"Does it matter whether we believe?" or "Does it matter what we believe?" Perhaps at some future time we might want to develop this theme and ask whether it does indeed matter what we believe.
By coincidence a talk given or still to be given by Rev Gordon Oliver to the Cape Town congregation came to hand by email as this was being prepared, and in many ways his topic "Religion as the creation of meaning" corresponds closely with ours, and so we'll draw from his talk unashamedly, as it is both inspirational and helpful.
Particularly with his questions at the end of his talk, which we can
perhaps use to direct our discussion this morning.If I may borrow an expression from the late folk singer John Denver and begin with "Far Out!"
What would ET think?
I wonder what some alien, arriving here on earth from some distant galaxy, would make of the subject of religion on earth? Or even whether our ET would have a background of religious thought where it came from?
Looking at many of the modern societies that the alien would encounter, certainly in the western world, it would be tempted, I think, to the conclusion that religion was currently of little consequence, although it would no doubt notice the role that religion has played in man's history, evidenced in part today through wonderful temples and cathedrals in every city across the globe that were erected in response to mankind's religious yearnings.
Perhaps the ET would notice that some of these buildings were occupied once a week or so, whereas others hardly at all. But were our alien to go into some well-stocked library and access history books, it would be to discover that religion has played a pivotal role in mankind's progress down the march of time, including some uplifting and rewarding ways of improving man's way of life and outlook, and that this could still be found in certain ways even today.
It would see that in some other areas of the world religion was continuing to play a major role in the lives of mankind, although some of the so-called religious practices went under other names, often political.
ET would of course discover that religion has and is playing a significant role in dividing mankind, of separating nations and even man and woman from each other, and that religion has in fact been responsible for some of the most horrific wars and strife in history. And it'd learn, perhaps with some degree of puzzlement, that some of the reasons for this had been because humans had insisted on foisting their ideas and religious beliefs on others who had no need to share them in exactly the same way.
ET would be puzzled
Of course ET would be correct to be puzzled, for there is no doubt about the role that religion has played in our society, and continues to play, both as something that still remains negative and harmful, and yet has another face that that is good and positive and constructive.
ET would realise that religion is in fact mixed up in almost every aspect of human life, often without people realising or acknowledging it, and yet that, of all life's activities here on earth, it seems that only mankind follows this outwardly religious trait, so much so that is would seem to have something to do with intellect and therefore wasn't something purely instinctive.
But turning away from our bemused onlooker, when we bring these thoughts closer to hand, to our own individual psyche, do we have to accept that the very essence of how we think, how we react, who we are and what we are, in fact the making of our personalities, is based partly or even largely on inbred religious thought and patterns, which is inherited from our forefathers in many instances?
In our genes
It's in our genes if you like, and this influence goes right down even to the type of religious experience and belief system, including its often illogical relevant superstitious base, that we end up following. Is it this inbred religious belief system that has helped develop our personal emotional security, which allows us to face up to many of life's challenges including the ultimate of tragedy and
death?
The anthropologist Pascal Boyer says that most accounts of religion are reliant on one or more of the following suggestions Human minds demand explanations Human hearts seek comfort Human society requires order Human intellect is illusion-prone.
He enlarges on this by saying that these accounts will say that people created religion to explain puzzling natural phenomena; that religion explains puzzling experiences such as dreams, prescience etc. Religion also explains the origin of things and religion explains why there is evil and suffering.
For those seeking comfort, religious explanations make mortality less unbearable; and allays anxiety while making for a comfortable world. On the question of social order, religion holds society together, it perpetuates a particular social order and it supports morality. Then as for religion being a cognitive illusion, people are naturally superstitious, so it would seem - they will believe anything. Most religious concepts are irrefutable, and refutation is more difficult than belief.
But, says Professor Boyer, an examination of each of these common intuitions still fails to reveal why it is we have religion. He describes religion in terms of cognitive processes that are common to all human brains, part and parcel of how a normal brain functions. But he then asks, does this mean that non-believers have become abnormal, or to put the question on a more positive slant, does this mean that non-believers have managed to free themselves of ordinary cognition? He suggests that mankind acquired religion as far back as between 100,000 and 50,000 years ago, based on the evidence of artefacts and cave paintings of that dating.
