Contents
Articles
- Nonrealist Worship: Paradox or Possibility?, Anne Ashworth
- Is Religion Created or Discovered?, Varaghosa
- The Good Levite and the Bad Samaritan, Richard Eddleston
- Conference Review: Is Nothing Sacred?
Reviews
- But Will It Feed the Hungry?, Eilidh Whiteford
- Conspicuous Consumption, Graeme Smith
- Alternative Victorian Values, David Boulton
- Job 6 Jehovah 0, Leslie Griffiths
- Damien in the Lion's Den, Tim Woodcock
Regulars and Occasionals
- Beachcomber: In Defence of Trash, Alison Webster
- Postscripts, Seafarer
Editorial
Varaghosa offers a Buddhist perspective Tim Woodcock on ‘Living with the Enemy’ THE Goop LEVITE AND THE BAD 10 SAMARITAN Richard Eddlestone reassesses a well-known parable REGULARS DAMIEN IN THE LIon’s DEN 17 FACING THE Music 3 Editorial REVIEWS BEACHCOMBER 18 BuT WILL IT FEED THE HUNGRY? 12 Alison Webster’s new column Eilidh Whiteford reviews Cupitt’s On Being PosTBAG 19 Your letters Conspicuous CONSUMPTION 13 PosTcRIPTS 21 Graeme Smith on Jeanette Winterson’s Gut Symmetries by Seafarer EDITORIAL Sea of Faith The quarterly magazine of the Sea of Faith Network Hobsons Farm, Dent, Cumbria LA10 5RF Editor: David Boulton Facing the Music and all that jazz an earnest music student whether he consid- ered his jazz “folk music”. He replied, “Well, I aint never heard no horse play a tune!” His point was that all music (like all religion) is made by folk. Who or what else could make it?
The pedant will reply that by Satchmo’s definition Mozart’s concertos, Beethoven’s quartets and Mahler’s “Symphony of a Thousand” are all “folk music” - which robs the term of its useful specific meaning as a popular, usually anonymous music within an ethnic tradition, as distinct from “high culture” music composed by specialists. That’s the trouble with pedants: they are so often right - but irrelevant. Anyway, my purpose here is not to trouble readers with musicological controversy. It is to descant lightly on all that jazz. :
I am encouraged in this direction by an article in the January Friends Quarterly with the unlikely title “Jazz - a Paradigm for Quaker Discipline?”.
The writer, Ted Cantrell, argues that “the essence of jazz (particularly the traditional type) is that it is a kind of music where there is freedom for each musician to play as (s)he is inspired, as long as (s)he harmonises with the group”. Five conditions, he suggests, are necessary to make a good, lively jazz (or jam) session: “(1) the musicians are centred round the same tune; (2) they are well practised with their instruments; (3) they are very sensitive to changes in tempo and key in the rest of the group, they are good listeners; (4) they enjoy being quiet when some of the others are creating good music; (5) they have an appreciative audience with whom to celebrate and share the pleasure.” He adds that “some ‘trad’ musicians may follow a 12-bar routine, others use a familiar theme that forms the basis of the music. The result may be very pleasant, but it may also be total chaos if disciplines are not followed or if one player ignores the rest”.
Ted Cantrell sees parallels with a good Quaker meeting, but we can extend the comparison to a L:: Armstrong was once famously asked by The “Duke”: collective spontaneity, disciplined anarchy L “SOF is still small, has no cathedrals, no liturgy, no canon of great works or old masters.
But it has a good tune to play, and to play with, both in ensemble and in solo breaks.” EDITORIAL much wider set of interactions, from church gatherings to special-interest groups of all kinds, certainly not excluding our own dear network and its web of meetings at all levels, from local group to steering committee, discussion group to national conference.
Our meetings work best when they are “centred round the same tune”. Wholly unstructured meetings, with no common agenda, no clear theme on which to play variations, make noise, not music.
We do well to remember that different members of the group play different instruments, and we'll get better results if we know when to give the tune to the tailgate trombone and when to leave the strumming to the banjo. But each player has a responsibility to the rest to practise and develop their own skills, to hone their own special contribution. The fewer careless bum notes, the better.
If we don’t listen to each other, the noise we make to the Lord will not be a joyful one. Every meeting has its shifts of tempo, changes of key. If we miss them, it will all end in tears.
Trad jazz is structured as a mix of ensemble and solo playing. We have to develop a feel for when it’s time for a solo “break”, and what instrument it is appropriate to give it to. The breaks are not just solo displays (though they can be that in passing); they should grow out of the ensemble playing which preceded them and point to further development of the theme. Players should know there is a time to speak and a time to stay silent.
Some jazz sessions work best when the players play only for themselves.
