Exactly, nanaej - which is why I consider myself to be a Christian atheist.
US: ICE at work - an Insight. 😡
What are you avoiding doing in this heat?
Is there a toiletry you can no longer buy and miss?
Gransnet forums
Religion/spirituality
John Rutter on religion
(158 Posts)I have just come across this interview with John Rutter the composer and I find it absolutely delightful - I identify with it so strongly - and his extraordinary personality shines through. I have edited it heavily, as the original is long (and can be found here: http://www.alanmacfarlane.com/DO/filmshow/ruttertx1.htm). I think the first and last sentences are fascinating!
"I am friend, fellow traveller, and agnostic supporter of the Christian faith; in my early days, people described themselves by default as Church of England if they didn't really have any religious affiliation...........I sang in the chapel choir and was always interested in religious studies, but somehow being a non-joiner became a habit; although I think I probably was religious in quite a powerful sense when I was young and into my twenties, not least because I felt so lucky as my career began to take off and things began to go well for me.......... a kind of theology of gratitude; probably can't take it very far because what happens when something goes wrong in your life? - the sense that there must be some benevolent deity behind all this is a bit like American religious thought; when I began to travel to America I started to meet an awful lot of Christians;....... the American faith world contains some of the very finest and most searching of theology and religious thought and practice, and some of the worst; I have experienced the full spectrum; ........ if I wanted to be honest about my own faith journey it has been backwards over the years; I am afraid what slightly began to sow the seeds of doubt was seeing the absolute certainty of religious adherents in America, and some of the harm that that certainty could lead to; I started by thinking there must be many paths to God and went from there to a rather tougher position which is that the universe is basically numbers, and in some sense mathematical and a lottery; if there is a controlling deity he is a bit like a Mafia don who is capable of doing good and charitable things, but also almost takes pleasure in doing malicious and harmful things, sowing the seeds of long-running dissent and problems; that is hard to reconcile with the Christian concept of a loving God; I don't find it helpful either to say that you have to have a personal relationship with Jesus; numerous of my religious friends say that if you are not born again and if Jesus is not your personal friend, then you are not a true Christian; I always remember the words of the Rev. Professor Charles Moule, a most searching theologian, who said he was perfectly sure he had only been born once; .........; people sometimes have asked me whether the fact that my son was killed affects my faith position; it happened in 2001 when he was nineteen and a student here at Cambridge, and he got run over crossing Queens’ Road one night; completely unforeseen and random, but I think that the answer is no, as by then I wouldn't have described myself as a believing Christian; on the other hand, you have to consider the alternatives; a world without any churches or space for religious thought or contemplation, or based only on material values, would be a hell; in a sense, if you believe the specific doctrines of the faith, I think that just the statement it makes about how man should not live by bread alone, is immensely important; music is a part of that because it is useless in a literal sense, you don't have to have music to survive, yet it has always been there; imagining a world without it is impossible, as is a world without faith; even though you might say that religion is an invention of man, I don't think it invalidates its worth; ....... it began to look to me as if the whole edifice of religion was a man-made construct; I do remain hugely sympathetic to the church, its music, its liturgy, its traditions, and, with some caveats, its ministry; on the whole, the Church I was baptised into, is trying to do good in a difficult situation, and is making a statement on behalf of qualities like compassion, forgiveness, charity, that everybody would support; I would be heartbroken if the Church of England closed its doors tomorrow; I hope to be buried in a country churchyard with a funeral service according to the 1662 Prayer Book, and all my favourite pieces of music; I suppose that is wanting it both ways - both the trappings without necessarily subscribing to the doctrine; I think there are quite a lot of people like me; Vaughan Williams was similar in that he had a sense of generalised spirituality which was triggered by things like standing on top of the Malvern Hills and contemplating the beauty of nature, or walking through the west door of a cathedral and being awestruck by the grandeur and mystery of the building, or being inspired by 'Pilgrim's Progress'; I think he would not have called himself a Christian, yet his life was steeped in Christianity at every point; I am like that and my moral compass probably does derive in large part from Christian ethic and teaching; I owe Christianity a huge debt and it is rather ungrateful of me not to believe in it more."
Ana you can't be a CHRISTian atheist. Not if you don't believe in Jesus Christ.
Never mind though. 
I believe in Jesus Christ - just not in God...
I call myself a Christian Humanist, JO because I accept the ethics of Christianity (as opposed to those of the Old Testament) but can no longer swallow the metaphysics.
About the Godmother thing. My parents had us christened as they felt they should not impose their atheism on us. The question of a Godmother was difficult as Mum's best friend Anne, the traditional Godmother, was Jewish. So she got another friend, a believer, to be official Godmother, but her friend Anne acted as unofficial Godmother. (I had the typical Jewish experience of getting my clothes wholesale as she ran a clothing shop. I loved the warehouse - like an Aladdin's cave. )
I can see that the question of non-believers using churches occasionally is a thorny one, when the question of money comes up. My own answer is that I never use churches except perhaps to pop into the cathedral for a cool down on a hot day in Brisbane. I don't think this costs them anything, but if I see a charity collection box I contribute.
