A few months ago I was feeling rather gleeful at the prospect of a discovery that there was something - a particle - that appeared to be moving faster than the speed of light. It now appears that this was probably a defect in the experimental equipment. I was just listening to Prof. Martin Rees on the radio, and it reminded me of this. I think at the time I had two reasons for feeling gleeful: firstly because it was very intellectually exciting - even though I was in no position to extrapolate anything from it - but secondly there is something very atavistic about my response. I feel that cosmology is an intellectual discipline which has some paralells with religions - yes, it is underpinned by maths, while religion is underpinned by common experience - but it is speculative, it is based on an attempt to understand the universe, just as religion is (sometimes) based on an attempt to understand the nature of God and then do what is right in accordance with that understanding (some religion is based on something much more primitive - but that's un altro discorso) So my second source of joy was at the discomfiture of a rival system of understanding...
What I liked about Martin Rees was that he does not dismiss religion - but says it's a system which has no overlap with science and therefore can't really be discussed in scientific terms. This is exactly what I believe too - but what I don't understand about the New Atheists (yes, that is what they are called) is their apparent desire not to rest until any scrap of belief in God has been roundly destroyed... why are they so keen to demolish our views? Actually, I know why - it's because they think we (people with faith) have a pernicious effect on liberal society. And this week a Catholic Cardinal - Keith O'Brien has come out with a scorcher about gay marriage.
I was delighted when civil partnerships became possible - it seemed fair and just and good that gay people should have the opportunity to make a public commitment to someone they loved. Gay marriage is a different question though - not because I anyway am trying to exclude them, more trying to understand why homosexual people should wish to participate in what is - speaking anthropologically and sociologically - a very heterosexual ritual. Weddings are great - but marriage is intended to provide a legal structure for inheritance and legitimising children. Presumably a civil partnership already does this. Marriage as a sacrament is simply the church taking over the Roman marriage rituals and claiming it for its own - then extrapolating a theology around marriage... I do not believe churches should be forced to "marry" homosexuals - but I do not believe churches should entertain any prejudice against them either. Unfortunately, it is rather difficult to separate these things... inevitably those churches which will not marry homosexuals will tend to be the prejudiced ones.
Traditionally radical gays refused to ape heterosexual practices - such as monogamy - now it appears that the majority of gay people want this right. I don't see why they can't have civil marriage services if they want it - but individual churches will have to make their own choices. I am not much looking forward to the anodyne words of the gay wedding service that the Church of England will create - or will they just edit the current one - with the inappropriate phrases removed. I am sure that there are plenty of traditionally minded gay people who might like the 1666 amended BCP service at their wedding: with my body I thee worship etc. What I do know is, that if there is any move towards this in the CofE the African church will go mad and probably secede, so we shall have that kerfuffle to look forward to.
What I liked about Martin Rees was that he does not dismiss religion - but says it's a system which has no overlap with science and therefore can't really be discussed in scientific terms. This is exactly what I believe too - but what I don't understand about the New Atheists (yes, that is what they are called) is their apparent desire not to rest until any scrap of belief in God has been roundly destroyed... why are they so keen to demolish our views? Actually, I know why - it's because they think we (people with faith) have a pernicious effect on liberal society. And this week a Catholic Cardinal - Keith O'Brien has come out with a scorcher about gay marriage.
I was delighted when civil partnerships became possible - it seemed fair and just and good that gay people should have the opportunity to make a public commitment to someone they loved. Gay marriage is a different question though - not because I anyway am trying to exclude them, more trying to understand why homosexual people should wish to participate in what is - speaking anthropologically and sociologically - a very heterosexual ritual. Weddings are great - but marriage is intended to provide a legal structure for inheritance and legitimising children. Presumably a civil partnership already does this. Marriage as a sacrament is simply the church taking over the Roman marriage rituals and claiming it for its own - then extrapolating a theology around marriage... I do not believe churches should be forced to "marry" homosexuals - but I do not believe churches should entertain any prejudice against them either. Unfortunately, it is rather difficult to separate these things... inevitably those churches which will not marry homosexuals will tend to be the prejudiced ones.
Traditionally radical gays refused to ape heterosexual practices - such as monogamy - now it appears that the majority of gay people want this right. I don't see why they can't have civil marriage services if they want it - but individual churches will have to make their own choices. I am not much looking forward to the anodyne words of the gay wedding service that the Church of England will create - or will they just edit the current one - with the inappropriate phrases removed. I am sure that there are plenty of traditionally minded gay people who might like the 1666 amended BCP service at their wedding: with my body I thee worship etc. What I do know is, that if there is any move towards this in the CofE the African church will go mad and probably secede, so we shall have that kerfuffle to look forward to.
No comments:
Post a Comment