DO ATHEISTS BELONG IN THE INTERFAITH MOVEMENT (Part 1)

Posted by & filed under atheism, atheism religion, atheists in interfaith movement, Chris Stedman, faith reason, science religion.

Tweet


By Christopher Stedman

Recently, there’s been a lot of talk in the organized atheist, humanist, skeptic and freethought movements about the potential benefits and drawbacks of interfaith work.
Over at Patheos, the Executive Director of the American Humanist Association, Roy Speckhardt, recently made an excellent case that while the terminology of “interfaith” may be problematic and there are several other important issues to grapple with, it is worth atheists’ while to get involved. At Friendly Atheist, Secular Student Alliance Communications Director Jesse Galef offered a long list of reasons atheists might participate, and how their involvement might improve some of the problems within the interfaith movement. Despite Galef and Speckhardt’s serious concerns and reservations, they have been actively involved in intentionally interfaith efforts, and I suspect their participation has informed their conclusions about the idea.
However, those speaking out against atheist involvement in the interfaith movement are, at the moment, a bit more numerous (just a couple of examples, with several others to follow). As far as I can tell based on what many atheists opposed to interfaith involvement state in their writing, a large percentage of them seem to have kept their distance from interfaith work. I understand their hesitation given the criticisms they offer, but I can’t help but wonder if there is some disconnect when those who criticize the interfaith movement the most also seem to have had little to no actual experience with it. I could be wrong, but I’d be surprised if someone who had been involved in interfaith work would suggest, as prominent atheist blogger P.Z. Myers did, that it “cheerfully and indiscriminately embrace[s] every faith without regard for content.”
Present in almost every atheist blog I’ve read opposed to interfaith work are perhaps the most common critiques I hear from my fellow atheists regarding interfaith work, and they’re directly related: that interfaith leaves no room for religious criticism, and that it by default excludes atheists because atheism isn’t a “faith.” Most atheists I know who reject the idea of participating in interfaith work do so in part because they assume that, in order to participate, everyone must bite his or her tongue and play nice, and that participation in this kind of movement lends our implicit approval to “faith” as a concept and rallying point.
I’d like to explain why I think these concerns may be somewhat overblown; how they might be combated where they exist, and the reality that they actually don’t apply to most situations.
Isn’t interfaith just a pro-religion ‘kumbaya’ club?
A recent expression of these concerns was made in a blog by Ronald A. Lindsay, president and CEO of the Center for Inquiry, an organization I have worked with a number of times (I recently accepted an invitation to join their Speakers’ Bureau) and whose “Living Without Religion” campaign I greatly admire. In his blog, Lindsay wrote that “it’s nice that some politicians are finally willing to acknowledge our existence, but are we so desperate for acceptance that we’ll allow others to condescendingly misdescribe us as adherents of a faith? Sorry, but I can’t get too excited about being permitted to drink at the Whites Only fountain because we can ‘pass.’” I’ll set aside my distaste for the bizarre (and far too common) parallel made between the atheist movement and the civil rights movement and address the meat of the argument: the fear that, in order to maintain the “kumbaya” status quo, atheists need to keep quiet about their beliefs about religion.
Lindsay continued:
“It is probably true that working together with religious groups in interfaith coalitions will result in some good will and more favorable opinions about atheists… But this benefit has to be weighed against the cost. The mission of secular organizations is, presumably, not just to get atheists to be liked. Among other things, it’s to promote critical reasoning; it’s to advance the view that faith is decidedly not a virtue. Calling our worldview a faith does not seem the best way to achieve these objectives.”
Unsurprisingly, the thought that interfaith work requires significant tongue-biting makes many atheists very uncomfortable; it was certainly a concern I had before I started working in the interfaith movement.
The irony of this worry is that the atheist and the interfaith movements actually share a common point of origin: they both started, in part, as a reaction to religious extremism. Much like the atheist movement, the interfaith movement seeks to build inter-group understanding, encourage critical thinking, and end religiously-based sociological and political exclusivism. The fundamental misunderstanding that many atheists have is that they imagine the interfaith movement as uninterested in combating religious totalitarianism and solely existing to maintain religious privilege—as an excuse to show that religion, in its many diverse forms, has a monopoly on morality—but that couldn’t be further from the truth.
In my experience, interfaith work exists to bring diverse religious and nonreligious people into common work to build relationships that might deconstruct the kind of “us vs. them” thinking that contributes to exclusivistic religious hierarchy. It is a place to challenge and question, but to do so constructively.
The success of such challenges is contingent on whether invested relationships exist between the involved parties; otherwise, disagreements run the risk of degenerating into shouting matches in place of reasonable discourse. In “E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the 21st Century,” Robert Putnam wrote that diversity is important to build strong and sustainable communities. But, at least at first, people tend to “hunker down” with those very similar to themselves and gaze upon others with suspicion. For diversity to flower, individuals must meet and learn from one another.
Similarly, in Ethnic Conflict and Civic Life: Hindus and Muslims in India, Ashutosh Varshney theorized that the likelihood that inciting events would lead to widespread or long-term violence was significantly less in communities where civic ties across lines of religious identity were present. In populations where such ties were nonexistent, inciting incidents provoked extensive inter-group violence. And while atheists and the religious in the United States don’t regularly commit physical violence against one another, it is clear that invested relationships across lines of identity difference are essential for cooperation and constructive inter-group communication, whether those groups are religious or not.
Whether it is engaging Christians around my negative experiences as a former evangelical and a queer person, or challenging my religious peers to rationally explain their beliefs, I’ve found interfaith work to not only be a fruitful place for such conversations, but the ideal forum for it. I can fondly recall any number of incidents where I argued theology and philosophy with a religious colleague while doing interfaith work; and how, later, they told me that they actually took my perspective seriously because we had built a trusting relationship. It made all the difference that I treated them as intellectual equals—as people with respectable goals rather than just mindless adherents of some stupid religion. They had heard positions similar to mine in the past from other atheists, but they had been presented so disrespectfully that they had made no impact, and had closed them off from even entertaining such ideas in some cases.
This is precisely what interfaith work sets out to do: elicit civil dialogue to increase understanding, not stifle it for the sake of “playing nice.”
(Tomorrow: Part 2 of Christopher’s Article)

