Exit To Entrance

A Post for NCRcafe: Exit to Entrance
By Marie Schickel Rottschaefer
Vol. 2 No. 5 August 2008

The goal of these posts is to give a brief overview of developments that have relevance for us in the early 21st century, particularly in seeking solutions for pressing people and planet problems.

Contemporary Faith Metamorphosis:
A Partial Answer To Why The Change (Continued):
Biblical Scholarship Adopts Scientific Methodology

Going beyond my comments of last time on Funk et al’s book, I add that the liberation celebrations of Passover and Easter have run their course and must be left to their places in history. Biblical scholarship and its implications for demythologization make the future of the Judeo-Christian tradition look empty. Our ever- present longing for liberation must be sought elsewhere. Exiting this tradition leads us to an obscure entrance where a post-axial age faith becomes defined in the living of it in a century that is radically different from all previous centuries. The worldwide intellectual/academic milieu, broad-spectrum scientific achievements, planetary and extra-planetary (cosmic) technological advances, political, social, moral and other post-axial age religious issues, massive angst-inducing economic and ecological changes all bring us to a turning point in our species’ existence that has never before been experienced. Might not the transformation from a hunter-gatherer to an agricultural society be considered “small change” compared to what is ahead for Homo sapiens in the twenty-first century?

We need also to look at other scholars who address the issues raised by biblical scholarship. Earlier in my New Search posts, I mentioned Thomas Sheehan and Louis Dupre. I will do so again to emphasize the profound changes of the post-Vatican II era. An overall sense that I have in reading Sheehan’s article is that, while there is no turning back in our faith experience to an earlier time, we are still feeling our way towards the future. Yet Dupre critiques Sheehan and his associates for “straddling the stream” rather than taking the required leap to which their spirit of adventure has led them. But hesitancy is normal in unfamiliar territory and that is why I earlier reminded us of the phenomenon of CONDITIONED BEHAVIOR: A CONDITIONED BEHAVIOR IS BEHAVIOR BROUGHT ON UNCONSCIOUSLY BY A STIMULUS THAT TRIGGERS A REACTION BECAUSE OF A LEARNED ASSOCIATION WITH SOMETHING ELSE. Recall the comparison: A CONDITIONED BEHAVIOR -- belief in the God of Judaism -- is BROUGHT ON UNCONSCIOUSLY BY A STIMULUS -- the threat of demythologization to one’s religious faith -- BECAUSE OF A LEARNED ASSOCIATION WITH SOMETHING ELSE – one’s religious tradition. Thus, though Sheehan in the article that I have been discussing has just finished demythologizing the alleged revelation of the Judeo-Christian God, he, nevertheless, suggests that we continue to follow the God of Judaism. Why does he do this? I think that his response is a conditioned one. He reacts in this way to the threat that his own demythologization raises for Judeo-Christian belief because of his long-standing association with the Judeo-Christian tradition. But since demythologization has shown that the God of Judaism is also a part of history, Sheehan necessarily ought to change his belief system.

So it is time for new strategies to overcome conditioned behavior. But a faith perspective thousands of years old doesn’t revise itself overnight. Scholars recognize that demythologization makes change inevitable. Thus, Dupre’s letter offers some initial suggestions for the required leap in pursuing a new faith perspective. While he writes an extraordinarily impressive letter, the transformation issue is so complex that it is in need of discussions from diverse disciplines.

Moving to another scholarly source, John J. Collins’ An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2004) focuses on the historicity of the Jewish biblical stories. In the volume’s Introduction, for example, Collins states that many scholars question whether we can claim any historical knowledge about a patriarchal period or even an exodus. In Chapter Five, The Exodus From Egypt, he says that very little can be said about the exodus as history. It is likely that some historical memory underlies the story, but it is full of legendary details and lacks supporting evidence from archeology or from nonbiblical sources. And so a pall is cast over the historicity of the Exodus story. And that story is fundamental to the Jewish Celebration of Passover.

The Exodus Story and the Passover celebration is to Judaism as the Resurrection story and the Easter celebration is to Christianity. I discussed these celebrations earlier in connection with Funk’s et al book. There appears to be little to celebrate in these liberation festivities, given that demythologization has rendered flimsy their faith foundation. This process in biblical-historical research strips away the mythical and mysterious elements of the idea of the inspired word of God or revelation, leaving a human story told as a lesson for the day. In other words, demythologization extinguishes the cornerstone idea of revelation in the Judeo-Christian tradition. (We will be discussing later Catholic and Protestant appeals to revelation and the idea of a circular argument embedded in each claim.) The removal of this long held sacred underpinning for human conduct through assent to divine right and authority must lead to a new responsibility and accountability rooted in the goal of planetary sustainability. For faith seekers a post-axial age faith necessarily follows.