The Downside of Institutionalized
Religion
LAWRENCE DAVIDSON
FEBRUARY 2, 2016 counterpunch
Ideologies are pre-set forms of thinking that shape
people’s worldviews and, supposedly, help to order and simplify
reality. While this supposition is always flawed to one extent
or another, ideologies can be very seductive. In part this is
because they free their adherents from the hard work of critical
thinking. Thus, they are often held onto tenaciously.
Because ideologies distort reality, they are
particularly unsuited for those aspiring to power as well as their
devoted supporters. History is full of examples of politically
powerful ideologies that underscore this fact: fascism, communism,
various military cults (particularly popular in South America and
the Middle East) and even the ideology of democracy as manipulated
by corrupt elites, who play the Pied Piper to the
masses.
Yet there is still one more ideology out there
which, even now, wreaks havoc by either claiming for itself the
trappings of secular power or attaching itself in some influential
advisory way to the institutions of power. That ideology is
religion in its various institutional manifestations.
I want to emphasize that I am not referring to the
personal religious convictions of millions by which life is made to
appear understandable and meaningful. Whether such convictions are
accurate or not, they play an important role at the individual
level and, as long as they do not promote harmful intolerance,
should be left to benignly function at the local level. What I am
referring to are religious ideologies that are institutionalized in
bureaucracies that can project power much as do secular
institutions of authority. Religious ideologies so
institutionalized see themselves as possessed of God-given truth
while playing the game of power amidst human
competitors.
Religion in Power
It is often said that we live in an age of religious
revival. Whatever this might say for the “spiritual” shortcomings
of modernity, this is a state of affairs rife with political
danger. A quick look at history can again easily demonstrate why
this is so.
* In the 10th through 15th centuries in Europe,
Roman Catholicism was a strong political power centered in the
Papacy. Historians often claim it preserved what was left of
Greco-Roman civilization ((despite the fact that the Church closed
down the ancient system of public baths.) It also brought with it
the bloodletting of the Crusades and the tortures of the
Inquisition.
* When, briefly, the Protestants tasted
political power in the form of Calvin’s Geneva, Savonarola’s
Florence, Cromwell’s England, and the early New World
establishments of North America, the result was widespread
intolerance, civil war, burning flesh at Salem and elsewhere and,
of course, no dancing. It does not take great imagination to see
the potential for high levels of intolerance occurring if some
representative of today’s Christian right, say Ted Cruz, takes
power in the U.S.
* Buddhism used to be universally revered as a
religion of peace and tolerance. However, put it in power or ally
it to those who politically rule, and what once was benign turns
malignant. Thus, consider the self-identified Buddhist government
of Sri Lanka and its brutal campaign against the Tamils in the
north of that country. Likewise, you can find Buddhists allied to
the government of Myanmar crying for the blood of the country’s
Rohingya, a Muslim minority.
* There is a lot of Hindu fanaticism in India,
and It remains to be seen if the present government of that
country, dominated now by Hindu nationalists, will again turn loose
the religious passion which, in the recent past, has led to
sectarian violence and massacres of India’s religious minorities
(again, notably Muslims).
* Where the Muslims seek or hold state power,
the situation is little different. According to Sunni tradition,
the ethical standards of behavior set down in the Quran did not
dictate state behavior beyond the brief reign of the so-called
“rightly guided Caliphs.” Shiites often point out that things fell
apart almost immediately upon Mohammad’s death. Civil war and
internecine slaughter followed in both scenarios.
Today, in Saudi Arabia and most of the Gulf
emirates, one finds Sunni intolerance of Shiite Islam and the
exploitation of non-citizen laborers despite their being fellow
Muslims. In Shia Iran, authorities seem unsure just how tolerant or
intolerant to be toward more moderate interpretations of their own,
now politicized, religious tenets.
Then, of course, you have various organizations,
claiming to be Sunni Muslim, ranging from ISIS to Al Nusra or some
other Al Qaeda variant, all reaching for political power. Where
they have tasted success, as in the case of ISIS, the consequences
have been particularly bad.
* Since 1948 Judaism has succumbed to the same
fate as other world religions entangling themselves in politics.
Despite all the rationalizations, propaganda, and self-deception,
it is clear that institutional Judaism is now firmly melded to the
deeply discriminatory and particularly brutal political ideology of
Zionism. I use the word “melded” because what we have here is
something more than just an alliance of two separate entities. The
Zionists have insisted since 1917, the year of the Balfour
Declaration, was proclaimed, that the fate of Judaism and an
Israeli “national home” are thoroughly intertwined. Their insistent
manipulations have resulted in a self-fulfilling
prophecy.
The consequences of this melding have been horrific.
If you want to know just how horrid things have become, there are
numerous Palestinian and Jewish human rights groups that are easily
found on the web which will document Israeli behavior in all its
dehumanizing detail.
For a more personalized assessment of just what this melding
means for Judaism as a religion I recommend the recent book by Marc
H. Ellis entitled The
Heartbeat of the Prophetic (New Diaspora Books,
2015). Ellis is a Jewish
theologian who, in the 1970s, was greatly influenced by the work of
Roman Catholic priests in Latin America who were promoting
“liberation theology.” That “for the good of the people”
interpretation of religion was corrosive of the institutionalized
Church, and so the movement was ultimately stifled. However, Ellis
thought that the same philosophy could be applied to Judaism – an
insight that eventually led him to denounce Zionized Judaism in a
manner reminiscent of the prophets of the Old Testament.
For Ellis, institutionalized Judaism has been
reduced to an adjunct of an expansionist and racist political
ideology. He feels that there is no getting around the inherent
evil of this situation. No two-state solution or other
“progressive” approach can erase it. As long as Judaism persists in
identifying itself in terms of the Israeli state and Zionist
ideology, the ethical underpinnings of the religion are left behind
in the wreckage of an evolving “Jewish empire.”
Lessons to Be Learned
What have all these historical examples to teach
those of religious faith? Some fundamentalists would have us
believe the lesson is to remain humble and obedient in the face of
an unfathomable deity whose mysterious purposes are simply beyond
human comprehension. Yet there is nothing incomprehensible about
the repetitive death, destruction and intolerance bred by
institutionalized ideologies. And, as the historical examples
given above tell us, religious ideology is no exception.
A better lesson learned seems to be: if you want to
be religious, keep it personal and tolerant, avoid tendencies
toward institutionalization beyond the level of local charity and
organized good works, and stay clear of political alliances. It is
said that Jesus told his disciples that “where two or three of you
are gathered together there I too will be.” Those are just about
the right numbers when it comes to keeping religion safe for the
believers and non-believers alike. After all, when you have two or
three thousand, or two or three million gathered together, for
whatever purpose, then something quite different from a helpful and
humane spirit is likely to be present.