Why it’s been a good year for religion

[cbayer]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/why-its-been-a-good-year-for-religion/article14104681/


YONI GOLDSTEIN
Contributed to The Globe and Mail
Published Wednesday, Sep. 04 2013, 10:28 AM EDT





With Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, upon us now, it seems an appropriate time to note that the last 12 months have, actually, been quite positive for religion – at least, those of us who would like to see religion move into the 21st century. There have emerged significant new strains in Judaism, Christianity and Islam of modernity, equality and acceptance – these three religions appear more welcoming, more open-minded, than ever before. This is good news not only for reform-inclined religious people, but for all who wish to see religion flourish.

Two events this summer gave me renewed hope that my religion, Judaism, will one day be truly modern. The first was the auf ruf (a pre-wedding ritual for the groom usually celebrated at synagogue the Saturday before nuptials) of two men at a condo building in Toronto’s gay village – two men preparing to marry each other. The event was conducted in a modernized Orthodox style (but complete with traditional kugel and cholent for lunch), and the couple was married by a gay, Orthodox rabbi during Pride week. I don’t think I have ever experienced a more brave performance of religion.

What happened in Judaism in June, though, was a close runner-up. For the first time ever, three female Orthodox rabbis – they have assumed a different term, maharat, but the job description is virtually the same – were ordained (by another Orthodox rabbi). Meanwhile, egalitarian-style Orthodox prayer groups, in which women assume leadership roles, are springing up in every major city in North America and across Israel. There is no question that in the last year progress toward modernity in the Orthodox community (Conservative and Reform Judaism have long been fully modern streams) has been more palpable than ever. May the trend continue.

The sharpest modern twist in world religion this past (Jewish calendar) year, however, occurred in Christianity. The election of Pope Francis has sent shockwaves through that world – so many of his public actions and comments, and certainly his very apparent humility, suggest the Church is on the path to becoming more open and, crucially, willing to atone for, and fix, its past sins. You can’t ask for a better advocate for that monumental endeavour than the man at the very top, and Francis has given every indication he is up to the task. In particular, his recent “who am I to judge?” line about gay people was absolutely brilliant – the lesson not to pass judgment transcends all religious boundaries, and that’s why it made such perfect sense. One hopes he’s just getting started on the job of modernizing and cleaning up the Church.

more at link

[trotsky]

1. Not for religion per se, but better for humanity.

Some varieties of religion have displayed signs of slowly beginning to accept liberal, secular morality - and that's great. Other varieties have stagnated or regressed - and that's bad.

What this means of course is another author somewhere undoubtedly wrote an article about what a horrible year it's been for religion, how gay marriage is legal in many states and recognized by the federal government, etc.

And both authors would be 100% right. What one thinks is good or bad for "religion" depends on what one's religion is, and all religious opinions are equally valid (or invalid, as the case may be).

[AtheistCrusader]

2. "but for all who wish to see religion flourish."

Why is that a thing, anyway?

I can understand why an individual might have faith, but why is it important for a Religion(TM) to 'flourish'?

[trotsky]

3. It's the kind of language that, should an atheist speak its equivalent...

they'd be instantly attacked and called all sorts of names.

Good luck looking for consistency. A theist can be certain god exists, and they are admired. An atheist expresses certainty that gods don't exist, and they are roundly condemned. By some people more than others, natch.

[el_bryanto]

14. It depends on how they do it I think

If you say "As an Atheist i believe there's no God" I don't know that that's very controversial. If you say "Believers are gullible morons." than that's something else.

It also depends on what your end goal is - to be fair everybody who holds a passionate opinion probably thinks the world would be better off if everybody agreed with him. Many if not most Atheists believe we'd all be better off if everybody accepted that there was no God. Many if not most Christians believe we'd all be better off if everybody committed themselves to serving Christ. And so on (in fairness there are some faith systems which revere tolerance and accept different paths to God.)

I suppose you have to be true to what you believe - if you feel that Christians, even Liberal DU Christians, are causing terrible harm to this nation and this world, you have to say so. But you also have to expect Christians to defend themselves.

