Table of Contents | 10. What good is religion in a post-modern world?
Religion has become one of the most wicked, ruinous and divisive forces of human experience. A careful reading of history indicates that it is open to more abuse than any other realm of life -- including politics and sex. "There is indisputable evidence that religion has had its bloody wars, its cruel superstitions, its brutal rituals of human sacrifice, its ugly superstitions and its barricades against scientific advances. The crusades, genocide in the European ocupation of North America and the holocaust all come to mind. One of the most dangerous aspects of religion is that it confers sacrality upon everything it deals with. If a certain form of liturgy is developed then that is sacred and must not be changed. If a certain theological idea is accepted as orthodox and final then that is sacred and must not be re-thought. If male-only clergy and celibacy are the rule of the day then those in authority claim you are to accept them and get on with the program. And this sense of the holy attaches itself to endless trivialities." So their argument goes. The era that grew out of the Enlightenment is over. So, why not join those who say that religion has served its day as humankind has moved from the primitive to the present? If this world is to survive then there is reason to set aside that which is the source of such harm. Yes, like water, it can refresh and cleanse or it can engulf and drown. But, while confessing that religion can be very bad as well as very good and wanting to clarify the difference between the two, I am suggesting some basic criteria for evaluating religion. The problem of distinguishing between good religion and bad religion was the problem that Jesus faced throughout his ministry. He never had to deal with irreligion. His problem was not irreligion against religion but a high, transforming and inspiring type of religion against a low, degrading and unethical type of religion that did people more harm than good. In the context of religion in this century, doesn't that sound familiar? As I survey the lay of the land, much of religion needs a new image rooted in a new understanding. The popular image is that religion should have its "don't" list (as in don't do certain things and don't associate with certain people), should bless us and guarantee our prosperity, should run our banner up the flagpole, should wave the flag we wave, should approve the wars our country chooses and should approve a church that entertains without challenging. You see, when it is sincere and earnest, religious faith is very powerful. It persuades people that certain ways of thinking and living are the will of God. It gives people the most comprehensive motive that they can be driven by, namely, the sense of obeying the divine will. But when that motive is associated with wrong things, the results are disastrous. Therefore, what characterizes religion at its best? One, vital and genuine religion is seldom obvious. It isn't self-conscious. We need to rid ourselves of the notion that a person of piety lets you know about it by a solemn look, by a showy abstaining from things that other people are enjoying and by using a lot of religious sounding labels like "God bless you" or "God loves you and so do I." There is a natural and genuine way for a sincere believer to reveal his or her faith. There is also a cloak of conventional and traditional piety that can be slipped on and off quite easily. In my experience this kind of self-conscious piety has been more of a charade than the real thing. Most of those for whom religious faith is vital don't parade it. Two, vital religion is characterized by personal authenticity. By this I mean a conscientious effort to purge ourselves of every pretext to be what we in fact are not, to believe what we in fact do not believe and to feel what we in fact do not feel at all. It means to seek as honestly and as appropriately as we know how to strip off all the cheap facades by which we wittingly and deliberately hide ourselves from other people, either to deceive them, to manipulate them or to impress them. It means to communicate ourselves as genuinely and openly as we possibly can. A third way to tell bad religion from good religion is the extent to which it is standing up for social justice. By this I mean the willingness to become involved when some other person's right to life and growth is being violated. When fundamental rights are denied to any person, by that much are the structures of human dignity and inclusiveness weakened for all of us. So authentic religion stands for a justice that applies to everyone. The last characteristic is humility. It isn't essential for passionate belief to degenerate into narrow dogmatism. And, for me, the religious style that refuses to live humbly and demands a portion of this planet's resources beyond what is essential for living a simple even austere lifestyle must be questioned. Our faith is at its best when we see ourselves as "beggars telling other beggars where we found bread." |