Our Lady of Lourdes and MRD

Recently we attended a catholic funeral of a friend. For me the surroundings seemed so alien. The liturgy was spoken and the responses made, robot like, in a sing-song voice and, later at the crematorium, we got a decade of Hail Marys. Afterwards one of our (non-catholic) group queried how could these people, in all good conscience, go through this seemingly empty ritual again and again without questioning it? And I wondered to myself if non-believers would likewise query as vain repetition our own church services.

Our Lady of Lourdes Church, Drogheda

mystical mural behind the altar

Strange how the strong conviction on which one person's life is built can be another person's anathema.

the skull belonging to MRD

They've just discovered MRD, a nearly complete 3.8-million-year-old skull in Ethiopia that has apparently changed views about human evolution. Strange how scientists allow such a paradigm shift and yet pooh pooh doubts expressed by those of lesser persuasions. Asked if this find was a "missing link" the scientist admitted "there are many links in the chain of human evolution and most if not nearly all of them are still missing". Is all of this more or less tenuous than belief in catholic transubstantiation? Or than in what you or I believe?

Pavlova deconstructed

A year or so ago Ali and I enjoyed a weekend get-away in Co. Wexford. We stayed at a hotel which had been recommended to us. The dinner menus at this hotel were curious and not my cup of tea. Like "served on a bed of..." and when the plate came the only food of substance seemed to be that of the "bed" but on closer inspection and taste I can only surmise it was not intended to be eaten. One of the "puddings", and one I chose in distress nothing else appearing palatable, was "pavlova deconstructed". When the desert came it contained one or two very small blobs of meringue, a few berries, perhaps half a strawberry and a small splodge of cream. And the usual ridiculous "jus" patterns on the considerable void of the rest of the otherwise empty plate. I was not impressed. Why should one pay more for eating less?

I used this story in the "opening" aka "devotion" I gave earlier this week adding that, at present, I feel like what I thought was my "faith" is under deconstruction. I went on to expose false ideas of what it means to "believe". As an example I explained how I had recently set a ladder on the tin roof and against our boiler's chimney which is no more than a steel pipe. I wanted to clean the flue. I had evidence gained from experience that the set-up would take my weight, but I could not be sure until I committed myself to climbing it. The bridge between the necessary evidence and the outworking I identified as "belief" or "faith".  The evidence and the outworking were two essential ingredients but they did not meet in the middle.

I explained that, quite apart from anything Christian, the human psyche could be strongly affected by what we believe, citing medical examples of remarkable restorations to health just because the patient believed a treatment, even a placebo, would do the trick.

I thought I made it clear that much of what I, and doubtless we, call "belief" in Christianity is wishful thinking or confirmation bias. I was nervous saying this because I thought I might be ousted!

The curious thing is that, although several folk thanked me for sharing, no-one made any reference to my apostasy.  Which was all very curious.

And then to cap it all, after the evening meal desert was do-it-yourself-deconstructed-pavlova. Only this time the quantities were right!

Belief and Diesel

I've always thought the advice to the Philippian jailer was over simplistic when he said: Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved. To give credit, the Greek pistis "belief", often translated "faith", includes the idea of wholly putting one's trust in something or someone. Whereas the modern English "belief" is sometimes much weaker as in "I believe it is going to rain this afternoon". So the above might better read "Put your trust wholly in the..."

One of our diesel vehicles had inadvertently been topped up with petrol (maybe 50% mix). I did not realise this until well on the way to Dublin to take Ali to an appointment. The engine ran lumpy but we got there, turned the engine off and did what we came for, but then I couldn't start it again. I got talking to the guy who we called out to drain the tank and we started discussing religion. He claimed to be a humanist atheist and said he believed only what he could see proof for, which definitely didn't include God. But apparently it did include some very wacky things like UFO's and life on other planets and the Jesus story being no more than a rehash of the Egyptian god Horus and did I know that Jesus condoned killing his enemies? When I got home and checked up on his points it quickly became apparent that there was a good deal less proof for his ideas than my Christian ones. But he was not the kind of gent that would be easily persuaded against his will and I'm not much use in debating (my brain works too slowly).  So we parted company each wondering how the other could possibly believe what he claimed.

Rachel Nuwer argues that the reason a god-shaped hole seems to exist in our species’ neuropsychology is due to a quirk of our evolution.  She says we have two very basic forms of thought: System 1 and System 2. System 2 evolved relatively recently. It’s the voice in our head – the narrator who never seems to shut up – that enables us to plan and think logically. System 1, on the other hand, is intuitive, instinctual and automatic... It makes us prone to looking for patterns to better understand our world, and to seek meaning for seemingly random events like natural disasters or the death of loved ones. Hence religion and her conclusion “There will always be people who believe, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they remain the majority”. But implied is that she doesn't.

In their paper "The biochemistry of belief" the authors quote Anton Chekhov as saying “Man is what he believes” and summarise that Beliefs are basically the guiding principles in life that provide direction and meaning in life. By way of example they mention the placebo effect: Medical history is replete with numerous reported cases where placebos were found to have a profound effect on a variety of disorders. One such astounding case was that of a woman suffering from severe nausea and vomiting. Objective measurements of her gastric contractions indicated a disrupted pattern matching the condition she complained of. Then a ‘new, magical, extremely potent’ drug was offered to her, which would, the doctors proclaimed, undoubtedly cure her nausea. Within a few minutes, her nausea vanished! 

We are motivated by belief at many levels. I can get out of breath jogging to my daughter's place a quarter mile down the road. When I tackle a long run like Church Mountain I have to first believe that I can do it (running barefoot with significant ascent and descent) and so far this has worked. Indeed I have just returned from such a run. I made it back albeit feeling like I couldn't have gone a step further, quod erat demonstrandum...

 distance 14.54 miles

 average speed moving 4.94 mph

 elevation gain 733m

 maximum elevation 541m

My track 

My lake, viewed from the summit

Looking south, the bump on the horizon centre left is Baltinglass Hill

What if the tenets of Christianity were untrue? Perhaps it might still be beneficial to believe in them, as in my recent post does it matter what one believes. This of course is the Puddleglum argument. But how much better if it the object of our belief could be shown to be true. And here's the catch: what does it take to show that something is true?  We take for granted that things we can sense are true, although even that is debatable. The rest: the makeup of an atom, the distance to far-off galaxies, the big bang and evolution (or creation) of man, the resurrection of Jesus, and whether the ladder I am about to climb will hold my weight... we take on trust. We have to believe else we cannot function. Whether or not the likes of Richard Dawkins agrees, it is clear to me that even atheists have to believe / have faith in their tenets.

Of people set in their ways Jesus remarked: neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead. And such conviction apparently comes only as a result of action taken by God on our behalf. Which places me in an unenviable position if I happen to doubt, as I do.