Blog
The Crusades again - in Africa this time.
(23 July 10)by Scott McKenzie
Ralph Peters writing in the New York Post outlines a case for the next Crusades. Again Christians vs. Moslems, but this time in Africa.
We hear a bit about the rise of Christianity in Africa, particularly of the Anglicans in Nigeria and their threat to leave the Anglican Communion.
But this piece gives some overall views of religion in Africa, and of a coming clash between the two: Christianity and Islam. There is an inevitability about it.
Faith and facts
(21 July 10)by Greg Spearritt
It seems that contradicting firmly-held beliefs with facts may be less than effective. In fact, it can be counter-productive, resulting in those beliefs being held even more strongly. That’s the conclusion of researchers at the University of Michigan. This finding has implications for the political process as Julia and Tony struggle to shape public opinion in the lead to Australia’s polls on August 21. It also rings true, surely, for religious belief... ……………
Our explanation of reality challenged
(21 July 10)by Scott McKenzie
We tend to think that we can explain our reality by using scientific models, theories and laws - that is until we begin to talk about 'subjective experience' and 'consciousness'. What brain scientists call 'the hard problem of consciousness', that is how we can explain our thoughts and our subjective experience as a result of physical processes in the brain, has failed to submit to satisfactory explanation.
And at the atomic level and below that level, quantum mechanics is also finding it difficult to use known physical processes to explain the behaviour of matter.
And then there's the question of where the laws came from, and how matter 'knows' to follow these laws.
Todd Duncan writing for The Global Spiral, a publication of the Metanexus Institute tries to untangle this problem. Worth a look.
Terrible sins: paedophilia & priesting women
(17 July 10)by Greg Spearritt
It takes your breath away. The ordination of women, apparently, is on some kind of a par with child abuse by clergy.
Is it any wonder the Catholic Church is both on the nose and increasingly irrelevant in the 21st century? It’s truly unfortunate, because there are very many forward-thinking Catholics who become more and more marginalised and demoralised as Rome (with Sydney in tow) continues its long-term lurch to the right.
……..
Gays and marriage
(17 July 10)by Greg Spearritt
Wow – here’s one out of left-field from a commentator known for his reactionary views… It was wrong of me to oppose gay marriage.
He makes some good points, including about our current (soon to be erstwhile?) atheistic Prime Minister’s views.
………….
The Church of England - a benign relic?
(10 July 10)by Scott McKenzie
England's state religion is an accident sustained by apathy: lacking any logical existence at the heart of the nation, it survives because it is already there. No one would campaign to create an official Church of England, if we had not inherited one; other parts of the country do without it. Non-believers, when they think of the English church at all, tend to see a benign relic, the keeper of country churchyards, a modest, often helpful and mostly inoffensive part of the national fabric. Its rituals involve a declining number of citizens and its tortured internal politics are a mystery, but it is still an important – and often profound – part of many English lives. The fact that the monarch is also its supreme governor, that some of its bishops sit in parliament, and that its senior clerics are appointed by the prime minister is both indefensible and profoundly unexciting. This tolerant indulgence, though, is being strained.
What now for religion in politics?
(26 June 10)by Greg Spearritt
Faith in politics may not be dead under non-practising Baptist Julia Gillard but it is certain to take on an altogether different meaning. So says Joel Gibson, writing in the SMH. Let’s hope the change is for the better.
………
Science and bunkum
(26 June 10)by Greg Spearritt
The New Scientist website features a review of Massimo Pigliucci’s book Nonsense on Stilts: How to tell science from bunk. (Thanks to Nigel Sinnot for the heads up on this.)
The review (and, one assumes, the book itself) is well worth a look. Some interesting questions are tackled, such as why quantum mysticism is in the ‘bunk’ category and string theory is considered ‘science’ (or ‘almost science’).
Reviewer Amanda Gefter says at one point:
The idea that science can't tell us anything about the objective world just because it is a human activity fraught with human flaws and biases is easily refuted the minute that planes fly or atomic bombs explode. Scientists, meanwhile, do us a disservice when they promote scientism - the idea that science can answer every meaningful question we might ask about the world.
I’d have to agree with this in principle, though the idea of science as a cultural activity is more complex and nuanced than Gefter allows here. Philosophers (Don Cupitt, for one) have no illusions about the usefulness of science, but they raise genuine epistemological issues that should force us to question the all-too-common assumption that we can grasp ‘reality itself’ in some magically unmediated way through science. The fact that we just can’t get a handle on the logic behind aspects of quantum physics is, I’d suggest, an illustration of this: our language-derived tools are indeed useful, but they don’t allow a seamless one-to-one mapping of what’s actually going on. In some sense, we are always ‘making it up’ or creating the reality we claim to ‘find’.
…….
Religion 'fading fast' in the US?
(26 June 10)by Scott McKenzie
Only 15 percent of emerging adults (between 18 and 29) in the USA have a strong personal faith and practise it regularly, a new poll shows. About 30 percent are engaged inconsistently or only loosely affiliated with a religious tradition. One in four is indifferent toward religion, while 15 percent are open to spiritual or religious matters but haven't made a personal commitment. The remaining 15 percent have little or no connection to religion, or hold negative attitudes toward it.
(Newsline is a newsletter of the National Secular Society [UK])
Religion still matters
(24 June 10)by Greg Spearritt
Religion still matters, says Gerard Henderson. The evidence? Unlike the “sneering secularists” who “frequent taxpayer subsidised literary festivals”, our erstwhile PM and the Opposition Leader thought religion important enough to speak to a recent gathering of Christian leaders, an event which was also apparently webcast to “thousands of Christians at hundreds of churches”. (What Gerard meant to say was “taxpayer subsidised churches”, but he’s a busy man.)
Religion does still matter. In some cases it’s a force for progressive thought and worthwhile social action. In others – arguably the majority, and typified by the organiser of the event just mentioned, the Australian Christian Lobby – it’s a force for conservatism which would rather see asylum seekers turned away or locked up on Nauru than given a fair go.
I expect compassion for asylum-seekers and refugees didn’t feature too prominently in either K. Rudd’s or A. Abbott’s visions of the values that should define Australia after the election.
One wonders what J. Gillard would have to say on the matter… and whether she’d bother attending such a function. Time will tell.
……..
Would you believe it?
(19 June 10)by Scott McKenzie
Some religious laws are so strange, so stupid and lead to such ridiculous outcomes that you would think that they'd change the laws.
Try this one from Saudi Arabia.
And it's the 21st century remember.
(I know we in SoFiA want to be tolerant of religious beliefs and customs, but really ... you judge for yourself if I'm being intolerant).
Why the Catholic Church must be destroyed
(18 June 10)by Scott McKenzie
Gregory Paul is an independent researcher interested in informing the public about little known yet important aspects of the complex interactions between religion, secularism, culture, economics, politics and societal conditions. In this article he argues for the destruction of the Catholic Church, saying:
“The Roman Church keeps getting away with its endless transgressions because most of their allies and even many critics take each failing in isolation, limiting their understanding of the pervasive scope of the corruption. The international press has been perpetually slack in putting the string of problems into its broader and damning context. As a result too few comprehend that the Catholic problem is so chronic and deep set that it is incurable.”
There are four pages to this lengthy but enlightening account.
Religious tolerance endangered by ethics trials?
(05 June 10)by Greg Spearritt
Moore College theology lecturer Michael Jensen (son of Archbishop Peter – in case the Moore College reference doesn’t place him well enough) has been continuing the campaign by conservative Christians against ethics classes in NSW State Schools.
The trial of ethics classes, he says, is diminishing the role for Special Religious Education and therefore endangering religious tolerance:
[I]f the option for SRE is diluted, or even removed, religious people will continue to withdraw their children from government schools and seek to educate their children in religious schools where they will only interact with children of their own faith.
………
Jensen goes on to claim that
Government schools are a unique opportunity for our society to inculcate our values of diversity, tolerance and friendship across cultural and religious divides. SRE facilitates these objectives wonderfully well.
Could this be true? Would ethics classes spell the end of SRE? And does SRE thus enhance religious tolerance?
Jensen could be right on the first question, if enough parents opt to send their children to the ethics classes instead of RE. (And if they do, then that’s what they want for their children, even if it’s not what the churches want. Who should have the greater say?) SRE might wither away for lack of patronage… though it sounds unlikely. There’s no proposal to remove it. And, unlike the case of the ethics trials, there are no wealthy, highly-organized groups campaigning to get rid of it.
So would the fervent faithful then take their children to faith-based schools, depriving them of interaction with children of other faiths and none? These will be the church/mosque/synagogue-attending families whose kids already get extended sessions of instruction, worship and socialising with their faith community in the evenings or at weekends. Would half an hour of (often poorly-organised) SRE really make that much difference? If so, surely these families will already have jumped ship.
On the second question: the actual SRE classes, if anything, are working against tolerance of religious diversity. The largely conservative-evangelical material commonly used (much of it emanating from Sydney Anglicanism) is not exactly big on affirming other religious points of view. The Bible, meaning a conservative Christian interpretation of it, is right, and that’s that. It’s hard to see how RE lessons – as opposed to secular ethics classes – can be promoting religious tolerance.
Jensen’s curious argument is another indication of how desperate the churches are in an increasingly secular era to retain their historical privileges.
……..
It makes you wonder ....
(28 May 10)by Scott McKenzie
Nicholas Kristoff writing in the New York Times of 28 May tells the story of Sister Margaret of St Joseph's Hospital in Phoenix, Arizona.
Sister Margaret was described by many as 'saintly' and 'close to God'.
But she took a decision that led to her automatic excommunication by a local bishop of the Roman Cathlolic Church. Much to the outrage of most who knew her and her decision.
Read Sister Margaret's story here. I makes me wonder - what about you?
New articles online
(24 May 10)by Greg Spearritt
You might like to view some items recently added to the SoFiA website…
- A Debate on Dawkins
- What is Spiritualism?
- If Only… (a reflection on prayer)
- A review of Adrian Cooper’s Places of Pilgrimage and Healing
- A review of A.C. Grayling’s Towards the Light: The Struggle for Liberty and Rights that Made the Modern West
- A Sporting Chance of Being Religious
…………..
Why atheism will replace religion.
(22 May 10)by Scott McKenzie
Quite a provocative title.
Nigel Barber Ph.D. writing in a recent edition of Psychology Today argues that people in developed countries tend to believe that they have more control over their lives and are therefore less in need of religion.
Barber also argues that sport fulfils a role something akin to religion in many developed countries with sporting events becoming quite ritualistic. It’s interesting that Western Europe provides an environment in which both factors are very strong, and that it’s in such countries that atheism is at its highest eg Sweden 64% nonbelievers.
Synthetic life - threat or blessing?
(22 May 10)by Greg Spearritt
The creation by scientists of synthetic life is certainly a milestone, and probably more than just a scientific one.
Enter the Italian bishops. While they’re apparently worried about man ‘playing God’, it’s good to see they’re not just following a knee-jerk oppositional line.
The argument that we don’t know where this will lead is a valid one: I, for one, regret that we were ever able to discover the secret power of atoms.
However, any complaint that humanity may use its new-found powers of creating life for dastardly ends doesn’t stack up if it’s assumed we’re usurping the powers of an almighty, beneficent Creator. God, after all, has given us Ebola virus, Loa loa and Pol Pot. Not to mention John Howard and Kevin Rudd.
………
The Catholic Church - today and tomorrow
(09 May 10)by Scott McKenzie
For centuries, the Catholic Church was unquestionably strongest in Europe. In 1900, the continent accounted for perhaps two-thirds of the Church's nearly 270 million members. Latin America had another 70 million believers, while Africa barely appeared on the map, with about two million followers. As Anglo-French sage Hilaire Belloc proclaimed in 1920, “The Faith is Europe and Europe is the Faith.”
Since then, and especially since the 1960s, Catholicism has been moving south. Partly, this is due to evangelism sponsored by the Church and its religious orders; new conversions, for instance, have surged in Africa. But shifting demographics have also played its part: While populations have increased modestly in Europe, they have boomed across the global south—and Catholic numbers have grown apace. Today, the world has 900 million more Catholics than it did in 1900, but only 100 hundred million of those new additions are Europeans.
So reports Philip Jenkins in a recent report for The New Republic. This is an insightful analysis of the condition of the global Catholic Church of today – and of tomorrow.
