Having an Ear for Devotional Language
What Traditional Christians Can Miss in Process Theology
What might traditional Christians miss in process theology? I've written on this before, saying what I myself, as a process theologian, miss in process theology: What is Missing in Process Theology?
Here is part of the problem; We humans cannot live by theology alone. We need practices and traditions, community and rituals, meditation and prayer. We need stories, too, and opportunities for service. These various offer wisdom and substance to a life that cannot be provided by theology alone, much less metaphysical systems. Traditional Christians can miss these things in process theology. For some it seems to be only a theology.
Yes, there are aspects of process theology traditional Christians may like very much. They may appreciate the emphasis on creativity, openness to the world, mutual becoming, relationality, interfaith dialog. They may appreciate the idea that God is an indwelling lure within each person and also an eternal companion to all the world's joys and sufferings. They may even like the idea that the future is not-yet-decided, not even for God. They may read Thomas Oord's God Can't and like it very much, because it helps them deal with theodicy. Or John Cobb's Christ in a Pluralistic Age because it helps them appreciate the universal Christ.
But they'll miss sacramentalism, mysticism, a respect for silence, a sense of mystery, a love of liturgy, a respect for tradition, an appeal to the Bible for nourishment, an emphasis on practice in daily life, and, so a friend of mine says, a sense of gratitude. Here she's not talking about gratitude to other people and to the world of nature, although she thinks that's very important. She's talking about gratitude to God. Or, in her words, a sense of gift. In her experience self-styled progressive, process Christians have been rather tone-deaf to this side of Christian life. Here's how she puts it to me:
Here is part of the problem; We humans cannot live by theology alone. We need practices and traditions, community and rituals, meditation and prayer. We need stories, too, and opportunities for service. These various offer wisdom and substance to a life that cannot be provided by theology alone, much less metaphysical systems. Traditional Christians can miss these things in process theology. For some it seems to be only a theology.
Yes, there are aspects of process theology traditional Christians may like very much. They may appreciate the emphasis on creativity, openness to the world, mutual becoming, relationality, interfaith dialog. They may appreciate the idea that God is an indwelling lure within each person and also an eternal companion to all the world's joys and sufferings. They may even like the idea that the future is not-yet-decided, not even for God. They may read Thomas Oord's God Can't and like it very much, because it helps them deal with theodicy. Or John Cobb's Christ in a Pluralistic Age because it helps them appreciate the universal Christ.
But they'll miss sacramentalism, mysticism, a respect for silence, a sense of mystery, a love of liturgy, a respect for tradition, an appeal to the Bible for nourishment, an emphasis on practice in daily life, and, so a friend of mine says, a sense of gratitude. Here she's not talking about gratitude to other people and to the world of nature, although she thinks that's very important. She's talking about gratitude to God. Or, in her words, a sense of gift. In her experience self-styled progressive, process Christians have been rather tone-deaf to this side of Christian life. Here's how she puts it to me:
"When I talk about the primacy of gift and that our salvation depends on God, I'm really saying that any true conversion or newness of life begins with God. I totally agree that salvation also depends on each of us to come to fruition. But there is a real intuition for me and for many Christians of a prevenient grace. It's an idea you find in Methodism. The desire to quit drinking, the belief that it is possible, the pull and strength in each moment to stay on track -- all of these come as gifts from God that then become real in our lives through our making them our own. Or so I believe.
I wish people who identify as progressive, process theologians might understand that traditional, devoted Christians who understand their salvation, their "newness of life" to quote Paul, to be dependent upon God are not fanatics. Perhaps such Christians intuit correctly something about God, something that Whitehead also expressed but in a different language/system: "His particular relevance to each creative act, as it arises from its own conditioned standpoint in the world, constitutes him the initial 'object of desire' establishing the initial phase of each subjective aim." I wish I had the knowledge to facilitate translation between the two worlds, but I don't. And I'm not sure everyone in the process world is open to listening more deeply within Christianity to hear the intuitions behind the doctrine."
Intuitions Behind the Doctrine
I think she's right. I think we Christian process theologians can be so literal-minded, that we fail to hear the intuitions behind doctrines: doctrines of the Trinity, doctrines within traditional creeds, doctrines of the real presence of the body of Christ in bread and wine, doctrines of salvation by grace through faith. No, we don't have to make gods of the doctrines. We can criticize them. We needn't recite them if we've been wounded by them, or if the recitation seems too dishonest. I have another friend, a Benedictine sister living in a monastery, who cannot recite the Psalms each day, because the imagery is so often too violent. I get this.
