This posting is about how some organised religions align themselves with the system and end up enslaving those who come looking for freedom. I’m not criticizing any belief system, but I’m highlighting how religion becomes institutionalised, and when maintaining the status quo and “fitting in” becomes the important thing. Instead of creating change as the founders intended, some religious institutions become reactionary forces to stifle transformation.

Let’s take Christianity as an example of a religion. The founder was Jesus Christ. His teaching was radical and transformational. He said things like “The truth shall set you free”. He was sought out by those who wanted freedom and opposed by the religious people of the day who saw him as a threat.

The early church promoted freedom and new ideas wherever it spread. It did not seek political power, in fact it had none. It was an underground belief system at odds with the society it found itself in.

Then it joined forces with the government. Constantine made Christianity the state religion of the Roman Empire. The state religion sold out. It became a way of reinforcing the state. It no longer was transformational – it was all about looking right, outward show over inner conviction and fitting in with the system. The institution became more concerned with its own perpetuation than in practicing the message of Jesus Christ.

The Reformation challenged the state religion, but we are again seeing a resurgent “unholy alliance” between Church and State. This alliance takes several forms, but the effect is always the same – a reactionary force to maintain the desired status quo, thereby protecting its own interests.

Firstly, the Church acts to condone injustice. It acts to legitimise political repression, particularly in Latin America. It supports pre-emptive wars against perceived ideological enemies, particularly in countries with a different belief system.

Secondly, it actively seeks government force through laws against groups it does not agree with in First World countries.

Thirdly, in First World countries, it is a pressure group that deceives the public into maintaining and extending the welfare system. This means that it continues to perpetuate poverty among the disadvantaged while ensuring that private charity never gets leverage, since those who don’t fall into the selected “disadvantaged” groups are heavily taxed and less able to contribute.

The belief system they espouse owes more to Karl Marx and his theories than Christian teaching. It is based around an assumption that we must all squabble over our share of a limited pie, rather than the reality: that wealth is actually created by both innovation and work – the pie can grow.

Even when there is clear economic advantage in removing inefficient subsidies and welfare rorts, it continuously opposes anything that will actually improve the lot of the less fortunate. I believe that the welfare lobby acts to secure its own interests and perpetuate its own “customer base”. It is not in its interest for its customers to be independent, it prefers to have victims to tend to.

At the same time, at least in Australia, some organised religious groups are on the gravy train. Church ministers collect money from those struggling in their congregations, take advantage of tax laws for “public benevolent organisations” and salary package everything they earn, paying little or no tax. In the meantime, they often drive luxury vehicles that are well out of reach of their tax paying parishioners. They are hand in hand with the government, each dependent on the other.

In the meantime, there is no transformational message. The public sees a dry, legalistic teaching that does not strike a chord in their hearts or minds. Change is only on the outside. Appearance is all, but this does not lead someone to freedom. The original message of the founders is glossed over, given lip service or simply ignored.

Not all religious organisations are reactionary. Some keep on putting out the message of the founder. These are the ones who don’t try to big note themselves, who don’t care about public acclaim or looking good, or a running system that employs a lot of people who could not otherwise make a living, or fitting in with the government. These are the ones that cause genuine change that creates true freedom. You’ll find that they have something that leads to freedom.

The others are so busy looking after themselves and perpetuating their institution that they have nothing substantial to say, and certainly nothing that will set you free. Avoid those at any cost.

Tags: reactionary, religion

This entry was posted on Wednesday, May 16th, 2007 at 10:25 pm and is filed under Lies and truth. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.