An ethical choice
(08 May 10)by Greg Spearritt
The ethics classes being trialed in ten NSW state schools are apparently proving popular; so much so that the Sydney Anglicans are squealing again.
The classes are being offered for those who don’t attend Scripture lessons, but it’s claimed there’s been a drain on Scripture classes of almost 50%.
Many of those protesting the ethics classes trial would be amongst the first to join the Howard-era chant of personal choice in any other sphere: indeed, in education itself, where they argue for government funding of wealthy private schools that have no obligation to take all comers.
When it comes to learning about the Church-version of Jesus, however, parents apparently should have no right to choose.
Clearly, parents want that right.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that interest would be sustained at high levels if ethics classes became an ongoing weekly event: as Neil Ormerod points out, over time there would repetition and recycling of material and the novelty element would fade.
Nonetheless, it’s the principle of the thing: by all means have Scripture classes as an option, but in secular 21st-century Australia how can it be the only real option?
……..
A cult in Brisbane
(01 May 10)by Scott McKenzie
Just in case you think there aren’t any really vile religious cults in Australia here’s a case study of one. It was written by Chrys Stevenson an active members of Brisbane Atheists.
It’s really sad to think that human beings could be so stupid as to behave as do the leaders of this Brisbane cult.
Isn’t there something we in SoFiA can do to let our voices be heard against this inhuman behaviour?
“A Path to Sustainable Energy.”
(29 April 10)by Scott McKenzie
Many of us are struggling to work out our positions in relation to global warming as well as to how we replace energy generated at present by coal-fired power stations. A couple of US professors wrote a paper for Scientific American in November last year called “A Path to Sustainable Energy” in which they claimed that the science and engineering suggested that it was possible “to re-power America with 100 percent carbon-free electricity within 10 years.” It was duly published and read by millions. How many woke up to the fact that it was a spoof is not clear, but Howard Hayden, Professor Emeritus of Physics, University of Connecticut did. It’s worth reading his report here.
I’ve never known a problem in science or technology on which the “truth” was so difficult to ascertain.
Not with a bang...
(29 April 10)by Greg Spearritt
Is this the end of religion-as-we-know-it? What about in Oz? Is it why Peter Jensen is so afraid that NSW parents will jump ship and send their children to secular ethics classes if they’re given a choice?
………….
Ethics: religious or secular?
(29 April 10)by Greg Spearritt
Neil Ormerod has argued in Eureka Street for the superiority of religious as opposed to secular ethics. To derive an ‘ought’ from ‘what is’ (that is, to use reason as the basis for ethics), he says there must be purpose:
The question is, do human beings have a purpose? Is there a point to being human, some goal towards which we 'ought' to move? Richard Dawkins repeatedly proclaims that there is no purpose beyond what we ourselves might create. Evolution is blind and purposeless and even morality can be reduced to this blind watchmaker implanting something within us.
But if the only purpose is the purpose I create for myself then ethics is irreducibly individualistic. You have yours and I have mine. Our ethics then boils down to a set of arbitrary (and hence non-rational) personal preferences.
It seems to me Ormerod is reading way too much Christian individualism into the issue. Christianity is very much a ‘me’ religion, where the essential ingredient is the individual’s relationship with God and assent to His gratuitous offer of pardon/forgiveness. Each person must make their own decision for the Lord.
A secular ethics, by contrast, does not have to be about “personal preferences” at all. Humans are social beings. Living as we do in community, our determination of what ought to be can be determined on such well-known and rational principles as the common-wealth, or what is good for the community/society. That is a genuine purpose: the well-being and betterment of the human group.
I suggest it may be better for our society - a la the NSW ethics classes trials in schools - to have children learn to genuinely listen to other views and rationally evaluate and discuss them than to teach an absolute ethic based on an ancient scripture (the ethics embodied in which are in any case morally suspect by any enlightened contemporary standards). This will teach, if nothing else, respect for diversity, an ethically attractive attitude which is missing from much of the religious instruction/indoctrination that masquerades in NSW schools as religious ‘education’.
(Thanks to Nigel Sinnott for alerting us to the article mentioned here.)
………..
Hans Kung’s open letter to the bishops
(24 April 10)by Scott McKenzie
The Catholic Church has reverted to type so slowly since the Second Vatican Council over 40 years ago that it’s not easy to see it happening. But this reversion has speeded up under the new Pope, and he has come under huge scrutiny for his action/inactions as a bishop and cardinal.
Hans Kung has written this open letter to the bishops. It draws out the reversions since the Second Council and Ratzinger’s own hastening of this process as well as his behaviour in the face of reports of child abuse by his priests.
Well worth a look – could be the epitaph for the Catholic Church.
It’s those women again
(19 April 10)by Greg Spearritt
When they’re naughty, they make the earth move. So says Iranian cleric
Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.
The exact link between leading innocent young men astray and earthquakes isn’t spelled out in the article. One is left to assume it’s Allah, blessed be His name, punishing everyone for the misdemeanours of a few.
……….
The ethics of ethics trials
(12 April 10)by Greg Spearritt
The unseemly and breathtaking hypocrisy of Sydney Anglicanism is currently on display over the trial of ethics classes in NSW schools.
Archbishop Peter Jensen – who reportedly refused to meet in the initial consultation phase with those from the St James Ethics Centre who will conduct the trial – complains that if the course continues after the trial, it will “jeopardise religious education in public schools.'' ''Without such a religious component, public schools will cease to be inclusive of all children,'' he says.
There are three problems with Dr Jensen’s one-eyed and immoderate views.
First, it’s not ‘religious education’ and never has been. Education would expose children to a range of faiths and deal with facts, not doctrines. It’s actually religious instruction, ‘RI’, aka religious indoctrination, delivered largely by fervent faithful who wouldn’t know the first thing about the true history of the ‘scripture’ they’re ‘teaching’.
Second, if religion is so foundational and valuable to our society, why is the Arch concerned that a secular alternative to religion classes would spell the end of RI? Aren’t there enough parents who would want it to continue? I don’t hear those arguing for ethics classes baying for the complete demise of choice – which is what Dr Jensen is doing.
Which brings us to the third point: public schools are not inclusive now. What currently happens to children whose parents don’t want their children learning church doctrine from uninformed volunteers? There’s no genuine alternative.
So, Dr Jensen: do you want choice, or don’t you? Is it fair – or ‘Christian’ – to force everyone to fit the religious model or ‘sit out’ for those lessons? Is it, indeed, ethical?
…………….
O sinner man
(11 April 10)by Greg Spearritt
Looks like the sinners have indeed been running to the Lord, or at least to places of worship, in recent times – and not necessarily to repent. According to the Daily Telegraph, the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research has released data showing that almost eight times as many people were charged with offences in churches, synagogues and the like as in strip clubs, brothels and gaming establishments in 2008.
…………….
It's only right
(11 April 10)by Greg Spearritt
The counter-attack of the conservative religious and faux-religious right is apparently underway. Its mission? To save us from uncertainty, immorality and utter dissolution. Imagine it: George Pell, Geoffrey Blainey, John Howard, Dame Elisabeth Murdoch, Hugh Morgan, Donald McGauchie and more under the emceeship of Mr Right himself, Andrew Bolt.
The message from this august event was reportedly that we mustn’t let godless secularism hold sway: that way lies the pit of meaninglessness. What, then, would prevent “lies, cheating, harm and swindling”?
It’s not clear whether Australian Christian Lobby managing director Jim Wallace got an invite, but he’s obviously on song. Secular ethics classes in schools? It’s an oxymoron for Jim. How can you have love for neighbour, self-sacrifice and help for the poor without the Bible?
Clearly, we need to rewind to a more certain, Christian, pre-post-modern Australia. Reverence for the authority of bishops and bible is the answer. There may of course be the reinstatement of the White Australia policy and chinamen again swinging in the breeze, there may be rampant sexual abuse of children by clergy, harassment of gays, the uprooting and relegation of aborigines to reserves and women would have to relearn their way to the kitchen. But at least there wouldn’t be any “lies, cheating, harm and swindling” going on. Would there?
…………….
This makes my blood boil
(01 April 10)by Scott McKenzie
All of us will have come across reports in recent times (and for years also in the past), of Catholic priests who molested (I’m too disgusted to use stronger and more appropriate terms) boys and girls, young and old, for years and years.
But we might not have read of the depth of this problem, of the significance of the sacraments that were abused in the process, and of the current Pope’s complicity in this sorry matter.
Three news reports have come to light that address these matters:
Christopher Hitchens writing in Slate clearly shows the complicity of the Pope in his piece The Pope is Not above the Law.
Michael Murphy asks in The Independent How could Catholics do Such a Thing? in an insightful and heart-rending analysis of “he who is in a state of grace” as the perpetrator of such evil.
And finally India Knight, long-time Catholic (of sorts), writes in TimesOnline from a personal perspective Holy Father I can no longer stay in this Church of Disgust.
Probably not the end of the Catholic Church (it’s proved remarkably resilient) but another nail in the coffin – as a mass movement at least.
Peas in a pod: authority and abuse
(31 March 10)by Greg Spearritt
Pope Benedict says he won’t be intimidated “by the chatter of dominant opinions”, in clear reference to the matter of child sex abuse by Catholic clergy.
More realistic assessments of the situation, however, abound. According to NY Times writer Maureen Dowd, for example, the Catholic Church gave up its credibility for Lent. Retired Aussie Bishop Geoffrey Robinson foresees a significantly diminished Church at least in the West largely as a result of the abuse crisis.
Surely, what it boils down to – the abuse itself, that is, together with the morally bankrupt response to it – is the issue of authority. Bishops and popes are not in fact gracious, excellent or reverent any more than your local ‘Honorable Member’ is honorable. Nor, in the case of (most) Catholic clergy, are they fathers. They’re fallible human beings with egos and libidos who have no right to be put on a pedestal or given special pseudo-family relationship rights – other than by dint of their character.
Maybe ditching the ludicrous titles would be a starting place for churches to regain some credibility.
……….
My tribe, your tribe
(26 March 10)by Greg Spearritt
If religion is not, at base, tribalism writ large, it is at least one of the handiest tools in the box for reinforcing group identity. The vigorous assertion of identity through religious violence seems to be characteristic of our age, and now even the Buddhists are at it.
If Australia is not so beset by these religious ructions, perhaps that underlines the connection between religion and tribalism. The bitter sectarianism of an earlier, more religious Australia - with Catholics and Protestants energetically harassing and excluding each other everywhere from the schoolyard to big business - should not be forgotten. Our growing secularism has largely put paid to that reprehensible phase of our national life.
Maybe our innate need to form groups and protect them from outsiders has found new expressions. It’s doubtful, however, that there are many mechanisms more powerful for indulging that propensity than religion.
I have sincere respect for the enlightened thought and ritual that goes on in some liberal and progressive religious communities. This is what some people mean when they use the term ‘religion’ (or ‘true religion’), but it seems to me that it’s very much a minority expression. It’s laudable, but is it enough to save ‘religion’ from the dark side?
…………
What the devil is going on?
(21 March 10)by Greg Spearritt
We expect to hear the ‘D’ word from the likes of Pat Robertson whenever something goes wrong in the world. (Haiti, we’re told, had sworn a "pact to the devil" and thus brought the recent earthquake upon itself.)
Not that we in Oz can mock. We have our own Pastor Danny and his 2009 mass exorcism of Canberra. (Did it work?... hard to tell… Oh, of course, Peter Costello’s gone…)
Serious talk of the Devil is nothing new in Catholicism either: the Vatican, as you’d expect, sets the pace. But we now have the home-grown spectacle of the Sydney Catholic Diocese appointing a new exorcist, who warns that Harry Potter and vampire stories may be trojan horses for the world of demons.
What’s really been demonising our children, though, is not some metaphysical boogie man. It turns out to have been men in frocks. But it’s not really their fault, don’t you see? Satan did it.
Could it be, in fact, that the real monster is religion? Or is it society itself?
I’m damned if I know.
………….
Global atheism in the news
(20 March 10)by Greg Spearritt
What the newspapers say about the recent Global Atheist Convention…
By their fruit shall ye know them (The Age, Melbourne)
Mar 9 – (Barney Zwartz) The jury is coming in on the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Melbourne last December: it has produced some good fruit, and may produce more.
