Letters - 08 July 2011
From nontheism to fairtrade gold
Theism or nontheism
With reference to the present discussions regarding theism/nontheism; one of my reasons for becoming a Quaker was my belief that the Religious Society of Friends had gone beyond this particular debate (and many other theological tangles) to another level whereby such discussions were no longer necessary.
The concept of the Inner Light, to me, implies a transforming power whose origin none of us really knows. Is it some kind of divine power originating at a spiritual dimension whose existence has yet to be discerned by science, or is it the highest and purest humanitarian impulse of which we are capable, having its source somewhere within our own human nature? In other words, is its source human or divine? I have been struggling with this question for many years and still do not know the answer. Like many things, maybe it isn’t an either/or issue – it’s both.
I find the concept of the Inner Light satisfying because it acknowledges the presence of a transforming power but leaves its source an open question. It also dispenses with the need to name a God/god in whom you believe. Whatever name you use, whether God/god, the Inner Light or some other similar name, the reality is of course beyond human language, just as the reality of a table is beyond the word ‘table’.
The great joy of Quakerism to me is its open-mindedness (as Quakers, our minds must be open to all possibilities) and it would directly contravene that principle if anyone was excluded simply because they were unwilling to name a God/god. Although not many Quakers would describe themselves as Universalist (with a capital U) to me the default position of all Quakers is universalist in the sense that we believe this light to be available to everyone, whether or not they care to give it a name.
Long live Quakerism!
Ron Hillier
For some time I have been thinking about Quakerism as a group phenomenon. As the letters pages show, there are Friends whose beliefs are close to mainstream Christianity and others who admit to being nontheist. The particular point I want to make is that the Quaker umbrella, with its history, testimonies and simple procedures, gives us a common identity that we can all wear without unease. Seen in this light, I see no need to be too concerned about our membership process.
Richard Seebohm
Those concerned about nontheism in the Society of Friends might be interested to read Karen Armstrong’s most recent book, The Case For God. In it, she writes: ‘People practise their faith in myriad contrasting and contradictory ways. But a deliberate and principled reticence about God and/or the sacred was a constant theme not only in Christianity but in the other major faith traditions until the rise of modernity in the West. People believed that God exceeded our thoughts and concepts and could only be known by dedicated practice… Today, when science itself is becoming less determinate, it is perhaps time to return to a theology that asserts less and is more open to silence and unknowing’.
Alison Leonard
I see that the theism/nontheism debate has resurfaced – fascinating in a way, but, as Jeremy Deane (Letters, 17 June) puts it, it ‘rather misses the point.’ I thank him and a number of other contributors to the Letters pages (10 and 17 June) for their wise responses. I hope that what unites us is our corporate mystical experience in Meeting for Worship, our acceptance of each other’s very diverse attempts to describe that indescribable experience, and our efforts to live in the spirit of it.
Readers may also wish to refer to my article, ‘One in the Spirit’, in the March 2010 issue of Quaker Voices, which was my response to a similar debate in 2009.
Judith Smith
I am a nontheist. I do not believe in the existence of God, which is an intellectual construct, because no one has satisfactorily demonstrated it to my intellect. What I do believe in is the presence of God, because I encounter it regularly in Meetings for Worship. And this I know experimentally.
David Parlett
Your readers have been having a good debate recently about Quaker beliefs in God. John McCarthy (17 June), among others, speaks my mind. As a noncredal denomination we should not have recourse to written statements. Nor should Quakers be judgmental about those Friends with views different from our own.
Over the years, in attempting to address ‘What do Quakers believe?’, when helping to facilitate at enquirers’ weekends, I have stressed the diversity that is now being shown in your pages. I have also used the quotation ‘Le Dieu define’ c’est le Dieu fini’, while admitting that I don’t know the source of this quotation; I would be very glad if a Friend could enlighten me.
Penelope Putz
Outward worship
Over 350 years ago, a movement of Christians were dissatisfied with the religious leaders of the time, whom they perceived as engaging with outward aspects of worship without really believing. One of this movement, George Fox, found that ‘there is one – even Christ Jesus’ who could speak to him, and members of this movement discovered that with neither priests nor liturgy, they could be led in worship by Christ alone.
Today, we are told that all that defines the present-day members of this movement is a common outward form of worship (Letters, 1 July).
I do not believe that being a Friend is just about turning up on a Sunday morning and sitting in silence, which is as meaningless as any other liturgy. It is what is going on in the silence that is important. Like early Friends, I believe that God is there: leading, guiding and speaking to us all, if we will listen.
Matthew Gee
More ponderings
The first archaeological manifestations of organised religion may be no later than the pre-pottery neolithic period (10,000-9,000 BC). It has been further suggested that farming may even have been developed as a way to support the numbers of people who would gather to take part in religious activities (‘Birth of Religion’, Charles C Mann, in National Geographic June 2011). Might this gathering and identification with others outside of our immediate families, perhaps in part so we avoided the negative consequences of in-breeding and so strengthened our species, also be associated with our unconscious need to be and feel part of a group or tribe? Might those who continue to practise organised religion, be they Quakers, Confuscianists or Pagans, or whatever, also be fulfilling the basic human urge to be tribal in a not entirely dissimilar way to the followers of a sports team or other human grouping?
Are these ponderings just another expression of the search for unity that Howard Grace wrote about (1 July)? We are torn between this or that tribe with their similarities and disparities as like sports teams, political parties or nations they/we seek to stand out, perhaps, ahead of the crowd. Might ‘standing out ahead’ be critical to survival – Homo sapiens, after all, out-survived the Neanderthals as I was reminded on BBC TV this week (Planet of the Apemen: Battle for Earth).
Andrew Hatton
Fairtrade gold
‘Nobody wants to buy a piece of jewellery that comes from a hell hole.’ This striking quote from Greg Valerio, a founder member of ARM, Fairtrade and Fairmined gold (23 June) underlined how consumers now have the opportunity to purchase Fairtrade gold. This welcome, hopeful initiative will improve the lives of thousands of impoverished, artisanal miners in Colombia, Bolivia, Ecuador and Peru, currently exploited by unfair markets.
We are fortunate in the UK to also have the opportunity to purchase fairly traded goods such as food, timber, cotton, flowers and sports products. We can also choose to buy eggs from uncaged hens that still have their beaks intact and cosmetics and household cleaners that have not been tested on animals. Alas, many thousands of animals, including primates, are still living in laboratory hell holes right here in Britain. Animals Defenders International are among the organisations currently urging our government to adopt a more progressive approach for animal testing. I look forward with hope to the day when I can visit my GP and be able to successfully request medication that has been developed through testing procedures that have replaced the outdated living animal model.
Ann Johnson
What comes after a name?
I agree wholeheartedly with Edrey Allott’s letter on this subject (1 July).
As a Friend, also of 80+ without electronic equipment, I regret that it is frequently assumed that one can communicate via a computer, and I feel rather sidetracked.
I’m glad that Jesus gave his message by the written word.
Ruth Allott
