Even as I posted the previous entry I knew that it absolutely required additional thought and, perhaps, explanation. Thanksgiving morning, after putting my apple pies in the oven, I sat at the breakfast table and made a few notes that, unfortunately in my mind, further complicated the subject. Now is the time to begin unraveling; to continue the journey.
If God is an omniscient, omni-prescient, omnipotent being apart from ourselves, then it is also a god that I want absolutely noting to do with. Think about it; that is a god that can make a difference but allows the wrongs of the world to exist. It can effect change and chooses not to. That isn't a loving god that Christianity claims.
If, on the other hand, we, humanity, are both god and evil, then religion begins to make sense. Within humanity lies the capability to affect the changes that alleviate suffering, soothe pain, and comfort the poor. Religion is the binding together of people of god who are supposed to be doing these works. That's one possible root of religion - to tie fast.
For me, however, religion is not much more than a gathering together of like minded persons to do all they can to unite, bringing together their separate strengths, to work toward reducing the evil that man does. It should be immediately obvious that being religious has nothing to do with being spiritual.
Spirituality is more crucial to creating the better world than religion, whether the religion is Christianity, Muslim, Judaism, Buddhism, Hindu, or any other tradition. And the definition I like best of spirituality is very similar to those I wrote of anarchism, simply a "harmonious condition of society in which government [and religion] is abolished as unnecessary. ... without a coercive state." And let's face it, religion is, or can too often be, a coercive force.
Why then do I attend a Christian church, and worship with other folk, believing as I do that the God we address is a symbol and not real? Because I believe that through these folk working together there can be change. Because the kind of people that are there are the kinds that I enjoy being around is a partial answer. Because it is important that even though god is a symbol, with symbol as focus people become greater than themselves.
As I re-read all the above, it sounds as if I have all, or at least a lot of, the answers. I don't, not at all. There is more that I do not understand than I do. I believe that there is something that brings additional strength to both individuals, congregations, and even traditions that I don't understand. I'm not ready to call it god, but I am sure that there is something, and it doesn't bother me that others do assign that strength to god. I've felt an additional strength in my own life, protecting me, comforting me, and at times challenging me.
Heck, I am not even spiritual. I have none of that "harmonious condition", and every time throughout my life that I've felt close to achieving some form of spiritual harmony it slipped away, wraith-like and elusive. I know people who seem to exemplify that harmonious condition, some Christian, more without a religious tradition of any type.
I love the Christian church, the music, some of the rituals, the stories, and in particular with University Presbyterian Church of Chapel Hill, most of the sermons. They almost always ground me, give me something to add to the mix of my thought processes, regardless of whether I believe in the Christian God. In that, last Sunday's sermon was successful because it certainly stimulated my thinking. But as long as God is separate, as in "God will gather ..."; "God promises peacemaking ..."; "... how God sees us ...", I cannot agree.