Latest Cab off the Rank

My latest book is being published by Australia's biggest publisher of Catholic bibles and materials - Garratt Publishing.  Garratt's people are clearly an ecumenical bunch.

They are producing a series of 13 novellas by different authors for upper primary, lower secondary school kids.  The series looks at faith and tolerance.  It started more as an interfaith exercise but the feedback from teachers was that tolerance issues were more interesting than interfaith ones. Mine is a secular and atheist approach to growing up in Jew Town, East St Kilda.

 

 The Third Space series is designed in response to the Australian Curriculum’s inclusion of the key elements of diversity competence: intercultural and ethical understanding, personal and social capability.   So it is a form of faith training that is far removed from the Divinity yawn fests of my day.  The kids in the stories are from wildly diverse backgrounds.  Most of the authors are young.  I look like I am the eldest by decades.  

My one involves a boy growing up in the Jewish quarter of East St Kilda - Melbourne’s Jew Town.  His dad is an annoying weirdo, his little sister Nell thinks she’s the Queen of the World and their two doggies are lovable but certifiably stupid. His Jewishness is ... well ... complicated. The streets are full of a kaleidoscope of hats which mean different things in Jew Town. And then a girl with a scarf on her head and a cute dog turns up and this brings frightening conflict out.  There are three battle grounds, the school yard, the street and the Town Hall.  Here is a link to me in my corporate tee shirt speaking on the issue. Interview

Part of the story is based upon the real life tale of the anti Islamic association, the Q Society trying to have prohibited a small Muslim Friday prayer meeting in East St Kilda. I was so enraged by this attack on freedom of association at the time that the yarn made its way into the book.  There is no paradox in an atheist defending the rights of religious minorities for atheists are a minorityand beliefs derived from atheism, such as Humanism, promote tolerance and diversity. 

Here is a link to some more propaganda about the book Propaganda

The book ends with three rhetorical questions.  Is a half Jew with a non Jewish mother a Jew given the matrilineal requirements of Judaism?  Is a person who celebrates their secular bar or bat mitzvah actually an adult?  And is a young boy of 14 capable of love?

Over to you...

Moving from Negative to Positive

By its very definition, atheism is a negative force.  It is about rebuttal of an idea, not an idea in itself.  The very word even has its sworn enemy, godliness, taking up most the letters.  The prefix “a” in atheism is derived from the Ancient Greek prefix meaning without – atheos – without gods.

For much of its early life, atheism had a big enough agenda poking out the eyes of theistic belief.  Faith was, and still is, so ingrained in humanity that we have been busy enough.  But in the end, it is all very well being correct in our criticisms.  Eventually we have to face the big dilemma.  Faiths arose for a reason.  We poor, vulnerable humans crave them to help with our need for solace for suffering, consolation in the face of death, moral guidance, powerful ritual and a sense of community.  This is the challenge.  We have won the intellectual war on God/s.  We have diminished the power of the sacred, particularly in the West.  What can we throw up as alternatives?

The Melbourne Sunday Assembly - a godless congregation in full flight

Sometimes alternatives are not needed.  The moral guidance from the bible is both uncertain and archaic and has easily been replaced by secular state based laws.  There are some uncertainties about these secular answers which are thrashed out not in church but on talk back radio and QandA.  We have Utilitarian alternatives but they are not needed for most people.  The secular state now is the cauldron in which moral issues such as gay and lesbian marriage are cooked and discussed. 

But there is a need for secular and civil ceremony.  We have replaced the religions in the rites of passage industry by mimicking the religious versions.  Civil weddings are chosen by the overwhelming majority of Aussies.  And secular funerals are common. There is a discussion to be had one day about whether these secular ceremonies are as successful as the sacred.  One could debate that the absence of community singing and the sense that an awe inspiring God is involved diminishes their power.  Maybe that is the case but I will leave that debate for another time. 

My point is that what I wrote at the start about atheism being only about negative repudiation is not an entirely correct picture.  The civil ceremonies show that we atheists sometimes fail to recognise that we have already dramatically changed the moral, ceremonial and cognitive world in the West.  So it is just not true to say that atheists are only negative even though our name implies otherwise. 

