“FAITHS IN SUFFOLK”. |
HUMANISTS |
LINKS TO LIST OF ARTICLES ABOUT AND BY HUMANISTS |
IMAGINE YOU ARE A HUMANIST |
|
Your philosophy is a positive |
|
Your moral values are
founded |
|
You believe that what a person does |
|
You aim to judge all situations |
|
Individual responsibility |
|
You might choose to mark |
|
You strive to live a full and happy life, |
|
|
|
Taken from the Humanist Faith Card in the Diversity Game |
|
* |
SUFFOLK HUMANISTS & SECULARISTS |
“WHAT ON EARTH ARE WE DOING?” |
Activities: |
|
Meetings – Some SH&S members meet in Ipswich and Hadleigh, others are content to keep in touch via the website and newsletters. We have pub lunches every couple of months, usually in Woodbridge. At some meetings we have guest speakers; they’ve included Peter Tatchell, the human rights activist, and Jim Herrick from the Rationalist Association, author of Humanism; an Introduction. Sometimes a member will talk about his or her own interest; Tom Boles has an observatory at Coddenham – he spoke about the cosmos, using photographs from the Hubble Space Telescope. Sometimes we have discussions; ten-minute topics are popular, when everyone can introduce a topical subject for discussion. |
|
Education – A member of SH&S is a member of Suffolk’s Standing Advisory Council for Religious Education (SACRE). We supply speakers for schools and other organisations. We’ve supplied Humanist education resources for RE teachers to every high school in the county, and have contributed content for a Humanist Box – objects designed to encourage young people to think critically, as part of SIFRE’s collection of resources for RE teachers. |
|
Ceremonies – Our team of Humanist Celebrants provide non-religious rite of passage ceremonies, mainly funerals, for anyone who wants one (you don’t have to be a Humanist to have a Humanist ceremony, as long as you accept that we don’t include any religion). Between us, we help hundreds of people every year. Two of us have done well over a thousand funerals each. Most funerals are in a crematorium, others are in a variety of places, including green burial sites, local authority cemeteries, and private buildings – even churches! Humanist ceremonies are all different, reflecting the personalities and circumstances of the people involved. |
|
Campaigning – From time to time, we join campaigns led by the organisations we’re affiliated to; the British Humanist Association and the National Secular Society. They’ve included the campaign to abolish the law on blasphemy, and the campaign to change the 2011 census form so that it recorded atheist and Humanist people – the records in the past have been inaccurate. |
|
Online activity – In 2009 we received the best regional website award from the BHA—in their words: "for blogging mercilessly; providing a content-rich, regularly-updated website". The site receives visits from tens of thousands of people every year, from all over the world. Through the website, we receive a variety of enquiries about ceremonies, Humanism in general, and the topics posted in the blog. We’re also on Twitter and Facebook. |
|
www.suffolkhands.org.uk – our main website. |
|
www.agoodlifewithoutreligion.com – a one-page introduction to alternatives to religion. |
|
www.twitter.com/SHandSNews – our Twitter ID. |
|
www.facebook.com/suffolkhands – our Facebook page. |
|
Emailing – We email news updates and newsletters to supporters and other interested people all over the UK and abroad. |
|
Promotion – In 2009 we marked the anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin with an exhibit about him and his theory of evolution in Ipswich Central Library. In 2010 we had another exhibit to mark Humanist Week, starting on 21 June. We’ve been invited to contribute features about Humanism by the local newspapers and BBC Radio Suffolk. From 1995 until about 2008, we contributed a regular Thought for the Day on BBC Radio Suffolk – you can read a collection on our website. We sometimes write letters or send press releases to the local media. |
|
Charitable & voluntary work – There used to be an Atheists’ Adoption Society and a Humanist Housing Association, when many similar organisations didn’t cater for non-Christians, but both have become redundant since a more liberal approach to welfare has been adopted. There are BHA members who’d like to start specifically Humanist welfare organisations, mainly to disprove the fallacy that we don’t do that sort of thing, but the consensus is that they’d duplicate existing organisations just to prove a point. Altruism is a natural human quality. We don’t need a label to express it. Many Humanists are generous with their time and money but they do this as individuals, through organisations without a religious agenda (such as the Red Cross) where your private beliefs are regarded as irrelevant. |
|
Aspirations – One of our main aims is to raise awareness of Humanism as a valid alternative to religious faith, and as an ethical approach to life. Another is to challenge ignorance about secularism, and to promote it as the only system that is fair to people of all faiths and none, because no one faith can or should be allowed to dominate society. Secularism means the separation of religion from the state. |
