Democratic Forest Trusts (PDF)in Watson, Alan; Dean, Liese; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2006. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Eighth World Wilderness Congress Symposium; 2005 September 30-October 6; Anchorage, AK.Democratic trusts with leadership elected by citizen-members promise to solve many of the problems afflicting both traditional government and corporate ownership of forestlands. This article explores these issues in some depth.Complexity and the Dream of Human Control of Eco-Systems (PDF)in Watson, Alan; Dean, Liese; Sproull, Janet, comps. 2006. Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Eighth World Wilderness Congress Symposium; 2005 September 30-October 6; Anchorage, AK.The title captures it. I then explore the kinds of institutions compatible with both nature and the modern world that are implied from this analysis.Rethinking the Obvious: Modernity and Living Respectfully With Nature (PDF)The Trumpeter: Journal of Ecosophy, Winter, 1997.Modernity is usually considered a wrong turn in terms of respect for and sustaining the environment. I argue the reality is more complex, for modernity has freed us from personal dependence on agriculture, ended the economic value of children, radically reduced the likelihood of large scale wat, and shifted much production to intellectual rather than material capital. This partially decouples society from nature, which gives us important opportunities as well as problems.Towards an Ecocentric Political Economy (PDF)The Trumpeter, Fall, 1996.This paper begins my effort at showing how liberal modernity can be harmonized with an ecocentric perspective on our relationship with the natural world. It is a corrective to much “free market environmental” literature that sacrifices Nature to money as well as to anti-liberal attacks by well-meaning but economically naïve environmentalists.Unexpected Harmonies: Self-Organization in Liberal Modernity and Ecology (PDF)The Trumpeter, Journal of Ecosophy, 10:1, Winter 1993This is my initial paper exploring how what I term ‘evolutionary liberal’ thought can be an important means by which society and nature can be brought into greater harmony. The other Trumpeter papers build on it.Deep Ecology and Liberalism: The Greener Implications of Evolutionary Liberalism (PDF)Review of Politics, Fall, 1996.Liberal thought and deep ecology are usually regarded as mutually exclusive. But the “evolutionary” tradition offers a way to integrate the two through commonalties in the work of David Hume, Michael Polanyi, Arne Naess, and Aldo Leopold, providing a stronger foundation for liberalism while strengthening the case for an ecocentric ethic.(Related subjects: Ecology)Saving Western Towns: A Jeffersonian Green Proposal (PDF)in Writers on the Range, Karl Hess and John Baden, eds., University Press of Colorado, 1998.Developmental pressures in the rural and small town West involve three groups: long term residents, new arrivals, and environmentalists. Today their interests often conflict. This conflict is in part the outcome of institutions which prevent harmonizing competing interests. The concept of developmental trusts, both for rural regions and for small communities offers a means whereby these interests can be harmonized for the benefit of all concerned.(Related subjects: Politics)Social Ecology, Deep Ecology, and Liberalism (PDF)Critical Review, 6: 2-3, 1992.Murray Bookchin is considered a leading radical environmental theorist. However, his analysis is incapable of leading humankind towards a more respectful and sustainable relationship with the natural world. Criticisms of Bookchin from both the deep ecology and evolutionary liberal perspective complement one another, pointing the way towards a better understanding of how modernity relates to the environment.The paper as a whole offers an early discussion of issues that are more clearly addressed in later papers, particularly Deep Ecology and Liberalism (1996) and the three Trumpeter articles in 1997, 1996, and 1993. However, there are other ideas in the article which have not been developed more thoroughly elsewhere.
I saw a number of wonderful sessions yesterday that might interest our larger community. Too many to put a blog together before fatigue led me to bed. One of particular importance was on Pagan involvement in interfaith work. (Reports on more will follow.)
Out here in California we have been active in interfaith for over twenty years, and this has led to a great many good things. Among a wide spectrum of religious groups, in Northern California Pagans are treated with respect by many leaders of other traditions. This respect and understanding led to our deep involvement with the Parliament of World Religions and the United Religions Initiative. That involvement in turn has led to wider recognition of who we are and what we (really) believe around the globe. That is now leading to a growing NeoPagan connection with indigenous and Pagan traditions worldwide.
