Fairy tales are more than true

Posted on January 28, 2012 by

This past week I’ve been on retreat with an extraordinary group of people. After much reluctance on my part, which I now look back upon with some shame, I have become a member of the Society of Ordained Scientists. The Society is an ecumenical group, though primarily Anglican, that for 25 years now has been a place where people who have professional experience in Science AND Theology have committed themselves to a Rule of Life and to living into a dispersed community that seeks to integrate to the two realms of thinking.

I’ll probably have much more to say about the organization over time and the new friends I’ve made this week. (There’s something wonderful about being a room with people who are struggling to do the same sort of thing that you’ve been trying to do. Both to discover that there are others, and to learn so many new insights from their journeys.) But I wanted to share the quote from G.K. Chesterton about Fairy Tales. I’m sorry to admit that I’d not known of it previously.

The form I heard this week in one of the meditations led by a society member was:

Fairy tales are more than true — not because they tell us dragons exist, but because they tell us dragons can be beaten.

It’s not Chesterton directly apparently, it’s an epigrammatic form first published by Neil Gaiman in 2004.

But there’s a world of metaphor waiting to be unlocked in it.

So that’s my task today and tomorrow. To contemplate the mystery of the metaphor of the dragons who can be beaten.

N.B.: I’m adding a new category to this blog that I’m titling SOSc – my plan is to use it for posts that discuss the task of integrating Religious and Scientific cosmologies (world views)

Posted in SOSc | Leave a comment

“Peak oil” is here. Now what?

Posted on January 26, 2012 by

The amount of oil produced world-wide has not increased significantly since 2005. Sure we’ve found major new reserves, but they’re harder to access and more expensive to produce. The cheap oil of that drove the hyper-progress of the 20th century is gone. Get ready. It’s gonna get bumpy.

We are entering an era in which we are effectively going through a economic phase change. In physics, when we move through a phase change, physical characteristics of the material begin to go “critical” and fluctuate wildly the closer we get to the transition. According to economists, the same thing is happening with oil prices. And it’s not going to stop for a long while.

John Timmer, writing on Nobel Intent points out what follows:

“That has some pretty significant consequences. Of the 11 recessions the US has experienced since World War II, 10 have been preceded by a sudden change in oil prices. The US isn’t alone, either. Italy’s entire trade deficit, which has contributed to its financial troubles, can be accounted for by the rise in imported oil. The world, it seems, has allowed its economies to become entirely dependent upon fossil fuels. “If oil production can’t grow, the implication is that the economy can’t grow either,” the authors write. “This is such a frightening prospect that many have simply avoided considering it.”

And it’s not just oil that poses problems. US coal production peaked in 2002, and the global peak has been predicted to hit as soon as 2025. The last time global coal reserves were evaluated, in 2005, the total was cut by more than half compared to previous estimates. Fracking has boosted the production of natural gas dramatically, but even here the authors find some reasons for concern. Recent reports suggest that shale gas reserves have been overestimated, and many fields that have been in production for a while have experienced large declines in production.

The commentary concludes that we simply can’t rely on any fossil fuel to provide a stable and economic source of energy for more than a couple of decades. And, given the economic shocks that result from rapid changes in energy prices, that’s a serious problem. “Economists and politicians continually debate policies that will lead to a return to economic growth,” the authors note. “But because they have failed to recognize that the high price of energy is a central problem, they haven’t identified the necessary solution: weaning society off fossil fuel.”"

More here.

So what for churches? Big floor-space buildings are going to become increasingly expensive to heat and cool. So are homes. Apparently the era of large homes is over – and for the first time in years, the average floor space of new construction is decreasing.

Episcopal church buildings, built for the most part in the early part of the 20th century (or the latter part of the 19th) are pretty well adapted to an era of high energy prices. They’re small. They have high ceilings and small windows. Sometimes they have thick rock walls. They tend to be in areas where significant numbers of people can get to church without too much transportation expense.

But that’s also a bit of curse. The small size means that average attendance might necessarily be less than 200 people a Sunday – because that’s the most you can seat at one time. But that would put a congregation squarely into a class of congregations (transitional and maybe pastoral size) where the present economics are wrecking havoc with sustainable business models of congregation life. Such congregations can barely afford full-time seminary trained clergy. But with the move to the 1979 prayer book, and Eucharist being the “primary act of Christian worship on a Sunday” the need for regular clergy has increased. It’s those congregations that are feeling the squeeze right now.

