Donald A. Crosby on Religious Naturalism and Suffering
In
his book Religion and Ambiguity:
Religious Naturalism and the Menace of Evil (2008), Donald A. Crosby recommends
a form of religious naturalism as a response to our own suffering and that of
others. He defines religious naturalism as “the view that nature is
metaphysically ultimate and that nature or some aspect of nature is religiously
ultimate” (ix); there is no supernatural realm in which a supernatural being or
beings reside (x). Evil cannot be explained away, but we can find in nature the
rejuvenating powers of the natural world, and in ourselves as natural creatures
sources of hope, purpose and value (xi).
Key points include:
Reference
Crosby, Donald A. 2008. Living With Ambiguity: Religious Naturalism and the Menace of Evil. New York: State University of New York Press.
For further information about Donald A. Crosby, please see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_A._Crosby
Elizabeth Burns, March 2015
Key points include:
- Suffering is the price we pay for life – “[t]o be capable of joy is also to be capable of pain” (28).
- Possible purposes for human beings include being sensitive to the suffering of all creatures, and contributing to the alleviation of suffering. What matters is not survival of death, but the contributions we can make before we die to present and future generations of living creatures (9).
- Awareness of our mortality should enhance rather than diminish the value of human life, since we have only a limited amount of time in which to make a difference to this world (10).
- The claim that life is absurd if it ends in death and there is no afterlife in a supernatural realm which brings endless contentment is vulnerable to three objections: 1. This supernatural realm is a perfect world where there could be no real freedom, no challenge or effort – and therefore no meaningful life. 2. We did not exist infinitely into the past, so why is it necessary for us to live infinitely into the future? 3. It is not clear how a future bliss could compensate for innocent suffering in this life (99), justice is best understood as its own reward, and this view distracts from dealing with present suffering (100).
- Faith is “not just the assertion of a claim or collection of claims as true”; to have faith is “to stake one’s life on something of momentous value and importance” (45). Faith is “a matter of being, not just of believing” (47).
- Religions help us deal with suffering by offering conceptual explanation as far as they can, but also “by evoking with symbol, rite, meditation, myth, parable, koan, and story the courageous life-affirming powers of the human spirit – powers nature has implanted in every human being” (92).
- Nature does have a dark side, and our task is “to find the courage to live in the face of it” (107). We should support one another in sorrow and grief (107-8). Sometimes this may be done by silent presence or simple symbolic deeds, such as making a cup of tea (108). We cannot resolve the ambiguities of nature, but “we can be fellow sufferers who understand” (108).
Reference
Crosby, Donald A. 2008. Living With Ambiguity: Religious Naturalism and the Menace of Evil. New York: State University of New York Press.
For further information about Donald A. Crosby, please see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_A._Crosby
Elizabeth Burns, March 2015