NYTimes: In a Crisis, Humanists Seem Absent

[marginlized]

This article was published yesterday. I didn't see any references to it in this group, so here goes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/29/us/on-religion-where-are-the-humanists.html?ref=global-home

And to start, I think this was finally a fairly written piece. The author points out "The interfaith service, by its very definition, precluded the involvement of leaders from non-faith organizations". He does reference and link to several organizations that provide these services. But this:

“The best we can do as humanists,” he continued, “is to talk about that pain in rational terms with the people who are suffering. We have humanist celebrants, as we call them, but they’re focused on doing weddings. It takes a lot more training to learn how to deal with grief and loss. I don’t see celebrants working in hospice or in hospitals, for example. There are secular people who need pastoral care, but we abdicate it to clergy.”

Doesn't begin to describe emotional needs in the face of tragedy, but it also ignores that religious ritual offers little more than homily. "Homily" itself being a synonym for platitude. If religious observance offers well worn emotional paths, honed by years of community recitation and shared ritual, how or what space can secularists provide to act as a similar buffer? Or what is a secularist's approach to this? I'm curious what you might think about the author's mention of "infrastructure"?

I guess I'm curious to know what efforts at building community if any there are in your areas or any that you know of?
Thanks for any comments you can offer.

[Curmudgeoness]

1. I agree with the writer regarding infrastructure,

at least to a point. The one big draw for religion is that it creates a place where comfort can be found in times of need. Whether you have a belief in god or not, everyone can use comfort some times. That is one of the things that I envy of the believers---they come together for members in need. Since we cannot be considered "members" of anything, we are missing that important role that religion (or community) plays.

But on a different part of the story, I do not think that atheists/agnostics/humanists would have been welcome at any of the services or other gatherings. At least they would not have been welcome if they had announced that they were nonbelievers. And that is the rub. People want to know where we are, and what we are doing, but if we were to announce that we were doing this as humanists, we would be criticized. Rock and a hard place.

I find that we tend to just do things that need to be done as individuals, not as an organized group. We do console people. We lend a shoulder to cry on. Instead of attending funerals, I volunteer to stay at the house to make sure that no one has read about the funeral and thinks it is a good time to rob the place. I have sat up nights with friends who are hurting. I bring food to the house when someone dies. But I don't proclaim that I am doing this for any reason than that it is the right thing to do. And I would feel stupid saying it was for any other reason, or under any banner.

[marginlized]

2. Thanks for writing

I get your ‘rock and a hard place’ is more about PR and less about who we are or what we do. And there is that ‘when is it best to act as a group or not’ problem. At least Humanist / Free Thinker groups in my town are volunteering on a variety of fronts as Humanists / Free Thinkers. And if today we’re volunteering for say environmental cleanups, then we can make steps towards areas that have traditionally been the province of church groups.

But your first paragraph is the biggie. And not as much for the “herding cats” sense of a lack of community.

After all, a sense of membership can happen almost automatically. Think of how many places you become a “regular”, just by showing up predictably: your workplace, coffee shops, your gym, a deli or butcher counter, etc. People are in church for an hour or two a week, their relationships are fairly formal, but they let that formality stand in for the sense of shared communion.

I don’t mean to downgrade religious community. Many people certainly know each other very well. But not everyone, which is my only point. Which do you know better, your congregation or your co-workers? The amount of personal information I can gather from 45 minutes at the barber shop, for example, is phenomenal.

But it’s the handling of big, powerful emotions that we, as a culture, agree to hand over to the clergy. Certainly this requires training, some clergy will have these skills. OTOH grief counseling is a profession whose members may or may not use their religious beliefs, or lack of them, in their practice. The difference is clergy come with congregations, grief counselors don’t. At any rate, we agree to allow emotional expression in religious settings, in part because it’s known and predictable, even if the clergy isn’t that good, even if all you get is homily.

[Curmudgeoness]

4. Maybe it is because I live in a very religious area,

but it is not as easy to organize a group of non-believers here. You are lucky to have a group that can do things. Even if there are atheists around here, they are in the closet. It would not be a good idea to announce it---believe me, since I am one of the few people who will admit to it. I suppose that when I do things, I could state that I am doing it as an atheist, but I am not ready to go that far.

Also in this area, church is not just a one hour affair. It is women's clubs and youth groups and retreats as welll as bake sales and dinners and all the other things that go along with it.

And religion goes much deeper than just going to church. Any function you attend will have prayers---we even still have government meetings trying to say prayers before the meetings. It seems a different world than the one you describe.

[marginlized]

6. Didn't mean to downplay religious community at all.

And we have our share of mega churches here as well which serve every need and then some. So if you want to shop social services you can. I was just trying to recognize that while some folks are in church every day, it's a spectrum from only C&E, etc.

However, "What church do you go to?" is definitely not the first thing anyone here asks. And I have to admit, when it comes to professing agnostic or other non-beliefs, I've heard people say so out load in public bars and other spaces.

The only time I've encountered prayer before a meeting was at a religiously affiliated nonprofit.

[mr blur]

3. "We have humanist celebrants, as we call them, but they’re focused on doing weddings."

No, they aren't. Not here, anyway

[marginlized]

5. We don't have any here either.

For my father's memorial a few years ago, we went with a Unitarian Universalist minister. I mean, you want somebody to officiate, play master of ceremonies, right? Neither of my parents were religious, but it's the same sort of problem: Who ya gonna call? She turned out to be lesbian, and wonderful. But early in the planning interview she asked "Ok, do I mention God at all?" Resounding no. And we went on from there.

[mr blur]

7. No, I meant that we *do* have Humanist Celebrants here,

but they're not just focussed on weddings.