Religion forum: Argues nix on mixing government and religion

Dennis Roberts, in his June 14 article on religious ignorance, makes some good and some very questionable points.

I agree that “… the relevance of religion to world affairs, our need to be better informed and the importance of finding common ground for working together,” is essential to all societies. Educated people are necessary in all countries. They should know as much as possible about a country’s constitution, mores, laws, etc., including its religious traditions which are important but no more important than other characteristics.

I also agree that there is significant illiteracy among the religious about, not only their own declared faith traditions, but, in particular, those of other faiths. I’ve never been able to understand how many can profess such commitment to something they care so little about as to remain ignorant of its fundamentals. But Mr. Roberts is right, and the ignorance, in particular, extends to the faith traditions of other countries.

Tony Blair’s objective of rescuing “… faith from the dual challenges of irrelevance and extremism” is laudable but probably impossible. I cite the more enlightened countries in Europe where religion is going the way of the Dodo bird. Robert’s citing of the Gallup polls of the U.S. as “… a nation of biblical illiterates” is undoubtedly accurate.

I don’t set myself outside these criticisms. My interest in religion is driven by my recognition that I can’t understand other cultures if I don’t understand their religious traditions. This is a daunting task given the estimated 4,200 world religions. It’s even more daunting if you believe there are over 25,000 Christian denominations as some have estimated. Can you imagine dividing God(s) and the Bible into this many different interpretations? For some, they might wonder if any commonalities can be found or if it’s even worth it.

Where I truly differ with Mr. Roberts is any suggestion to entangle church and state. Setting aside the silly arguments of some that the Constitution isn’t dispositive on this issue, all we have to do is look at Iraq or Iran to see the folly of entwining religion and government. Each is enormously difficult to accomplish in its own right, let alone trying to do both at the same time.

Blair is right. Religion could become “… an instrument of peaceful co-existence …,” but it has to overcome a long and difficult history of torture, cruelty, killing, hypocrisy, arrogance and outright ignorance. I’m not optimistic on any of these points.

Rather than trying to concentrate on entangling religion and government, why not focus on getting government to work effectively and letting all individuals “do their own thing” with religion. Given Bush’s religious initiative failure, our success rate might be much higher.

David McLoughlin
Forest