Jesus and Salvation

This is the second post in a series about Unity and Re-claiming the Christian heritage. In this post I'd like to focus particularly on Christology and Soteriology, or who Jesus is and his role in the process of salvation/liberation.

First of all, I should state up front that there are many Jesus' to be found out there - the variety of portraits of Jesus found in biblical scholarship, Christian theology, church worship and liturgy, and even other religions (recall, for instance, the important and revered role of Jesus as prophet in Islam). Here I'm combining my understanding of biblical studies and Christian theological discourse and history to forward a way to bridge "traditional" approaches to Jesus and salvation with Unity. Or more accurately, I'm trying to forge a way to integrate certain mainline/traditional theological doctrine into a Unity context.

Throughout Church history there have been several different models of understanding who Jesus is. The earliest Christians articulated the following confession: "Iesou Christou Theou Yion Soter -- Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior." Jesus, for them, held the title "Christ" or "Messiah," which means "the annointed one" of God's establishment of the Kingdom of God on Earth. He was also "Son of God," which was a title also often applied to the Roman Emperors. In these early Christian communities, Jesus was seen as God's special Son sent to inaugurate reconciliation with God and redemption. And this liberating, transformative role also speaks to his role as Savior or healer of the individual soul, humanity, and all creation.

Now, there were several early Christian groups who understood Jesus rather differently from one another. For instance, there were the Ebionites, or Judean Christians, who saw him as only human, but still regarded him as the greatest rabbi and prophet who was the Messiah/Christ ushering in God's new Kingdom or rule on Earth. On the other side of the spectrum were Docetic Christians (from "dokeo" meaning "to seem or appear") who asserted that Jesus on appeared human but was, in reality, totally and solely divine or God. And then there were various shades and combinations in between on the spectrum. The eventual "orthodox" perspective claims that Jesus was and is 100% human and 100% divine, totally human and totally God (adds up to 200%, I know, but this is not math but faith experience and reflection). This "fully human, fully God" view has been affirmed by the Fillmores and Unity leaders throughout the years, but then adds that we are like Jesus in this way. We are different from Jesus only by degree or perhaps office/role but not in kind or species.

The central element that I believe Unity has lost or is in the process of losing is the discipleship and devotional elements in regard to Jesus. In normative Unity, especially in Charles Fillmore's writings, Jesus is affirmed as our way-shower, elder brother, and/or great example. I'm wanting to kick this up a notch and show how more explicitly discipleship and devotional understandings of Jesus make sense in Unity and can be brought in to our theological understanding. Concerning discipleship, this involves following Jesus' way of living, the manner of his relationships, the transformative content of his teachings, and learning from his death and resurrection what sacrifice for truth and liberation means. Being a disciple of Jesus simply means claiming Jesus as a/the central figure whose life is worthy of complete emulation due to his transparency to God.

Concerning devotion, this is a bit more controversial in Unity. This is because most Unity folks make a significant distinction between the religion of Jesus and the religion about Jesus, or faith of Jesus versus the faith in Jesus. Many Unity people have given up on the belief that Jesus saves or liberates by virtue of some sacrificial atonement or penal substitution. Well, quite frankly, I count myself in among them. However, this doesn't mean that we must completely discard or discredit faith in Jesus. In redefining and clarifying what this means, faith in Jesus involves embracing the faith of Jesus. There is a devotional tenor here. Devoting our spiritual intention, attention, and energy to aligning our thoughts, words, and actions with the pattern of God's disclosure and expression in and through Jesus' whole life. If he, as is widely asserted in Unity, is the one who has most fully manifested his Christ nature, then it would make perfect sense to put trusting acceptance (faith) in his whole personhood (his teachings, way of life, mindset, relationality, etc.) that fully reveal who and what God is. We may devote our spiritual life and growth to Jesus, looking to his example and thus guidance, and give him thanks in gratefulness for his God-consciousness. And when we devote ourselves this way to Jesus, we become further inspired, awakened, enlightened, and transformed by the impact our relationship with his life has on us. And this is not simply a literary relationship but a dynamic, living relationship with Christ Jesus (the "ascended Jesus," as Charles Fillmore puts it) who is still living in and among us and is available when we call on him in consciousness, in prayer and meditation or in other contemplative practices.

