2009
I didn’t want my 1,000th post to be about Catholicism so we’ll say instead that it is about dysfunction in religion.
Here is our starting point, a question from the Catholic Answers Forums: “How do I save my daughter from Fundamentalism?”
This may not sound like much of a problem to Pagans. From our perspective, there is little to choose between conservative Catholicism and conservative Protestantism. They are two sides of the same coin.
It’s an old tale, dating from the so-called Reformation and the subsequent “Counter” Reformation. Christianity tore Europe apart for hundreds of years with its competing doctrines. It still tears families apart. It isn’t enough to find the White Christ; you have to find the RIGHT White Christ. It isn’t enough that he lived, died, was reborn and what-not. It isn’t enough that you believed it all happened. Crazy, huh?
I have trouble understanding a religion like this, but of course, it’s not a religion at all; it’s a superstition, so perhaps my expectations are too high.
Religion is about showing proper forms of devotion. It is not about what you think about Zeus or Odin or any other god, or whether you think Zeus or Odin are the same god with different names. What is required of a functional religion is that the proper rituals are performed. It is about cultic acts, not about belief. It is not about doing or believing things out of fear of divine retribution.
I happen to think my gods are individuals and not the same as other gods. But it does not matter to me if you think Zeus is also Odin is also Juppiter Optimus Maximus or if you think Thor is Teshub. It’s not for me to say. I certainly can’t prove it one way or another so it would be rather silly to argue about it, wouldn’t it? Two people arguing about something that neither one of them can possibly know.
So how does a proper Catholic respond to the threat of protestant fundamentalism?
Coercion and punitive measures, of course.
Come on, did you think the answer would be different? We have 2,000 years of evidence and you think it’s going to be something else?
Here we go. Hold on to your hats:
1. If she is entirely independent, you are limited to prayer, sacrifice, and talking to her about religious issues when opportunities arise. If she is in any way dependent upon you, you can explain to her that, while she may be a legal adult, her dependence means that she is still subject to your authority.
2. If that is the case, you could tell her that attendance at Mass is a family responsibility and you expect her to go, even though she should not receive Communion right now. If she refuses, then draw up an “exit plan” to transition her as quickly as possible away from being financially supported by you. If she agrees to accept your authority as a condition of accepting your financial support, you should assure her that you will not force her to talk to a priest or go to religious education classes (as you would do if she were a minor instead of a legal adult). You may though point out to her that doing so on her own could make going to Mass easier to deal with because she will have a forum for asking her questions and expressing her concerns about religion.
Assuming your definition of religion is not the same as mine, does this sound like a functional religion to you?
I was forced to go to church when I was a teenager too, even though by then it was clear to me that Christianity did more harm than good, and not to put too fine a point on it, that it was a farce.
For the record, I am the father of two grown children. My daughter is at least nominally a Christian. My son is a scientist. He believes in science. Of course I would like them to both be Heathens like me. But it is their choice, not mine, what they wish to believe or not believe. I would never have dreamed of coercing them. Why would I not wish to grant my children the same freedom of thought I embraced for myself?
The amusing thing about all this is that even early Church Fathers recognized that you cannot force belief on anyone. Yet that is exactly what is being prescribed here.
I imagine being coerced to “keep the faith” will make this poor girl a loving daughter of the church, full of passion for Catholicism. Not.
If there can be any clearer argument for polytheism, I don’t know what it is. Since by definition all gods exist. it doesn’t matter which one you choose to show devotion to. It doesn’t matter what you believe about any one of them. All that matters is a proper show of devotion.
From a polytheistic perspective, imagine the question reformulated as follows:
Our daughter, age 19, has recently turned away from her Norwegian Heathen religion. refusing to attend our rituals and looking elsewhere for answers (she’s interested in Danish ideas). She is stubborn and will not speak to a priest. What do we do?
