First atheist church opens in London

[rug]

Posted at 05:34 PM ET, 01/07/2013
Jan 07, 2013 10:34 PM EST
The Washington Post
By Elizabeth Tenety

The first atheist church has opened in London, and it serves as yet another reminder of three important facts connected to the ongoing cultural struggle between many believers and non-believers. First, principled atheism is as much a faith as is theism; no matter how much many atheists would have us believe otherwise. Second, the human longing for community transcends the often bitter divides about where to find it and how to celebrate it. Third, like most so-called firsts in the world of faith and no-faith, this one is not really new.

Very few, if any, ideas or institutions are truly new. Virtually everything that we celebrate as new has its roots in something else, and that is especially true when it comes to religion. For example, before there was Christmas, there was Hanukkah. And before there was Hanukkah there were yet older celebrations of light in the midst of darkness - some Greco-Roman and others Zoroastrian. Of course, each of these traditions is unique, but none simply fell from the sky as fully formed novelties. Each emerged from a context which included predecessors which they both mirrored and altered, and the same can be said for this “first” atheist church.

While there may be no precedent for this kind of church in England, Americans have been playing with idea of church without God for generations. Perhaps best known, and most durable, among these experiments is the Society for Ethical Culture. Founded in 1877 by Felix Adler, the society did not actively embrace atheism. It simply pursued “deed over creed” and assumed that both theist and atheist beliefs were entirely personal and largely irrelevant.

That the society was founded not only by a Jew, but by the son of noted Reform rabbi Samuel Adler, also fits within a tradition in which arguing against the very right of God to be God goes back to the Genesis story of Abraham. Not to mention the fact that according to recent studies of the American spiritual landscape, Jews are the most highly secularized religious group in the nation. They would eschew the term religious, but functionally, that is what it is. They are part of a community of meaning, values and practice which draws on a shared past and identifies with a collective present and future.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/for-gods-sake/post/first-atheist-church-opens-in-london/2013/01/07/ed6136fc-5918-11e2-88d0-c4cf65c3ad15_blog.html

[Trajan]

1. More of the "Atheism is faith based" nonsense

Silliness abound ...

[gcomeau]

2. Sigh...

The first atheist church has opened in London, and it serves as yet another reminder of three important facts connected to the ongoing cultural struggle between many believers and non-believers. First, principled atheism is as much a faith as is theism; no matter how much many atheists would have us believe otherwise.

No, it just means some people in London did a stupid thing and called their meeting place a "church". That's it.

[cbayer]

16. What makes it stupid? If there is an interest and it serves the needs/desires of a community,

how is that stupid?

[gcomeau]

18. Because the only reason they called it a "church"

...is because they were trying to make some meaingless point that atheists can have the same community experience a religion can and couldn't figure out that all they had to do was have ANY KIND of meeting place. A community center. A library. A clubhouse. WHATEVER.

Churches on the other hand are very specific structures in which *worship* occurs. Which they will most certainly not be engaged in doing. So calling it a church is idiotic. It's like saying you wish your chess club had the same sense of team spirit as the swim team, and deciding that to achieve that you were going to start calling the room you play in every weekend a pool.

[cbayer]

19. Who care what they call it? Again, if there is a desire, a need, a demand and it serves a

purpose for some people that doesn't infringe on the rights of others, what do you care what they call it?

Or is it the concept that they don't share some people's total rejection of all things religious what makes you uncomfortable?

[gcomeau]

27. Did you read the OP?

If you did and saw what certain people immediately latched on to the use of that name to do then that was a pretty silly question.

[cbayer]

28. Yes i did, and I think he made a legitimate argument that some believers and non-believers

have more in common than they do differences.

It's a concept I like and support.

In the end, whether one believes in a god or gods is not the issue. Since the question will never be resolved, its about respect other people's perspectives or what they find important in their lives.

[gcomeau]

34. Good for you.

But not one single word you just wrote had anything to do ith the subject of the disagreement we've been discussing. Which was:

1: Calling it a "church" was every bit as stupid as the chess club calling their playing room a pool.
2: The reason I care about them calling it a church was freaking obvious from the way the OP pounced all over that usage to pull that favorite ploy of many a theist... "atheism is a religion!!!!"

[trixie]

3. oh for Christ sakes!

I am sooo sick and tired of the religious types trying to bait me into an argument. Just like in your made-up religions of many types, atheism has its own types. I could give a crap about meeting and discussing.............I have community without religion, bowling night, movie club etc....

In my opinion, a true athiest has no interest in religion at all. It's like still believing in Santa, the Easter Bunny etc. We grew up and left fantasy land way behind.

At Christmas dinner my brother's girlfriend asked to say a prayer for Jesus.........OMG! Not a thing to say in a house full of athiests who won't say anything in your house but you're in our house now.......blasted the shit out of her. We told her to leave her made up bullshit outside. Parents of small children told her not to indoctrinate their children with her hooey.

[rug]

4. Why were you having a Christmas dinner?

[amuse bouche]

5. Afterall, It is a Pagan Holiday

Too bad it was hijacked

[rug]

6. So why not call it Saturnalia supper?

[amuse bouche]

8. Why not stop

associating a tree with the birth of some ancient character conceived by delusionary means?

[rug]

9. You assume facts not in evidece.

[amuse bouche]

13. Of course...You are looking in a mirror

speaking to yourself

[rug]

14. I must not have aged well.

[amuse bouche]

21. Probably not

[trixie]

10. because that's what the retail stores call that time in December

Our pagen tree with Barbie topper, lining up to see the holier than holy Santa Claus, and not attending church (shudders) of any kind is our way of having a family dinner where all members have the day off.

