While these questions seem far removed from the latest blogs concerned with the personal aspects (or lack of them) of God, they really are not. Consider a New Age perspective on cancer; at least for a while, many of its adherents preached that cancer was caused not only by cigarettes and other carcinogens, but also by one's spiritual/mental state. Many people were offended by this, considering it an unproven burden placed on those already suffering, and I have to admit that they have a point. However, this provokes a contrary and equally un-provable belief - that some things, like cancer, simply happen; that some things are up to fate; meaning, for believers, that some things are simply up to God, who in His higher wisdom has deemed certain sufferings necessary. Could it be, then, that something as large and unwieldy as climate change is really more up to God than to us?
Many think so, but this does not mean that Man is off the hook, for in this view, we may be approaching Armageddon in the form of Global Warming due to our sinful behavior. We might even say that the excess carbon in the atmosphere is due to greed, so that both our sins and science coalesce. This points to a third way of thinking, something that holds the scientific and the moral together. According to many esoteric thinkers (see The Secret Teachers by Gary Lachman), our current technology is the product of unbalanced, "left brain" thinking that has overridden "right brain" conceptualizations of timeless unity between individuals, humans, and nature. We are now at the breaking point, where we will have either a smooth transition to a more balanced approach, including both the left and right mode, or we we will have a complete meltdown of the left, causing the end of the world as we know it, and a return to those who survive of the primitive, mythological mind. In this case, "sin" is replaced by poor balance, and our current science is simply a reflection of our lack of balance, along with the ensuing problems. Thus, science and mind and physical reality are joined together in mutually causative ways. And no matter how one looks at it, we need a return in some degree to a more right brain, or spiritual mode.
But where in this has God gone? Does he remain the distant clock maker who has built in this dichotomy, so that we might not run too far from the spiritual path in pursuit of physical control? And is our "free will" only the choice between this limited duality, or its balance? In other words, is God still an active "father" or is "It" removed from our prayers and concerns?
Here, we go back to the beginning, to the poor guy with cancer. Is this cancer the will of God? Or is it from unknown carcinogens alone? Or is it caused by the friction between the right and left brain dichotomy?
If either the dichotomy or the will of God, then the cancer is a sign that things are not OK, and that we have to work on our faith or our balance. If it is simply an organic problem, then we have to find the material that caused this, so that it will not happen again. Which of these, though, is it?
And so this writer's struggle with the nature of God. Not surprisingly, I found synchronicity between this question and the Gospel in this week's church service, the famous one about the Prodigal Son. In this, God is compared to a loving father who is willing to allow his son the freedom to choose his own destruction, yet who is overjoyed when he rejects this and comes home in humiliation and repentance. There is much to be made from this, but for our purposes, we see here a god that allows foolish, self-destructive behavior, but also welcomes the fool back into the fold. We see, then, a permissive but loving and involved being, something so attuned to humans that we might truly say that we are made in His image. And yet, we are allowed to kill ourselves, if that be our decision. Where would this fit in with science? Where would this fit in with the balanced an unbalanced mind?
More directly, where would this fit in with Global Warming and cancer? Oddly, I think it agrees with all of the perspectives. With pure science, humans have the reasoning powers to destroy or to create - to mess up the environment, or not - or to make carcinogens or find the cure. With pure religion, we are cared for if we truly love God; with this, cancer might be a test or a strengthening, and Warming (as mentioned above) a consequence of sin - and in any case, eternal salvation is always waiting. With the New Age approach, God gave us both reason and spirituality, both necessary and useful, but best when well-balanced. And, except for His absence in science, "He" is more than willing to take us back.
But God's nature, or even lack of it, still remains a mystery. Just as he could be either nothing but science or mental balance, so could he still be the benevolent father. But how does one talk to science? And is it worth it for one part of the brain to beseech the other for good fortune or health? This, at least for me, requires more thought and maybe that something else - more prayer. For although it might be foolish to have my will in many ways of the world, how could greater clarity of mind ever be a mistake? And if there is no response, could that not also be a deciding answer? FK