Talking About Politics and Religion
After a spectacular meal at the Hillebrand Winery Restaurant in Virgil, the Guru and his wife Gloria, my wife Paula and I were settled in the Guru's living room enjoying a post-dinner glass of---what else---his latest icewine.
We had been talking about the US election and I asked the Guru whether he agreed with most of the pundits that the Supreme Court would strike down the Health Care Mandate.
"It's hard to say, but if I were a betting man I would wager that it won't. My guess is that Justice Kennedy will decide that the health care problem in the US is so great that the administration's attempt to fix it should be allowed to stand. He will, however, insist that the wording of the decision include a 'broccoli barricade'."
"A broccoli barricade?"
"That's what I call it. Scalia and Alito argued that by approving the Mandate the Court would open up the Commerce Clause of the Constitution so that one could drive the proverbial Mack Truck through it, forcing people to eat broccoli, own cell phones, get their hair cut, whatever. The arguments were nonsense, of course, but Kennedy could meet their concerns by suggesting that the wording of the decision should limit the use of the Commerce Clause in future to truly exceptional situations. I think the Chief Justice would then join him so the Court's decision would be 6 to 3."
"Interesting point. I hope you're right!"
Then Paula shifted the conversation to the role that the evangelical churches and the Catholic church have been playing in both the choice of a Republican presidential nominee and in the general election. She burst out, "I can't stand the way religion gets mixed up in politics, especially in matters like birth control."
Gloria, whose academic background was the sociology of religion, said, quietly, "It is not religion, it's theology."
"But aren't they the same?', Paula asked.
"Most people use the terms interchangeably but when I was studying religions I gradually decided, in my own mind at least, that 'religion' and 'theology' were different. Let me go back a bit. I grew up in a devout family in California and when I was a teenager I started to rebel against some of the rules and customs, especially those that I felt discriminated against females. When I got to university I was a mixed up kid, part of me clinging to my parents' faith and part of me rejecting it. I think that was why I ended up studying religion when my friends were going into mathematics, economics, art history, languages and so on. I wanted to resolve the 'internal civil war' that was going on in my head."
"So", Paula said, "how did deciding that religion and theology were different help you bring peace to that civil war?"
"It didn't happen quickly but as I studied religions from around the world I realized that they almost all shared a common belief in what Christianity calls the Golden Rule---do under others as you would have them do unto you. The formulations were different but the meaning was the same. It occurred to me that successful cultures need a belief, a value, that restrains individuals from killing, robbing, raping each other. If a culture doesn't find a way to limit selfishness and aggression, it will die out. About the same time, I found an article that said that while the origin of the word 'religion' is unclear, some experts believe that it comes from Latin words that mean 'hold back' or 'restrain'. I decided that if that was what 'religion' meant I could subscribe to that, I could consider myself a 'religious' person.
"But", I joined in," you haven't told us what in your view distinguishes 'religion' from 'theology'?"
"I'll come to that, "Gloria replied, "but let me stick with my thoughts about 'religion' a bit. The more I thought about religion as the notion that we should treat each other as we would want to be treated, the more I questioned the need for all the rules, and customs that most religions---but not all---have built on that simple idea. If you believe in that idea then you don't need to be told that you shouldn't kill someone, steal from your neighbour, or bear false witness. Someone who had internalized that idea wouldn't think of treating others in that way. I started to call all that extraneous stuff that cluttered up that simple idea, 'theology'. I realized that my rebelling against 'religion' wasn't a rebellion against the idea of treating each other as we would want to be treated, but against the stuff that cluttered up the idea. And especially, as I said before, all the rules and customs that placed men on a pedestal, with women occupying an inferior place. But it wasn't just the gender discrimination, it was all the rules that I thought were unrelated to the core belief. What you can eat, what you can wear, what you have to believe about god, about the hereafter, heaven, hell and on and on."
"And all that 'stuff' is what you call 'theology'? What did your professors think of that distinction between religion and theology", asked Paula.