Dawkins derides sainthood as Pythonesque (Sydney Morning Herald)
Mar 15 – (Jacqueline Maley) THE creation of saints is "pure Monty Python" and the Family First senator Steve Fielding is more stupid than an earthworm, says the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins.
Mysterious rituals of the atheists (The Age, Melbourne)
Mar 15 – (Stephen Bullivant And Lois Lee) Those declaring themselves godless provide a fascinating study for sociologists.
Celebrating life beyond belief (The Australian)
Mar 15 – (Miriam Cosic) THEY came from everywhere, the true unbelievers: from Perth, Sydney, Brisbane, the Sunshine Coast, New Zealand and beyond.
Atheists’ ridicule won’t win friends and influence people (The Age, Melbourne)
Mar 16 – (Barney Zwartz) If the meek really do inherit the earth, it won’t be the atheists who turned out in force in Melbourne at the weekend for what organisers believe to be the world’s biggest atheist conference.
Dawkins preaches to the deluded against the divine (The Australian)
Mar 16 – (Melanie Phillips) LIKE revivalists from an alternative universe, 2500 hardcore believers in the absence of religion packed into the Global Atheists Convention in Melbourne last weekend to give a hero's welcome to the high priest of belief in unbelief, Richard Dawkins.
Atheism is a broad church (Sydney Morning Herald)
Mar 17 – (Catherine Deveny) WHAT were we going to talk about all weekend? Nothing? Could we scientifically prove the existence of Richard Dawkins?
The atheist delusion (ABC News)
Mar 19 – (Phillip Adams) When I was a child I was the only person who didn't believe in God that I knew.
Atheism: the good, the bad and the ugly (The Age, Melbourne)
Mar 21 – (Michael Coulter) There's more to the meaning of life than proving God does (or doesn't) exist.
………….
Cult survivor relives history of servitude
(20 March 10)by Scott McKenzie
'Helen Pomery and David Lowe remember a former life of servitude. "I had to submit and be obedient to my husband," Ms Pomery, a 60-year-old Brisbane mother, claims. "I had to submit and be obedient to the church elders and I had to cut off my daughter." This, she was assured, was key to her eternal salvation. "We lived at Samford on acreage. We were ordinary. We just happened to go to an extraordinary church..."
The church - the Brisbane Christian Fellowship (BCF) - nestled in the Samford Valley in Brisbane's north, has a loyal following. Church elders preach sacrifice, submission and obedience, she claimed. To the church faithful, they are God's messengers. But beyond the public face of the church, strategically hidden from the congregation, is human devastation.' (Brisbane Times, 19 March 2010)
This is unbelievable in this day and age. Read more of the story.
Global Atheism, Melbourne-style
(16 March 10)by Greg Spearritt
Cordelia Hull gives us a view on the recent Global Atheist Convention held in Melbourne. I was there also, and though I’d diverge from Cordelia’s assessment on a few points, in general I reckon she’s got it about right.
The 2,500-strong crowd was ready for some anti-religion mass-think and even some hero-worship (with Mr Dawkins on the bill), but to the credit of the organisers and several speakers (notably Phillip Adams and Richard Dawkins himself) the event wasn’t allowed to become an unthinking anti-religion rally.
Some speakers were terrific, some were ordinary and the odd one awful – but such variation is an unavoidable risk in these kinds of events. There were more than 25 speakers in all, so lots of perspectives were presented.
My only real criticism (apart from frustration at the Convention Centre staff who didn’t seem to know that those on stage needed some simple audio foldback to hear questions from the audience) is that there was no direction or overall theme to the Convention. This is perhaps understandable for the first event of its type in Oz; hopefully the next one (which I’ll be trying to attend) will be a tad more focused.
Overall, congratulations to the Atheist Foundation of Australia and Atheist Alliance International for a stimulating weekend.
…………..
The GAC – harbinger of balance?
(10 March 10)by Greg Spearritt
I’m one of a number of SoFers who are tripping off to the Melbourne Convention Centre this weekend for the Global Atheist Convention.
I expect the fears of those like Barney Zwartz will be realised: there is bound to be some triumphalist, fundamentalist atheism on display. Apparently blind adherence to the doctrine that religion is baaad and atheism good, with no shades of grey – a la (for the most part) Richard Dawkins and Tamas Pataki, who are both on the bill – is no better than its polar opposite in the many conservative churches and mosques around Australia.
I doubt, though, that the event as a whole will be able to be easily dismissed. There are some incisive thinkers there (A.C. Grayling, for one) and they have a genuine point to make.
Being ‘religious’ (whatever that means!) is the default mode in our society. Belief in God is socially acceptable; atheism is somehow dangerous, and will frighten the children. We’ll all fall apart morally if atheism gets a proper look in, so best not to mention it let alone have Global Conventions about it.
Yet the evidence is clear: religion, for all that it is lauded in every way (including through generous tax exemptions) has been implicit in pretty bad stuff even in Oz in very recent times, whether that’s intolerance and injustice toward GBLT folk or sexual abuse of children. The small-minded racism that can be encountered even within your bland, apparently inoffensive local Anglican congregation (as I know from 40 years’ experience) exists just as surely as true compassion and a passion for justice.
The Global Atheist Convention, as I see it, is a small, long-overdue measure towards achieving some balance. Religion needs to earn its place. It should not be allowed to maintain its present position of privilege by divine right.
…………..
Did Jesus really exist?
(27 February 10)by Scott McKenzie
I was a bit surprised to hear during one of Peter Kennedy’s interviews this week he said in reference to Jesus “if he ever really existed”. I’ve heard Peter say that some years ago but was nevertheless surprised that he continues to do so. So when I came upon a piece that outlines the argument against the existence of Jesus I thought it might be appropriate to bring it again to our attention. This is an article of some age and which has been superseded by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy’s The Laughing Jesus of 2005 (which I learned about from Peter Kennedy), but remains a fundamental resource about this matter.
Of course in many ways it doesn't matter a hoot whether Jesus actually existed.
On PK (the threat to Rome)
(24 February 10)by Greg Spearritt
A couple of worthy media items on Peter Kennedy, leader of the St Mary’s-in-Exile community:
- Phillip Adams recent LNL interview.
- Andrew Hamilton of the United Faculty of Theology in Melbourne (and consulting editor for Eureka Street) offers a thoughtful review of Peter Kennedy: The Man Who Threatened Rome
Wotnews also has a Peter Kennedy page.
…………..
'If God Exists, He Wouldn't Want This'
(19 February 10)by Scott McKenzie
The community of ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel is half a million strong and growing. They live in a parallel universe cut off from the modern world in tight-knit communities where everything revolves around religion. Only a few dare to abandon this life -- and the price for doing so is high.
This piece from Spiegel Online International tells the stories of two who defected.
Ethics and euthanasia
(18 February 10)by Greg Spearritt
The Age tells us that “prominent ethicist” Nicholas Tonti-Filippini of the Pope John Paul II Institute for Marriage and Family is calling for voluntary euthanasia campaigner Philip Nitschke to be prosecuted over deaths caused by the use of Nembutal. Ethicist Leslie Cannold disagrees: for her, Nitschke, like the back-yard abortionist, is meeting a need that will be met in one way or another, regardless of what the law says.
Somehow (for colour perhaps?) Jim Wallace of the Australian Christian Lobby also snuck into the Age article. He’s not a noted ethicist, though undoubtedly the former brigadier’s military career presented him with the odd ethical dilemma. Without the least hint of irony, he’s reported as saying: “Nitschke and his ilk are fundamentalists of the worst type”.
Ethics informed by religion seem usually to be anti-voluntary euthanasia. It’s worth noting, however, that a sample of SoFiA members in a recent poll, 88% of whom were raised in a Christian church, was 66% in favour of VE.
I wonder how those attending next month’s Global Atheist Convention in Melbourne would vote on the issue.
……..
Religion and evolution - a God gene?
(12 February 10)by Scott McKenzie
The New York Times published "The Evolution of the God Gene" by Nicholas Wade in which we are told that, "religion has the hallmarks of an evolved behavior, meaning it exists because it was favored by natural selection." We are further informed that religion is "universal because it was wired into our neural circuitry before the ancestral human population dispersed from its African homeland." There is a certain plausibility to Wade's arguments that religion is hard-wired into our brain via natural selection, making it almost 'natural'.
Jeff Schweitzer, a neurobiologist, takes issue with Wade's interpretation in a Huffington Post piece. This is entitled "The Fallacy of the God Gene".
Not a world-shaking argument, but one worth our consideration
New articles & reviews
(07 February 10)by Greg Spearritt
A new set of articles and reviews has been added to the SoFiA collection:
Malcolm Brown reflects on the meaning of islam and debunks some of our preconceptions.
John Wessel describes what contemporary prayer might mean.
Chantal Babin reviews a 2009 collection of essays.
Peter Hooton argues the case for belief in God.
Why is There Not Just Nothing?
Laurel Sommerfeld tackles one of the big questions.
…………..
Human rights and justice, Christian-style
(04 February 10)by Greg Spearritt
The Pope (along with Anglican bishops in the UK) apparently has a problem with new legislation reform concerning human rights and equality in Britain. Churches and schools under these reforms would no longer be able to use arguments based on religious freedom to justify their refusal to employ gay people.
The Sydney Morning Herald tells us:
The Pope urged Catholics in Britain to fight back against the legislation with ''missionary zeal'' in a speech delivered on Monday during a visit to Rome of the 35 Catholic bishops of England and Wales.
The article goes on to quote from Pope Benedict’s oration:
………
“Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet, as you have rightly pointed out, the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs.”
It’s true, of course. This legislation would impose such limitations, in the same way that the ability of white supremacists to “act in accordance with their beliefs” by not employing people of colour is limited. An “unjust” limitation, though? Surely not.
It’s yet another example of Don Cupitt’s point from his 2008 book, The Meaning of the West (SCM, p.34):
The Church clings to its old inefficiencies, discriminations and injustices, and repeatedly demands for itself opt-outs from legislation that would require it to get its treatment of its own employees, women, gays and other groups up to decent contemporary secular standards. (34)
…………..
I believe... in evolution
(30 January 10)by Greg Spearritt
We have a Prime Minister and Opposition Leader who both believe in evolution despite being Christians.
The only real (sad) question is why this fact is in the least bit newsworthy.
………
Events
(24 January 10)by Greg Spearritt
An updated list of non-SoF public lectures, seminars or conferences that might interest SoFiA members is now online.
……….
Confirmation bias – a BIG problem
(12 January 10)by Scott McKenzie
How do we respond when confronted with information that agrees with what we already believe – think about that – how do you? If you’re like me you take it in quickly and smile inwardly. "I’ve been confirmed in my thinking".
What about when the information is against what you already believe – recall this happening – how did you respond? If you’re like me you reject it or forget it or say it’s wrong, and feel a bit dark about it. "That’s not what I wanted to read".
The climate change debate is one area in which this phenomenon is almost epidemic. Most of us have a point of view but two types of argument – for and against – appear regularly before us.
Kevin Dunbar has been studying how scientists REALLY behave in the laboratory and his research has revealed some interesting things about a part of our brain called the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex that has evolved to suppress, yes suppress, incoming information that we don’t want to hear. Wired magazine has an excellent article, quite readable, about Dunbar’s research.
Confirmation bias is a BIG problem for us.
Atheist attitudes to religion
(10 January 10)by Greg Spearritt
Albert Camus, via David Burchell, gives some thoughtful advice about the approach atheists might usefully take to religious folk:
Speaking to a group of Dominican friars in 1948, Camus suggested three cardinal principles for unbelieving philosophers such as himself. First, it wasn't his business to reproach Christians for failing to keep higher moral standards than his own. Second, "I should never start from the supposition that Christian truth is illusory, but merely from the fact I cannot accept it."
And third, "I shall not try to change anything that I think or anything that you think: the only possible dialogue is between people who remain what they are and speak their minds."
It all sounds good to me, except for that last point: if we think we’re not trying to convert others to our own point of view, at least on issues that mean something significant to us, we’re kidding ourselves.
.........
Is atheism a religion?
(08 January 10)by Greg Spearritt
David Burchell, writing in The Australian, has an interesting observation about the nature of atheism:
At a talk in Canberra a couple of years back, the Italian bishop Bruno Forte suggested unbelief ought properly to be seen as another kind of religious journey: "It is a passion for truth that pays a personal price for the bitter courage of not believing."
