their professional life “doing philosophy”, so to speak. After a career pursuing this academic subject, I was encouraged by Whitehead’s words to show the relevance of philosophical thinking to such a situation “on the ground”. In this book I offer an analysis of fundamental issues in various areas of life in society. Among the topics dealt with are: individual interests and the common good; relationships and communal living; the individual and society; ethical thinking and formation; images, reality and truth; the power and limits of human freedom; social roles, public office and moral society; economic crisis and accountability; the marketplace, academia, education; and the meaning and significance of life. The final chapter acknowledges the importance of Whitehead’s and Hartshorne’s philosophy as it seeks to show how their particular vision of reality translates into a workable mission to reform and transform society. As far as my indebtedness to process thought and lessons derived from it are concerned, it is “a return to base”, as it were, as I got involved in this way with some of the practical issues of living in society. The publication of the present collection of essays in this book, Christian Message as Vision and Mission, had been prompted by the lectures given at the two seminaries in the Philippines. The occasion stimulated the writing of new essays and the updating of previously published ones on various aspects of the topic. It renewed my long-held conviction on the value of philosophical thinking to religious issues. At the same time, focusing on the Christian message of love, hope and redemption while employing philosophical methods brought many of my research interests into new light.52 It was another instance of heeding Whitehead’s advice of returning to base. But the phrase “returning to base” has another particular but related significance in the present context as I reflect on my use of the conceptuality provided by process thought. It is symbolized by the plaque, which hangs on the wall at the entrance to the Arnoldus Library of the Divine 52

The complementary approaches of the recent popes of the Catholic Church to how the Christian message is to be understood and implemented in our society have had an impact on the methodology and content of the discussions in this book.

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

237

Word Seminary of Tagaytay and the same one at Christ the King Mission Seminary, Quezon City, both in the Philippines, depicting the wild geese winging their way home. These birds are known to fly away to “distant shores” but no matter how far they travel, they retain a memory of home and always know how to return to it. The occasion provided in the writing of the second part of this reflective essay (and of this book on the Christian message) can somehow be likened to it: not only was it an opportunity for me to look back at developments in my philosophical thinking in the specific context of my use of process thought as a Filipino but it is also a return to where my philosophical odyssey had begun. And it reminds one of the lines in T.S. Eliot’s “Little Gidding”: We shall not cease from exploration And the end of all our exploring Will be to arrive where we started And know the place for the first time.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abbot, Walter M. ed. 1966, The Documents of Vatican II, Guild Press. Aristotle. trans. W. Rhys Robert, Rhetoric, Book I, Part 2. Baghi, Felix SVD. May & November 2014, “Ricoeur’s Ways of Recognition,” DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, 39 (1 & 2), 11-33. Beardslee, William A. et al. 1989, Biblical Preaching on the Death of Jesus, Nashville: Abingdon Press. Beck, Hubert F. 1970, The Age of Technology, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House. Becker, Ernest. 1973, The Denial of Death, N.Y.: The Free Press. Berdyaev, Nicolas. trans. N. Duddington. 1937, The Destiny of Man, London: G. Bles, N.Y.: Scribner’s. Berdyaev, Nicolas. 1955, The Meaning of the Creative Act, London: V. Gollanz. —. trans. R. M. French. 1953, Truth and Revelation, New York: Harper and Bros. Bergan, Sjur. 2011, Not By Bread Alone, Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Bloch, Chana. 1985, Spelling the Word: George Herbert and the Bible, University of California Press. Bollnow, Otto Friedrich. 1961, “The Meaning of Hope,” Universitas, 4, 263-273. Bowker, John. 1991, The Meanings of Death, Cambridge University Press. Brubacher, John S. 1969, Modern Philosophies of Education: Foundations of Education, 4th ed., McGraw-Hill Book Company. Buber, Martin. trans. Ronald Gregor Smith. 1966, Between Man and Man. N.Y.: The Macmillan Co. —. 1957, Eclipse of God: Studies on the Relation between Religion and Philosophy, N.Y.: Harper and Row. —. trans. Ronald Gregor Smith. 2nd ed., 1966, I and Thou, Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. Charlesworth, M.J. 1972, Philosophy of Religion: the Historic Approaches, London: Macmillan. Clarke, Peter B. & Peter Byrne. 1993, Religion Defined and Explained, Basingstoke: Macmillan/N.Y.: St. Martin’s Press.

