Creating Meaning Together: The Humanist Hub
As ‘A Religion Critic,’ I have had no other experience that has challenged me (in a good way) than my visit to the Humanist Hub. I have been humbled twice, once at the meeting itself and again in my interview with Greg Epstein, leader of the Hub (also forthcoming). In writing this, I find it difficult to give context to the origins of humanism. Nevertheless context matters, regardless of the difficulty. I also gained a deep respect for Greg Epstein in the process, though our interaction was brief.
Whereas, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and other major religions have a specific place and time in which they developed, humanist ideas do not. There are examples of humanist ideas in Eastern and Western religious texts, from the Rg Veda to Ecclesiastes. In the contemporary period there are many non-religious humanists from many cultures (unlike Epstein, I still suspect that the number of professing living humanists is less than 1 billion). In these respects, humanism is global.
The Humanist Hub does have a place and time in which it originated. They were founded in 1974 as the Humanist Chaplaincy at Harvard, originally serving only Harvard University students; however, recently they have broadened their scope to serve people of all ages and backgrounds. It is this Western liberal context that MOST influences them. Though they work extremely hard at realizing the larger context of humanism, which is the most that can be expected of them.
When entering the Humanist Hub natural light, at least on sunny days, illuminates most of the room. On one side there are comfortable chairs away from the center. This center has folding chairs in several rows. When I got there, a few minutes past starting time, there was a middle aged musician with the appearance of a hippy strumming a guitar, while the rest of the ‘congregation’ conversed among themselves. (Epstein himself calls the Humanist Hub a godless congregation).
During this time I was able to look at their book shelf. It was adorned with Doubt, Pagans and Christians, Skeptical Inquirer (magazine), various books by New Atheist authors, and more. The books suggested skepticism towards religious claims, i.e. God, that was continued politely and non-dogmatically both in Epstein’s talk and discussions with the other congregants.
The meeting was called to order and a musician played an original song called “In This Place.” It praised the Humanist Hub, for its openness to freethinking and dialogue. In form, but not content, this song reminded me of the Christian hymn with the same title. At my previous visit the same person sang a song about how wonderful it is that all that you see is all there is, implying that there is no world of spirits, God, or gods; there is just the natural world.
The music portion was short. I get the sense that people do not usually sing along. However, it was the singer’s birthday this week; so, encouraged and backed up by the entire congregation, he sang happy birthday to himself.
The talk was primarily about spirituality, at least what it was and wasn’t according to Epstein. He started with the observation that many in the humanist community were arguing over two incompatible views. The first group really wants humanism to be spiritual and the second really doesn’t want it to be spiritual.
My initial reaction was that this is silly; ‘spirituality’ has so many meanings that the word is essentially useless. But if I am being fair ‘God’ has just as many meanings. Borrowing from Epstein, but replacing ‘God’ with ‘spirituality,’ the first question that should be asked is: what do you believe about spirituality. This question is necessary before you decide whether spirituality should be important to humanism or not.
Epstein did something very similar. He started out by giving us examples of what spiritualty isn’t. Spiritualty is not religion. It does not make religious concepts, such as God, Karma, afterlife, dogma, or ‘cat’ma, central. It is not Eastern mysticism interpreted uncritically. Spirituality is not the idea that everything happens for a reason (it doesn’t, he stated forcefully, then retracted slightly; saying that this was his firm opinion). Most importantly to Epstein, spirituality is not going it alone contra to the 19th century transcendentalist Emerson.
When discussing Eastern mysticism, Epstein screened a College Humor video featuring an imagined Ghandi in an exaggerated version of an American yoga class:
https://www.youtube.com/watch? v=hBMc9s8oDWE. Many of the congregation participated in a discussion about the Hindu concept of ‘yoga’ and whether it: has changed, is syncretic (combination of two or more religions/cultures), and/or racist/insensitive to people of Indian descent. This discussion was reminiscent of discussions in graduate religion courses.
During this talk there were several references to the television show Mad Men. It seemed to function almost like a sacred text to this congregation or at least to Epstein. He referenced it several times, sometimes offering interpretations, and sometimes refraining from interpretation. One thing that he took from Mad Men was that people often believe that they should feel a certain way or do certain things; and when they don’t, they feel guilty. We broke into small groups and I heard, for the first time, what I would like to call atheist guilt.
Atheist guilt is the feeling that you only live one life and this one life has to be lived well. Failing to live your life well means there is no second chance and no possibility of redemption on your deathbed. So then how do you plan your one life to make it the most meaningful in the time you have? This was quite likely the most ‘spiritual’ or ‘religious’ atheist discussion I have been able to witness. (Both ‘spiritual’ and ‘religious’ are words that should be taken with a huge grain of salt in this context).
I did not share with this small group and being at such a great advantage doesn’t sit well with me, especially since I am writing about them. So (to the Humanist Hub members that I heard speak) my elephant is this: I fail in my interpersonal relationships. And when I think about my failures I get overwhelmed and do nothing or at least very little.
In my understanding of Epstein’s talk, the answer to what humanist spirituality could be is: sharing in the struggle, sorrows, and joys of life together.
Bottom Line:
To me, this meeting was beautiful. I often imagine ideas as a gallery. We have existentialist ideas, religious ideas, political ideas, and etc… I imagine myself viewing them from a distance and seeing them, much like art, as a reflection of their time as well as for their beauty, truth, and usefulness.
Epstein helped enable a community, or at least this single meeting, to produce, or at VERY least ornately organize and pack, beautiful and deep ideas.
Admittedly part of this reaction is that godless congregations are a relatively new idea. New art forms can be attractive and seductive precisely because they have not yet been seen. But, this is not wholly relevant in this case. I reviewed the book Religion for Atheists and visited Sunday Assembly Boston and saw potential in each (despite my criticisms); but both seemed incomplete. The Humanist Hub does not.
I did give good without God, Epstein’s book, a mediocre review. I do stand by my critiques; but like religion, this version of humanism can’t be captured in a book. Minor errors like pointing out bad use of numbers, using the wrong terminology when discussing science, or even logical errors can’t take away from something deeper.
No comments:
Post a Comment