In "traditional" Christianity there has been essentially four distinct soteriological views concerning Jesus. There are four ways of understanding the role of Jesus in the process of liberation or salvation from the human condition, which is sin, "missing the mark," or a sense of estrangement/alienation/separation from God (in Unity this is normally understood to be estrangement from God in consciousness, since we are always one with God).

The first soteriology is often called "Christus Victor." This the belief that Jesus the Christ, in his life, death, and resurrection, has defeated the devil or Satan (however understood) in some kind of cosmic battle. His victory has liberated humanity from the bondage to sin that the devil/Satan has had over us. This particular perspective was very popular in the first few centuries of the early Church and was revived again in the 20th century in the theological work of Gustav Aulen.

Another view may be called "penal substitution." This was most influentially articulated in the 12th century by Anselm, archbishop of Canterbury. This has become the dominant understanding of salvation in Protestantism and Catholicism in the West. The idea here is that all humans owe all possible honor and obedience to God. Through the sin of Adam and Eve, all of humanity has incurred an infinite debt and dishonor to God who is infinite. However, as we are finite creatures, we cannot possibly fulfill this debt. Only God, who is infinite and eternal, can satisfy this debt. Thus, only a being who is both human and God could right this wrong. Enter Jesus Christ, who is understood to be the God-man who took on the punishment that humans deserved and fulfilled the debt obligation to God since he is fully divine. On this view, Jesus accomplishes salvation for humanity by reconciling us to God.

One view of salvation that holds importance in Eastern Orthodox Christianity is what may be termed theosis, or divination. That is, when the eternal Logos/Word became human as Jesus Christ, the human and divine natures were completely united, allowing for the cleansing or purification of humanity through identification with Jesus. By virtue of personal, mystical union with Jesus, the Christian is transformed into greater likeness of him - human and divine. The meaning is often stated: We become by grace what God is by nature. And this is accomplished through conscious identification with Jesus.

The final view is the one most normatively understood in Unity circles. I term it inspirational influence; others call it moral influence theory. This was first explicated most comprehensively by medieval scholastic Peter Abelard. This is essentially the outlook that when the Christian encounters the life of Jesus in scripture and prayer, s/he is inspired, enlightened, transformed in mind, body, and spirit. Jesus' entire life profoundly impacts and influences the person into greater experience and expression of God's Love.

The last two - theosis and inspirational influence - I believe are able to be integrated into a Unity Christian soteriology that, if explained in New Thought language, would be tenable for many or most Unity folks. I like to state it this way: Jesus, as the pinnacle demonstrator of the Christ Spirit within all, reveals and discloses who/what God is for humanity. Most of the time we don't live out our true nature as the Christ/image of God, and so we need a concrete human exemplar that demonstrates the fullness of human potential that we rarely, if ever, witness -- Jesus. Aligning ourselves with and following Jesus (the identification of theosis) as the perfect pattern of human life totally transparent to God and completely imbued with God's Spirit brings liberating, transforming, and "saving" experience. That is, Jesus saves by showing and offering us his life, which allows liberation from a sense of estrangement from God and others and liberation into an awareness and experience of God's immediate presence of Love and Wisdom.

Through this union of traditional teaching and New Thought re-interpretation, I believe it is definitely possible and, indeed, spiritually important to bring Jesus back into the center of the Unity movement. While not everyone will agree with this viewpoint, I think it's one that is viable for the movement, one that not only puts us back in touch with the roots of Unity but also moves us forward into new ways of re-claiming and finding transformational import in and through the most influential spiritual individual person in history.

