May 14 2008
‘Respect atheists’, says cardinal
[BBC]
Believers may be partly responsible for the decline in faith by losing sense of the mystery and treating God as a “fact in the world”, he said in a lecture.Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor called for more understanding and appreciation between believers and non-believers.
But the leader of Roman Catholics in England and Wales said that Britain must not become “a God-free zone”. The cardinal’s lecture at Westminster Cathedral comes after a spate of public clashes over issues such as stem-cell research, gay adoption and faith schools.
God is not a “fact in the world” as though God could be treated as “one thing among other things to be empirically investigated” and affirmed or denied on the “basis of observation”, said Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor.
“If Christians really believed in the mystery of God, we would realise that proper talk about God is always difficult, always tentative.
“I want to encourage people of faith to regard those without faith with deep esteem because the hidden God is active in their lives as well as in the lives of those who believe.”
But Richard Dawkins, scientist, staunch atheist and author of books including The God Delusion, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the cardinal’s comments carried no weight.
Referring to God as an “imaginary friend”, Mr Dawkins said: “When talking to a politician you would demand proof for what they say, but suddenly when talking to a clergyman you don’t have to provide evidence.
“There’s absolutely no reason to take seriously someone who says, ‘I believe it because I believe it.’
Read about it here.
[From me]
I think the Cardinal makes an excellent point. Degrading and calling people names isn’t going to change their mind. Mr. Dawkins comes off as an arrogant know it all. I wonder how many atheists and agnostics think the same of believers who have the same arrogance about their faith. Respect, friendship, love and dialogue is important.
What do you think?
8 responses so far
Kevin,
I agree. Respect is all too rare these days, both in blogs and in normal day-to-day life. One thing I enjoy most about this blog is that it is possible to disagree (and often have meaningfull discussions as a result) while maintaining a high level of respect.
Respect is sufficient for good dialog, but friendship and love make it more enjoyable. Another thing I like about this blog are the friends I’ve made (some declared, and others implicit).
Dialogue is only possible when each contributor to the dialog is capable of understanding the others’ views. A dialog is more than people saying different things, it’s people communicating - which means contributors explain, listen, understand, and respond. It is possible to speak without either explaining or responding - not explaining or not responding amounts to opting out of the dialog. It is possible to hear without listening or understanding - refusal to listen or to understand amounts to opting out of the dialog.
Free thinkers (atheists and theists alike) have a distinct advantage with regard to dialog. Since a free thinker is one who decides for himself based in what he feels makes the most sense, he is free to suspend both his beliefs and disbeliefs long enough to consider someone else’s beliefs and doubts. He then feels free to continue in his original beliefs, or to adjust them to incorporate the new understanding he gained from the dialog. Fundamentalists, both atheists and theists, who perceive questioning and doubt as a weakness, or a type of flaw, are at a disadvantage: they feel they must prevent themselves from suspending their own beliefs and disbeliefs, and as a result, are less capable of entertaining different points of view.
Free thought and fundamentalism are opposite extremes and most people fall somewhere in between. One doesn’t simply choose to be a free thinker, rather one sees the virtue of free thought and strives to be more of a free thinker. That, at least, has been my personal experience. Free thought and good dialog support each other: the more one is a free thinker, the more productive his dialogs are. The better his dialogs, the more understanding he gains, which further encourages his free thought.
A3,
I’d like to think I’m still learning. Nobody likes to be wrong, but I think those of us who want to learn are willing to be corrected. I’ve learned from you and many others so much more than just living in the little world before the internet.
Kevin Bussey’s last blog post..‘Respect atheists’, says cardinal
God’s pretty clear in that the power is the gospel. Our problem is we want to do something today and reap the harvest tomorrow, so to speak. And god doesn’t work on our timetable, nor does He honor our “cause & effect” expectations. And when we realize that the battle is really His, not ours, and that we’re not strategists, only tacticians, the pressure is off us, to show results.
That makes it possible to be kind, loving, patient, understanding, etc. Those things sound familiar; I think I read them somewhere.
The cardinal does have a point.
Bob Cleveland’s last blog post..We Do Keep Building Them
Whoops .. forgot to capitalize one reference to God. Sowwy.
Bob Cleveland’s last blog post..We Do Keep Building Them
A3, I enjoy reading your comments because while I don’t always agree, they always make me think. One of my favorite professors in college (and one of the hardest) was renowned for telling us that the “my parents told me this” or “I learned this in Sunday School” line would not work in a discussions in his class. It forced us to think our answers through, research WHY we believe what we believe and discuss things rationally. While we had heated discussions in class on a routine basis, they were always respectful conversations that both parties learned from. That class more than anything else taught me how to develop my arguments in a rational manner. I still process most things that way today, 13 years after walking out of his class for the last time.
Unlike some in the church today, I like having my beliefs questioned. Thinking rationally about why I believe what I believe usually makes my beliefs stronger not weaker.
Angie,
I’m envious of that great prof you had - those are definitely the best kinds of classes. You’re thoughtful approach to your beliefs is refreshing - you sound like the kind of person I had in mind when I mentioned “free thinkers” in my comment above.
It’s a good thing when thinking rationally causes us to strengthen our beliefs. It’s even a better thing when thinking rationally causes us to change some of our beliefs (I don’t mean necessarily to my way of thinking, I just mean in general). I know that’s true in my case. No one is born with all the right answers, nor are they taught all the right answers by their parents, their church, their community, etc. The more we think for ourselves, the more chances we have of replacing the wrong answers with the right ones - or at least with better ones. At the end of the day, people who are willing to change their views for better ones have a better shot at ending up with the best answers. Let’s all keep thinking!
Yes, of course we should be respectful and we should think freely and clearly. Both are a biblical motifs.
Dawkins’ views are true for a subset of Christians who, while placing their trust in the one true Savior, do not know the background of their faith well. But Dawkins cherry-picks his opponents, of course, and broad brushes all Christians with his comments. We have tons of evidence and logic behind our views. To dimiss that as just an “imaginary friend” is willful ignorance. But with his strident and insulting tone he does make it easier to appeal to middle-grounders.
Neil’s last blog post..Weekly roundup
belief does not make anything “fact” no matter who believes it and faith is never up for debate.
belief is in the head and faith is in the feet, for we will never act on what we do not believe.
This is why both sides of the God/ no God argument fight so passionately for the beliefs because beliefs guide actions(faith).
bert boan’s last blog post..The 4 T’s (Part One: Time)