Bryant

[trotsky]

15. Suppose someone wrote of a development being positive "for all who wish to see atheism flourish"...

What do you suppose would be the reaction?

And why is certainty in belief admired and respected (certainly not criticized), whereas certainty in disbelief attacked? Granted I don't recall you engaging in that hypocritical behavior so I don't know if you can help explain.

But there is obviously a double standard going on for many individuals.

[el_bryanto]

16. There is certainly a double standard and it's unfortunate

And I see what you mean about the double standard on certainty. I think you are right that in the public forum it would be read differently.

Bryant

[cbayer]

4. What's the definition of Religion(TM)?

Many people think that religion and religious organizations have the capacity, if not the obligation, to take care of the poor, sick, marginalized and needy. It's probably some of those people who want religion to flourish.

Have you seen Half the Sky? Great documentary and highlight some of the things that different organizations are doing around the world to help girls/women who are suffering unspeakable abuses. Some of those organizations are religiously based.

[AtheistCrusader]

5. Hard to define.

I'd probably take the same tack as the Supreme Court in attempting to define obscenity: 'I'll know it when I see it'. Certainly the OP gave multiple concrete examples of well-established religions, if not a comprehensive list.


I have not seen that documentary. I do accept that there are religions that have outreach programs that do good works around the world, though most seem to come at a price. (For instance, I am not impressed in the slightest with the much-vaunted 'Mother Teresa', though that is obviously not a condemnation of ALL religious outreach.)

[cbayer]

7. Do you have any evidence that "most seem to come at a price"?

I have very mixed feelings about Mother Teresa because there are clearly two stories being told here and I don't know which is true.

But there are a lot of organizations that I have no mixed feelings about. During the rebuilding of New Orleans after Katrina, there were many, many religiously based organizations who came down to work for example. I could not see any negative in that at all.

The OP talked about Judaism and Christianity. Are they Religion(TM)? I'm still not sure what you mean by that.

[AtheistCrusader]

8. Essentially, most of them are paying for access.

If it were wholly charity work with no expectation of anything in return, the people on the receiving end would never know exactly why these people showed up to help them. No group prayers. No photo ops. Etc.

One way to convert people is to instill a sense of indebtedness. I have observed it firsthand, and it is subtle. In some cases, the people doing to legwork aren't even aware what they are actually doing.

I have also 'gotten into it' with some people. I have shown up for some charity work, wherein some of the participants wanted to 'kick it off' with a prayer (of patently obvious denomination). I cut that shit short. I was there to help, as one human to another, not to be used for free advertising.

[cbayer]

9. What do you mean "paying for access"?

Sometimes it is very much wholly charitable work with absolutely no expectation of anything in return.

Sad that you have not had exposure to those. Or perhaps you have and you didn't even know it.

No doubt that there are those that are trying to convert, but some are just trying to do the right thing because they think it's right. Some may be religious, others not.

[AtheistCrusader]

10. When I do charity work, I do not identify myself as an athiest

because I am not trying to convert anyone to atheism. There's nothing to convert them to, being a state, rather than an organization. I have yet to see a religious charity fail to identify itself as such at any opportunity.

That's what I mean by paying for access. It's a sales pitch. They get an opportunity to 'sell' their org. There are many ways to go about it, some subtle, some not.

[cbayer]

11. And when some religious people do charity work they don't identify

themselves as members of a particular religion or try to convert.

Again, you may not have had contact with these kinds of organizations or maybe you did and didn't even know it.

You can't have it both ways, AC. You can't condemn them for identifying themselves, then say that you've never seen one that doesn't identify itself and that proves their aren't any.

You apparently have been exposed to crusaders, but not all are like that.

[AtheistCrusader]

12. Not logically true.

"You can't have it both ways, AC. You can't condemn them for identifying themselves, then say that you've never seen one that doesn't identify itself and that proves their aren't any."

First off, I didn't, nor would I try to claim there aren't 'ANY'. That's a misattribution/straw man.

"I have yet to see a religious charity fail to identify itself as such at any opportunity."

