Psst! Come to church this Sunday and I’ll bung you 30 quid
by Jura Watchmaker, 22 December 2007
I’ve just been told that Channel 4 News ran a story yesterday about the latest initiative of an outfit called “Christian Research”. Apparently, some gormless idiot in a sensible jumper was interviewed by the formidable Sue Turton, and advocated bribing people into church with the offer of £30 in a plain brown envelope, and as much Fair Trade coffee as they can drink.
Did any of you see this?
Meanwhile, a man in a frock in Wales has awoken from his slumbers, and with the help of the BBC popped up to denounce “atheistic fundamentalism”.
Saturday 22 December 2007 at 16:58
No link, I imagine, between £30 and the equivalent number of pieces of silver. Regarding which: Nuntio vobis gaudium magnum: following in the footsteps of Augustine, Henri IV, James II, Dryden, John Henry Newman, Oscar Wilde, G K Chesterton, Graham Greene and Evelyn Waugh…the PEOPLE’S TONY!! Just when it was safe to cross the Tiber….
Saturday 22 December 2007 at 20:01
I used to live in a town infested with Baptists. Their best tactic was to have a sexy young thing latch on to you and invite you to come to church with her.. It was tempting.
Saturday 22 December 2007 at 20:05
Yes, was breaking news on earlier this afternoon.
News24 got Anne Widdecombe to pop up and demand to know if that meant Blair repented for his anti Cattlick legislation like keeping abortion legal and gay marriage.
The fact that he wasn’t a cattlick when this was put through is no excuse for her. HE MUST REPENT.
Sunday 23 December 2007 at 0:55
“atheistic fundamentalism” - I must add that to my list of non-existent things to be scared of.
Sunday 23 December 2007 at 1:00
Is that like secular fundamentalism that got mentioned in Pickled Politics a while back?
Sunday 23 December 2007 at 1:27
Aye — that’ll be the same sort of thing.
Scary as fuck these non-existent things are.
Monday 24 December 2007 at 13:52
£30 - is it per church visit? Count me in, then.
Tuesday 25 December 2007 at 13:03
Now it’s chocolate.
Saturday 29 December 2007 at 8:37
So… is fundamentalist atheism NOT real where fundamentalist Christianity (or Islam) IS real? Or is religious fundamentalism not real either?
I thought Bishop Morgan was halfway to a good point when he got sidetracked into the nativity plays etc, which is a different thing. But, and Francis you and I have discussed this, there is something scary about anyone - on whichever “side” - simply declaring that he (or she, duh) is right and locking down the debate.
Clearly the word “fundamentalism” refers to “going back to fundamental principles,” ie those expressed in the Koran or the Bible. The danger in this of course lies in taking culturally-specific and allegorical data and applying it literally. There is not an analagous set of atheist fundamental principles, unless one were to read, I don’t know, Neitzche and Voltaire the whole time - but we’re not teenagers any more, are we? Or Brecht, God help us.
But we use the word in a figurative sense as part of a pattern-making impulse, and as an adjective with a secondary meaning we can transfer from religion to anti-religion. I’m just clarifying the terms. I wish everyone would do that.
I see in daily life a lot of people who are so damn certain of their own atheism, which is fine, that they become sneering towards anyone who isn’t a declared atheist, which is not fine. Because you all know and I know that you can’t usefully just write someone off because of one aspect of their thinking. I’m talking just about conversations at work or in the pub. It’s a shame, too, because if you feel so strongly that you’re right, you’re not asking questions and you’re not listening either, which means you’re not learning and you’re not going to grow very much as a human being.
By which I don’t mean “learning to be a Christian,” I mean “learning about yourself and others.”
So I’m disappointed to see you sneering at Bishop Morgan.
Saturday 29 December 2007 at 9:14
Katy, this is not about me or other atheists arrogantly insisting that we are right, and sneering at the likes of Dr Morgan for being religious believers. I will criticise believers - often robustly so - and even mock them. This is quite legitimate, and the believers will have to accept it.
What annoys me about Dr Morgan is his erecting of a straw man, and the fact that he’s jumped on this bandwagon months after everyone else. I actually know something about the politics of Eglwys yng nGhymru, and am fully aware that Morgan is perceived as a weak leader, and that the Anglican church in Wales is in a perilous position.
What I find pathetic and worthy of ridicule is this notion that Christians are now being persecuted by “fundamentalist atheists”. This is absolutely ridiculous, and even if the atheist community were in a stronger position politically, I don’t think you would see us trampling on the human rights of religious believers.
Hundreds, nay thousands of religious books are published each year. Apart from a few press releases issued by the National Secular Society criticising in detail specific texts, you hear barely a whimper from non-believers. A handful of bestselling atheist tomes, however, and the believers cry foul. It beggars belief (excuse the pun!).
Saturday 29 December 2007 at 10:48
It’s a shame, too, because if you feel so strongly that you’re right, you’re not asking questions and you’re not listening either, which means you’re not learning and you’re not going to grow very much as a human being.
This could equally be applied to religious believers for whom dogma takes precedence over an open spirituality that will happily discard beliefs in the face of new evidence and personal experience.
I try not to stereotype people, whatever their background and professed beliefs, but there is a difficulty when it comes to dialogue with religious believers. I would support such dialogue, but for this to be possible there needs to be a common denominator. And that means the religious have to engage with non-believers without invoking the supernatural. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, yet there is none that stands up to scrutiny.
Lastly, I’m not scared by people declaring that they are right, and locking down the debate. I’m suspicious of them, and will defend myself by whatever means necessary if they try to impose their beliefs on me. Otherwise I ignore them. The only reason why atheists of the thinking variety are vocal in their criticism of religion is that its influence extends beyond worshipping communities, and it is more often than not malign.
Monday 31 December 2007 at 8:58
Well, fair enough Francis. I’m not saying I thought the Bishop’s statement was even that cohesive - I just meant that you can’t assume someone’s wrong just because they’re a bishop.
Anyway, I have a toothache, a meringue to make, cleaning to do, some printer ink to go and replace for the right kind (duh) and somewhere to be by mid-afternoon. I’m past rational argument. So I wish you and yours a very Happy New Year!!