St. Augustine chimes in on the Burris appointment
By Chad Crawford • Jan 11th, 2009 • Category: church history, engaging, politicsThere was a column in the NYT the other day by Stanley Fish comparing the controversy surrounding the Burris appointment to the Donatist Controversy. While the government is not a religious institution, I believe if St. Augustine were an influential person in today’s American politics, his judgment would be that Burris should be seated, barring any legal bombshells. Augustine’s position on the Donatist Controversy was that authority is ex opere operato: from the work having been worked, rather than the worker. So a person’s authority is derived from the legitimacy of the institution itself, and not the qualities of the person. Augustine did not believe the church was made up of only saints.
The Donatists in the Senate are starting to see the same wisdom. If Burris is denied his seat, the Burris Controversy could set a precedent for arguing against the legitimacy of any appointment. How clean does one’s record have to be to appoint someone? And how far does one have to travel down the line of succession to have sufficiently verified one’s credentials?
Chad Crawford is a graduate of the University of Mary Hardin-Baylor and Wake Forest University Divinity School. He is originally from Austin, Texas and now lives in San Francisco, where he is the online communications manager for Interfaith Power & Light, a nonprofit organization mobilizing a religious response to global warming. He's a former youth minister and long distance hiker sharing thoughts on ecology, politics, culture, and faith.
Follow Chad on Twitter | Chad on Facebook
Email this author | All posts by Chad Crawford
PROCESS THOUGHT I
From our countercultural faith perspective, there is in our theological, traditional culture, emphasis placed on substance and changelessness.
For example, perfection, especially, in God, is viewed as having no change because change implies lack of perfection.
There are, however, other philosophical systems besides what is known as Thomistic or Scholastic philosophy which our theology has been based on for centuries.
Alfred North Whitehead, who died in 1947, was one of the most original thinkers of the 20th century.
Yet he is not well known even in intellectual circles, never mind in daily discourse.
In 1952, five years after his death, he wasn’t even mentioned in our seminary course of The History of Philosophy.
Whitehead is responsible for what is called Process Thought. Process Thought has been translated into Process Philosophy and Process Theology.
Whitehead’s philosophy is now being taught in many schools of advanced learning. But even in seminaries, where Whitehead might be mentioned, his ideas of change are contrasted with the teachings of Thomas Aquinas and they are dismissed as lacking if not false.
An interesting footnote is that Aquinas’ thought was banned because he used the Greek philosopher, Aristotle, instead of the time-honored Augustine’s use of Plato. Actually it was because Aquinas’ teaching was new and different.
The fundamental difference between traditional thought (Aquinas based on Aristotle) and process thought (Whitehead based on the Greek philosopher, Heraclitus) is that Aquinas bases reality on substance and essence while Whitehead bases reality on change or process.
The Greek philosopher, Heraclitus, is famous for his statement that you cannot step into the same river twice. In other words, the river is forever changing.
Robert Mellert in his book, What Is Process Theology? states this opinion: “Heraclitus was largely ignored. As a result, the thrust of Greek thought, and most of Western thought thereafter, was derived from the static concepts of ‘being,’ ‘substance,’ and ‘essence,’ rather than the more dynamic concepts of ‘becoming,’ ‘process,’ and ‘evolution.’”
The whole universe is in constant motion and therefore change, extending outward for 10 billion light years.
As Heraclitus also said, “Everything changes.”
Becoming precedes being; we emerge first, then we establish our identity. Emerging is becoming.
The theologian and spiritual writer, poet and storyteller, John Shea, says, “At root everything is evolutionary.”
Some might object to Whitehead’s adoption of evolution. But as long as we posit the Creator God at the beginning of the evolutionary process, there is no contradiction.
For example, doesn’t a baby, all things being equal, evolve into an adult? If you say, ‘grow’ not ‘evolve,’ you’re just wasting time nitpicking.
Doesn’t this evolution indicate the value of change and ongoing process?
OUR SPIRITUALITY
What does process thought have to do with our spiritual development?
The very word, development, emphasizes process.
Freedom is God’s greatest gift to us and God so respects our freedom that God will never interfere with coercion.
Therefore, God is constantly issuing multiple possibilities for us to choose from.
These possibilities range from the least to the little to the less to the average to the great to the greater to the greatest.
Take, for example, St. Thomas a Becket.
Becket could have chosen the least and become a cohort and supporter of King Henry II in Henry’s unjust treatment of the Church.
Or Becket could have chosen the less, keeping one foot in Henry’s world and one in the world of the Church.
Or Becket could have chosen, as he actually did, the greatest: fulfilling his vow as Archbishop of Canterbury, opposing Henry’s abuse of the Church.
God includes the least so as to reinforce our freedom
But God is forever persuasively luring us to choosing the greatest possibility, allowing us the freedom to make the choice we want.
So as far as our spiritual development is concerned, we have the freedom to choose being nominal Catholics (least) or Sunday Catholics (less) or fervent Catholics(greater) or mystics (greatest).
In any of these choices God is infinitely respectful of our freedom, but always luring us toward mysticism with infinite persuasion.
God respects our freedom even to the point of our abusing our freedom by choosing the least worthy possibility or even sin.
God pours all the goodness and power he has acquired from his faithful creatures back into us; and to receive this goodness and power we must be consciously open.