In areas of our country with less interfaith experience with NeoPagans, even liberal Churchmen often disapprove of us. I suspect this is because, in their heart of hearts, for some it is OK to tolerate nonconforming views by black, brown, and yellow people as they have never “gotten it right” in the first place. Western Pagans are another matter, having found the tradition they were usually raised in insufficient. Tolerating us, let alone respecting us, requires moving from toleration for those you do not find threatening to toleration to those you might. That so much of the Old Testament consists of accounts of killing Pagans does not make this process any easier.
The only remedy is enough cooperative contact so that imagined fears can be dispelled by personal experience. That requires us to reach out. It is not always easy.
Interfaith is a grass roots effort by people of good will in many religious traditions to over come the misunderstandings that have led to so much distrust and violence, and then find common cause addressing issues of common concern. In a striking image given by Angie Buchanan, who serves on the governing board of the Council for a Parliament of the World’s Religions, each religious community is an island, and interfaith builds bridges between those islands.
Interfaith work does not seek a common understanding on basic spiritual tenets of belief, it seeks toleration of one another’s separate paths while finding what I call “second order” issues where we can agree. For example, I find this world a direct manifestation of the sacred, deserving of respect and good treatment. A Christian may think it is God’s creation, and because God created it, it deserves respect and good treatment. We will likely never agree on WHY we have come to a conclusion, but we can agree about the conclusion, and what to do about it.
Even among people of good will with better understanding, progress can be slow. When engaging in interfaith work, Buchanan advocated practicing “aggressive listening.” As an example, she described encountering a panel on the “Divine Feminine” composed of Christians, Jews, and a Muslim at the 2004 Parliament of World’s Religions held in Barcelona. She walked in to listen, only to hear the women of these faiths congratulate themselves on how well they were responding to this ‘newly important’ dimension of spirituality. Later she confronted them, asking “How dare you” have such a panel without any representatives of the Goddess oriented religions present. It would be like if Pagans had a panel discussing religious celibacy without having anyone present from a tradition that practiced celibacy. She was met with tears. The women answered we had not “been on their radar.” We are now.
In a sense we are in a privileged position. Our celebration of divine immanence means that as Buchanan put it. “the social issues of the world are already in our spirituality.” Our celebration of diversity within our own community means that we can easily celebrate the diversity of other communities. Buchanan asked that we act on this foundation. But the several thousand year record of suppression bin the name of Abrahamic religion has led to a mixture of fear and contempt on the part of many contemporary practitioners. Patientpersistence is the best resposes As Buchanan put it, that we do not agree on theological matters does not mean we cannot cooperate in installing a water filtration system in Africa. And from those projects comes benefits not only for the recipients of this help, the helpers also benefit, not last in developing deeper respect for one another..
posted February 16, 2009 at 12:35 am
To tolerate a different tradition I must learn enough about it to allay my fears. To accept its legitimacy to others I must understand both it and the culture and its history. To be able to learn from it and still not lose my tradition I must have a strong faith and a love of learning. To overcome difference I must recognize common ground, and that by common experience.
In our age, some form of meta-ethics, something akin to the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights (see http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html) is a necessary starting point. Can we come to agree upon this, to hold that even as our traditions and cultures vary, that there is a common place which is held even as there are divergences within our cultures and faith traditions. This is a formal starting point and not an end point.
The shamans and mystics, those who are informed via direct experience recognize the intrinsic connection, they know because they have experienced it first hand. It is easy for the mystics to sit together, their ineffable states transcend word and form. Unfortunately, mystics are not bound or tightly bound to anything other than that which informs them directly. They may have affiliation and even commitment to their spiritual traditions, but they do not give symbols a validity that supersedes what has been spoken directly to them. For this reason they have often been viewed suspiciously, and often martyred for heresy and blaspheme. Even so, today there is a far greater awareness and desire by people who affiliate themselves with a faith tradition to experience directly the intimate Presence first hand and at full strength. From that place of deep intimate fellowship which is common in ecstatic states, they can descend the mountain or return as the man in Plato’s allegory of the cave (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plato%27s_allegory_of_the_cave). Those unfamiliar with said experiences may be very resistant to the knowing that is experiential, but if enough people of enough traditions come to this knowing, the point of commonality will begin to eclipse the differences of tradition. This enables not only tolerance, but also connection and an ability to stand outside of an exclusive and intolerant view of religious tradition. This must be the aim, and it should be clearly understood that the best of ways is one in which shared ecstatic states of union become an undeniable base of the common ground. Then the differences of tradition become inconsequential in fact, even as they are very consequential to those who have not ascended into common-union.