But they’re also the most likely to flourish in the new high-energy cost economy. The question is how to move to a new way of providing for the needs of the congregation? I suspect that it’s going to require multiple actions to discover. We’ll need to actively conserve energy costs. Health insurance costs are going to have to be contained somehow. Congregational staffing is going to have to be rethought. Perhaps we’ll move to an à la carte clergy model in some places. I expect congregations will share resources more intentionally both in the diocese and with local ecumenical groups. Stewardship is going to look different too I think. People are not going to know from year to year how much gas and oil are going to cost, and until people can move closer to work that’s going to deeply effect family finances. Maybe endowments will help?

Got any other ideas? ‘Cause the time for ideas is now. We’ve arrived.

Posted in Peak Oil, Religion | 2 Comments

Who will say you’ve mastered divinity?

Posted on January 25, 2012 by

I had a wonderful conversation with a colleague over lunch today. We were talking about the future of Theological Education and the role of seminaries. (But we could have just as well have been talking about the role of traditional Universities.)

iTunes University and other similar tools make it very easy to share world-class lectures. But that’s only part of what’s involved in getting an education. There’s the issue of mastering the material, not just consuming it. And then there’s the issue of demonstrating mastery.

A professor at Wheaton College, Alan Jacobs, talks about this very question in terms of “credentialing” – or giving a student some sort of imprimatur that tells the rest of the world that the student is now the master.

Jacobs writes of how Universities are going to have to unbundle the services they provide:

“But now: unbundling. Clearly, many universities have come, or are coming, to the conclusion that their primary product is the credentialing, and that they can give knowledge away either as a public service or as brand consolidation (choose your interpretation according to your level of cynicism). Those 160,000 students may have learned a great deal about artificial intelligence, and the successful ones received a “statement of accomplishment … sent via e-mail and signed by Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig.” But in announcing the course the instructors were careful to note that the “statement of accomplishment … will not be issued by Stanford University.”"

Read the rest here.

The problem is particularly acute in theological education. We’ve effectively funded theological education for the past four decades by asking mid-life students to cash out the equity in their homes and use that to subsidize their and younger student’s educations. But the equity disappeared with the recent housing price collapse, and with it the business model of most of the seminaries in the Mainline denominations.

So how do we do education now? Perhaps by using freely available online education materials and asking local diocesan tutors (perhaps centered around diocesan cathedrals) to facilitate regular discussion and seminar classes on the material; not unlike how Community Colleges are using the free lectures being provided by MIT and Yale. The students get the best lecture material and they get the classroom discussions. Good!

The problem is certifying that the student has mastered the material in such a way as to be able to assure another diocese or congregation that the student is ready to be hired outside of the training diocese.

In the Episcopal Church we’ve used the General Ordination Exams to do some of that, but lately there’s been a great deal of dissatisfaction with the exams on the part of seminaries and dioceses. (The sense I hear is that the GOE’s are becoming quirky in what they’re testing.) I wonder if it’s time for the Episcopal Church to have a conversation about rethinking the GOE’s and the work of Seminaries so that working in concert they can manage the issue of certification.

If clergy are going to take on the rabbinical role in the community that is being increasing expected of them, we probably need to be moving in this direction.

Posted in Religion, Web/Tech | 12 Comments

Put it in a special drawer…

Posted on January 24, 2012 by

The Arizona State Legislature is about to begin its Spring session. And being Arizona, it means it’s time for some serious political posturing. I suppose we learn by the example set at the moment by the national presidential discourse.

Two years ago Arizona passed Senate Bill 1070 (SB1070). It made being in Arizona without proper immigration documentation a State as opposed to a Federal crime. (The Federal Statutes still apply.) The passage was highly contested but never in doubt. The Republican majority in the State Legislature was pretty much uniformly in support of the measure and with a roughly 2/3rds majority there was nothing the minority party could do except complain in the press.

But the Feds took action after the law was passed and through the courts blocked most of the implementation portions. There have still been some economic repercussions (though mixed admittedly) and we’ve seen a lot of national attention (mostly bad).

The biggest consequence of the passage of SB1070 and the way it was passed was the awful effect it has had on the way people in Arizona talk to each other. The Democrats here have promised to do all in their power to repeal the law. The Republicans who still hold a majority, but have seen their primary sponsor of the bill, who was the President of the State Senate, recalled and defeated in a special election, are insisting fervently that they will defend the law and protect the state against the ILLEGALS. (Note that the rhetoric has reduced the families who were invited to come to the state decades ago to provide cheap non-unionized labor are no longer people or neighbors, they’re illegals.)

