26 – Sofia 26

Editorial

EDITORIAL There is a tendency for a movement like the Sea of Faith to become a little turned in on itself, and develop its own ‘orthodoxy’ which is every bit as inhibiting as the religious dogmatism against which it is reacting. The contributions to this issue from Ronald Beasley, Charles Ward and Jack Wood all in their different ways alert us to this danger.

The contribution of modern science (especially physics) to our understanding of religion is another theme which has emerged, unlooked for, in the compiling of this edition of the magazine. Gerd Sommerhoff is not a member of the network, but is a scientist and secularist who gladly acknowledges the importance of religion to others. His article is a model of the kind of creative dialogue which is needed in the wider ecumenism which extends to all who ‘seek the common good’. He had the distinction of presenting the BBC’s first TV science programmes for schools.

The ‘new physics’ — and notably the thought-experiment involving Schrédinger’s famous cat — feature in both Gerard Sullivan’s response to Chris Gaal and in Nigel Baynes’ review of Lloyd Geering’s book on the subject.

More familiar SoF concerns emerge in two articles from the clergy, the thoughts on prayer by John Hodgson and the autobiographical piece by Nicholas Smith. fs (FF Kae This time last year I agreed to edit SoF' Magazine for one issue. That has extended to one year, but other commitments mean that I am now having to stand down. The October issue will (as last year) take the form of a Conference Report, and after that I shall put the care of the publication back into the far more capable hands of David Boulton.

I should like to take this opportunity to thank all those who have contributed to the magazine over the past year, and to apologise to those who, for lack of space, have not yet seen their offering in print.

How is it that The Sea of Faith is still ignoring Jesus the Man by Barbara 'Thierrin? This book' is of the same rank as John Robins. Will promises to write a positive introduction to Thierring’s work. All the reviews of it I have seen say it is junk. If you have read this book and have an opinion on it, let’s hear from you.

— Will Watson