Glorifying God

When I was newly ordained, I was required to teach confirmation classes using a standard “catechism”. At that time it was important for the confirmands to know the correct answers to these questions. I remember reading in the Westminster Catechism, one used by several reformed theology protestant churches, that the “chief end of [man] was the glorification of God.” Of course, in addition to that “end”, faithful humans also were in line to receive the reward of salvation in the process. But the purpose of life and, by extension, the purpose of the church was ultimately to glorify God. I must confess to you that I’ve been struggling for a long time even to figure out what glorification of God is supposed to look like. To many religious people it seems to have something to do with giving credit to the only One who deserves credit for anything. Somehow, human obedience, refusal to succumb to temptation, piety, and gratitude also helped to add up to the glorification of God. While the word is still used, even in liberal protestant liturgy and worship, I wonder how many people are left who still see the glorification of God as their primary purpose, or how many are left who still go to church (if they go at all) to get support in this holy task.

Bear with me; there’s a question embedded in all this. Is the glorification of God the only way to understand the purpose of creation, and not just human creation, either? And furthermore, what role might the liberal Christian church play in helping people work toward some alternative end?

If, for the sake of argument, glorification of God is not really about how we behave or how we believe, then could it have something to do with who we are or who we are becoming? If we assume that we are created in the image of God (or even that all creation embodies the image of God in some way), then who we are or who we are becoming takes on primary significance.

For me, this question is best addressed by edging out onto the bridge that hangs between the theological notion of creation and the scientific notion of evolution. In many Christian circles these have been cast as opposites for so long that it is difficult to connect them. I have believed for a long time that evolution could be seen as the “how” of creation, but the question about the purpose of creation invites us to take another step and embrace evolution as a sacred process.

Recently, I have been rereading a book by Loren Eisley called “The Immense Journey”. It was written 40 or 50 years ago and I haven’t looked at it for a long time. I remember, however, from my initial introduction to this beautiful book how moved I was at Eisley’s profound, almost sacred, respect and amazement at the wonders of the evolutionary process. I’m sure I’m not the first one to come to this conclusion, but, aided by Eisley’s images, I find myself believing that the sacred purpose of life is to evolve. What makes this a fascinating idea is that human beings have attained a level of conscious awareness that makes it possible for us to observe, think about, and intentionally participate in the evolutionary process.

No doubt, there is plenty of room for growth and development in the human race. For one thing, we humans tend to operate at a relatively immature level of ethical development. The lion’s share of ethical thinking seems to revolve around either not getting caught, or around the potential rewards or punishments that we deserve as a result of our behavior. Even the catechistic “glorification of God” is too often construed in reward/punishment terms, or in terms of the need to survive at the expense of others. Such thinking supports all sorts of violent attempts to address the problems of the world.

So, how might life and society be different if we based human behavior less on selfish pursuits and more on improving our abilities to relate and cooperate at more profound levels? For humans to embrace a higher ethic, it will probably be necessary for us to allow our image of God to mature, too. It won’t work for us to continue to see God as a demanding (though probably loving) parent, who throws divine temper tantrums when we don’t behave.

A radical Christian idea is that we embody the divine and that the divine is in an evolutionary process of coming into being in and through us. If we see it that way, then our ethical task is to become as fully our unique selves as we can. We honor God, not by obedience or by giving credit. We honor God by maturing and taking responsibility for our lives, our relationships, our social systems, and even our destiny.

We must be honest, though. Maturity is scary. We may find it necessary to make sacrifices. We may even need to get out of the way as a human race so the evolutionary process can go on. As Jesus died so we might live, maybe in time, we will die so life can go on. This, of course, is only speculation. Evolution is a very slow process.

Still, I have come to believe that Healthy Liberal Christianity will help people and cultures mature, even beyond their need for the church – and even beyond their need to cling selfishly to life. We liberal Christians have a lot of work to do if we are to mature in our understanding of Jesus’ sacrifice, but it’s difficult work, and not for the faint of heart.

If you’re interested in a somewhat dated but poetic treatment of the evolutionary process, read “The Immense Journey” by Loren Eisley. And if you are interested in exploring some startling speculations on the purpose of life and it’s possible sacrifices, take a look at “Quantum Theology: Spiritual Implications of the New Physics” by Diarmuid O’Murchu.

I’ll be away next week, so the next post will be during the first week in July. Thanks for reading and for the comments you have made. They mean a lot to me.

Wayne Gustafson

"Our Faith is 2000 years old, our thinking is not." United Church of Christ