Rest and Dynamics⤒🔗

"So each scribe, who is a student of the heav­enly kingdom, can be compared to a father who brings out new and old things from his supply room." It is remarkable, in this saying of Jesus, that theologians apparently can always draw new things from such an old book as the Bible, but in such a way that the old is never lost. And that is necessary as well. For, if the indicators are not deceptive, the general Synod meeting at Leusden will need to find the wisdom to combine rest and stability with change and reformation. In our hyper-dynamic time that is certainly not a simple task, especially now that individualism runs riot and unanimity is far-sought. And, because superficiality and passing fads often win out over thorough deliberations and continuous prayer, it is to be hoped that besides room for eye-catching matters such as hymns and liturgy, there is also time for the underlying distress of the church in our days. For a crisis is not allayed by beautiful formulations and clever compromises.

The church, all things being equal, has the time, for she lives and thinks in terms of centuries and in the perspective of eternity. She is a body as well, a strong community, in which the variety of gifts serves the function­ing of the unit. Both characteristics are dia­metrically opposed to those of our time. The time-to-market flood of new technological products that washes over us is measured in days and months and is designed to fill the needs of hyper-individuals and extremely picky consumers. Our culture is inundated with radical changes that often put Christians on the spot. What believer can shield himself against the constant bombardment of stimuli, products, and information that, via all sorts of channels, rumbles into our living rooms. Did you really think that their messages are neu­tral? In the coming years the developments in information- and biotechnology will stun and astound us. The tension between rest and stability, on the one hand, and restlessness and change, on the other, is centuries old, but the unprecedented dynamics of our time is brand-new.

God in the Machine Shop←⤒🔗

Honestly speaking, the community costs me too much valuable time and the seeds of the glad tidings, with me, choke under the stress and jamming stations that constantly give the impression that God really does not exist, and that effete, spiritual matters such as redemp­tion and sin no longer matter and are things of the past. Sermons seem like something from another planet, because they are out of touch with the world we live in. We tackle today's problems ourselves with pills, programs, and projects. Here and now the restless, modern man has taken justice in his own hands. And the church stands in the middle of this culture. It, therefore, does not make sense to lower an iron curtain to shut it out, but it, however, makes sense to hand out weapons. If the Lord Jesus had been born in our age, He surely would have chosen other images for His parables. In the style of a song from the E&R Songbook from which we often sing at home,

'Koninkrijk van God ontwaakt tussen flatgebouwen en het eng'len lied weerkaatst op 'twerkterrein. Zingend van de mensenzoon met zijn kruis en doornenkroon, die in de machinehal een herder wezen zal. 145:2

(Transl. God's kingdom awakes among the blocks of flats and the angel's choir repercusses on the job site. Singing about the Son of man with his cross and crown of thorns, who will be a shepherd in the machine shop.)

I, however, often miss God "in the machine shop." Man, over time, learned to use new materials: glass, steel, concrete, aluminum, synthetics, semi-conductors. He learned to tap into dizzying sources of energy: steam, gas engines, electricity, gas turbines, atomic energy. And no less important: he learned to develop complex organizational structures and give form to the necessary co-operation of people, and educational methods to pass on the growing mountain of knowledge to the next generation. The social structures with its far reaching specialization – that got rid of responsibility – are focused on technological progress, and with success. The average life expectancy of man in Western Europe during the time of Christ was 22 years, after the Middle Ages it increased to 33, in 1900 it rose to 49, and today breaks the 75 years' barrier. This is mainly due to the increased production in agriculture and the strides made in hygiene and medicine. The technological progress has been spectacular in the last century. The first computer in 1943 – the ENIAC – was con­structed with vacuum tubes, occupied a large room and weighed 30 tons. The laptop com­puter, which today fits in a carrying case, weighs a few kilo's and has a speed and computing capacity that lies more than a thousand times higher, and the limits of this technology are not even in sight. God's crea­tion apparently embodies unheard of and unknown possibilities, but what is its purpose now that we enjoy sufficient prosperity to be satisfied?

Each new technological discovery not only brings us longer life, but also a myriad of new possibilities, but it always comes at a certain cost. Something we all too soon forget, dis­count, or simply shrug off. It would not be a bad idea to ask ourselves with each new technological novelty: what is the cost? The time we save in owning and using a car is absolutely not offset by the hours of work needed for its upkeep. The microwave oven in the kitchen is not only handy, when we are in a hurry, but also causes haste, and who knows if the food that comes from it may, as a consequence, will be less tasty. The hearth of olden days created togetherness; today's central heat gives everyone in his room what he needs. Genetically modified foods can be grown more efficiently, but over against towering risks, and Murphy's law teaches that it will eventually go wrong. The second reason, why the gain of new possibilities is wiped out, is that we never have the time to pick its fruits. If we allow automation – which frees us from work – to keep pace with the increasing stress in the work place, are we not crackers?