240

Selected Bibliography

Cobb, Jr., John. 1966, A Christian Natural Theology: Based on the Thought of A.N. Whitehead, London: Lutterworth Press. Confucius, trans. Raymond Dawson. The Analects. 1993, Oxford University Press. Cox, Harvey. 1968, rev. ed., The Secular City: Secularization and Urbanization in Theological Perspective, N.Y.: The Macmillan Company. De Mesa, Jose. 1987, In Solidarity with the Culture: Studies in Theological Re-rooting, Quezon City: Maryhill School of Theology. Festin, Raymun SVD. 2008, Beliefs and Certitudes, Manila: Logos Publications. Frankl, Victor. 2004, Man’s Search for Meaning: the Classic Tribute to Hope from the Holocaust, Rider. —. 2011, Man’s Search for Ultimate Meaning, Rider. Fromm, Eric. 1972, The Art of Loving, London: Unwin Books. —. 1968, The Revolution of Hope: Toward a Humanized Technology, N.Y.: Harper & Row. Garbowski, Christopher et al. eds. 2005, Catholic Universities in the New Europe, Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL. Gill, Jerry H. ed. 1970, Philosophy and Religion: Some Contemporary Perspectives, Minneapolis, Minn.: Burgess Publishing Co. Gorospe, Vitaliano R. 1988, Filipino Values Revisited, Manila: National Bookstore. Habermas, Jürgen. trans. T. McCarthy, 1984, The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. I: Reason and the Rationalization of Society; 1987, Vol. II: Lifeworld and System, Boston: Beacon Hamilton, Daniel S. and Joseph P. Quinlan. 2008, Globalisation and Europe: Prospering in the New World Order, Centre for Transatlantic Relations. Hartshorne, Charles. 1967, A Natural Theology for Our Time, La Salle, Ill: Open Court. —. 1983, Creative Synthesis and Philosophic Method, Lanham: University Press of America. —. eds. Donald Wayne Viney and Jincheol O. 2011, Creative Experiencing: a Philosophy of Freedom, SUNY Press. —. 1948, Divine Relativity: a Social Conception of God, New Haven: Yale University Press. —. 1941, Man’s Vision of God and the Logic of Theism, Chicago: Willet, Clark, and Company. —. 1987, Wisdom as Moderation: a Philosophy of the Middle Way, N.Y.: SUNY Press.

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

241

Hawkesworth, M.E. 2006, Globalization and Feminist Actions, Rowman & Littlefield. Hick, John. 1989, An Interpretation of Religion: Human Responses to the Transcendent, Basingstoke: Macmillan. Jasper, David. 1989, The Study of Literature and Religion: an Introduction. Studies in Literature and Religion, London: Macmillan. Josephson, Eric. ed. 1966, Man Alone: Alienation in Modern Society, N.Y.: Dell Publishing Co. Inc. Juhant, Janez and Bojan Žalec eds. 2008, Surviving Globalization: the Uneasy Gift of Interdependence, Theologie Ost-West, Europäische Perspectiven 13, Berlin: Lit Verlag. Kerr, Fergus. 1997, Immortal Longings: Versions of Transcending Humanity, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press. Kübler-Ross, Elisabeth. 1971, On Death and Dying, N.Y.: Macmillan Company. Lane, Dermot A. 1966, Keeping Hope Alive: Stirrings in Christian Theology, Dublin: Gill & Macmillan. Langford, Michael J. 1981, Providence, London: SCM Press. Levinas, Emmanuel. trans. Bettina Bergo, ed. and annotated by Jacques Rolland. 2000, God, Death, and Time, Stanford University Press. MacIntyre, Alasdair. 1967, Secularization and Moral Change, Oxford University Press. Marcel, Gabriel. trans. Emma Crawford. 1962, Homo Viator: Introduction to a Metaphysic of Hope, N.Y. Harper Torchbooks, —. 1967, Problematic Man, N.Y.: Herder and Herder. Mencius, Mencius. 1988, Penguin Books. MeruĠiu, Monica. ed. 2011, Reason and Faith at the Beginning of the Third Millennium, Cluj Napoca: Editura Fundatiei Pentru Studii Europene. Nussbaum, Martha. 2000, Women and Human Development: a Global Challenge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Owens, Joseph C.Ss.R., 1985, Human Destiny: Some Problems for Catholic Philosophy, Washington, D.C: The Catholic University of America Press. Partridge, A.C. 1978, John Donne—Language and Style. Andre Deutsch. Pernia, Antonio M. SVD, 2014, “The State of Mission Today,” DIWA: Studies in Philosophy and Theology, 39 (1 & 2 May & November), 7892. —. 2015, “The Stranger and the Poor: Two Challenges to the Missionary Church in Evangelii Gaudium,” Missio Inter Gentes, (I, 1), 37-56. Phillips, D.Z. 1981, The Concept of Prayer, N. Y.: The Seabury Press.