Ana, many of our friends would say the same. I'd call them 'cultural Christians' perhaps - ie they want the tradition of Christian values to go on, but are not believers. It is a fairly recent thing in Christianity I think - but the concept of the 'cultural Jew' has been a reality for a long time.
My point is - how many of those 'cultural Christians' would still call themselves so, and put their names down as such on census, if it meant having to pay 2.3% of income in return. I imagine, as happened here, that they would quickly stop 'sitting on the fence' and put themselves down as 'atheist/none/humanist' to save a substantial sum of money.
So here it it, a simple question:
If YOU had to pay 2.3% of your income to the Church nominated by yourself as your religious affiliation on the official census, would you drop your religious affiliation?
If I had a nominated church and a serious religious afflilation then presumably I owuld sign up to supporting it financially.
No.
No, neither would I. Can't see DD agreeing to that either, and she's a "pillar" of her church!
Here it is not a nominated Church as per Parish - it is the local Church as per, the Protestant or Catholic Church of a county, in the UK would be something like 'CofE of Leicestershire' or 'Catholic Church of Surrey'.
I would think that those who go regularly, take part in most of the acitvities and do believe in what the content of the King James Bible and the crede, would do, quite naturally. But probably not most of those who only go once in a blue moon for a wedding, a funeral or to sing Carols on Christmas eve, those I previously called 'cultural Christians' (just has has happened here where I live- where sitting on the fence, like Rutter wants to, would cost a pretty penny).
Rutter does not simply want to sit on the fence - he gets on and sits on it! And good for him! He has cogent and well-expressed reasons for doing so.
Well, those who didn't wish to pay would simply change what they put on official forms. It wouldn't affect their beliefs of course.
Of course not. I pay more than that snyway. But it wouldn't please me. I hate compulsion.
Ana, it might not affect their beliefs - but it would affect their relationship with a Parish unable to deliver its services, not just in Church, but in the community, where they play a large role with the elderly, infirm, sick, lonely, etc. The Parish of course gets a list of names of those who pay, and of course can easily deduce who does not. Personally, if I expected to be part of a Parish, and expect its services to continue, both in and outside Church- I'd feel pretty bad not to pay- and to continue to expect such service to continue.
You wouldn't expect to continue to play golf or squash at a club and yet refuse to pay fees, would you?
Sorry, granjura, I thought you were asking whether we, in this country, would be prepared to pay a tithe to whatever Church we purported to belong to, I wasn't considering the bigger picture.
I think working for your church - like being an "elder", and organising Xmas fairs and suchlike, is an acceptable way to "pay" towards your church.
Of course, there is always the collection.
As for John Rutter, I have just read, in my Bernard Cornwell book, a quote from some saint (can't remember the name):- "If you won't have God as your Father then you can't have the Church as your mother".
Quite right I would think.
What Granjura asked was, if you were asked to pay 2.3% of your income...would you give up your religious affiliation. Yes, Of course I would pay and no, of course I wouldn't give up my religious affiliation. Many people pay much more than that and some churches already tithe. Churches (at the moment) still have charitable status and therefore people can covenant what they give. Lots of people do. And many people also give their services, like the organist at St Saviour who was murdered at Christmas. Many churches cover their costs. Many don't. In the CoE most churches pay a contribution based on income to the diocese which covers the admin costs of the diocese and goes towards the support of poorer parishes. Those of you who are not believers but say you like visiting churches and listening to the music benefit from the money raised by the Christians who attend church for other reasons.
'Middle class parishes in leafy suburbs' may well be able to balance the books - but what about those in inner city areas- where contributors are struggling financially and have so many social and other problems, thus requiring so much more time, effort ... and finances to pay for such? Hence here, people pay tax to the County synod that will then share according to need.
Lilygran - I fully understand your reply and that you would be prepared to pay, as you are, it seems, a regular Church goer with a genuine Christian faith.
My question was 'aimed' at those who, like John Rutter want to sit on the fence, have their cake and eat it. The ones who, here where I live, when asked to put the money where they 'mouth' is - turned away.
People who become Christian to get their children into good schools would probably pay because it's still cheaper than school fees! 
www.churchofengland.org/about-us/facts-stats/funding.aspx Churches in leafy suburbs subsidise inner city churches and much other work. But having said that, many inner city congregations do support their churches because those who have, give generously. All CoE churches are expected to pay a contribution to the general work of the diocese. This is not a tax since it is not compulsory but it operates in a similar way.
Doesn't the CofE, like the Catholic Church, have investments (from donations from rich sponsors) that help it to pay its way? The RC is phenominally rich.
If we accept that churches are part of the fabric of a country's life, and perform important sociological and charitable functions, then they should receive enough government support to function.
As an atheist, I would have no problem with a bit of my tax going that way. After all, local taxes go to supporting other things in which I have no interest, such as sport.
Join the conversation
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join the discussion, watch threads and lots more.
Register now »Already registered? Log in with:
Gransnet »