Some don’t come alive unless there is an audience to cheer the players on, or to join in the singing or dancing. Sharing the pleasure, both the pleasure of performing and that of listening, not to mention the extra pleasure of both playing and listening simultaneously, is what the enterprise is all about. Jazz is not easy music to make. It may seem at first sight the most anarchic of music-forms, but it demands concentration, discipline and rigour. It can only work where the players are clear about the conventions within which they are playing. Even the most virtuoso soloist must respect these conventions - the 12-bar routine, the set repetitions, the agreed harmonic progressions, knowing when to blow and when to blue.
Indeed, the smaller and more informal the group, the greater the need for an agreed group discipline. Turn-of-the-century Dixieland jazz, made in small groups, worked with a skeleton structure on which was laid a largely improvised framework. The discipline came from respect for the conventions within which the improvisations were structured. As the demands on them grew, the better bands began to rely more on priorarrangement and less on genuine improvisation. The great bands of Jelly Roll Morton in the twenties and Duke Ellington in the thirties were arrangement-led, but they never lost the essence of great jazz: collective spontaneity. (Where they did lose it, as in the sanitised big-band “swing” of Glen Miller and all the other moonlight serenaders, it just wasn’t jazz any more, which is why jazz had to be revived in the forties - but that’s another story!) A network is a network, not an institution. Its essence is collective improvisation, with a tad more emphasis on the “collective” than the “improvisation”. As the pattern resulting from a mixture of sounds makes good jazz, so the pattern resulting from our explorations and promotions should make good music to our inner ears.
As the best of Jelly Roll, King Oliver, Kid Ory and the Duke gloriously demonstrated, the disciplined anarchy of jazz may be a world apart from the exquisitely crafted work of a Mozart or the architectural monument-making of a Mahler, but it sings and celebrates the same song.
Patti Whaley, Letters Editor, Sea of Faith, 145 Petherton Road, London N5 2RS Or e-mail them to: 101335.3561@compuserve.com LETTERS More Jesus, more Marx ost SoFers will know something of Mine Jesus Seminar, the nearest thing to Sea of Faith in the USA. I went to their annual gathering in Santa Rosa, California in October as a self-appointed delegate. It is a meeting of biblical scholars (fellows) and those interested in their work (associates). I took a stack of SoF literature, mainly magazine back issues and conference papers. All in all I had a good time, it is a cheerful, friendly gathering.
I would also like to comment on the November London SoF Conference about which I can’t be so positive. It was entitled “Is Nothing Sacred?” and if I’ve understood them aright, for David Hart the sacred was manifest in the Lamb of William Blake, for Don Cupitt life was sacred and for Karen Armstrong it was compassion. I found myself being forced into the unfamiliar role of a conservative; for me none of these concepts were as “numinous” as that of the Kingdom of Heaven as preached by Jesus and, in our own day, by Marx; that vision where each receives according to their needs and gives according to their abilities.
Nothing they said related to or approached the grandeur and majesty of this idea, none gave a hint of that “measure for all things” which it is the sole function of religion to provide. None of the speakers even hinted at the central moral fact of our situation, that we consume far more than our fair share of the world’s resources.
It almost seems that freedom from the traditional concept of God has destroyed any notion of moral commitment, to have a vision at all is almost, in theological terms, to make one a realist. SoF has lost its faith in God but it has yet to find its faith in humanity; it has led us out of Egypt but refuses to go to Sinai. Without vision the people perish.
— Peter Lumsden, London
PETER LUMSDEN 23D South Villas London NW11 9BT The meaning of ‘life’ n listening to Don Cupitt’s November SoF conference lecture I cannot but feel that he is a little out of touch with life. For me, the reason why so much reference to “life” in our language has crept in since the fifties is a sign not of a new religious feeling but of the increasing materialism of the world with its “God” being “money”. With money in pockets, certainly, life is better. But judging from the amount spent on the lottery and the way in which the new rich spread their money, I feel Cupitt is wrong in seeing new spiritual development being widespread.
Possibly more single efforts to raise money for charity are made, but the charities themselves say they are feeling the effects of the lottery. And what is being done (really) for the poor countries overseas? Certainly one should lead life to the full, but too much demand is being put on people in the workplace, and hours of work are now longer, not shorter, than before. And what of drug culture of the young? - these people are trying for “fixes”, not for the real joy that can come from living life to the full. There is more on offer materially for us all, but that can lead to envy and sharp practice, not spirituality.
— Margaret Davis, Chepstow
MarGaARET Davis 7 The Hop Garden Chepstow NP6 5RX Sea of evolving values? aving arranged for a few friends to He copies of the excellent Spring edition of the SoF magazine I was disappointed to find one copy had been promptly put out for recycling.
