Part 1 of this blogpiece very briefly traced the journey from the sacred to the ecclesial and on to the secular within the European cultural tradition. Part 2 will briefly describe where this journey has brought us to and whether there are any signs of a return to Earth once again being viewed as sacred.
Viewed entirely through secular eyes the world becomes
a collection of individual pieces that move and operate according to
“scientific” laws. The Scientific Revolution (heralded in by the publication of
Nicolas Copernicus’ heliocentric view of the heavens, in 1543) placed human
beings largely as observers of a mechanistic, linear, objective world.
The Age of Discovery (alluded to in Part 1) and the subsequent
tidal wave of colonisation of almost all parts of the globe by Europeans
brought to the entire globe this highly secularised way of perceiving the
world.
The Industrial Revolution (beginning
- also in Europe - in the 18th century) did nothing to impede this
world-as-object view. Indeed, this revolution took this view and ran with it.
If the world is nothing more than a collection of disparate objects, then using
those objects for the benefit of humans is the proper thing to do.
Cracks in this mechanistic view began to appear within
science itself with the emergence of quantum mechanics and relativity theory
only a little over 100 years ago. With respect to the purposes of this
blogpiece the major importance of these scientific fields was the dismantling
of the notion of the independent observer. A corollary of this was the
recognition that the world, including us humans, was not a disconnected place.
One of the foremost of these scientists, Albert
Einstein, recognised this when he stated that:
“A human being is a part of the whole called by us
universe, a part limited in time and space. He (sic) experiences himself, his
thoughts and feeling as something separated from the rest, a kind of optical
delusion of his consciousness. This delusion is a kind of prison for us,
restricting us to our personal desires and to affection for a few persons nearest
to us. Our task must be to free ourselves from this prison by widening our
circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature in
its beauty.”
Later in the 20th
century, other scientific branches (e.g., biology, meteorology, ecology) would
begin to come to similar perceptions. Although such recognitions were being
made within the scientific community, the world as a whole continued to
consider the world as secular.
The inventions of the Industrial
Revolution and the technologies it spawned saw a rapid rise in material wealth
and well-being (although many were excluded.) However, this has come at the
enormous expense of the ecosystems of the world.
Environmental Movement
Although there had been many
precedents, it was not until the mid-20th century that a widespread
global environmental awareness began to infiltrate this secular world-view.
Many consider the publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, in 1962
to be the book that heralded this movement. Early environmentalism was still
trapped within the secular model and tended to think of the environment as
something out there. The environment was seen as needing protection, needing to
be saved, or conserved. There was little sign that a return to a sacred view of the world was on offer.
Arne Næss, the
Norwegian philosopher, published a paper in 1973 in which he coined the term deep
ecology to mean a view that was more spiritual and intuitive than that of
the mainstream environmental movement of the time. He claimed “that you feel, when you are working in favour of free
nature, you are working for something within your self, that ... demands
changes. So you are motivated from what I call ‘deeper premises’”
Deep Ecology took awhile to make an impact, and
today it still struggles to sway mainstream environmentalism, especially as the
climate change movement (with its tinge of anthropocentrism) has become almost
synonymous with environmentalism.
Are there any other signs of a re-sacralising
of the Earth?
Yes. The emergence of eco-psychology,
especially since the 1990s, has had an important role in recognising that the
human psyche is fundamentally shaped by our participation in, and partnership
with, the more-than-human world.
Eco-spirituality (in many forms) has also been
growing in recent years. Within the Christian faith the recent rise of Green
Christianity has emphasised the concept of stewardship rather than ownership
(or dominion) in Genesis 1.
Indigenous societies around the world have been
offering a potent critique of secular Eurocentric world-views for decades.
Notwithstanding the near total genocide that many of these cultures endured
through colonisation, many have retained a strong connection with their strong
nature-based values and insights. Some of us from within the European tradition
are starting to wake up and to listen and learn.
In Europe there has recently been keen interest
in re-discovering and re-kindling some of its pagan heritage. Much of this
paganism had a strong sense of the sacredness of life and the Earth.
Nature Deficit Disorder is a term coined by
Richard Louv in his 2005 book Last Child in the Woods. In this book, and
other writings, Louv lucidly outlines the intimate connection between our
well-being and the amount of time we spend in nature. This, and the Japanese
practice of Shinrin yoku (Forest Bathing) clearly bring to mind and body
our deep need for a sacred connection with nature.
So, yes, there are indications that there may
be the beginning of returning to our sacred roots, and our place in the
wholeness (holy-ness) of nature.
Addendum: Nothing in either Part 1 or Part 2 of
this blogpiece should be read as directing culpability at any particular
institution or person. It is futile pointing the finger of blame at Christianity
or the scientists of the 16th and 17th century. Nor does it
make sense to mete out judgement upon the inventors of new technologies in the
18th and 19th centuries.
This blogpiece simply suggests an arc by which
there has been a shift from a sacred view of the Earth towards a mechanistic perspective.
Sadly, that arc has brought us to a position where the fate of humanity and the
more-than-human world is at the mercy of humans.