KARL JASPERS FORUM
TA 106 (Müller)
Commentary
C32 (to R11)
EVOLUTION
AND RELIGION
by Maurice McCarthy
12 May 2008, posted 17 May 2008
<1>
You wrote: [3]
I guess what I am trying to say is : an individual like you can make all sorts of
personal connections, without being handicapped by dogma. But this is quite different at the level of
religious organizations, though hope is always allowed.
[MM:]
Yes, and my hope is that, in this age of planetisation, ideas of unity in diversity will gain
currency, that religion can begin to brought under the umbrella of knowledge by
means of evolutionary theory. Since I
view knowledge as a free creative act then I hold the unification of religion
and science as an ideal.
<2>
Interestingly, this week's New Scientist No. 2655 (10 May 2008) carried an
article by Stuart Kauffman on pages 52 to 53 to mark the publication of his new
book Reinventing the Sacred. These are some the statements made
:
"The process of reinventing the sacred requires a
fresh understanding of science that takes into account complexity theory and
the ideas of emergence. It will require a shift from reductionism, the way of
thinking that still dominates our scientific world view. "
"I do not believe that the evolution of the
biosphere, economy and human culture are derivable or reducible to
physics."
"Yet what is more awesome: to believe that God
created everything in six days, or to believe that the biosphere came into
being on its own, with no creator, and partially lawlessly? I find the latter
proposition so stunning, so worthy of awe and respect, that I am happy to
accept this natural creativity in the universe as a reinvention of
"God". From it we can build a sense of the sacred that encompasses
all life and the planet itself. From it, we can change our value system across
the globe and try, together, to ease the fears of religious fundamentalists
with a safe, sacred space we can share. And from it, we can, if we are wise,
find means to avert wars of civilisations, the ravages of global warming, and
the potential disaster of peak oil."
<3>
To your question in [4] ... the kingdom
of Lothar (Lotharingia),
... I had not been aware of a
‘spiritual’ dimension of this political development, the relation to the
trinity which you mention. Is this your
personal interpretation, or do you have historical references for this view ?
The interpretation was personal (and I've no idea
whether Charlemagne had any knowledge or deliberate spiritual intent) but
similar views are held by many anthroposophists since
Steiner made rather a lot of 869. The
few references I have all belong to the anthroposophical
movement. Terry Boardman, an
anthroposophist and historian, has recently posted an article on his personal
website at <www.monju.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Council of 869.htm> His
principal source appears to be
H.H.Schöffler ed., Der
Kampf um das Menschenbild (Verlag um Goetheanum, 1986)
He also mentions
Markus Osterrieder,
Verschweigen des Geistes (Silencing the Spirit)
www.celtoslavica.org/bibliothek/trichotomie.pdf
Much of the content of Boardman’s article is esoteric, even so, I find the quasi-numerological means of
grasping structure in the fabric time as arbitrary and unconvincing. I’m not quite sure what his purpose is but it
does contain a lot of factual report. It
does not answer your request though.
-----------------------------------
Maurice McCarthy
e-mail <moss (at) mythic-beasts
(dot) com>