Any Questions?

The Panel consisted of representatives of 4 traditions:
Roman Catholic: Monsignor John Coglan
Methodist: Rev. David Dickinson
Jewish: Rabbi Dr. Andrew Goldstein
Church of England: Rev. David Tuck

The Audience - a mixture of members and visitors - were invited to "get the answers to those questions you have always wanted to ask"

The Chairman was Sidney Moss, Branch Chairman of Hillingdon CCJ. He asked the panellists to make it clear whether their answers were personal or the official view/policy of the group they represented.

Voluntary Euthanasia
The first questioner invited the panel's views on voluntary euthanasia. A considerable amount of time was spent on discussing this issue. While all the panellists regarded life as "God-given", and therefore sacred, there was not complete agreement on practical matters affecting pastoral care. Matters considered included the use or misuse of "extraordinary" means of prolonging life, and the administration of pain control therapies which will shorten life. Views were also put forward regarding the practice of writing "Living Wills".

Gender of God
To the question "God ­ male or female?" the panellists were universally agreed that while the male gender is ascribed to God in the Scriptures, and God has often been depicted as male in art down the ages, for example as an old man with a beard sitting on a cloud, this imagery is not helpful. God is genderless.

The Future of Established Religions
The panellists considered the question "In an age of increasing secularism and materialism what hope is there for the established religions?" Here again, the panellists held similar views. The overriding necessity was considered to be the provision of denominational structures from which the established religions can "reach out" to meet people's needs and spiritual aspirations. There can be a future for the established religions if they respond to the needs that are there. This led on to a discussion of a thesis, put forward by the author Grace Davie, that a growing number of people "believe but choose not to belong".

While the fact of decreasing congregations verifies the concept that people choose not to belong, the question of belief, or lack of belief, is harder to assess. However it was suggested that for some the converse of Grace Davie's observation applies. For some people the reason why they attend Synagogue or Church is precisely because they want to belong to a community or wider family. Even if they have very little, or in fact no faith at all, the fact that the community is faith-based is not a problem for them. The consensus was that people have needs of various sorts, spiritual and secular, and the established religions are challenged to respond if they are to have a future.

Faith Schools
The panellists were divided on the desirability/necessity of faith schools. Not only was there not agreement among themselves, but their views did not always reflect the official viewpoint of the denomination they represented. Comments ranged from firmly in favour, or in favour but with conditions, to definitely against. Arguments put forward in support of these positions ranged from the need to provide children with a firm foundation and ethos within a worshipping community, to the divisiveness within a community caused by separating school children along denominational lines.

Dialogue with Muslims
A questioner asked whether, in the light of the present situation, we should seek dialogue with Muslims. The panellists gave a unanimous "Yes". The chairman said that up to now there had been a reluctance on the part of the CCJ "head office", but now he perceived that there was movement in this direction. He thought it likely that our local CCJ branch committee would consider inviting representatives of other religions to talk to us.

War with Iraq
Another questioner stated that she didn't want this country to go to war with Iraq, which would involve the immorality of bombing innocent people, and asked for the panellists' views. No member of the panel would disagree that bombing innocent people is a moral issue. However panel members found it difficult to decide the issue of whether we should go to war with Iraq in simple "Yes" or "No" terms.

Various related issues were brought into the debate such as the need to re-examine the traditional doctrine of a "just war", justice issues in general, parallels and dissimilarities between now and September 1939, the possibility of a pre-emptive strike being justified if, although resulting in innocent casualties, it were to prevent Saddam Hussein from using weapons of mass destruction causing a greater number of casualties etc. All were agreed that there are a number of unknown factors.

Distrust was expressed of the veracity of information which is fed to us, and distrust of America's actions and motivation. In short, we don't have the relevant facts. The consensus was that there does not appear to be a strong case for war against Iraq, and one panellist stated, without qualification, that in his opinion a strike against Iraq would be an act of aggression

Religion and Politics
The question was asked as to whether religious leaders should make public pronouncements on political matters. The panellists' collective view was that there are situations where this is appropriate, and examples were given of specific interventions by religious leaders, and the thorough research which was undertaken prior to the quoted examples.

Interpretation and literal truth of Scripture
A questioner referred to events recorded in Sacred Scriptures, the historicity of which is questionable, and asked how the panel "come to terms with it". The panellists were at one in agreeing that accounts of events recorded in Scripture as historical events are not necessarily literally true, although in certain instances they may be factual. Problems arise when Scripture is assumed to be literally true in every respect.

It is necessary to appreciate that the Scriptures contain a mixture of poetry, literature and metaphors. Historicity as such, said the panellists, is not a real issue. The important thing is the interpretation of the message the authors of the various books intend to convey. Prayer and one's relationship with the Lord is of higher priority than worries about historicity. Interpretation is necessary even though the Bible is regarded as the inspired Word of God. It is generally accepted that Jesus was a historical figure but whether, for example, he physically walked on water is not of primary importance. What is important is the significance of the story i.e. the underlying truth which the Evangelist, in relating the story, intends to convey.

Loss of Faith
The panellists were asked what would make them lose their faith. The feeling seemed to be that faith is something which is not necessarily challenged by an event or discovery which negates a previously held aspect of that faith. This was illustrated by one of the panel who pointed out that the Christian faith is validated by the resurrection of Jesus, but were Jesus's bones to be discovered he would still retain his faith in the Christian revelation. It was also pointed out that the Christian community has not been tested to the same extent as the Jewish community by the terrible event of the Holocaust (Shoah). As far as the panellists were concerned they thought that they would retain their faith come what may.

Partners and Spouses
The final questioner asked the panellists for their views on having a partner rather than a spouse, and how they handle this situation. The answer seems to be that one has to be pragmatic and accept that, in this day and age, this is the reality. (A panellist joked that when at a conference in America some years ago he almost felt the need to apologise for having been happily married for 33 years!).

This "Any Questions" event provided a highly enjoyable and informative evening, and thanks were expressed to the panellists and audience for their participation.

- Bernard Tiley