The Silent Word

the unheard, unspoken word

Link of the Week

True Confessions: I listen to Relevant Radio almost exclusively these days.

I find it to be much more uplifting than K-love (or whatever it's called). And I do like NPR, but sometimes even I get overwhelmed by the leftist perspective. Not all the time. Just sometimes. Anyway, we have Catholic radio here in Bozeman, which I discovered a couple of years ago, and I really enjoy it. Mostly. (Like any radio station, there are people on it that I don't agree with, and sometimes I listen to it, sometimes I don't.)

Anyway, I really enjoy listening to Drew Mariani. He hosts a talk show where he discusses sort of whatever he wants. And I think he's pretty funny, and very insightful. I tend not to agree with some of his politics, and am often offended by his refusal to entertain opinions that are not his own. But I respect his earnestness, and I respect his faith a lot. I tend not to get up in arms with the topics he presents. But yesterday, he talked about something that I had to blog about.

There is an atheist anti-religion organization trying to prevent the US from issuing a commemorative stamp to honor Mother Theresa. If you want to read an article on the discussion, go here. They are, of course, citing the separation of Church and State, and the fact that Mother Theresa was famously anti-abortion, and used her platform to promote her belief that justice and compassion come from God. I should say, I am a proponent of the separation of Church and State myself. I'm not a "why isn't there more prayer in schools" or a "ten commandments on every bus" kind of person.

I get that this organization doesn't want religious figures to be part of anything. They're anti-religion. That makes sense. But when they use Katherine Hepburn as an example for someone who would be great on an American stamp (something I don't disagree with), and then quote her as saying that "the only thing I know is that we should be kind to each other and do what we can for other people", but then argue against commemorating Mother Theresa, who may have arguably been the most kind person on the planet during her lifetime, and the person who did the most for those that society thought didn't deserve it....? That just doesn't make sense to me. If Mother Theresa had taken a vocation of evangelism and spent her time in the slums of India trying to convert everyone to Christianity... then I could see their side. It'd be different if they wanted to make a stamp out of Jerry Fallwell, or Billy Graham, even. I can understand someone who is anti-religious wanting someone who is an evangelist not to be on their stamps.

But she wasn't. She believed in justice and equality and compassion and kindness. Yes, and Jesus. But you can't demote everyone who believes in Jesus to "not worthy because of their religion". Kindness isn't negated by believing in Jesus.

So, by that right, should we stop commemorating Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., as well? Should we stop commemorating Darwin (who was a Deist, if not a Christian)? What about Barack Obama? Is absolutely no one safe unless they agree with your perspective? Isn't that just as narrow-minded as they accuse Christians of being?

I have a lot of compassion for atheists, and sometimes, I would like to not believe in God so I could completely denounce organized religion, too. I think there are occasions when religion only exists for its own sake and the propagation of its own values--not God's. But I can't. And I'm sorry that I can't. But I can't get around for myself that I believe in God. And for right now, the only place for me to be is in church, no matter how flawed it is and no matter how uncomfortable I feel there. Still, I would like to think that there's some hope that someday we could all just be at peace.

I guess there's hope. But it's a very small fragment. And it makes me very sad.

Anyway, if you believe Mother Theresa was a person worth commemorating, go to the website and write a letter of support to the Postal Serivce, letting them know that you want to help our nation remember someone who helped and served the poorest of the poor, without any thought of herself. To me, that's something worth commemorating. No matter why she did it.

4 comments:

I love the blog, Becca, but I disagree that atheists as a group could be characterized as anti-religious. Some certainly are (see Dawkins, Richard or Hitchens, Christopher). A small minority spend a lot of time and energy filing lawsuits and trying to drive religion out of public life. But the vast majority of non-religious people don't. Since atheists, agnostics, etc. aren't organized there's no way to kick the bad eggs out of the group or to say "they don't represent me" because there isn't any claim to a banner of shared beliefs (unlike Christians).

The main problem these (misguided) folks seem to be making is in assuming that just because someone is on a US stamp that the government endorses all of his/her beliefs. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that Christians and/or people who oppose abortion rights have appeared on US stamps before. The Postal Service issues a number of explicitly religious stamps, for example. They have also issued stamps celebrating politicians and activists and not everyone agrees with every belief that those people had.

I saw a USPS press release about this year's stamps in December and I'm pretty sure that the Mother Teresa stamp is a done deal so this all sounds like much ado about nothing to me.

Cheers!

 

Great point, Katie.

I should have been more clear, that it wasn't "a group of atheists" or "these atheists", as I had said. But it was a specific atheist anti-religion organization. I'll go back in and change that.

It is interesting that there is no central association for atheists like there is for religion. In fact, I talked with an atheist once who was convinced that the only reason people were Christians at all was that they had a need to "belong" to something, where as he didn't. He even objected to the term "practical atheism" because the author was assuming a belief system that atheism (since it's not a religion) doesn't have.

Anyway, thanks again for stopping by the blog!

 

I wrote a post a few years on my blog about leaving my church (the UCC). What made the transition to agnosticism difficult was entirely the loss of the sense of belong, the community, the patterns and rituals, and the social assumptions that one does/will participate in organized religion and not the more 'serious' stuff. I had never had faith or believed in the dogma, but the other aspects of the church had been very powerful to me. I understand why organizations like the Unitarian/Universalists can be attractive because they offer fellowship without the aspects that some non-religious folks find troubling.

Because atheists, agnostics, et al usually traveled different paths out of the faith traditions of their youths and/or very different senses of what they believe (or not) and/or different attitudes toward social organization itself, I can't imagine there being umbrella groups that seek to unite them toward some common cause. That's not inherently a strength or a weakness, it simply reflects the lack of cohension within the group (which isn't really a group at all).

 

Katie, do you have a link to that post? I'd like to read it if it's still posted somewhere.