4.1 Religious Methods and Practices                                             Version 1.3 March 2012

Is religion a fixed set of dogmatic statements from a guru or prophet? 

Aren’t the rituals and practices of all religions a bit silly?

Are some better than others?  Or are they all bad?

Aren’t all religions totally different and contradicting each other?


 

4.1 Conclusions on Religious Methods & Practices                                       (Statement 21)

For many people, religion is principally a practical discipline of meditation or prayer:

           sometimes focused on religious symbols or rituals;

           sometimes at places of worship or at particular times of the day or week;

           but also more widely in all aspects of daily life;

           to increase selflessness, perhaps even to lose any sense of self;

           to express compassion and mercy;

           and by these practices to obtain a spiritual experience or just behave better.

For many people, the principle religious activity is the acceptance of a set of beliefs:

           that God exists, God created the world, and God cares about us;

           that we should submit to God’s will, follow God’s commands and praise God;

           that certain people are prophets or messengers, or even the son, of God; and

           for many this requires us to follow religious practices like those above.

Within all religions there is a range of people whose commitment varies: 

           Some participate only for personal status or monetary benefit, who we must be wary of and criticize their hypocrisy, but otherwise we can ignore them; 

           Some are part of the group for the social or cultural benefits, and do no harm;

           Some are totally committed, or follow the faith but with sincere doubts, and these people we must treat with respect and engage with.

In all major religions sincere followers can be fundamentalists, traditional or liberal:

           Fundamentalists think their sacred texts (the Bible or the Koran) are totally true, even if they need to be interpreted, and we cannot stray too far from the literal meaning.  Studying the sacred texts themselves shows that this cannot be so.

           Traditionals accept that their sacred texts are sometimes or frequently symbolic or allegorical, with stories that are not literally true but convey an underlying truth.

           Liberals use their sacred texts as guides rather than God’s word, and also accept inspiration from other religious texts as well as philosophy, science and history.

All major religions have over time used different methods to develop and spread:

           Just as philosophical, scientific and historical methods require us to be open, transparent and honest with ourselves, so religious discussion should be too. 

           All religions have honesty as a core value, but many of their leaders have difficulty actually being honest with their followers. 

           A justifiable religious approach must also include openness and transparency, but many are closed and secretive about significant matters.

           Some religious leaders, especially Christians (for centuries) and some Muslims (more recently), have threatened or used force to maintain orthodoxy, to squash any dissent and to prevent variations in the accepted practices or beliefs.

          All religions have leaders and adherents who make mistakes and do bad or silly things.  But the overall behaviour of typical adherents and leaders is a significant indicator of the worth of a religion: generally the stricter religions do more harm.

           Some modern ‘religions’ are based on lies or secrets hidden from their followers, such as Scientologists.

           The most harmful religious cults will not tolerate dissent, prevent followers from contact with ‘unbelievers’ or with outside sources of information, expect strict obedience to the leaders, demand large or ongoing donations, and do not openly disclose how their money is spent.  History shows such cults generally lead to social, sexual and financial abuse that is covered up in the name of the religion.

 

Some religions have many gods (such as some varieties of Hinduism) or one god (such as Christianity) or no god (such as Buddhism or Taoism).  All traditional religions involve a belief in god(s) or other supernatural entities, but we can address at the most fundamental level how we are to live without invoking the supernatural.

Many religions, and most religious people, are tolerant of other faiths and believe their own is based on reason and the evidence.  The evidence many religious people use comes from personal experience, and sacred texts such as the Bible or the Koran are treated as evidence. 

At various times, different religious groups have been dogmatic, rather than open to reason and the evidence, or intolerant and exclusive, and polite debate with them is difficult. 

For many, religion is more of a practice than a set of fixed beliefs, the willingness to adopt a humble, reverent openness to follow the practices, to experience the world differently, to reflect and learn, and perhaps see the true reality.  We can follow these practices while at the same time sensibly experiencing doubt, reviewing their justifications and their outcomes.

Some religions (such as Hinduism and reformed Judaism) have few core doctrines held by all adherents, and are focussed more on rituals and/or shared narratives rather than a fixed set of beliefs.  Other religions (such as Buddhism and Islam) do have a core doctrine, but it may be interpreted in a variety of ways by different adherents. 

Most religions have a mystical tradition (such as the Kabbalah in Judaism and Sufism in Islam) based on some esoteric cosmology and practices that lead to mystical experiences. 

Religious dialogue must focus on sincere adherents who can entertain doubt, excluding hypocrites and social climbers. 

There are many bogus religions, established or maintained to promote their leaders rather than to be open to the truth and seek meaning and purpose.

The Catholic Church has not been open about its sexual abuse of children, its role in WWII Nazism, or the Dead Sea Scrolls.  A few centuries after Jesus died the Bible was translated into the current Latin version.  Catholic Mass was said in Latin until after the Vatican II Council  in 1965.  Catholic priests were required tell the population what the mass was about, and what the Bible said.  Some conservatives still prefer, and say, the Latin Mass.  The Bible was not translated into the vernacular until the Reformation – the 1500s.  A key difference with the Protestants was that they thought people communicate directly with God (or Jesus) so they must be able to read the Bible so it must be in the local language and people must be taught to read.  This is one cause of the technological advance of Protestant (Western) Europe.