From The Onion:
Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are
Just practicing for the next four years. 😉
It would seem that Richard Dawkins has resigned his position at Oxford, the Simonyi professorship for the public understanding of science, to write a children’s book warning of the dangers of “non-scientific” fairy tales. The “non-scientific” label is, of course, to distinguish these from the “scientific” fairy stories, but that’s another issue. Taking Dawkins’ place at Oxford is mathemetician Marcus du Sautoy, who sounds a bit more lucid than his predecessor.
The Telegraph quotes Dawkins as saying
“I think looking back to my own childhood, the fact that so many of the stories I read allowed the possibility of frogs turning into princes, whether that has a sort of insidious affect on rationality, I’m not sure. Perhaps it’s something for research.”
And, with regard to raising children in a religion,”It’s a form of child abuse, even worse than physical child abuse.” I wonder, exactly what did Mr. & Mrs. Dawkins read to Richard when he was a boy? He obviously has some very deep-seated emotional reactions to the teaching of religion and anything non-scientific to children.
While I really don’t expect anything profound from Dawkins on the issue, I would be interested in his thoughts on George MacDonald, CS Lewis, Tolkien, and even Lewis Carroll and more interested in people’s response to whatever book he ends up writing. For his research, perhaps he could start here. I imagine that Dawkins will still make a fair bit of noise from time to time, but for the most part, I think his time has come and gone; people seem bored with him. Even the news bits on his leaving Oxford seem to be written with a stifled yawn.
But, I could be wrong.
Thanks to John H for blogging on this.
My friend David Hayward (a facebook friend, anyway…) has written a very interesting post on the 10 Movements of faith, most of which don’t sound very faith-like, using words like questioning, doubt, rejection, darkness, abandon and fear. From a Western evangelical point of view, these are bad words, things that we either try to avoid, ignore, heal, or if nothing else fails, condemn. However, perhaps David is right; perhaps we should not fear these, but recognize them as signs of growth.
I’ve seen these stages over the years in many friends and acquaintances. I don’t know that everyone goes through all stages, at least concerning core beliefs. As I commented on David’s blog, I think the Western evangelical church is often geared towards keeping people at Stage 1, where people can be entertained, placated, and manipulated. Growth – as any parent can tell you – is often hard to deal with. Then, some folks are just better at dealing with questions than others. And, as I have mentioned, it may not be our core faith that’s challenged, but the “baggage” that we often receive along with the Gospel, or perhaps even the nature of our faith. Again, I think David is on to something: if we never go through these stages, we’re not growing. As my favorite songwriter has written,
It’s not that hard
to figure it out
Where there’s no question,
there’s no doubt– Glen Phillips, There Comes a Time
As we read through the Gospels, it seems that Jesus even encouraged questioning and doubt at times – consider the story of the Rich Young Ruler, for one, or the “eat my flesh” teaching. A preacher that I heard many years ago said that God “offends the mind to reveal the heart.” If we won’t challenge our own beliefs, sometimes God himself will. The ancient church traditions – such as the Eastern Orthodox and Anglican – seem better able to deal with these stages of faith, and even anticipate and encourage them. There is a wealth in the liturgical and mystical (speaking of the old mystical tradition, not what currently passes for mysticism) traditions that the evangelical church simply cannot understand; and perhaps it is this very issue – dealing with these “negative” stages of faith – that acts as a barrier between the old and new.
So, what happens when the church fails to recognize these stages as growth rather than “backsliding?”
At the close of his post, David asks
Can we consider the possibility that someone abandoning their faith and leaving the church could actually be a potential development in their spirituality, a stage where they are being beckoned to abandon their child-like faith to move toward a more mature and adult faith? And can we allow people to linger in any of these movements without time limits? I think these are important questions to consider.
Fundamentalism, and even more temperate versions of evangelicalism, leave no room for those who have to step outside of the program. If they fail to “experience” God like they are supposed to, or question some of the teaching, they are often condemned, or treated as immature (the “weak in faith”). However, I think we need to ask ourselves, exactly who is “weak in faith,” those who dare risk their faith to deal with their questions, or those who insist on suppressing doubt?