|
Through education, in schools and the public at large, we aim to challenge lazy assumptions, such as the widespread belief that moral values only come from religion and that those of us who have no faith lack them. This is deeply insulting. There is a long list of people who’ve contributed to the common good, without religion. Religious leaders have no claim to the moral high ground. |
|
We look forward to the day when everyone, regardless of their beliefs, will be treated as individuals and consulted as such, rather than through their “community”. Although some Humanists talk about a “community”, the idea is generally anathema to most of us. Some say that trying to organise Humanists is like trying to herd cats, with good reason, because we like to think for ourselves rather than accept any authority. The only form of “community” we recognise is the one we live in – our street, neighbourhood or district – where we have diverse beliefs, interests and opinions, and where we must try to get along together in spite of our differences. The same applies to society in general. |
|
Margaret Nelson. |
WHAT IS HUMANISM? – A SUMMARY |
|
· A descriptive word applied retrospectively (from about the late 19th century) to a certain set of beliefs and values, free from religion. These beliefs and values are at least as old as recorded history and a ‘permanent alternative’ that recur throughout time and place. They’re based on an ethical approach to life. |
|
· Humanism isn’t equivalent to religion. It’s not a ‘faith’, which means belief without proof. |
|
Atheism |
|
The word atheist comes from the Greek – ‘a’ meaning ‘without’, and ‘theos’, meaning ‘god’. |
|
Secularism |
|
· The term ‘secular’ was invented by George Holyoake in 1846 to describe the promotion of a social order separate from religion, without actively dismissing or criticising religious belief. Holyoake referred to Christianity rather than religion in general because this was a culturally Christian country in pre-multiculturalism 1846. |
|
· A secular society is one where religion and the state are kept separate, where politics and religion don’t mix, and where everyone is free to practice his or her religion, or not to have a religion, according to his or her own conscience, as long as he or she does no harm. |
|
How faith in the public sphere works in practice – some examples |
|
· The Church of England dominates national and regional ceremonial. |
|
· The Church of England enjoys financial privileges through the tax system and subsidy for its schools. |
|
· The UK is the only democratic country that has religious representatives in the legislature as of right (bishops in the House of Lords). |
|
· If you’re a member of the judiciary, the military, or the government, you’re expected to participate in Christian services on special occasions, whether you’re a believer or not, whatever sort of belief you may have. |
|
· Whenever an ethical issue is being reported in the news, a cleric is invariably invited to comment on the issue, as though the clergy were the only moral authority. |
|
· Whenever there’s a disaster of some sort, it’s usually commemorated with a church service, which isn’t inclusive. |
|
· The NHS funds the provision of hospital chaplains. |
Multiculturalism |
|
A concept promoted by Tony Blair (as PM) and his Communities Secretary, Hazel Blears. This isn’t fair or democratic to as it provides religious groups special channels of communication to local or national government, which have been used by unelected, unaccountable self-appointed “leaders”, who presume to speak on behalf of British citizens who ostensibly share the same religion, but whose attitudes and values may vary enormously. |
Fallacies |
|
· Goodness or badness in connection with atheism and faith: Canon Jenkin (at a previous seminar) and the Pope have linked atheism with destructive regimes of the 20th century. Describing someone as an atheist doesn’t tell you any more than that; it doesn’t tell you anything about his or her values and attitudes. Conversely, saying that someone is religious doesn’t necessarily mean that he or she is a good person. Whether you are good or bad, or mostly good or bad, doesn’t depend on whether or not you believe in a god; it depends on how you behave. |
|
· “Atheists never do anything charitable”: Most humanists and atheists contribute their voluntary efforts to good causes, but they do it without waving a banner in organisations like the Red Cross, Oxfam, UNICEF and so on, which don’t have a religious agenda but do include people of all faiths and none. They’re also likely to be found supporting other people on a one to one basis, without making a fuss. |
Fuzzy religion |
|
· No religious organisation’s representative is entitled to claim a legitimate presence in the public sphere because they don’t speak for a majority of those who have a religious faith. |
|
· Only a minority of nominal Christians know or understand the theology of Christianity. |
|
· A minority of British people subscribe to religions that never get a look in, because they’re barely recognised. |
|
· An increasing number of people say that they have a faith or that they do believe in a god, but don’t subscribe to any form of organised religion. |