As you can see clearly now, this is no question at all, let alone a problem. The gods are still there. Thor, Odin, Freyja, Freyr and so on. But Norse Heathenism was not uniform in belief and practice in the pre-Christian world. It’s not even as if the gods in question are changing here. In the Catholic complaint it is still Jesus. I’ve never heard of a Fundamentalist who denied Jesus.
No, folks, there lies madness. Why anyone would embrace it is beyond me. We should be happy in our multiplicity of belief, in our diversity and in our embracing of the divine. When you can see the forest for the trees, you won’t nitpick about a single tree out of thousands.
In the end, it is questions like this that caused me to make my first post here one thousand entries ago. Such questions still drive me, and that is why I am still here one thousand entries later. I don’t suppose the day will ever come when that will change, however many days off I may take in between.
Congratulations on your 1000th entry…way to go!
I find it utterly disgusting that the answer to the ridiculous question seemed to be centred on financial dependance.
…"If she refuses, then draw up an "exit plan" to transition her as quickly as possible away from being financially supported by you."…
Sounds like it's a case of 'save your cash and kick the kid out'…..and I thought they centered their 'faith' around love!!!
Silly me…what was I thinking?
Congrats on the 1,000 mark, H! May you continue on to a glorious 2,000 and more.
It's the ole "my way or the highway" being doled out. It's a form of family excommunication and is common to other Christian groups. The Jehovah's Witnesses practice a very severe form of group shunning. And many "Bible only" types have group "accountability sessions" in which a person gets up in front of everyone and others accuse them of their "sins" to break them down to repentance. Something I see as not healthy at all but psychologically damaging!
Here's the deal, if it were a Lutheran child having doubts and wanting to convert to Catholicism…you would *NOT* see this same advice given to the parents. You'd hear screams of, "You let that child choose for themselves what they believe Jesus is leading them to!"
Congratulations on the 1000th post!
Reading those "exit plans" made me glad that I grew up in a household where church wasn't a requirement, and I could think the way I want.
Religion is a terrible thing to force upon children. My brother's step-daughter and her boyfriend are putting their kids through converting to a Rastafarian way of life, which also means they have to go Vegan. I feel so bad for those kids, when I go over there to eat chicken that my brother cooks and they get their steamed vegetables. I feel like I'm torturing them, heh.
Thank you, Stu. Yeah, what happened to love? Like I asked my son's nurse today (she's a protestant), "isn't it enough they both believe in Christ?"
Gran, thanks. 2000 seems a long way off! But then, I started this in 2005 and here I am four years later.
The shunning thing is insane, but then I've never been big on coercion. I grew up a Lutheran with a best friend who was Catholic. None of us were concerned about whether one of us was more of a Christian than the other, and that, I think, is how it should be for these idiots.
Talgrimm, thanks, and I think that's the way to go. My little boy is growing up Heathen but if he wants to believe something else when he grows up, that's his choice. I'll still love him and be there for him to the same degree.
Rastafarian, eh? Well, fortunately we Heathen's have no dietary requirements so I don't torture my son either way. He likes vegetables more than meat though he eats a lot of chicken but I'm not going to force either of them on him. A multi-vitamin makes up for a lot. But I'm with you in the food department – steamed veggies isn't a meal for me. I like a good juicy steak and potatoes.
Children grow up eating what their parents give them. That's just normal.
Yeah, I don't get the way of coercion in regards religion. But I guess when you believe your faith has been revealed as a whole…and you think you have the whole and someone comes along and shows you their faith (which they claim is the same as yours) with "missing parts" then naturally you're going to assume they're wrong. It's like looking at DaVinci's "Last Supper" without John sitting next to him and no Judas. You know?
Heartfelt congratulations on your 1000th post. I hope to see many, many more.
I was thinking about the hypothetical case of a Norse girl taking an interest in the Danish gods. When my dad and later my mum came to know I had accepted Hellenism as my second identity, they had no problem dealing with it. My father actually took an interest in Hellenism and wanted to know how what gods/desses Hellenes believe in and worship.
I reckon it would be the same with the vast majority of Hindus had their children taken an interest in other pagan religions.
