Gransnet forums

Religion/spirituality

John Rutter on religion

(158 Posts)
Mishap Fri 28-Dec-12 21:32:13

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."

Bags Tue 01-Jan-13 20:20:00

Being an atheist does not necessarily include certainty (see Dawkins' atheism scale in The God Delusion). It certainly doesn't in my case. I'm an atheist because no-one has given me an adequate reason to believe that gods exist. If and when they do, I'll believe that those gods exist. Until then, I feel no need for gods. I can get on with my life without them.

I can't speak for people with faith, but I have got impression from quite a few people who have some kind of religious faith that they aren't certain of much either.

So, it would seem to be a coin with degrees of uncertainty, or perhaps a scale of needing understandable or clear evidence. Some people seem to need less than others, and vice versa.

Bags Tue 01-Jan-13 20:21:30

Yes, quite, mishap. By some people's definiton, I would be an agnostic. But since I have no gods and atheist means "without gods", I'm an atheist.

petallus Tue 01-Jan-13 20:25:34

Bags do you believe love exists and what is the proof (scientific not anecdotal)?

petallus Tue 01-Jan-13 20:26:26

Mishap I'm one of those chaps who is certain of nothing.

Bags Tue 01-Jan-13 20:38:59

Yes, I do believe love exists, petallus, just as I believe anger exists, and other emotions. The evidence for them is observable from people's behaviour. I don't think there is the same kind of evidence for the existence of gods, though obviously some people do think there is. If there is, it's not observable in the same kind of way. At least, so it seems to me and millions of others, otherwise we'd all believe in gods (how many? which ones?) in the same way that we believe in love and other emotions.

The scientific evidence that emotions exist can be ascertained by brain scans which show electrical impulses/brain activity when people are 'feeling' certain emotions. That's what I understand anyhow, which is, admittedly, not much.

Bags Tue 01-Jan-13 20:40:38

I'm as certain as I can be that life exists and that I'm alive. That'll do for me.

Ana Tue 01-Jan-13 20:45:19

It would be hard to differentiate 'love' from, say, 'pleasure' by a brain scan though, surely? We only know what love is by feeling it ourselves and acknowledging that what we're feeling is actually 'love'.

granjura Tue 01-Jan-13 21:11:22

Bags agreed about being taught in schools - but very rarely in Religious Studies lessons (about world religions), certainly not in the 4 schools our daughters attended (they both did GCSE RE) nor in the 4 schools I taught at, and the many where I did supply teaching. A question I always asked the RE teachers. The general tenet that any religion is OK and to be respected, but not having one is a 'problem' with moral development.

The most interesting thing I learnt during my Teacher training was Kohlberg's theory of moral development and stages (well worth a Google and read around), which is totally unrelated to religion for most.

petallus Tue 01-Jan-13 22:18:47

I once did an experient with my A level Psychology students based on Kohlberg's theory of moral development.

It was interesting that a religious group who were amongst our participants did turn out to be less highly developed than average. They were fairly fundamentalist though, Seven Day Adventists I seem to remember.

I'm sure it would be different for, say, Rowan Williams.

Bags Wed 02-Jan-13 07:51:08

jura, I shall look out for that book. However, it's obvious that morality isn't dependent on religion because there are millions of moral and ethical people who have no religion. Nowadays there is at least a generation of people brought up with no religion and they do not lack moral sense or ethical values. My own daughters are a case in point, and I daresay yours are. QED.

petallus, I believe faith exists as well as love and other emotions, but that's what faith is – an emotion. It doesn't prove the existence of anything else.

Lilygran Wed 02-Jan-13 08:15:51

I'm still interested in which religions people feel should be taught about in schools - if at all. The 'major world religions' is a bit of a cop out in my view. What are the 'major' world religions? Do you decide on the basis of number of adherents? Or geographical spread? Or how long the West has known about them? New religions? Or only old ones? And why should they be taught in schools (if at all)?

Bags Wed 02-Jan-13 08:48:12

I think my preference is to not have teaching about religions in primary schools and to have the study of religion as an option at the tertiary education stage. I'm not sure about secondary. Seems to me they are busy enough already with essentials, but perhaps an option in the upper years for the study of religion might start with some history of ancient religions and the development of modern ones andnof agnosticism/atheism. I think I'd be interested in that. But it would be better at the tertiary level, I think.

petallus Wed 02-Jan-13 09:32:09

Bags I am interested in the idea that if something cannot be scientifically proven, it cannot reliably be said to exist. That's why I mentioned love (and other emotions).

It might well be the case that if parts of the brain are stimulated people say they are feeling certain emotions. But that is still at the hypothesis level.

One difficulty in testing the hypothesis would be in objectively measuring emotion. You couldn't really rely on what people said, they might be mistaken or lying.

petallus Wed 02-Jan-13 09:36:09

I'm only in the middle of what I was trying to say but have to go off and see to GS.

jO5 Wed 02-Jan-13 09:39:59

First things first petallus. Quite right. smile

jO5 Wed 02-Jan-13 09:45:49

I think the need to protect has a lot to do with "love". Whether to continue our own gene pool, or to protect, and further, the human race in general.

Lilygran Wed 02-Jan-13 09:49:10

If not religion, Bags, how about ethics? Or philosophy?

petallus Wed 02-Jan-13 09:56:40

To sum up, in my view there are many things in this life which it is not possible to prove the existence of by the scientific method.

Then it comes down to faith or belief.

petallus Wed 02-Jan-13 09:58:42

I wonder what is swirling arouind in our existence which we haven't yet discovered.

A few hundred years ago who would have guessed at microbes, sound waves and flying to the moon?

feetlebaum Wed 02-Jan-13 10:07:31

BUT Petallus... science would not make claim to prove the existence of such things. That means the burden of proof falls on the believer, who is relying on blind faith, not on the sceptic.

And what is yet to be discovered will be found (if at all) by science, not by faith.

Bags Wed 02-Jan-13 10:49:03

Schools, even nursery schools, do teach 'ethics' already, if you include teaching kids what is good/acceptable behaviour and what isn't. I don't think ethics or basic moral philosophy can be avoided really – it comes naturally under bringing children up to be good citizens and to care for others. Thus DD's school 'rules' of respect for self, respect for others, respect for surroundings.

Bags Wed 02-Jan-13 10:52:32

I agree with petallus that there are many things beyond our understanding. But I don't feel the need to resort to faith. We just carry on searching for answers to our questions by observation, hypothesis and testing. And we improve our understanding bit by bit.

Ariadne Wed 02-Jan-13 11:04:53

In my last school (and certainly in DG1's school) the GCSE option was Philosophy and Ethics.

In KS3, RE covered a variety of religions, and the choice was down to the Head of Department. RE, of course, is not bound by the National Curriculum! Huh!

As ever, I believe that disestablishment is the only way forward, so that Church and state, and therefore education, are kept completely separate.

(Although it was hard enough teaching say, Milton, Shakespeare or Chaucer to students who had no conception of bible stories...one had to explain Original Sin many times! Mmmm.)

Bags Wed 02-Jan-13 11:09:01

And what was original 'sin' but a thirst for knowledge and experience? Of course it's hard to understand the concept of something so alien to modern minds.

feetlebaum Wed 02-Jan-13 15:54:51

Surely that 'original sin' is what makes the newly born baby a 'sinner', inheriting the 'sins' of his or her forebears... one of the less charming notions of the believers.