|
Secular societies are inclusive; religious societies aren’t |
|
A secular society is the best sort of society for everyone, because it allows you to freely practice whatever faith you choose, or to live without religion without interference, as the case may be, and that the representatives of organised religion have no right to claim a stake in the public sphere, because they speak for a small minority and it’s presumptuous of them to do so. |
|
Faith in the Public Sphere – A Humanist Perspective - Summary |
|
EEFA lunchtime seminar. St Edmund’s House, Ipswich, 14 October 2010 |
|
Margaret Nelson. |
|
* |
FAITH IN THE PUBLIC SPHERE – A HUMANIST PERSPECTIVE. |
|
I’m a Humanist. Humanism is a descriptive word applied retrospectively (from about the late 19th century) to a certain set of beliefs and values, free from religion. These beliefs and values are at least as old as recorded history. |
|
Humanists accept naturalism (rather than supernaturalism) and we value scientific method as a means to gain knowledge. We accept that this life is the only one we have, and we think that morality arises out of human nature and culture. These ideas are a ‘permanent alternative’ that recur throughout time and place. They’ve been evident in Europe from the 6th century BCE to about 6th century CE, in China from the 6th century BCE onwards (the followers of Confucius were humanists), in India from the 6th century onwards, in the Arab world from about the 12th century, and in the Western world from about the 17th century onwards. |
|
Humanism isn’t a religion for atheists. It’s not equivalent to religion. It’s not a ‘faith’ – the word ‘faith’ means believing in something without evidence, which is anathema to a humanist. Humanists use reason to try to make sense of life and the world we live in, and if there’s something we don’t know or understand we’re content to admit that we don’t know. |
|
Some people misunderstand the word ‘humanist’ and think that it means an anthropocentric (meaning human-centred) view of the universe, as though we’re the most important species. We are important because we’re potentially the most dangerous species, but humanism’s about being aware of this potential and of our responsibility to live in a way that will cause the least harm. |
|
Many humanists might describe themselves as atheists, or are willing to be described as atheists, but I’m uncomfortable with the term, for several reasons. The word atheist comes from the Greek – ‘a’ meaning ‘without’, and ‘theos’, meaning god. I don’t care to be described in terms of something I’m not or in relation to a belief I don’t share. I don’t believe in fairies either, but I don’t call myself ‘afairyist’. Some humanists might call themselves agnostics, a term invented by the 19th century naturalist Thomas Henry Huxley to mean ‘without knowledge’, as Huxley said it’s impossible to say whether or not God exists. Again, this would mean defining yourself in religious terms. |
|
The notion of a God or gods is irrelevant to my life. So is religion. I live perfectly happily without any of it. If other people have faith, that’s up to them, but I don’t believe that they have any right to try to persuade me to accept their beliefs, or to impose their faith on me or anyone else. This is why I’m a secularist. I reject the opinion expressed by Canon Jenkin last week that faith has a legitimate place in the public sphere. If we’re talking about institutionalised religion at public expense, it does not. |
|
Just as the word ‘humanist’ has been misrepresented and misunderstood, so has the term ‘secular’, which was invented by an agnostic British writer called George Holyoake in 1846. He used it to describe the promotion of a social order separate from religion, without actively dismissing or criticising religious belief. Holyoake wrote, “Secularism is not an argument against Christianity, it is one independent of it. It does not question the pretensions of Christianity; it advances others. Secularism does not say there is no light or guidance elsewhere, but maintains that there is light and guidance in secular truth, whose conditions and sanctions exist independently, and act forever. Secular knowledge is manifestly that kind of knowledge which is founded in this life, which relates to the conduct of this life, conduces to the welfare of this life, and is capable of being tested by the experience of this life.” Holyoake referred to Christianity rather than religion in general because this was a culturally Christian country in pre-multiculturalism 1846. |
|
A secular society is one where religion and the state are kept separate, where politics and religion don’t mix, and where everyone is free to practice his or her religion, or not to have a religion, according to his or her own conscience, as long as he or she does no harm. There are many religious people who support this principle, as well as humanists like me. In religious states, such as Yemen and Iran, you aren’t free to practice any other religion but the state religion and it would be dangerous to assert that you don’t believe in a god or gods. In some societies, it would be impossible for Canon Jenkin to assert his Christian beliefs in public. |