Dangers←⤒🔗

Our noses are rubbed in it: this world will never be perfect; the stress increases. Three kinds of dangers hang over our heads. First, there is the psychological danger. The stress and pressure from work – brought about by the rampant dynamics of our time – is great and many perish. Where the environment changes at the speed of a bullet train, estrangement makes its inroads. Our social problems consti­tute a second kind of danger. Individualism brings about techniques that isolate people, and an increasing commercialization of society, that causes people to become lonely, is the cause of a leveling, a worn-down awareness of norms, and an increasing criminality. The growing gap between the rich and poor in the world will result in an ever swelling stream of economic refugees. In the third place there are the risks such as environmental problems, increasing urbanization, endangered plant – and wildlife, the enormous complexity of society which, according to the parliamentary inquiries, is increasingly difficult to govern, military threats of nuclear and biological weapons, the uncertainty about the health risks posed by genetically modified foods, etc. Not for nothing does the sociologist Ulrich Beck speak about a "risk-society," in which techno­logical advancements go hand in hand with greater risks.

Since the Enlightenment modern man has especially tried to calculate and control risks, post modern man on the other hand seems to make a point of accepting risk as inevitable. The well-known philosopher Herman de Dijn (Leuven) recently spoke at Delft about the role of ethics in our technological society. In his opinion, we must learn to live with the new kinds of fear and uncertainty that have re­placed the traditional fears of earlier days: the plague, evil spirits, poverty and hunger.

Earlier there were dangers as well but they had a natural rather than a technological character. Complaining about our technological era makes no sense, just as it made no sense to complain about the fate of nature. De Dijn saw here a task for the church and religion which by banishing fears always had a kind of thera­peutic effect. Now, indeed, rest proceeds from faith, but not without exposing the technologi­cal expectation of salvation.

The common opinion about technology among us is that it is a neutral means which man can use for either good or bad. This instrumenta­lism reasons like: "Guns do not kill people, people kill people." Technology in this view is not lord and master in our society, but only a servant that we at will can turn on and off. A second opinion – that particularly held sway among philosophers – is that technology is an evil, autonomous force that has us in its clutches. This view treats all technology the same.

According to the representatives of a third view – held by social-constructivism – technol­ogy can not be seen as a neutral instrument but, in their opinion, man, however, controls and directs it. These social-constructivists are of the opinion that in technology norms and values gain form. Technology, according to them, is never autonomous, it is and continues to be human work. Instrumentalists and social­-constructivists are of the opinion that there are not only objectionable but also good motives for using technology and, therefore, we must not completely write it off. We can make thankful use of much of it. The three views correspond with three periods. From the Industrial Revolution till about 1950 society had a positive view of technological develop­ments. After that there came a period that was ushered in by the Club of Rome and the neo­-Marxists, in which a critical mood dominated, and in which all technicians were accused of creating atom bombs and environmental pollution. The former social critics, however, have now put their hands to the plough, and have come to the realization that, in order to solve the great problems, technology is indis­pensable. At this moment the mood is, there­fore, ambivalent.

Depth←⤒🔗

Yet, that, in the eyes of the social-constructi­vists, however, is not the end of the matter. Man can, indeed, become addicted to technol­ogy, and those who look around can see that this is the order of the day. As an alcoholic is not cured of his drinking problem when you tell him that he is not a slave to drink, but to the enjoyment of drink, so Western society is not helped by knowing that technology itself can do no harm and can be controlled by man. For, because of the ambivalent mood, the expectations remain high: "Yet, our future prosperity will in large measure have to come from technology. It is either technology or poverty," so writes a director of the Energy Research Centre, The Netherlands. Not only technologists utter these kinds of assertions. The drift of these fairly innocuous phrases can be found in many reports and studies. What kind of spirit do they represent? In the first place: we, as human beings, create our own future, we have it in our hands. In the second place: man must bring about prosperity with technological know-how. The magic word in all sorts of reports is, therefore, "INNOVA­TION." In the absence of a social consensus, technological solutions are, indeed, the only way out. Technology must guarantee our future, material prosperity. There is then talk of a materialistic, secularized expectation of salvation. In spite of the fact that we in this age did not lack innovation, and look what it brought us, we continue to search for solutions in this direction.

Yet, I do not experience technology in my lab at Delft as pure distress and misery. The technology itself is a wonderful and impres­sive gift of God. Technological products are indeed loaded, and in our time much resemble the sacrificial meat about which Paul wrote in his time, and you may not deal with it thoughtlessly and naively. We sometimes say admiringly that technology does not stand for anything, but that is not true. Technology, indeed, stands for something, namely a certain mentality. It must stand for something as well, for without any content it is an empty shell. What do all these innovation profit us? PowerPoint does not truly make our presenta­tions any better. All communication technol­ogy in the world does not guarantee a good conversation. Genetically modified foods do not bring the solution of the world's food problems one step closer. ICT is a wonderful means, but is not a goal of good education, and can never replace the personal attention of the teacher in the classroom. The beautiful lay-out of reports that roll from the laser printers, often get stuck in creating a beautiful illusion. Technology continues to hang on the outside, and is absolutely no guarantee for a spiritual depth

With that we have returned to the beginning of this article. For what do a thousand hymns, an overhead projector on the pulpit, and a won­derful liturgy with beautiful instruments profit us?

...I will point you to a better way, a way that surpasses all this.