I do not assume that anonymous charity is non-religious. What I am saying is, I haven't seen a lot of anonymous charity PERIOD. Not when it involves swinging a hammer, picking up a shovel, delivering or collecting food, etc.

"You can't condemn them for identifying themselves" I don't know that I am 'condemning', I am simply not impressed. Obvious sales tactic is obvious. That's all.

If most/all people that I have seen claim to be from XYZ charity/church/org then I CAN logically and validly say that I haven't seen any that don't.

[cbayer]

13. One of the things I noticed in New Orleans was that many of these organizations

used very generic names that didn't indicate that they were affiliated with any particular religion. I made it a point to ask some of these groups and they then told me that they were a church group from someplace.

If they were selling something, they sure were quiet about it.

Would have made a great documentary.

[AtheistCrusader]

17. Perhaps a regional thing?

I'm up in the PacNW, and I note the political and religious climates are very different here, compared to the rest of the nation I have visited.

[cbayer]

18. What's different about it?

The people who came to NOLA came from all over the country, some from all over the world.

The outpouring of concern and willingness to work was a testament to the goodness of all kinds of people, both religious and not religious.

[trotsky]

6. Let me ask point blank, because you're given such mixed signals on this.

Do you think religion is the ONLY thing capable of taking care of "the poor, sick, marginalized, and needy"? Is religion *required* in order for us to try and solve those issues?

I don't expect an answer, of course, but at least I tried to ask and get clarification.

[QSkier]

20. I'm willing to bet that religions have caused more suffering than

all the suffering they have relieved. But that's just a guess.

We have about 2000-3000 years of history to back this up.

Not enough, the religious folks willl say, they want us to look at the "bigger picture" and the "other ways of knowing".

[cbayer]

21. While there is no argument about the suffering that religion has

and continues to inflict, it's a narrow view that does not see and can not celebrate the successes.

But if you want to keep a scoreboard, go for it.

[QSkier]

22. If you want to keep a scoreboard, show it!

I'm remaining "independent" as a jurist, until some actual evidence comes in. So far, none!

So far, I see about 3000 years of religious wars, and wars cloaked in religion in order to conspript troops to fight them, usually for economic prizes to the leader of the winning fighters, but somehow "religious" reasons became big time leverage to conscript those poor fools, get them to fight and die.

But if you have evidence to show that none of the advances in human endeavors would never have come about, were it not for religion, like germ theory, or a heliocentric solar system, maybe something more contemporary, like the freeing of African American slaves, bring it all on. I'd love to see that evidence that religion was the deciding factor. But where does the evidence come from, some 20th century religious prelate re-writing history from 140 years ago? Lincoln freed the slaves not because of his religious beliefs, he had to do that to win that war, cold hard fact, (much as Republicans now think that was their ticket to the black vote forever).

Let's compare and contrast notes about how religious folks have advanced humanity while holding others in slavery, others in bondage, other women without equal rights, (going on today among over a billion people of one faith or another). Let's compare those notes about how religious beliefs advances justice and equality among human beings, gives them all an equal chance to survive, (some parents arrested last week in the Northwest USA for denying their diabetic child medical treatment for "religious" reasons). Let's talk about the rational arguments for giving religious beliefs a free pass, a special pleading, as you call it.

Let's talk about how irrational fairy tales "advance" the course of human civilization, and bring up your best arguments. I'll come back tomorrow and see if you have come up with one compelling one, ask your friends to help out, this is a big assignment, bring all your best examples to prove your point. I look forward to it.

[cbayer]

23. No, you misunderstand. I have absolutely no interest in keeping a scoreboard.

That would appear to be you.

I am interested in celebrating good and confronting bad, that's all.

So you will have to find someone else to play this game that nobody wins.

See you tomorrow...... or not.

[hrmjustin]

24. As A believer I will admit that religious people have started wars in the name of religion.

Not something humanity should be proud of.

But I as a believer am not causing these issues. We are not all warlike.

[dimbear]

19. The only way I can imagine that that be true is the crop of martyrs this year is copious, and many

them were very young, active, and possibly a little reluctant to fill that role.