|
There are secular states around the world; America, Canada, France, and Turkey (where secularism is under threat from Islamists) are just a few where secular principles are written in their constitutions. In Britain, we’re not a secular state because we have an established church, a legacy from King Henry VIII, who split with Rome when he had some difficulties over divorce, an heir, and alliances. The Queen is head of state and the church, and so we have a confused and confusing system. |
|
Let’s think about how faith in the public sphere works in practice. It’s not about censoring people who want to talk about their faith in public, though soap-box preachers are generally ignored. |
|
The Church of England, which has bishops sitting in the House of Lords despite its dwindling congregations and lack of accountability, tends to dominate all national and regional ceremonial, including remembrance events. We live in the only democratic country that has religious representatives in the legislature as of right. If you’re a member of the judiciary[1], the military, or the government, you’re expected to participate in Christian services on special occasions, whether you’re a believer or not, whatever sort of belief you may have. This makes hypocrites of thousands. I’m told that serving soldiers, sailors and airmen are not excused from church parade, regardless of their religion or lack of it. Religion, or faith, in this sense, is something that’s foisted on you, not something you choose. If religious authorities were confident that they were offering people something they wanted or needed, they would allow us to opt in, rather than making it difficult for us to opt out. |
|
I, and many others like me, find it very annoying that whenever an ethical issue is being reported in the news, the media, particularly the broadcast media, invariably find a cleric to comment on the issue, as though the clergy were the only moral authority. Handing over the moral high ground to religious people gives the impression that they have a natural entitlement to it; they do not. |
|
Whenever there’s a disaster of some sort, how is it commemorated? With a church service. Any event of this type excludes a significant proportion of the population because the religious terminology, the hymns and prayers, are meaningless to many of us. It was interesting, I thought, that the families and friends of the people killed by the bombs in London on 7th July 2005 organised their own memorial event in Regent’s Park a year later, and it was entirely secular so that it included everyone – of all faiths and none. That’s how all such public events should be, if they’re to be considered inclusive. |
|
Then there’s the difficult matter of multiculturalism, a concept that was promoted by Tony Blair, when he was Prime Minister, and his Communities Secretary, Hazel Blears. This has caused more problems than it pretends to solve. If you were as cynical as me, you might be inclined to blame it on the Iraq War, and a clumsy attempt to woo back the Muslim voters who’d abandoned the Labour Party. But even if you’re not a cynic, you might recognise that it isn’t fair or democratic to offer religious groups special channels of communication to local or national government, especially when those channels have been used by unelected, unaccountable self-appointed “leaders”, who presume to speak on behalf of British citizens who ostensibly share the same religion, but whose attitudes and values may vary enormously. The Conservatives rejected this approach to “consultation” as fraught with difficulties, saying that it’s better to consult people directly. It’s also presumptuous to talk about religious “communities”, when this assumes a commonality that may not exist. I recently met a young Egyptian Muslim who said that he’d visited a British mosque that was dominated by Pakistani Muslims, and that he’d never go again as he had nothing in common with them. In places like Oldham and Bradford, where there was rioting a few years ago, immigrant imams, who don’t speak English as a first language, impose their backward tribal values on young British people, and wonder why they’re resented. |
|
So, in many instances, faith in the public sphere is about people taking liberties by imposing their beliefs on other people, whether they like it or not – a recipe for dissatisfaction. |
|
I wasn’t surprised, but I was irritated, to note from Canon Jenkin’s summary that he linked atheism with “several of the most destructive and vile regimes of the 20th century”. Within minutes of landing in Britain on his recent visit, the Pope mentioned atheism in connection with Nazism. The Pope should know, and probably does, that Hitler was raised a Catholic and although he may have lapsed, he wasn’t an atheist. He developed a personal religious faith that seemed to have something to do with his Aryan ideals. Many Nazis were also Christians, and many Catholic priests openly collaborated with the Nazis in Germany and Italy. Like the other “destructive and vile regimes” Canon Jenkin might have been referring to, atheism didn’t have anything to do with the ideologies concerned. As I mentioned earlier, atheism simply means “without god”. Describing someone as an atheist doesn’t tell you any more than that; it doesn’t tell you anything about his or her values and attitudes. Conversely, saying that someone is religious doesn’t necessarily mean that he or she is a good person. Whether you are good or bad, or mostly good or bad, doesn’t depend on whether or not you believe in a god; it depends on how you behave. I think that Canon Jenkin sort of admitted that. |
