Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Buddhist
NON CREDO On Believing and Loving

NON CREDO On Believing and Loving

Last updated on: February 3, 2012 at 1:10 pm by James Ford

NON CREDO On Believing and Loving 2012-02-03T13:10:32-08:00 James Ford

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

NON CREDO

On Believing and Loving

Joan Richards

22 January 2011

First Unitarian Church
Providence, Rhode Island

Text

And when he came to his disciples, he saw a great multitude about them, and the scribes questioning with them. And straightway all the people, when they beheld him, were greatly amazed, and running to him saluted him. And he asked the scribes, What question ye with them? And one of the multitude answered and said, Master, I have brought unto thee my son, which hath a dumb spirit; And wheresoever he taketh him, he teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth away: and I spake to thy disciples that they should cast him out; and they could not. He answereth him, and saith, O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him unto me. And they brought him unto him: and when he saw him, straightway the spirit tare him; and he fell on the ground, and wallowed foaming. And he asked his father, How long is it ago since this came unto him? And he said, Of a child. And ofttimes it hath cast him into the fire, and into the waters, to destroy him: but if thou canst do any thing, have compassion on us, and help us. Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth. And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief. When Jesus saw that the people came running together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him. And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him: and he was as one dead; insomuch that many said, He is dead. But Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted him up; and he arose.

Mark 9 14-27

As I struggled to come up with a title for this sermon, I hit upon “Non Credo?” because of its ties to the Unitarian notion of ourselves as a creedless religion. But that’s about as much Latin as I want to cope with at the moment. “Credo” is usually translated “I believe” which is an English phrase with a different history than does Credo, and therefore a different meaning. I’m going to start there. My word for today is “believe.”

The origin of the English word is the same as that of the German word “beliebt,” which means “beloved.” In the early modern period to say “I believe in God” would be to say “I love God” in much the same way that for me to say “I believe in my son” still means “I love my son.” But in the year 2012, these two phrases tend to be understood very differently. Even as people recognize “I believe in my son” as a statement about my deepest personal commitments, they tend to hear “I believe in God” as some kind of affirmation that God exists; if the statement carries overtones of personal commitment, they most likely entail some kind of stubborn insistence on existence despite all evidence.

This is because in the year 2012 “believe” is a word that has lost its heart. It is most often set in contrast to knowing—we believe things we do not know—and has lost its love. As a result, in our world, statements of belief are most often attributed to other people and contain strong overtones of falsehood, as in “They believe the earth is flat.” There is nothing clear or explicit as different meanings bounce around in this word, though. And that can be very confusing to all of us, who both think and communicate with our words. So today I want to think about “believing” with love.

I want to start with the passage Keith so valiantly read for us just now. This is, I find, a complicated story. The pleas of the man whose child is so very ill appears as just another distraction in a larger narrative in which Jesus is trying to prepare his disciples for his coming death, even as they are squabbling amongst themselves and not listening to what he is saying. What makes the passage stand out is the interaction between Jesus and the child’s father. First there is Jesus’s statement: “If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth” and the father’s tearful, wrenching reply: “Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.”

The response to this plea is, for me, a very interesting one, because whatever the crowd—or Mark—might have seen, Jesus did not effect any miraculous intervention in this case. The narrative of violent thrashing followed by unconsciousness and then normalcy is a basically accurate description of the major phases of a grand mal seizure. This is something the father of the child, who had observed many such seizures, undoubtedly knew. What the father would have seen that was different, is the way Jesus responded to the affected child: the warmth with which “Jesus took him by the hand, and lifted him up; and he arose.” As I read this passage, this warm interaction was Jesus’s response to the father’s desperate cry. By showing the grieving father the truth of love Jesus was opening the way for the father to “believe,” that is to find in himself the ways of love.

I self-consciously took this reading from the King James version of the Bible, which appeared in 1611 because at that time “belief” was still love saturated. When the father prays “help thou mine unbelief” he is not talking about doubt. He is rather asking for help against the despair, bitterness, sadness which threaten to close him off from his love of the truth of his world and his life with his son. An echo of his call rings through our first hymn: “Grant us wisdom, grant us courage for the facing of this hour—for the facing of this hour.”

There is no question in my mind that “believing” in this sense is essential to all of us as we journey through our world. At one time or another all of us find ourselves faced with situations that have completely overwhelmed our sense of wholeness and well-being, and left us crying out for help. At one time or another we have all found ourselves faced with enormous disappointments: debilitating illnesses, sick or dying children, devastating job losses, crumbling marriages, horrible disillusionments. And as we move through these troubles the challenge for all of us is the same as that of the struggling father in Mark’s gospel—to find ways to remain fully open to the world even as it deeply disappoints, to allow the truth of love to open us to the love of truth, that is to “believe.”

