John Rutter on religion

I'm with you 100% Lilygran, and with your vicar, Mishap. Which one of us can look into someone's heart and soul and know what is there?

granjura I think your stance is very principled and I used to agree with you. But I've changed my mind over the years. I know that many Christians welcome people who say they are non-believers to make use of what the churches can offer. Whatever people say, who's to know what's really going on in their lives? And who's to know how the experience will affect them?

Interesting post granjura. My local vicar is the exact opposite - she is happy for people to use the church for ceremonies, without the idea that the church is being "used" in a negative way. She goes out of her way to make it meaningful to those who are there, and understands that whatever their beliefs, they are acknowledging the importance of the event and of its value in a historical context. - and I expect that she also hopes that something will "rub off" on the participants.

She is never dogmatic and hosts a pagan wassail event every January - we always joke, that if you want a good pagan event, go to the vicarage!

I think her openness has done much to foster a positive role for the church in the commnunity here, for believers and non-believers alike. She knows that I am agnostic, but often invites my choir to come and sing and uses my skills in other ways - e.g. making cards from my photos to sell in aid of the church; uincluding me in a listening project because she knows of my history of running such things. It all seems very healthy to me.

The use of church buildings by the non-religious has an ancient history. The presence in the ministry of doubting or unbelieving priests is also a reality. In one wonderful book I read, the central character, a vicar, loses his faith and eventually comes to the decision that he is a better priest on account of it as he is more open to people's doubts and fears - he no longer felt constrained to utter doctrinal platitudes.

I married in church because it would have given deep offence to my highly religious MIL if we had not - I regard it as a kind decision, as, for my MIL, we would not have been regarded as married in her eyes otherwise. It made her happy - that's fine with me.

I enjoyed reading it - but I just can't do this 'having it both ways'. I can value and respect many aspects of Christianity - but in my life, either I do, or I don't. Because if respect my Christian friends - I couldn't 'use' the Church unless I wholeheartedly believed in the faith. Couldn't have go married in Church, that day was too important for lies, and always refused to be a Godmother 'oh it's only words- it does not matter' - if I promise to do something, I promise with all my heart- can't promise to do what I can't or won't do.

And never ever could I expect a Vicar/Priest to stand there at my funeral, saying all these things that I totally do NOT believe in, heaven, meeting up with my loved ones, etc. Our local Vicar is wonderful- but he finds it so hard to Minister for weddings, funerals and baptisms- knowing for many that it is just for show, for the official video! He is constantly asked to officiate at funerals and is told previously by the family, not too much religion, please, the deceased was not a believer and neither are we!!! As far as I am concerned, either you do, or you don't. Partly out of respect for those who do 'do'.

On the strength of this thread I have started listening to John Rutter's music. I have some lovely stuff on in the background as I write.

Very calming and uplifting.

I admire Rutter's honesty and his humility; and I do think that he reflects the views of many others.

I enjoy visiting our local ancient church which is just down the lane - it embodies the hopes, fears and aspirations of many generations and one cannot fail to be moved by that. It has some important architectural and historical features; and it is a very peaceful place to be. I am hugely moved by the music that religion has engendered - and also the art. And I think that religious myths are not empty of meaning, even if you do not take literally the doctrines that run alongside and are not a "believer."

Rutter's non-belief does not blind him to the importance of religion and to its potential for good. I think that is a healthy stance which is thoughtful and concerned and avoids polarisation, which is so dangerous.

I agree jO5.

Human beings have good and bad in them and will express both whether they are religious or not.

You could say religion corrupts people but equally that it is people who corrupt religion.

I don't believe truly religious people do any more "bad things" than the rest of us do, as human beings. The atrocities committed in Northern Ireland, for example, were done under the labels of the different religions. That was all it was - labels. Denominations people were born under and which in that country, happened to form the political parties they subscribed too. True religion didn't come into it.

The same can probably be said about many so called "religious" conflicts.

Most beautiful church buildings were built for the glory of the people who built them. Not for the glory of God.

Bags said that on a previous thread. And, thinking about it, I agree with her.

However, it is possible to stand inside a church, even a simple one, and unexpectedly, quite out of the blue, feel the love of God.

I think the Weinberg quote oversimplifies what is a very complex matter.

I don't feel cross with Rutter for wanting it both ways, but I do understand a committed Christian's problem with his views. But I do feel that many many people who appear to be believing Christians, simply like the whole church thing, and happily go along with stories they know, deep down, to be myths.