What about community ceremonies other than rites of passage?  A rite of passage is a ceremony of change.  Birth, adulthood, graduation, marriage, school reunions, retirement and death are the rites of change.  But what of the weekly communal gathering that, although losing steam in the West, still offers a basis for a community to gather and re emphasise common bonds and perform non verbal rituals together?  This we have lost with the loss of faith. 

But no longer.  A movement has arisen in Britain that is creeping around the globe.  The Sunday Assembly, a group for unbelievers to connect with like-minded individuals, is expanding from the UK to the USA and Oz.  The Sunday Assembly is a godless congregation that celebrates life. Their motto has three pillars live better, help often, wonder more. They are a place where unbelievers can gather, sing and commune with like or indeed, different minds.

The Sunday Assembly started when two comedians, Sanderson Jones and Pippa Evans, realised that they wanted to do something that had all the best bits of church, but without the religion, and with awesome pop songs added.

The first version of this was in January 6th 2013, and though they weren’t expecting many people, the entire place was full. At the next Assembly there were 300. Then they had to go to two services a day.  And now it is going global.  Now there are 28 Assemblies across the world. http://sundayassembly.com/

It is almost every Australian capital city and is growing.  Sydney is really humming (see http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/12/my-local-atheist-church-is-part-of-the-long-inglorious-march-of-gentrification) and like Melbourne has its assembly on the last Sunday of the month. 

This isn’t the first attempt at such a project.  Humanism is a movement which embraces human logic and consciously rejects god and faith.  The International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU) is the world union of 117 Humanist, rationalist, organisations in 38 countries.  Humanism has foundations in Ancient Greek philosophy and the Enlightenment.  As a movement, it has not really grabbed humans by the ontological short and curlies but is battling on.

In the USA, Unitarianism started in the liberal protestant churches in the 19^th century and now has godless and creedless aspects to its faith.  It might have a few hundred thousand adherents worldwide.   

Apart from that, we godless write boring books and tedious blogs.  Our community is virtual and celebrated in the comments that follow blogs like this one.  We need something more human.

The Sunday Assemblies are new but cool.  Community singing is encouraged.  This interests me as singing is a polarizing issue.  Some love it and others wince.  The British are much better at it than Aussies, probably from the football culture that bought us “Ooh ah, Cantona” and hooliganism.  I saw a final of the women’s hockey when the British girls sang God Save our Gracious Queen beautifully whereas our girls sang an inhibited, tuneless version of AAF.  The two cultures, though similar are starkly different on this issue.  I sing in gospel choir in a Baptist Church with a bunch of secular people so this issue of song and faith entrances me.  

Kate Murray - the current Grand Poo Bah of the Melbourne Sunday Assembly

 Kate Murray the current Organiser of Sunday Assembly Melbourne has a very sophisticated vision of the issues of ritual.  “The singing is the best part of our Assemblies.  We have a rock back and sing the best songs that everyone knows.”  They use the best of the rock genre.  Kate is pregnant and her child will be welcomed with a naming ceremony at the Assembly.  There is clear evidence of the rise of godless community where ages and stages are lived out and celebrated.

What is your view?

Do we need communities for the godless?

Will the competition from the net, the media and sport crowd out these new Sunday Assemblies?

Can we survive and thrive without direct human contact and ritual?

Over to you….

CHRIS O’DOWD AND HIS OFFENSIVE AGAINST FAITH

One of my favourite actors has just weighed in on the godless side of things.  In a trenchant and let me add plausible attack, Chris O’Dowd, star of Bridesmaids and more importantly The IT Crowd warns that the religions will soon be as despised as racism. 

He contends that “religious doctrine is halting human progress.  It is a weird cult".  He continues in the same vein, “For most of my life, I've been, 'Hey, I'm not into it, but I respect your right to believe whatever you want'. But as time goes on, weirdly, I'm growing less liberal. I'm more like, 'No, religion is ruining the world, you need to stop!'”

