Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.

Underground > Head Shop >

Religious law and religious faith

21:26 / 15.09.04

Kind of coming out of the Switchboard thread on the adoption of a civil code of Sharia law in Canada, I put forward the notion that following religious law is part and parcel of professing a religous faith -

So what do people think? How vailid is it to profess a faith you do not observe?

03:24 / 16.09.04

Seems pretty pointless to me, which would make it invalid I guess. I mean, wouldn't it be dictionary definition hypocritical to say, "I am an X," or "I believe (in) X" and yet not observe or participate in the practices of X?

Seems open and shut. What are you driving at sleazenation? Is there a subtlety here I am missing?

06:59 / 16.09.04

I was particularly thinking of religions that have a more prominent cultural/ethnic aspect such as Judaism, Islam and even Catholicism amongst others.

There are secular Jews, ex-Catholics and non-practicing Muslims who identify with the cultural aspects of the faith they were raised in, but do not practise their religion. I'm just trying to get a handle on what level of a lack of religious observance is necessary before people can be placed as definitively outside the faith they were born into, if such a thing is possible.

Is their an argument for a secularization of religion as appears to be occuring within the Anglican church?

08:17 / 16.09.04

I can certainly attest from personal experience that a good many Catholics, especially in traditionally Catholic countries like Ireland, Spain, Italy (not sure about Latin America) regard themselves as Catholic without paying a great deal of attention to the actual practice of the religion. As sleaze says, this is a cultural identity first and a religious position second.

How valid is that? Weeeellll, it is as valid as any other form of identity, probably. Who are we to say what the primary function of religion should be? Personally, I think it is a little suspect since religion tends to carry a lot of baggage and an identity forged around religion can undervalue diversity (this would tie well with the recent discussions we have had about marriage, for instance). But in this context, the value of diversity is not self evident.

10:40 / 16.09.04

US Catholics have apparently been discouraged from voting for pro-choice candidates - which seems brings religion even further into the politics of a supposedly secular nation...

Hattie's Kitchen

13:19 / 16.09.04

From a (lapsed) Catholic perspective...The official Catholic line is that if you challenge or defy the teachings of the church on issues such as abortion, contraception, euthanasia, then you cannot validly call yourself a Catholic - doesn't matter whether you got to Mass twice a day and three times on Sunday, and pray the Rosary every five minutes - to willingly participate or assist in procuring abortion or euthanasia is a mortal sin and is an excommunicable offence.

There is much hoo-haa in the US, particularly on the more conservative Catholic BBS boards , over John Kerry classifying himself as Catholic despite being pro-choice - and compounding that by taking communion at Mass, which is prompting some to call for him to be excommunicated.

Having said that, and having grown up in a predominantly Irish Catholic neighbourhood, I knew many families who defied teachings on contraception, sex before marriage etc, who proudly identified as Catholic, who duly went to mass each Sunday. Will add more to this later, at work at the moment, so apologies...

13:44 / 16.09.04

Well, there is a cultural element to a faith - although I don't believe in or practice Christianity, I am much more literate in Christianity than in any other faith (can pick up on Biblical references in films, etc) and there are unconscious 'comfort' things there too - for example, when I was living in a Muslim country where the weekend was Thursday and Friday, I had endless trouble remembering what day of the week it was (because I'd transpose 'Friday' into 'Sunday'). Nothing to do with religious belief or practice, more like remembering which way to look when you cross the road, but it made me realize that there's a level of cultural comfort that comes from living in a society whose rhythms and mores line up with the religion you [don't] practice. I think the Sabbath is probably an intersection point for a lot of cultural/religious practices - whether or not the society you live in make it easy or difficult for you to conform to the pattern of the week your culture/religion practices, whether that be praying at certain times on a Friday, not using electricity on a Saturday, or staying in bed with the papers on a Sunday.

Tryphena Absent

13:58 / 16.09.04

My mother was Catholic but I've never been to a confirmation, I have been to one bar-mitzvah and two bat-mitzvahs and my oldest friend is a Jew so I suppose I'm more culturally aware of Judaism than any other religion. Because it's a religion that professes such a connection to its cultural roots- Jewish food (is so Eastern European) etc.- I think it's very difficult to separate the faith from the culture and thus it's not so strange to link the two together so absolutely. I think once you are a Jew you can't really escape it even if you abandon all practice their are certain activities that will still seem fundamentally linked to the religion.

And then there's the other thing- say you suddenly start eating bacon when you're 20, there's a good chance that everytime you eat it you'll think about the fact that you once followed a faith that said you weren't allowed to. So even as you don't follow the faith there's a part of you that almost is following it.

18:23 / 16.09.04

So even as you don't follow the faith, there's a part of you that almost is following it

But isn't that a bit like saying that as a lapsed Catholic who then started practising Satanism, say, then even as you were attempting to summon the Goat of Mendes, there'd be a part of you thinking about the faith you grew up in ? I mean there would be obviously, that would mainly be the point, but I very much doubt the local priest would see it in positive terms.

