Everybody is unique, right? We have different personalities, different opinions, different perspectives, different paradigms through which we view the world. Not to say that there aren't similarities, but I doubt that it is even slightly close to possible to find somebody with the exact same views on everything (if you find that person, keep them forever). So I'm wondering to what degree individual opinion and choice does, or does not, play a role in religion.
Last week was the first week of classes for the new semester, which means I began a course called "The Teaching of Theology and Religious Communication." It is a required course for my program, so I did not really give it much thought before last Tuesday morning, but it turns out it's a class about how to teach (obvious enough once I read the title again). Considering the fact that I have always adamantly claimed that I do not want to be a teacher, this was surprisingly okay with me. When people ask me about what I do, what interfaith relations really means, it generally involves some element of knowing how to properly "teach" about religious topics, both that are a part of my own as well as a part of other religious traditions. I found the class, taught by a priest, extremely interesting--not least of all because he showed us a video called "The Butterfly Circus" without telling us anything about it in advance. So I leave it here similarly with no introduction, except to say that it deals with individual difference and choice, it's not about religion, I found it inspiring, and it is twenty minutes long (but worth it, if you have the time).* Even if you aren't able to watch that video right now, I think that individual opinion and agency is a topic that we can all ruminate on.
In terms of the importance of the individual and choice, it's important to remember that I'm certainly coming from a more liberal religious perspective. I can largely believe what I want to believe on modern issues like gay marriage and abortion. I do not keep kosher, so I am not limited in what I eat. I feel quite free in my religion to be who I want to be, and believe what I want to believe, but with the support of a worldwide progressive Jewish community. But what about those who are more strictly religious and so are meant to subscribe to a list of specific beliefs, whether that is in Judaism or another faith? I would like to discuss a case example to explain what I mean.
As a strong supporter of gay marriage myself, I would not feel comfortable attending a synagogue that preached against this. I often wonder how supporters of gay marriage, or gay individuals who are raised in the Catholic Church or any other group that somehow condemns homosexuality, deal with reconciling their feelings with their religion. I know many leave the Church.
But am I really free in Reform Judaism? What if, for example, I did not support gay marriage? Attending a liberal, Reform Jewish synagogue in New York State would not be out of the question, but I might be judged harshly for my opinion if it were to be made known. Plus, the Reform movement of Judaism does officially support gay marriage...so perhaps if I disagreed, I would similarly feel at odds with the establishment.
This case study aside, the idea of individuality in religion comes up because of my heavy involvement in Catholicism while I am here in Rome. I meet numerous priests, deacons, Catholic lay people, all of whom at least hypothetically agree with the Church's teaching on not only gay marriage, but also birth control, sex outside of marriage, the future salvation (or not) of people, proper times and frequency with which one should attend church, etc. And yet I have met many, many people throughout my life who consider themselves Catholic and yet do not agree with some of these lines of thinking. Sometimes people just ignore the conflicting views--they might continue to use birth control, for example, but still attend church regularly. Others feel ostracized for their beliefs and might not fully participate in the community. I once sat down for an interview with an Episcopal minister, and she said that she liked her part of Christianity because, "I don't have to check my brain at the door." It was an interesting, if blunt, statement, and I have given some thought to it since that interview, and how it relates to this question of individual opinion in a system like Catholicism.
I am not making an overall value judgment on the worth of individuality in religion. For many people, having this strict structure of a faith and associated beliefs is an important way in which to organize their world, and I can see the comfort in that. There is definitely some sense of stability in everyone believing the same things, doing the same things, being the same in at least this aspect of their lives. But for me, this strict form of telling me what to think would be untenable. I sometimes describe Reform as the "religion for secular people," with its generally liberal social opinions but the traditional community institutions of a religion. But if all of a sudden the movement started trying to tell me what to think about certain things, I would probably be extremely uncomfortable with it.
So what do you think? Does your religion or belief system encourage individual differences of opinions? Does it take a stance on contemporary political issues? Could you ever just ignore something coming out of your faith establishment that you felt so strongly was just wrong?
Now go out and love one another.
<3,
Allyson
---
*Regarding the short film above, I have to wonder: if the individual struggling was gay, would a priest be showing it in our class? I am not sure.