I look forward to further dialogue and conversation about Jesus and new ways to re-claim him for Unity in the 21st century. Peace!

Dialogue on Oneness with Fellow Unity Colleague Ogun Holder

Ogun Holder and I have been exchanging ideas in a dialogue concerning the nature of Oneness. Check out the posts on his blogsite Living in the Question.

Harvey Cox and Thomas Dyer on Interfaith Voices

This week's program of Interfaith Voices ("a public radio show promoting religious harmony and interfaith understanding") includes a feature of Harvard theologian, Harvey Cox, and Buddhist military chaplain, Thomas Dyer.

Harvey Cox, Hollis professor of Divinity at Harvard University, looks inside the idea of ‘spritual but not religious’, and discovers that modern believers are abandoning creeds and doctrine for practices that emphasize a direct experience with the divine in his new book The Future of Faith. He speaks of this current development as Christianity, and religion in general, entering the "age of the Spirit." This is an idea that would resonate significantly with Unity ministers, students, and churchgoers of all stripes. One of the central tenets within Unity circles is that creeds, dogmatic statements, and static belief are not the cornerstones of authentic faith. Rather, it is first-hand experience of the Divine or Sacred or Spirit that promotes faith and engenders spiritual growth.

And Thomas Dyer is the first Buddhist military chaplain. A former Southern Baptist minister, Dyer is now a practicing Buddhist that has entered the military as as spiritual guide and counselor for Buddhist and non-Buddhist soldiers alike. With the increasing number of Americans becoming interested in Buddhism it is completely understandable how eventually a representative of the growing American Buddhist traditions would be included in military chaplaincy. Interfaith Voices conducts an intriguing interview with chaplain Dyer.

Check out these features and more at Interfaith Voices.

Is God 'Out There' or Only Found Within?

This Friday on Unity.FM Rev. Dr. Thomas Shepherd's program "Let's Talk About It" will feature an interesting topic: "Praying to the Ceiling - Is God 'Out There' or Only Found Within?"

"Let's Talk About It" always has interesting themes for its programming, but this one promises to be extra intriguing, in my opinion. As a Unity student in the Unity movement I'm certainly of the belief that God is most certainly found within. The living Christ is fully present within every human being as the Divine Ground of Being, and, as such, is God immanent.

However, since God is not relegated to being present only within one individual, but is present in every individual, God is also found outside of myself in the being and life of others. I can encounter God not only through the Christ innate in myself but also in my interactions and relationships with others. The back-and-forth movement of inter-relatedness discloses God as Being, Life, and Love in my relationships with other human beings.

The Christ in me is fully God, but this presence is not all of God, it doesn't exhaust God's being. This leads me to a decisively panentheistic (all-in-God) viewpoint: God is fully in all creation, but God is also equally beyond creation. God is both immanent and transcendent. Faith in this experiential truth, for me, leads me to claim that I find God "in" myself and also "outside" myself. That is, I experience God as being part and parcel of myself, my own subjective awareness, but also not limited to me as subject -- experienced as object or that-to-which-I-relate.

I'm looking forward to hearing what Rev. Dr. Shepherd and his guests have to say about this fascinating and important topic of theology for the Unity movment.

Listen on Friday Oct. 9, 2009 at 4pm CST to "Let's Talk About It" on Unity.FM.

Spiritual Social Action on Unity.org

A recent short essay entitled "Spiritual Social Action Leads to Unity in the Community" by Jane Simmons has been posted on Unity.org which originally appeared in the Jan. 2009 issue of Contact magazine.

In this brief article Simmons articulates what I've been hoping to see come about in Unity as an over-all movement. I know social action has always been a part of Unity circles and groups, but it has rarely been emphasized as an integral part of Unity metaphysical thought or made a distinct and explicit ministry in the Association of Unity Churches. That is, until recently when the "spiritual social action" group in Unity began formulating a language and spiritual rationale that places importance on social engagement and justice advocacy and this activity's significance for spiritual growth.