I knew why I loved that man.  Just as his career is skyrocketing in the States, O’Dowd risks losing his lustre in the religious parts of the USA, by proclaiming his undying atheism.  He is so gutsy.  And just to make sure that everyone knows he is serious, he opines, “And you know, now America can't have a president that doesn't say he believes in God. So we're fucked! Like, they fucked everything!

"You wanna go and live in your weird cult and talk about a man who lives in a cloud, you do that, but don't (believe it). I mean, you really think that Barack Obama believes in God? No way!" http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/celebrity/actor-chris-odowd-says-religion-is-unacceptable-20140308-34ded.html#ixzz2vnUaYcE2

What do we think of this?  We know what Christians would argue.  They would say several things such as Terry Eagleton said of Richard Dawkins.  Let looks at the possible criticisms. 

The first is “how can you criticize faith if you know nothing of theology?”  I assume that Chris, despite his first name, is as ignorant of theology as I am.  However, as I regard theology as a huge human constructed edifice on the shabby foundations of faith.  To be sure, I and, I imagine Chris O’Dowd, do not understand theology but we can look at the foundations of faith in God and form a view.  I think that is fine.  One doesn’t need the propaganda of either atheist or believer to form a view on God.  You can form a view on God without a thorough understanding of His texts for it is an empirical view.  Either your life experience and learning persuades you of the presence of God or not.  One doesn’t need a deep understanding of theology.  That stuff comes after the first view is formed in the affirmative.  So I say Chris is safe from condemnation if indeed he is, as I hope he is, ignorant of theology.

The second criticism of Chris and other New Atheists is that God is so transcendent that He does not need our love or belief.  He is so ethereal that he does not provide evidence because He does not need to.  Well, that may or may not be true but it is an argument that does not shoot Chris the messenger because it is an assertion devoid of evidence.  It is typical of the mindset of the faithful that such an argument is proffered and believed.  I look at that argument and think it is merely the meandering logic of a person who believes stuff that is manifestly made up.  Others, however, will be persuaded by that argument.  Such is the variety of humanity.  My view is that the talk of a God who does not care to reveal himself is merely self serving and therefore unconvincing.

The third potential criticism has more power.  Chris and the New Atheists may be accused of attacking straw men.  There are vast numbers of innocuous, indeed wonderful believers who are not the mad fundamentalists of our godless imagining.  Whilst there are awful rat bags and nut bags amongst the various religions, there are so many normal, lovely people that we need to avoid stereotyping all religious folk as evil.  It is simply not the case.  Faith is not all bad.  Some parts are uplifting.  We need to acknowledge this and not slag off the whole segment of the community immersed in faith.  There lies a future for atheism as a minority fringe movement.

Finally, a related criticism would be that such adversarial positions like those of Chris and his deceased namesake Chris Hitchins are unhelpful.  My response is that the New Atheists have given strength to both sides.  Atheism is now a movement with a sense of morale.  Just a decade ago, it was a disparate group of people writing boring books for each other.  Chris O’Dowd and others have made atheism so sexy.  They have been aided by the sexual abuse scandal, the continuing religious wars and the utterly nasty weirdoes thrown up by the various faiths.  But New Atheists have also given great power to the faiths.  They love bagging the doctrinaire disciples of New Atheism.  We have to be careful not to be so sure of ourselves that we display hubris.  New Atheism is a big target.  Paradoxically the have pumped up the spokespersons of the churches and put God back into the front pages.  It can be a bit self defeating.

What is your view?

Is Chris O’Dowd your hero?

Is he creating straw men by making rednecks and homophobes the representatives of all faith?

Is he polarizing the world setting up a battle that gives strength to the promoters of faiths?

Over to you guys…

Karma and the Cardinal

Going but not yet gone. Cardinal George Pell - the most incompetent leader in Chrisendom?

