Faith without Belief... (Main Forum)

by Brian Coyne , LINDEN, NSW, Sunday, June 17, 2012, 00:55 (343 days ago) @ Ynot

Tony and all,

I have only just gotten around to reading David Tacey's essay in full. For ease of reading I made myself a better pdf copy with a bit of spacing between paragraphs and highlighted sub-heads. I won't put it online at the moment until I obtain permission from Dr Tacey or give it to him to put online, but if anybody would like a copy please email me. It is much easier to read than the original.

This is one of the richest articles I have read in recent times that (a) helps explain why so many have 'given up' religious practice and listening to religious leaders; and (b) if offers a 'way forward'. Bravo to David Tacey. I suspect this essay will be widely read — and eventually right around the globe.

He argues many of the conclusions that I have come to about my own beliefs. For example that Jesus didn't come to bring us creeds but a "way" of negotiating life. David uses different words to mine but is essentially making the same point in his more succinct line which I have made the subject line for this post: "As an adult, I have recovered faith, but it is completely different from the naïve gospel I received as a child and that most churches continue to promulgate. I would call the third stage, faith without reliance on belief."

A little further on I think he makes an important distinction in distancing himself from the alternative offered by Don Cupitt and the "Sea of Faith" movement:

For many thinking people, the old literalism has fallen away, and is replaced by nothing except a barren intellectual understanding. Jesus is no longer a supernatural figure, or a son of God, but merely a decent kind of bloke, a local community worker. Such people have reached a partial enlightenment, in which the metaphorical is conceded, but it does not actually convey any spiritual power. The metaphors are not alive, not spiritually 'true', but seen as literary adornments or decorations.

Don Cupitt of Cambridge University and his 'Sea of Faith' movement are exponents of this outlook, with which my own position is sometimes confused. I am nothing like Cupitt, but if comparisons are to be made, I am much closer to Spong. Cupitt and his followers have seen through the literalism, are progressive and unconventional, but not spiritual. His thirty books about his journey into post-Christianity and unbelief is a testimony to the dangers that await us as we leave the guideposts of the past. If we leave the conventions, we have to find reliable guides to steer us through the dangers, but Cupitt succumbs, in my view, to all the perils: intellectualism, rationalism, reductionism, relativism. His books are lifeless and barren, and his 'sea of faith' is permanently at ebb tide. To reach the third stage, faith without belief, one has to become mystical, not merely intellectual. Without the mystical, God cannot be redeemed, but remains an odd piece of the old mythology which needs to be discarded. I meet large numbers of ex-Catholic priests and ex-Protestant ministers who are in this state, and I find it terribly sad. They think they are on my wave-length but they are not. They abandon the old magical thinking – having outgrown it – but cannot cross over to a spiritual perception. There are, as yet, no institutional channels to help them make the journey.

I'd also like to highlight some things in this paragraph towards the end which I think is a superb exploration of the challenge that is to be faced:

The problem is that we have to make this leap of faith by ourselves, there are no props to rely on. The historicity of the scriptures is in grave doubt, the authority of the literal-minded churches is in doubt, and we are left in an existential situation that few Christians can cope with, because they are used to being supported, or bolstered. We have to do it for ourselves, and many are unable to cross over to the other side. In Matthew, Jesus says 'Unless you change and become like little children you will never enter the kingdom of heaven'. We are asked to 'become' as children, which means that we are to recover the gift of imagination, which children have in plentiful supply. If we don't achieve a second innocence, and look upon things through the eyes of imagination, we have no hope of entering the kingdom, that is, of experiencing the world as a spiritual cosmos. However, the churches have asked the faithful to remain as children, not to become children, and this is what is killing religion today. We are not allowed to grow up, which means asking questions and doubting the literalism that may have been appropriate for us as children. What we need is a religion that is prepared to grow up, so we can grow up with it.

I have to say though that I remain totally pessimistic about any future for institutional Catholicism. Reading Jane Cadzow's feature in the Sydney Morning Herald today [LINK] I honestly think the entire institutional endeavour is cactus under the leadership of the likes of George Pell and Benedict Ratzinger. These men are like "petrified pieces of wood" in the face of the challenges humanity faces today. The myths they are defending are their own authority — not the authority of Jesus Christ or God the Almighty. They are petrified of losing the allegiance of those whom Benedict himself has described as "the little people" and "the simple people". They literally do not care how many in the educated ranks in society cease listening and practising. Institutional religion has been transformed into another version of secular politics when it talks of "building the kingdom". These institutional leaders want this world of "childish, socially conformist clones" who cannot think for themselves and are driven primarily by their emotions, and their primitive, lizard brain level drives of the ego and need for someone, anyone, to love and respect them — just like the "love" hungered for by little children and puppy dogs. They are no longer interested in "educating the great unwashed masses of society" to "follow Christ". Instead they want the great "unwashed masses" to follow them as though they are God Almighty or Jesus himself. The trouble is that the people who lead institutional Catholicism (or any of the institutional religions) today are unlikely to be reading David Tacey — or if they do it sails above their heads at about the level of an Airbus 380 at cruising altitude. For the rest of humankind it is like dreaming of being able to extinguish the light of our Sun to dream of removing these people from the positions of power in which they have no so deeply entrenched themselves. There are no arguments that might be capable of getting through to them and there is no power in the whole of creation capable of ejecting them from their positions of power. Even a Second Appearance from Jesus himself would be incapable of moving them. They'd be more than likely the ones to be calling for his crucifixion all over again!

Reading David Tacey though I become optimistic for the future spiritual health of humankind. There is a great "spiritual searching" underway. Yesterday afternoon, Amanda and myself, attended an interfaith group meeting at Lawson in the Blue Mountains. It was exciting being there. The hall we were in was comfortably full — and with a diversity in age ranges. Three of the four keynote speakers were in their 30s — Jacqui Rémond, Director of Catholic Earthcare [pictured at right], representing the Catholic perspective. I hope to write more about that in coming days. I do have a growing sense that when this annihilation of institutional religion is complete and the "smaller, purer churches" have been established what will emerge is some great healing of the religious divisions that have characterised human civilisation for so long. Our "faith" is not some kindergarten-level game of running around trying to prove our "God" is bigger or better than anyone else's God — and that is essentially the "game" the fundamentalists in all religions are playing. Our "faith" is meant to be leading us into the Godhead or the Mystery of the Divine. It is meant to lead to a healing of the religious divisions in society, not exacerbating and deepening them.

Brian Coyne
[Editor & Publisher]