Simmons sums up well the communal dimension I've always felt is an integral element of one's spiritual journey. Sometimes Unity people and Unity metaphysical thought are so individualistic that this societal-intersubjective facet is downplayed or not even spoken of or engaged in at all.

No human is an island unto his/her self. Based on the belief and conviction of the interconnectivity of all life grounded in a God often referred to as Oneness or Source or Absolute, it seems that social justice, human rights, and general community action to better others' well being as well as our own would be a foundational ethical principle in Unity. If God in Christ is present equally and fully in each of us and our thought, word, and deed actions substantially affect ourselves and all else around us (based on the principle of Oneness), then our service for others not only physcially and spiritually helps others, it also uplifts ourselves.

The notion of spiritual social action should be integrated into Unity metaphysics. In fact, I'd like to develop a Unity systematic theology wherein the principle of spiritual social action becomes a central theological piece. Social engagement, as an ethic, can be formulated as the organic outgrowth of a mature and effective inner contemplative life -- and the inner contemplative life can be furthered, deepened and expanded through the participation in the service of social action toward the betterment of lives, relationships, and society as a whole.

I like the five points of spiritual social action based on Unity principles that are forwarded by Simmons:

- Empowerment of individuals rather than inviting dependency (which I take to mean a complete dependency on others that dissolves one's sense of worth, uniqueness, and distinction as and individual spiritual being; this is not a negation of the principle of inter-dependence, which refers to the reality of every individual being affected by and in intimate relationship with other individuals)
- Creation of sustainable living, allowing the receiver to give back (that is, when the receiver becomes too reliant on the giver a lack of integrity and equality arises; true social action gives with the intention and implementation of empowering the receiver with resources to become the giver of social service as well)
- Honoring the wholeness of Spirit within all beings, regardless of the outer appearance (no matter what the outer conditions may be, "spiritual" social action recognizes the inner dimension of spiritual integrity and God-presence within all individuals)
- Coming from a consciousness of love and compassion (the intention and attitude with which spiritual social action is done is characterized by love and compassion for humanity, usually grounded in an inner practice of some kind, i.e. prayer, meditation, contemplation)
- Moves us from the role of "benevolent giver, handing down to a needy receiver" to instead, the conscious realization of the privilege to be of service to the divine (in other words, the hierarchy and inequality of relationship inherent in other forms of social service is abrogated in favor of a more humble role of giving to a spiritual equal -- giving from God, through God, to God since God is fully present in every piece of the process).

Read the essay at Unity.org.

Reminder: Jurgen Moltmann at Garrett-Evangelical

This is just a reminder for those who are interested in Christian theology that Jurgen Moltmann, the great German Protestant theologian at Tubingen University, is to speak at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary (my alma mater) tomorrow Sept. 9, 2009 at 1:30pm Central time.

The talk can be viewed via webcast here. Tune in 30 minutes ahead of time and download Apple's free Quicktime player.

For more info about the talk, Dr. Moltmann, or how to listen/watch visit the Garrett-Evangelical Jurgen Moltmann page.

The Unbelieving Future of Christian Faith

Peter Laarman writes an intriguing article for Religion Dispatches concerned with the future sustainability of Christian faith as being one that doesn't cling to doctrine but is open to reinterpreting past teachings and bringing into our worldview new insights to edify and make relevant Christian spirituality in the present context.

Laarman's argument is that he predicts the Christianity of the future will be mostly comprised of those who haven't tenaciously latched onto dogma and creedal belief, instead opting for a faith guided by an ethic socially committed to liberating the oppressed, downtrodden, and poor in our communities and one maintaining an attitude of openness to truth and revelation wherever one may find it. And the people say . . . Amen!

Read the article at Religion Dispatches.

