Part Two: A different
approach
As I noted before, I have not been
trained as a historian, sociologist, or other social scientists, my training
has been in Christian ministry, theology and biblical studies. As such, I have
a slightly different perspective on what constitutes religion than those who
observe it as a social/psychological phenomenon. I recall from my college days
hearing a debate that began over the notion of what constitutes religion. While
the names Foucault and Durkheim were being bandied about with great excitement,
I sat quietly remembering the words of the epistle of James, chapter one verse
twenty-seven, “Pure religion and undefiled before the Father is this: to visit
the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unspotted
from the world.” What might the relative religiosity of Americans look like if
it is measured by this standard?
Towards a biblical
view of religion
Of course, I understand the problems
and perils of attempting to apply a first century definition of religion given
in the context of a particular epistle that addressed people of another time,
culture, and social situation; however, there is something to be said for the
fact that the Christian scriptures provide such a straight forward definition. So
let’s take a look at James 1.27, and see if we can find a way to apply the
definition of religion it provides towards America’s religious situation. This
definition will seek to address issues of belief in that belief influences action,
and it will seek to find criteria for determining religiosity that do not
depend on self-reported behavior. It will do this by focusing on what “true” religion
claims to do (sorry, it’s the pragmatist in me)- because the degree to which
the goals of “true” religion are being accomplished may help to provide an
objective measurement of the degree of religiosity for a nation. In so doing I hope
to provide a way to measure America’s religiosity that can be used for an
apples to apples comparison with any other nation in the world- but this starts
with the book of James. Lest the author be accused of taking this verse out of
context, let’s start with an overview of the book of James and its teachings,
as a whole, on the nature of religion.
On the Epistle of
James
The
Epistle of James was written, according to tradition, by James the brother of
Jesus and leader of the Jerusalem church. Though, it is difficult to determine
the accuracy of this tradition. The theology of the letter is very straight
forward, and its style makes it very difficult to place within a particular
Christian tradition. It is addressed to “those of the twelve tribes”; this
could either mean it was written to Jewish Christians, or that a high degree of
importance was placed on the Jewish symbol world by the community to whom it
was written. James has been a part of the Christian scriptures since the third
century, and it has been in continual use by the entire Christian church since
the canonization of the New Testament.
The
primary concern of the Epistle of James is praxis- that is: religious thought
put into practice. In the first chapter of James’ epistle, the author
admonishes his readers to: joyfully endure trials, bless those who endure
temptations, remember humility, to give freely, speak well of others, and to
live in humility, freedom and peace.
The
second chapter warns against the evils of materialism and showing partiality to
one person over another because one has more money. It explains that faith
without works is useless, in that it is not enough to wish the hungry fed, the
homeless housed, and the naked clothed, but one must initiate concrete
particular action to see to it that it is done.
The
third chapter argues against boasting and cursing others and that one should
eschew selfish ambition. The author admonishes his audience in 3.13 saying,
“Who is wise and understanding among you? Show by your good life that your
works are done with gentleness born of wisdom.” This illustrates the epistles
emphasis on practical action and its teaching that one’s inner religious life
must lead to concrete particular actions. If these actions are not present in
the life of the individual, regardless of their self-reported beliefs, the
individual is not religious according to James. Or to put it in the author’s
own words, “What good is it… if you say you have faith but do not have works?
Can faith save you? ... Just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith
without works is dead” (James 2.14, 20).
Chapter
four of James’ epistle addresses the need for humility before God, and explains
the foolishness of boasting, the wrongheadedness of judging others, and the
problem of boasting about getting rich. This segues into the fifth and final
chapter which warns in apocalyptic language against the injustice and the
problems inherent in being rich, as well as unrighteousness and inequity in
mistreating workers. It also addresses the need for patience in suffering, the
need for compassion and mercy, the importance of not making vows, the place of
communal prayer and ritual, and the need to accept those who left their
Christian community and want to return.
James
is, above all, an immensely pragmatic book whose preference for production over
pondering, and results over rhetoric will help to provide a workable,
quantifiable definition for “religious-ness” that can be used to measure the
degree of religious adherence in the United States and elsewhere so we can
finally answer our the question posed by this article.
Principles from James
1.27 and a standard for measuring religiosity
It has been said once already but it
bears repeating. James 1.27 tells us that, “Pure religion and undefiled before
the Father is this. To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and
to keep himself unspotted from the world.” Here the author provides two measurable
values for our judging the relative “religious-ness” of an individual, group,
or nation. Applied to a nation one may ask: How well do the people of the
nation in question care for orphans and widows, and how well do they assert the
priorities of “true religion” above those of the world (i.e. Do they care for
others or for their own fiscal gain)?
Combined with the lessons of James
chapter one, we could also examine rates of charitable giving, humility,
patience in national rhetoric and discourse when facing calamity (like economic
down-turn). We could also examine how well the people of a nation promote peace
globally (perhaps by examining the nation’s history of military aggression and
the public perception of particular armed conflicts among its citizenry and the
larger world).
When
the lessons of chapter two are taken into consideration we could also examine a
nations’ welfare spending, as well as the efficacy and stigmas related to its
welfare programs as indicators of national “religious-ness”. Additionally,
charitable giving (both in terms of quantity and percentage of individual
earnings) could be used as a criterion for determining “religious-ness”.
Further, equal access to resources like high quality schools, libraries,
hospitals, and such the like could be examined, as James chapter two condemns
disproportionate treatment based upon income.
Chapters
three, four, and five add to our list questions of the tenor of national
discourse and the need for humility therein as markers of “religious-ness”. The
need for fair and equitable treatment of the poor and the working class is also
a marker of “religious-ness”. Both of these can be gauged by examining minimum
wage and worker’s rights in particular nations.
