Dancing with
Dinosaurs – a spirituality for the twenty-first century. Mark Patrick Hederman,
the St. Columba Press, Dublin. 2011. pp 100.
This review was first written on October 1st 2011.
This is Mark
Patrick Hederman’s ninth book, all in the last ten years or so and all in my
own library. There is an introduction and five chapters.
To-day
we have invented our own dinosaurs. Churches, banks and internationals are some
of the modern breed of dinosaurs. Small may be beautiful but in the world in
which we live it is not very durable. Unless any organisation becomes a
dinosaur it will not survive the vicissitudes of history
Modern Hong Kong |
The first
chapter of 18 pages deals with the history of the dinosaurs, the author’s
concept of modern dinosaurs and his reference to historical aspects over the
last 2,000 years which are germane to the evolution of modern dinosaur equivalents
The second
chapter of 12 pages begins with a long quote from Snake
by D.H. Lawrence and this is followed by a detailed description of the evolution
of the human brain. The quote from Snake had to do,
I think, with the gradual separation of humanity from the beasts. To those
without some knowledge of medicine, of anatomy and physiology his concept of
the brain will require a deal of concentration. To me his reference is a
confirmation of the Darwinian proposal about the survival of the fittest and
the continued progress of science in increasing knowledge of this life. Despite his faith in the Holy Spirit as
an integral part of the Trinity, I find it hard to accept on the current
evidence that there is a different world than the one we live in. For me evidence is the keystone of conviction.
As far back
as 13,000 years before Christ there was evidence of belief in the next world
among the Hindus in India and the far eastern areas of Asia, and later among Buddhism 500 years before Christ. Judaism
was first recorded about 1000 years before Christ, while Christianity was
established 2000 years ago and the Muslim faith in the 7th century
A.D. These beliefs are all with us to-day.
Most beliefs
now include a bewildering number of sects which at times can be in clear
conflict with each other in theological and secular matters. No doubt a belief
in God and another world existed before these early years but it was the
evolution of the written word which accounts for our record of past religions.
And yet there are others, like the author of this essay, who firmly believes in
the power and the ubiquity of the Holy Spirit and in the Trinity.
Chapter
three of 36 pages, The Church as Dinosaur, is the kernel of the book and
provides the greatest challenge to the reader, including to myself. The author
goes in some detail into the history of Christianity during the two millennia
and particularly of the Roman Catholic Church before and after the break with
the Orthodox Church in the 11th century and the later Protestant upheaval in
the 16th Century
It was not
until the early 4th Century that Christianity was legalised by
Constantine and later in that century it was declared the state religion of
Europe marking not only the further spread of Christianity but also the
beginning of the political power of the Church, particularly after the break
with the Orthodox Church. Rome remained the head of the Catholic Church and
was to remain not only a great spiritual influence in Europe but also an
increasingly powerful political force with its extensive territory and military
support, at least until the late 19th century when it was deprived
of power by the Italian Government.
The slow
advance of Christianity
during its first few hundred years was in striking contrast with the very rapid
advance of Islam which
within a generation or two had spread widely along the eastern and southern
coasts of the Mediterranean and deep into the western lands of Asia. The slow extension of Christianity
might possibly be one factor which is consistent with our doubts about the
authenticity of Christ and his miraculous appearance on earth.
It is clear
from Mark Hederman’s narrative that Christianity continued to evolve in terms
of beliefs and dogma during its entire history with the support of Rome and its
leaders. If Christians proclaim to have the one unique truth, one might ask why
have so many sects worldwide
spawned, particularly in America and in Europe, and why has the Catholic Church needed so many additional
opinions and emendations during the centuries?
The belief in God and a hereafter is widespread throughout the world. The Jews, the Buddhists, the Hindus, the Muslims and the Christians are only some of the religions which share a belief in God and the next world. It is apparent that we cannot accept in its finality our departure from this earthly existence although the question of our existence before being born to this world is never raised. Was the creation of the soul a first and spontaneous event that is designed to continue ad infinitum?
Christianity
may have some historic basis for the virgin birth, the incarnation,
resurrection and the miracles
attributed to Christ but the evidence would hardly stand up to the very strict
criteria of
scientists, statisticians and most historians nowadays. Nor do these claims impress most
Christians if we are to judge by the little impact many have on religious
observance. The stated miracles claimed in
later years hardly stand up to serious scrutiny. I might change my mind on the
latter issue if somebody lost a leg and the exact same limb was to reappear and
be functionally normal a few weeks later.