Jurgen Moltmann to Speak at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary

Jurgen Moltmann, one of the world's foremost Protestant Christian theologians, will deliver the academic convocation address at my alma mater Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary in Evanston, IL at 11am on Sept. 9, 2009.

Dr. Moltmann will deliver the Opening Convocation address, "A Theology for Life -- A Life for Theology" in the seminary's Chapel of the Unnamed Faithful (a gorgeous and wonderfully contemplative chapel, by the way).

Dr. Moltmann came to the faith while a prisoner of war during WWII and went on to serve as a distinguished professor of systematic theology at the University of Tubingen in his native Germany. He has written some of the most widely studied and highly influential books of the past 50 years in the area of Christian systematics. Most notable is his luminous A Theology of Hope. In this insightful work Moltmann argues that life in Christ is a life of hope that has power over the future. Hope strengthens faith, assists believers in living a life of love, and engenders a passion for the possible. This hope is the driving force behind the liberation of peoples and the world.

Learn more about Dr. Jurgen Moltmann and his upcoming address here.

"Ethics of Being a Theologian" Article in Chronicle of Higher Ed.

My good friend and colleague Danny Fisher over at his blog has mentioned an important article in the Chronicle of Higher Education delineating the relationship between the academic disciplines of of theology and religious studies. Danny quotes a significant part of the article that hones in on the important distinction:

The best theologians are scholars who have immersed themselves in many of the same academic disciplines favored by religion researchers. Like good religion research, good theology is generated by the application of sound reasoning to empirical evidence. But there is a crucial difference. The religion researcher evaluates that evidence from within a tradition of secular, academic "wisdom." The theologian evaluates the same evidence from within a tradition of sacred, esoteric "wisdom."

The import of this differentiation between the religion scholar and the theologian is that they are both employing the same methodology of using critical thinking to evaluate evidence that can be observed, discerned, and understood by the senses and the mind. However, their contexts are very disparate. The religion scholar is attempting to place her/his self within the traditions of the secular sciences, especially the "softer" sciences like history, sociology, anthropology, as well as the discipline of philosophy. Theologians draw from all of these secular disciplines, but are seeking answers from within a particular religious tradition, doing their work within and for the advancement of the tradition with which they are affiliated.

This distinction between theology and religious studies should not be glossed over and ought to be a more present aspect of public discourse. (Even though critical discussion of religious issues is largely absent from the public sphere in the U.S. I refer those interested to Stephen Prothero's book Religious Literacy).

I did find the article to be a bit overly critical of theologians and the purpose of theological endeavor. The author, K.L. Noll, tends to view theology as less sound and more wishy-washy than religious studies. Nonetheless, it's certainly an essay worth reading for it's insighful distinction between these two important areas of study.

Check out Danny's post.

Presiding Episcopal Bishop Critiques Prominent Soteriology at General Convention

"While many expected LGBT issues to be at the forefront of controversy at the Episcopal Church's General Convention, presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori stunned some participants by taking aim at narrow notions of salvation." (Religion Dispatches)

Since the LGBT issue is threatening to totally split the Episcopal Church, one would imagine that the subject matter for the Bishop might be along those lines, but she surprised everyone with a much more wide-ranging issue - soteriology. Bishop Schori argues that the great Western Christian heresy is that salvation is individual, that right relation with God is something that can be accomplished all on one's own. Salvation is communal, just as life itself is.

As for me, the Unity tradition in which I reside certainly asserts a rather individualistic notion of salvation. Salvation/liberation is brought about by one's own free will in changing attitudes, persepectives, and consciousness from limitation and lack to prosperity and abundance. However, I most certainly see Bishop Schori's point. We in Unity do believe in interdependence. And as interdependently existing beings, each individual human cannot solely rely upon his/herself for existence. Rather, each individual life is integrally interconnected and interrelated to all else in thought, word, and deed. That is, though we certainly do have a free will/volitional agency, this will is impacted, influenced, and affected by others. Our life and living is possible only by virtue of others and is dependent upon others.

