Spiritual Bankruptcy: A Prophetic Call to Action

by John B. Cobb JR.

Overview

In these times many people feel that their cherished religious values are held hostage by the forces of secularization and that, as a consequence, society is morally bankrupt.  While acknowledging this problem, John Cobb overturns the prevailing expectations by drawing a distinction between secularization and secularism. 

Secularization, as Cobb uses the term, has a prophetic function. It is a process by which religion is cleansed and refocused on mission and ministry rather than on other-worldly myths and concerns. The uncritical understanding of religion that focuses on religion for its own sake is what Cobb calls secularism. In Cobb’s view, secularization has led to secularism or a culture of consumerism that threatens those very religious convictions many hold dear.  After teasing the concepts of secularization and secularism apart, Cobb proposes an alternate path for secularization that will help us reevaluate our relation to our world and each other.

Product Details

ISBN-13:	9781426720123
Publisher:	Abingdon Press
Publication date:	09/01/2010
Sold by:	Barnes & Noble
Format:	eBook
File size:	381 KB

Read an Excerpt

Spiritual Bankruptcy

A Prophetic Call to Action

---

By John B. Cobb Jr.

Abingdon Press

Copyright © 2010 Abingdon Press
All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4267-2012-3

---

CHAPTER 1

IN CONFRONTING CATASTROPHE, WHO CAN HELP?

I. Collective Insanity

In the summer of 1969, I awakened to the fact that humanity faces a crisis of unprecedented proportions. My son, Cliff, had persuaded me to read Paul Ehrlich's The Population Bomb. The book was wrong about a lot of things, but it was right about one extremely important matter. The growth of population and of per capita consumption was on a collision course with the limited capacity of the Earth to support human activity. Most of our supposed intelligence and rationality was directed to "improving" activities, leading us to selfdestruction in the sense of making them more efficient.

For a few years it seemed that we might, collectively, begin to behave rationally. Earth Day 1970 got a lot of press. There was widespread public concern. There were articles, books, and conferences. Some significant legislation made its way through Congress and was signed by Richard Nixon. The United Nations held a major conference at Oslo and established helpful programs. If this momentum had continued during the past forty years, the world would be in a very different place.

But that was not what happened. With the United States in the forefront, world opinion, or at least that of its controlling leadership, decided we had had enough of that issue; we needed to get back to "serious business." Serious business was, of course, making money. From that point of view, it was regrettable that in the brief period when world attention had turned to the fate of the Earth, a few laws had been passed that interfered with the real business of the world, but they could be worked around. By economic globalization, industrial production could be moved from countries that had enacted laws to protect their environment to others that had not. The proper goal of humanity was to increase global product, especially in a way that would further enrich the wealthy. The public accepted this reversal, and the burst of ecological concern was viewed as one fad among others.

As a result of these developments, I had another awakening by the end of the 1970s. This time I saw that collectively we are insane. After it had become clear that economic growth was leading to disaster, efforts to attain faster rates of economic growth were redoubled. The call was not for meeting certain human needs, even if that required some amount of growth. That could be quite rational. The goal was growth as measured by gross world product, a measure that has very little to do with the well-being of humanity.

Perhaps an imaginary story will provide a way of understanding why I charge humanity collectively with insanity. Suppose that there is a small city-state, something like Luxembourg, built on a large floodplain. Suppose that the city has grown up in the past hundred years or so after a large dam was built to control flooding. Suppose that the dam has been quite successful. It also provides electricity and water for the city and for the countryside, especially for irrigation of farms. The lake behind the dam is the center of recreation for the entire country. The citizens have become accustomed to attending to the ordinary affairs of life with a sense of full security about floods. They are proud of their steady economic growth and general prosperity.

The river and its tributaries rise in a large hilly area that was once heavily forested and still supplies the city with wood. The economy of the city at the time the dam was built was largely based on furniture making using the fine woods from the forest. Of course, the forest was also used for lumber and for firewood. As the population increased, more of the forested area was being used for agriculture and summer homes. As the furniture industry grew, so did its demands on the remaining forest.

Now suppose that the government, knowing that the dam is old, commissions a team of specialists to check it out. Their report is shocking. The lake behind the dam has been filling up with silt so that the capacity to hold water is already greatly reduced. Everyone knew that would happen eventually, but most had supposed that no serious problem would arise until the distant future. Now they learn that because of deforestation of the hillsides from which the river comes, the pace of siltation is becoming more rapid each year. At the current rate, the ability of the dam to control flooding will end in twenty years. If the rate continues to accelerate, the flooding is more imminent. In the event of unusual storms, there may be occasional minor flooding at any time. The team has also found that cracks have developed in the dam, allowing some seepage. This is likely to increase, and there is some danger that the dam may give way abruptly.