In the past, India had welcomed Zoroastrians, white jews and even Christians to her soil. It was not till the coming of Islam – a monotheistic faith – that Indians were forced to either retaliate in self-defence or accept death. It was only then that they chose the first and the age old rivarly between Hinduism and Islam began to take shape.
I would, myself, give my future children the right to choose their own belief system. I will be teaching them about paganism once they are able to read and write, true, but still, it will be left to them as to what they choose as their religious identity, when they become adults.
Just because someone is financially dependent on me, doesn't mean that I can force this individual to accept my religious beliefs. Such thinking and behaviour go against the norms of democracy, which should be practiced everywhere and not just at the political level.
But then, what does Christianity know about democracy?
Dysfunction in religion…I understand that completely. I always had a hard time listening to my father bad mouth other Christians of different denominations. How was that "Christ like"? It no longer matters that he lived and died and was a teacher who deserved respect…it's whose club you are in and who is "holier than thou".
The last discussion I had with a lady ended in my foot up her butt because she was so busy pointing her finger, she didn't realize she was representing her own religion and succeeding at making them look bad. Indirectly telling me that I'm on my way to Hell and how she's praying that I see the "light"…hah! What kind of light did she think she was giving off? Nothing…but a black hole of intolerance.
It is all about respect for all other religions and realize that we are all working towards the same goal but fighting over petty matters does nothing but slow everyone down and, sometimes, cause irreversible damage that can stunt anyone's spiritual growth…and I would NOT want that kind of casualty on my conscience.
Uncensored: I agree with lots of what you said. Except this:
"It is all about respect for all other religions and realize that we are all working towards the same goal…"
We are *not* all working towards the same goal. Christians are working toward salvation of their soul, forgiveness of sins and access to a paradise. I'm not working toward *any* of those things. You might want to consider that. Also, not all religions are worthy of respect.
Granamyr: I totally agree with what you pointed out. To clarify, I didn't mean that goal to be literally the same goal. My goal isn't to go to heaven or hell because I don't believe they exist. But I get your meaning.
I also agree about not all religions deserving respect…especially if they believe that intentional harm is a "good" thing. I should have also specified that equal respect should be paid, in return. I don't show respect to someone who doesn't show me equal treatment.
That's what I get for trying to watch a movie, cook dinner and write comments at the same time…I am also having issues with my spelling.
Nice.
LOL! No worries! I just like to clarify when I can. (:
Cheeks, well said. Christians in this country like to pretend that Democracy has Judeo-Christian origins but Judaism was never big on individual human rights – after all, being an individual and trying to exercise free thought got you accused of "whoring after foreign gods" and had unhappy consequences. And it was Pagans who invented democracy, which is not at all surprising. It's hard to even imagine monotheism giving birth to something that encourages not being part of a hive-mind.
Uncensored, I can't multitask either. Recipe for disaster, speaking of cooking. I agree with both you and Granamyr that not all religions are deserving of respect. I still agree 100% with Jan Assmann that monotheism is counter-religion and that polytheism is religion. I cannot respect a so-called religion whose entire purpose seems to be to eradicate all thought outside its own. Monotheism = Totalitarianism
Wow…1000 posts! I just started my blog 2 months ago, and I cannot imagine reaching that point or where my life's journey will be when I get there! Way to go!
I think you hit the nail square on the head with the "dysfunction in religion" direction. I would be horrified, am horrified, at the Catholic advice here, except that I have seen it far too often in other fundie denominations. If you remember Bloom County and Opus, well, Dandelion break, brb!!!