Yesterday there were a series of rallies at the State Capital. The Latino community joined by the Democratic caucus held a rally complaining about SB1070 and the way it has harmed the state and “poisoned” relationships. The Republicans promised to resist all efforts toward repeal. The new State Senate President is quoted as saying to effect, “Any bill that I receive to repeal SB1070 is going into a special drawer in my desk. And it’s not coming out.”

In other words, the minority can expect no hearing of their concerns by the legislature. They should not expect the government to act in their interest. It will only act in the interest of the majority.

And thus can die the belief in democratic government. Perhaps that’s why the Founders insisted we were a Republic.

That statement by the new Senate President encapsulates much of what I think is happening here now, and soon to happen across our country. The present majority is refusing to govern for the Common Good, to seek consensus, and instead is using their majority to dismiss voices they disagree with. It’s the learned behavior of the “Echo Chamber“- turing the dial away from a dissenting voice to one we agree with.

The problem for the present majority is that very soon, perhaps in less than a generation, they will cease to be the majority. They are going to become the minority, and I fear the new majority will want revenge. (Unless a saintly voice such as Arcbishop Tutu arises as he did in South Africa after the fall of Apartheid.) The people in the present majority here in this state know this, and I believe, fear it. That’s what leads us to the sort of rhetoric and inflammatory politics we’re hearing and seeing.

Don’t for a moment imagine this fear isn’t present in the Church as well. Much of the anguish felt within the various branches of Christendom here in the United States has to do with the passing of one majority voice for another. Sometimes it’s happening gracefully. Sometimes it’s not. And sometimes the new majority learns from the old majority how to use their new found power to oppress others the same way they were oppressed.

What’s the solution?

I don’t know. But I know that the sort of rhetoric and the unwillingness to seek consensus and broad Common Good is going to make the inevitable demographic transition worse for all. Worse for the new minority. Worse for the souls of the new majority.

I suppose the best we can do is to create small communities of reconciliation anywhere we can. Because knowing each other, recognizing each other’s common humanity is probably the only way to escape.

As one of the Hispanic children here at our Cathedral said unguardedly to his Anglo Sunday School teacher; “I hate white people. But you’re okay.” And then looked at his face with something close to wonderment.

What does Jesus say? “Make friends for yourself by means of unrighteous mammon…”

Posted in Centrists, Current Affairs, Religion | 2 Comments

Epiphany 3B 2012; Learning to reverse-crop

Posted on January 23, 2012 by

As a number of writers have pointed out, in the Book of Jonah, the Ninevehites repent but Jonah does not. Even though word of God comes to him three times. God asks Jonah to see the world differently. Jonah refuses.

What about us?

We've started a weekly parish Evensong at the Cathedral. When we preach at the service, there's more time to fully develop an idea. In this particular sermon, in the first part, as I introduce what I mean by the idea of "reverse cropping" I talk at a bit of length of the history of this blog and the meaning of the image at the top of this page.

If you've ever wondered about such things, hopefully you'll find your answer.

MP3 File

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Wait! There’s more!

Posted on January 21, 2012 by

Yesterday, while I was diddling about with the banner on the top of the blog, I happened to notice that the email widget which subscribes people to my posts by email is reporting that there are something like 675 people doing that. That’s stunning to me.

Between email subscribers and the 200 or so of you who read my posts by RSS subscription, and the 200+ people who just load this page the old fashioned (in their web browsers) there’s quite a little community going. Thank you for that. I learn more from your comments than I imagine you do from my posts. Some of you have been instrumental in helping me think through theological issues, or have pointed out something to me about the implications of an experiment that I totally missed.

And that fact that so many people are willing to have my natterings clog up their email regularly is quite humbling.

But in case you don’t visit the web page very often, I should probably tell you that I share much more than appears here on the blog. I link to lots of articles, that are interesting, but, for whatever reason, not “bloggable” via my twitter account. (http://twitter.com/wnknisely)

There’s a similar number who follow my twitter account as who subscribe to the blog via email, but I’m thinking those are two roughly non-congruent sets of folks. So, if you want more, now you know where to find it.

And thanks for reading. Seriously. I’ve been quiet here for a while mostly because of a bad case of writer’s block. But that seems to be clearing for a whole bunch of reasons. Knowing you’re here helps.

