Celebrating religious diversity in Lewisham

[Robin Orton]

I had an interesting and encouraging afternoon yesterday participating, without about 150 (guess) other people in an inter-faith walk for peace through the rainy street of central Lewisham. We started at the synagogue off Bromley Road, and visited the civic centre, a mosque (where we were all given lunch), a church (Methodist) and a Hindu temple (the incredible Sivan Temple, with the exterior totally covered with statues of Hindu gods, many with the heads of animals.) There was also a Sikh leader and a humanist representative on the walk, as well as Sir Steve, Heidi Alexander MP, and the newly-appointed police commander for Lewisham borough, Kate Halpin. The event was organised by the police in consultation with a group of Lewisham faith leaders.

Everyone was incredibly friendly and relaxed, and I felt quite proud to live in a borough which seemed to be doing well in encouraging tolerant and constructive relationships between faith communities. The only slightly uneasy moment (for me ) was my own fault; I imprudently asked a Muslim man how he felt about seeing a picture of a holy person (Jesus) in a place of worship (a stained glass window in the Methodist Church.) He started to lecture me, politely but quite fiercely, about idolatry. I mumbled my excuses and moved away.

[stuart]

A few weeks ago on another rainy Sunday - but this time in Brussels - I went to see an Ottoman exhibition. Extremely illuminating and a testament on how attitudes within and between religions changes over time. The Ottomans embraced idolatry commissioning portraits of themselves by leading Venetian artists (including Titian). The Sultan and Christian courts of Europe were, depending on time and place, extremely friendly.

Oh, and you might not like this one Robin, but I hope you understand why I mention it - but there was a protestant cartoon from the land of Geet Wilders at the time of the 'Gates of Vienna' welcoming the Ottoman hordes as allies as they would prefer to be converted to Islam than to Rome.

Not so today. The religions are the same. Just the interpretation and alliances have changed - and may change again?

Stuart

[Tim Lund]

He started to lecture me, politely but quite fiercely, about idolatry. I mumbled my excuses and moved away.

Could you not, with equal politeness and ferocity have continued the discussion, maybe without a possibly off-putting lecturing tome? Your failure to do so might suggest, to outsiders, that he holds his faith with somewhat greate conviction than you do yours.

[Robin Orton]

I didn't think this was the occasion for theological argument - indeed, that was the excuse I mumbled. I shouldn't have raised the issue at all. In a more appropriate context, I'd have been more than happy to do my best to explain the Christian (or at any rate Catholic) view about pictures, statues and icons (which is based on the doctrine of the incarnation, so I'd have had to try and explain that as well.)

[Tim Lund]

I'm not saying we shouldn't celebrate religous diversity in Lewisham, but should it be celebrated for its own sake? If so, then there would be no limits to sects who you would welcome - any one for Scientology?

I think there is a case for celebrating religous diversity, namely that we may always benefit from learning about others' ideas, and that tolerating diversity is necessary for this possibility. But if anyone's attempt to share their views is chilled by another's reaction, then something is going wrong.

I think Milton had it right, in his Areopagitica, calling for as wide as possible diverity of thought, but with a careful delineation of the need to exclude

open superstition, which as it extirpates all religions and civill supremacies, so it self should be extirpated, provided first that all charitable and compassionate means be us'd to win and regain the weak and the misled:

[leenewham]

Sounds like a branding issue more than anything. Would have been interesting, religious brands are extremely interesting as they are at the very origin of branding, from logo's, guidelines, sounds, architecture, feeling, brand followers, salesmen, events, clothing, uniforms and even smells.

The issue between competing brands of religion is their outlet for competition. It shouldn't be war or violence as they rub up against easy other, it should be debate and other forms of competition.

Sir Steve Bullock has been tweeting and face booking about the walk. Looks like a positive thing overall and perhaps they will recognise their similarity rather than their differences, which in effect are rather small. They all have the same boss after all.

[Robin Orton]

Oh dear, I did wonder whether the cosy, alcohol-free Town Café (halal sandwiches, kosher sandwiches, fish on Friday? - just ask!) was the right place for this thread.

The title I gave the thread was perhaps, with hindsight, misleading. The overt theme of the walk was that of peace between 'faiths', although this was not really developed further and some of the brief speeches we heard were certainly about the positive aspects of religious diversity.

I'm not sure I buy Lee's idea that branding has religious origins. The idea of religions as competing with each other in some sort of market place is arguably just modern secularist reductionism, and there have certainly been times and places in human history in which it would have been fiercely rejected.

They all have the same boss after all.

More of a collective leadership for the Hindus, perhaps.

[Tim Lund]

I wondered too about it as a suitable subject for the café.