Even the existence of Jesus is not certain. I think Joshua bar Joseph probably existed as a charismatic young rabbi with rather challenging views who preached along the shores of Galilee, but there is no contemporary Roman literature to confirm his life or death.

The Jesus we read about in the gospels though, would be utterly horrified at the riches of the established Catholic and Anglican churches, and the whole Vatican, at the violent and repressive history, at the money-grubbing televangelists, and at right wing religion everywhere.

He would be pleased at charitable work being done in his name though.

And spirituality perhaps?

JO5 how can you say these things have nothing to do with religion? They arose from religion - the beautiful churches the music and the traditions. They may not have anything to do with with personal faith but they certainly have something to do with religion.

Quote Joan (if I may) "But I too love the good bits about religion - the beautiful architecture, cool quiet churches to meditate in, music and tradition"

That isn't the religion. Those things haven't got anything to do with the religion involved.

And no-one - definitely no-one - is 100% sure of their religious faith.

" 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"

Yes, John Rutter. Make your mind up.

This is a wonderful thread, the truth of which resonates with me a great deal. I am an atheist with atheist parents, but I was taught Christianity at Sunday School and school, my parents being against forcing their views on their children. We all became agnostics or atheists in the end, because we were brought up, from an early age, to analyse, question and debate.

But I too love the good bits about religion - the beautiful architecture, cool quiet churches to meditate in, music and tradition.

People who are utterly certain about their religious views scare me though. They are the ones Weinberg talks about in his famous quotation:
'....good people tend to do good things, bad people tend to do bad things, but for good people to do bad things, that takes religion.'

wisewoman you chose the right moniker ... and no wonder you attract the kindnesses you mention. Hope your DH is okay. I agree that it often doesn't take much on the part of the giver, that makes a huge difference to the person on the receiving end.

Hi Grannyknot I went back and had a look. I had actually made a small contribution to the thread. In the last few weeks DH and I have gone through a very difficult time culminating in him having heart surgery. It is the wonderful kindness of family, friends and neighbours that have got us through. Apparently small acts like drawing the curtains and making the house cosy for me coming home from hospital visiting, putting small, easy to heat meals in the fridge, giving me a lift to hospital so I can have a day off driving. All these things kept me sane and more than ever I believe that kindness makes the world go round.

Open minded, searching, humble, a seeker of truth, beauty and goodness, and spiritually aware. And not a trace of the arrogant superiority which is so distasteful in some polemicists. There are many different ways of seeking these ideals and many different ways of describing the world. There are no certainties as Mishap says, but it's good to see respect and kindness when it appears.

wisewoman re kindness, my feelings exactly - see my thread 'In praise of kindness' from a while ago and to you.

Mishap Thanks! I am very glad to have read that, its very interesting and probably my sort of view, but put far more eloquently than I ever could.
Good for JR... Except I wish he wouldn't always give the humming or the ah! ahhing! lines to the Altos"!

Mishap I agree with you about young people wanting certainty. It seems to me that is is certainty that causes problems. If I am certain I am right and you are wrong we can never have the really interesting discussions which lead to new perpectives on both sides. Long live uncertainty and the wisdom that hopefully comes with age.

wisewoman - I can identify with your last sentence!

I think that in some ways we get better at accepting uncertainty as we get older - young people want clear answers to everything but in the end we gradually accept that they may not exist (at least not in our lifetime) - and maybe that this does not matter.

Those of you who are interested in this thread may find "Religion for Atheists" by Alain de Botton interesting. He picks out the good things about religion despite being an atheist himself. I heard him speak at the Edinburgh Book Festival this year and was inspired by his ideas. Petullus it is so good to feel there are others who are interested in depth and complexity! The older I get the less certain I get about pretty much anything except that we should all be kind to one another!

Glad you found it interesting - and many thanks for the Mortimer extract too.

There is something charming about Rutter's honesty and thoughtfulness. I heard him on TV the other day and he said much the same thing, also adding that if he were to pretend to something he does not believe then people would suss him out pretty quickly. The fact that he sets a lot of religious texts and writes a lot of carols leaves him open to these sort of questions all the time.

People sometimes ask me how I can go to the cathedral carol service as my start to Christmas, or take my singing group to a concert in aid of a church when I am an agnostic - but the answer is very much contained in what Rutter is saying - I just wish I had the eloquence to express it so well.

I went to a workshop that he ran a few days after his son was killed - we all expected him to cancel - and he was extraordinarily brave, charming and inspiring. He is certainly a very interesting man.