242

Selected Bibliography

Pittenger, Norman.1980, After Death: Life in God, London: SCM Press. Ratzinger, Joseph. 1968, Introduction to Christianity, London: Burns & Oates. Richmond, James. 1966, Faith and Philosophy, London: Hodder and Stoughton. Robillard, Edmond, O.P. trans. K.D. Whitehead. 1982, Reincarnation: Illusion or Reality?, N.Y. Alba House. Roston, Murray. 1974, The Soul of Wit: A Study of John Donne, Oxford: Clarendon Press. Sia, Marian F. and Santiago Sia. Foreword by Prof David Jasper, 2010, From Question to Quest: Literary-Philosophical Enquiries into the Challenges of Life, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Sia, Santiago. 2010, Ethical Contexts and Theoretical Issues: Essays in Ethical Thinking, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. —. Postscript by Charles Hartshorne, 1985, God in Process Thought: a Study in Charles Hartshorne’s Concept of God. Studies in Philosophy and Religion 7, Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff Publisher. —. 2004, Religion, Reason and God: Essays in the Philosophies of Charles Hartshorne and A.N. Whitehead, Peter Lang Publishers. —. Foreword by former President of Ireland Mary McAleese. 2014, 2015, Society in its Challenges: Philosophical Considerations of Living in Society, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Smith, Wilfred Cantwell. 1978, The Meaning and End of Religion: A Revolutionary Approach to the Great Religious Traditions, London: SPCK. Strier, Richard. 1983, Love Known: Theology and Experience in George Herbert’s Poetry, Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press. Sweetman, Brendan, ed. 2013, 2014, Philosophical Thinking and the Religious Context: Essays in Honor of Santiago Sia, N.Y. and London: Bloomsbury Academic. —. 2006, Why Politics Needs Religion, Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press. Taylor, Charles. 2007, A Secular Age, Cambridge & London: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Tugwell, Simon. 1990, Human Immortality and the Redemption of Death, London: Darton Longman and Todd. Uy, Antolin, ed. 2009. Witness to the Word: Society of the Divine Word Philippines 1909-2009, Manila: Logos Publications.

The Christian Message as Vision and Mission

243

Walker, Margarite and Sylvia Marcos. 2005, Dialogue and Difference: Feminism’s Challenge to Globalization, Palgrave Macmillan. Whitehead, A.N. 1942, Adventures of Ideas, Cambridge University Press. —. corrected edition by David Ray Griffin and Donald F. Sherburne. 1978, Process and Reality, N.Y and London: The Free Press. —. 1926, Religion in the Making, Cambridge University Press. —. 1967, The Aims of Education and Other Essays. The Free Press Paperback Edition. Wiles, Maurice. 1977. The Christian Fathers, London: SCM Press. www.papalencyclicals.net/ www.vatican.va/offices/papal_docs_list.html