|
Return to First Unitarian Church Website This talk was delivered by Greg Nooney on May 30, 2004. Cosmology: Effects on Empowerment
by
|
| When
my partner Ibu saw the title of my talk today on the sign in front
of the church, she asked me whatever did “Cosmology: Effects
on Empowerment” mean? I replied that I was going to talk
about how what we believe affects how we see others and treat others.
She of course then asked me why I didn’t just say that, and
I didn’t have a good answer for her. So perhaps I ought to
change the title, or add a subtitle “What we believe will
influence how we see each other and how we treat each other.” I
guess this is one of the assumptions of my talk today. I figure
if this is true then I ought to pay some attention to what it is
I believe and notice some of the effects on my own perceptions
and practices.
In 1902 William James published a book entitled The Varieties of Religious Experience, which was compiled from the Guilford Lectures he delivered in Edinburgh Scotland in the 1890s. His audience was academic and scientific, and tended to believe too little rather than too much, according to James. Although his ideas are over 100 years old, they are still relevant. He proposed that we would do well to pay attention to the effects of the religious experience on the lives of those who practice it. He speaks of applying the test of common sense to evaluate the actions and practices of those who profess certain beliefs, and if those human activities pass the test, then so do the beliefs that inspire them. If not, then the beliefs also will be discredited. In fact, he notes that religions do fall out of favor as soon as they cease to fit the needs of the humans who attempt to apply them to their lives. He was criticized for applying empirical practices to the study of religious expression, lest religion itself be encouraged and make even more of a public nuisance of itself. I suspect there might be some in this community who could agree, at least partly to such a criticism. James writes:
I would invite you to apply these tests to what I have to say today, and do not judge me too harshly as long as I do not cross the line by “putting on rationalistic and authoritative pretensions.” And I would ask one more thing of you, and that is to take what I have to say and put it to the test of your own discernment. I ask you to take it into your heart, and notice how it feels in that space. If it speaks to your heart through a sense of warmth or a feeling that it fits for you, then I would invite you to consider it further. If not, then it would be best, I believe, to set it aside without judgment, for it may speak to another. I am hoping that my reflections on cosmology and my sharing of my own spiritual journey will be of some value to you today. I must admit that to share details of my spiritual journey with you today is just a bit frightening, due I suppose to my sense that many of my beliefs will be in the minority in this community. A couple of months ago, Rev. Charles Stephen delivered a sermon here entitled “Is Secularism the Will of God?” In that sermon he quoted a New York Times article that reported a recent poll where the majority of respondents in the United States said they believed in angels. The backdrop of the presentation of this piece of information was that of the gullibility or irrationality of such beliefs. Rev. Stephen stated:
My particular brand of spirituality does the same, and I am here to share it with you. I do believe in angels. I believe in fact that all of us are creatures of light, and that we are the Magicians of the Gameboard of Free Choice. I suppose I ought to back up a little here and get a bit more into cosmology. I offer the following as a creation myth. I would also like to acknowledge that my understandings have been significantly influenced by the work of Steve Rother.
Of course there is no morality or ethics on the other side of the veil, there is only the Oneness, Only Love. From the perspective of the angels, all choices are honored. We, my friends, here at this moment, we are the Magicians of the Gameboard of Free Choice. Charles Stephen rightly praises the secularist for seeing institutions, governments, churches, mosques, and temples as created by human beings and for seeing ethics and rules as human creations. The cosmology I have presented here does the same. Of course it is we who have created all this. It wasn’t the gods who did it, except that we are the gods who do it. I have a difficult time deciding if this cosmology is deist or theist or something else entirely. In common usage, a deist believes in a God who started things out and then became disinterested. A theist on the other hand has some belief in the creator being active in human affairs. In the cosmology I have described God remains active because we are all a part of god. However, theism seems to assume a separation between us creatures and the creator, which is not present in my cosmology. So I will leave it up to you to decide, or perhaps it isn’t really that important, simply another of our many struggles with polarity. What is left for me to discuss, however, is what effect, if any, such a cosmology might have on our perceptions of each other and of the world. I would maintain that all the benefits of an atheistic secularism, or secular humanism, remain with us. It is still up to us as humans to create or destroy, to love or to hate (more exercises in polarity of course). At the same time, I believe there are benefits that are not evident in secular humanism. I will outline some of them as follows:
At this point, some of you may be thinking, this is wild, perhaps even interesting, but “Do you really believe all this stuff?” I want to answer first of all, that it might not matter whether I do or don’t actually believe this stuff. If I can act as if it were true, what might happen? Wouldn’t some of the effects described above be positive developments? Secondly, because we are living in a field of polarity, I have to assume that whatever metaphors or stories I can come up with, will not be exactly accurate. When I described the angels’ argument about whether to start the experiment, I was, for example, using polarity thinking. I cannot conceive a universe without it, so it permeates even my description of the Oneness. Thirdly, although these beliefs may seem fantastic, I do not think they are any more fantastic than what physicists and mathematicians have been coming up with lately. For example, can you believe that this universe is actually made up of 11 dimensional realties, but we are only able to perceive four, three of space and one of time? Or how about the notion that this entire universe is a three dimensional bane (something like a hologram) set on the edge of a multi-dimensional reality? Or that all matter is made up of tiny strings of energy, that it is only the direction and spin of those strings that distinguish starfish from stars, and that these strings also spin in other dimensions that we are unable to perceive? Or that there are an infinity of universes, each with slightly different natural laws? Or that every time we make a decision, the universe splits into two with one universe carrying out one decision and the other, another? All of these ideas are legitimately proposed theories in physics or mathematics (although I do not claim to be presenting them accurately or precisely here). I would close today with a question as to whether I have crossed the William James’ line of not putting on rationalistic and authoritative pretensions. If not, then I would invite you again to use your own discernment and place these ideas on your heart to see if they resonate there. If so, then I would invite you to reflect more on them. If not, then I would invite you to leave them alone, but without judgment, for although their flavor is not suitable for your palate, they might be suitable for others. Thank you for the opportunity to share with you today. References
Rother, Steve — please see his website at lightworker.com. |