Apparently unwelcome notions of supernatural powers were triggered by the words “religious faith” in the title.
On the premise that the magazine is the voice of a thinktank concerned to find new ways of cultivating spiritual values in our Darwinian society, perhaps a shorter title such as “Evolving Values” would prove to be slightly less disconcerting.
— Ian Readman, Horncastle
IAN READMAN Old School Minting Horncastle LNO SRT Christianity does not need God ur electioneering politicians appear (); have recruited morality as a votecatcher but carefully avoid any mention of religion for fear of entanglement with the Church whose condemnation they still fear. Congregations continue to decline because the Church persists in preaching the unbelievable to the unbelieving following Darwin’s publication of Origin of Species in 1859. Christianity does not need God: the former is a proven and practical code of conduct for Love Letters, Stanley Spencer, 1950 everyday decision making that owes its success to the fact that it is nothing more than enlightened and sublimated selfinterest, whereas the latter is a primordial alternative to the Big Bang.
If we are to maintain the belief that our destiny lies in the hands of some incomprehensible supreme intelligence then we must not overlook the probability that such an intelligence is inanimate and inorganic. The dominant feature of this concept is its incomprehensibility that renders futile all attempts at human interpretation. The Christian ethic on the other hand is easily understood and instantly applicable to today’s human problems, some of which are considered in my recently published A Rational Christian.
If our Church wishes to reclaim its former authority it should promote Rational Christian solutions for all our problems, thereby rendering politicians redundant!
— C.A.P. Ellis, Ilford
C.A.P. ELLIs 212 Roding Lane South Ilford Essex IG4 5PP Evangelical balls nn Padley’s church (“An Unreasonable Distinction”, Autumn 1998) is so perfectly balanced it makes me feel quite giddy. Fortunately it’s also non-existent and so can remain perfect.
Being “in the mode of passion”, however, messy old existence still has a place in my religious life. Lovers like to “do it”. I can fully understand Ann’s choice but, personally speaking, I’ve had it up to here with partying alone and damned if I’m going to miss out on the fun. And since I am going to party I might as well have a ball.
Of course evangelical balls are not for everyone: too physical, too loud, and far too much emotional inebriation, certainly no place to bring one’s brain (unless it’s big enough to contain acres of absurdity, paradox, pathos and is firmly attached to a sensual body). But it is a party, for Christ’s sake, not a wake. Ann understands this and, with remarkable enlightenment acknowledges the integrity of joy and the dignity of individual passion. We can all use a sacred space and congenial company to be different together in.
I like Phillip Knight’s “new category” (“Reason and Faith: the Cherry Cake Option”, Autumn 1998) a whole lot more than recycled reason-versus-faith dualism. Give me “radically-middle-of-theroad” anytime because truth (whatever that is) lies at both extremes. In the passionate geometry of faith the centre is at the circumference - where Philip’s cherries are. Faith is its own rationale. It create its own intellectual climate just like it created the world.
My original article (“Love in an Evangelical Climate”, Summer 1998) was actually a celebration of evangelical passion, not gladsomeminded irrationality.
Any connoisseur of the varieties of religious experience could not confuse them.
Some quite intelligent people fall madly in love with Jesus, but they don’t feel it necessary to turn the emotional wine into rationalist water as a sign of their enlightenment. Evangelical passion, like all love trysts, is both self-indulgent and self-sacrificing - a nice balance. There is a time to “raise the low” and a time to raise the roof, a time to be rational and a time to be daft, a time to be doggedly non-realist and a time to fly with the metaphor.
Alas, if Ann did get her beautiful church, it wouldn’t suit everyone (far too perfect). Mercifully, in the new postmodern paradigm it doesn’t have to. It is not only possible that theological radicalism could wed (or at least have a passionate affair with) evangelicalism - but devoutly to be wished. Just imagine their offspring - singing dancing post-realists.
— Duncan Park, London
DuNcAN PARK 1 Stratford House Tenterden Drive London NW4 1EB ‘One impulse from a vernal wood...’ *ve long felt that Wordsworth (“A Lyrical Ballad,” Winter 1998) was one of us: indeed, when I first fell out with mainline “realist” Christianity and before I knew of SoF, I formulated a view that God is to be found, or, more precisely, comes into being, where the shaping human imagination meets the natural (or human or humanly created) world with a particular effect. At its most profound we call it a spiritual experience, but I think it happens all the time. And Wordsworth, I thought then and think now, is probably among our best guides to how it happens.
JOANNA AND GARTH DALES 45 West Park Avenue Leeds LS8 2EB LETT ERS should be sent to Patti Whaley at the above address. ‘REVIEWS re edited by Alison Webster, and books and review-sug- gestions should be sent to her c/o.
— Joanna and Garth Dales, Leeds