To be sure, equating atheism with religion is far too simplistic a move, as the popular atheist retort illustrates: ‘Atheism is a religion in the same way that not collecting stamps is a hobby.’ (Anyone know the original source for this saying?)
As the front page of the Atheist Foundation of Australia website shows, however, some atheists will go to great lengths to avoid using the word ‘belief’ of their own beliefs (their position is an “acceptance”, not a “belief”).
Surely, though, the kind of crusading atheism we are now seeing develop (on display, for example, at the upcoming Rise of Atheism conference) has a good deal in common with the evangelical fervour of some religions.
.........
Mission possible
(08 January 10)by Greg Spearritt
On the face of it, at least, the story of Evergreen in China sounds like a very positive example of contemporary Christian missionary activity, the more so for the acknowledgement by Evergreen head Finn Torjesen that
Westerners... often embrace a black-and-white, systematic position on what the Bible says, "like book-keeping". But Chinese people tend to take a more multidimensional approach to their faith.
.........
Who on Earth was Jesus? - audio
(01 January 10)by Greg Spearritt
David Boulton’s talk for the 2009 Queensland SoFiA Conference, ‘Who on earth was Jesus?: The Scholarship and Research’, is now available as an audio download.
………….
Another Catholic disgrace
(01 January 10)by Scott McKenzie
In another expose of the disgraceful behaviour of the Catholic Church in protecting pedophiles and sadists in their schools in Ireland, Paula Kirby has contributed a sad piece in the Washington Times (28 December) that considers the Ryan Report and the Murphy Report, both released in Ireland in 2009.
There are also some interesting posts from readers especially an early one from a lay person who chaired a committee reviewing the Church’s investigations of sexual abuse in San Francisco. Jim Jenkins resigned from this position after considering the less than satisfactory investigations that were conducted.
This sexual abuse and sadistic behaviour is a disgrace, but covering up is perhaps even worse.
SoFiA Religion Poll results
(01 January 10)by Greg Spearritt
The survey of attitudes on various religious and other matters from the 2009 Toowoomba SoFiA Conference is now available in full online.
Climate Heresy 2
(27 December 09)by Scott McKenzie
On 27 November Greg Spearritt posted an item entitled “Climate Heresy” to which I made some comments and he replied. What might well appear in the annals of science as the greatest hoax or blunder or mistake since the Piltdown Man of 1905 seemed destined to pass us by almost un-noticed.
For a couple of months now I’ve been chasing down websites around the world for more and more reliable information about AGW (anthropogenic global warming) i.e. the proposition that it is the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that give rise to global warming and its alleged consequences.
It has to be the internet as the source since most media (for a variety of reasons) seem to avoid publishing anything that remotely challenges the received wisdom of the climate change proponents.
And I’ve found some good ones:
http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-warming-01.html
This one is the easiest to read and most comprehensive and fair-minded that I came across.
http://www.climatechangefraud.com/contact-us
Click on “Temperate Facts” to find a primer of information about climate change and AGW etc. The daily newsletter provides a daily glimpse of anti-climate change activities and publications globally.
So does this site.
There are many others, most accessible via the three mentioned above.
I don’t know for sure that AGW is nonsense. However:
- the physics, quite simple physics in fact, as explained in the first site above, makes it clear that carbon dioxide is quite unable to absorb enough heat to cause the temperature rises that are claimed
- solar cycles are more likely to explain the heating of the atmosphere
- the unscientific behaviour of the ‘climate scientists’ who worked with the UN IPCC is quite astounding, and the ideology-driven behaviour of many UN bureaucrats and national politicians is deplorable.
However it’s up to you to decide for yourself.
What are they saying about Christmas?
(23 December 09)by Greg Spearritt
From the smorgasbord of Christmas views (News Ltd and Fairfax offerings)…
The obligatory conservative apologetics (the Bible really is true, you know):
Despite the sceptics, there is real truth in the story of Christmas
And more:
The obligatory withering atheist satire:
On looking beyond the incredible ‘facts’ of the Christmas story:
The Christmas call to fulfilment
An Aussie Muslim reflects:
Christmas, curry and many faiths
An atheist philosopher on celebrating at Christmas:
An enriching, illuminating, bonding, godless Christmas
Amateur project naively accepts birth narratives as history:
Stop the presses: the day Jesus appeared in the Birth Notices
Consumption and the Reason for the Season:
Did Jesus make us fat and greedy?
The ways we secular Aussies all ‘believe’ at Christmas:
The relevance of Christmas (chiefly editorials):
Christmas story still resonates in a troubled world
The Christmas message of hope is as powerful as ever
A time to slow down and enjoy each other
Goodwill is so common in adversity
From the clergy:
That simple birth in a stable was God's great gift to the world
Leaders urge faith, hope and charity in times of struggle
Human life must be our top priority
Now is the time to forgive, say church leaders
……………
God Talk
(21 December 09)by Scott McKenzie
One of my hot buttons is the use of the word ‘God’. I’m a non-theist, perhaps even an atheist. I have great difficulty understanding what religious people think they are doing when they pray to, or worship, God. Yet deep within me there is a sense that without some feeling for the sacred we live less than full lives.
I have found Don Cupitt’s writing helpful if a bit theoretical. So my search continues.
Now comes this morning from The Centre for Progressive Christianity in the US, a newsletter featuring two very interesting pieces about ‘God Talk'.
Fred Plumer, president of TCPC, has written a very interesting piece ‘God Talk’,
and Michael Morwood, another interesting piece ‘Progressive Christians and God Talk’.
These are well worth reading and thinking about. I’ll be doing that and, perhaps, coming to some conclusions about the sacred for me.
Scott
The LOLcat Bible
(21 December 09)by Greg Spearritt
If you’re into cats, you’re probably familiar by now with the Icanhascheezburger site. And, therefore, with kittyspeak.
But now we have… the LOLcat Bible translation project.
(Mor on thiz viytl projek at Lingua Franca.)
……
Miraculous Mary
(21 December 09)by Greg Spearritt
All power to the celebration of Mary MacKillop as a fighter for social justice who was willing to stand up to those wielding power in the Catholic Church. (An attitude Archbishop Pell says we should emulate, though he didn’t seem to appreciate that approach from the St Mary’s South Brisbane mob.)
However, to credit Mary Mac with the posthumous miracle of curing cancer raises the question of why she won’t do it for every cancer sufferer. How many faithful Catholics (and others – presumably a saint-in-waiting isn’t picky) have prayed to her for a cure? And what’s her strike rate? Since it took this long to get her to the canonisation starting gate, one assumes it’s not been overly high.
Interestingly, even the Arch himself acknowledges prayer-induced cancer cures are “a long shot”. Does that mean Mother Mary is in fact picky as to who she’ll reprieve? Doesn’t sound very saintly, does it?
I’m with Dick “Godless” Gross on this one.
………..
What Aussies believe
(19 December 09)by Greg Spearritt
A new Neilsen Poll (Faith in Australia 2009) adds to polls over many decades showing a gradual decline of belief in traditional Christian doctrine. That’s not to say there’s a gradual decline in belief in general, though. God, miracles, angels, ESP, astrology: you name it, we Aussies seem to believe in it.
There are some items of particular interest, including significant differences between men and women (e.g. men were twice as likely as women to say they did not believe in God).
The variety of ways the data is reported is also interesting. For mine, the David Marr piece says it well. Your options include:
- APN papers: Australians believe in God: poll
- The Age: God is still tops but angels rate well
- Sydney Morning Herald (David Marr): Our faith today
- Herald Sun: We believe in God, UFOs and astrology
Also see, from WAToday.com.au: Faith sometimes divides us, but that's OK (“Australia's secular status is not threatened by the resilience of religious traditions.”)
Perhaps, since we’re apparently so confused about what we believe, Tony Abbott is on the right track: compulsory school classes on Christian belief and the Bible might be the go!
……
Is religion healthy for society?
(13 December 09)by Greg Spearritt
From Sue Blackmore (writing in the UK Guardian) we learn that recent sociological research seems to suggest that, at least in the ‘developed’ world, the healthiest nations are also the least religious. The question of cause and effect, however, is a complicated one.
(Thanks to Jim Norman for alerting us to this item.)
………..
Catering for youth
(12 December 09)by Greg Spearritt
It’s often lamented that the under 40s demographic in Australia seems to have little interest in religious participation. Increasing secularisation plus factors such as family breakdown mean that membership of religious groups, and especially of the mainstream Christian churches, is inexorably aging.
Gens X, Y and Z have often had only a cursory contact with religion. To boot, this has largely been through the naïve Sunday-school lens of conservative-evangelical religious instruction at school or cuddly-Jesus Christmas Carol theology in the park. No wonder they’re just not that interested.
It’s not only Australian Christianity that’s affected: Buddhist monks in Japan are apparently resorting to manga images and rap music to be heard amidst the ‘buzz’ of life.
So what’s happening? ‘Cult’ groups like Hillsong may be filling the gap to a small extent, but what other organised social options do our young people have to be engaged in wrestling with the great issues and building character?
Involvement in that great Aussie obsession, sport, may be one answer, but failing a resurgence of religion in mainstream Australian life where else are young folk to go? Melbourne will host the Global Atheist Convention in 2010, but where in Oz are the secular/humanist successors to the churches?
Must we face the fact that communal activity will die with organised religion?
………….
Climate heresy
(27 November 09)by Greg Spearritt
There are plenty of people now arguing that that global warming is not happening, or that it’s not caused by humans: Clive James, Andrew Bolt, Ian Plimer, the whole of the National Party and most of the Libs among them. Is this a heresy? And does it matter?
It is, and it does.
………..
Religion and violence
(24 November 09)by Greg Spearritt
Is religious violence inherently to do with the nature of religion?
Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and confreres would have us believe so. Barney Zwartz, columnist with the Melbourne Age, disagrees:
My argument amounts to this: religion is practised by people. It is therefore as ambiguous, messy, prone to both moral heights and depths, as people themselves are. It has been used for good and for harm. My own view is that the scales are weighted firmly on the side of good by making people morally aware of the “other”, but I know many disagree. I think Richard Neibuhr put it particularly well: “Religion makes good people better and bad people worse.”
(Zwartz gives the topic a longer treatment here.)
I have some sympathy with Zwartz’s view. However, on balance I’d want to disagree.
Historically, religion has been primarily tribal, and that remains largely true today. It’s about identity, about distinguishing one ethnic or belief group from others, and usually about privileging that group.
It’s an obvious point, surely. If you are Shiite you are emphatically not Sunni; Mahayana Buddhism has traditionally called Theravada the “lesser vehicle” and itself the “greater”; Protestant and Catholic were hard at the exclusion game as little as a few decades ago in Australia.
Even today the Christian denominations represent varying degrees of exclusivity, from Exclusive Brethren through Catholic to the tolerant old non-Sydney Anglicans. (But even the Anglicans are proud of their identity; their tolerance sets them apart.)
The earthly Jesus attempted to turn the urge to tribalism and exclusivity on its head, supping with sinners and smiling on Samaritans. But the Church wasted little time in righting the ship again.
In this light, it’s not surprising to see so much violence in the name of religion: religion has always been a powerful tool for asserting identity. It may not meet with approval from enlightened religious folk in these enlightened times, but us-them religion remains a prominent feature of twenty-first century life. Ask the Taliban. Or the folk from St Mary’s-in-Exile.
……………..
Evolution of religion
(24 November 09)by Scott McKenzie
There were two pieces in the New York Times in mid-November that addressed the question of the origin and evolution of religion, and how pervasive religion is among ancient (and not so ancient) cultures. Both emanated from consideration of Nicholas Wade’s new book “The Faith Instinct: How Religion Evolved and Why It Endures”. The first was the author’s own summary of the book and the second was by a colleague John Tierney who wrote a review.
These pieces suggest that religion evolves i.e. that a religion changes to better meet the needs and expectations of the people it serves. Some of us find this hard to believe when we look at Christianity today but change has already occurred and more is on the way according to our progressives. But that’s another story.
Magical realism
(21 November 09)by Greg Spearritt
Whether it’s vampires, sorcery or talking animals, you’ve probably had your shot (and perhaps your fill?) of magical realism through popular culture in recent times.