"The professors of divinity weren't happy with me at all. I'm afraid I was a bit brash. I told them that promoting the Golden Rule didn't need church hierarchies, or tenured professors of divinity. It just needed people who believed in it and lived by it. As far as I could see, theology, on the other hand, was all about certain people using---actually misusing---religion to gain status, power, influence or money."
I looked at the Guru who had remained silent during Gloria's comments but it was clear that he was listening carefully. " What do you think", I asked.
"This whole discussion reminds me of how Gloria and I met."
"You were giving a talk at UCLA, weren't you?"
"Yes, it was just a prosaic lecture on how to promote economic development in what we used to call under-developed countries. Then an intense young woman attacked me in the question period about not paying attention to the role of organized religion in keeping the countries poor. She argued that the church hierarchy made deals with the political and business leaders, deals that kept workers quiet, docile---and poor."
"I was nasty to the Guru", Gloria said, "but then we went for a drink, and he agreed that I was probably right, and I decided that I liked his eyes and his hands."
"My eyes are fine but my hands are a bit arthritic", the Guru said, rubbing his hands together.
"You're just fine", Gloria smiled. "While we were having our drink after the lecture, the Guru argued that he had seen devoted church workers providing education and health care in poor countries. After some discussion, I convinced him that they were motivated by religion but the people at the top of the church weren't. They were into theology, not religion, and their deals with business and political leaders kept the poor, poor."
"So", I said, "Gloria, you would argue that the church leaders who oppose contraception are practising theology while the priests and nuns, who turn a blind eye to poor women who are using birth control because they can't afford any more children, are practising religion?"
"Yes", replied Gloria. "And I would argue that countries that treat the poor and disadvantaged well are religious even if most people don't go to a church, synagogue, mosque or whatever. So, this means that the Scandinavian countries are by my definition very religious even though few of their citizens attend places of worship."
"All this reminds me", Paula said, "of a visit I made recently to my granddaughter's daycare centre, which has children from every corner of the world and many religions. At the end of the morning, the children sat in a circle while the leader read to them and led them in songs. Before they broke up, the leader asked them to 'look after each other' until they met again---in effect she was asking them to practise the Golden Rule. Now, that's the kind of 'religion' one can teach in school and no one will object!"
"Exactly," Gloria said.
Thinking of the Posting (this one!) that I would have to write, I tried to summarize the discussion. "So, we started by saying that there was too much religion in politics but then we decided that one should make a distinction between 'religion' and 'theology'. We now seem to be saying that 'religion'---defined as treating others as we would like to be treated---is not a problem in politics, but should, in fact, be encouraged. On the other hand, "Theology'---defined as all the rules, customs, sacred texts, beliefs in a deity and so on that are part of an 'organized religion'---are personal and have no place in politics. Have I got that right?"
"That's it", Gloria said, and Paula and the Guru nodded agreement.
I couldn't help but bring up an historical allusion. "You know we have just agreed on something that the British accepted in the 18th century after spending a century of bloody fighting over 'religion'. It seems that we have to keep re-learning the lesson that politics and theology don't mix."
"I hope and believe", the Guru said, "that we will see a sharp decline in the involvement of theologians in politics. The shrewder leaders are now realizing that they have been 'used' by the greedoholics and their minions like Karl Rove."
"And so say all of us!", Gloria, Paula and I joined in.
000
Gloria mentioned that when I was recording the discussion for this blog I might want to mention a poster that the Scarborough Missions has prepared showing how each of the main religions expresses the Golden Rule. Here is a copy of the poster:
 |
| This image is courtesy of the Scarborough Missions. To order a poster click here |
000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
If you have any comments, please leave them below or drop me a line at johnpathunter@gmail.com. The next Icewine Guru posting will appear in the fullness of time. My other blog, The Letter from Virgil, (http://letterfromvirgil.blogspot.com/) appears every Sunday morning.