I believe we
have more than enough problems in trying to understand the world we are living
in. When did it start and when is it likely to finish? And how big is it in
terms of space and its trillions of stars and planets, all continuing to
increase in numbers as we develop more efficient spectroscopes. It is likely that we shall never understand the
world’s limitations of space, content and time. If there are limitations of
time and space, what exists beyond? Is it possible that scientific progress
will continue until Homo sapiens have learnt all there is to learn? Might this
be our concept of Heaven?
The theists
say that our ignorance and our dilemmas about the nature of life are surely
evidence of God and another world. Would not such an additional world require
the same enquiry and the same understanding? Of course it depends on what we
mean by God. God may simply be the totality of knowledge or the totality of
existing space but these concepts are beyond our understanding.
One wonders
about the author’s views about the history of Christianity and the many social,
political and theological changes which have taken place over these many
centuries. In the short
introduction he states that his task is to clarify the landscape between this
world and the next.
Others
have the job of explaining everything else that exists. Mine is simple and
straightforward and how we relate to God.’’
I believe
that Mark Hederman’s most significant comment may have been expressed on
television when he advised us to 'keep in direct contact with God.’ Does he
circumvent the problem of the Vatican and the more secular aspects of
Catholicism when he speaks directly to God? Perhaps he assumes it was
unnecessary for the faithful to be reminded of the Holy See in the affairs of
our spiritual world. To the doubting Thomas’s, one might ask need we accept the
many changing theological and secular policies imposed on the faithful by the
Church over these many centuries.
His subject
of linking the real world around us with his deep spirituality might not be
easily understood by the less enlightened laity, although I do respect the
sincerity of his faith and profess high admiration for his scholarship and for
his analytical mind.
Science does
not deal with belief. It deals with things that you can prove. And since we
cannot disprove the existence of God, the question of whether or not a person
believes in God is surely a personal matter. I daresay that the gradual loss of
religion, or at least religious observation, during the last two or three
centuries can be correlated with the improvement in the education of the masses
and not necessarily with reduced personal and moral behaviour
We have no
prospect of solving the nature of God or to understand the next world if it exists. Why all this fuss about
dogmatic formulations on God’s nature? It seems to me that God should be simply
interested in our moral actions and intentions. I
suspect that the author’s view of religion reflects the great mystery of God
and that much of the secular changes which have been introduced by the Church
have little relevance to his spirituality nor to my fate
My own view
about God and the next world is clear. I am an
atheist. I believe that God’s advice about human behaviour was crystallised by
the Stoics and their secular philosophy a few centuries before the time of
Christ. It was based on humility, love and forgiveness. And surely those who
profess no religion and who may not believe in a
next world do not differ in their morals and in their behaviour from those of
the religious. Indeed some of the worst forms of bigotry, cruelty and destructive
behaviour have been committed over the centuries in the context of religion. Is
our concept of God and His goodness as evoked by the Church consistent with the
extermination of the Cathars in Languedoc, the fanaticism of the Crusades and
the horrors of the Inquisition? And the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick 1 forcibly
converting the Eastern Orthodox Slavs to Roman Catholicism?
The progress
of science is inexorable. If humanity survives the rapid destruction of the
planet’s environment, on which we, together with all living beings, depend for
our existence, we may reach a state of full knowledge and wisdom, a state perhaps
not unlike our concept of Heaven.
But I have little hope in the meantime of avoiding nemesis.
James
Lovelock, world environmentalist and leader in the earth sciences, spoke to a
packed audience at University College Dublin about four ye ars ago when the world
population was just reaching 7 billion (it was 2.5 billion in 1950). He was
asked to guess the likely population of the world in the year 2100. He proferred
the figure of one billion. He may have been right but he may have been
over-optimistic. Can humanity survive another hundred years with the rapid
deterioration of the environment on which we depend, a deterioration which is
accelerating in its course and with our population approaching 8 billion in
another decade? I hardly think so with our politicians’ fixation on our standard of
living, with an electorate spurred on by the same philosophy and with the
constant shadow of the nuclear bomb.
Graveyard of airplanes |
The great Russian
physiologist Ivan Pavlov defined health as a state of being in equilibrium with
Nature. Certainly, we are dependent on harmony with Nature, a fact which should
compel current generations to avoid nemesis by ensuring that we care for our
natural surroundings as assiduously as we care for ourselves. Humanity’s
current obsession with material acquisitions, its gross neglect of our natural
surroundings on which we depend on our welfare and survival, its waste of
Nature’s limited resources added, above all, to its burgeoning human
population, does not bode well for our immediate future.
Going up or down Sir? |