Some might be inclined to dismiss it as fantasy, but Melbourne playwright Ricci-Jane Adams urges us to look again at what magical realism has to offer. She calls it “the portal between the mundane and the extraordinary.”
In art and literature – and, I’d argue, religion – magical realism is a way of allowing us to see afresh the mundane: to find new value, new meaning and new possibilities in the everyday.
CS Lewis used it. Phillip Pullman uses it in spades.
Magical realism in religion can boost our esteem for everyday life and for other people; it can give us a glimpse of an alternative reality that could enhance life on our planet. Provided, that is, that we can distinguish the fantasy from the real.
If you go to church you’ve probably been imbibing magical-realist stories of a dying-rising, divine-human god. Or in the local mosque (and in many Sydney Anglican churches) you may celebrate a perfect text that dropped from the sky.
When these imaginative tales are transformed into Truth, the power of magical realism is commandeered by the urge to control and dictate. That’s the beauty of art and literature: it’s immeasurably enriching, but we know it’s fiction.
…………
Festival of peaceful slaughter
(18 November 09)by Greg Spearritt
1200-odd police, many of them armed, will descend on the village of Bariyapur in Nepal next week for the Hindu festival of Gadhimai. The festival involves the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of buffaloes, goats, chickens, and other animals.
Why are the police necessary? It seems they’re to enforce an alcohol ban among the million or so people attending the event. Such a move is necessary, according to chief district officer Tara Nath Gautam, so that (as the ABC reports) “people can carry out their religious activities in peace."
One can imagine what a peaceful couple of days it will be!
Despite the protestations of pesky animal rights activists, the Nepalese government won’t stop the festival. It’s a centuries-old religious tradition, don’t you know. And, of course, it’s peaceful. Who could possibly object?
……….
Who on earth was Jesus - and does it matter?
(11 November 09)by Greg Spearritt
The text of David Boulton’s two addresses to the 2009 South-East Queensland Conference are now online:
Who on Earth was Jesus: The Scholarship and the Research
……….
A non-pandering pollie: hallelujah!
(09 November 09)by Greg Spearritt
If his proposed speech to the Sydney Institute is anything to go by, Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey’s take on religion – and perhaps even his political integrity – is quite an improvement on that of a prominent former Liberal Treasurer (and not a few other pollies and former pollies of both persuasions).
A politician publicly having no truck with biblical literalism is a brave move, even in secular old Oz.
One suspects Hockey won’t come to be known anytime soon as one who “soaked up a rapturous welcome from 20,000 followers of the Hillsong Church”.
Update: Joe Hockey’s opinion piece.
………
God endures, even as religion wanes
(02 November 09)by Scott McKenzie
The nature of the American religious experience is changing as a rising number of people report having no formal religious affiliation, even though the number of Americans who say they pray is increasing, according to a new survey.
Those twin trends suggest a growing number of people are “spiritual but not religious,” says study author Tom Smith, director of the General Social Survey at the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center. The report, “Religious Change Around the World,” found that in addition to an increased number of people who pray, a growing number believe in the afterlife.
The complete 364-page report Religious Change around the World, by Tom W. Smith of the University of Chicago was released on October 23, 2009. It is a report prepared for the Templeton Foundation.
Who Speaks for Christians?
(31 October 09)by Greg Spearritt
Lyle Shelton of the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) has complained about a group calling itself Christians Supporting Choice for Voluntary Euthanasia. It seems the CSCVE group had the temerity to campaign about VE legislation before Parliament last week in Adelaide.
How dare these people purport to be Christians? According to the ABC, Lyle is certain that Christians don’t support VE.
Two-thirds (67%) of those attending the recent SoFiA Conference in Toowoomba described themselves as Christian. And two-thirds (66%) of those attending were in favour of voluntary euthanasia. Sounds rather like there was at least some overlap…
Could it be that Lyle and the ACL, despite the hubris underlying the name they chose for their organisation, do not in fact represent the thinking of each and every Christian in Australia?
………
Religion: society's saviour or nemesis?
(28 October 09)by Greg Spearritt
In the wake of Christopher Hitchens’s visit to Oz, and more especially in the lead-up to the Global Atheist Convention in Melbourne next March, the argument about whether religion is society’s saviour or its nemesis is likely to hit our shores with renewed vigour.
Two such salvos have just been fired in The Age: Jew Dvir Abramovich vents at the hypocrisy of anti-religion writers like Dawkins and Hitchens, and atheist James Richmond presents a lively rebuttal.
So is religion good or bad on balance? In a poll of SoFiA members at the recent Toowoomba Conference the results were pretty even: 26% saw religion as a force for good, 21% as a force for evil and 53% felt it was neutral.
James Jupp, editor of the newly-published Encyclopedia of Religion in Australia, says of that volume in The Australian:
If you go through the whole book the general message is that religion in Australia is fairly benign. Most of the things the religions do here are socially desirable and relatively benign.
(Jupp, by the way, says he is “not a person of faith”, though he won’t lay claim to being an atheist either. Phillip Adams has recently interviewed Jupp and two other contributors about The Encyclopedia of Religion In Australia.)
There is, surely, no objective way of judging the question. ‘Religion’ is far too broad a category to say anything much that is coherent about its virtues or vices. Personal experience counts for a lot in this debate, and evidence heavily skewed to a sample of one just doesn’t stack up in the reasoned argument stakes.
……..
Climate Justice
(22 October 09)by Greg Spearritt
The fundamental religious and ethical dimension of Climate Change is clearly enunciated by Desmond Tutu. In a word, it’s about justice: Africa’s poorest will be among those to suffer worst from changes that are probably in large part the legacy of the way rich Australians, Americans and Europeans have lived and continue to live.
In the lead-up to Copenhagen, when real-world politics will face a critical test of ethics and possibly even the long-term survival of humanity, every attempt should be made to prod the Australian Government into real action (a genuine carbon tax, for instance, as opposed to its weak-kneed ETS). Perhaps Saturday, 24 October – the International Day of Climate Action – is an opportunity to ring or send a message to a politician. (Some sound advice on getting the attention of pollies is presented on the ‘Electronic Frontiers Australia’ website).
…………….
Is God unhappy?
(21 October 09)by Greg Spearritt
Peter Jensen, Archbishop of Sydney Anglican Diocese, has been doing some soul-searching. He suspects God’s not happy. How else to account for the plunge of around $160 million in Sydney Diocese investments?
Jensen is quoted by the Oz as telling the Sydney Diocesan Synod that the church was "up against a large challenge and there is no guarantee whatever that we will survive except as a small but wealthy cult". (As opposed to what it has been, of course: a moderately large and very wealthy cult.)
So what on earth did God have in mind? To his credit, Jensen has apparently considered whether the Almighty might not approve of the Sydney stance on gay priests. (Don’t hold your breath for that horse to come home.)
He’s also canvassed the possibility that the Lord may not actually be “directly speaking to us through these large losses”. For folk who believe God acts through history and freely intervenes in human affairs, though, that’s a big ask.
Since the Archbishop is floundering, he might appreciate some suggestions to ponder. I have a couple to get the ball rolling:
- The Diocese could try giving a great deal more of its wealth to the poor and following Jesus
- Perhaps it’s a sign biblical literalism isn’t all it’s cracked up to be
Any more ideas?
2010 Global Atheist Convention
(06 October 09)by Greg Spearritt
Richard Dawkins, AC Grayling, Peter Singer, Phillip Adams and Catherine Deveny are among the speakers at next year’s Global Atheist Convention in Melbourne. The Convention runs from 12 - 14 March, 2010.
Atheism in Australia, according to Deveny, is “going off like a frog in a sock”, and the clear intention of the organisers (the Atheist Foundation of Australia and Atheist Alliance International) is to ‘sock it to ‘em’ and show some atheist muscle.
…………..
Religions don't deserve special treatment
(04 October 09)by Scott McKenzie
Religions don't deserve special treatment
“It is time to reverse the prevailing notion that religious commitment is intrinsically deserving of respect.
It is time to reverse the prevailing notion that religious commitment is intrinsically deserving of respect, and that it should be handled with kid gloves and protected by custom and in some cases law against criticism and ridicule.”
So writes AC Grayling in The Guardian on 19 October 2006. Well worth a look.
The pros and cons of discrimination
(04 October 09)by Greg Spearritt
The recent debate in The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald about the Victorian Attorney-General’s decision to exempt religious groups/schools from aspects of anti-discrimination law has raised much food for thought. Here are the contributions, by date:
(Sept 29 –John Mcintyre, Anglican Bishop of Gippsland)
Christians should support equality and human rights laws, not seek exemptions.
(Sept 29 – Dick Gross, atheist blogger)
The right wing bit of our broad church of the religious community has done it again. It has actively campaigned on promoting prejudice and bigotry and won.
Freedom of religion is also a basic right
(Sept 30 – Rob Ward, Victorian Director of The Australian Christian Lobby)
Telling a church or a mosque it can't employ people who share its ethos is a bit like telling the Labor Party it must employ Liberals.
Why the Bishop is wrong on faith and rights
(Sept 30 – Kevin Donnelly, former Liberal staffer and Executive Director of Melbourne-based consulting group Education Strategies)
Bishop John McIntyre criticises the decision by Attorney-General Rob Hulls to continue to allow faith-based schools to discriminate in terms of who they employ.
Balancing religion and rights: the case against discrimination
(Oct 4 – Margaret Thornton, professor of law at the Australian National University)
Allowing religious organisations to discriminate runs contrary to community standards.
Balancing religion and rights: the case for discrimination
(Oct 4 – Denis Hart, Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne)
Religious organisations must have the right to act in ways consistent with their beliefs.
Hulls' lack of courage leaves discrimination entrenched
(Oct 4 – Editorial)
We must be cautious about allowing any group the right to discriminate.
Teacher scorned for 'chosen lifestyle'
(Oct 4 – news item, Melissa Fyfe, journalist)
This is an example of the largely unseen discrimination that will be allowed to continue under last week's decision by Attorney-General Rob Hulls to grant religious organisations the right to continue to reject employees on the grounds of sex, sexuality, marital and parental status and gender identity.
……………..
A discriminating decision
(29 September 09)by Greg Spearritt
In the recent action of Victorian Attorney-General Rob Hulls we see more confirmation of the irrelevance of some churches: it’s exactly as Don Cupitt observes in his 2008 book The Meaning of the West (SCM, p.34):
The Church clings to its old inefficiencies, discriminations and injustices, and repeatedly demands for itself opt-outs from legislation that would require it to get its treatment of its own employees, women, gays and other groups up to decent contemporary secular standards.
Hold on a minute, though: before we tar all Church leaders with the same brush, let’s give credit where it’s due. The Anglican Bishop of Gippsland, John McIntyre, has made a spirited objection to Hull’s actions which ought to give hope to progressive Christians everywhere. He says, in part:
How bizarre that the followers of Jesus Christ would oppose, and ask for exemptions from, a legal instrument that has at its heart a declaration of the dignity and value of every human life and the basic rights of every person. Jesus of all people, would champion an affirmation of fundamental human rights, which especially benefits marginalised groups in society and those least able to protect themselves.
………..
Who do Americans mistrust the most?
(28 September 09)by Scott McKenzie
A recent piece in Psychology Today reports on yet another study that finds Atheists to be "the most mistrusted group" in the United States.
When asked in a national survey to identify segments of the population which did "not all agree with my vision of American society," ten groups were listed. Some were religious -- Christians, Muslims and Jews -- while others covered ethnic categories (Asians, blacks). Still others were traditional targets of popular animus, such as homosexuals and immigrants. The category which elicited the most opprobrium, however, was Atheists. When it came to marriage and other indicators of social acceptance, the godless were the most despised, marginalized and excluded.
Psychology Today contributor Gad Saad observed, "This might be one of the saddest scientific findings I have ever read." He cited a roll-call of famous luminaries including Albert Einstein, Francis Crick, Linus Pauling, Bertrand Russell and others who fall into the Atheist or non-believer category. There have been Atheist men and women who have made astounding contributions to the welfare of humanity, who have fought for civil liberties and individual rights, who have struggled against considerable odds to make the world a more peaceful, tolerant and nourishing space -- and to no avail, at least, it appears, to the average American.
Religious Instruction
(25 September 09)by Greg Spearritt
A good number of children in Australian state schools spend half an hour each week in exile from the classroom because their parents can’t abide the thought of them being subjected to the naively-realist conservative religious propaganda that the Religious Instruction program serves up.
