Replies

This section on relational power was also what stood out to me in this week’s reading. Professionally, I work in youth ministry at a Presbyterian church and it’s been my mission in recent years to learn how to teach process ideas as alternatives to classical theism ideas. Often I present them as one option among many depending on the topic, but I’m always excited when students gravitate toward the more “common sense” aspects of process that resonate with our daily lived experience (I love that Mesle’s book uses that framework as the starting point).
This section on power was timely as i’m currently teaching a confirmation class. We’re discussion theodicy and different views of Jesus’s crucifixion… students are picking up on the problems inherent in the classical ideas of God as divine child abuser for the sake of us sinful humans. I used this breakdown of the two types of power as a starting point to reimagine the classical attributes of God and see if that sorts out any of the historic tensions in these doctrines (it does:)

This is a great convo.
I appreciate the tension Jay brings up about the evolutionary view of sin and the question of why God couldn’t have lured the evolutionary process in a less violent direction. We can’t know, but the pain and suffering present in natural predation in the animal world has weighed on my heart for a long time.

When it comes to the lure of sin, I think of James K.A. Smith’s “cultural liturgies” books. He’s not a process thinker, but they are a good study in the idea that “we are what we love” and what we love is formed in us over time by our practices and habits. Lots of layers here for how “sinful” tendencies and practices can emerge… not just from the raw selfishness of the heart, or something like that, but sinful patterns of living can also be manufactured by the wider culture as an answer (albeit not a good answers) to fears, insecurities, existential worries, etc. that we all have. I’m thinking things like exploitative economic systems, ecologically devastating consumerism, self-serving ideologies, etc. Sort of how addictions are often not actually the problem a person is facing, they are an attempt to address the problem, whether it be loneliness, hopelessness, a lack of purpose and value, etc.
I think there’s a lot to be gained in the convo about systemic sin and how individuals can live faithfully when certain sinful patterns are engrained into public life (like paying taxes to fund war).

I really appreciate this thought on humility. Coming from an Evangelical Christian upbringing, I’ve had to undo most all of the worldview I was taught, which focused primarily on certainty about the nature of God and reality. It’s been a journey of learning how to have compelling commitments that are motivating and inspiring for living well while also holding things with open hands, knowing I could be wrong.

That being said, when it comes to how process thinkers relate to non-process thinkers, I think there is some amount of “proof in the pudding” that can be used to evaluate different worldview frameworks. Or to use biblical language, we can tell a tree by its fruit. Without appeals to certainty, I think we can (humbly) compare the implications, ethics, and results of living according to different understandings of reality to see which produce a better outcome. (“better” is a relative term. for me, “better,” is what creates the most freedom and flourishing for all creatures).
There was another post on the discussion board (and Mesle’s book) about when people of faith appeal to the mysteries of faith as a way of dealing with any tensions or unknowns that don’t fit into a certainty-based framework. I think this is also a good option for a judge: if appeals to mystery happen too quickly and appear to leave much left out of one’s understanding of reality, there might be better options that include consideration for more aspects of life…

This is an interesting sentence to ponder… I wonder if the meaning is in word order? Continuity is dependent on the ongoing process of becoming, rather than vice versa.
It makes me think of time flowing in a certain direction. As a moment/experience concresces and becomes part of the past, only upon reflecting on that past do we see the continuity that creates actualization vs. a pattern of continuity somehow determining future possibilities of becoming. Yes, we prehend the past, but not to the detriment of the future being open with new creative possibilities.

…or I might also be misunderstanding 🙂