This week I watched the
first part of Stephen Hawking’s documentary, The Universe: The Grand
Design. In the documentary we travel
from the wide expanse of the universe with its infinite possibilities to the
reasoned elimination of nearly all random events in life. Within the span of just
45 minutes, with the rules of cosmic physics setting the parameters, we are led
to conclude that all of life is simply influenced by a set of predictable variables
and that everything we perceive about reality is based solely on our own
individual interpretation of those variables. Even the decisions we
make are predetermined by a catalog of past events stored in our memory which effectively
creates the illusion of free will. We are left with what amounts to being a
single-planed matrix. But because this is
not a perfect system we can only see a partial picture of how reality appears at
any one time, and so our minds fill in the blanks. It is a if we are all fish in a our own small
fishbowl, completely dependent on the set of variables we have access to and are
at the mercy of the constantly firing synopses in our brains that supply our
minds with the missing information so seamlessly that we do not even
notice. For instance, we see color
because our eye and brain functions work together as part of our excellent
machinery. We do not see color because objects actually have color, it is only
how we are hardwired to perceive and interpret our surroundings. This is hardly
new science. It first began with Descartes who first made the clear distinction
between what constitutes the mind and what constitutes the body; and made a distinction
between the two; an idea not disputed to this day. If you are not up on your Descartes, does the
phrase, “I think, therefore I am, ” ring a bell? Hawkins and a whole body of other scientists
have been building on this theory over many decades. But Hawkins goes on to ask
that if all human life can be reduced to cosmic physics, is there meaning to
life?
If you haven’t guessed,
I’m not a big Stephen Hawkins fan. But I am hardly the first religious advocate
to clash with such grand schemes that seem so offhandedly eliminate God by way
of scientific reasoning. In fact, by scientific reason alone, God does not even
merit a mention. God is not even on the radar or a part of the equation. On the other end of the spectrum, it is the
popular tendency to associate Christianity with anti-intellectualism and
opposition to scientific knowledge. Given the Episcopal Church’s encouragement
of critical thought I do not find our little corner on the religious market
guilty of such charges. But given today
Gospel reading: John’s reasoned treatise on the God, the Word, and Jesus’ part
in this universally grand theological statement regarding all of creation, the
passage of time and the roles of light and darkness, it seems only fair that a
thinking faith community should find its voice in such discussions.
The majority of our
Christian forebears could not have fathomed such diversity of thought, much
less a stand-off between scientific intellectuals and religious fundamentalists,
which leaves both parties the poorer for it. Far
more broadly, our theological forebears left us with a way of thinking about the
human capacity to reason; as opposed to reason itself being the topic of
debate. They referred to reason in three ways: created reason, fallen reason
and regenerative reason. Created reason is the
human mind working for good, as was intended – in the beginning, as it
were. Some literalist would liken this
to the Garden of Eden experience. Others
would simply say, having the capacity to reason made us human, it separates us
from all other animals on this planet. But to reason alone was good enough for
only a time. Eventually, some would say as we evolved, our ability to reason was
fashioned into a tool for pushing us to extend beyond our means; coaxing us to
believe that if we can dream it, we can do it, independent of either the help
of, or the advice of, our creator. Another word for this is sin. Which leads us to fallen reason, which is
corrupt and corrupting, a distortion of a created good; but not a criticism of
reason itself. And finally there is
regenerative reason, or reason reborn.
This is where a thinking person can find some refuge in the
scientific/religious standoff. It is regenerative
reason that gives John such a powerful voice; a voice that has propelled the
Gospel of Jesus Christ in to every nation on earth, and found a home in
millions of hearts of soundly reasoned, faithful people, including scientists
and intellectuals. When reason is
reborn, the boundaries of what is and what is not real or possible become
impossible to declare, much less define.
But to go where John
wants us to go, "to go where no man has gone before", as it were, it will be of
some use to us to revisit Stephen Hawkins.
Among his theorems, based in physics and cosmic science, is the idea that
there are limits to what we are able to perceive. Hawkins suggests that even as complex as
human beings are we are only able to process a fraction of what actually makes
up the world in which we exists. Our
version of reality is only defined by that single plane matrix after all. Hawkins points out that this is one of the
basic constants of the universe; the limits of each system’s ability to relate
to another system; regardless of how interconnected it might be. Imagine, if you can, the end of this
universe, and the one it merges into and where that one ends. We cannot imagine it; that’s the point. It’s
not that an ever-expanding universe doesn’t exists, it’s just that we humans are limited as
to what knowledge we will ever be able to acquire; it is far beyond us. Our creator, the one we call God, or who John
refers to as The Word, is in that category; the more than we can fathom category.
We think and therefore we are, in fact does
not make us rulers of the universe, or lords of our own creations (as Hawkins
suggests), but very clearly points out that we are subjects bent to the will of
forces far greater that even our wildest imaginings. It is in that place,
the place beyond our wildest imaginings of a super complex matrix that is not
single-planed but of multiple dimensions, it is there that God resides. It is from that place that God spoke the
Word, the Word that was with God. “He was in the beginning with God. All things
came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being.
What came into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all
people. The light shines in the
darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.” There is a undeniably cosmic
element to John’s reasoning. This cosmic
understanding of the divine and the world as part of that otherworldly reality is
expressed similarly in Isaiah 55, “so shall my word be that goes out from my
mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I
purpose.”
It is within the expansive understanding that
religious people have of the world we live in that we find meaning for
life. I do not dispute this science nor
do I think it the church’s place to do so, but I cannot find meaning in life so
narrowly defined by single-planed matrices; free will that is predetermined by
predictable variables, and a reality that has been largely filled in by a data
bank of memories and prior experiences. For me, for the church, for all religious
people, it is God’s purpose that gives our life meaning. God’s purpose that
intends for us to have life and have it abundantly.
As we travel through
this life, and we have explored for ourselves the consequences of creative and
fallen reason within our own lives, we purposely redirect our energy toward
regenerative reason; that is, employing our God-given ability to think through
the complex issues that face humanity for the common good. In
this way our purpose may more closely align itself with God’s purpose. We do this with the
three tools of Christian thought passed down to us by the aforementioned
theological forebears; also known in the Anglican world as the three legged
stool: scripture, tradition and reason.
We appreciate and greatly benefit daily for the strides made by science
that have transformed our lives of toil into lives of ease; and we reason that
there has been a great cost in doing so. We go to Holy Scripture not for
comfort and solace but for strength and resolve to align our purpose with God’s
purpose; to make right our common wrongs; to admit the damage we inflict on one
another and resolve to cease in doing it. And we look
to a long tradition, about 4000 years of religious communities who centered
their lives on the single purpose of knowing and obeying God and making God
known in the world. And in doing these things we are not shaken by the stark
theorems of cosmic physicists but we embrace them as part of the greater
mystery of life. It is after all our most complex scientific attempts to
explain life that ultimately reveal how severely limited is our understanding
of things truly cosmic and fantastic.
No comments:
Post a Comment