The Talking Squid backs up my own experiences as a parent and a teacher concerning the materials that are used (often emanating from Sydney Anglican Diocese). I’d add to that the selection (usually self-selection) of people who deliver the program: enthusiastic, usually well-meaning people of faith with little or no theological education who take this state-sanctioned opportunity to promote biblical literalism and pump sacrificial atonement theory into the kids for all they’re worth.
At least the Queensland Education system has had the grace to switch back to calling the program “RI”: at one stage it was known as Religious Education, which in 99% of cases it most certainly was not.
An alternative that encourages children to explore issues ethically without the baggage of uncritical, conservative religion makes a lot of sense: but not, apparently, to the NSW State Government’s religious education advisory panel.
A good place to start would be with the work of Professor Phillip Cam, renowned for bringing quality philosophy programs into primary schools. (There’s an example on You-Tube of Cam’s work.)
……………..
Religion ain't what it used to be
(24 September 09)by Greg Spearritt
Nicholas Rundle (our man in Adelaide) points us to an stimulating article on the Social Science Research Council website in the US.
‘Rethinking secularism and religion in the global age’ is a discussion with sociologist of religion, Robert Bellah about the place of ritual vis-à-vis thought or theory in religion. Has religion ‘evolved’ into philosophy out of ritual beginnings? And if so, is this necessarily a move toward secularism?
……………
Books for the Boys in Blue
(05 September 09)by Greg Spearritt
Good news! Every policeman graduating from the police academy in Goulbourn will now be offered a Bible – but not just any old Holy Writ. It’s the new policeman-blue version especially designed by the Bible Society for the wallopers of NSW.
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, these new Bibles
contain the police prayer and images of police on the beat. They also feature ''situational'' chapters with specific readings on grief, ethics, integrity, leadership, sin and, perhaps less practically for police, forgiveness.
We’re assured that it’s the Bible Society, not the NSW taxpayer footing the bill for this innovation (though it’s not clear whether tax-deductibility comes into it).
Now who’ll step up to offer a cop-coloured Koran? Or the Blue Books version of Bertrand Russell’s ‘Why I am Not a Christian’?
……….
…….
Don't Mention the... Church
(02 September 09)by Greg Spearritt
It’s September, so be prepared. Over the next 6 weeks, 90% of you – if all goes to plan – will be seeing a prime-time ad or billboard about Jesus at least ten times, courtesy of the Bible Society, local churches (including Catholics, Brethren and Hillsong) and a largely-tax-deductable $1.8 million. You might even be lucky enough to cop the “viral internet component” of the campaign.
One marker of success, as Bible Society chief executive Daniel Willis told The Age, will be a boost to regular church attendance in Australia (currently around 8%).
And yet the campaign (“Jesus. All about life”) was apparently designed to take our minds off church. Willis admitted:
Research showed us that people were not really happy about the church. When we started this research in 2003, all the problems that were associated with the church were being raised, and there was a lot of bad press. The church was anathema but Jesus was fine.
So be prepared to hear about “who Jesus is and what he actually said” and “the truth of the Bible” without, presumably, much mention of church (or of the Jesus Seminar, for that matter).
……..
Conversation or Conversion?
(21 August 09)by Greg Spearritt
Anglican Bishop Tom Frame is Director of St Mark's National Theological Centre and head of the School of Theology at Charles Sturt University. He has a new book out, reportedly lamenting the weakness of the Churches and their message in Australia.
In Losing My Religion: Unbelief In Australia he says:
The Christianity that most Australians have encountered is weak and insipid and in more than a few instances uninspiring and unintelligible, and the majority have no idea of what the Christian religion is offering.
It seems that among the factors contributing to a decline in faith in Australia is an inability among Christians to stand up and express clearly and resolutely what they believe.
………….
But Frame makes clear in an interview on Radio National Breakfast that he’s not promoting bible-bashing. He argues that Christianity should engage with non- (or tepidly-) religious Australians, but that the encounter should be in the form of conversation, not point-scoring debate.
It sounds good at first blush. However, ‘conversation’ here has a very clear sub-text: to whit, conversion. Frame himself has a firm view of his own faith, based as it is on what he considers “strong and compelling” evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. My question is whether there can really be genuine conversation if one party has a position fixed in the cement of fervent religious belief (or unbelief, for that matter) and, to boot, a hope that the other party will come round to their way of thinking.
It’s a bit like the situation in anthropology:
In their studies of the cultures of other people, even those anthropologists who sincerely love the people they study almost never think they are learning something about the way the world really is.
(Riesman, quoted in Bernard McGrane, Beyond Anthropology [Columbia Uni Press, 1989] 128)
In ‘conversation’ of the kind Frame envisages, can the Christians – the ones firm in their faith, the ones Frame believes need to engage with non-believers – engage so that they are genuinely open to the possibility that their faith may not after all be justified? If their position is not in the teensiest bit provisional, how can the conversation be genuine?
………….
Reconciling science and religion?
(18 August 09)by Scott McKenzie
Jerry Coyne, a professor in the Department of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, has written an excellent analysis of efforts to effect a reconciliation between science and religion. He has done this by way of reviewing two new books by scientists who are practising Christians, both of whom attempt to demonstration the needed reconciliation.
Coyne shows the failure in their attempts, and in the process examines the many aspects of the science-religion conflict. It is a 12 page piece but well worth the read to find Coyne's view that the reconciliation is impossible, at least with traditional Christianity, Islam and Judaism.
The article was published in The New Republic in February this year.
One in the Eye for Dawkins?
(15 August 09)by Greg Spearritt
Karen Armstrong has responded to Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion with a new book. Peter Kirkwood’s review suggests that The Case for God: What Religion Really Means is much more than a cogent refutation of simple-minded atheism.
Evidently, Armstrong quotes Einstein:
To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself to us as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty, which our full faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms -- this knowledge, this feeling is at the centre of all true religiousness.
Having read a couple of previous Armstrong books, I have no doubt she could make a compelling case for religion. To be fair to Dawkins, though, I do wonder whether what she describes in The Case for God bears much resemblance to religion as it is actually practiced by the naively-realist 95% of pew- or prayer-mat-warmers.
……
Profiles of the Godless
(05 August 09)by Scott McKenzie
Last year the Center for Inquiry asked members to participate in a ground-breaking, first-of-its-kind survey of nonbelievers. Thousands responded and the results are in!
Luke Galen, associate professor of psychology at Grand Valley State University in Michigan, has released the findings of his study and published an article summarizing the results in the most recent issue of Free Inquiry magazine, the flagship publication of CFI's sister organization, the Council for Secular Humanism.
In his article, Galen notes that other researchers have collected mountains of data about the attitudes and characteristics of believers, but there's far less information about nonbelievers. Even worse, what little data does exist has often been collected accidentally.
Galen's study is the first to direct a full range of sociological survey questions specifically at our population of "nones" (as nonbelievers have usually been identified by pollsters).
In addition - and perhaps most significantly - Galen's data calls into question the oft-reported link between strong religious belief and mental health.
The Divine Dumbledore
(03 August 09)by Greg Spearritt
The Harry Potter Alliance is a group dedicated to creative and innovative action on social justice issues. Whether it’s raising money for victims of oppression in Darfur and Burma, supporting local food banks or promoting equal marriage for LGBT folk, members of the HPA draw their inspiration from JK Rowling’s Harry Potter novels and in particular from the character Albus Dumbledore.
Are we seeing the rise of a genuinely secular, this-worldly religion?:
What Would Dumbledore Do?: 100 Lessons on Living from the World’s Greatest Wizard
While this project has been coordinated by the HP Alliance, it is happening because of the entire Harry Potter fandom and our love for a fictional character who continues to serve us as a real teacher in transforming our lives and our world to be based on love.
……………
Living in Sin
(29 July 09)by Greg Spearritt
Though the Church of England says it’s not condoning sex before marriage, it’s taken the step of introducing a double whammy of a service: the ‘hatch ‘n’ match’, or marriage for a de facto couple plus baptism of their children.
Such a ceremony is opposed by those few whose mouths morph into a cat’s bum at the very mention of the phrase ‘living together’, but there can be no doubt that cohabitation is no longer seriously considered ‘living in sin’ in our society.
Not so long ago it was scandalous behaviour. So have the clergy and the religiously devout acquired tolerance on this issue, or have they simply had no choice but to accommodate to the way we live nowadays? Or does it indicate the irrelevance of old-style religious moralising in an increasingly secular society?
……….
A Speck in the Sea of Existence
(22 July 09)by Greg Spearritt
Does the immensity of the universe – or perhaps even the multiverse – inspire religious terror, wonder… or just more hubris based on an inflated view of our significance in it?
Marcia Bartusiak argues that it’s not all about us.
……..
A Future for Progressive Christianity?
(21 July 09)by Greg Spearritt
SoFiA member Jim Norman has alerted us to a thought-provoking article by Rita Nakashima Brock on the website of The Centre for Progressive Christianity. It’s titled ‘We Might Need the End of Progressive Christianity’ and, being written by an ‘insider’, pulls no punches. For instance:
Most progressive Christians don't even know the strand of their own tradition well enough to have a clue about the vast and profound cultural differences involved in encountering another religion. Instead, they like to dabble in an eclectic "spirituality." This same tolerance applies to their view of race: side-by-side, respectful, and profoundly unintegrated and unengaged, so they tend to be kindly and paternalistic or admiring and fawning.
Can progressive Christians escape the ‘woolly-thinker’ label for so long associated with religious liberalism and find a way forward?
……………
Scaling Sacred Heights
(20 July 09)by Greg Spearritt
The Chaser team has hit the news (again) for attempting to scale the spire of St John’s Anglican Church in Canberra while K. Rudd & spouse were at Holy Communion. This, of course, at a time when a draft management plan calls for a ban on people climbing Uluru. The Prime Minister apparently wants the climb to remain open.
The Federal Government’s Environment website, however, makes it plain that
[t]he traditional owners of Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park ask visitors not to climb Uluru because of its spiritual significance as the traditional route of the ancestral Mala men on their arrival at Uluru.
Respect is surely the keyword for dealing with sensitive cultural and religious matters. Respecting the religious tradition of the local Aborigines should therefore mean not climbing. But what if climbing Uluru is a ‘spiritual’ experience for some of those who do it?
(A useful presentation of pros and cons for climbing can be found here.)
………
Women are People, Too
(15 July 09)by Greg Spearritt
Long-time Southern Baptist Jimmy Carter has explained his (biblically-underpinned) reasons for cutting ties with the Southern Baptist Convention. His enlightened rant points out the need for all faiths to respect people regardless of sex/gender:
The truth is that male religious leaders have had - and still have - an option to interpret holy teachings either to exalt or subjugate women. They have, for their own selfish ends, overwhelmingly chosen the latter.
……..
…………
Insecurity and Religious Belief
(07 July 09)by Greg Spearritt
Tomas James Rees, writing in the Journal of Religion and Society, investigates a possible link between personal insecurity and the intensity of religious belief. He considers the puzzle of why modernisation is linked to increased secularisation in some countries but not in others.
Though he doesn’t specifically mention Australia, our situation is clearly in keeping with his thesis.
…..
The Good Ol’ Days
(05 July 09)by Greg Spearritt
According to art critic/”cultural commentator” Giles Auty, postmodernism has usurped communism as “Christianity's most persistent and relentless recent foe”:
Now postmodernism in all its largely Marxist-inspired guises - political correctness, gender theory, feminism, post-colonialism, determinism, deconstruction, relativism, structuralism, historical revisionism - has become a stealthier and thus even more sinister adversary that flourishes, generally unremarked, in our midst.
It’s a topic Giles has been banging on about for years. Especially in the arts and in education, it seems, an evil plot is unfolding, driven by the Devil’s Left-hand men (and, as even Giles would acknowledge, women).
Giles pines for the days when ‘the truth’ was singular and tradition ruled the roost: a time of “truth, honour, objectivity, altruism, justice and religious faith”.
Like, for instance, when priests were revered by a submissive public and merely shuffled from parish to parish if their proclivities for sex with little boys became inconvenient. A time when homosexuals were justly persecuted, when men altruistically barred women from tertiary education and the professions, and theft was uncommon (unless you counted the theft of country and children from heathen indigenous folk).