Thus, when it comes to soteriology, our individual salvation/liberation can only be understood in and through relationships. That is, my spiritual path to salvation/liberation is influenced by the lives, actions, and intentions of others and is accomplished in a social context of community. Perhaps we can bring more of this aspect of communal liberation explicitly into our Unity theology. There is much more to be said about this issue, but this is just a tidbit of thought.

Candace Chellew-Hodge has the Bishop Schori article at Religion Dispatches.

St. Paul the Pacifist: A Christian Response to Torture

V. Henry T. Nguyen , a lecturer in theology at Loyola Marymount University (L.A.) has written an essay in Religion Dispatches that is a response to recent findings that evangelical Christians are more likely, statistically, to support the use of torture, and proposes an approach to nonviolence based on the teaching of Christianity’s first theologian -- Paul of Tarsus.

Nguyen reminds us that Paul is the earliest historical interpreters of the meaning of the crucifixion and death of Jesus Christ. He points out that Paul turns away from a life of persecutor to that of a preacher and apostle. His being was transformed from a life of violence in the name of religion to a life of love in the spirit of Christ. Paul must have known many of Jesus' teachings because he quotes the Sermon on the Mount in Romans 12, stating "if your enemies are hungry, feed them; if they are thirsty, give them something to drink." He tells us, "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

Another excellent point that Nguyen makes in his article is that Paul's convictions are often misunderstood when it comes to issues of violence. Many miss his bold statements on non-violence and come to the conclusion that he supported violence as a means of dealing with conflict and justice. Some argue that Paul uses military language and thus condones the way of violence. However, Nguyen aptly makes note of the fact that Paul uses military imagery in the service of the gospel of Christ and not the other way around. He reinterprets the gospel such that one is not to intentionally inflict suffering on others but is willing to endure suffering for others. It's this transformative act of taking on suffering for others' sake that is part and parcel of being united to Christ. One suffers and dies like Christ; one is resurrected and reborn like Christ.

Paul's message on violence is one coming from a changed man -- a man who has been radically affected by the experience of redemptive suffering in Christ. This doesn't mean that Paul thought people should seek out suffering, but it does mean that he felt Christians are called to unite ourselves to Christ, which includes loving without reservation (including enemies) and thus being willing to compassionately suffer if it will benefit the well-being of others.

Many in Unity back away from this language of the embrace of suffering for the sake of others. But I don't think we in Unity should be scared of it at all. It's totally in line with our belief in the love of God expressing as each individual. Suffering is not something to be sought or glorified (for it's not our created state). But when suffering is willingly and compassionately endured so that others' well-being may prosper this evinces the profound and transformative Love that we all are. When this compassion occurs, the experience of suffering for all involved is changed into triumph and delivered into the hands of divine glory, release, and peace. This kind of empathy and lovingkindness is an exemplification of the reality of interdependence in the great dynamism of Oneness. (Perhaps more on Unity and suffering at a later time.)

Nguyen offers an informed and insightful look at the teachings of Paul on suffering and violence, using prominent New Testament scholars as well as his own learning. Due to the present circumstances in the world concerning war, terrorism, and torture-debates, this brief essay makes Paul and his theology very relevant for today.

Read the article at Religion Dispatches.

Unity Institute's Lyceum 2009 - Unity Moving in a New Direction

Last year was the first year for Unity Institute's annual conference on theology, spirituality, metaphysics, and religious studies. Unity ministers, religious scholars, and some graduate students presented scholarly papers on a range of themes. I wasn't able to attend last year due to lack of funds (since I'm way out here in SoCal), but the paper I wrote with intentions of attending will be published in the Unity Institute Journal of Theology, which is in the process of getting up and running with both online and hard-copy versions. The first Lyceum was enough of a success that the Institute will be holding another Lyceum conference this year from September 30 - October 3 with the theme - "Science and Religion: An Evolving Dialogue."

