Daily Question Jan 30

What is religion?

Religion is a nuanced and confounding term, and it seems that even dictionaries, whose sole tasks are to supply adequate definitions of terms, fail to reach a consensus on what religion truly is. For instance, Merriam-Webster offers several definitions: “the service and worship of God or the supernatural,” “commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance,” “a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices,” and “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.” These definitions are all quite broad and can be interpreted in a wide variety of ways. And other dictionaries offer separate definitions which have differing underlying connotations.

My point is that the term”religion” is a loaded word, marred by disagreement and controversy — because of this, I believe it carries different meanings and connotations for pretty much everyone. To answer the question at hand — what is religion? — I’ll describe my personal thoughts about what religion means to me, but ultimately, I don’t think there’s a single understanding of the word which is fitting in every scenario or pleasing to everyone. Before I get to my understanding of the term, though, I’ll turn to Cavanaugh’s essay to demonstrate some of the troubles and controversies in defining the term; namely, should it extend to political and secular adherence?

In his essay “Violence, Religion, and the State,” William Cavanaugh points out how there is a pervasive “myth of religious violence [which] arbitrarily focuses on certain kinds of violence and ignores others,” and he also argues that this myth’s perpetuation is partially responsible for the inception of the “new and more violent religion, the civil religion of nationalism.” In this instance, it is clear Cavanaugh used the term “religion” much more liberally and in a broader sense than many of the dictionary definitions, which instead focused primarily on religion as it relates to God and other related faith-based ideas. But it seems to me that Cavanaugh backs up his argument exceptionally well as he succinctly and convincingly dismantles the arguments of the so-called “religion and violence theorists,” pointing out their contradictions and highlighting their hypocritical absolutism. He writes, “Christianity and Islam are put in the category religion, while nationalism and other phenomena are excluded, and then we are warned about the absolutism inherent in religion.” He then makes the claim that “most American Christians would find the idea of killing for Christ repugnant, but would treat the possibility of killing for America as a necessary sacrifice.” This truth alone underscores the reality that if adherence to a faith such as Christianity is to be considered a religion, then stricter adherence to a nation such as America certainly should as well.

This leads me to my personal understanding of what religion is. The term means many things, but it’s evident to me that it should encompass things that aren’t traditionally thought of as “religious,” such as nationalism and other rigid allegiances that groups of people have. However, there is a notable caveat for me, which leads me to define religion in a way perhaps differently than most of my peers; having grown up in a non-denominational church, it has been instilled in me the notion that Christianity should be about a relationship (with Jesus) instead of about religion. “Losing your religion” is considered a good thing. I agree whole-heartedly with this sentiment, which means by extension, I agree with this use of the term “religion.” To clarify, religion in this sense refers to rigid adherence to laws (i.e. legalism), blind subservience to authority, and essentially, going through the motions of being a religious person. To this end, I object to many of the formal acts present in liturgy, such as recited creeds, mandated sacraments, confession, etc. I see the value of these things in principle and on individual occasions; I take communion, I think confessing your sins is a good thing, I enjoy worship music. But I perceive the overarching system of performing specific rituals and acts to be mindless and devoid of both critical thought and genuine relational intimacy — think of the Pharisees and Sadducees in the New Testament.

To summarize, I view religion as being a set system of actions one is supposed to do, which lies in stark contrast to how I personally view Christian faith, which is as a relationship. Don’t be alarmed; there is still the church, the body of Christ, which is in community, and there is certainly structure present. It isn’t free reign. But at the end of the day, one’s only allegiance is to God and the only imperatives are to follow His commandments as laid out in Scripture. Hence, I generally believe that strict organized religion structures (e.g. Catholicism, Islam, etc.) encourage oppressive legalism and mindlessness.

So, with all of that in mind, what is my definition of religion? It encompasses all types of adherence to governing systems & ideology and suggests a deep sense of passion accompanied by a distinct lack of mindfulness. The end result of following a religion then, whether that be Islam or nationalism, is going through the motions of what should accompany such a belief.