Ah, the good old days of traditional Christian authoritarianism. Don’t you miss ‘em?
……..
Belief and 'g'
(28 June 09)by Greg Spearritt
In The Chronicle of Higher Education, associate professor in the department of behavioural and applied sciences at Texas A&M International University, Christopher J. Ferguson, dismisses Howard Gardner's influential theory of multiple intelligences. There’s just one intelligence, says Ferguson, ‘g’, and either you’ve got it or you haven’t.
One must assume that the vast majority of medical students have it. Yet a surprising number of those I’ve known personally have had a conservative, even fundamentalist, approach to religion.
I’ve thought the idea of multiple intelligences might help to account for this: maybe lots of med students are ‘logical-mathematical’ thinkers instead of ‘verbal-linguistic’, for instance. Medicine requires ingesting and regurgitating a large quantity of facts, where an Arts degree demands critical analysis and synthesis of ideas. Perhaps the critical thinking skills required to question received religious doctrines are just poorly developed in many of these students.
Ferguson argues that the ‘multiple intelligences’ theory “fundamentally conflates intelligence and motivation”. So perhaps the intelligent, educated students who read sacred texts literally are simply motivated to do so in ways that over-ride the application of their intelligence to their beliefs.
Whatever the answer, belief, and religious belief in particular, is a complex phenomenon. There seems to be a lot more going on than ‘g’.
……….
God and Science don't mix
(26 June 09)by Scott McKenzie
Lawrence Krauss, who sme of us met in Melbourne at the SoFiA Conference last year, has written a piece for the Wall Street Journal "God and Science don't mix". He reports some esults of a panel he was on that addressed this sort of topic, with scientists of both persuasions (atheist and Christian) speaking.
Krauss points out, as many of us do from time to time, the disconnect between what Christians believe and say, and how they behave, in relation to God' concern for4 each of us as individuals. He starts off noting that scientists do their work assuming that God (or his agents) won't interfere in any way. Sounds reasonable?
But in other aspects such as health we insure against ill-health rather than trust in God, or go to a doctor rather than praying for help. Is there a disconnect here?
Don Cupitt talks about the end of Christianity starting when a couple of otherwise religious Scots businessmen insured their cargoes from abroad against loss at sea several hundred years ago. Niall Ferguson made reference to thsi event during hs "Ascent of Money" episode a couple of mweeks ago. Why if you trust in God, do you insure anything against loss?
The Faith-Healing Flaw
(18 June 09)by Greg Spearritt
I recall Don Cupitt suggesting that the death of God should be traced to the time when life insurance entered the scene.
This excerpt from thehistoryof.net points up this connection (and contains a delicious irony):
The first American insurance corporation was sponsored by a church – the Presbyterian Synod of Philadelphia – for their ministers and their dependents. Then other needs for insurance were discovered and, in the 1830s, the practice of classifying risks was begun. Although there was religious prejudice against the practice of insurance by a church, after 1840 it declined and life insurance boomed.
It makes sense: if God is in fact who many contemporary conservative-evangelical Christians claim Him to be, insurance is nothing but evidence of a lack of faith. And surely the same should apply to medicine.
Unfortunately, a couple in the US is facing up to 10 years’ jail for manslaughter for holding this very view. Instead of seeking medical help, they relied on prayer as their daughter died of pneumonia.
Most conservative Christians would not hold views as extreme as this. The question is: why not? Nothing in the Bible suggests seeking a physician is an important adjunct to faith healing. And does God answer prayer, or not?
………..
The Pope's Physician Hits the News
(16 June 09)by Greg Spearritt
What do Australians – or, at least, Australian newspapers – find newsworthy about religion?
After a year and a half of trawling through the websites of ABC News Online and the major Fairfax and News Ltd papers in search of articles about religious topics, I find some interesting facts emerging. Interesting, but probably not so very surprising.
If (God forbid) you were to rely on these news sources for a snapshot of our society, you would probably believe that Catholics and Muslims are the only religious people doing anything really worth reporting on, both in Australia and overseas. And much of what they’re up to is bad.
(The figures, very roughly, are these. In almost 70 weeks of reporting, here are the number of weeks in which the following are mentioned at least once:
Muslims 68, Catholics 67, Anglicans 60, Jews 45, Buddhists 43, Scientologists 24, Atheists 21, Orthodox/Eastern 20, Uniting Church 18, Exclusive Brethren 17, Baha'i 16, Witchcraft 15, Mormons 14, Hindus 14, Baptists 11, Hillsong 11, Salvation Army 11, Pagans 10, Sikhs 7, Lutherans 4, Presbyterians 4, Jehovah’s Witness 3, Seventh-Day Adventist 3, Spiritualists 2, Zoroastrians 1.
In a given week, however, there are usually far more articles about Muslims and Catholics than about any of the others.)
Why so much on Muslims and Catholics?
Religious violence, of course, accounts for many of the articles mentioning Islam. General reference to the Middle East accounts for many more. In articles about events in Australia, controversy over different cultural standards and issues like opposition to Islamic schools – as well as terrorism trials – feature strongly.
For the Catholics, child sexual abuse is right up there with the doings of the Pope. In reporting on Australia, sexual abuse by Catholic clergy again features, as does the Pope. In fact, whatever the Pope does seems to be considered newsworthy – did you know, for instance, that he just changed his doctor?
It should not be surprising, I suggest, that our news media especially pick up on the violent, abusive, outdated, intolerant, intransigent and illiberal aspects of religion. Certainly, there are articles which paint religion in a much more favourable light, but clearly these don’t sell newspapers. Nothing sells like controversy, and in the world of religion today, the Catholics and Muslims seem to have cornered the market on it.
……….
In God Our Pollies Trust
(09 June 09)by Greg Spearritt
We expect religion to feature in US politics, but why in Australia, where God-bothering is an even more marginal sport than soccer? In a new article, Anna Crabb examines the increasing prominence of religion in Australian politics.
……
New articles and reviews
(02 June 09)by Greg Spearritt
In our newest set of online articles and reviews:
- Peter Bore muses about the big questions and in particular the biggest of all: ‘how should we live?’.
- Religion writer Alison Cotes reviews the latest Dan Brown movie, ‘Angels and Demons’;
- Greg Spearritt looks at Don Cupitt’s recent book The Meaning of the West in which Cupitt claims the long-promised Kingdom is finally manifest here on earth;
- Rodney Eivers assesses Who On Earth Was Jesus?, the latest book by our 2009 Conference speaker David Boulton; and
- Judith Bore looks with tenderness on Don Cupitt’s Impossible Loves.
………
Angels, Demons and Fatwas
(01 June 09)by Malcolm Brown
The review of ‘Angels and Demons’ that is reproduced in this month’s Sea of Faith Bulletin includes these words: ‘Rushdie’s life was endangered when the Ayatollah Khomeini imposed a fatwa, or sentence of death.’ The review was taken from the American Atheist News, I enjoyed reading (most of) it, and – I want to emphasise this point – it was entirely appropriate to reproduce it in the Bulletin.
So, what’s my problem? Simply this: a fatwa is not a sentence of death, and never has been. A fatwa is a legal opinion, issued by a suitably qualified Islamic jurist. Usuli Shi’a Muslims – such as the majority in Iran – are expected to follow the fatwas of a living mujtahid (jurist capable of exercising independent legal judgement). Khomeinin died some 20 years ago, so he doesn’t count any more!
One of the most notable Sunni fatwas on the twentieth century was the Al-Azhar Shi’a Fatwa, an exemplary piece of Islamic ecumenism. A recent one forbids the use of weapons of mass destruction, reportedly because they endanger the lives of Muslims as well as non-Muslims, but I haven’t yet seen the text (which I would expect to value the lives of non-Muslims as well). The same scholar, Ali Gomaa, has issued a fatwa forbidding female genital mutilation, which he describes as ‘a deplorable custom’ with ‘no written grounds in the Qur’an’.
Is life sacred?
(01 June 09)by Scott McKenzie
Universal moral precepts are finding it difficult to survive in a postmodern world where all standards appear to be relative to one’s point of view. Here, Peter Kuttner reflects on his own personal encounter with the question of whether life really is sacred.
This is a question that we might well all face eventually as overpopulation and diminishing resources, together with life-lengthening advances in medicine, conspire to confront us with this question.
Those Godless Clergy
(26 May 09)by Greg Spearritt
It’s a never-ending source of media fascination: the clergy who doubt the out-there divinity thing.
At one end of the spectrum is outrage, for example in Tess Livingstone’s Australian opinion piece condemning Fr Peter Kennedy for doubting the existence of Jesus. How hypocritical of him to celebrate the Eucharist each Sunday! (See Australian Story or ABC TV iview for more on what Kennedy believes – or doesn’t.)
A much more sympathetic hearing is given to former Bishop of Edinburgh Richard Holloway by Andrew West of the Sydney Morning Herald. Holloway, who’s in Australia promoting Between The Monster And The Saint, his most recent book about the Church, also still presides at Holy Communion, despite being an avowed agnostic.
You have to concede that the Livingstones of the world have a point. None of Kennedy’s doubts were voiced in any significant public way while he was at St Mary’s Catholic Church. Obviously, they would have constituted far too much of a challenge to orthodox Catholic teaching to be acceptable to the Catholic Powers that Be. Holloway, too, has become far more vocal on such matters as a retired bishop. In his case, articulating some of his ideas may not have been fatal to his career, but they’d certainly have made it rockier.
Did Holloway and Kennedy – like the significant minority of clergy still on the job who have similar doubts – fail their congregations by keeping schtum?
…….
Onward Christian Soldiers
(20 May 09)by Scott McKenzie
Let me predict here and now an enormous outrage among Muslim nations as news of the material I am about to show you filters out around the world. I was gradually more and more stunned as I turned the pages.
Journalist Robert Douglas has obtained a set of cover sheets for the Secretary of Defense Worldwide Intelligence Update, a classified daily briefing that was hand delivered (only 16 copies made) to George Bush and selected White House aides.
Why Should an Atheist be Ethical?
(19 May 09)by Greg Spearritt
Dr John Dickson, director of the conservative-evangelical Centre for Public Christianity, asks in an opinion piece on the ABC news site:
What is there in the atheist's perspective that can rationally inspire love and discourage hate?... On what grounds can the atheist speak rationally of the high and equal value of the poor or the weak or the asylum seeker?
Most atheists in our society do choose love over hate, he acknowledges, but queries whether this choice is “anything more than a mere preference, a product of 'feelings' as atheist Bertrand Russell famously acknowledged”.
The agnostic Bishop Richard Holloway seems to confirm Dickson’s point. He begins with a quote from Spanish philosopher, Miguel de Unamuno:
'Man is perishing, that may be, but if it is nothingness that await us, let us perish resisting and let us so live that it will be an unjust fate.' I want people to live as though life had eternal meaning. Even if you don't believe in a God of unconditional love, choose to live as though there were.
Is ethical behaviour, though, a clear-cut case of rational Christian action and ‘mere preference’ for atheists?
If the Christian theist’s actions are influenced by the idea of a loving God – as Dickson’s article implies – why is that ‘rational’ rather than ‘emotional’? A desire to please God is logical if you have a fear of hell or desire for heaven, but otherwise surely it’s a product of ‘feelings’ just as much as Russell’s atheistic ethical actions.
The hope of cosmic superannuation might rationally inspire good behaviour, but I think even Dickson would find that an unpalatable motive.
Surely, too, there are ‘rational’ reasons for atheists to act morally: for example, a society that cares about the poor and disadvantaged and values human worth is logically likely to have lower rates of social alienation and therefore less crime.
This very question, the warrant for ethical behaviour in a post-Christian age, will be the theme of the 2010 National SoFiA Conference in Brisbane. Keep an eye on our main page for links to the details as they come to hand.
……….
The Call of Islam
(19 May 09)by Malcolm Brown
Liberation theology, inter-religious solidarity, feminism, justice for people with AIDS.
Not words you will often hear associated with Islam. However, leading South African Muslim Farid Esack has brought them together in his reflections on the Muslim role in the anti-apartheid struggle, and its relevance for today. His website includes articles on these issues, and more. It also has information about his books, including “On Being a Muslim”, and the excellent “Qur’an, Liberation and Pluralism”.