I have to ask…and I have the feeling I am so-o-o going to regret this! LOL! – everything you say about Christianity's blind, monolithic, fundamentalist, hate mongering behaviour is true, true, true…
But what do you do with people like me – who identify as Christian, but are not exclusively monotheistic, who is pagan as well, and find great comfort in both identities. I am not a true Christian? Perhaps I am not, by the definition you hold to of Christianity. Thats an odd feeling. I am enjoying your blog, glad I found it, and will continue as your faithful Episcopagan reader. Hang in there…can't wait to see post 2000! LOL! Can we hope the world may change just a little before then? Maybe…
Cameron, thank you! My definition of Christianity is actually that of Christianity itself in the Nicene Creed, that Christianity is defined by the idea that salvation is through Jesus Christ and Jesus Christ alone. This makes many people who claim to be Christian, who believe themselves to be Christian, actually not Christian. Obviously, there are many who feel this definition is too limiting, since there are growing numbers of Christians who embrace ideas of reincarnation and who accept the possibility of other paths to whatever awaits us.
My own opinion, for what it's worth, is that if you are a monotheist, you cannot even acknowledge the possibility of other gods, since by its very definition, monotheism claims but one. BUT, Porphyry made an attempt in the third century CE to create a place for Jesus in polytheism, claiming him to be a divine man, rather like Herakles, who is not quite a god but more than a mere man. So you could still "believe in" Jesus in some sense, or even worship him, and call yourself a Christian if you refuse to accept the Nicene Creed.
The problem for the Creed and it's narrow definition is that it's late. It dates from the Fourth Century, after all, when 400 years of "Jesus followers" had lived and died. Besides which, Christian only means "messianist" so really, if you accept Jesus as some sort of messiah (and there are all kinds) then you could call yourself a Christian as well. But if you leave out the messiah, you can't really be a Christian because you'd be leaving out what gives the term its very meaning. Without a messiah you'd have to be a Jesus "something else", I suppose.
Just my two cents there. Terms are a terrible thing and it's almost impossible to arrive at terms or definitions that are satisfactory to everyone!
Hey, H…wasn't it specifically the views of the Northmen that contributed the most to our democratic style? Representatives, taking a vote? You know the ole Althing…uh, thing? (:
Cameron: Just my own thoughts. If you're accepting of other religious views that Christianity has traditionally condemned, why do you want to remain Christian? What does it do for you that perhaps other, more diverse deities can't? Just curious. (:
Hraf, Granamyr, I will gladly take a swing at answering why I am still a Christian…but I plead your patience – I have a cumulative exam coming up at the tail end of a 3 week summer semester class in college – Astronomy – and at this point if I tackled that post, you would find me typing galaxy formation, chemical composition of the sun and the definition of a Parsec (3.3 light years for those of us who watched Star Wars all those years…)
Let me survive this, and I promise I will return to the question on Monday! I will say that so far I have an A, so I am not as panicked as some of my poor classmates!
Oh – and the celts elected their leaders too. *grin*
Hello there, Hrafnkell. I'm still around, lurking.
I was taken by the quote (paraphrase?) from Jan Assmann stating that "monotheism is counter-religion and that polytheism is religion." That is essentially my own point of view.
Which of Assmann's works says that, or at least supports it? I've never read him, but it seems that book might be the place to start!
Oh! And congratulations on your 1000th post!
Hello, Quercus, and thank you. Jan Assmann is a German scholar and well worth reading. I first encountered his views on monotheism in Jan Assman “The Mosaic Distinction: Israel, Egypt, and the Invention of Paganism,” Representations 56 (1996). He repeats the idea in an article appearing Sarah Iles Johnston, ed. Ancient Religions (2007). Here he states in relation to what he calls "revolutionary monotheism", "This form of monotheism manifests itself in the first place as a negative or counterreligion, defining what god is not and how god should not be worshiped."
He goes on to say that "Biblical monotheism is based not on evidence but on revelation. It is not a matter of cognition but of commitment. It requires adherents to make a conscious decision to accept revealed truth and reject deceitful evidence. Natural evidence is debunked as seduction, as luring people away from revealed truth into the traps and pitfalls of the false gods, that is, the world" (pp. 28-29).
You might also read his book Moses the Egyptian: The Memory of Moses in Western Monotheism, where, if I remember correctly, he makes the same argument.
Gran, yes the Althing has many democratic aspects but most modern democracies and republics (which is actually what the USA is, a representative republic) are based on Greek and Roman models.