It was about that time, so the evidence seems to point, that mankind broke free of evolutionary shackles and became more flexible, more capable of novelty, or, in a word, more open. If this is so, then mankind, having "broken free of his evolutionary shackles", and faced with life's seemingly unanswerable mysteries, perhaps then began a religious voyage of discovery.
As an aside, if this dating has some truth, then it appears to me quite amazing that some societies and religious groups still claim an exclusivity, as though God had waited all these tens of thousands of years to reveal himself to mankind and to offer some form or other of 'salvation', which for some other strange reason was then directed at them alone. I have to ask, what about all those poor souls that went before?
Man would have invented him
I'm also reminded of the saying, although I cannot recall who it was that said it, that if God did not exist then man would have invented him.
But let us not confuse the issue of having a belief system, and believing in God. Being religious does not restrict oneself to belief in a particular deity, or any deity or God at all. One can after all have a pantheistic belief system that is every bit as vital as another convinced of the presence of an individual Godhead. And then of course there are those mystic spiritual teachers who will say that the highest belief system or religious experience is based not on a personal knowledge of someone or something, but an unknowing of everything - a sort of state of absolute wonder and openness and clarity, which to others may seem like emptiness.
Religion as the creation of meaning
If I can quote from a little book that Ivan lent me, 'Religions of the World' by DE Harding, "I don't, personally, believe that any intelligent human is entirely without religious feeling, though certainly most of us in the modern west neglect it or suppress it nearly all the time." And then taking something from Rev Gordon Oliver's excellent talk, 'Religion as the creation of meaning', in which he quotes from Lloyd Geering's book 'Tomorrow's God'. He reads "The quest for meaning lies behind all religious aspirations," and goes on to quote Albert Schweitzer: "To be religious is to have found an answer to the question of what is the meaning of life." He then quotes the 19th century philosopher Feuerbach, who said that, "He who has an aim in life, an aim which in itself is true and essential, has a religion."
So here we have sound argument that for mankind to have a meaning in life, it seems he has of necessity to have religion, as the base for which we give a meaning to our lives. Our forefathers in ancient history came up with answers to questions that started puzzling mankind just about as soon as he was capable of thinking for himself beyond his basic needs. And in so doing our forefathers devised ideas and solutions to life's mysteries, which as mankind has advanced down the years, so our Professor Boyer says, have become problems, because we are now starting to think we have some idea of the answers, which can be found in models of cognitive psychology, anthropology, linguistics, and evolutionary biology.
And so, if we return to our visiting alien, how would we go about
explaining how it is that our beliefs are so different and diverse, or most important of all, that they matter. How do we explain the need for the difference between Eastern Buddhists, Amazonian shamans, American Southern Baptists, or devout Roman Catholics? How could we explain this religious phenomenon, one that is so variable in terms of something (the brain) yet it is the same everywhere? Can the very diversity of religion actually provide us with keys to the answer?
One of Ivan Baard's suggestions for reading matter happened to be a book that I am fond of using - Kahlil Gibran's 'The Prophet'. We used this as one of our readings recently.
The old priest asks the prophet, "Speak to us of religion", and the prophet replies, "Have I spoken this day of aught else? Is not religion all deeds and all reflection...... Who can separate his faith from his actions, or his belief from his occupations?.... or .. Who can spread his hours before him, saying, 'This for God and this for myself; This for my soul and this other for my body.'"
Butterflies down!
As we go into some discussion time, let us borrow again from Rev Gordon Oliver's recent sermon in which he raised a set of discussion points. We can use this to assist with the question, "Does it matter?" for I've deliberately avoided attempting an answer - for that surely lies within ourselves.
But as a finale, I'm reminded of the little story about two butterflies caught in a snowstorm. As they watched the falling snow, which was building up on the tree branch on which they rested, one asks the other - "Do you think one of these snowflakes will ever matter to us?" "Oh, I doubt it" says the other. "It hardly seems likely, after all, each snowflake is so light and ineffectual."
Just as he said this down came one last snowflake as the storm eased, snagging on the end of the sagging branch on which they rested. The weight of that final snowflake was what finally tipped the balance, and the branch, together with the two butterflies, came crashing down. Does it matter?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For South African contact details
Durban - Johannesburg
Cape Town - contact form
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For South African contact details
Durban - Johannesburg
Cape Town - contact form
