I'll give the clergy one thing: sermonizing can be hard work. Not always, of course. Some politicians and religious figures do it effortlessly, without thought, so to speak. Maybe I should leave off "so to speak." Without thought. Sometimes, though, it's hard to think of what to say on Sunday. But today isn't one of them. There was so much good material over the last week, choosing was difficult. Would it be the vacationers in Australia who got drunk together and started to argue evolution versus creationism? The English creationist wound up killing the Scottish biomedical scientist with a kitchen knife. How about the Flying Spaghetti Monster campaign in Florida to include it in biology teaching along with evolution and intelligent design? A story that I can only describe as "delicious."
But this is a serious time of year for religious folks so I thought, as a sign of respect, I'd highlight two serious opinion pieces.
The first is a column by Roger Cohen in the International Herald Tribune about what he sees as the big cultural divide between Europe and the US. Religion, naturally. Benighted Mitt Romney is the occasion for Cohen's column, although Romney is clearly a symptom of the US disease, not its cause. In his "Mormons are Christians and atheists aren't even Americans" speech, Romney observed that Europe's cathedrals are "so inspired, so grand, so empty." Cohen, writing from St.Andrews, Scotland, observes back that its 12th century cathedral, once the largest in Scotland, met its downfall when "a mob of reformers bent on eradicating such lavish manifestations of 'Popery' ransacked the place in 1559, leaving gulls to swoop through the surviving facade."
Europeans still take their Enlightenment seriously enough not to put it in quote marks. They have long found one of its most inspiring reflections in the first 16 words of the American Bill of Rights of 1791: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Thomas Jefferson famously saw those words as "building a wall of separation between church and state." So, much later, did John F. Kennedy, who in a speech predating Romney's by 47 years, declared: "I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute." (Roger Cohen, International Herald Tribune)
Ah, yes. The Enlightenment. Which means? Here's my version. Your mileage may differ, of course. The late 18th century Enlightenment (exemplars, Hume, Jefferson, Kant, Voltaire) is so many things to so many people: a style, an attitude, a temperament -- skeptical, pragmatic and secular. At its core is human rationality and reason. We are free, not because we are "children of God," but because and to the extent we choose (or not) to do things for rational reasons. The corollary is that doing things by reason of political or religious authority is not the action of free individuals. This doesn't mean we shouldn't do them (e.g., obey the law because it's the law) or observe tradition for its own sake, but it does mean that to the extent the law or tradition are not rationally based, we are not free in the Enlightenment sense (at least my version of it). These ideas are also at the core of classical liberalism, itself a product of The Enlightenment. I have a scientist's typical extension of Enlightenment thinking: I believe the world exists independently of me, that I can know it, and that science is a valid way of obtaining that knowledge.
Enlightenment thinking is taken for granted by modern Europeans, so it's no surprise they are aghast when the leaders of a 21st century power think Divine Guidance is a good reason for exercising overwhelming power over its own and other peoples.
Which brings me to the other opinion piece of note, from Peter Watson in The Times (London). This one starts with the Teddy Bear teacher, the unfortunate English teacher in the Sudan who named a teddy bear Mohamed and was arrested and threatened with death by religious nutcases. She was jailed and sentenced to 40 lashes by authorities (she has now been repatriated to England unharmed). Of course the authorities and the mob in the Sudan were Divinely Guided. As Watson points out, this sorry event is not logically at odds with the values of a Romney or a Bush, for whom Divine Guidance is an acceptable principle (as long as it's the right God). It is at odds with Western values, which Watson identifies as secularism and which I have interpreted to mean Enlightenment values. It doesn't have to do with "democratic values," per se, as secular Sweden is more congruent with Western values than the democratically elected governments of Hamas, Iraq and Iran:
The rise of the West had much less to do with democracy than with the rise of secularism. The West's advance was chiefly related to the decline in the influence of religion that sought the truth by "looking in" to see what God had to say, and its replacement by looking out, deriving authority from observation, experimentation and exploration.