It is tempting for me to end right here, because this is really my message, but if I did so we would get to coffee hour too soon. So I will instead notice one of the problems that lurks in my loving interpretation of belief. The King James version of the Bible comes to us from the beginning of the seventeenth century, and one of the casualities of the intervening years has been the loving openness of their “believing.” The word has nonetheless remained central to a great deal of our religious thinking and speech, but it now often lurks only as a false friend. It has lost its enfolding, loving roots. In our modern world to say “I believe” only rarely means “I hold dear” “I honor” “I love.”

This might be the moment to admit that when I am not in this pulpit, which is most of the time, I study the history of science. This may explain why, if I had to pick a single moment that marked the beginning of the end of this loving meaning of “believing” I would place it with Newton at the end of that seventeenth century. Newton is now generally known for developing a theory of universal gravitation, not for changing the notion of what it means to “believe.” But the two developments were very closely joined. I want to use the Hymn we just sang, Hymn 273, as an entrée into Newton’s world. As I do so, please remember, that when I and our hymn writers, speak of God, we are speaking not of a being, who does or does not exist, but rather of what is ultimate in our world and experience.

Now, Hymn 273 takes a rather different approach to this ultimate reality that we are calling “God” than does Hymn 115, “God of Grace and God of Glory.” The difference is that until its very last line, this hymn does not talk to God; it does not pray to God; instead it describes God.

“Immortal, invisible, God only wise
In light inaccessible, hid from our eyes.”

I frankly love this hymn. I hear it and sing it as an outpouring of praise and love by someone who is wholly embedded in a Newtonian universe. In the hands of the hymn writer the adjectives that describe God: “immortal,” “invisible” “In light inaccessible hid from our eyes,” come together into a wonderfully soaring image of “goodness and love.” Less generally noticed is that these same adjectives may equally be applied to the infinite, absolute space that in a Newtonian world houses all of us, our solar system, and the stars beyond. Like the God of this hymn, Newtonian space is “immortal,” “invisible,” “in light inaccessible hid from our eyes.” And, what is more, Newtonian space is like God, in being ever-present to us in all of our lives, every moment on this earth.

These connections between God and the universe we live in were so universally recognized and celebrated in nineteenth century England that they were all but unconscious to this hymn writer. They were so striking to Newton that in he actually equated the two: “God is eternal and infinite” he wrote in the Principia. “He endures forever, and is everywhere present; and by existing always and everywhere he constitutes duration and space.” And about twenty years later, he said the same thing a bit differently when he said that space was essentially God’s brain, the “sensorium” by which God “perceives all things by his immediate presence to them in all space, wherever they are, without the intervention of assistance of any organ or medium whatsoever.”

Now, in this Hymn and so many others (I think, for example, of the “Blue Boat Home” from the Teal Hymnal) the conflation of God with the space we live in forms a wonderfully sustaining image. Its importance to me for the moment, though, is the way that it has acted on our ideas of knowing and believing. Because the power of Newtonian space lies not only in that it has the attributes of God; the other trick is that Newtonian space is the space we all learned about in high school geometry. In the Newtonian world God may be “in light inaccessible hid from our eyes,” but he is not hid from our knowing minds. This means that the place of loving belief in this Newtonian world is all of a sudden very unclear: we can know God and his world through mathematics.

A major mouth piece for this Newtonian view of the world was John Locke. It is still possible to find the “belief of truth” shining in bits of Locke’s effort to present Newtonian knowing. “He that would seriously set upon the search for truth ought in the first place to prepare his mind with a love of it,” he wrote in his Essay Concerning Human Understanding. And, in a letter to a friend: “To love truth for truth’s sake is the principal part of human perfection in this world, and the seed-plot of all other virtues.”

What is striking in these statements is not the centrality of love in Locke’s understanding of what it is to search out truth; that was a commonplace in his religiously saturated world. What is striking is that as Locke is reaching for the truth in these loving terms he does not use the word “believe.” He does not say “To believe is the principal part of human perfection” but rather “To love truth for truth’s sake is the principal part of human perfection.” This signals a change in the way Locke uses the word “believe.” It places him at the forefront of a change that would glorify the God who opened our minds to the certain knowledge of mathematics, even as it relegated “believing,” to the category of the uncertain or unknown.

When Newton and Locke wrenched belief from its loving roots and moved it into the bloodless category of uncertain knowledge he effectively ended its religious career. However, that is not the way these things work; words cannot be so neatly redefined; their histories remain in their hearts and echo through our minds. In the case of “Belief” and “believing,” the words have remained central to religion, even as these words have lost their loving hearts. One response to the confusions this has caused, has been an effort to remove belief from the heart of religion, that is to find a religion without creed.

There may be a neatness to this solution, but the world is not neat. When, on the NPR segment called “This I Believe,” an eighth-grader proudly proclaimed his refusal to believe anything, I cringed. I cannot turn back the clock to the days when everyone knew that that “believing” meant loving, honoring, holding dear. But even today, I know that when life becomes overwhelming, it is the truth of love and the love of truth that can carry me through. In other words, even today, I know that I need to believe.

