Richard Dawkins - new poster boy for Christian Atheism.

Richard Dawkins is a Secular Christian. In that tie. [Telegraph]

When I describe my Christian Atheism project to some people, they often glaze over a bit. Why on earth would you want to keep any of Christianity? Surely that's the whole point of atheism - moving beyond the primitive superstitions of an earlier time? Out with the old! Don't give succour to those who would drag us back into the Dark Ages!

Yet I think such views miss out some very important aspects of our history and culture in the West. David Cameron got into a lot of trouble for saying Britain is a "Christian country", but the problem with what he said wasn't that it was wrong, but that it had the wrong emphasis. I have argued that Atheism is one (not necessarily the only) logical outcome of Christianity properly applied. For many people, being an Atheist is like a Level 2 Christian, where theists are still stuck at Level 1. They haven't solved the puzzle sufficiently to move beyond the simplistic notion of God and Salvation and all that jazz.

But Richard Dawkins accepts that Britain is steeped in Christian heritage, and this in turn has shaped his thinking, as well as that of everyone "British". We should no more ditch the Bible than we would ditch Shakespeare or Dickens. The hymns of Cowper have a resonance that owes everything to Christianity, and that resonance rings as loudly in the heart of an atheist as it does in a theist. It's not the first time Prof Dawkins has said this. He has previously suggested that "Atheists for Jesus" could be an appropriate slogan (I concur).

Now, not everyone is going to be happy with this - that much is clear. Some people did not arrive at atheism as a journey out of Christianity - or, if they did, it was a hair-raising escape, and they're just glad to be free. For me, I enjoyed Christianity, I got a lot from it, most of my friends are still believers, and I don't even mind religious ceremony. I just don't believe it's true any more. As such, I still feel like a Christian (or what I think a Christian should feel like), and I can rebuild my notion of "Christ" around ideals that the historical Jesus may or may not have embodied, however imperfectly. Because it's a story - a parable. We all have our foundational myths - recognising that they are myths doesn't make them less powerful - on the contrary, it makes them more useful and adaptable. We can do more with them, rather than being doxastically constrained by them.

Maybe this Secular Christianity will catch on. But remember - you heard it here first!

On the word "Action"...

As previously remarked, it is very very quiet round here these days. Sorry for that, but we're all pretty busy, and I don't kid myself that there are thousands of people eagerly awaiting my next comment on any particular subject.

However, there IS a Facebook group, and you're very welcome to head over there and see if anything tickles your fancy: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Christian-Atheism-in-Action/128248970561284

I'm always keen to hear from you, my fine friends, as to how you see Christian Atheism working out in practice. Are you a church goer? Have you pretty much given up on church, but still see yourself as Christian? Or maybe you are an out-and-out atheist who feels that Christianity in particular, as well as Religion in general, are Bad Things that need opposed rather than exapted for humanistic purposes? Maybe you're a Theistic Christian who feels that we're all hellbound heretics, and how dare we assume the label "Christian" for an atheistic humanistic worldview that seeks to express itself via the Christian narrative (as others will express theirs through an Islamic, Jewish, Egyptian, Buddhist etc narrative)?

As quiet as Mars here...?

Thanks for sticking with this, those of you who are still around! As you'll have noticed, things have been a little quiet around here lately. I hope to get some more material up fairly shortly - no shortage of good ideas, but you know the typical quandary of things failing between neuron and keyboard...
Anyway, here is a little song I wrote about Mars exploration - I hope you like it:


The justification for putting this on here is that when I was a theistic Christian I did sometimes wonder what the vanilla "traditional" Christianity should make of interplanetary travel and colonisation. Would the Rapture on Earth happen at the same time as on other planets? Would other planets be "unfallen" (as C.S. Lewis mused in the "Out of the Silent Planet" fantasy trilogy)? Indeed, could we see the effects of the Fall, as the wavefront of sin impacted on them? Is the Speed of Sin the same as the speed of light?

Looking back from the perspective of the Christian Atheist, this all seems rather silly. But, as I hint in the song, the trail of our footprints leads back to the Turkana clay, and some day we'll have to decide whether we are simply Children of the Earth or Children of the Stars.

Groovy, baby.

Name change

OK, after the consultation (thanks, all!) I have decided to change the name from "Church of Jesus Christ Atheist" to "Christian Atheism in Action" (not "inaction"). The new URL for the blog is christian-atheist.blogspot.com (yes, it has a hyphen - sorry about that).

One problem with the "Church" label was that it gave the impression that we were trying to start a denomination. That would be totally against the core concept of the Christianity Compatibility Layer. Another problem was that it juxtaposed "Jesus Christ" with "Atheist" too soon in the game, and I think potentially alienated part of the audience who really need to get a wee bit deeper into the thinking before deciding whether to switch off.

So let me know what you think - is there a better title? Are there other blogs or websites doing a similar thing to this? Are there useful links you can suggest? Is the concept fundamentally flawed, or is there a better way of getting atheists and believers alike to snuggle cosily together under the banner of "Christian" (in the same way as I hope they can do for Judaism and Islam)?

Alienation or Illumination?

It has come to my attention (i.e. I've been collared by one of my nearest and dearest) that the title of this blog, "Church of Jesus Christ Atheist" might be somewhat alienating or even offensive to some Christians, or even to some Atheists. Perhaps the juxtaposition of Jesus Christ and Atheism is too much for some (despite the very deliberate device in the gospels of Matthew and Mark that suggest that Jesus cried out on the cross "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?").

