Heal, Repair and Transform
Today in one class, the prof discussed the difference between Authoritative religions and Humanist religions. Authoritative religions are based on ultimate obedience to God/YHWH/Allah and the law code handed down to humans. Humanist religions are based on a personal quest for virtue and morality.

Many academic and spiritual communities have realized the destructive power of blind allegiance to Authoritative religions (ie. world wars, racial hatred, etc.). Part of the response to that realization, is a group called the Tikkun Community (Tikkun from the Hebrew, meaning to heal, repair and transform the world). They are an interfaith movement, with primarily Jewish influences.

Understanding that many see the Ten Commandments as oppressive, they sought to rewrite them to fit into a humanist religious framework. Under the direction of Rabbi Micheal Lerner, they wrote the Ten Commitments. One that caught my eye, was the rewriting of the third commandment.

The original looks like this:
"You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain." from Ex. 20

Lerner et al, coined it like this:
Aware of the suffering caused by religious or spiritual fanaticism, I vow to be respectful of all religious traditions which preach love and respect for the Other, and to recognize that there are many possible paths to God. I vow to acknowledge that we as Jews are not better than others and our path is only one of the many ways that people have heard God's voice. I vow to remain aware of the distortions in our own traditions, and the ways that I myself necessarily bring my own limitations to every encounter with the Divine. So I will practice spiritual humility. Yet I will enthusiastically advocate for what I find compelling in the Jewish tradition and encourage others to explore that which has moved me. (read all ten here)

Theologically I don't have a problem with rewriting the Ten Commandments, or even renaming them, nor am I absolutely opposed to the notion of the humanist view of Christianity. I am however slightly bothered by the wording of this commitment. It seems to me that this level of pluralism isn't always healthy. How much can we water down our own divine revelation before we ourselves are using God's name in vain? Are religious convictions only that which compell and move us? I hope that my religious experience isn't simply a sequence of intellectually stimulating events. Otherwise I would have to add Chris Rock to my list of revered "church" fathers.

The "paths to God" argument is likely the topic of another post, but I cannot help but feel that the wording of this commitment can only weaken the religious convictions of its speaker.

   [ posted by William @ 3:56 PM ]