Bibliographical Note: For more on the complex evolution of the meaning of belief see Wilfred Cantwell Smith, Belief and History (University Press of Virginia: Charlottesville, Virginia, 1977) and/or Wilfred Cantwell Smith, Faith and Belief (Princeton University Press: Princeton, N
. J. , 1979).

Joan Richards currently serves as co-chair of the Worship Committee of the First Unitarian Church in Providence. She is also Professor of History at Brown University, author of numerous articles on history, particularly the history of science, as well as Angles of Reflection (W. H. Freeman, 2000) and Mathematical Visions: The Pursuit of Geometry in Victorian England (Academic Press, 1988)

Uncategorized

Previous Post

February 2, 2012

A Meditation on the Arc of Justice

Next Post

February 4, 2012 TWO ENTRANCES, FOUR PRACTICES A Meditation on Bodhidharma's Way and Ours

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category A Christmas Carol Abolitionist African-American Ahmadiyya Alan Watts Aldous Huxley Allen Ginsberg Amedkar Jayanti American politics American Zen Anaheim Zen Sangha Anglican Annie Besant April Fool Armageddon Art and Religion artificial intellegence Atheist Awakening B R Ambedkar Barlaam & Josaphat Beatnik Between Bhagavad Gita Bible biography birthday bodhisattva Bodhisattva Precepts Book burning Book of Common Prayer Book of Mormon Brahmo Samaj Buddha Buddhism Buddhist Buddhist Lord's Prayer Butterflies Calendars cartoons cat ChatGPT Chicken Tortilla Soup choices Christian atheism Christian mysticism Christian origins Christian Science Christian Zen Christianity Christianity and Buddhism christmas Christmas Truce Christopher Isherwood Church of Later Day Saints Cinco de Mayo circus covenant critical thinking culture D. T. Suzuki Dalit Buddhism Daniel Defoe Desert Fathers and Mothers dharma talk Dogen Donald Trump Dongshan's Five Ranks Dorothy Day dream Duty Easter ecology Edwin Arnold emptiness Empty Moon Zen Network Episcopal Church Eternal Now Ethics evolution existentialism Faith fantasy Fathers Day film film review fire Five Ranks Folk music food Form and emptiness Four Seals Francis of Assisi Francis Xavier Free thinker friendship George MacDonald Gerald Heard Glenn Taylor Webb God Good Friday Gospel of Gospel of Mark Gospel of Thomas grace Graduate Theological Unioin Graduate Theological Union Guanyin H R Blyth Hakuin Ekaku Hanamatsuri Hanukkah Harada Yasutani Zen Heart Sutra Henry David Thoreau Hermann Hesse Hinduism History and Religion history of religion Holy Spirit home Hospitality Icon Ides of March Isaac Newton Islam Islamic mysticism Jack Kerouac James Luther Adams Jiddu Krishnamurti Joan of Arc Johannes Gutenberg John Donne joke Judaism justice karma kensho King James Bible koan Koun Yamada Kyoto School Lewis Carrol Liberal Christianity Liberal Religion Life Plan Community Liminal literature Literature and Religion Liturgy Lord's Prayer Love Mahatma Gandhi Mahayana Martin Luther King Jr Mary Baker Eddy Mary Magdelene Mary Oliver Mayflower Compact Meditation memories memory metaphor money money and religioin Mormons Mother's Day movie review mysticism mythic Neighborhood Unitarian Universalist Church New Thought Nichiren Buddhism Nonduality not knowing Omar Khayyam Pacific School of Religion pagan Palm Sunday Passover peace Pentecost perennialism Phantastes Philip Kapleau philosophy Pilgrimage poetry Poetry and Religion politics Prayer Precepts Printing Press prophecy prophetic spirituality psychology Pure Land Queer religion queering religion Quietism Ram Mohan Roy rebirth recipe Relationships and religion religion religion and history Religious syncretism Resistance Retirement Retreat review Rissho Kosei Kai Ritual Robert Aitken Roshi Robert Ingersoll Rohatsu Romani religion Rosie the Riveter saints samadhi SanboZen Sangha Satyagraha science science and reigion science and religion science fiction seminary sermon Sesshin Sex and Religion Shinran Sikh Sikh tradition silence Social Justice Socially Engaged Buddhism Society and religion Soto Zen soul spiritual community spiritual practice Spirituality Sufism Suicide superstition Taoism Television Teresa of Avila Thanksgiving theological schools Theosophy Thomas Merton Time Transcendentalism Transcendentalist Trinitarian Trinity Uncategorized unitarian Unitarian Christianity Unitarian Universalist Universalism Vajrayana Vedanta Walking war Willa Cather William Ellery Channing wisdom women and religion women in religion World Teacher Writing zazen Zen Zen Center Zen inspired retriement zen meditation Zen Precepts Zen women

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Who said, "All things work together for good"?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Paul John James Peter