Well he’s finally going.  Cardinal Pell, the leader of the Australian Catholic Church,  is being promoted to almost the very top.  George is being kicked upstairs to be the Vatican's "Grand Financial Inquisitor".  www.smh.com.au/national/cardinal-george-pell-named-by-pope-francis-to-head-vatican-finance-ministry-20140225-hvdn3.html

This Inquisition unlike its Spanish predecessor is reasonably welcome.  I say reasonably because I wonder if it will be as transparent as would be desirable.  There are allegations of corruption, nepotism and dysfunction in the Vatican made public by the Pope Benedict’s butler.  I mean, really, who cares?  So what if the Vatican is awash with sleaze and fraud.  That has been a centuries old tradition.  The allegations of the money laundering through the Vatican Bank by pious war lords and prayerful crooks exemplifies how Vatican finances are remote from both God and the good works required by the Bible.

Several issues emerge, however, from this appointment which requires the godless to drop their repugnance and gaze in wonder at byzantine world of Vatican finances.

The first point is the remarkable seniority of Cardinal Pell in the catholic stronghold.  We look at him as a doddering fool.  His public appearances are a wonderful catastrophe.  He appears remote, devoid of charisma and slow witted.  In short, his is atheism’s greatest friend.  And yet he is a member of the Group of 8 most senior Cardinals at the elbow of the Pope nudging him along.  It is incredible that such a low calibre man could achieve these dizzying heights.  What this tells me is that there is a leadership vacuum.  Catholicism is an organisation where leadership cannot be recruited from a competitive pool of qualified candidates.  It must recruit from a group of elderly men with great expertise in theological and liturgical matters but probably untrained in finance and management.  It is a recipe for disaster.  And we have seen this disaster unfold both here in Australia and across the world.

The second thing I feel is that Australia is diminished with the loss of Cardinal Pell.  He is such a lumbering fool, that Catholicism in Oz must be cheering from the rafters at his departure.  They must have wished him dead for some time.  Now he disappears into the bowels of the actuarial inquisition in Rome never to be seen again they would hope.  I, as an unbeliever, am gutted.  Never have I seen such a poor adversary as dumb foolish Pell.  It is a nightmare for me that he is gone and a wonderful opportunity for Australian Catholicism to somehow reinvent itself. 

Finally, Cardinal Pell’s elevation gives one pause for thought on the Indian notion of Karma found in Buddhist, Hindu and other eastern faiths.  Karma is a notion based on the justice of causality.  If one is good, then good things should be caused to happen.  My rather uninformed knowledge of Karma essentially boils down to this.  If a good/bad person has good/bad things happen, then I intone the word “Karma” even though I think that causation has no basis in fact.  Indeed, I feel that Karma is complete crap.  Would you say to the dying Syrian child, “Karma kid because you were naughty”? I don’t think so.  The notion that actions and intentions lead inexorably to a causal outcome is nonsense.  Bad things happen to good people and vice versa.

Great things have happened to Cardinal Pell and he doesn’t deserve them.  He presided over the demoralization and decline of the Church.  The Church is a basket case when he was its leader.  Is he fired?  No.  Do the normal processes of accountability apply so that the buck stops with him?  No.  Will he be subject to the competitive pressures of the labour market and be forced to resign?  No.  His last task before his Roman holiday is further testimony on child sex abuse.  It is a fucking joke.  Catholicism is in crisis in this country on his watch and he gets promoted.  Kids were abused and his record seems less than proactive in stopping the rot.  No, as a leader he was appalling and should be held accountable.  But he is promoted to ethereal heights.  Karma????

What is your view?

Was Cardinal Pell atheism’s greatest friend?

Is his departure good or bad?

Is his departure deserved or is he being kicked upstairs to be hidden?

Why is he so successful in Rome?

Over to you guys….

Dear Everyone,

Sorry I have been a bit silent of late.  I have a play reading of a musical play I have written which looks at secular views on death.  Guaranteed to be a bit hard to attract an audience to such a deadly topic.  It is at the protype stage and a play reading is happening in Melbourne on Wednesday, 19 February fortyfive downstairs.  Once I survive this, more regular blogs will bloom.  I hope to see some Melbournian readers at the reading on Wednesday or a more rehearsed reading on Monday 17 March. 

Dick