Being naked really heightens your sense of personal space and vulnerability - feeling exposed can be a deeply theological experience!
Last week I was one of a group of less-than-perfect bodies, sweating together naked in a forest savusauna (smoke sauna). Our limits were tested as each ladle of water splashed onto the superheated stones, until the heat became too much and one-by-one we dashed for the door, streaked through the twilight to plunge off the jetty into the lake. A brief swim, punctuated by exultations of exhilaration and a flash of buttocks breaking the surface, was all we could manage before the cold forced a desperate dash to dry land. Then, for the more masochistic it was back into the savusauna again. Six times I did that, and after an hour and a half I felt more at peace than has ever been achieved by attending a church service. Our group was an odd mix of bodies. Ranging from the bear shaped bulk of a Russian to the slight and slender figure of a Nepalese, and included a spectrum of humanity's colours and shapes: China, Japan, Kiribati, Uganda, South Africa, USA, Canada, UK, and Finland provided an eclectic combination of cultures, language, accent and experience. We were friendly and respectful, considerate and interested, genuinely conversing on topics without being pretentious, for under such circumstances any dissembling is quickly exposed (pun intended). I doubt we would naturally form a group of friends. There was no job compulsion, no institutional obligation to be there. The key is that each had volunteered to be aligned behind a common purpose, and this group offered one means of working together to help humanity address the impacts of climate change. Although we're all nominally intelligent – in-so-far as a PhD really represents intelligence – that's not enough to hold us together. Similarly, as scientists we all try to live an evidence-based life that is real and rational, facing up to life's positives and negatives with equal honesty – but that's also not enough. The central fact is that we are all deeply concerned about something much bigger than our personal lives. Thus, with our complementary skill sets and an opportunity to make a change, there we were sitting naked in a brief respite from our more serious deliberations. You might be surprised to hear that we meet once or twice a year at most, and then for only 2-3 days at a time. In between are occasional emails as we go about our individual lives working on separate aspects of our shared concern. Yet despite the infrequency of meeting I count these people as friends; individuals who have chosen to know each other, who volunteer and collaborate, who accept a peer-led process based on knowledge and wisdom rather than authority. I've come to know much of their personal lives, and they've expressed a genuine interest in mine. They know about my home and my social activities, while I know about their history and their children. If there's an event in my life or my personal circumstances change, then as soon as they are aware they will display a genuine interest - that seems to fit the definition of friendship. This is what I believe is our purpose: – to align our efforts with what's real, contest our delusions in thoughtful discussion, share our experiences of reality, humbly listen to a diversity of views, converge on evidence-based truth despite the discomfort at what we find, search for understanding, consider the human condition, and then do something about it! That's the experience of many climate scientists - science is amazingly self correcting because it is predicated on truth. Isn't that what Christianity is meant to be about too? Yet, I venture to say that in our occasional gatherings I probably have more real relational time with this group of individuals than I do with nearly all of those I see every Sunday. Because despite that we meet for purposes related to our work, there is relationship rooted in a commitment to serve a common purpose. It permeates every day of our lives and overcomes our differences. Our meetings of course have formal agenda – matters of documents and action items and responsibilities – but in-between we also talk about the bigger picture of risks and consequences, of how we know what we know, and how our values frame our decisions. To use big words, we deal with an ethical-epistemic dilemma - that is, the intersection of values for decision, what we know, and how do we know it - which is, I suppose, life. So I cannot help but think about the parallels and contrasts with religion. If ever there was an ethical-epistemic dilemma it is that of living a faith which defines our relational existence, that speaks about right and wrong, and is predicated on personally examining what we know and how we know. Is there a God, what is right, how do I know, and what do I do next? In my work I (try to) lead a group of scientists that is part of a global community of thousands – we've joined together because we share a passion, a collective inquisitiveness and a thirst for knowing, a common concern about the threat of climate change to the human condition. As the impacts increase and resilience falters we believe that we can and should contribute to making a difference. Our alignment of purpose leads us to join in an effort and commitment that goes beyond obligation, and does so despite the vast differences of life experiences, personalities, and cultural perspectives. Isn't that what a Christian is supposed to be? In church we gather regularly, a local (and low diversity) representation of the global community. We gather because we say we share a common passion for God, and we say we have a concern about the human condition. Yet, this stated passion often seems at odds with the evidence. The appearance of form is there, in the formalities of our gathering and in the words we use. But our actions speak louder than words, and the investment in each other is often limited to social niceties while the demonstrated commitment tells a different tale. By contrast, my group of naked colleagues sometimes seem more Christian in their function than do many Christians in their stated purpose. My peers in science often make deep sacrifices, working many hours beyond what they are paid to do, volunteering on demanding international activities, taking on challenging tasks, and stepping up to leadership. And all done with no real compelling reason other than a desire for the truth and a consciousness that it is the right thing to do. Yes, there are always a few who engage primarily from ego and ambition, but even where that is the case, still intellectual honesty about what is real remains the anchor. Like a sauna reveals the body, so science reveals nature, and so religion (should) reveal the human condition. In my church experiences this is more the exception than the norm. It is rare that one finds in a modern church the depth of commitment that, metaphorically, could bring such diverse people to sit together naked in a sauna, literally sweating over a shared experience as they figuratively sweat over a shared purpose.
1 Comment
R4space
12/7/2016 08:41:38 am
"... there is relationship rooted in a commitment to serve a common purpose. It permeates every day of our lives and overcomes our differences."
Reply
Your comment will be posted after it is approved.
Leave a Reply. |
Why?
Probably the best therapy is to express yourself. Why do you think psychiatrists make you lie on the couch and talk, while all they do is murmur "hmmm", "uhuh", or "go on"? Archives
May 2017
|