Another religious phenomenon worth consideration

At church today, I was struck again and again by the structure, power, and significance of the prayers we offer in public settings. Their ability to set a mood or structure a gathering is incredible. They have all the makings of a focal practice as outlined by Borgmann. Pretty nifty!

I suggest that you add that to your list of religious things to devote further thought to, Marty.

Rudolf Otto: The Idea of the Holy Chapter 3 The Elements in the Numinous

Summary: Otto asks the reader to direct himself towards a moment of what he would believe to be a quintessentially religious moment. If this cannot be done, Otto requests the reader to go no further. While not blameworthy, the ignorant often view aesthetics in terms of sensuous pleasure and religion as a funtion of gregarious instinct, but an artist will decline such a theory, and the religious uncompromisingly dismiss it. Otto takes one moment of numinous experience, that of solemn worship, and tries to isolate what is unique about it. Solemn worship no doubt shares common features with being morally uplifted, with feelings of "gratitude, trust, love, reliance, humble submission, and dedication." But solemn worship is not exhausted by these terms; there is something in the being "rapt" that is more. Schleiermacher focused on the "feeling of dependence," and while important, Otto believes this feeling is not unique to numinous experience: such as when one recognizes one is determined by societal circumstances and the environment (think of people's judgments about their power to change during economic depressions). Schleiermacher recognized that the religious dependence was different from the other forms, and suggested the difference was between absolute and relative dependence. Otto thinks Schleiermacher made a mistake in having the distinction being a matter of degree; it is a matter of intrinsic quality. While it provides a close analogy, mental analysis shows that the religious feeling is so primary a datum that it can only be defined via itself. Otto sees this numinous feeling in the biblical text, where Abraham asserts that he will speak to the Lord, recognizing that he himself is "but dust and ashes" (Genesis 18:27). There is dependence, but something more/other than just dependence, and so Otto labels this experience "creature-consciousness" (or "creature-feeling"). The creature is overwhelmed by its nothingness in contrast to the supreme. Otto argues that the term is not a conceptual explanation of the experience, since everything revolves around the character of the supreme, which is ineffable, only suggested via the tone and content of man's feeling-response to it. Otto further faults Schleiermacher by reducing the religious emotion to self-depreciation, and having God appear through inference to a cause beyond the self for this sense of dependence. Otto believes this is opposed to the psychological facts. Creature-consciousness is derived from another feeling-element that has immediate (not inferred) reference to a sensed numinous object outside the self. With an unjustifiably poor understanding of William James' philosophic position, Otto yet correctly observes that James concluded that accounts of religious experience suggest that in consciousness there is a "sense of reality" (in Varieties, this is the "consciousness of a presence") that is deeper in perceiving the real than the five senses. Otto sees creature-consciousness again as deriving from and presupposed by this feeling of a numinous object objectively given. The depreciation comes in recognition of that object, and is carried out by the subject.

Rudolf Otto: The Idea of the Holy Chapter 1 The Rational and the Non-Rational

Summary: Theists, by analogy, project and perfect their human rationality and personality on to their idea of God. The attributes that they apply to God can be understood and analyzed by the mind, and are thus what Otto calls "rational." Religions, such as Christianity, applying such attributes to God are rational religions and summon a belief and faith-based knowledge in their doctrines in contrast to vague, propositionless feelings. Yet it is wrong to suppose that God's essence can fully be understood through rational attributions, even though the rational occupies the foreground of discourse. Otto urges that the rational attributions imply a non-rational subject of which they are predicates. The rational elements are essential, but also "synthetic." Otto's explanation is dense: we have to attribute these rational elements to the God-subject, but this subject "in its deeper sense" is not comprehended by these elements. Comprehending it requires a different mode of understanding. Otto believes this mode must be utilized by mankind or we would not be able to assert anything of the God-subject, and we do this. Mysticism, in its assertions of experiential ineffability, does not mean nothing can be asserted of the object of religious consciousness, but their copious writings suggest there is something beyond the effable. Otto takes this as the first distinction between religious "rationalism" and "profounder religion." It is not the rejection of the miraculous that distinguishes them, but a difference regarding the "quality in the mental attitude and emotional content of the religious life itself." Orthodoxy constructed dogma/doctrine, and in the meantime failed to value the non-rational element in religion and so gave God an unbalanced intellectualistic spin. Eyes have been shut to the uniqueness of religious experience, but Otto believes it is one of the most unique of phenomena. In what follows, Otto will try to unpack the category of the holy or sacred.

Investigations into Religious Phenomena

A common topic amongst some of you and other philosophical friends in the past was what is philosophy of religion, its method, and what can it accomplish? We have discussed the place of theology (and "physical theology"), James' science of religion, transcendental philosophy of religion, and other possible avenues that might be unique (such as the ontological argument; not that I buy the argument, but it does take a different route). In general, I imagine our philosophical thinking in religion (amongst others) shows and attempts to remove contradiction and ellucidates/explains particulars, often through greater distinctions. These particulars are often done theologically (or intra-religiously), working and explaining a text or doctrinal propositions based on revelation claims. I have been interested, ever since reading James' Varieties of Religious Experience, in thinking about and explaining less "textual" religious matters, which are more external, in the sense of at least being intersubjective phenomena. And then I am interested in all elements of subjective religious consciousness. To poorly use "phenomenology" (as honestly it feels all do), I like trying to look at and explain phenomena that have a quasi-religious character about them(religious phenomenology). I wrote a quick list down of some of these (inluding more general thoughts) that probably needs to be pruned somewhat:

• The holy


• Beauty of existence


• Conversion


• Prayerfulness


• Revelation


• Religious testimony


• The ideal (heaven) and the longing for it


• Harmony


• Perfection


• Life's "purpose"


• Duty to the divine and religious guilt.


• The mystery of being (why do I exist, and in a greater sense, why is there anything at all instead of the nothing that might be in its place?). This one is strange, because it seems semi-religious, and yet also a place where the strictly philosophical emerge too. Perhaps it is a place of shared kinship?


• Covenant relationship and Covenant community


• The limits of reason and the feeling of something "more"


• Other "religious" values

Any others you might add to this list? My personal "acquaintance" with these things has made me want to examine them more fully, and the study of them seems a different track (investigatory) than other religious thought (which feels more puzzle piece fitting). I have started my study with a famous book that I haven't wanted to read for some time: Rudolf Otto's The Idea of the Holy. In it Otto, tries to isolate the unique content and feeling of holiness, which he will call the "numinous." You can find it for free off of archive.org if you want to follow along with me. I have finished the first 3 chapters and will start throwing up summaries as I go. After Otto's book, I will probably return (again) to James' Varieties, and from there I am open to suggestions. Some my old Faulconer readings come to mind...