As Religion Wanes, ‘Religious’ Hatred Grows

I found this article very interesting, it addresses the synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh on Oct 27th in a new light. As a result of this tragic event, most reporters are choosing to focus simply on the news and details of the event, while this article looks deeper and offers a unique perspective. While not ignoring the severity and grief of this shooting, the author focuses on the fact that there were no young people injured in this horrific event, simply because they weren’t in attendance. While this can be seen as a blessing that no children were slain, the author found this concerning for the sake of the Jewish religion.

The author makes the statement: “Where were the millennials? They’re gone. From temple, from church. From the community of faith” (Graham 2). He describes this as more horrific than the hate crimes that exist against the Jewish community because it it may mean that the Jewish faith among others, is slowly dying due to lack of new young followers that can continue the practice of these religions. Graham argues that the rise in ‘nones’ (people with no religious affiliation) correlates to the presence and rise in religious hate crimes. According to the author, as many as 35% of people now identify as ‘nones’ (Graham 6). This concerns him because young people of today are responsible for continuing traditions and religion. He also addresses the presence of hate that is unfortunately becoming more common surrounding religious settings. I have to say I disagree with the point the author is making. While yes, the amount of people who identify as ‘unaffiliated’ may be on the rise, I do not think it is related to the amount of religion based hate crimes.

Reading this article about a religious hate crime made me think of the piece by Thomas Merton, and his claims that alienation leads to violence. These ideas didn’t seem to be too far away from Graham’s thoughts that religious ‘nones’ have something to do with the rise in religious hate crimes we see in the United States. Merton states “as long as we are not purified…by the union of pure sanctity, we will remain apart from one another, opposed to one another” (Merton 453). This idea of unification through religion mirrors the ideas that Graham writes about in his article. His ideas about religious nones lacking unity with communities of faith are very similar to the themes of love and hate found within Merton’s writing. Graham’s final statement is: ” Faith didn’t divide. It united. Is this a message about to be lost on an entire generation of millennials?”. He is referring to the unity that was created between various believers during the time following the shooting, and the fact that this community may eventually cease to exist if the rise of ‘nones’ is to continue and contribute to hateful events and crimes. This is related to Merton’s quote,”hatred tries to cure disunion by annihilating those who are not united with us” (Merton 545). Both authors find power in unity through religion.

 

Graham, Michael. “As Religion Wanes, ‘Religious’ Hatred Grows.” Boston Herald, 30 Oct. 2018, http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/op_ed/2018/10/as_religion_wanes_religious_hatred_grows.\

http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/op_ed/2018/10/as_religion_wanes_religious_hatred_grows

Merton, Thomas. “From New Seeds of Contemplation.” American Religions: a Documentary History, by R. Marie Griffith, Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 448–461.

Elastic Faith

In the article ““Joel Osteen Is Deluded. Just Being Happy Won’t Save You” written by Rick Snedeker, the credibility and character of a Houston Christian Pastor is brought into question. The author makes it clear from the very beginning that he does not believe in Christianity, and refers to Christians as “believers of the unbelievable” (1). His article discusses the recent rise in the Christian ideal of happiness. The happiness of a Christian follower is not exactly something encouraged or pushed in he foundation of the religion. Snedeker points out that the love and worship of God, and adhering to the commandments in the Bible are the ‘key to heaven’, and happiness is neither mentioned nor encouraged to ensure the Christian follower a ticket to heaven. 

Osteen, along with many other more contemporary pastors in the U.S., suggest that happiness should also play a role in the Christian faith. Snedeker argues that in today’s Christianity, it is not uncommon to hear words similar to Osteen’s: “God takes pleasure when we’re happy. So I want you to know this morning: Just do good for your own self. Do good because God wants you to be happy” (2). 

Osteen is described: “lovely, swept-back pompadour, thousand-watt smile and irrepressibly sunny disposition is the king of elastic religious faith, the prophet of worldly happiness” (1).  This description is a stab at Osteen, almost mocking him and in a way challenging his credibility. He is painted as the slimy salesman character and Snedeker almost attacks his followers as naive. Snedeker claims “in fact, they make their doctrines up. Whatever ideas keep the faithful filing into church each Sunday (and other days) are the gospel of these preachers” (4).
I thought the ideas presented in this article tied well into the ideas presented at the end of Will Herberg’s “Prostestant-Catholic-Jew”. Herberg maintains the stance that religion should not necessarily be centered around happiness. On page 532, Herberg opposes the idea of God being someone “who is always ready to give you the pat on the back you need when you happen to feel blue”. He believes that this mentality of the Jewish-Christian community is harmful to the authentic tradition of these religions, contrasting the value in fearing God. These ideas line up with Snedeker’s of maintaining tradition within religious communities. Herberg also sites the words of Patrick O’Boyle on this issue: “many persons appear to be ‘turning to religion as they would to a benign sedative to soothe their mind and settle their nerves'” (532). These ideas attack the validity of many religious people who seem to be drawn to religion not by faith, but because of their emotional needs.

To both Herberg and Snedeker, the idea of people flocking to religion to feel good about themselves is inappropriate, and contrasts the core values of these religions. The increasing use of church as a mental and emotional release: “Go to church— you’ll feel better” (Herberg 533) is not the original purpose of the Christian faith and should not become the purpose. It is one thing to find joy in traditional practice of religion, but an individual should not be drawn into practice for the sole purpose of pursuing happiness. 

I think people should be able to believe what they choose, and if they believe that being happy and talking to God about it will save them, then let them practice what they want. The opposing ideas of Osteen and Herberg display the changes in the Christian faith and I think these changes are interesting.

Herberg, Will. Protestant, Catholic, Jew: an Essay in American Religious Sociology. Univ. of Chicago Pr., 1994.

Snedeker, Rick. “Joel Osteen Is Deluded. Just Being Happy Won’t Save You.” Patheos, Godzooks, 27 Sept. 2018, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/godzooks/2018/09/joel-osteen-happiness/.