Posted in Blogging | Leave a comment

The Search for the “God-like” Higgs

Posted on January 20, 2012 by

This is the text of an essay that was published to the Diocese of Arizona as part of a series of essays by ordained scientists within the diocese. You can read the original posting here, and the series is being posted essay by essay with links appearing in the sidebar to the right on the diocesan site.

Last month the news accounts were breathlessly reporting that physicists were ready to announce that they’d discovered, at long last, the Higgs Boson – the so called “God Particle”. The news when it came out was much less exciting than the earlier reports seemed to indicate. There was no discovery. There was instead essentially just an announcement that there was one last drawer to open to find the particle. And that the drawer would be opened sometime this coming year.

The Higgs particle’s existence is predicted by the Standard Model of Particle Physics. It’s a very successful model at explaining the odd, counterintuitive world of elementary particles. It has a lot of confirmed predictions to its credit. But there’s one missing piece, the Higgs boson, a keystone that needs to exist but has not yet been confirmed. The Higgs particle is a boson, a class of particles that connects the forces of the world to their expressions. In essence, the Higgs is the particle whose existence explains why some elementary particles have masses and some don’t. It was nicknamed the God particle by an author who wrote a popularized explanation of the theory. Physicists don’t really like the term. Nor does this particular priest.

If scientists do, in fact, confirm the existence of the Higgs particle later this year, it will be a major triumph of the Standard Model. It will mean that we have effectively discovered a way to view almost all the major forces of Nature (electricity, magnetism and the weak and strong nuclear forces) as different manifestations of one underlying phenomenon. (Gravity still stubbornly refuses to be folded into the structure.) The confirmation will be the capstone of a more than a century’s worth of work.

But if the Higgs particle isn’t in that last drawer; well, then things will get very interesting. Because the Standard Model works very well. But it will be shown to be wrong. And when science is wrong, it’s gets very exciting. Because it means that physicists will all have to go back to the beginning, figure out where they went wrong, and look to see where they might fix up a new view of reality.

This happens with some regularity in Physics. It happened in the time of Copernicus and Kepler. It happened when Einstein showed the errors with Newton’s model. It happened as Bohr et al showed errors with both Einstein and Newton. If it happens again, well and good! More Nobel prizes to be won! (Scientists like winning prizes.)

The possibility that the Higgs won’t be found is worth reflecting on. Because the furor that would result shows the difference between the scientific method and religious practice. Science is always striving to find new and more successful ways to view the world. And when something is wrong, it means that whole existing edifice is supposed to be tossed aside and a new one created. Woe to any philosophy or theology that depends on the structures being discarded.

Christianity on the other hand starts with a story to which we have a responsibility to conform our lives; the story of God’s creation and love of Creation, our role within that Creation and the unique expression of God’s will for us in the person of Jesus. Rather than overturning the story and starting over again, we draw close to the story and discover new facets and ways to apply a universal and timeless truth to our lives. Science changes the account to fit the present observations.

The two enterprises are often seen as being in conflict. But they’re not really. They are using different methodologies to draw as close as possible to Truth. In my mind they’ve always been complementary to each other, best used in conversation with one another.

So keep that in mind when the results of the search for the Higgs Particle are announced. If it’s found – yay. If it’s not found – then YAY! Either way, the scientific endeavor will continue to try to hunt the Truth no matter how elusive. And faith will continue to seek enlightenment by its contemplation of the Truth already delivered.

Posted in Religion, Science | Leave a comment

Quick thoughts on iBook Maker and iTunes U

Posted on January 19, 2012 by

So earlier today Apple released two new tools for educators; a tool that makes creating a multimedia text book very very easy, and a publishing service that allows you to create a curriculum and distribute it and materials remotely.

Both can have a major impact on the way we do Christian Formation.

We have a consistent challenge here in Arizona – there are many postulants for priesthood and diaconate for whom a three year residential seminary experience won’t work. Most of the people we’re trying to *recruit* for the ordained ministry are bulking at the idea of giving up their lives for three years and moving to another state (there’s no Episcopal seminary in Arizona) with no promise of paid work once they complete their studies. This is especially true for bi-vocational clergy which is pretty much every single deacon we’re ordaining and many of the priests who we hope will transform smaller congregations.