Why do you pimp out your Christian holiday that has absolutely nothing to do with the birth of your deity (which defies your 10 commandments)?

[rug]

11. What's a pagen tree?

[trixie]

12. You are kidding aren't you?

Google pagen tree. Perhaps knowing something of others would be helpful. Just FYI we were trained in all religions. We went to the Church, Mosque, Meeting Hall, Temple etc. I have read and studied all the texts of the desert religions. When you compare any text with the desert religions to the Budhist texts it is plain to see they rip off various texts from various religions.

I can't believe grown people can buy into the sham. My opinion.

[okasha]

33. Perhaps you mean a capitalist tree?

And it's pagan, with two a's.

[amuse bouche]

7. Good for you

I used to tolerate the religious hooey, but more and more I find it all offensive

[cbayer]

17. Hang around this group and you will find that many *true* atheists have a great deal

of interest in religion.

Nice way to treat your brother's girlfriend on Christmas. I bet she can't wait to further her relationship with the fam. Wasn't there some way to talk to her that would not have been at attacking insult?

[trixie]

20. like I said this was at my house

She knows we are all athiests. At her house she can go ahead and do a prayer. I find it highly offensive to take over my home at my dinner with her crap.

So Christians can do whatever they want wherever they want? Athiests have no say in their own home?

[dimbear]

23. She behaves like that because in her mind she is right and you are wrong.

Politeness and respect don't seem to figure into it at all.

Ask her if she 'misses' the Inquisition.

[cbayer]

26. Not at all. I never made the argument that you shouldn't set the rules for your own home.

I only challenged how you dealt with it.

In a house of believers, would you not expect some civil treatment if you expressed your views?

I would.

[cbayer]

15. Fascinating and interesting analysis of the whole thing.

Perhaps some believers and non-bellevers have more in common than they differ.

[amuse bouche]

22. Not possible

One is reality and science based..the other, wishful thinking

[cbayer]

25. One is science. One is religion.

Equally valuable and much different animals, imo.

[gcomeau]

35. Oh?

Name one thing religion has ever provided humanity that wasn't perfectly possible without it. Then we'll talk about what the heck you think "equally valuable" means.

[cbayer]

36. Lol. I could go on for pages, but you would reject them all.

You've got it bad, and that ain't good, but it is who you are.

See you around the campfire.

[gcomeau]

37. Didn't ask for pages. Asked for one item.

Your inability to provide it is noted.

[cbayer]

38. Make sure to put it in your scorebook.

There's a big prize at the end of this.

[gcomeau]

39. If you can't contribute to the discussion

Why do you continue to post?

[madrchsod]

24. it`s not a "church".......

[BlueJazz]

29. In my mind, this is what an Atheist church should look like. >>

[Kalidurga]

30. That looks more like the atheist bible....

I don't have a problem with an atheist meeting place. Calling it a church has brought on the predicted response though of people calling it a religion. It's a church like the anarchist cookbook is an actually cookbook.

[BlueJazz]

31. I have no idea why someone would come up with calling an Atheist ...ah..Hall ?? ..

...a Church.
Who do you worship ?
Ah...Chocolate ?

Who is that?
He/She tastes good and doesn't mind hanging out with the poor.

[Kalidurga]

32. That is a good idea..

The atheist hall or something like that to take away the religious type language.

Or just make it a community center, because that is what it is.

[ZombieHorde]

40. Aren't Buddhist churches also atheist churches? nt

[rug]

41. This the the temple nearest me.

http://www.kadampanewyork.org/

What do you think?

[ZombieHorde]

42. They seem like atheists to me.

I looked at their website, and I don't see any mention of gods in their Kadampa Buddhism section.

They seem to me to be both very religious and atheist.

[rug]

43. It's about 18 miles from me.

We all went up one Sunday and a monk, a woman, gave us a tour. Along the wall are paintings and statues of gods and goddesses. She explained the meaning of each and was very pleasant the whole time.

This is from the glossary at kadampa.org:

God ‘Deva’ in Sanskrit. A being of the god realm, the highest of the six realms of samsara. There are many different types of god. Some are desire realm gods, while others are form or formless realm gods. See Joyful Path of Good Fortune.

Goddesses of the doorways The four Goddesses of the doorways are Kakase, literally ‘crow-faced one’; Ulukase, ‘owl-faced one’; Shönase, ‘dog-faced one’; and Shukarase, ‘pig-faced one’. Although they have human-shaped heads and ears, their names reflect the appearances of their faces, which are like a crow, like an owl, and so on, rather as if they are wearing masks.

http://kadampa.org/en/reference/glossary-of-buddhist-terms-f-j

[ZombieHorde]

44. Did you get the impression the gods were literal beings or aspects of the mind?

Hard to tell with Buddhists because they have a different perspective than many non-Buddhists, and they sometimes use words differently.

[rug]

45. The one monk spoke as if they were literal.

And they were objects of devotion. Even though there is controversy within and among schools of Buddhism, I would have to say that this monk took them as literal gods. (And there is still that reincarnation issue.)

In Hinduism, where the gods are more explicit, I read that many Hindus treat them as aspects of one godhead, that Hinduism is essentially monotheistic and not polytheistic.

[ZombieHorde]

46. Then I would say that they are not atheists.

I don't think reincarnation is an issue for atheists. Someone can easily be an atheist and believe in reincarnation.