Here’s a snippet: “I can use Islam and its text, the Qur’an, to re-enforce all my prejudices, to shed them or to re-work them.”
Sound familiar?
Cupitt for Archbishop!
(15 May 09)by Malcolm Brown
Whenever I read Don Cupitt, I find myself wholeheartedly agreeing with about half of what he says, and violently disagreeing with the other half. I wouldn’t have it any other way. So, how could I resist this petition on Facebook?
“Don Cupitt for Archbishop of Canterbury
“Don Cupitt is England's (forgotten?) theological genius. It is my belief that the only way to correct such sinful neglect is by enthroning him as the next Archbishop of Canterbury - or, as a compromise measure, working alongside Rowan in a job share.
“Join this group now and help put radical liberal theology back where it belongs - Lambeth Palace.”
I love the job share idea. As long as he works on the days that I agree with him.
Religion That Moves With the Times
(13 May 09)by Greg Spearritt
Commenting on the current situation in Pakistan, Tanveer Ahmed writes in the Sydney Morning Herald:
Laws that were designed to protect women in the tribal clans of the sixth century now hold back the aspirations of half the population. What women now need protecting from, within Islam, is the idea that they need so much protection.
It’s another case of human customs, developed for a specific cultural and social context, becoming set in the cement of religion. Even in Australia, where real religious fervour has ebbed to a record low, ideas once enshrined in religious text or edict continue to have a powerful effect. Whether the issue is homosexuality, the roles and rights of women or voluntary euthanasia, we still have centuries-old views from entirely different cultural contexts exerting their influence by dint of their association with religion.
‘Progressive religion’, however, is not an oxymoron. Religion that can move with times and distinguish custom from substance and principle is happening more and more (and now more!) in Australia - and even in America.
……
New articles and reviews
(09 May 09)by Greg Spearritt
A new set of articles and reviews is now online:
- The Noah Assignment – how did Noah manage it?
- Spiritual Experiences in a Secular World – ideas and experiences from one of the local Brisbane SoF groups.
- Seriously Secular – has religion had its day?
- Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance – revisited after all these years
- Reviews of Don Cupitt’s Above Us Only Sky, Michael Hampson’s God Without God? and Peter Kirkwood’s The Quiet Revolution.
……….
Why we believe in Gods!
(02 May 09)by Scott McKenzie
Brian Wilder sent in this YouTube piece of Andrew Thomson presenting a talk on "Why We Believe in Gods" at the American Atheist Convention 2009 in Atlanta Georgia.
This talk (all 54 minutes of it) draws on a wide range of studies in neuroscience in particular but also in evolutionary psychology and related disciplines, to explain how our brains evolved in such a way as to make us susceptible (vulnerable?) to belief in the supernatural.
Justin Barrett covers similar territory in Why Would Anyone Believe in God? (AltaMira Press, 2004)
You need to set aside almost an hour to watch Thomson's quite interesting address which is well supported with PP slides. Interested? Click here.
Humanitarian Religion
(24 April 09)by Greg Spearritt
It’s refreshing to see a religious point of view reported in the Australian press that clearly has compassion – rather than self-righteous judgement – at its root.
Darwin imam Adam Konda has a response to the recent arrival and disastrous experience of Afghan and Iranian asylum-seekers aboard SIEV 36 that suggests a very humane and laudable perspective on Islam.
…..
Science & Religion: Hear, Hear!
(23 April 09)by Greg Spearritt
Some audio snippets from the plenary session of the 2008 SoFiA National Conference are now available online.
Physicist and cosmologist Lawrence Krauss and philosopher with a special interest in evolution John Wilkins respond to these questions:
· Is organised religion helpful or unhelpful to science?
· Is there any value in scientists engaging with religious fundamentalists?
· Why are you, or are you not, religious?
· What do you think of Richard Dawkins’ approach to religion?
………..
Defending the Offensive
(21 April 09)by Greg Spearritt
I seldom agree with much that Australian columnist Jane Albrechtsen has to say, but on the issue of free speech I’m behind her 100 per cent. (Her contribution and that of David Marr’s to the recent IQ2 debate on this topic are well worth hearing.)
‘Openness’ is prized by the Sea of Faith Network because it is a necessary condition for allowing genuine autonomy of thought – that is, for treating people as grown-ups capable of deciding for themselves what they should think. It means being able to hear and assess all points of view, whether ridiculous, sublime, unorthodox or even offensive. No topic should be taboo for us.
For centuries we in the West have been – as Don Cupitt puts it in The Meaning of the West – outgrowing “the repressive boarding-school culture of the Church”. Now the State, if Albrechtsen and other commentators are to be believed, is showing signs of stepping into the breach.
BTW, Cupitt has an interesting sidelight to this free speech issue:
Blasphemy used to be an offence directly against God, and God punished it with suitable thunderbolts; but today blasphemy is an offence against human religious susceptibilities, and no more than that. With the disappearance of the sacred, blasphemy has come down in the world.
(The Meaning of the West, SCM 2008, p.129)
………
The Jesus Vote
(17 April 09)by Greg Spearritt
Would Jesus vote for the British National Party?
Despite sentiment such as that from eleven C of E bishops in the UK who said in 2004 that “voting for or supporting a political party that offers racist policies is like spitting in the face of God", the BNP has apparently recruited Jesus in the lead-up to June 2009 elections for the European Parliament.
I suppose it’s fair enough. Jesus no longer has a US election to distract him, and he won’t have to choose between Kevin from Heaven and Mal from H...eavens knows where for another couple of years.
………
Believers are away with the fairies
(12 April 09)by Scott McKenzie
We'd be better off without religion, argues AC Grayling, who is a keynote speaker in a major debate on the futility of faith in London tomorrow (30 March 2007) He says:
"There is an increasingly noisy and bad-tempered quarrel between religious people and non-religious people in contemporary society.
It has flared up in the past few years, and has quickly taken a bitter turn. Why is this so?"
Grayling makes an important point about faith-based schools (and in particular, government funding of them) that we need to take well into account. This is of signifixcance to me since I chair the board of one such school.
Rudd, Recession & Religious Rhetoric
(09 April 09)by Greg Spearritt
David Burchell, writing in The Australian, takes Kevin Rudd and Gordon Brown to task for their bout of “windy semonising” at St Paul’s Cathedral during the G20 Summit:
When Rudd crafted a word-picture of modern society torn between rival and incompatible doctrines - one of Friedrich von Hayek-style naked greed, the other on the model of Christian kindness - he revealed a striking lack of interest in the ethics of politics, as opposed to the transcendental morality of the churches. By the same token, when Brown spoke to the assembled prelates at St Paul's about the need for the West to rediscover its moral compass… he revealed only the capacity of windy moralism to obscure the most troubling facts about our economic predicament.
Mutuality à la Adam Smith, not economics based on Christian benevolence or moralising from on high, suggests Burchell, is the way out of the GFC maze.
Regardless of the value of his economic argument, however, in this entertaining article Burchell has some interesting side-swipes at the churches - which today “not uncommonly occupy what we might call an ethical niche-market, with a speciality in the rhetoric of moral reproach.”
………
CPX - Conservative Propaganda for Christianity?
(09 April 09)by Greg Spearritt
The Centre for Public Christianity (CPX) has been embraced with worrying enthusiasm by the mainstream Australian media (notably the Fairfax press and that bastion of critical thought, the ABC) and glowingly endorsed by our highest publicly-elected official. What CPX comes out with is portrayed as “the Christian” point of view, and one bolstered by rigorous scholarship to boot.
According to co-founder and director Dr John Dickson, CPX aims to “promote the public understanding of the Christian faith [meaning good ‘ol Nicean orthodoxy, of course] using the best of scholarship by the best of media, which basically means a lot of good, intelligent noise for Christianity in the public sphere”.
Best of scholarship? What he actually means is the best of scholarship that a Moore Theological College-trained Sydney Anglican can bring himself to accept.
You won’t find any of that Jesus Seminar, Spong or FaithFutures nonsense underpinning CPX thinking.
A sample of what you can expect from CPX – the “best of scholarship”:
- Speaking to John Cleary on the ABC, Dickson claims: “The historical core of the birth narratives is a Bethlehem birth.” (This is well-known to be considered of dubious historicity among biblical scholars.)
- “Bizarrely, 31% of Australians think that Jesus lived ‘B.C’—before he was born, so to speak.” - From a CPX press release. (Scholarly consensus is that Jesus was in fact born around 4 or 5 BCE.)
· Teaching about world religions at Macquarie Christian Studies Institute in 2008, Dickson avers that in Australia “over 70% of the population describes itself as ‘Christian' ”. 2006 Census figures published in 2007 show that the actual figure is 64%.
- Dr John in this film trailer proclaims that “around 5%” of people are atheists. It may (or may not) be true worldwide, but it’s well and truly wide of the mark for most Western countries. Adherents.com gives figures of over 20% for more than 30 countries, including Australia (at 24-25%). Other sources, too, give figures for places like Australia that are much higher than 5%. What ‘atheist’ means is a moot point, of course, but in the 2006 Australian Census, 19% stated “no religion”.
CPX has given us an Easter present: a documentary titled Life of Jesus, due to be aired on Channel 7 at 1pm on Good Friday.
It beings with the question: “What happens when the theologians hand over the New Testament to the historians?”. The answers to that, if the trailer is anything to go by, suggest the historians in question (including Dr John himself) might also happen to be Christians. There seems to be a tendency to blur theology (or Christology) and history.
Co-founder and co-director of CPX, Greg Clarke had this to say about Life of Jesus in an opinion piece on the ABC news site:
There is a Jesus who can be explored through history. I have just finished working with colleagues on a six-episode documentary on the life of Jesus, filmed in Israel, that looks at what mainstream historians agree upon in the historical record of Jesus and there's plenty. In fact, in The Historical Figure of Jesus, Duke University historian, Professor EP Sanders goes so far as to say: "There are no substantial doubts about the general course of Jesus' life" (p.11). I do wish the outspoken atheists of our time would give a little respect to the historians on this question.
Perhaps the outspoken Christians of CPX need to give a little more respect to what Sanders has to say elsewhere in The Historical Figure. For example, about the gospels: “There are no sources that give us the ‘unvarnished truth’; the varnish of faith in Jesus covers everything” (p. 73).
They could also give a little more respect to the Australian public – who subsidise the ‘Centre’ through the tax deductibility of donations to it – by not pretending that all Christians think alike. Theologically and socially conservative Christians are but one strand in Australian Christianity.
……….
New Articles & Reviews
(01 April 09)by Greg Spearritt
A new crop of articles and reviews from our newsletter is now online. (You can, of course, receive such items hot off the press, along with a myriad of other news, ideas and information by becoming a SoFiA member and receiving our monthly Bulletin.)
New Articles
- The Failings of Religion
- Is Science the New Religion?
- What’s Wrong with Buddhism?: An Atheist’s Perspective
- Nor Certitude
- A Psychological Approach to the Experience of Spirituality
- The Origin of Religion
New Reviews
- Karen Armstrong On the Bible
- David Mills Atheist Universe
- Fisk, Robert The Great War for Civilisation & Hamid, Mohsin The Reluctant Fundamentalist
……
The Catholic Mass and the St Mary's Saga
(29 March 09)by Greg Spearritt
What is the meaning of the Catholic Mass? Donna Garibaldi sees this as a crucial question in the current furore over St Mary's Catholic Church, South Brisbane:
[For the latest development see Rebel priest to lead Catholic 'community in exile' - ABC News]
Fr Tom Elich, Director of the Liturgical Commission in Brisbane, in his article in The Catholic Leader on March 8, came closest to pointing out the real problem with St. Mary's. The secular media had been caught up in the peripheral issues and focussed on such things as the unfairness of treating an obviously socially aware priest, as Fr Kennedy seems to be, so badly. After all, didn't he look after the disadvantaged and run a very inclusive community? Why then should how he celebrates Mass matter? More…
Science - don't be too dogmatic
(22 March 09)by Scott McKenzie
Harry Collins, a philosopher and sociologist of science in the UK has contributed an interesting piece in Nature that illustrates the difficulties of: 1. treating scientific knowledge as if it provides universal truths 2. emphasizing the 'post-modern' perspective on the social constructivist nature of scientific knowledge. A position somewhere between these is probably more appropriate, Collins claims. This piece is worth reading for its balance, redressing the extremes of Dawkins for example. &