Read also earlier posts »Intro: About »Part 1: Born Of Lockdown »Part 2: Need For Naturalism »Part 3: Equivalence Of God & Nature »Part 4: Special Role Of Science »Part 5: Right & Wrong Tech »Part 6: Smartphones & Covid Vaccines »Part 7: Irredeemable Tech »Part 8: Tower Of Babel »Part 9: Eden & The Fall »Part 10: Mary Shelley: Prophet?
I’ll take a sharp turn from the heady topics of the past few posts. I feel like I’ve defined the philosophy of Naturalism enough for the time being. Now I’ll try to paint a picture of what Naturalism might look like in actual practice. In this post, I’ll anticipate what a congregation meeting might look like.
If you are reading this blog for the first time, I’d suggest first reading the intro “About Naturalism”. If you are familiar with Naturalism already, I’ll remind you that I don’t anticipate a congregation any time soon. I’d be surprised if any of my ideas were ever directly adopted to a gathering of likeminded believers, but I think it is at least likely that some of these ideas might serve as inspiration for something similar.
Before starting to imagine any specifics of Naturalist church services, let me try to list some basic Naturalist beliefs that could be reflected in a gathering of adherents. I’ve mentioned all the following in previous posts:
God is nature, and nature is sacred
technology should be “right”, and low-tech is generally better (see Parts 5 and 6 for a detailed discussion of this)
in-person gathering is important, and cannot be replaced
natural health is superior to pharma health (sort of a corollary of #2)
there is a trinity of science, ethics, and spirituality with regard to our relation to nature (see Part 4 of this substack)
freedoms of speech, religion, science, assembly, healthcare, and inquiry are essential
current religion and culture is the proper basis of any new religion and culture.
I’ll brainstorm some ideas for Naturalist church meetings, based on each of these beliefs.
In relation to the first belief, it would make sense if a Naturalist church had obvious physical connection to nature. If indoors, there might be skylights illuminating potted plants and natural features such as rocks, ponds, and fish. Perhaps a greenhouse would be a good all-weather setting. Comfortable outdoor locations might be very fitting, too. It almost goes without mentioning that gardening could be a prominent shared pastime for congregants.
Like in other churches, there might be a podium or stage for a speaker or for musical performers, but instead of having a defined seating arrangement, seating might be left “naturally” to congregants each time. Folded chairs or portable benches could be arranged however people like, in different ways for each service. At the end of the service, chairs could be folded again and put away, so that a new arrangement could happen the next time.
As for what is spoken in the church, the terms “nature” and “God” would be used interchangeably. In fact, there perhaps should be an opening ceremony in which this is pointed out, both to define the faith and make sure newcomers are aware of the equivalence of the terms.
Regarding the second belief, technology employed at the Naturalist church service should be minimal. Phones should normally be turned off, of course, and not used unless necessary. There should be no unnecessary amplification, and no recording of the services. The services would be unique, non-repeatable, non-playback-able events. Wherever tech might be needed, the most “right” type—generally the simplest—should be employed. Energy efficiency might also be important, but again with an emphasis on simpler tech and on being present in nature. For example, for indoor services during the winter, the heat could be set somewhat low—at least low enough so that everyone is reminded of the season--and congregants could be reminded to bring sweaters.
The third belief, in the importance of in-person meeting, can be honored in at least a couple ways. First, Naturalists should make attending in-person services paramount. Disallowing recording of the gatherings is one way to do this: there is no other way to see the service than by being there. Second, a ceremony called “air communion” could be regularly held at services. Congregants simply sit and share silent breathing together, with perhaps an invocation briefly mentioning the reasons that in-person gathering is important, such as the autonomy and free will of each person to gather as they please with others, the social nature of humans, and the history of misguided lockdown during the corona years.
The fourth belief relates to natural health, and this could be reflected in a time for congregants to share knowledge, research, and experiences related to non-pharmaceutical health, treatments, and diet. Perhaps demonstrations or group activities could be sometimes done in this segment of the service.
The fifth belief, regarding the ethics-science-spirit trinity (discussed in Part 4), could be the basis of sermons by a pastor or by rotating speakers. The sermons should be topically varied: sometimes concentrating on ethical matters, sometimes on science, and sometimes on spirit, or perhaps single sermons with a combination of these.
The sixth belief—in freedom—means that the topics of the sermons and of other information shared in the church would be uninhibited by censorship and bias in the media or in the wider culture. For example, there are many natural health topics that are not discussed in mainstream news due to the influence of pharmaceutical companies, chiefly through the advertisements they place in media. These sorts of health topics could be freely discussed in a Naturalist church: I see Naturalist congregations as being media-resistant rather than media-reactive.
In Naturalism, freedom of inquiry would mean the freedom to explore topics without the sanction of any authority, including the authority of the church itself. For example, if any individual congregant or set of congregants wishes to explore the rightness of a certain type of technology (see Part 5), they should not need permission from any authority, including from any church authority. This freedom also implies that Naturalists can come to their own personal conclusions on technological ethics, based on their own learning and understanding. Specific judgements of technological rightness should not be dogma issued by a central committee. Such judgements must be made individually. However, it is likely that on some judgements—such as on the wrongness of genetic engineering technology—there might be consensus—or nearly so—in a congregation.
Regarding belief in freedom of assembly, the Naturalist church would not lock down during health scares, but would leave attendance optional to whoever wishes to come in person. It is natural for people to associate with each other, in person and willingly. We need it.
Naturalism enshrines freedom, but it’s important to note that it is not an ethical free-for-all. Just the opposite.
The seventh belief—that new religion and culture must come from current religion and culture—means that prevalent traditional notions of morality in major religions can be regarded as a starting point for ethics. Although Naturalism may be a new way to look at ethics, the Ten Commandments—present both in Buddhism and Judaic religions—would be regarded as a source.
Sourcing from current religions applies not just to ethics, but also to cultural practices. Although there are some differences, in a lot of ways a Naturalist church would be similar in culture to existing churches. I can see music, singing, celebrations of holidays, potluck dinners, coffee and chat after services, youth groups, weddings, funerals, etc. In short, the same sort of social activities that existing churches normally do.
Regarding holidays, I don’t see any reason not to honor some existing traditional holidays—from Christianity, other established religions, or of pagan origin (for example, Easter and Halloween). Many of these holidays—at their roots—are simply markers of the natural passing of seasons. If they can be described in relation to nature, it’s especially appropriate to celebrate them. Perhaps Naturalists could elevate Mid-summer’s Day to a special event, in order to seasonally balance the mid-winter celebrations of Christmas and New Year. In fact, the celebration of Christmas was scheduled on the calendar in early-Christian Rome by placing it conveniently on a sun-worshipping holiday. There is no reason that Naturalism should not do likewise: grow a new celebration from an existing one.
In fact, such outgrowth is completely fitting for Naturalism, because that’s exactly how nature itself grows and changes. Whenever nature changes, it doesn’t suddenly materialize completely novel items. It uses what’s available as the source, then rearranges it and enhances it. Natural change is like evolution on a huge scale. Its creativity is unending, and its efficiency is astounding.
The above descriptions of a Naturalist service are hopefully enough of a sketch for the reader to see what Naturalism could become in a social sense. In the next post, I’ll attempt to describe the personal life of a Naturalist, and how Naturalism could be put into personal practice.