Re branding, I think you'll find it is an extension of early humans' need to identify species, attaching values to them according to, for example, how wholesome or toxic they are; there would have been a very strong evolutionary selective pressure to be able to identify brands such as indicated by these spots



Not the sort of thing you'd expect a political brand manager to want to commuicate, however.

[Robin Orton]

I wondered too about it as a suitable subject for the café.

The café is meant for 'reviews', I think, And I hoped anyway that my posting would be uncontroversial and uplifting.

[_HB]

would be uncontroversial and uplifting.

I found it both, Robin.

[leenewham]

Tim is bang on to a degree, branding evolved from the origins of bias which originates in nature. Branding is about humans managing bias through the senses. Although that is a conversation for the Cafe me thinks.

I agree with HB, I think Robins multi faith experience was rather heat warming and the way it should be (minus the theology competition).

[Tim Lund]

Tim is bang on to a degree, branding evolved from the origins of bias which originates in nature. Branding is about humans managing bias through the senses. Although that is a conversation for the Cafe me thinks.

I agree with HB, I think Robins multi faith experience was rather heat warming and the way it should be (minus the theology competition).

Did you mean somewhere other than the Café - which using 'although' suggests?

I think if you bring in something as controversial as a theological exchange about representations of the divine, then you should not be posting here. Why not the Pub - or is this another case for the Town Seminar Room?

I'm sorry, but I didn't find it heart warming - it read to me as if Robin was just cringing in the face of someone more assertive than him, and I find that depressing.

[Robin Orton]

I think if you bring in something as controversial as a theological exchange about representations of the divine, then you should not be posting here. Why not the Pub - or is this another case for the Town Seminar Room?

I only mentioned it as I thought it was a quite amusing anecdote, perfectly suitable for the café. I was certainly not trying to start an argument. If what I said it incited others, more excitable, café customers to start throwing chairs around and terrorizing the staff, that's hardly my fault.

it read to me as if Robin was just cringing in the face of someone more assertive than him, and I find that depressing.

I think cringing is often an excellent plan. I do it all the time. It can avoid bloodshed and other kinds of unpleasantness.

[_HB]

I'm cringing reading this thread right now

[Eagle]

Tim

Whilst I have nothing against people having a religious persuasion , surely many , if not a majority , of the population are not religious.

Regrettably you only have to look at the many conflicts around the world and see a far too higher percentage have a religious background.

Have a good day.

[alburt.c]

i jus wishing relijion kept for self and not for fight with difrent relijion peeple. evry relijions thinking that only one to be right. relijions not help world this way

PEACE

[mosy]

Yes, alburt.c.

Didn't this thread start off in the Town Hall as a news item? Can't be certain as if flitting about I don't always remember correctly and of course no way of telling if Admin moved it. What the hey.

I think it is good that a combined effort was successfully brought about to publicly to show that religions can get along harmoniously. That must surely be a good thing. Maybe there should be one every week...

Differences, however big or small, clearly exist between religions so they're never likely to agree with one another. That seems fine to me if "Give peace a chance" (was that John Lennon?) is promoted. As long as none start trying to impinge on either the way of life or beliefs of others. That's when harmony breaks down because it was only superficial in the first place. Most people just want to be left alone to get on with their life and beliefs. The minority who believe otherwise probably weren't in this togetherness march and I doubt ever would be.

I'm curious - was there a secular section on the march? It would be good to know that there is still freedom not to believe or follow any of them.

[admin]

Didn't this thread start off in the Town Hall as a news item? Can't be certain as if flitting about I don't always remember correctly and of course no way of telling if Admin moved it.

Nope, Robin started it here. IMHO the right place. Enjoy!

Admin

[Tim Lund]

I only mentioned it as I thought it was a quite amusing anecdote, perfectly suitable for the café. I was certainly not trying to start an argument. If what I said it incited others, more excitable, café customers to start throwing chairs around and terrorizing the staff, that's hardly my fault.

I guess if anyone starts terrorising the staff, it would be appropriate to respond by saying "Tout est pardonné". Could lead to an amusing anecdote.

[Pally]

I think if you bring in something as controversial as a theological exchange about representations of the divine, then you should not be posting here. Why not the Pub - or is this another case for the Town Seminar Room?

I only mentioned it as I thought it was a quite amusing anecdote, perfectly suitable for the café. I was certainly not trying to start an argument. If what I said it incited others, more excitable, café customers to start throwing chairs around and terrorizing the staff, that's hardly my fault.

it read to me as if Robin was just cringing in the face of someone more assertive than him, and I find that depressing.

I think cringing is often an excellent plan. I do it all the time. It can avoid bloodshed and other kinds of unpleasantness.

Is it cringing or just choosing time and place, and choosing "not the time or place" .....walking away is not necessarily cringing or avoidance!! Argument (may not be right word) for arguments same is pointless as can sometimes be seen on this forum!