The report creates an uproar, and the people demand action. The government appropriates money for reforestation and repair of the cracks in the dam. There are suggestions of building a new dam farther upstream to capture the silt, but even among those making the suggestions, there is no consensus about where it would best be built. Any new dam would flood homes and businesses along the river. Many of these homes belong to the most affluent and influential citizens. In any case it would be very expensive.

Others propose massive dredging to deepen the lake so that it can function longer. But this raises questions not only of huge expense and the lack of suitable ways of disposing of the silt but also of maintaining water supplies and electricity while the dredging is taking place. So a decision about these matters is postponed.

A few measures are passed. Some of the most important forests are to be protected from further logging. There are new restrictions on expanding agriculture in the region and on building more homes. Plans are made for some reforestation.

Within a year, the question of how to respond to the threats to the city disappears from the front page of the papers and from the main television programs. The city goes back to normal, with a vague sense that the danger has been dealt with. The furniture business thrives. There is little unemployment. Everything seems fine.

In a few years, when the budget is tight, reducing the amount budgeted for reforestation turns out to be the easiest way to balance it without raising taxes. As the need for wood for the furniture business grows, compromises are reached about extracting trees from the protected areas. Rules against new summer houses and the expansion of farming are relaxed. Siltation accelerates, but it remains invisible and little publicized.

Despite the relaxation of rules on logging, wood for furniture becomes scarce. Its cost rises. Furniture makers complain that they cannot compete with other makers where wood is cheaper. They blame the protection of some of the forests. The rules are relaxed, but the result is only a slight delay in facing the now permanent shortage of wood for furniture making. The business declines, and so does the economy of the city.

Meanwhile, now and again, after unusually heavy rains in the mountains, there is some flooding. Sections of the city become uninhabitable. The people from those sections are moved to the less populated areas, most of which are in the headwaters of the river. A few voices are raised, pointing out that these policies only increase the siltation that is the deeper cause of the problems. Some urge again that something fundamental be done, but most morally concerned people prefer to cope with the immediate problems of those who have lost their homes and businesses rather than with the capacity of the dam and the deforestation of the land around the headwaters of the rivers. They prefer to listen to those who say that the problem is unusual weather.

Those who call for a massive response are told that the country cannot afford the cost of constructing another dam or dredging the lake. Many taxpayers are angry that anyone would suggest increasing taxes for such purposes. Leading politicians avoid the issue.

Some concerned citizens remain troubled. They raise money and approach the city's most famous research university. They hope that if respected scholars develop a comprehensive plan, public opinion can be mobilized in its favor and the government will go along. They are directed to the department of public policy.

However, the professors in this department make it clear that they are not equipped to help. They deal with policy questions that arise in the normal course of government operations, not with how to respond in radically different circumstances. The citizens ask where in the university they can get help. They are told that there is no individual department in the university that can help them, but that perhaps an interdepartmental team of scholars who personally are concerned about the future of the city could be organized.

The citizens approach the university administration again. They are told that if sufficient funds are provided, the university would be willing to organize such a team, but that previous efforts with interdisciplinary research had not proved fruitful. The departmental structure channels research, and such research is directed to ends set for it by those ready to pay. Research about an overall plan of this kind is not the university's role. Accordingly, this muchadmired center of research and teaching is of no use in finding answers to the most important questions facing the city.

I will not continue the story in the present tense. Two future scenarios are possible. It may be that the floods will gradually get worse, with increasing loss of property and life on each occasion. The cost of dealing with these tragedies rises, and the economic base of the city is further weakened. Although there is increasing recognition of the need to do something, the ability to pay for what needs to be done declines. Tensions increase between those whose property is most threatened and those living and working on higher ground. The now frequent floods not only cause deaths but lead to increased disease as well as homelessness. The dam no longer stores sufficient water for both city usage and irrigation for agriculture. Food supplies decline. It is harder and harder for the government to find consensus on which to act as groups compete over reduced resources. Violence erupts more frequently. Eventually the city is largely abandoned and a greatly reduced population survives on the higher ground beyond it. Relations among those who blame one another for the catastrophe are acrimonious.

The other possibility is that the dam gives way abruptly. Water and silt destroy most of the city with a huge death toll. Even so, with the end of irrigation, food supplies become too small to sustain the reduced population. Without electricity or piped water, much of what the people had known as civilized life is ended.