|
Another fallacy that some religionists are fond of suggesting is that atheists never do anything charitable. This is nonsense. Most of the humanists and atheists I know have contributed or are contributing their voluntary efforts to good causes, but they do it without waving a banner in organisations like the Red Cross, Oxfam, UNICEF and so on, which don’t have a religious agenda but do include people of all faiths and none. They’re also likely to be found supporting other people on a one to one basis, without making a fuss. I’ve conducted about a thousand funerals for people who’ve lived without religion, and I’ve heard many stories of unselfish actions that have benefitted other people. |
|
Finally, there is another reason why no religious organisation is entitled to claim a legitimate presence in the public sphere, and that’s because they don’t speak for a majority of those who have a religious faith. Only a minority of nominal Christians, the ones who tick the “Christian” box on the census form or hospital admission form, actually know or understand the theology of Christianity. A minority of British people subscribe to religions that never get a look in, because they’re barely recognised – though apparently the Druids have just been recognised as a religion. An increasing number of people will say that they do have a faith, or that they do believe in a god, but don’t subscribe to any form of organised religion. They’ve worked out their own personal set of beliefs, which can be a mixture of paganism, pantheism and pacifism, and they’re happy to just try to live quietly by their own values, without coming into conflict with anyone. The conventions and rituals of organised monotheistic religions don’t interest them. I seem to remember that there was a newspaper report about some research that demonstrated this not long ago, but I can’t remember where it was. My own experience, having talked to people at Suffolk Inter-Faith Resource events, is that this is fairly common. My experience of young people, as a school visitor, is that most wouldn’t describe themselves as religious, but they do feel very strongly about ethical issues. |
|
So, my view is that a secular society is the best sort of society for everyone, because it allows you to freely practice whatever faith you choose, or to live without religion without interference, as the case may be, and that the representatives of organised religion have no right to claim a stake in the public sphere, because they speak for a small minority and it’s presumptuous of them to do so. As a humanist celebrant with twenty years experience, I can confidently say that there’d be no problem providing ceremonial or other public events to suit any occasion that would include everyone. |
|
Faith in the Public Sphere – A Humanist Perspective |
|
EEFA lunchtime seminar. St Edmund’s House, Ipswich, 14 October 2010 |
|
Margaret Nelson. |
|
* |
IT ALL REMAINS A MYSTERY. |
|
Six years old, in church, surrounded by adults who are all facing in one direction, singing hymns, praying, I tried to see who was the target of all this effort, but there was no one there! I did not understand, and seventy-two years later, I still don’t. What is this belief that defies logic and reasoning? |
|
Later in life, I attended school assemblies because it was compulsory but didn’t join in with any religious aspects. I hoped someone would question my rebelliousness, but nobody commented. |
|
I avoid the labels that seem necessary to define a person, such as atheist and agnostic, because they are interpreted as opposed to religion. I am not opposed; I just do not understand it. In the same way, I do not understand quantum physics, but I’m not opposed to it. |
|
I have never knowingly harmed anyone, physically or mentally, which cannot be said of many people of faith. Thousands, perhaps millions, have been killed in the name of religion. There has never been an atheist war. |
|
On the rare occasions that I’ve discussed religion with a person of faith, I’ve asked if God made everything. The answer was always “Yes”. I then asked why he made, for example, cancer. End of conversation. |
|
It all remains a mystery. |
|
Derek Mason. |
|
* |
MY JOURNEY INTO HUMANISM |
|
My journey into humanism was a long one. As a child, I was drawn towards worship in any form. I’m sure theatre was part of the attraction – I was a dramatic child and loved to watch the ‘goings on’ at the altar in church. Like many children, I loved the idea of Jesus and relished the colourful bible stories associated with him. |
|