In response to this challenge the Bishop, the Commission on Ministry and the Board of Examining Chaplains (I serve on the latter two) have created a Deacon’s Formation program and are in the process of creating a “local” seminary experience based at the Cathedral in Phoenix. The Deacon’s program is working very well, but suffers on occasion from not giving our students access to the broadest possible viewpoints with the Episcopal Church. The priest formation process, of which I’m sort of tasked with primary responsibility, suffers from a lack of good texts and few lecturers.

But, what if we could get seminary professors around the country to create curriculum using their existing powerpoint/keynote slides as text books to be read in companion with the classic texts? And what if we could film their lectures (like what happens at Yale or Duke already) and use those as the formal lectures and the local meetings become “recitation” or seminar sections? Like what is happening in Community Colleges using the MIT open-course material…

Suddenly the idea of Cathedral’s becoming “local seminary branches” starts to make a great deal of sense, and the use of materials from the traditional seminaries keeps us all working in the mainstream of modern pedagogy. Yet by studying in groups of five or six (or larger) the best part of seminary, the student to student discussions is preserved.

At a national level, it would be very exciting to see the National Cathedral revisiting the College of Preachers and the College of the Laity and re-visioning them as virtual colleges. Imagine some of the short courses that the College of Preachers used to offer now available through iTunes U, with easily accessed workbooks and texts (many of which might be in the public domain) for use by many students at a nominal cost…

What else can you think of that the Episcopal Church might be doing with these new classes of tools? Here’s one idea, I could create an annotated Prayer Book with the Cathedral Customary for use by clergy and servers here at the Cathedral. (Or for a class I teach for clergy being ordained from other traditions.)

Posted in Religion, Web/Tech | 9 Comments

Mandala (A Musical Palindrome)

Posted on January 18, 2012 by

If Wikipedia wasn’t blacked out today, I’d suggest you first go and read up on the idea of the “Music of the Spheres”. It’s an idea that had it genesis in the writings of Pythagoras, who discovered the mathematical relationships between musical tones. The idea was further developed by Plato who suggested that since music and planetary motion both involved mathematical relationships between pairs and triads, that there must be a kind of planetary music waiting to be heard.

So, a musician has decided to try doing just that by creating a piece he calls “Mandala” which is based on the relative periods of the planets. It turns out that he’s created a palindrome (like RACE CAR) that is the same whether it’s played backwards for forwards. Though none of us can ever hope to listen to the whole thing.

Watch and listen:

““

Universe Today characterizes “Mandal” thusly:

Musician Daniel Starr-Tambor has created a song by assigning each planet a note and speeding up the orbital periods of the planets where 2 seconds represents one Earth year, with a note playing for each orbit. But this isn’t just any typical song; it ends up being a musical palindrome, which means it can be played the same both forwards and backwards … that is, if you lived long enough to play to the end of the song. At the accelerated speeds of the Solar System, Starr-Tambor estimates it would continue without repetition for over 532.25 septendecillion years (5.3225 X 10 56). And with more than 62 vigintillion (6.2 X 10 64) individual notes, this composition, called “Mandala,” is the longest musical palindrome in existence.

I love the ethereal nature of Saturn’s tones breaking in over the rhythm track created by Mecury’s orbit.

Posted in Science, Sermons and audio | Leave a comment

Researchers claim Turin Shroud is “supernatural”

Posted on December 21, 2011 by

The Independent is reporting that a team of Italian scientists who have been investigating the Shroud of Turin for years have finally managed to duplicated the particular characteristics of the “negative” image seen on the linen.

But…

“… they only managed the effect by scorching equivalent linen material with high-intensity ultra violet lasers, undermining the arguments of other research, they say, which claims the Turin Shroud is a medieval hoax.

Such technology, say researchers from the National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (Enea), was far beyond the capability of medieval forgers, whom most experts have credited with making the famous relic.

“The results show that a short and intense burst of UV directional radiation can colour a linen cloth so as to reproduce many of the peculiar characteristics of the body image on the Shroud of Turin,” they said.

And in case there was any doubt about the preternatural degree of energy needed to make such distinct marks, the Enea report spells it out: “This degree of power cannot be reproduced by any normal UV source built to date.”"

More here.

I’m not sure it’s conclusive proof that the image wasn’t made by a forger a thousand years after the event of the resurrection. And I don’t think people who doubt will accept this as proof of the Resurrection, but…

I’m happy to have this as an early Christmas present.

Posted in Religion, Science | 2 Comments