Whether we like it or not (and I don't - just to make that clear), many Christians and Atheists regard the "other side" with a degree of disdain, suspicion, or even outright hostility, so that putting Jesus Christ together with Atheist might raise a few eyebrows.

My intent in the name was to indeed raise the eyebrows, but not to put people off; rather, I wanted them to read further, to see whether the distinction was as sharp as it is often made out. I would contend that already many people who see themselves as Christian, and unapologetically so, do not believe that the bible records absolutely accurate accounts of past events, do not believe the stories of miracles represent true records of real events, do not believe that Jesus was divine, born of a virgin, or rose from the dead, and don't even believe in God (at least not in the "conventional" way).

So enough preamble. It's over to you folks now: should I change the name of this blog, and if so, what should I change it to? Bear in mind the stated purpose of the blog - to develop a Christianity Compatibility Layer for Atheists. Some ideas for starters:

• "Christian Atheist Understanding"
• "Tolerating Difference"
• "What is Truth?"

Opinions welcome below in the comments section. Thanks in advance!

A Christian Atheist response to the #Brady scandal

[Image source: BBC]

The Catholic Primate of all Ireland, Cardinal Sean Brady, is in some very hot water, and like the proverbial frog in a saucepan, claims he is quite happy as the gas is turned up and the water starts to boil. It turns out that his role in the Catholic Church's cover-up of clerical paedophilia was substantially greater than he has previously intimated, and he had the opportunity to save children from abuse, but failed to do so. "Just following orders" is as close as we got to an explanation of his position.

This has prompted a huge wave of outrage in Ireland, much of it (rightly) directed towards the Catholic Church itself, whose archaic procedures left it effectively legally and morally rudderless, where defence of the Church itself was seen as more important than the protection of little children. Jesus himself had something to say about that, but I don't see the Vatican or the Irish Church hierarchy queuing up to be fitted for their millstones.

But as Christian Atheists, whether Catholic, Protestant or other, what should we take from this sordid affair?

My own view is that we need to learn the lessons - no organisation or structure has the right to decide for itself to deal with criminal matters purely through its own procedures. People collusive in such procedures - which effectively amount to conspiracy to pervert the course of justice - need to examine their consciences, and offer their resignations, even if only to show some degree of contrition. Children need to be protected at all times.

Although writing from an unashamedly Atheist position, I do not feel that religion per se is the great social evil that some Atheists make it out to be. The evil is unchallengeable belief. The arrogance that will see Brady fall (inevitably) derives from an unshakeable belief in his own superiority, and a view that the church can do no wrong. The complete absence of humility is staggering in its extent, but perhaps not surprising, given the attitude of the Roman Catholic Church to those who break ranks (Father Brian D'Arcy being the most prominent and commendable example).

Should Christians leave the Catholic Church for a different church? I can't say. But Christian Atheists should at least make their voice heard on this and other issues. We do not lack a moral compass, as some detractors would imply. On the contrary, we base our dealings with our fellow humans on that Great Commandment (a short sharp Humanist manifesto if ever there was one) to love our neighbour as ourselves. The irony is that the priest and Levite in the parable of the Good Samaritan were obeying their religious orders not to touch a wounded person. Yet in following orders, in putting their religious structures and procedures above the act of helping a fellow human being in dire distress, we quite rightly regard them as ghastly hypocrites. And so we should regard Brady. And indeed, so we should regard ourselves when we look back over our lives at the times when we have just followed orders, and left someone to suffer.

Sometimes the best way to show leadership is to resign. In clinging to the ever-more sweaty and sordid reins of power, Brady is putting himself above the victims of his own inexcusable inaction.

The Meaning of Easter

Here's David Rattigan on the topic of how a non-theist can find meaning in the Easter narrative - I think the same probably holds true for Christianity in general. My experience is that there are many Christians (perhaps as high as 15%) who do not believe in God, but for whom their church and the Christian life form a vehicle through which they prefer to see the world (or in which they feel trapped - a somewhat sad, but common enough situation).

I'll go further. For too long Atheists and Agnostics have been excluded from the dialogues that shape Christianity as a religion. It is an evolutionary process, and we are shutting ourselves out of the memepool. As long-time readers of CJCA will know (both of you), there are at least some of us who feel that although Christianity (or any religion) is not "true" in the literal / scientific / historical sense, we remain human animals, with a need (or weakness for) an overarching narrative upon which to pin the various events and processes in our lives. For many people Christianity fulfils this purpose, even though it isn't "real". Similarly for others Islam or Judaism or Buddhism do the trick. But why should we non-theist Christians sit back and let the agenda be set by "believers"?

Should we not have the courage of our convictions - that Jesus died, the resurrection is a legend, that Christians got so much wrong, but that there is a core of a story here that tells us a little about us as a species or a society - and use those convictions to create space for a secular Christian Atheistic viewpoint? A viewpoint that is based on equality, on doing good for others, on promoting tolerance while encouraging open and frank debate?

OK, I'm rambling now, and the evening wine is kicking in, but as we emerge into Easter Sunday, perhaps it's time that Christian Atheism had its own little resurrection, and became seen as a player - albeit a small one - in the grand scheme of things. I'd appreciate any comments (as always!)...