Chris Stedman is the Interfaith and Community Service Fellow for the Humanist Chaplaincy at Harvard University and the Managing Director of State of Formation at the Journal of Inter-Religious Dialogue. Chris received an MA in Religion from Meadville Lombard Theological School at the University of Chicago, for which he was awarded the Billings Prize for Most Outstanding Scholastic Achievement. A graduate of Augsburg College with a summa cum laude B.A. in Religion, Chris is the founder and author of the blog NonProphet Status

***
YOUR COMMENTS ARE ALWAYS WELCOME!
***
And Please Note: If you enjoy our Blog Posts, you will certainly enjoy my books.

z00m3r says:

Very interesting question & article!

I think people of faith and atheists need each other to “stay honest”; intelligent, mutually respectful critique from those of very different POVs is always valuable. One of our gals here in the Religious Tolerance discussion group on Facebook has recently expressed this more elegantly.

I’m concerned, both from the article and from my own admittedly limited experience with atheism both within our group and otherwise (including some with the Toronto chapter of the Center for Inquiry) that some atheists (do most prefer it capitalized or not?) — a vociferous minority I hope — seem to have a problem with the mutually respectful part, thought there are certainly plenty of egregious zealots on the other side of the “barrier.”

What’s wrong with “biting your tongue” once in a while, and avoiding the occasional emotional impulse to gratuitous rudeness or insult? It makes for more productive, intelligent discourse all around, I think.

Can atheists “promote critical reasoning” without having to “advance the view that faith is decidedly not a virtue”?

Similarly, can theists/other people of faith put aside the instinctive mistrust of atheism, and the habit many have of and associating, even equating it with immorality or utter Evil?

More good questions we all need to ask ourselves!

There is of course that particularly vigorous movement within atheism that seems dedicated to eradicating any and all religion whatsoever. Not sure what to do with them.

If we can all get to the point where we agree that not all atheists are completely rational and scientific all the time, and that not all theists/other people of faith utterly reject science, logic and reason (most don’t, I hope) — that these two polar opposites of human experience can work hand in hand, and that neither is categorically immoral, socially/culturally destructive or whatever — then I’d say there is great hope for all of us to continue contributing to these “interfaith” projects (yeah, maybe the name’ll have to be changed).

We all seem to manage pretty well here in this group, occasional interpersonal hiccups and spats aside. :)

_______________________

I hope no one minds my including links to our discussion group and parent website of extensive reference materials. All followers of religious, spiritual, and secular belief systems… or none of the above — are very welcome! If it’s not “interfaith”, it’s a darn good inter-something!

Please do delete the following links, though, if they are against policy.

peace! 😀

Roman Romaniuk
Head administrator/moderator, Religious Tolerance group on Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/groups/115060631838983/

http://ReligiousTolerance.org

Do Atheists Belong in the Interfaith Movement? | (A)theologies | Religion Dispatches

Posted by & filed under Uncategorized.

Do Atheists Belong in the Interfaith Movement? | (A)theologies | Religion Dispatches