Similarly, while deciding to eat bacon when you're twenty and fron the Jewish tradition is a far less transgressive step, it still is one, as with the child from a hardcore environmentalist background who wants nothing better than to go to McDonalds - the deliciousness of bacon, such as it is, is I doubt in itself an incentive to turn your back on your family's religion. To a certain extent anyway, I'd imagine that every time you tucked into a full English breakfast, in your own small way you'd be thinking, Fuck you rabbi, or something similar. Being aware of the taboos, and then deliberately breaking them for your own amusement, doesn't seem like the act of someone the relevant faith would exactly encourage.

More seriously, it's a major mistake to confuse the Jewish religion and the Jewish cultural identity, as anyone on a kibbutz would definitely tell you. In my own experience, for what little it's worth, faith is a far bigger issue for the Diaspora community, at least in London, than it is for the average person who lives in Israel, where rightly or wrongly there are other concerns.

( Knowing you know this already Anna, but I figured I may as well mention it anyway. )

Tryphena Absent

18:31 / 16.09.04

Being aware of the taboos, and then deliberately breaking them for your own amusement, doesn't seem like the act of someone the relevant faith would exactly encourage.

Well that seems rather flippant to me, firstly deliberately breaking the taboos of a faith you once belonged to is seldom an amused action. Secondly why bring in the fundamental notion of a person practising that faith and their opinion? That's simply a by-product, it bears little on the reality of the person who still integrally understands a religion. My point is simply that people don't abandon these things entirely and never can, there's a certain cultural mindset that comes from growing up in religious communities that the more secular of us don't have and can never have. Thus to profess a faith or at least an allegiance to a faith without practising within it is not an odd thing to do.

23:23 / 16.09.04

Deliberately breaking the tabboos of a faith you once belonged to is seldom an amused action

I could be wrong here, but I think if it's a question of what you're having for breakfast, then yes, it probably is. If there are larger battles to be fought, and god knows there might be when it comes to religion, they'll perhaps be decided under different circumstances.

My point is that people don't abandon these things entirely, and never can

Well yes, but so what ? Arguably nobody ever really escapes from their background, one way or the other, it's always going to be there in terms of class, or religion, or whatever you'd like, but I can't see that means one has to knock oneself out trying pay too much attention, y'know ?

Personally, if I was asked at gunpoint what faith I belonged to, I dare say I'd have an answer, but it's equally true that it, the faith, would have absolutely nothing to do with how I conduct myself these days, really.

While ostensibly a Christian ( confirmed, the whole lot, ) I do despise it somehow, so in answer to the original question, Sleaze, no it's not valid, but these characters do seem to have a monopoly on hatch, match and dispatch.

So you have to entertain them, the creepy old priests, as much as you dislike them, and their nebulous thoughts.

IMHO, pretty clearly.

08:38 / 17.09.04

I think the question is going off in two directions, isn't it? Sleaze, can you clarify a bit? I don't think the original idea was to discuss whether a secular Jew/Christian/Muslim who does not follow religious law can be described as a good religious Jew/Christian/Muslim (that's a simpler question: no, they can't), but at what point a secular Jew becomes an atheist, to the extent that 'Jewish' is no longer a significant descriptor in any way. Yes? No?

09:08 / 17.09.04

Yes, Deva that’s pretty much it - my initial post and abstract are a bit wooly, as, I fear, this post will be too.

But yes, I was thinking about the edges of religious observance and the continuum between secular faith and atheism, particularly in relation to religious law.

I had in the back of my mind the possible problems that might arise from applying a civil code of Sharia law to more secular elements of the Muslim community, and attempting to locate where boundaries, amorphous as they might be, of that secular community extended to.

15:43 / 17.09.04

Try doing a web search for "cafeteria catholics" and you'll soon see how vexed a question this is.

The real answer is "it depends on who you ask."

17:24 / 17.09.04

Pish.

Sleaze -I've got this friend who's a second-generation Muslim. He's as gay as an orange blossom and runs around in other cities so's he don't get caught with his pants down, literally. My heart goes out.

But his family is close, and although the kids are pure mallrats, he fears his parents and desperately wants their approval. He's one of those textbook rock and a hard place kids they ought to make movies about.

Let's assume he gets caught shoplifting from a Muslim-owned store. If he were to "go Sharia" to be Muslim, but mostly to please his parents, what would happen? Would the legal consquence be better or worse than if he were to go "straight law" ? I'd like to think this would be a case where my friend would think first about what would happen to HIM, as opposed to the devout beliefs of his parents.

What is his validity for going Sharia? It's in question because his intentions have less to do with authentic religious belief than community social awareness. Should he NOT be allowed to "go Sharia" because of that? Or does one equal the other? Or does his questionable personal integrity make it impossible for him to choose authentically?

