Alex’s Heresies – embracing a physical reality

An amusing billboard by a NZ progressive Christian church. What can one say?

Alex McCullie

The most recent mailout of the National Secular Society (UK) warns of Christian fundamentalism creeping into British schools via the Alpha religious course. To quote the article:

Fundamentalist Alpha Course infiltrating more schools

The fundamentalist Christian Alpha Course is being operated in state schools up and down the country, drawing in children to its particular brand of literalist religious dogma – and all with the schools’ approval and support.

The NSS is receiving increasing numbers of complaints from parents who are alarmed by the number of evangelical groups that are being allowed into schools to spread intolerant religious teaching, but the Alpha course is by far the most organised and widespread.

The Times Educational Supplement last week reported the growing influence of Alpha in schools. It cited Archbishop Blanch CofE High School in Liverpool, where “Youth Alpha” courses have been running for 3 years and has had 300 pupils participating. It runs for eight weeks at lunchtime and is promoted throughout the school on notice boards and in assemblies.

The course was set up with the headteacher’s backing by Reverend Kate Wharton, the Bishop of Liverpool’s appointee on the school’s board of governors. She claims that the Alpha Course is a “balanced introduction” to Christianity.

What she does not mention is its homophobia and the final sinister “holy spirit” session that encourages participants to speak in tongues and behave hysterically.

Terry Sanderson, President of the National Secular Society, said: “This is real fundamentalist stuff all wrapped up in reassuring words and delivered by a bloke in a jumper with a permanent smile who looks remarkably like Tony Blair. This is not a ‘balanced introduction’ to anything; it is a carefully planned attempt to push people in a very specific direction. It is deeply manipulative and has no place in schools paid for by the taxpayer.”

Quoted in the TES, Jonathan Bartley of the Ekklesia Christian “think tank” said the courses deal with doctrine rather than Christianity as a way of life. “It’s about sin, hell and resurrection and what people must do to get to heaven. I would be very worried about the adult content being used in schools unless it has been heavily modified.” He said that Governing bodies of “faith schools” (who are mostly representatives of the local diocese) are “overstepping the mark” in pushing these courses in schools.

Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the NSS, told the TES: “We have pupils, a captive audience, funnelled into hardline proselytising on school premises. These schools should be seeking permission from parents, but I’ll bet they aren’t.”

Alex McCullie

Here is a link to Susan Blackmore’s essay in the Guardian. She also refers to an interesting research paper by Gregory Paul,  freelance researcher, on the dependence on religious belief and dysfunctional psychosociological conditions.

Alex McCullie

This is an opportunity to add a beautifully produced bible to your library. Logos are giving away premium bibles (and not the cheaply produced giveaways we normally see) until the end of this month. Whether you are a believer or a critic, the Christian Bible is an essential part of any thinkers library as one of the most important books in Western civilisation. I have more than one bible and I would recommend one for your library too.

Alex McCullie

My dad enjoyed boxing. He used to described in colourful ways previous boxing champions and their personal stories outside of the ring. I took an interest as it meant common ground for both of us. One surprise for me was his saying that an opponent smiling was one in a lot of pain, presumably to hide his anguish.

I read an opinion piece in The Age, Melbourne Australia, by Greg Craven and understand what Dad meant. It’s a boostful, sarcastic attack on “the new hobby atheist is as brash, noisy and confident as a cheap electric kettle” by the vice cancellor of a local Catholic university. Craven equates this group of atheists to a new plague of blowflies or something fictitious from biblical Egypt.

The Roman Catholic Church is apparently a particularly popular target. Is it the endless cover-ups of priestly child abuse around the world? No. Is the use of misleading scare campaigns against the use of condoms to fight HIV infections in Africa? Is the historical distorting of the evolution science message in Catholic schools and communities? Is the selective application of healthcare driven by theology ahead of humanity? Is it the discrimination of women and homosexuals from positions of power within the church? It is none of these: apparently its because the church is big and, unlike their protestant bretheren, they actually believe in something. Craven sees the media as full of Christian attacks as today’s modern blood-sport.

I shall give Greg Craven the closing words:

At the bottom, of course, lies hate. I am not quite clear why our modern crop of atheists hates Christians, as opposed to ignoring or even politely dismissing them, but they very clearly do. There is nothing clever, witty or funny about hate.

Alex McCullie

Tom Scott says it all.

It’s a theme here – stop giving religions immunity from criticism about their human rights attitudes. Religions, faiths and churches should be subject to the same standards as applied to all in our societies. Adverse homophobic attitudes should be unacceptable from all secular and religious organisations. Some (not enough) have highlighted the Vatican’s appalling offer to disaffected Anglicans – homophobes, misogynists and bigots – to join an organisation happy with those attitudes – the Roman Catholic Church. And the same churches are so sensitive to criticism!

