Mapping our journeys
Jenny Dnes reflects on a weekend engaging with The Case for God
I recently enjoyed participating in a Woodbrooke course that explored the issues arising from Karen Armstrong’s book The Case for God. We heard from Timothy Peat Ashworth, Rachel Muers, Harvey Gillman, David Boulton and Alex Wildwood, both individually and also in dialogue with one another. There were opportunities for discussion in groups and reflection on our own. On the final evening, Philip Gross joined us and read some of his poems.
It was a privilege to hear these speakers talk about a book that I have found to be inspiring and that has prompted many questions about the nature of religion. It also gave each speaker an opportunity to talk about their own experience of God in an atmosphere of openness and trust. A short article cannot do justice either to the range of approaches or to the collective wisdom that was generously shared. As Karen says in the book, language was stretched to its limits.
The distinction between theist and nontheist was mentioned a few times and one Friend spoke of ‘coming out’ as a nontheist. Some thought that labels helped us to identify those with whom we had something in common. Others thought they were divisive and could lead us to make too simplistic assumptions about one another, which do not allow for change or for the subtleties of personal difference.
Alex Wildwood suggested the helpful metaphor of a map. Rather than place one another in neatly labelled boxes, we could try to draw a ‘map’ of our collective experience of God. Of course, this would be challenging, but it could be a way forward. I reflected that a map allows for movement – I might identify with this place on the map at one stage in my life and move on to another place altogether as I grow older. However, I am still on the same map, and am part of the same fellowship. It may not be as precise as labels, but it is less divisive and gives us the opportunity to share experiences as fellow travellers.
Going home, my reflections led me to consider the relevance of Karen’s The Case for God to the future of Quakers. One of the key themes of the book is that religion is now often perceived as providing a faith based certainty, arising from a modern perception of an interventionist God. She claims that this neglects the richness of the pre modern approach to religion, which focussed on mystery and explored God through silence and contemplation.
Karen maintains that the modern consensus is breaking down and identifies an opportunity to revive a religious approach that acknowledges the limits both of our knowledge and of our language. As Quakers, with our shared experience of unprogrammed worship and our openness to new light, we should be well placed to provide a home for some of today’s seekers.
Thank you, Woodbrooke, for providing a chance to explore these important issues in an atmosphere of trust and quiet reflection.