[snip]
The inconvenient truth is that the West should be exporting secularism around the world before it exports democracy. Democracy implies not just one person one vote but -- no less important -- that the political process proceeds by rational means, by argument, by persuasion, and is based on knowledge that is as objective, as scientific, as one can make it. (Peter Watson, The Times)
There are a number of things in Watson's piece I don't agree with. But his point is a good one. Democracy without rationality -- or in my terms, Enlightenment values -- is a hollow promise, or worse, mob rule.
Am I more of a European or more of an American? Neither. I'm a Child of the Enlightenment.
- Log in to post comments
It seems more clear now that a civilized country need to practice the separation of state and church,nevertheless, it is definitely not the state without church. Or the other around.
It is human society that everything will be abused profoundly. As Paul Tillich's defense for the dynamic of faith- abuse indicates the reality of the use. It is most pathetic that the religion is no use in the country like China. People only value visible things and are very materialistic.
I wish that America will not follow Europe and become soul-less as they are rightly criticizing themselves. I stay in Phuket where many Europeans have chosen to reside after retirement. You can occasionally encounter the people have missed the days of Hitler's and still find his speech inspiring, coupling with strong anti-American sentiment, especially after cups of beer. A sign of twlight of a civilization. I wish Revere were here to encounter this spiritual draining.
The public agenda of debating Evolution and Creationism to me has reflected the immature semantics from science and religion education. Both parties are distorting the language of the other side.
For instance, Genesis to be treated literally like there was a journalist who had happened to view what God's creation and reported it, rediculous!
Religion is the poetry of people. Its practice demands skills and hard work, as said,"He who would bring home the wealth of the Indies must carry the wealth of the Indies with him." So does a world class musician, so does a high spiritual performer.
People who is creative will understand the sub-conscious functions in inspiration generation. I think, enlightenment is more profound than inspiration. Anyway, it is an excellent topic, because it is relating to the area of a person's competency and conscience as well.
I appreciate this Sermonette to reflect what true religion is not and perhaps implicitly to hint what it .......
Paiwan
An excellent point, if religion were spirituality. Unfortunately, it is not. The view that religion is the poetry of people is idealistic at best. If the bible is poetry, it is neither beautiful nor informative. It's filled with violence, bigotry, fairy tales, gender abuse and general misinformation. The only way the bible can inform is if the reader reinterprets it to best describe their own version of what god "really" meant. How does that inform? ("For instance, Genesis to be treated literally like there was a journalist who had happened to view what God's creation and reported it, rediculous!") You're right, it is ridiculous--Ridiculous for someone to be able to call the bible fictionalized in one breath but non-fiction in the next. In that case, I'm sure the reader could get a much better moral education by reading Winnie the Pooh--The account is fiction, but the message is golden.
And please, don't insult athiests by saying that people who are not spiritual are "soul-less". That is absurd--as is the suggestion that people who don't believe in god praise Hitler. There are plenty of conservative right-wing KKK and Skinheads in the US that praise god and Hitler in the same breath.
I think Peter Watson's choice to emphasize "secularism" has the unfortunate effect of opening his argument to stupid criticisms that miss the point, such as talk about how the U.S.S.R. was an officially "secular" state. My own discussion of his editorial had the same basic thrust as yours: It's the Enlightenment, stupid!
No, poetry is the poetry of people. Don't try to defend religion by claiming it is something other than what it is. There is nothing religion can offer to the intellectually and emotionally fulfilled atheist, neither artistically nor nor metaphorically nor "spiritually," whatever the hell that's supposed to be a euphemism for. Paiwan, religion is superfluous. Your suggestion that people who lack your nuanced understanding of religion are in some way poorer for it is asinine.
Kay Way
The soul-less comment was quoted from the speaker ( this term or last term?) of EU Parliament's remark on EU political weakness.
No implication to atheists. Apologize, if people felt that way.
