Led by prominent British comedians Sanderson Jones and Pippa Evans, some groups of people in Britain, the U.S. and Australia are gathering to participate in an event that's very much comparable to a church service; it has fun songs, inspirational talks and community service. It lacks but one thing: God.
Societies of "atheist churches" are popping up with increasing popularity. They appeal to those who enjoy the structure and functions of a congregation and religious community, but don't believe in what's at its heart. This movement is coinciding with more and more Americans drifting away from religious affiliation, studies show.
Some members of the Sunday Assembly feel that there's a vibe about society that says, "religiosity equates to patriotism." Phil Zuckerman, professor of secular studies at at Pitzer College in Claremont, thinks that "a lot of secular people say, 'Hey, wait a minute. We are charitable, we are good people, we're good parents and we are just as good citizens as you and we're going to start a church to prove it.'"
Yet, it has some opponents: atheist Michael Luciano contents that "'the idea that you're building an entire organization based on what you don't believe...sounds like an offense against sensibility.'"
Still, this has proved to be an excellent alternative to legitimate religion for some. Atheist Elijah Senn says that this isn't a destructive or mean group; "'it's about making things and making things better.'"
As oxymoronic as the idea of an "atheistic church" may sound, I think this is a perfectly lovely solution for those who may not believe in the heart of a certain faith, but appreciate its communal nature and peaceable surroundings. I could not help but glance at that ever-nasty comment section this time; a few folks considered this organization a mockery of religion. Clearly, it is no mockery, as it is composed only of the most friendly and communal sentiments, and is meant to be a secular aid to society (the article mentions further that the gatherings are not bashing sessions of the religious). Not to mention, the sociopolitical field of the nation could use a counterweight to organized religion, frankly speaking. America is not a Christian nation by decree of any formal doctrine, but its society is indubitably founded on Judeo-Christian principles. This is not right, but it is fact.
I would agree with some that it isn't the best idea to call this a "church," as it blurs the lines between secular and religious organizations and furthers the belief of some that atheism can be classified as a religion. Atheism is a religion in the same way that Nothing is a foodstuff. And as atheism is no true religion, any formal, state-sponsored, atheistic organization could not receive tax exemptions, as some others in the always-dreadful comment section feared.
Until any problem should arise, let this godless congregation thrive and be merry.
Article: http://news.yahoo.com/atheist-mega-churches-root-across-us-world-214619648.html
being a christian (and a strong one in her faith) I see these atheist churches as pointless. I understand that people can be atheist, and i respect what others believe, but atheism is the lack of religious faith. I see atheists as people who are confused with the idea of a God so the reject it entirely, without researching about it. Either way, what can they talk about in these gatherings? being a good person? cool, my parents can lecture me on that any day of the week. These get togethers to disprove other religious is nonsensical and abasing to other faith religions
ReplyDeleteAs is stated both in the article and in the above analysis, these get-togethers are in no way bashing sessions. They do indeed talk about being a good person through community service, and they aren't trying to "disprove" other religions. From what I can tell, calling them "churches" is a bit of a comedic fling, and as I said in the analysis, that is indeed rather misleading. But when there's potential for a good force in the community, based on integrity and founded in humor, why not let it be active?
DeleteFelicia Padilla 5th period- while I support everyone's right to have their own religion, I do find it sometimes unnecessary to try and find an equivalent to religion. For instance. If I were not to believe in God, and have no religious affiliation, I would not only be opposing God, but mainly organized religion. I think some people say they are a certain religion rather than just saying no affiliation to gain attention.
ReplyDeleteIf one is to subscibe to an aditonal set of rules, besides the ones they already must subscibe to due to instutions such as the goverment and school, they should be able to choose these rules. And in choosing these rules they should be able to gather with people with similar rules and converse about how this system is working. An atheist church is completly valid and serves the same purpose as a normal chuch. Opposition that is even a smidge goverment related would be unconstitutional, and from a moral point of view, nothing is truly wrong. Where as some see atheism as a lack of knowlage most atheists found loopholes in religion through intentse studing. Rejecting god is a personal choice and degrading the intellgence or thought of any person based on religion is an ignorant thing to do.
ReplyDeleteI agree 100%.
Delete