But this is not the whole story by any means. There are many, many Christians in the world who are "traditional" in the sense that the recite the creeds, appreciate the liturgy, and feel bonded with a cloud of witnesses, living and dead, who form an extended family on a shared journey. They are better people than they might otherwise be, precisely with help from the traditions. We can indeed, and we should, listen for the intuitions behind the doctrines.
If we are self-styled progressives with a hidden arrogance for our "progressive" views, we should repent. We should listen with respect for the Christians who feel unheard by us, and with a willingness to be creatively transformed by what we learn from them. Yes, we can respond with our "but's." We can say "but process theology says this" or "process theology says that." We can be defensive. But the real response is to say "I'm sorry. You're right. I haven't listened well. Will you give me another chance?" And I think that when we do, we may well see much more wisdom in the tradition than we ever quite imagined, including the idea that God's love comes to us as a pure gift.
Having an Ear for Devotional Language
How might we open our ears? I think it can help to remember Whitehead's idea that all language, including religious language, consists of lures for feeling. And to remember his idea that there is no perfect dictionary: that is, no perfect system of verbal statements that perfectly mirrors the world as it is. The later Wittgenstein saw this and we can, too.
When we hear sincere and loving Christians reciting creeds, and when the fruits of their sincerity are loving, we best look for the feelings, the intuitions, that the language helps evoke. We best recognize that theirs devotional language, not philosophical language, and that devotional language is rooted in intuitions. It's poetry. Not metaphysical poetry but rather confessional poetry. Or, perhaps better, love poetry.
Once we hear the intuitions, we can then work to formulate process theology in terms that make sense to traditional Christians, not as a way of pulling them into the process camp, but as our way of appreciating the wisdom they offer us and the world. Once we hear devotional language for what it is, we will find our own process horizons widened. We'll be less judgmental, less reactive, less oppositional, and, in that way, more loving. Our widened ears will enable us to find the God of love in places we've neglected. Isn't that spirit of discovery, of being open to what is different; of taking a second look at what we've dismissed; of being creatively transformed by the novelty of tradition, isn't that part of the process way? Yes, it is.
-- Jay McDaniel, May 2020
I think she's right. I think we Christian process theologians can be so literal-minded, that we fail to hear the intuitions behind doctrines: doctrines of the Trinity, doctrines within traditional creeds, doctrines of the real presence of the body of Christ in bread and wine, doctrines of salvation by grace through faith. No, we don't have to make gods of the doctrines. We can criticize them. We needn't recite them if we've been wounded by them, or if the recitation seems too dishonest. I have another friend, a Benedictine sister living in a monastery, who cannot recite the Psalms each day, because the imagery is so often too violent. I get this.
But this is not the whole story by any means. There are many, many Christians in the world who are "traditional" in the sense that the recite the creeds, appreciate the liturgy, and feel bonded with a cloud of witnesses, living and dead, who form an extended family on a shared journey. They are better people than they might otherwise be, precisely with help from the traditions. We can indeed, and we should, listen for the intuitions behind the doctrines.
If we are self-styled progressives with a hidden arrogance for our "progressive" views, we should repent. We should listen with respect for the Christians who feel unheard by us, and with a willingness to be creatively transformed by what we learn from them. Yes, we can respond with our "but's." We can say "but process theology says this" or "process theology says that." We can be defensive. But the real response is to say "I'm sorry. You're right. I haven't listened well. Will you give me another chance?" And I think that when we do, we may well see much more wisdom in the tradition than we ever quite imagined, including the idea that God's love comes to us as a pure gift.
Having an Ear for Devotional Language
How might we open our ears? I think it can help to remember Whitehead's idea that all language, including religious language, consists of lures for feeling. And to remember his idea that there is no perfect dictionary: that is, no perfect system of verbal statements that perfectly mirrors the world as it is. The later Wittgenstein saw this and we can, too.
When we hear sincere and loving Christians reciting creeds, and when the fruits of their sincerity are loving, we best look for the feelings, the intuitions, that the language helps evoke. We best recognize that theirs devotional language, not philosophical language, and that devotional language is rooted in intuitions. It's poetry. Not metaphysical poetry but rather confessional poetry. Or, perhaps better, love poetry.
Once we hear the intuitions, we can then work to formulate process theology in terms that make sense to traditional Christians, not as a way of pulling them into the process camp, but as our way of appreciating the wisdom they offer us and the world. Once we hear devotional language for what it is, we will find our own process horizons widened. We'll be less judgmental, less reactive, less oppositional, and, in that way, more loving. Our widened ears will enable us to find the God of love in places we've neglected. Isn't that spirit of discovery, of being open to what is different; of taking a second look at what we've dismissed; of being creatively transformed by the novelty of tradition, isn't that part of the process way? Yes, it is.
-- Jay McDaniel, May 2020