by Peter Davison
Q:What is “progressive religion?”
A:There are many different descriptions — some Christian, and some interfaith in nature. Personally I remain uncomfortable with labels. Current debates are filled with them, and people use them to set themselves up and put other people down. In some ways our dilemma was summed up in the name of the former political party, known as the Progressive Conservatives. When it amalgamated with the Reform Party, the "Progressive" part was dropped, much to the dismay of “old Tories.”
Religious people face the same problem. By its very nature religion tends to be conservative and deeply rooted in tradition; yet there is a strong part of that tradition which is prophetic and future oriented, and opposed to established power and its tendency to persecute or marginalize those it labels as deviants.
Progressive religion has two main thrusts. One is a concern for social justice. Religious progressives have been in the forefront of movements to abolish slavery, create a more equitable economic and social order, and promote peace rather than war. Noting that religion means “that which binds,” they protest economic, social and political arrangements which permit, and even encourage, a growing disparity between rich and poor, “haves” and “have-nots,” powerful and powerless.
Another element of progressive religion has to do with a suspicion of dogma. Its modern roots lie in Enlightenment individualism and its mistrust of external authority. Its formal manifestation is Unitarianism, which combines a somewhat Puritan morality with a rejection of any notion of credal religion. One can belong to the Unitarian Universalist Fellowship without believing in God at all. In a way, it provides a counterpoint to religionless Christianity by offering Godless religion: but both find common ground in attempts to demythologize religion. What does this mean?
Part of the problem lies in how we see language. Religious conservatives are inclined to see scriptures of whatever faith as consisting of an absolute and final revelation. The words of scripture contain truth and are definitive — despite the fact that scripture, particularly in the Judeo-Christian tradition, is full of contradictions. Critics say this allows us to use the Bible to justify anything and everything by selective quotation. Defenders point out that the community of faith has enshrined paradox, and the principle of both…and, over against a rigid either…or mindset. This brings us, I believe, to the heart of the matter.
Religion binds together the seemingly irreconcilable opposites of our lives. It compels us to deal with our own inner contradictions. It gathers into a rich and diverse, if often difficult community, people who might otherwise not see themselves as compatible. And it sees language, not as a container of truth, but as a pointer to it. Language in general, and religious language in particular, is symbolic. We see this even when we think we speak the same language. Our conversation is all about making sense of words we use in a bewildering variety of ways: and the deepest religious experiences often find us at a loss for words — which is why silence, poetry, art and music are so important.
As we have noted before, both rationalism and fundamentalism try to reduce reality to what can be contained within words. But they betray the religious imperative to worship — to go beyond labels and find ourselves “lost in wonder, love and praise.” Truly progressive religion is the opposite of reductionist. It recognizes the Divine Mystery, which foils all attempts to name and control it; and it looks beyond the labels with which we imprison others and ourselves to recognize and respect the dignity and worth of every human being. It seeks that something more that draws us into prayer, conversation, community, peace-making and social justice.
