"Religion was no large part of [Terai's] life, but the Triad seemed to him as sensible a way as any of symbolizing an ultimate mystery; on the whole, its church served the nation well, and the rites ranged from pleasant to awesome." (3, p. 134)
Mysteries should be symbolized and rites should inspire awe. However, I assess a religion by what it does for its individual practitioners, not by how well it serves the nation. National issues are secular and pluralist.
I thought that Roger Scruton was an atheist who approved the socially conservative role of an established church but it is argued that he regained religious belief. See here.
Kaor, Paul!
ReplyDeleteI also assess a religion by what it believes and teaches. Naturally, I believe Catholic Christianity to be true, and all others (including Protestantism) to be in error, in varying degrees. And Chesterton thought very well of Zoroastrianism!
I think it's more accurate to say national issues are secular (sometimes) and PARTICULAR.
The late Sir Roger Scruton is sometimes mentioned here. I have a vague recollection of him calling himself an Anglican.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
ReplyDeleteHe was, if you look at the link.
By "pluralist," I meant that a national population comprises members of all faiths and none.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
ReplyDeleteI did, and two points about that article interested me: Scruton was disgusted by the pointless riots in Paris in 1968, which led him to becoming a Burkean conservative. The second was mention of how philosophic reasoning led him to belief in God.
Ad astra! Sean (also a Burkean conservative!)
Religion is a social activity; in most times and places, it's intimately connected with other social institutions, and an integral part of group identity.
ReplyDeleteKaor, Mr. Stirling!
ReplyDeleteOf course I agree with that. But I still argue that it matters, as well, WHAT a religion teaches and believes in.
Ad astra! Sean