Afterlife Research Centre
  • Home
  • About ARC
  • Who We Are
  • Programmes
  • Research
    • ARC Publications
    • Reviews >
      • Books
      • Events
    • Talks
  • Directory
  • News
  • Bookstore
  • Events
    • ARC Workshop 2016
    • ISSR 2015 Conference
    • IAHR 2015 Congress
    • IUAES 2013 Congress
    • ARC Network Meeting 2012
    • ARC Workshop 2011
    • ARC Workshop 2010
  • Forum
  • Links
  • Support
  • Contact

Conference Report: The Study of Religious Experience in Lampeter

2/9/2014

0 Comments

 
Rev. Dr. Jeff Leonardi wrote the following report on the conference held in Lampeter, UK on 4.7.14, to relaunch the Alister Hardy Religious Experience Research Centre at the University of Wales Trinity saint David.

A Response to The Study of Religious Experience conference held at Lampeter on 4th July 2014.

I have recently retired to the Lampeter area and was pleased that this 'relaunch' for the Alister Hardy Centre was to take place just after we moved here. My background is in counselling and ordained ministry and in 2008 I completed doctoral research into the relationship between the spirituality of the Person-centred approach to counselling and Christian spirituality, and the implications for Christian ministry and pastoral practice. I had quoted from David Hay's work in defining spirituality and religious experience, and I was delighted to discover that the Alister Hardy Centre is now based in Lampeter.

The first presentation, by Fiona Bowie on 'How to study religious experience? Methodological reflections on the study of the afterlife and other examples of religious experience', made me realise how oppressed I feel as a British citizen in espousing spiritual and religious experience in the climate of polite scepticism and dismissal that characterises so much of our public discourse. This recognition came in response to Dr Bowie's fearless declaration of her evidence based conviction of the realities underlying so many of the experiences to which she referred.

As the day progressed I perceived there to be an interesting 'fault line' between the academically credible study of such experience, akin to anthropology -  'this is what the natives believe' - but without any claim to affirm the ontological reality of the experiences, on the one hand, and those such as Fiona Bowie, who took the further step of crediting the source of the experiences beyond a simple subjectivism. (She made more than one reference to the difficulty of receiving academic respectability for such views, particularly at early stages of promotion, and suggested that perhaps academic staff only felt 'safe' to hold such views when they had secured a tenured post!).

It seems to me that there is a real challenge here for this area of study. The nature of spiritual and religious experience when experienced at any kind of depth is that it is transformative, life-changing and life-shaping. There could be said to be a danger for the researcher, if he or she maintains the required scientific distance and objectivity, of recording others' accounts of powerful spiritual experience while maintaining a detached and therefore uncommitted attitude towards that to which their accounts refer: an 'out there' reality with the power to change lives for the good.

In saying this I do not mean to suggest that every experience be given equal credibility, or that scientific objectivity is unnecessary or undesirable in such research. But if one engages in some depth with the experience of others with 'a form of cognitive, empathetic engagement (which) implies openness to the other, critical awareness of one's own perspective, and reluctance to move too quickly to explanation' (from Dr Bowie's abstract for her talk), then one may indeed find oneself sufficiently respectful as to accord their experience, when viewed alongside one's own, as suggestive of, at least a shared reality, or even a level of experiential truth, and with 'anthropological wonder' (ibid).

Dr Schmidt's presentation on spirit possession and trance in Brazil was tantalising in just this regard. Her account of being present to such experience, accompanied by visual illustrations, inspired more than one of her audience to try to ask what she had made of it personally and not purely objectively - and indeed whether she had been touched by it in the sense of beginning to experience something subjectively at the time - but she wouldn't be drawn, maintaining an impressively scientific stance towards her subject matter.

Dr Jansen's presentation in relation to Chinese culture was also tantalising in leaving me, at least, wanting to hear much more of substance about his extensive experience of contemporary Chinese culture, behaviour and attitudes in relation to historical perspectives.

Dr Pope's session led into the later one by Dr Williams, in that both were concerned with the place of experience in Christian tradition. His presentation helped explain the almost distrust of personal spiritual and religious experience in relation to the 'surer ground' of systematic theology and scriptural authority. Dr Williams took our focus to Early Christian beliefs in relation to personal religious experience, and in particular St Paul's own accounts of his experience, especially in 2 Corinthians 12, his 'third heaven experience'. It is tempting to interpret Paul's third-party self references: 'I know a man ..' as proceeding from both humility and a diffidence about claiming such experience, a diffidence that could be said to continue today.

In the question time following her presentation I asked about the dividing line between scripture and later Christian experience. I have long been intrigued by the question of why the NT ends where it does in Acts. In an obvious sense Acts is 'The Acts of the Apostles', and when they died out their acts were over, but I believe there is some merit in considering whether there might not have been continuing acts by their successors which could have been deemed worthy of record? In this sense my question was simply about the closure of the Canon.

But in the context of the conference theme, I think it might be argued that by enshrining only the foundational documents and accounts in the Canon, and making no equivalent space for continuing revelation and testimony, the early Church made inevitable the separation of doctrine from ongoing experience, and the longer the time lapse the greater the potential discrepancy between teaching and experience. In this way one might argue that the attempt to affirm the value of researching religious experience is in conflict with the legacy and modality of tradition.

In conclusion I should like to make one further observation. It seems to me that a great deal of the study of religious experience is formulated in terms of individual experience. The particular focus of my research has been into the spirituality of therapeutic experience, that is when two or more persons are engaging at relational depth. I would be interested to develop this perspective further in the context of the Alister Hardy Centre's explorations.

(Rev Dr) Jeff Leonardi

0 Comments

Cfp: Body Knowledge in Religions

2/9/2014

0 Comments

 
XXI World Congress of the International Association for the History of Religions
Erfurt University, Germany
23-29 August 2015

Panel Convenors: Prof Almut-Barbara Renger (Freie Universität Berlin) and Prof Bettina Schmidt (University of Wales Trinity Saint David)

Body knowledge – ‘knowledge about the body’ and ‘knowledge of the body’ - is an integral part of the history of knowledge, which examines the interweaving of cognitive processes, social values and cultural practices across disciplinary traditions and boundaries of cultures and societies beyond.

This panel will take a closer look at the processes involved in the transfer of body knowledge within a religious context. The aim of the panel is to discuss how body knowledge is passed on from teacher to student, doctor to patient, authors to readers, religious specialists to believers. Does the mediation take place verbally or non-verbally? How are these transfer processes described in text, interpreted and contextualized? We want to reconstruct processes of the production and dissemination of knowledge and discuss, for instance, how this knowledge is transferred in and between cultures. Despite all attempts to codify knowledge we argue that something changes in the transfer from one context to another, from one person to another. We are interested in processes of body knowledge both within and between European and non-European cultures.

We invite panelists to analyze the interaction of various factors as well as the interaction between the physical carriers of body knowledge and the environment. The panel will look in detail at practices and techniques which are based on physical skills. In addition we want to analyze how non-verbal experiences which arise from such practices and techniques, are interpreted within each socio-cultural context, whether it us presented in text genres, visual media, rituals and other performances. Finally we want to investigate how knowledge changes when transferred into different cultural contexts and constellations and how they are integrated.

If interested, please send an abstract (app. 150 words) by email to renger@zedat.fu-berlin.de and b.schmidt@tsd.uwtsd.ac.uk.

0 Comments

    Archives

    October 2018
    June 2018
    January 2018
    September 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    September 2016
    June 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    November 2014
    September 2014
    June 2014
    March 2014
    January 2014
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    June 2012

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.