So what is a religion anyway?
It may have been a coincidence, but Liv had a post today about religion and several personal discussions converged on that topic as well. So, I won’t be Manhattan, it will be all about religion today.
A friend of mine told me a story about how, when he was contemplating joining the National Guard (which he did not end up doing), he was asked for his religious preference. He responded that his religion and his religious preference are two different and distinct things. His implication was that your religion is something you are born with and has nothing to do with religious preferences.
I am challenged by this a bit. I know several people who have changed their religion, apparently quite successfully. I have certainly met enough Jews and Catholics to whom the thought of changing their religion is as unthinkable as walking with their innards inside out. Now, I am not talking about fanatics; I am talking about very bright, perfectly reasonable people who are very logical in all other ways. Could it be that religion is not necessarily logical? There is a code of behavior that states one does not discuss religion at casual social gathering. Personally, I think it is a good rule of thumb. In virtually all conversations about religion, the argument seems to boil down to one faith versus another. Since faith cannot be proven by definition, any serious argument is out of the question. What one left with then is stupid arguments, or arguments that extol the practitioners of one religion over another (or, conversely, denigrates the practitioners of the opposing religion – just check any Christian, Jewish or Muslim chat room for ready examples).
Fine and well, I say to myself, faith, especially deep faith, cannot be argued with. But is it faith really? I know quite a few people that designate themselves as Jews, Catholics, etc., that, if pressed, will admit that they do not follow the edicts of their religions, even to a minimal degree. The selfsame people would nevertheless identify themselves violently with the religion of their birth. One possible explanation is the fact that we all have the tendency to define ourselves by our early experiences. Any religious exposure as a child imprints itself rather indelibly on one’s personality. Having been born a Catholic once would find it very hard to derive the same sense from a Jewish service as from a Catholic one – the hymns just don’t sound the same, and by experiential definition, the Jewish service is not a religious service (to a Catholic’s personal vantage point, that is).
I think that the kind of religious attachment as the one I just described cannot be severed. On the other hand, if one’s religious convictions are cerebral, intellectual and based on some type of reasoning, it is a different question altogether. If one became convinced that a certain religion is RIGHT, or if one reached a certain conclusion regarding his or her own religion, then that very fact opens the religious discussion to a valid debate. It does not have to be necessarily a question of a Jew being logically convinced in the divinity of Christ or the validity of the Trinity. It can be a choice regarding the role of religion in one’s quotidian existence. This is the case where a member of a mixed marriage assumes his or her spouse’s religious convictions because it will allow them to better fit in within an environment where they WANT to fit in. In both cases one views one’s position vis-à-vis religion as something, which is conditioned on one’s choice and is subject to it.
I am not saying that one approach is better than the other, although the latter appears to me personally to be more productive on an individual basis – if you are convinced that being an Episcopalian is more correct than being a member of the Pentecostal church, you will be a much happier person if you can make that transition. I would also note that, to my knowledge, all religions allow for the possibility of conversion, even Orthodox Judaism, which places very strict rules as to who is considered to be Jewish would allow a person without a drop of Jewish blood to be accepted.
Once again, no conclusions, just an attempt to gain a perspective.
5:45:48 PM 
|
|