I find that I am able to appreciate the various traditions without being bound to any one of them as exclusive. I must occupy this position, since I have shared a cup of unity in the radiant ineffable light with others who ascended the mountain by a different route. When I descend it will be to my community and those to whom I share my life within a cultural context; but I will not allow the light of direct experience to be extinguished or subordinated to a set of symbols and rituals that are specific to my tradition. I will recognize the radiance even though it be hidden within layers and exposed darkly upon surfaces. I will see and know that all are bound together intrinsically, and that this takes precedence over the outer forms of religion.
posted February 16, 2009 at 12:43 pm
When I work with people of other faiths and traditions, I do three things.
1. I tell them what we are not (cat killers, etc.).
which is.
2. I tell what we stand for and explain earthwise ethics. This is often a meeting place for heart and minds:
Earthwise Ethics:
http://fullcirclenews.blogspot.com/2008/05/earthwise-ethics.html
I’ve found that actions speak louder then dogma.
3. I also do a lot of active listening.
I loved that story about the panel – thank you.
As a Californian and a Bay Area community organizer for many years, the focus on interfaith is one of the things I liked best about living and working there. I think that the multicultural mindset that exists there helps a great deal.
I see less of this work being done here in Oregon which is, overall, less diverse and more conservative. Here, individuals reach out to one another quite a lot and this seems to work rather well. In my experience, the work being done by college groups helps, as does the active, dedicated volunteer work many Pagans here do with ecological, activist, animal welfare, and local charity groups. We call it being a “stealth” Pagan. Someone who might be fearful if they knew of our belief system from the beginning meets us as a person first, and doesn’t get hung up on cliches. Then it’s “Oh, that’s Joan. She’s in our PTA and she’s a wonderful knitter”.
As much as I love and value dialogue, I value action, too. In my experience, community efforts make wonderful bridges.
Sia Vogel
posted February 16, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Sia-
Both are necessary. I think no single strategy of political and social change is sufficient. We live in a very complex world, too complex for us to understand beyond the very abstract. I think of political and social action as occurring in a kind of social ecology. So long as he or she is focused on the same broad goal, each actor contributes to its ultimate impact. There is a time for marches, for letters to the editor, and for dialogue. In each of our cases those times will vary both biographically and among different people.
gus
posted February 16, 2009 at 1:56 pm
Bless you for what you’re trying to do, but I have no desire to have any contact with the Abrahamists. They believe, whatever they say, that their job is to “convert” us to their patriarchial religion. I don’t have anything to say to people who believe that except: Stay Away From Me.
posted February 23, 2009 at 11:34 am
Hecate, it is true that many in Abrahamic faiths do take that stance. And I absolutely respect your right not to do interfaith work. It isn’t an easy Path.
But I will say that in the interfaith movement there is a strong taboo against proselytizing. We are all there to help make the world a better place. Hans Kung said, “There will be no peace among the religions without dialogue among the religions.”
We find there are many things we can agree on – the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Barcelona had four themes: peace among religions, access to clean water, the plight of refugees and debt relief for impoverished nations. This year in Australia the Parliament theme is “Healing each other, healing the earth”.
The United Religions Initiative, the other large modern interfaith organization, has Cooperation Circles all over the world doing amazing work, dedicated peacemaking and wonderful dialog.
There are many problems in the world to be solved, I believe that finding ways to work together is the only way we will find solutions.
May Peace Prevail Amongst all Peoples, May Peace Prevail on Earth.