Do You Know 100 People Who Were Transformed by Spirituality?

I can think of many instances when the church divided people. I can think of a few instances when the church transformed people. So what is the point? Can you explain it? Me, neither.

Recently, I attended a Zoom meeting with philosopher John D. Caputo. Caputo speaks and writes about radical theology, which emphasizes social justice over supernatural doctrine. Increasingly, radical theology challenges biblical literalism, creedal boundaries, and established tradition. Many radical theologians consider the absence or irrelevance of a personal, supernatural God.

Also, scholars recognize Caputo as a founder of the weak theology movement. Weak theology rejects the idea that God is an overwhelming physical or metaphysical force. The God of weak theology does NOT intervene in nature. As a result, weak theology emphasizes the responsibility of humans to act in this world here and now.

Weak theology confirms the most common objections to a personal, supernatural God, namely the hiddenness of God and the presence of evil. At the same time, weak theology challenges the advisability or effectiveness of worshipping a personal, supernatural God who might be uninvolved and/or non-existent.

A Caputo Primer

In The Way, I quote Caputo several times. For example, Caputo asks provocatively, “Does the Kingdom of God need God?” In other words, can we love our neighbors as ourselves without God? Can we practice unconditional love without God? And can we promote environmental sustainability, human flourishing and world peace without God?

If a personal, supernatural God is essential to human flourishing, how is that so? If a personal, supernatural God is NOT essential to human flourishing, how is such a God essential?

As Caputo has written, “Seek first the Kingdom of God: that is, the first order of business is to transform one’s own inner life, not the accumulation of external trappings of speculative knowledge.  Radical theology is a theology of the event, where what matters is not what we believe but what happens, what breaks into our lives and transforms us.” (emphasis added)

And he continues, “Let us remember that we are in the presencing of God, of the coming to be of God, of the insistence of God, of the may-being of God. Let us remember that we are summoned to be part of the history of God, of God becoming God in the world.” These are active words. They are NOT passive words that suggest that “God is in charge” or that “Jesus has the wheel.”

Also, Caputo has harsh words for those who are believers, NOT transformers. He argues that Christian doctrine is incredible, and Christian believers are incredulous. He writes: “The conservatives confirm that religion requires believing fantasies. The progressives confirm that living well has little or nothing to do with believing in religion’s supernatural beings and codified doctrines.

“Indeed, far from being sustained by such beliefs, living well is actually impeded by them and too often results in leading furiously reactionary, intolerant, exclusionary, avaricious, mean-spirited, science- denying and anti-modern lives.” There are plenty of examples of beliefs that actually impede living well in contemporary Christianity.

I Can Think of Many Instances When the Church Divided People

In my last column, I wrote, “But if we look around, we see that religion does NOT offer transcendence for most people.” Those who know me best can attest that my spirituality transformed me. Eventually, I realized that everyone is related, and everything is connected. To see it, I stopped listening to Catholic priests and Protestant ministers and started listening to mystics and scientists.

Christianity has over two billion believers and 2,000 years of history. Its founder is widely respected, and its scripture is widely read. Although it is NOT the religion of most people in the world, Christianity is arguably the most culturally-influential religion in the world. Many Christians contribute considerable talent, time, and treasure to their churches. They could be agents of change.

You would think that nations that are predominantly Christian would be less selfish and more selfless, less materialistic and more spiritual, than nations that are NOT predominantly Christian. You would think that people who are Christian would be more loving, more peaceful and more tolerant than people who are NOT Christian. Do you find that to be the case? Me, neither.

In theory, right belief would produce right conduct. In practice, that is often NOT the case.

Sadly, transformation is the exception, NOT the rule. Each of us encounters almost 100,000 people in our lifetimes. Few transform. Do you know 100 people who were transformed by religion? And do you know 100 people who presence God, as Caputo says? Or do you know 100 people who love their neighbors as themselves or who practice unconditional love?” Me, neither.

If there are 2.6 billion Christians today and if each of us encounters almost 100,000 people in our lifetimes, then why do so few of us know 100 people (only one in 1,0000) who are transformed?

I can think of many instances when the church divided people. I can think of a few instances when the church transformed people. There are people, like me, who transformed as they left church. After I left church, Jesus made much more sense, and the church made much less sense.

Why Do We All Have to Have the Same Beliefs?

Today, I met with several pastors who were wrestling with how to accommodate (or whether to accommodate) people with different beliefs. “Why do we all have to have the same beliefs?” I asked. And why are the Disciples, the Episcopalians, the Methodists and the Presbyterians splintering into ‘traditional’ churches and ‘welcoming’ churches over questions of belief and behavior?

Why do others’ beliefs or preferences concern anyone else? Why do we spend our time wondering whether we should judge or tolerate others, NOT how to presence God or usher in the Kingdom? And why does it harm us if the person next to us sees the world differently from how we see it? Why do some people say things like, “I’m a Christian, but I’m NOT ‘that kind of Christian.'”

Increasingly, some progressive Christians are beginning to ask whether progressive Christianity has become as exclusive and intolerant as conservative Christianity. Many Christians of all stripes value belief over behavior. This is curious, since Jesus said very little about what to believe and very much about how to behave. Still, most Christian creeds are about belief, NOT behavior.

What would church look like if “All are welcome,” even if they do NOT believe everything we believe? Do we have different beliefs? That’s OK. Do we treat people with different beliefs differently? That’s NOT OK. I can think of many instances when the church divided people, especially people with different beliefs and behaviors.

In several years of practicing Buddhism, I have NOT seen any Buddhist ever have to affirm political ideologies or religious theologies or to pass judgment on anyone else’s conduct or preferences. Further, I have NOT heard any Buddhist qualify themselves by saying, “I’m a Buddhist, but I’m NOT ‘that kind of Buddhist'” (or “I’m NOT a Buddhist Nationalist.”) Never happens.

Likewise, at Hindu ashrams, Shinto temples and Sufi circles, no one ever asked me if I was a Hindu, a Shinto or a Sufi. And no one ever tried to evangelize me to Hinduism, Shintoism or Sufism. Never happens.

Where Did We Learn to Oppose Those Who Do Not Share Our Beliefs?

In The Way, I wonder, “Where did we learn to confuse beliefs with facts? We learned that in church. Where did we learn to support people who share our beliefs and to oppose those who do not? We learned that in church. Where did we learn that God rewards us for our beliefs—and therefore, that God will punish others for theirs? We learned that in church, too.”

I can think of many instances when the church divided people. I can think of a few instances when the church transformed people. So what is the point? Can you explain it? Me, neither.