2 responses to “Ethics and Organized Religion”

1. 

   John

   April 10, 2008

   I agree. God forms us in community. As far as the Levetical laws are concerned, though, I was under the impression that these were given to a people who needed to be re-formed after generations of Egyptian enculturation. I’m not sure that God intended for these laws to become an organized religion per se, as much as he intended the law to be a framework for their new relationship with their God. I’m reminded that God’s favorite house wasn’t the Jerusalem Temple, but the tabernacle of the nomadic tribes. I guess the idea of organized religion, especially perhaps in the minds of those outside our communities, is closer to the pomp and circumstance of institutional religion than the living, dynamic relationship we find with God through Christ. Hence the maxim, “I like Jesus but not the Church.” We’re probably talking semantics at this point, but it’s probably worth investigating.

   Reply
2. 

   George P. Wood

   April 10, 2008

   John:

   In my book, any form of religion that involves a centralized location for worship (whether tabernacle or temple), a hierarchy of priests with assigned duties and professional obligations, a mandated financial support system, not to mention detailed instructions about what the priests are supposed to do at the temple — that form of religion is an “organized” religion.

   And while the Levitical laws were certainly designed to “deculturate” the Israelites from their Egyptian slave mentality, they were also designed to “enculturate” the Israelites for their new home in the Promised Land. Or, more broadly, they were designed as a school in which the Israelites could learn who God was, why salvation was necessary, and what a holy lifestyle looked like.

   Recently, while perusing a book catalogue, I came across a book on the evolution of civilizations that argued something like this: Civilizations begin to stagnate and decline when the “instrument” of their growth and dynamism becomes an “institution.” For some reason, that description resonated with me. The law was a means to an end; it was an “instrument.” The proverbist, however, warned about religion that had become an “institution,” an end in and of itself. As long as “organized religion” serves godly purposes, it’s a dynamic, growth-oriented instrument of God’s purposes. When it ceases serving those purposes, however, it becomes an “institution” of spiritual oppression and moral corruption.

   George

   Reply