There was an
interesting article in last year’s Wall
Street Journal (yes, we’ve been dying to use that line since last week . .
. that is, last year) asking the question, “Why are Americans so religious?” (“The Marketplace of Faith,” 12/28/18, A-10). Sriya Iyer, who wrote the piece, is also the
author of The Economics of Religion in
India (2018). She argues in part
that in America there is more competition between religions and between
religion and the government. With more
choices for basic services, competition — and institutions providing that
competition — will thrive.
 |
| Eliphas Levi, socialist, Neo-Catholic guru. |
There is some
merit in Ms. Iyer’s analysis, but having acknowledged that, she missed the
whole point of religion and why, despite so much effort to remove as much
religion from civil, domestic, and — yes — religious life as possible,
Americans are still religious. And, yes,
the so-called “New Christianity”/”Neo-Catholicism” — what used to be called “the
democratic religion” until people finally settled more or less on “socialism” and
“modernism” — was always intended as a way to make religion more “relevant” to
the world, updating doctrines and beliefs until they fit in with secular
society.
Ms. Iyer’s
analysis and the goal of the socialists and modernists, as we said, misses the
whole point of religion. It is not to
compete with civil society, but to fill a need that civil society does not and
should not fill, any more than the family can.
As Church becomes viewed as something in competition with State and
Family, and as merely one alternative among many for providing basic services
(Ms. Iyer lists a number of economic services provided by organized religion in
India in competition with government and private sector enterprise, a situation
she sees duplicated in America), people gradually lose interest in religion’s
actual role.
And that is? Organized religion has a twofold role with
respect to the human person, corresponding to people’s individual and social
natures. Any religion that fails to meet
both of these needs soon finds itself irrelevant. It may linger on for a time, sometimes
centuries, but will eventually simply fade away.
One, with respect to a person’s
spiritual and moral development, a religion must provide a basic moral
framework and philosophy, directed toward that person’s proper end. That end may be to be united with God in
Heaven, with Satan in Hell, to be absorbed into the World Spirit, attain
Nirvana, simply disappear at death, or whatever. The spiritual aspect of any religion must be
directed to helping each human being to become more fully human in order to
prepare him or her to be fitted for his or her proper end. That aspect of religion must be based on free
will and is up to each person’s conscience.
We can say nothing more about it, nor should we. This is the individual aspect of religion.
 |
| Alexis de Tocqueville |
Two, there is the social aspect of
religion, that is, how religious faith relates to the surrounding civil and
domestic societies. This is what Alexis
de Tocqueville spoke of in Democracy in
America when he noted that while it is of overriding importance that someone’s
religion be true, it is a matter of complete indifference to the State as long
as the religion does not teach anything contrary to a well-ordered society.
And therein lies
the main problem organized religion faces today, whether Pagan, Jewish,
Christian, Muslim, or anything else.
When any organized religion exceeds its natural bounds and tries to provide
what families, governments, and the private sector are supposed to be
providing, then it does not make itself more
relevant to modern life, but less.
We are not
talking here about what Catholics call “the Corporal Works of Mercy,” i.e., feed the hungry, give drink to the
thirsty, shelter the homeless, visit the sick, visit the prisoners, bury the
dead, and give alms to the poor. These
are things people should do individually or in an organized way through a church.
Nor are we
referring to “the Spiritual Works of Mercy,” i.e., counseling the doubtful, instructing the ignorant,
admonishing the sinner, comforting the sorrowful, forgiving injuries, bearing
wrongs patiently, and praying for the living and the dead. These, too, are things people should do
individually or (in certain circumstances) in association with others.
Organized
religion offers a backup to domestic and civil society for the corporal and
spiritual works of mercy when a family or other people fail to do so. None of the works of mercy are the primary
job of either organized religion or government.
Efforts to make them so has made organized religion irrelevant and
bloated the State far beyond even the shadow of its legitimate role.
 |
| Aristotle: the purpose of life is to more fully human. |
This is not to
say that governments and organized religions do not have a role to play in
providing for such things, but it should always be viewed as a backup to
individual efforts or as expedients.
Even the immense charities and educational institutions run by organized
religion are not the primary job of religion in civil or domestic society.
If not that,
however, then what?
To teach
fundamental principles of how to be more fully human. This is essential to both individual and
social life.
Now, it is perfectly
true that, strictly speaking, it is possible to come to knowledge of God’s
existence and of the natural law (the general code of human behavior) through
the force and light of human reason alone.
Strictly peaking.
It is also
perfectly true that most people have neither the time nor the inclination to undertake
the immensely long and arduous task of doing so, that is, of working out
knowledge of God’s existence and of the natural law.
That is why, as
G.K. Chesterton reminded us in his sketch of Thomas Aquinas, that Aquinas
argued most people need a revealed religion and an organized church of some
sort to teach them basic principles of how to become and be human beings. The task is simply too much for most people.
Thus, while as de
Tocqueville noted that it is of the utmost importance that someone’s personal
faith be true in everything (and, frankly, if you do not believe that your
religion is true, you are in the wrong religion), it is of equally great
importance for the rest of society that whatever faith or faiths are espoused not
be false.
That is, the
basic moral principles of any faith or philosophy must be in conformity with
the precepts of the natural law, and all three societies, Church, State, and
Family, must be based on those principles, however they are applied, and integrated
into all aspects of life, both individually and institutionally. Governments must stay out of purely religious
matters, just as religions must stay out of purely political matters, but that
still leaves a broad area in which Church, State, and Family must cooperate or
at least not contradict one another.
For example, a religion
that practices human sacrifice violates the natural law right to life, and the
civil authorities can (and must) interfere.
A family that sentences one of its members to death equally violates the
right to life, and both civil and religious authorities have the duty to
prevent such a sentence from being carried out.
A government that permits or (worse) funds or even mandates abortion
also violates the right to life, and individuals, families, and religions are
fully within their rights — and their duties — to oppose abortion by all
legitimate means.
At the same time,
organized religion should not try and usurp the role of the State or the Family,
nor the other way around. Attempts to
merge the three societies and concentrate power inevitably end up in anarchy or
totalitarianism.
Thus, while we
personally find Ms. Iyer’s analysis superficially attractive — competition is
almost always a positive good when not pursued as an end in itself and kept within
bounds — it should be competition between competing ideas and rivals in the
same field. Church, State, and Family each
have a special role to play, and setting them up in competition with one
another is a sure path to destroying the weaker society.
#30#