It
becomes clear, if the criteria of the book of James are to be used as markers
of religiosity and not self reported belief in God, or self-reported church
attendance, that we could turn our attention to the national and domestic
policies of a people in democratic nations, as well as personal charitable giving
in order to determine the “religious-ness” of that nation’s people.
The standard applied
and America’s “Religious-ness”
Domestic
Policy: welfare and minimum wage
The first statistic to be examined
in order to determine American “religious-ness” is the amount of welfare
spending in the United States. In 2000, the United States spent $434.3 billion on
welfare programs to help the poor among the U.S. population[1]
this amounts to a little over five percent of the U.S.’s annual GDP.[2]
Compare this to the thirteen to thirty-three percent of GDP spent by member
nations of the E.U. on social welfare programs each year and it becomes clear
that the health and well being of the poor is not as great a national concern
to the United States as it is to their European counterparts. If spending on
the poor and less fortunate is an indicator of religiosity it would appear that
when compared to their European counterparts, Americans are not particularly
religious.
James four and five show a
preoccupation with the plight of workers and a concern that they are treated
with justice and equity. The minimum wage in the United States was designed in
1938 to ensure that Americans had enough money to live. The original calculation for this wage was
based upon food costs. In 1938 one third of an individual’s income went to
food, when food costs were calculated and multiplied by three a living wage
(minimum wage) was arrived at; unfortunately presently food costs account for
far less than they used to, and the minimum wage calculation has not been changed
to reflect this. As a result, it is no longer possible in most places to live
off of a minimum wage income in America.
In Europe, however wages set by
member states are at times drastically higher than those set in the U.S. and in
most cases have greater buying power (see Figure 2).
As can be seen in the
above figure eight European nations have a higher, and one a similar, minimum wage as
the United States. Further, when one considers that many of the European
nations listed above practice some form of socialized medicine, and as such do
not require their minimum wage workers to purchase outside insurance, it is
clear that the standard of living of most minimum wage workers is higher in
many European countries than in the United States. If minimum wage and cost of
healthcare are the markers of a nation’s religiosity it is clear that the
United States is no more religious than about a third of European nations, and
with healthcare costs factored in is less religious than most of the E.U..
Foreign
Policy: International aid, war, peace and diplomacy
James tells us that our care for our
neighbor is an indicator of the authenticity of our “religious-ness”. Foreign
aid, the monies allocated to disease prevention, to alleviate starvation,
provide health care and other basic necessities, is a major way in which
nations care for their neighbors. As a
group, the “EU's spending on foreign aid far surpasses the United States.”[4]
When issues of war, peace and
diplomacy are taken into consideration the picture becomes dimmer. The Bush
doctrine, an unprecedented national security stance originally voiced in the
2002 “National Security Strategy of the United States of America” established
the pre-emptive war doctrine, or “Bush Doctrine” as the rules by which the U.S.
would engage perceived threats. This pre-emptive war doctrine has provided the
justification for the United States to declare war on any nation or group they
wish provided they perceive said nation or group to be a present or possible
future threat. The E.U. has no corresponding doctrine in their European
Security Strategy, and instead favors diplomacy, and cooperative action to
solve military problems[5]. Judging by both the criteria of international
spending on foreign aid and on stances towards war and international diplomacy,
it is clear that while America is a nation, in this respect it is not
particularly religious, or at least less so than its European counterpart.
Personal
Action: Charitable giving
Charitable giving is one area in
which the U.S. demonstrates its “religious-ness”. In the U.S. more money is
raised by individuals for the purposes of charitable giving than in any other
nation in the world (see Figure 3) [6].
This includes individual E.U. member nations, and dwarfs the contribution given
by the E.U. as a whole. In this regard, the argument could be made that America
is “so
religious”. Though
the combined rates of individual giving and national aid for the poor and
foreign aid are still lower than many of their European counterparts.
Conclusion
In conclusion, when one examines
some of the definitions of religion set forth in this article and the one
preceding it, and uses these to judge the relative “religious-ness” of the
United States against that of Europe, one can see that the U.S. is not more
religious than the E.U. but would rather be seated in the top third of E.U.
member nations as regards “religious-ness”. Once the subjective criteria for
determining religiosity are abandoned (i.e.: self-reported behavior about the
existence of God and self-reported attendance rates at religious services) in
favor of more objective criteria that focus on the function of religion, one
finds that Americans are perhaps less religious than their European
counterparts (with the notable exception of individual charitable giving rates).
Though to listen to the national discourse and the condemnation of “godless
Europe” in some circles in contrast to America as a “Christian Nation” it
appears that in one half to one third of cases, the opposite is true… I wonder
what James might say about that?
[1] http://www.heritage.org/Research/welfare/Test080101.cfm,
accessed 12/07/08.
[2] http://www.heritage.org/press/commentary/ed062995b.cfm,
accessed 12/07/08.
[3]
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-08-105/EN/KS-SF-08-105-EN.PDF
[4] Schweiss, Christina. "Challenging
US Hegemony: The European Union's Comparative Advantage in Nation-Building and
Democratization" Paper presented at the annual meeting of
the International Studies Association, Le Centre Sheraton Hotel, Montreal,
Quebec, Canada, Mar 01, 2004
[5] http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/r00004.htm,
accessed 12/07/08.
[6] International Comparisons of
Charitable Giving November 2006 found at http://www.cafonline.org/pdf/International%20%20Giving%20highlights.pdf, accessed 12/07/08.
No comments:
Post a Comment