I have tried to make the failure to act to save the city understandable. Nevertheless, I think the reader will agree that it is also insane. At some level, people know that taking fundamental action with regard to the dam is far more important than expanding their manufacture of furniture. They know that economic sacrifice is necessary and rational in order to save the city. But they choose to act as if this were not the case. Giving primacy to immediate economic advantages at the cost of future catastrophe is insane, even if it is all too understandable.

Despite the craziness of collective human behavior directed by political and economic leaders, there are thousands, even millions, of people who do understand that concern for the fate of the Earth is not properly dealt with as a passing fad but should be the first priority for thought and action. There are also groups that have continued to focus on this issue; conferences have been held; and there has been a continuing stream of books alerting those who cared to read of the ever-worsening situation and what could be done in response. Whether it is madness or addiction that accounts for the absurd behavior of the human species as a whole, it cannot be blamed simply on human nature. Humans can see the world lucidly and act appropriately. What is the difference between those who do and the others?

The question is primarily about those who live to some extent in the world of ideas as well as the world of immediate need. Why do so many of them behave in a way that is wholly inappropriate to the needs of the planet? Why have the vast majority of those with power chosen to use that power to worsen the prospects of the Earth? And what leads some to behave responsibly? Where can we look for communities that nurture a rational response to the knowledge of humanity's greatest crisis?

II. The Insanity of Religiousness

Suppose that the majority of the citizens of the doomed city had been very religious. Would this have led them to behave more rationally? That is highly doubtful. Being religious tends to confirm existing patterns of behavior or even those of ancestors rather than encourage drastic innovation. Being religious would have led some to find consolation in thinking of another world or seeking ways to escape the reality of this world through spiritual disciplines.

Religiousness typically expresses itself in ways that distinguish "us," those who assert the right beliefs and do things in the right way, from "them," those who do not. The distinction may be between Baptists and other Protestants, between Protestants and Catholics, or between Christians and non-Christians. In the doomed city it could be between those who lived by the river and those who lived in the hills. The more religious people are, the more strongly they are committed to "us." The others may be tolerated or strongly opposed, or they may be objects for conversion. Religiousness would have been more likely to intensify hostilities among groups within the city than to encourage work toward unified action.

In our world, the situation is made worse by the supernaturalism that has played a role in most of the traditional religions, which I am calling here the great Ways. Secularists generally suppose that the great Ways are inherently and perhaps exhaustively supernaturalist. To believe in God, for example, is thought to be inherently supernaturalist. I am not using the term in that way. Belief in God has been an important part of what has moved the leadership of Christian churches to repent of its neglect of the natural world. But belief that God intervenes in the course of worldly events is supernaturalist. And a great deal of Christianity and of some of the other Ways seems to take this idea as central. Modernity has intensified this intervention motif, since it excludes God's presence and constant working from nature. Most religiousness is now supernaturalist, and this works against the needed sense of human responsibility for the Earth.

Secularists also often suppose that the Ways are inherently otherworldly. For example, to believe that there is continued or renewed life after death is taken to be basic to Christianity. In my usage, religiousness can characterize thisworldly convictions as well. Also, simply believing that there is more than this life is not inherently otherworldly. It can ground the sense of the importance and dignity of each human being here and now. But this belief can direct attention away from this life to another, belittling the importance of what happens here.

Religiousness often attaches to ideas and norms that made sense at one time but are not helpful today. For example, in ancient times most human communities were strongly pro-natal. Many died in infancy, and life expectancy was short. To maintain a steady population required many births so that any interference with bringing children into the world was damaging to society. Social pressure to marry and have large families made sense in ancient times. Traditions dating from those days reflect that situation.

Today, the global population already exceeds global carrying capacity. In terms of resolving the current global crisis, that fact is of immense importance. The need is to stop global population growth as soon as possible. Yet the religious stance tends to continue to promote the ancient teaching.

(Continues...)

---

Excerpted from Spiritual Bankruptcy by John B. Cobb Jr.. Copyright © 2010 Abingdon Press. Excerpted by permission of Abingdon Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

---

Table of Contents

Contents

Preface,
Chapter 1: In Confronting Catastrophe, Who Can Help?,
Chapter 2: Our Heritage from Greece and Israel,
Chapter 3: Religiousness and Secularizing in the Church,
Chapter 4: The Rise of Secularism,
Chapter 5: The Secularist Intention of Modern Philosophy,
Chapter 6: Secularist Education,
Chapter 7: The Discipline of Economics and the Triumph of Economism,
Chapter 8: Reactions to Secularism,
Chapter 9: A New Beginning in Philosophy,
Chapter 10: Secularizing Christianity in the United States,