Re "Atheists," you'll be happy to know, is spelled correctly in the article.":
Indeed - but only after a reader's comment alerted the sub editor to the error! Yes, I understand Francis Spufford's exasperation with Dawkins and co. Of course, part of the problem Christians have with the New Atheists is that they - the Christians - have insisted on a literal interpretation for so long that it seems evasive when they now back-pedal to a more "existential" defence of the Faith. You've read GK Chesterton's essay "The Ethics of Elfland" haven't you? If not, please do. It's short and sweet and I'm sure would drive Dawkins completely bonkers. His view of Christianity is very much this-world centred (rather than other-worldly) but is very far from being pessimistic. It's actually rather cheerful, which is what "Gospel" (Good News) should be. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com> wrote: Seraphita, you may enjoy this article: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/aug/31/trouble-with-athiests-defence-of-faith?CMP=twt_gu http://www.theguardian.com/books/2012/aug/31/trouble-with-athiests-defence-of-faith?CMP=twt_gu ("Atheists," you'll be happy to know, is spelled correctly in the article.) It's by Francis Spufford, a countryman of yours--you may even know of him. His book "Unapologetic" was just released in the U.S. From several excerpts I've read various places on the Web and this piece in the Guardian, it looks to be an informal, highly personal defense of Christianity (Anglican flavor). I'm tempted to buy it. See what you think.