Randy Cohen in the NYT comments

Richard Dawkins has a few low-key words, including:

What major institution most deserves the title of greatest force for evil in the world? In a field of stiff competition, the Roman Catholic Church is surely up there among the leaders. The Anglican church has at least a few shreds of decency, traces of kindness and humanity with which Jesus himself might have connected, however tenuously: a generosity of spirit, of respect for women, and of Christ-like compassion for the less fortunate. The Anglican church does not cleave to the dotty idea that a priest, by blessing bread and wine, can transform it literally into a cannibal feast; nor to the nastier idea that possession of testicles is an essential qualification to perform the rite. It does not send its missionaries out to tell deliberate lies to AIDS-weakened Africans, about the alleged ineffectiveness of condoms in protecting against HIV. Whether one agrees with him or not, there is a saintly quality in the Archbishop of Canterbury, a benignity of countenance, a well-meaning sincerity. How does Pope Ratzinger measure up? The comparison is almost embarrassing.

Alex McCullie

Our belief in magic continues to haunt humanity – religions, churches, sacred texts, and – now – crazy interpretations of scientific research. Recently the New York Times, copied and extended by the Sunday Age, produced fanciful religious-style speculations of serious empirical research – Large Hadron Collider project near Geneva. The Age article, in particular, makes a seemless transition from some science reporting, well requoting of the NYT article, to a mixing poetical story telling; crazy faith claims of near-death experiences; and stories of saints.

As soon as we find something unexplained in science, out come the gurus, gullibly quoted by unqualified feature writers, to spruke simplistic mixtures of new-age mysticism with traditional religious beliefs, ‘explaining’ the unknowns in such strange worlds as sub-atomic particles. Worst still, even renowned scientists leave their areas of expertise (while still being quoted with those same scientific qualifications) to declare evidences for god, free-will, consciousness or any other mystery, without the slightest shred of empirical evidence. This is speculation at its worst and most dangerous. One such scientist even won the lucrative Templeton Prize for his god-like imaginations, good for his bank balance and great PR for the religious Templeton organisation.

Do not believe that quotations from scientists actually support these ideas. We must remember that scientists often use god-type language to explain wonderous mysteries. But they do not mean anything like the Christian, Islamic or Jewish God. Even Einstein did this while strongly disbelieving in any sort of god. Scientists are excited and often mystified by findings at the frontiers of knowledge and then will use poetic language to describe those mysteries. Most are not seriously seeking answers from 2000-3000 year old writings of Middle Eastern desert tribesmen.

Alex McCullie

Catholic Culture website quotes Msgr. Anthony R. Frontiero, a priest of the Diocese of Manchester (New Hampshire) as criticising a secular approach to tolerance:

[N]eutrality toward world views cannot be truly tolerant and respectful. Likewise, an absence of convictions does not define tolerance; and in the absence of some compelling notion of the truth that requires us to be tolerant of those who have a different understanding of the truth of things, there is only skepticism and relativism.

and later:

An authentic notion of tolerance in pluralistic societies demands that in their dealings with unbelievers and those of different faiths, believers should grasp that they must reasonably expect that the dissent they encounter will go on existing. At the same time, however, secular political cultures must encourage unbelievers to grasp the same point in their dealings with believers. When secularized citizens act in their role as citizens, they must [not] deny in principle that religious images of the world have the potential to express truth. Nor must they refuse their believing fellow citizens the right to make contributions in a religions language to public debates.

Again, the Catholic hierarchy view astounds me. I would have thought neutrality towards religious world views would more naturally lead to tolerance than say an ardent Christian, Islamic or Jewish view. Many religious people love conflating secularism and atheism to be anti-religious. They seem to work on the most intolerant mentality of ‘for us’ or ‘against us’. So who is really intolerant?

The real agenda comes in the second quotation. The Catholic leadership wants to imposed their faith-based morality (derived from revelations and ancient scriptures) onto the modern secular world. I have no problems people having religious attitudes. However, and this is a big ‘however’, discussion in the public space needs to be based in modern-day secular terms. Restricting condom use in HIV ravaged Africa, for example, should not be argued on the basis of God’s will or preventing soul-creation.

Alex McCullie

According to Amnesty International a Texan jury consulted a Christian bible to justify the death penalty in a murder trial. It is good to see Christian scriptures being put to a humane use – perhaps not.

Alex McCullie

If you want to be both, you can be ordained on-line for free through to US$89.95 for the deluxe version. A site for spiritual humanism offers ordaining packages without the need for seminary training. I have no idea whether it is a simple money making activity or someone seriously wanting to allow atheists to conduct civil services and other religious roles.

It doesn’t help in Australia as we have particular requirements before one is able to conduct wedding or funeral ceremonies.

Alex McCullie