IRISC

International Research Institute into Spirituality and Change

Present John Reader (chair), Ian Carter (minutes), John Atherton (speaker), Caroline Baillie, Martin Hazell, Ian Ball

The group each introduced themselves.

John Atherton gave a talk without script or notes. The gist follows, any inadequacies are probably the transcription of Ian Carter who has written it down:-

There have been many changes in the area of the Cathedral here. The journey through change is the greatest journey we make.

Callum Brown in The Death of Christian Britain (Routledge, 2001) has highlighted a major decline in mainstream denominations linked to this process of change. At the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th a well documented process of secularization began. Brown says this process has accelerated since the 1960’s and changed out of all recognition. One of the major changes he identifies is in connection with the decline of organized religion. A relevant question for RCs is, ‘Is this linked to Vatican 2?’ There is currently a pick and mix understanding of spiritualities. This is not sustainable in relation to organized religion, if the latter undergoes major decline. The changes are cumulative and cannot be interpreted solely in terms of received understanding.

Atherton suggests we need to go back to the 18th century to find inherited models that may help us understand this process. The age generates an interdisciplinary understanding. An age of economic ideas, scientific developments, social and political change. We can look at the convergencies. We can formulate models, study the relationship of for example organized Christianity (as the major religious force in this culture) in relation to the changes.

(John Reader’s (sic.) thesis on faith and reason was mentioned as a model of secular and theological practices. The secular can be about faith as much as reason. This started JR. talking about Derrida’s ideological connection of faith and reason. We acquiesce to the faith of another on the basis of trust. A book by Antonio Damasio Descartes Error was mentioned. It gives scientific evidence for reason and emotion being located in nearby areas of the brain. It suggests somatic markers to do with feelings in our response to decisions. We respond to things by gut instinct and then rationalize them. There was discussion about the way people respond with feelings rather than what they are seeing - this was related to the e-group - it is a neutral medium so it is difficult to see the intention of an e-mail without seeing what the people sending it are feeling.)

Atherton was allowed to resume his talk. The 18th and 19th centuries were an age of voluntarism. This time witnessed a growing significance of industrial corporations, but also of voluntary societies growing without state interference. Theologically this may be characterized as the age of atonement. Religion is the journey of an individual soul through life as a vale of tears - a time of testing. RC evangelism manifested by the Sacred Heart. Most important parable is the parable of the Talents. Protestant Work Ethic paralleled in Self-Help approaches. Common understanding of faith and reason embedded in both. JS Mill is a major figure and reflects this interaction. Came from the Utilitarian tradition, but encountered the Lakeland poets and discovered another side to himself - the romantic tradition. This is the location of the human, is the interaction between the two. Almost like Buber’s I and Thou. A convergence so substantial as to be a reality. Not a dualism, but a significant entity by itself, as interaction.

By the end of the 19th century free market voluntarism was seen as insufficient. The importance of regulation by the state began to emerge. From the 1850’s on Town Halls began to be constructed and all the intervention from local government that goes with them. This grew into the significance of nation states. The extreme version of this was Marxist Leninist. But there is also its more moderated version in the capitalist welfare state.

Theologically this is the age of incarnation. FD Maurice etc. Recognizing the journey through life in God’s creation and promoting the signs of the kingdom as we go. There is a very sacramental understanding of state - for example William Temple who coined the idea of the welfare state. Temple provided the theological undergirdings for Beveridge. Whilst Bishop of Manchester he did a lot of work on this on Blackpool beach (expounding John’s Gospel to his diocese at play). Theologically the concept of incarnation moves from the individual to collective action.

In the 80’s the move to collective action was pronounced with cf. Faith in the City. If the changes are as seismic as Brown suggests, then it may be that we can no longer run with an incarnational model.

The new model is partnership. In the secular realm, no one discipline can explain / address all the problematics or engage all the issues. This means having to construct relationships (partnerships) in an interdisciplinary and international way. To construct collaborative enterprises is a form of reconciliation, and indeed often requires it. The engagement with other disciplines needs to recognize the identity of disciplines in and through engagement with the other. How do you work with this theologically? For instance, how can you truly work interfaith? Can you put inter and faith together? The cost is enormous. Through pain comes creativity.