Is this MORE in line with your original question, sleaze?

18:47 / 17.09.04

Would he be allowed to go to the Sharia court? I mean, if he's out and unrepentant, would an Imam accept him as a Muslim? I kinda doubt it, although I can't say for sure.

Currently, most of the debate around the same subject in the States is focussed on whether or not Catholics are allowed to vote for John Kerry. Kerry calls himself a Catholic. He goes to Mass, takes communion... and has voted against abortion bans in the Senate. He's a pro-choice candidate.

Now, some Catholics -- including some cardinals -- say there's no such thing as a pro-choice Catholic. Either you're a "real" Catholic or else you're a "cafeteria Catholic" -- one who picks and chooses beliefs like you do dishes in the cafeteria. According to some guardians of the orthodoxy, that doesn't go. According to other members of the faith who actually live in the post-modern world, that's how things work nowadays.

So that "who's in, who's out, who decides" issue is basically the pitched battle at the heart of pretty much every major religion nowadays (check out the Rushkoff interview in the Judaism thread), but I'm most familiar with the Christian iteration of it.

You can watch the argument unfold (as I did) in several different ways over on Cross+Flame: in this discussion of labelling, or on this thread on contraception, or even in this less focussed discussion called "Who Decides?".

If you really want to plunge into the viewpoint the orthodox Catholics are coming from in those discussions, check out the polemics at ConcernedCatholics.org, which has "cafeteria Catholics" listed over "Freemasons" and "New Age" as a threat to the faith.

The paradox at the heart of the battle is that one has to make a subjective decision which objective authority to trust as genuine... and once one accepts an objective authority (whether it's Freedom of Choice, or the Magesterium of the Mother Church, or the Holy Word of God, or your own Guardian Angel), then all other authorities are automagically incorrect. There's no way I can see to bridge that gap... which means determining the validity of professing a faith you do not observe is really going to depend on who you're looking to for validation.

20:08 / 17.09.04

My friend's not out of the closet at all -at least not in his hometown and community. He's not religious, but maintains the image of it.

23:42 / 17.09.04

Chad - The scenario you outline wouldn't happen – Sharia law as has been adopted in parts of Canada is not an opt out from Canadian criminal law – it is there to mediate a narrow range of disputes - from clashes over property and inheritances, to matters in marriage and divorce.

I guess the question more pertinant to this thread would be to what extent your friend feels able to identify himself as a Muslim - does he practice at all? Would he, say, agree to arbitration in a dispute over inheritance? Is there any set of circumstances that would prompt your friend to cease to identify as a Muslim?

Grant - Some very interesting food for thought there - It is an interesting conundrum that organised religion faces as modern secular morality asserts itself and the gap between it and the observance of an unchanging religeon continues grow.

flufeemunk effluvia

00:29 / 18.09.04

Is there an argument for a secularization of religion as appears to be occuring within the Anglican church?

I was raised in the "Dirty Liberal Episcopal Church", and they certainly tried to bridget eh secular-religious gap in a very interesting way.

They had us read the dirty bits of the bible in Sunday School.

The best way to get angsty teens into religion is to make them realize the holy texts are actually soft porn!

11:38 / 18.09.04

all other authorities are automagically incorrect

[sorry for threadrot] Grant, is that a typo or a pun? Either way, I love it.

flufeemunk effluvia

01:39 / 19.09.04

[threadrot]
'fraid not, bub.
[/threadrot]

01:43 / 19.09.04

[off topic]It's a corny pun I got in the habit of using and have mostly broken myself of it -- kinda seemed appropriate for the mental sproinging action when everything snaps into place and the borders suddenly become clear. I think I may have stolen it from Robert Anton Wilson, actually.
[/off]

Just for kicks, here's the Catholics Against Kerry website.

And here's something from the Catholic News Service about denying communion to pro-choice politicians, and the controversy surrounding it. They had a seminar about that, featuring Father Richard John Neuhaus, the editor of (the really quite good) First Things magazine. He thinks the to-do over Kerry (first Catholic pres. candidate in 44 years, but, uh, pro-choice) is a big deal:

Father Neuhaus described the current debate over how bishops should deal with Catholic politicians who dissent from church teachings in public policy stands on fundamental life issues "a turning point of considerable consequence in American history."

How the bishops handle the issue will have significant implications for "the future of Christian witness to the Gospel of Jesus Christ" in the United States, he said.

Scrambled Password Bogus Email

08:09 / 20.09.04

Interesting thread...It is somewhat commonplace round this part of merrie London for mums to notice that the best (by a long shot) schools for wee bairns (primary schools) are strictly Catholic...

To even be valid to enrol, you need the say so of the local ministry, so you have to attend, be devout etc. (ar at least maintain a convincing appearance of such).

Loads of mums do so purely to get their kids off to a good start. Hypocrisy? Of course.