Jan 30

Religion is of course impossible to find an all encompassing but simultaneously specific definition for, as Cavanaugh established in “Violence, Religion, and the State.” Cavanaugh points out that many ideologies, such as nationalism, capitalism, or liberalism, have the characteristics of religion but are not defined as such. It is true that these political and economic ideologies focus on an ultimate concern, build community, appeal to myth and symbol, are enforced through rites and ceremonies, and demand certain behavior. I agree with Cavanaugh that while these five qualities put forth by Marty are a starting point, they provide too broad a definition in which people can pick and choose what they do and do not consider a religion depending on the argument they are trying to make. I think that one element that is missing is faith in a supreme power, whatever shape or shapes that takes. Faith is not synonymous with religion, but I believe it is implicit in it. As Cavidini wrote about in “Why Study God? The Role of Theology at a Catholic University” and as we spoke of in class, fides quaerens intellectum, or faith seeking understanding, is how we might define the study of theology. I think that is an absolutely central aspect of the objective of a religion. This differentiates the ultimate concern of secular ideologies with the concern of a religious follower. A religious follower strives to deepen their understanding of the divine power and this quest requires some element of faith because the divine can never be fully understood. This contrasts with a political or economic ideology in which their is no mystery that cannot be proven or quantified, although of course disagreements within those ideologies over their beliefs still arise.