Once, in Rhyl, my parents lost me. We had been walking along the prom when we came across a crowd singing lustily to the strains of a Salvation Army band. My parents ambled on, failing to notice that I had slipped in amongst the singers. I joined them for quite a while before Mum and Dad retrieved me. |
|
To my shame I suppose, I continued along the Christian pathway without question, was confirmed and married in church. There was a moment, however, when I was thirteen that troubled me for a very long time. My brother was killed in a road accident, aged sixteen. He disappeared from my life; I wasn’t allowed to see his body. My mother was devastated and would never recover. My father, I now suppose, felt helpless. He had to keep going, which my mother saw as uncaring. She had always felt that I was Dad’s favourite; she had lost hers. |
|
I was allowed to attend my brother’s funeral. I remember preparations that seemed odd even at the time; my clothes had to be right, things like that. I remember standing next to my mother and praying that this ceremony would help. I remember choked singing and lots of words I didn’t understand being rattled off by the vicar. No-one else spoke. I think the vicar visited us afterwards from time to time. It didn’t help at all. |
|
I became a Primary School teacher and had to ‘teach’ R.E. I was uncomfortable doing it and determined to encourage the children to keep an open mind. I always prefaced everything I said about Jesus or any other religious figure with the words, “there are lots of people who believe...” Even so, I was accused by one parent of telling their child they had to love Jesus. |
|
It was during the decade when both my parents died that I finally stopped to think it all through more ‘intelligently’. Like many people, I had a lot of guilt to deal with; a lot of anger too, especially with Mum who I felt had abandoned me. I became increasingly confident that I could find my way through the agony, confusion, bewilderment etc by sharing my experience with other human beings, by rational thought and by reading the works of great thinkers. I need to do more of it. |
|
About three years ago I met Margaret Nelson, a leading figure in humanism locally, nationally and internationally. I finally woke up to the reality of becoming a humanist and how it leads to new interests, meeting people across the age range and so on. I joined Suffolk Humanist & Secularists and trained as a Humanist Celebrant. |
|
Whilst I am not ‘anti-religion’ and respect those who have faith, I do believe in the statement that it’s possible to lead ‘a good life without religion’. I might even say that it seems possible that the world would be a safer place without the divisions caused by religions. |
|
Sue Hewlett. |
THE PROBLEM WITH LABELS |
|
The older I get, the less I’m inclined to adopt any label to describe how I view life, the universe, and everything. The trouble with labels is that they encourage laziness. If you’re in a social situation and someone asks you what you do, or what you are, and you tell them, they’ll be inclined to refer to whatever they’ve heard or read about that label and apply it to you. It’s more interesting to be mysterious; to learn about each other through a process of discovery. Labels lead to pre-conceived ideas about what they stand for. If someone identifies him or herself as a Christian or a Muslim, what do you assume about him or her, and his or her attitudes to, say, morality or privilege? You’re likely to be wrong. We form our values and opinions through our experience and the people and ideas that have influenced us, including religious ideas, and we react to these things differently. |
|
So, if I describe myself as a humanist, some may assume that I’m part of a trend towards what a friend calls “fluffy, cuddly humanism”, which can be summarised as simply being good without God. In its campaign for legal humanist weddings in England and Wales, the British Humanist Association has, perhaps unintentionally, given the impression that everyone who has a humanist rite of passage celebration (a humanist ceremony) is a humanist, and that humanism is equivalent to religion, which it isn’t. |
|
Humanism, to me, is a way of thinking, of viewing the world, in the only way we can; as human beings, without reference to any supernatural explanations for life, the universe, and everything. The philosopher Bertrand Russell said, “Many people would sooner die than think. In fact they do.” I’m not sure that he was entirely right, as it seems to me that not thinking isn’t necessarily a choice; some people are just not very curious. A humanist friend was asked, “Don't you have to be really brainy to be a humanist?” “No,” she replied, “you just have to use the brains you've got.” Humanism is a philosophy for the insatiably curious, who never stop asking questions. Far from being fluffy and cuddly, humanism can sometimes lead you to lonely places. But it can also be bracing to find yourself in a different place from other people, discovering things for yourself. Humanists habitually ask “Why?” Sometimes, there isn’t an answer – yet. |
|
