ways we learn

In the sermon this past Sunday I spent some time talking about contemplative prayer as a way to spend time with God. This mode of prayer is about being with God, rather than asking God for things, or telling God things, or in any way expecting anything from God. I used the analogy of a human relationship, in which it is necessary, and a blessing to spend time with the other. Can we imagine growing in relationship with another person without spending time with them? Can we imagine growing in understanding of them if we do all the talking, and fail to take time to simply be present with the person, and open to what they offer? My sense is that for many of us, our relationship with the Divine can benefit from simply being quiet.

I made use in the sermon of the image of a Russian Orthodox icon, painted by Alexander (Andrei) Rubilev, painted around 1410. It depicts the Trinity, the Christian doctrine that God is “One God, Three Persons”. The image is taken from a story in the Book of Genesis in which Abraham, patriarch of the Jewish people, extends hospitality to three strangers that turn out to be angels, messengers from God.

Many people around the world pray with icons and other images. This is distinct from praying to an icon! The visual image provides a way to enter into an exercise of prayer.

Growing up in the United Church, I did not spend a lot of time praying with icons. Actually, I spent no time with icons! Most of my religious education, and experiences of worship have been either verbal (word based, as in readings, sermons and spoken prayer) or musical (singing or listening to church music or hymns). Some of the churches I have been part of make some effort to appeal to visual learning, with banners, stained glass windows, and other art, but these tend to be peripheral.

Recently, as I was researching curriculum choices for Sunday School, I came across a publisher that has drawn inspiration from the theories of a Harvard psychologist named Dr. Howard Gardner. In a book called “Frames of Mind”, Gardner proposed a theory of Multiple Intelligences. He posits that humans learn through a wide variety of “intelligences”.

The Sunday School curriculum, called “PowerXpress” sets out to appeal to different ways of learning. They suggest that Verbal learners work well with word-based material, and become frustrated without verbal stimulation. Logical learners enjoy abstract and scientific thinking, and do less well in arenas of confusion. Visual learners do well with pictures, and mental imagery, and artistic work, but are discouraged when there is too much text-based material. Physical learners like to be active, and move, and tune out if they have to sit still too long. Musical learners are bored by lectures, and thrive if the material is set to music. Social learners like group work, and thinking out loud with others, and are stifled by long periods of silent study. Independent learners are reflective, introspective, and self-aware, and group activities cause them to withdraw.

Recently, Gardner has proposed two other “intelligences”: Nature, and the Spiritual.

It seems to me that these insights can be very valuable to those of us who may be trying to plan worship. They can also be useful in our personal explorations of how to spend time with God in prayer.

listening to each other

Last week I spoke at an inter-faith gathering hosted by the Oakville chapter of the Ahmadiyya Muslim movement. A few times of year, this group arranges events like this one. They ask representatives of various religions to offer perspectives on issues such as the topic for last Thursday evening, which was “Is God Relevant in today’s world?” This is the second time I have attended one of these evenings. Each time I have been aware of two things that seem important to share.

The first is the genuine warmth, and the heart-felt spirit of welcome in the room. The organizers, and the attenders bring an openness and willingness to be with people of different backgrounds that I do not think can be feigned.

The second is that those who speak, regardless of their faith background, tend to approach the questions in a positive, life-affirming, down-to-earth way. Very often, the essence of the views offered are very similar, regardless of whether they are rooted in the Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, or Christian traditions.

How is this possible? It would be overly-simplistic, and would not do justice to the various faith traditions to suggest that at heart, all religions say the same thing. I don’t think that’s true. What I do see is that a spiritually based way of living can lead to surprisingly similar reflections, when members of the various traditions are asked to talk about a question that is relevant to them all.

The people I have met at these gatherings are not specialists in inter-faith dialogue, tasked with the onerous responsibility of rationalizing or justifying their theologies in light of the other traditions. They are just ordinary people of faith, who are interested in moving beyond the fear, suspicion, and narrow-mindedness that too often takes the place of religious discourse in our world.

It is important, I think, to recognize that too much broadcast air-time, and ink in the print media, is given over to the views of religious fundamentalism. As Karen Armstrong, that heroic and prolific scholar of religion says in her book “The Case for God”:

“In all its forms, fundamentalism is fiercely reductive faith. In their anxiety and fear, fundamentalists often distort the tradition they are trying to defend. They can, for example, be highly selective in their reading of scripture. Christian fundamentalists quote extensively from the book of Revelation and are inspired by its violent end-time vision but rarely refer to the Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus tells his followers to love their enemies, to turn the other cheek, and not to judge others. Jewish fundamentalists rely heavily on the Deuteronomist sections of the Bible and seem to pass over the rabbis’ injunction that exegesis should lead to charity. Muslim fundamentalists ignore the pluralism of the Qu’ran, and extremists quote its more aggressive verses to justify violence, pointedly disregarding its far more numerous calls for peace, tolerance, and forgiveness.”

Armstrong goes on to offer this comment on fundamentalism in all its forms:

“Fundamentalists are convinced that they are fighting for God, but in fact this type of religiosity represents a retreat from God. To make purely human, historical phenomena – such as “family values,” “the Holy Land” or “Islam”- sacred and absolute is idolatry, and, as always, their idol forces them to try to destroy its opponents.”

I will remember this the next time I read something in my e-mail inbox about the “evils” of Islam.