Organized Hatred

Call me a cynic, but it seems to me that a lot of "organized religion" is just "organized hatred". What I mean by that is that there seems to be a kind of permission granted from on high to hate certain groups of people that are outside the 'true faith'.

It wouldn't be called "hate", of course--not by the haters. That would be too bold, too shocking. For Christians: Too obviously out of line with the clear teachings of Jesus.

The haters don't generally think of themselves as haters. They typically see themselves as just trying to do what God wants them to do, to live the 'right' kind of life, to be a 'good' person. The problems start when someone comes along who doesn't agree with your vision of the 'good' life--either because he doesn't agree on what God really wants or because he doesn't care what your God has to say at all.

What do you do with a guy like that? His example might lead other people astray, cause them to go off the rails! That would be Bad, and must be Prevented. A conflict is set in motion that will have--must have--winners and losers, and this usually leads to further escalation rather than resolution.

When one group of people attempts to impose its beliefs or lifestyle on another group, that group will defend itself, which tends to really irritate the imposing group. The imposing group--secure in the belief that its own position is the only Right one for everybody--interprets resistance to reform or conversion as further evidence of the depravity of the imposed upon group. Carried to its logical extreme, that process results in the dehumanization of the 'enemy', and provides the exemption, the free pass, that says, "You don't have to love this person. He is not lovable. In fact, he's not really even a person."

When religion is used to identify those people who are the 'enemies of God', it provides a channel for organized hatred. Jesus taught us to love our enemies and be kind to them. Carried to its logical extreme, that process results in realizing one day that you don't have any enemies....

What is a 'heresy', anyway?...

I'm glad you asked! The word "heresy" comes from the Greek hairetikos, "able to choose". If you think about that for a minute, you might ask yourself something like, "so what's wrong with making a choice?".

I'm glad you asked! What's wrong with making a choice? Apparently everything, if you think you and your group are the UAORAW (Undisputed Arbiters of Right and Wrong). If you belong to a group that considers itself to be Right in a way that makes everyone else Wrong, then anyone who chooses to believe something you don't approve of is a heretic, and their disapproved beliefs are heresy.

Wikipedia says that Iraeneus back in the second century (this has been going on a long time...) was the first guy to really promote the idea that his beliefs were "orthodox" and anyone else's were "heresy". He even wrote a book he titled Adversus Haereses (that's right: "Against Heresies") just to straighten everyone out.

Maybe it's just me, but this seems to be an exercise in name calling. As in a shooting war, where the enemy has to be depersonalized through some kind of derogatory nickname, calling someone a 'heretic' seems to be right in there with 'son of a bitch', just a way to be offensive, to put down someone you disagree with, to give yourself permission to hate, and to stereotype the individual to the point where the individual ceases to be a real person. Jesus would love it.

There's one other thing: Notice that the guy who entertains a completely different set of religious beliefs from yours is not called a heretic. That name is reserved for people who claim to follow your own religion, but aren't doing it right ("right" in this context meaning "the way you do it"). In this regard, claims of orthodoxy and heresy look suspiciously like an exercise in branding. Maybe someone should trademark words like "Christian" or "Presbyterian", so they'd have legal rights that they can enforce against anyone who presumes to use those words without their approval.

The conundrum is the sheer number of groups out there that all think they're right and everyone else is wrong. Ten or twelve years ago I read that there were at the time something like 22,000 separate Christian denominations on the planet. Who is "orthodox" now? Not who claims to be orthodox--that's just about everyone, and not just the ones with the word "orthodox" in their brand. I mean who really gets to adjudicate what's the One True Way against which all others are measured? (And how funny is it to watch all these different groups judging each other as if it mattered to anyone else what they think?)

The lawyers might ask, quo warranto? (that is, by what warrant, or by what authority do you do this?). Jesus and his apostles had a lot to say about factions, divisiveness, the traditions of men, religious exclusion, and persecution. They had a lot to say about love, unity, brotherhood, bearing each other's burdens, praying for each other, and taking care of the needy. They did not have a lot to say about creedal conformity. They had a lot to say about Right Action and Right Motive; not so much to say about Right Doctrine. Whatever authority causes some people to think they're the Church Police, the UAORAW, it's not the teachings of Jesus or the apostles.

Bottom line is: I'm not worried about being called a heretic. Everyone's a heretic in someone else's eyes, so if you take any position at all, someone's not going to like it. And at it's etymological root, "heretic" is just another name for "free thinker", someone who is "able to choose", someone who doesn't have to be told what to think, who to vote for, what to believe.

I'm okay with that.