This approach to life has been described as a scientific one; science is defined as the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. It’s also been claimed as a philosophical approach, since philosophy is the study of the fundamental nature of knowledge, reality, and existence. But we’re back to labels again, and possibly the claims of different disciplines, when a humanist approach to life is limitless. Creative expression through the arts, social innovation, psychology, political theory, the evolving uses of language, are all avenues through which we’re free to explore, if we choose. |
|
How did I get here? As a child, I drove my parents and teachers mad by constantly questioning what I was told. My parents, whose families originated in Scotland, were raised as Presbyterians – a rather dour bunch of non-conformists who disapproved of the pleasures of the senses, particularly on Sundays. Mother, who enjoyed a wee dram, didn’t appear to be wholly convinced by this brand of Christianity and, like many others, developed her own, private version, which didn’t involve going to church. Dad did go to church until his deafness meant he couldn’t follow the services. I was sent to church, and the church youth club, where I got into trouble for arguing with the minister. By the time I was in my early teens, having explored some alternative ways of thinking in the public library and with a friend’s more liberal parents, I announced I didn’t believe any of it, and that was that. I wasn’t put under any pressure to continue going to church. A Quaker RE teacher listened to some of my half-formed ideas and didn’t try to impose any kind of orthodoxy, which helped. By the time I left school at sixteen to work in a bank, religion played no part in my life. It has been an irrelevance ever since. |
|
Going to Art College and university in the 1960s and early 1970s brought me into contact with bright people from a wide range of disciplines, as well as some students whose upbringing had been far more religious than mine. One sad case was a boy who’d been raised a Catholic, and who found it hard to cope with all the students’ sexual activity going on around him. Deeply conflicted, he had a breakdown and was found wandering the streets naked late one night. Another Catholic friend coped by spending a lot of time in the confessional, joking that they’d had to install a loo in there, just for him. At university, studying for a post-graduate teaching qualification with an assortment of graduates from all disciplines, one of my tutors was the mathematician Dick Tahta, who’d inspired Stephen Hawking as a schoolboy. Dick was very keen on existentialism. He took a small group of us for an intense weekend in a remote bungalow owned by the Monkton Wyld Centre in Dorset (my son was fortunate to go there, years later, for a holiday organised for bright schoolchildren). To this day, I’m still not sure what the purpose of this weekend was, and I’m none the wiser about existentialism (a rather nihilistic movement), but Dick encouraged us to question just about everything, which some of us did. One friend, a fellow artist, took to spending a lot of time in the garden playing his violin. If I could remember more about it, it would make a good film. Dick was among several of the staff at college and university who encouraged a non-conformist approach to life and although I didn’t end up with particularly impressive qualifications, as I was never very good at sticking to a syllabus, I’m forever grateful to them. |
|
It wasn’t until much later, over twenty years later, that I got involved with organised humanism. At that time, the British Humanist Association was a small organisation that campaigned against religious privilege and encouraged non-religious people to openly reject the status quo, where the church claimed the moral high ground and dominated public ceremonial, and children were not taught about alternatives to Christianity, including the free-thinking alternative. I had surgery and treatment for cancer and soon afterwards my parents died within six months of one another. These events led me to consider what sort of funeral my son might arrange for me, as it wouldn’t be appropriate to invite God. Funeral directors only offered religious funerals, so I volunteered to become a humanist celebrant in 1991. In December that year, I founded the Suffolk Humanist group, where like-minded people have met to share ideas and raise awareness of alternatives to religion. The rest, as they say, is history. After those first few years, most people became aware that religious ministers don’t have a monopoly of rite of passage ceremonies, which can be as personal as you choose. What started as a small subversive movement has resulted in a widespread rejection of convention. Humanists still have a role to play, but we’re among many who offer a choice. What most people don’t realise is that we were here first. |
|
Having given over twenty years as a secular subversive, I’m no longer very active in organised humanism, but I’ll be a humanist freethinker until the day I die, unless I go doolally, in which case, I won’t care. |
|
Margaret Nelson. |
The happy human is the symbol of Humanists.
The maxim "Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself"
is a sound basis for community life. Humanists have faith in human nature and
believe that working together for the common good leads to human happiness.