ESR Director of Recruitment and Admissions Matt Hisrich reflects on a recent book about building bridges between atheists and those of faith:
Harvard University Assistant Humanist Chaplain Chris Stedman
seeks to chart a different course from the combative “New Atheism” of Richard
Dawkins, Sam Harris, and others. As the title of his book suggests – Faitheist: How an Atheist Found Common
Ground with the Religious (Beacon Press, 2012) – his hope is to neither
deny his secular humanism nor deny the value of those with differing
perspectives.
It is important to recognize from the outset that the short
book (191 pages including notes) is primarily Stedman sharing the story about
how he came to his current position. The “treatise” portion of the text that
one interested in building bridges between secular and religious spheres might
be looking for is limited to the concluding pages. Stedman spends a lot of time
on his youth, in other words, but the point is to take readers on a journey
through a variety of positions regarding faith. As he explains:
In my youth, being
"right" held ultimacy. I valued precision and accuracy, and was sure
to correct anyone I felt was “wrong.” I thought I was doing people a favor by
correcting them. Now, I strive to lead with listening instead of
lecturing. We can be dogmatically
fixated on who is "right" and who is "wrong", or we can
discern a way to live together in tension and ambiguity. Joining forces, we can
buck the clash-of-civilizations story that has come to define our world and
dictate a new narrative – one that bridges the religious and the secular,
rather than threatening the “other” with extinction. (180-181)
Having grown up in a non-religious family and then joining
an evangelical Christian church, Stedman struggled for years to reconcile his
sexuality with what he was taught the Bible proclaims on the subject. This
eventually led him to reject faith entirely and violently. As the intensity of
his hostility to religion waned he came into contact with Eboo Patel (who wrote the
forward to the book) and the Interfaith Youth
Core. As he describes it, the IFYC’s mission aligned with his own growing
sense of communication and cooperation across faith (and non-faith) lines. “[I]t
sounds like exactly what our world needs,” he says, “people of all different
stripes and convictions coming together to deal with things that matter,
announcing our differences without fear, enthusiastically embracing our
commonalities, and intentionally seeking out points of mutuality and
understanding in the face of vastly different metaphysical commitments.” (133)
Stedman gained a name for himself in advocating this view on
his blog, NonProphet Status. His
growing presence brought him to the attention of Harvard Humanist Chaplain and Good Without God author Greg
Epstein, who hired him for his current role.
Stedman is part of an emerging group of “new new atheists.”
As columnist Theo
Hobson observes:
atheism’s younger advocates are
reluctant to compete for the role of Dawkins’s disciple. They are more likely
to bemoan the new atheist approach and call for large injections of nuance. A
good example is the pop-philosopher Julian
Baggini. He is a stalwart atheist who likes a bit of a scrap with
believers, but he’s also able to admit that religion has its virtues, that humanism
needs to learn from it… This is also the approach of the pop-philosopher king, Alain de Botton.
According to Stedman this more positive approach not only
allows for collaboration with those of faith, but actually frees many atheists
put off by the stridency of Dawkins and others to reclaim their identity (for
those interested in non-theism among Friends, consider checking out Godless for God’s Sake). Toward the
end of Faitheist, he issues an
inspiring call to action: "Let’s learn from our shared past and imagine,
together, a more vibrant future. I’m tired of seeing people pitted against one
another because of these inherently false broad strokes that paint religious
people as ‘delusional’ and atheists as ‘degenerates.’ Let’s start to see one
another as people first." (156)
Any form of interfaith dialogue raises a host of questions,
particularly for a “Christian seminary in the Quaker tradition,” as ESR
describes itself. The idea of building bridges between theist and non-theist views
takes this even a step further. If seeing “that of God” in every person was one
way Friends advocated for equality across all of humanity, how do we continue
to live into this testimony with integrity (for ourselves and respecting that
of the other) when someone specifically rejects that of God within themselves,
for instance? Perhaps we do not need to resolve all of the complexity and ambiguity
at the outset. Perhaps, as Stedman suggests, starting to see one another as
people first is enough of a step in the right direction.
Ironically, seeing people as 'souls', not "social animals"/humans, was "that of God in European-everyone" and seems to be the wheel/non-God-specific reality that does Not need to be re-named or re-created.
ReplyDelete