4 comments:
I appreciate your post here, Allyson. I have been thinking about this issue as well and often frame it as a paradox of religious community. The paradox exists between upholding traditional religious ideals/practice, which largely encourage uniformity, and welcoming some diversity, which rejects uniformity. Some communities strive to do both equally, and I don't think it's really possible to do so with a consistent ideology.
To play devil's advocate with regard to your point on opinions coming out of faith establishments: I think that some people view religious institutions as something of ideological guardians that are meant to maintain a traditional religious ideology/practice somewhat independent of what its members believe/do. For those people, they may be willing to accept a very controversial opinion as "the traditional religious view" and then independently form their own belief.
Hello, Phil! You make some good points. I definitely recognize the paradox inherent in the argument I was trying to figure out--a religion by its very nature needs to believe something, or else it is not really a religion and instead perhaps a culture. I guess the conclusions I come to is that I prefer the orthopraxy of Judaism, where belief is almost secondary to action, to the orthodoxy of Christianity, where belief is the primary item of concern. Thanks for commenting!
I loved this blog post Allyson and it really made me think.
Some thoughts as a Catholic:
- 1.21 billion Catholics in the world at the end of 2011 (Wikipedia)
- That's 1.21 billion individuals participating in what I see as a 'discussion' on Catholic life
- Our individual life experiences and situations mean that all of our contributions are as valuable as those by priests, nuns, religious scholars etc
- I love the quote about not checking our brains at the door. Like you I am interested in guidance from all kinds of people, secular and religious, on how to live my life. But I know that the final decisions will be made by my own God-given brain.
Katy
Hi, Sorry in advance for what will be a super long comment, but your post inspired a lot of reflection ;)
I'm a half-filipino, half-swedish catholic who grew up in Sweden. My mother's catholic faith was and is extremely important to her and she has always been very dedicated to instilling it in the family. Dad converted voluntarily after they married, so we're a catholic family.
Merging the catholic church's rather rigid doctrine with the liberal Swedish "taken-for-granted" value set that is typical of my countrymen has always, always been a challenge, because several times my conflicts come down to a blurred compromise of belonging to my society, belonging to my faith and belonging to my religiously deviant family. The latter two are especially intertwined, so much of my religious struggle regarding life choices is inseparable from losing the acceptance of people I love dearly.
So for that reason, I feel that there is a bit of extra complexity to the lack of "wiggle room" within the discourse of catholic faith to express personal dissent, because it can be intertwined with a loss of belonging - so even if I disagree on an intellectual level with much (but not all) of church doctrine, I think I choose to stay passive about voicing how I really think in some family or church settings.
I don't have very many catholic friends - due to this, I mostly feel free to not have my own views conform to church doctrine, but it also presents rather a lot of situations where I "represent" catholicism to people who are unfamiliar with it, and perhaps that has shaped my desire to voice the nuances of my own, more liberal practice of my faith - it builds connection with most people I talk to, and they can approach me as a person rather than distance themselves from me as a "caricature" of my faith.
But I also try, within my family, to voice my dissent, so my family is aware of some of my conflicting value set - but I would probably refrain from doing so in a church setting among other catholics. This is probably why I have a personal opinion that catholics may be oppressed from finding out about when many of us don't agree with doctrine - probably because a tenet of our faith is to agree that the church is right and wants what's best for our souls, and that the phrase "lapsed catholic" signals that you are probably more liberal but at the same time, seeing yourself as voluntarily ostracized.
Keeping a faith alive and relevant to a modern life, within a spiritual framework that is trying to stay eternal by never changing, is a constant mental challenge if you never want to check your brain at the door, and especially if it is intertwined with an emotional source of both security and worry of not belonging.
Finally, I only recently read up on how some forms of judaism seem to prioritize jewish identity before actually having a belief, to the point where you can essentially be a rather open atheist but still remain "perfectly jewish" as long as you're born into it (please correct me if I'm wrong, I got that from the site Judaism 101 ;). Given my own background, I have a really hard time wrapping my head around that - for me, I choose to belong to a catholic identity that separates me from most people I know, and the driving motivation is that I believe in what the spiritual practice gives to my relation to God. But it also means that in practice, I'm constantly in a spotlight of proving myself - it's like I always have to actively "deserve" being catholic.
Thanks for writing this interesting blog! :)
Cessie
Post a Comment