Sacrament is about incarnational theology. Material embodiment. Yet the host is a symbol of both incarnation and atonement. This becomes reconciliation.

A theme parable is the Prodigal Son. Luke’s narrative is of a gentile. The son goes out from the Jewish homeland. The enterprise of going out is an important part of the narrative. The return and reconciliation shows a maturity of journeying that takes us beyond foundations.

What do we make of organized religions? If religion is part of globalization, then presently successful and prosperous 3rd world churches are likely to end up with decline like organized religion in the West. The collaborative enterprise suggests a wide range of ways people relate to knowledge - but feeling is as important as reason.

Atherton summed up by saying that the reconciliation he was talking about was a living interaction of thesis and antithesis. Is there an ultimate reconciliation?

_ _ _ _ _ _

Caroline Baillie began the discussion by tossing in the idea of an "Outcome space". A fact is a dialectic - it’s not that we all agree, but we all assent to share in an outcome space. We all see it in different ways and relate to it in different ways. Negotiated universals. There is a sense that there should be a space corresponding to meaning, there should be an outcome of purpose. (People should?? be in relationship with each other) Is this the right thing to be aiming for? What is an appropriate level of indeterminacy in this process? What level of flexibility is permissible for things part of a community’s core identity? It is difficult to let go of identity and move into a space where more is up for grabs. In religion, Derrida and Kant were mentioned as subjecting religion to reason without worrying about orthodoxy. In business the balance score card was mentioned as a process presented as a highly objective "scientific" thing - which was on analysis highly subjective. A business plan feels a reassuringly concrete and real projection into the future. But in fact it conceals risk - it’s fluid, up for grabs. In practice we are back to feelings and intuitions.

An "outcome space" may not be very solid. After discussion we may have a better convergence on an idea, a fuller collective understanding of something. Science can be as subjective and uncertain as any other area of thought, but we are forced to have criteria by which we make decisions. People share in a process. They need an outcome space.

Tension is part of this structure. It is easier in some ways to deal with metaphors of science than metaphors of religion. A religious metaphor does not work for the majority of people now. Tension has exciting potential. In relationships between people what really matters is the tension. Perhaps we should look at relations between molecules, and look for analogies in people relations. Unfortunately we do not "know" as much about relationships between people as with materials. It is the interface which is particularly interesting e.g. a piece of reinforced plastic. Good architecture is putting different elements together.

Sacramental space may say something about this outcome space - "Where it all comes together" physically in the same space, something deeply significant and yet different to each of the participants. Like taking a group of Romanians to Whitby where Dracula came ashore. A deeper intention than reinforcing belief, more than mundane, more reflective, purposeful.

At 1.30 it was decided the outcome space should be the pub for lunch. There was a short discussion about the e-group. The medium can be quite hard to 'chat' with to give any feeling or meaning, but is ideal for factual transfer of important data and discussion of academic issues.

Sometimes also, especially with a group like ours, there can be people who want to use it for conversations between themselves but using the wider e-group as their medium. Perhaps the best policy is that those who read the conversations that they are not actively involved in, feel free to let others get on with them if they want to, or ask about the things they don’t know about and want to find out.

It would be nice to have a e-group in which it feels safe to admit ignorance and in this way, a bit of true 'knowledge building ' might occur. We continued to explore the idea of an 'outcome space'. This is the place in which all possible ways of understanding something are expressed. We have permission to look at things in different ways from different angles, to carry on different conversations and to opt out when we want to.

We decided, for now, not to change the keywords or the introductory statement on the Yahoo site. For now, until something better is suggested. Change is about developing awareness, and this can only occur if we know what we don’t know. (Thanks Caroline!).

Next meeting in the summer at Bangor

If you would like to contact the secretary with comments or suggestions mail me