You see the lift of EU weapon embargo to China is just like Swiss designed and sold Gas Chamber machine to Auschwitz, they just repeat too often. (American is much more civilized in this token.) This is a side tract discussion. but I just responded to Revere's text. Maybe I am wrong, because it is too general impression based on EU political performances so far.
My understanding of poetic nature in religion can be listed several examples;
1 Carl Jung's interpretation on Jacob- The God inside you defends for you against God.
2. Prayer is the God inside you to speak to God, beyond speech.
3. Mother Teresa said, " The dying persons on the street are my Jesus Christ."
4. The theme of Genesis in fact in poetry form.
I have no problem that people use ' creative imagination' or ' the ground of beings' to express religious experiences. I have found that new re-interpretation are very helpful to me, but it is very personal.
Last point on your Biblical comment, I like the description in Bible so nakedly formed. I take the latest JEPD hypotheis on document formation of Bible. In fact, the record was very honest, for instance, the worm bited the wirtten material, so the successive record just recorded it and put the 'guess' note( becuse worm destroyed the part). JEPD depicted that at least four traditions of document formation of Bible. The board meeting of editors could not reconcile four traditions, so their solutions just all put in. So the Bible literally had lots of conflicting description. I can list many references.
Imperfect tool serves as transformation catalyst indeed is very paradoxical and beautiful, isn't it.
Some parts of Bible research needs scientific methods to analyze, the scholars now are smart! Unfortunately, some fundamentalists are so dogmatic and distort the beautiful spirit.
Mother Teresa said, " The dying persons on the street are my Jesus Christ."
Then she certainly didn't pass the sentiment on to her sisters. When I was at a Missionaries of Charity home in the early nineties the sisters were required to retire and pray together for hours at a time. If the dying people in their care had the bad grace to breath their last during praying time they died alone unless there was a godless volunteer on hand.
Paiwan, it is true, the US has a shining record of selling weapons (including chemical weapons) to only the highest caliber of dictator and fanatic. Even if they do end up being used against civilians or indeed the US itself, nevermind.
But still, that is what any sensible godfearing and loving civilisation would do, right? Nothing like those dastardly Swiss, with their cheese and their cookoo clocks. ;)
[blockquote]I wish that America will not follow Europe and become soul-less as they are rightly criticizing themselves. I stay in Phuket where many Europeans have chosen to reside after retirement. You can occasionally encounter the people have missed the days of Hitler's and still find his speech inspiring, coupling with strong anti-American sentiment, especially after cups of beer. A sign of twlight of a civilization. I wish Revere were here to encounter this spiritual draining.[/blockquote]
You have some strange ideas about Europe and America, not to mention the role that the Church played in the rise of fascism in Europe during the 1930's and 1940's (hint: for the most part, the clergy weren't exactly the good guys.)
True religion? What's that? does it involve wearing kilts?
fm: FCD
True religion? What's that? does it involve wearing kilts?
fm: Revere
But this is a serious time of year for religious folks so I thought, as a sign of respect,
Did it sound that I put words on people's mouth? Maybe.
My speculation does not believe that there is an iron wall between non- and religion groups. Human beings are supposed to build inclusive community thru dialogues..
My theme stated as above: Is the separation of state and church, but not state without church. It implies the important place of religion in modern life which encompasses every arena.
Human civilizations have tried many measures to sustain the continuity; religion had brilliant and dark sides. So did the secularism in last several centuries' attempts.
An example: As Vicktor Frankle ( survivor of Dead Camp and became Logo therapy founder) ironically depicted that the German Capon who pushed the button of Gas Chamber, the finger after an hour in his house also pushed the button of record to have Bach's or Beethoven music.
We look back the history and try to look from now in order that we can continue to create our common future. Secularism has proven inadequate to sustain our civilization. The democratic Nazi in fact had adopted the consequences of secularism. The history in this period had shown that Hitler himself, his original motive just wanted confined Jewish who had held financial control, so his regime could move the financial support easily. The later collective crime was in fact the German elite and people ( who had been exposed to secularism long enough and proud of their achievements.)
