Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
The fine line between hypocrisy and reform
Q:What should pastors do if they no longer hold the defining beliefs of their denomination? Do clergy have a moral obligation not to challenge the sincere faith of their parishioners? If this requires them to dissemble from the pulpit, doesn't this create systematic hypocrisy at the center of religion? What would you want your pastor to do with his or her personal doubts or loss of faith?
Religion poses many tests of conscience. This isn't a drawback. If anything, it's one of the reasons organized faith exists. But of course there are extremes of opinion about how acceptable it is to disagree with church doctrine. My insistence that religion must teach people how to think about God for themselves would be seen as extreme -- or even heretical -- by those at the opposite end of the spectrum. We've witnessed the tide of tolerance ebb and flow in the Catholic Church. We've seen gay Episcopal bishops advance in a liberal climate only to cause a schism among conservatives.
Millions of people have left the church, or quietly rebelled while keeping their place in the pew, because they feel too confined by dogma. Is this hypocrisy? Of course it can be, as witness the "good Catholics" who practice birth control. Not that they are to be singled out. Millions of gay worshippers in every denomination are forced to walk a fine line between what they do and what they are told to believe.
In a healthy climate this tension gives rise to reform. Battles of conscience come to the surface instead of remaining hidden, and although not every battle leads to progress, progress requires a fight when it comes to organized faiths. In India the fight may be over the caste system; in Judaism it may be over marrying outside the faith or giving up orthodox rules about the Sabbath. The dividing line between hypocrisy and reform is drawn by silence. If you silently go along with what is wrong -- however you define wrong -- then you are verging on hypocrisy. If you speak out, you are inciting reform.
And attracting hostility at the same time. After 9/11 there was an interfaith gathering in Yankee Stadium that had a tremendous healing effect. Yet some participants, because they came from rigidly fundamentalist congregations, were condemned merely for appearing on stage with members of other faiths. This is arrant bigotry, and painful as it may be, those preachers who were condemned should resign their positions. The only other course for a person of conscience is to fight for what you believe in.
These comments apply to all believers equally, I think. There isn't a special category for ministers and priests. Their vows may hold them to a higher standard, but silent dishonesty is what it is, just as outspoken honesty is what it is.
By
Deepak Chopra
|
March 16, 2010; 9:58 PM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: A crisis of faith is one thing, a rejection of faith another |
Next: A dilemma worthy of literature
Posted by: FarnazMansouri | March 22, 2010 3:53 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Not reforming is what is hypocritical. Honesty should be the core value of commentaries on the relevance of belief in secular humanism or religious dogma. These clergy and "people of faith" who are honestly questioning their entire belief systems and religious teachings should be praised for their openness and honesty. The opposite of Jim Jones leading his "flock" into a suicide cult, I would love to see these "doubting Thomas's" lead their followers on their same quest to the fundamental truths of non-belief in church dogma and supernatural deities. Somewhere in that 28 page study it was said that there are plenty of paid, professional clergy, but no paid atheists. I'd like to see institutions started that would pay atheists to "preach" the truth about science, the scientific method and the certainty and serenity of solid beliefs in substantiated reality. Let's exchange Sunday school indoctrination with early scientific learning, maybe based on children's near universal interest in dinosaurs and extinct ice age mammals. By learning of the geological epochs, radiocarbon and other dating methods, extinction events and the flowering of life based on evolution, these enlightened children will have the necessary knowledge to see where ethics, morality and altruism actually arose from, deep in the antiquity of animal evolution - not in religious trappings and myth! THAT would be honesty in education. The hypocrisy arises when "faith" clouds all aspects of reality and poisons youthful inquisitiveness with brainwashing and false belief systems. Base your teachings on science and rationality, not fairy tales and the supernatural. Please see www.edge.org to see what the truly enlightened are saying about atheism and reality!
Posted by: photojack53 | March 19, 2010 11:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Deepak,
If you have not already done so, please watch Julia Sweeney's monologue "Letting Go of God". You are one of the "stars" in the show.
(Ex-Catholic, now atheist) Julia Sweeney's monologue "Letting Go Of God" will be the final nail in the coffin of religious belief/faith and is and will continue to be more effective than any money-generating book or blog on the historical Jesus, "Ultimate Happiness Prescription", atheism or secularism. Buy the DVD or watch it on Showtime. Check your cable listings.
from www.amazon.com
"Letting Go of God ~ Julia Sweeney (DVD - 2008)
Buy new: $19.99 $15.99
Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping.
five star rating"
Posted by: YEAL9 | March 18, 2010 11:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment
“silent dishonesty is what it is, just as outspoken honesty is what it is.”
And outspoken dishonesty is what it is. How should one compare the secret skepticism of these clergy with these pronouncements from you?
“Western science is still frozen in an obsolete, Newtonian worldview that is based literally on superstition … Every cell instantly knows what is happening in every other cell, in fact, in the whole universe.”
“Only Spirituality Can Solve The Problems Of The World”
These are the words of either a deranged crackpot or a deeply and cynically dishonest peddler of new-age nonsense. How dare you, Deepak Chopra, criticize any other person of dishonesty.
Posted by: frigate32 | March 18, 2010 2:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
Deepak, it is, unfortunately, true that you continually appear to be a charlatan. In large part, that is why many people cannot stand you.
Some may have other reasons.