The Lyceum conference is a benchmark for the Unity movement, for it represents a definite move toward greater participation in critical theological discussion in a wider context beyond the New Thought paradigm. This is not to say that Unity has never advocated the use of the intellect or rationality in spiritual matters, because it certainly has. However, it is to say that, up to now, Unity has tended to emphasize the intuitive over the intellectual faculty of the human person. 

We in Unity possess a fairly mature and refined concept of ministry; a spiritually deep understanding and practice of prayer (which is evinced through the Daily Word pamphlet and the well-established Silent Unity prayer ministry, among other things); a global network of autonomous churches, prayer ministries, and study groups where people cultivate personal and communal spiritual growth; a history embracing mystical thought that can be traced back through the Transcendentalists (e.g. Emerson and Thoreau) and American Pragmatism (e.g. W. James) to such controversial figures as Eckhart, John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila, Hildegard of Bingen, Pelagius, Bernard of Clairvaux, and Clement and Origen of Alexandria; and an impressive array of prayer techniques ranging from centering and affirmative prayer to visualization and silent meditation. The problem we have in Unity is that most Unity students, ministers, and even some instructors wouldn't know the important historical references I just mentioned and probably wouldn't know how to even begin to theologically assess what these people said or critically reflect on what this means for them in their present context. 

Unity's rich and textured spiritual practice needs to be matched by the intellectual rigor of critical theology. Unity people (especially leadership in the movement such as ministers, instructors, licensed teachers, etc.) must begin to set aside the easy, often feel-good, reading of pop-psychology and spiritual self-help books and take up a volume of Barth, Tillich, Rahner, Moltmann, Cobb, Gutierrez, Fiorenza, or Reuther. Exposing oneself to great thinkers such as these allows one to begin to think critically and theologically about one's faith, spirituality, and practice. In his Systematic Theology, Tillich states, " Theology is the methodical interpretation of the contents of the Christian faith." (ST 1951, 15). The work of theology is to state the kerygma (proclamation of truth) and critically re-interpret this truth contextually from generation to generation. Theology is making the truth-claims of faith reasonable and understandable for the religious community. This theological practice of using the intellect and the past tradition to critically and methodically reflect on faith convictions discerned through mystical revelation or intuition is unfortunately something Unity has not really done. 

However, the good news (no pun intended) is that the Lyceum conference is a mark of a change in attitude among some Unity people. For, as its creative founder, Rev. Thomas Shepherd, has alluded to in his blog, Unity's Lyceum is intended to be a forum for Unity to start to engage in critical scholarly discourse with the wider theological community. I trust that this is the beginning of a wonderful and exciting evolution in Unity, and I'm delighted to participate in its furtherance.

John Polkinghorne, Christianity and Science

Anglican physicist and theologian John Polkinghorne is dedicated to showing how physics, biology, and geology can be employed by Christian (as well as other) theologians as they're doing theology. Using science in our task of interpreting, understanding, and making sense of our faith and practice is important for us in today's context, which is pervaded by scientific inquiry and worldview. The more we, as theologians, are able to traverse and keep up in the realm of science the better we'll learn the intricacies of the physical/material world (an unavoidable part of our daily lives and God's good creation) and the more conversant we'll be in our dialogues with members of the scientific community.

Dr. Polkinghorne is another one of those amazing people who is able to crossover between the theological and scientific disciplines with great ease; an ability I admire, to say the least. His new book, Theology in the Context of Science (Yale, 2009) examines what scientific topics like space and time can teach us about God, and how a scientific style of inquiry can benefit theologians.

See the brief interview with Dr. Polkinghorne the Religion News Service has recently published.

2nd Annual Meeting of Society for Spirituality, Theology, and Health in Diverse Communities

Duke University Medical Center will be holding the 2nd annual meeting for the Society for Spirituality, Theology, and Health June 3-5, 2009. The Religion News Service has the info.