We are now living in post-scientific era and post-existentialism from religious movements. I see the convergence not divergence of these two areas.
Paiwan: Setting a false dilemma as a premise is a fallacy. How can a state be separated from the church yet have religious elements within it? To include religion ("church") within state violates the definition of a separation.
Human civilizations have created religions to explain what frightens us. The unknown frightens us fundamentally; anything than cannot be explained, rationalized, or defined is inherently unsettling. What is more frightening, then, than the idea of a God that cannot be named, defined, sensed by any known means of detection (organic or artificial), or be agreed upon by the people that worship It to hold common traits with consistency in thoughts and actions through time?
As a side note, the Nazi party was not democratic and never professed to be. It was the leading German Socialist Party. Hitler was a profound Christian and did believe that he was acting in accordance with the Almighty One. Using him as an example of secularism v.s. religiosity has backfired.
Andrew
I occasionally purchase Belgium chocolate, next time I will shift to Swiss. :)
C.P.
Hilter was not democratically elected, really!
Paiwan
"My understanding of poetic nature in religion can be listed several examples;
1 Carl Jung's interpretation on Jacob- The God inside you defends for you against God.
2. Prayer is the God inside you to speak to God, beyond speech.
3. Mother Teresa said, " The dying persons on the street are my Jesus Christ."
4. The theme of Genesis in fact in poetry form. Just because someone says it's poetry doesn't mean it is poetry and it certainly doesn't mean it's a work of non-fiction. To base your life on it is ludicrous.
Your use of religion and people who examine religion as a means to validate your argument is obsurd.
1. What does it matter what Carl Jung thought about Jacob? Jung was a psychologist speaking about a work of fiction.
2. Prayer is nothing more than mental focus--no matter who describes it as "the god inside you"
3. I believe I read that Mother Teresa questioned God's existence (perhaps someone else can verify this).
4. Poetry? Genesis? Really?
2. Prayer is nothing more than mental focus--no matter who describes it as "the god inside you"
3. I believe I read that Mother Teresa questioned God's existence (perhaps someone else can verify this).
Kay Way:
I think that number 2 is no more than ingrained obsessive-compulsive behavior. The patterning is initiated at the same time that the brain is most vulnerable to such incursions (younger is always better; that is why they are brought to church, synagogue, mosque, etc., while they are still unable to think).
And number 3? Mother Teresa would have been clinically diagnosed as a schizophrenic, had she been properly attended to. She wasn't. She admitted that she gave up praying, entirely, for the last two decades -- or so -- of her life. Jesus no longer "talked" to her. She somehow worked her way through the disease. I met many schizophrenics, during my time as a street cop, in San Jose, California. When you deal with a few hundred of them -- during the course of twenty years -- you come to recognize the symptoms, very easily.
An old folk like me, 35 years ago had read "The dialogue between Paul Tillich and Albert Einstein" until today I find that it is still very interesting to me. Maybe many of you read it also.
In Paul Tillich's response, he had explained the symbol of God as essential to a living religion, and the interpretation of God's omnipotence, I just miss K and Michael's previous dialogues. I am sort of continuing Michael's idea "Dialogues between two groups" It is better for you who are interested in studying more to read by yourself.
http://speakingoffaith.publicradio.org/programs/einsteinsgod/tillich-ei…
In addition, Paul Tillich had written many books, among them I recommend
1. The Dynamics of Faith
2. The Courage to Be
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Tillich
Often I share my viewpoints with my church-goer friends, I will be labeled " un-believer", certainly they are many kinds of religious people.
In the eyes of atheists, if I were to be labeled "religiosity" that is too heavy and un-comfortable to me. Certainly there are many kinds of atheists that I have learned. But I decline that people mention religious experiences to be labeled that way.