Stephen Prothero has written many books now regarding religious literacy, and he is championing a good cause. Critically exploring the differences of different religious in a way that non-academic audiences can enjoy is impossible for some academics. I applaud Prothero for his efforts.
Why is it that we are so religiously illiterate? We are surrounded by religions. We are inundated with Christian symbols and phrases. We are well versed in what Prothero calls the "American Jesus," but we do not understand the intricacies of religious beliefs and doctrines. Indeed, I have often bemoaned the fact that everyone I have encountered uses belief and faith interchangeably, but they are quite distinct concepts - the one (belief) indicating an often vehement adherence to specific doctrines or even popularized dogma and the other (faith) indicating a struggle with doubt and mystery while attempting to reconcile religious devotion with secular advances. Having written this sentence I see at least four more problematic terms that are mis-used and misunderstood - dogma, doubt, religion and the sacred/secular dichotomy.
With so many terms being mis-used how can one possibly hope to engage an American public in the Public Square in a healthy debate? There are so many different premises buttressing everyone's different faith expressions, where does one begin to unpack all of this terminology? This is a significant question that I believe deserves extended attention, especially since the many people today tend to put their noses in the air while stating, "I'm spiritual but I'm not religious." What this statement signifies, however, is absolutely nothing. When you attempt to affirm everything, then you affirm nothing. What's the point of being spiritual if you aren't religious? The problem, again, is a breakdown in communication, i.e., terminology. I would in fact argue that it is impossible to be spiritual without being religious. As Mircea Eliade has argued extensively, we are religious beings. The problem is that we have no idea what that means, so rather than thinking seriously about religion we are able to dismiss it under the guise of spirituality. The diverse American public doesn't typically like to think too critically about their "beliefs." It is easier not to investigate religious institutions and rail against them and opt out of the conversation by claiming "spirituality."
Until we can seriously approach the mysteries of faith and the struggle with theology we will be almost entirely unable to engage in meaningful efforts at inter-faith exchanges and dialogue. One step further, I would add intra-faith dialogue as well. Until we understand the multiplicity and heterogeneity of religious expressions in all of their fascinating differences we will continually undermine ourselves in the quagmire of homogeneity. Homogenizing differences might seem to solve the issues of difference, but it will only exacerbate the issue and result in further ignorance; even frustration and violence. We must embrace Martin Buber's I-Thou conceptual premise and Levinas's ethical alterity. That is, we cannot see the otherness of a "Thou" if all we see is the sameness of "I" in everything we explore.
Understanding religion is too important not to explore in depth. Communicating religious literacy is a challenge, as Prothero also highlights, and it does not matter if you believe in "God" or not. "God" is a powerful conceptual force in our society, and it is important to try to understand the how and the why of everyone's connection to the concept because it will always influence what they do and how they interact with those around them. If humanity is anything it's a religious species. Even atheists have "beliefs" and "faith." They share a common terminology and certain rituals. Without getting into a definition of "religion," isn't the fact that we have been shaped for thousands of years by religious forces enough of a reason to take religious illiteracy seriously? If not, then how about the fact that it's wielded as a political tool today and that it affects us all on a daily basis both inside and outside the political arena?
