Click photo to enlarge
Controversial visiting US cleric Bishop John Spong chats
with Dunedin women (from left) Ann Broadfoot, Jenny Madill
and Cynthia Greensill, at a seminar in Dunedin in 2001.
Photo by Jane Dawber.
Ian Harris looks at how modern religious ideas are
framing the concept of an "afterlife".
Nowhere have traditional ideas about life yielded so
decisively to new knowledge as in what lies beyond it - or
what does not.
Funeral services that once consigned the deceased to the
afterlife in sure and certain hope of the resurrection to
eternal life are rarer now as secular celebrants and
ministers alike respond to families' wishes to reflect
instead on the life lived by the departed, and to celebrate
it with laughter, love and tears.
That marks a sea change.
Recently, I asked a gathering of 85 people, half of them
churchgoers and half not, how many of them saw the purpose of
their life and destiny as lying in a world beyond this one.
Only three put up their hands.
Modern cosmology and changing perspectives on religion are
steadily dislodging old ideas of heaven as our final
resting-place.
In the hymnbook I grew up with, the afterlife is graphically
depicted as eternal bliss (or rest, take your pick) in an
environment of pearly gates, streets paved with gold,
magnificent gardens, harps and heavenly choirs.
The movie version of The Lovely Bones, currently
screening, brings the imagery of heaven closer to earth with
South Island alpine scenery alternating with prairie-style
cornfields.
It is intriguing that the afterlife is continually being
re-visualised in novels and movies.
Each new depiction of a spirit world is rooted in a
particular culture, each reflects a lingering reluctance to
let go of an idea that till recent times was central to human
speculation.
Hence those images of jewel-encrusted palaces, alpine
panoramas, lush green fields, shaded gardens, music . . . and
for Muslim men, beautiful black-eyed virgins.
Some argue that the idea of an afterlife is deeply ingrained
in the psyche.
Alone among living creatures, humans know that one day they
will die, and a basic impulse for survival makes them
receptive to the notion of another, better life to follow
this one.
There is also a natural longing to meet again those whom we
have loved.
An afterlife offers both hope and consolation.
Faith in its pre-modern understanding promises all three.
But in today's secular world, such faith needs re-thinking.
Another yearning is for fairness.
It seems only right that those who have lived exemplary lives
should be rewarded, while those who have been selfish,
indifferent or cruel should be punished.
Heaven and hell took care of both groups by offering a tidy
balancing-up.
But fewer and fewer Westerners think that is how things will
play out.
The latest of myriad thinkers to pronounce on an afterlife is
American Episcopal (Anglican) Bishop John Spong.
In Eternal Life: A New Vision, he takes the scythe to
ancient religious notions of God in a physical heaven
(Galileo dealt to that), of divine manipulation of the
natural world (Newton to that), and of human life originating
distinct from the processes of nature (Darwin to that).
Past theologies built on those ideas, but they no longer
square with what we know about the way the world functions.
So Bishop Spong steps outside that framework to ground his
probing of an afterlife solely on human experience and on a
redoubtable stack of abstract nouns.
He writes of selfhood and identity, of mysticism, of a
universal consciousness resonating with unity and wholeness,
of entering the meaning of transcendence, oneness,
timelessness and eternity, and concludes: "I believe deeply
that this life that I love so passionately is not all there
is."
His convictions, he says, "are real and they are convincing
to me".
But not to me. An afterlife remains unproven either way.
That has always been so, and it probably always will be.
In the new climate there is a simpler way through.
It is to accept that death really does bring our life to an
end.
Our individual consciousness will not survive it.
We are part of nature in which every living thing dies.
Dead means dead.
It is possible, however, to accept that life on earth is all
there is, yet still find abiding value in those qualities
which Christians have always considered to be eternal, but
which they have been too eager to source in a world beyond.
Among them - the list is the apostle Paul's - are love, joy,
peace, hope, patience, kindness, generosity, fidelity,
gentleness and self-control.
When these are naturalised in people's everyday lives, and on
top of that they feel free to live richly and exuberantly,
there is a sense in which they brush eternity.
Come to think of it, that's what Jesus was on about.
Ian Harris is a journalist and commentator
Nothing new
Mr. Harris espouses opinions that he claims are dislodging the "old" ideas about life after death. Does he not realise that these ideas themselves are as old as the hills?
The Bible itself (Matthew 22) records an encounter between Jesus and a group of Jews known as the Sadducees. They, like Mr. Harris, argued that there was no "resurrection from the dead" (in other words, life after death).
Jesus answered "You are in error because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God".
I suspect that Jesus would have a similar response to Mr. Harris' comments today.