Can people ever really agree to disagree about God?
Two forums at USM last month invited religious believers, atheists and everybody in-between to approach that question head-on.
The series, entitled “Religion and Secularism: Contrasting Worldviews” was billed as a group effort between the off-campus Portland Skeptics and Open House United Church of Christ, along with SMASH – the Southern Maine Association of Secular Humanists, who donated their usual meeting time and space at 327 Luther Bonney.
David and Jennifer Dubay, primary organizers of the talks and founders of Portland Skeptics, opened the first session with a call for peaceful debate and a plea to avoid the “shouting match quality” that can take over when passions on both sides are incited.
“The intent is to look at things from a different angle… and dismantle stereotypes,” said David Dubay, whose group organized through the online service Meetup.com.
Fliers for the first meeting also advertised it as co-sponsored by USM’s Interfaith Chaplaincy, and while several chaplains attended, head Andrea McCall distanced her office a bit from the proceedings.
“To clarify, it would be more accurate to say I’m here as a guest,” she said upon introducing herself. “I did not participate in the planning.”
As it turned out, much of the planning was moot – despite two ambitious itineraries, the events were largely open discussion forums, though the Dubays aimed for more focus in the second session by steering the conversation toward stereotypes recognized by both sides of the divide.
One local resident and believer, Dana Seaman, asked for clarification on what constitutes a popular stereotype.
“Like Hare Krishna just sell pens and flowers at airports, that’s a stereotype,” said Jennifer Dubay. “You might even be a Hare Krishna.”
“I am,” he replied. “And we don’t really do that anymore.”
Over the course of the next two nights, topics included secular morality, doubt, and science – occasionally veering off, very briefly, into something of a debate over the existence of God.
Here are some highlights:
Twist of Faith
“Faith is a lot like falling in love,” says Trevor Karrer, a student and one of the believers on hand. “It’s not rational, you can’t quite explain it, but you feel it.”
Or you don’t. Skeptic Paul Oppenheim of Yarmouth countered: “‘People-of-faith’ often sort of assume that people who would call themselves not ‘people-of-faith’ are somehow missing some incredibly essential, important kernel of meaning in their life.”
“As if to experience the richness, wonder and sacredness of this world, requires one to be a person of faith,” he added.
Stephen Carnahan, pastor at the Open House Church of Christ, disagrees with that notion, but he brings his own definition of the term.
“If you ask me how many people in this room are people of faith, I’d say we all are,” said Carhahan. “I would define faith as the practice of belief in something greater than yourself.”
“I couldn’t agree with you more,” Oppenheim replied.
Moral Danger
Can secular people be moral? The question is posited by atheists in the room as a piece of stereotypical baggage that nags them. Few believers in the room seem interested in that idea, though Seaman openly agrees with it.
“There’s an implicit metaphysical realm to it,” he says. “It is what gives us all equal rights, because physically and mentally, we’re not equal.”
Jose and Hartwell quickly counter that morality, just like belief, are concepts born from the human brain. “We can all see we’d probably be better off if we didn’t kill, steal – we live in society, we all need to live in society,” says Jose.
Wrath of Kant
“I’m a little miffed by the heaven and hell stereotype I’m hearing here,” says Shirley Bowen, USM’s episcopal chaplain, after there’s some hints from the nonbelievers that the faithful put too much emphasis on fearing God’s wrath.
Not all religions believe there’s necessarily a heaven to have ‘fallen’ from, points out Chris Brown. Catholic chaplain Joseph Mailhot also worries that maybe these concepts aren’t well-enough understood by the detractors of religious belief.
“Though maybe not enough Christians have cracked open scripture, either,” he adds.
Some of the secularists say Mother Theresa, renowned for her charitable pursuits, must have been motivated by a selfish – none of the nonbelievers use this term disparagingly – desire to please God and attain eternal life. Bowen strongly disagrees with the notion that Theresa’s deeds were the result of “utilitarian” thinking.
Jennifer Dubay lays it out flatly: “I believe there’s only selfishness.”
“I agree with that,” says Mailhot, sounding like he’s just discovered the first significant chunk of common ground. While he believes good is God’s will, he also accepts Kant’s theory that God would have created man to feel pleasure and often see self-interest in performing good deeds.
Bound by Laws
Several atheists brought up evolution, but rarely stirred the pot.
In the first session, somebody called for a show of hands for people who think evolution is a valid scientific theory. While there was indeed a lone skeptic of evolution in the room, some believers looked thrown by the need to declare a mainstream understanding of science.
“Notice that in the Bible, you read page one, and you get a story of how the world was created,” noted Pastor Carnahan. “Then turn to page two, and you’ll read another story – they don’t match up, because he intention isn’t to show how it all happened. It’s about why we’re here.”
Jose – who teaches a course on science and religion at USM’s Osher college – maintains that the fragments of the fossil record scientists are piecing together are interesting to secularists’ faith in the natural world, and that a creation story is being uncovered that is “much more powerful than anything in scriptures.”
“Many believers feel that God acts or has acted in the world, and pray for the laws of nature to be suspended,” Jose continues. “I understand the emotional side of that, but there’s the rub.”
Good Books
At one point David Dubay solicited book recommendations that might help people better understand the “other side,” and several in attendance jumped at the opportunity.
Shirley Bowen recommends “Doubt: A History” by Jennifer Michael Hecht. The role of doubt in religious life and scholarship was news to some, and the book traces it’s evolution from Socrates to Emily Dickenson.
Greg Lake recommends C.S. Lewis’ “Mere Christianity,” in which the author describes the reasoning behind his conversion from atheism and explores Christian ethics.
Jennifer Dubay likes Sam Harris’ “Letter to a Christian Nation,” one of several recent atheist manifestos, and David recommends Steven Walderman’s “Founding Faith” for more information on the complicated beliefs and practices of five founders: Franklin, Jefferson, Washington, Adams and Madison.