Secular pastors

Oh dear - regarding ritual, I guess I was thinking of prayers and hymns and holy communion when I talked of ritual.

The ritual of welcoming a baby into the world, sanctioning a marriage, and giving a good sent-off for the deceased is a good thing of course.

Lilygran - exactly what I was going to say - but you beat me to it!!

Agree lilygran

I got the impression that ritual (and pastoral care) was exactly the kind of thing that people felt a secular ministry could provide. Spirituality without religion - or religion without a god. Being an atheist or an agnostic doesn't necessarily mean not wanting ritual. I've been to a number of non- religious funerals and it's clear that they follow a meaningful pattern - same with secular weddings. To say nothing of the secular rituals already attached to these important life events, religious or not; naming ceremonies, divorce celebrations, birthday parties. Apparently we need ritual and if we don't want the trappings of religion, we find some other form of recognised and familiar behaviour to attach to whatever it is.

I think I should point out that atheism is not a belief system: it is simply non-belief. Therefore if atheists met in church space, they would not be manifesting a different or contrary belief. There would be no rival god or idol or anything. There would be no rival ritual as they have none.

I always worry about new Christian 'churches' that pop up all over the place..usually evangelical and led by a fairly charismatic man. My cynical view is that it is all about power and control and not about genuine spirituality.

I think you may be wanting to start a new religion. Nothing wrong with that, but if it's ritual you hanker for, there's lots already around!

elegranwhen I first read that I thought of a nicely shaped lower leg!

Your local church sounds fantastic Mishap!

I think the coming together for enjoyment happens already. At my daughter's church (she is a 'church elder' - how daft is that! She's my little girl!) they have events such as Christmas/Summer fairs, harvest suppers, etc. when most of the local community seem to visit and enjoy themselves.

Made me laugh, anyway, Elegran!

Performing, not supporting. I should read my posts more carefully before I send them.

Busy worshipping. Not sure how one performs bust worship, in a religious sense.

One of the god-attributed statements is "Thou shalt have no other God besides me" and there was a big stushy when Moses returned from a meeting with head office up on the mountain to find the Israelites bust worshipping a golden calf.

So while ecumenisn is preached and co-operation with other faiths/none on welfare issues is encouraged, I can't see any major religion welcoming a group into their consecrated building who are actively supporting another kind of worship there.

I find the idea of "rival" rituals interesting - in our multi-cultural, multi-faith (or no faith at all) world it would be good to move on from a sense of rivalry at some point.

Having said that, I can see why some churches might be concerned as many who go to church but have doctrinal problems would have an alternative. There are many who go to church but find that they cannot in all honesty say the creed with any integrity as there is so much of it that they cannot subscribe to. I know many in this boat.

Our local Knights Templar church had pagan origins - there are symbols etched in the stonework all around.

Wouldn't it be good to see a coming-together of those of faith and those of none to share their community festivals and enjoy each others' company with no sense that one or the other has a monopoly on the truth? It is just people that matter.

Fine to use a church if it is up for sale and you buy it. It would have been de-consecrated at that point.

(Elegran that is the word I was looking for )

Religion existed before we had the science to explain the big questions, before we had a welfare system to look after those in need, before we could question the supernatural and not suffer for it, before we had a police service to keep order in society.

There is nothing wrong with maintaining a belief in religion: there is nothing wrong with losing a belief in religion: we are all different. But the way I see it, churches were built for us all, because back then most of us were believers.

JO4 said: I can see that some churches, or a room behind the church, could be used for some kind of secular counselling service. I don't think that would be objectionable. But wouldn't the very interior of a church be abhorrent to a non-religious, or even anti-religion, person? (Thinking Crosses, Virgin Mary and Child statues, etc)

I don't think secular activities would contaminate a church in any way, and I don't think religious symbols are offensive to atheists: they are certainly not offensive to me. I think churches could and should be used for more than religion.

Ah Jing but which god? Many are built on the sites of pagan worship![wooden spoon] emoticon

Ex-churches get un-dedicated, if that is a real word (de-consecrated? that's it) and are turned into warehouses, private homes, discos, whatever.

But a deconsecrated church would no longer have the financial input from the congregation or diocese, so would need a lot of income to maintain.

A working church is probably not the place to celebrate using rival rituals, but a generalised Winter Jolly would not offend, surely.

Agree with JO 4 going to have one right now

Beautifully said Mishap

I still don't understand how you could celebrate Easter, Christmas, Harvest etc. in a Christian church if you are taking the festivals back to the pagan versions of same. Churches have been dedicated to God.

I can see that some churches, or a room behind the church, could be used for some kind of secular counselling service. I don't think that would be objectionable. But wouldn't the very interior of a church be abhorrent to a non-religious, or even anti-religion, person? (Thinking Crosses, Virgin Mary and Child statues, etc)

Our vicar (female) has always been very happy for secular occasions to take place in the church - she's very broad-minded!! The narrow-minded Christianity of former years is thankfully diminishing and most of the Christians of my acquaintance would be entirely happy about the idea. Their concern is just for people and their happiness; and the health and well-being of their wider community (religious or not).

Indeed, the atmosphere in churches is about the people who built it/have shared life events there etc. - agnostics can respect and value that too. I know that I do. I live next to my local church - just across the field - and I go there most days when I am out on my walk to enjoy the peace and cool and the atmosphere. And I support it financially and sell photos of the church that I have taken to go into the church coffers.

I hate strident religion and strident atheism - thankfully both communities here are open-minded and kind.

I still think a Homestart for all might be a good idea. Perhaps you could call it Lifestart. Or Life-sort-out-because you've buggered it up again.

No. You cannot take over Christian churches for secular activities.

There are still enough Christians around to NOT LET THAT HAPPEN.

The very idea is a daft one.

And Joan the atmosphere in churches is there because of the use the building has been put to, often over centuries.