Religion, evil and children
Bob Rogers believes the idea of evil is harmful to children and vulnerable people
Religious beliefs are very varied and interfaith work is vital. But is the topic of conservative belief in evil, based on the literal reading of historical writings, the one topic where tolerance must be suspended and critical concern expressed? Evil as defined by historically literal theology is threatening, fearful and potentially harmful for some. Do major questions need to be asked of the extent of these beliefs and the harm that they cause, particularly to children and the vulnerable?
Historically, literal theology equates evil with Satan and demons and other enemy forces. These are combined with a focus on individual sinfulness, original sin, salvation and the need for forgiveness, possession and deliverance. Hell is a dreadful opposite binary choice to heaven. Is this belief in evil potentially very damaging for some people, the young and vulnerable? Do these ‘threat ministries’ risk subjectively continuing throughout some lives with dark issues at the end of life?
Does the literal belief in evil that exists throughout world religions also embody people’s lack of self-worth and their need for repentance, with communion liturgies such as ‘I am not worthy even to pick up the crumbs under the Lord’s Table’? Similarly, in a Catholic baptism service is a child or vulnerable person likely to be disturbed to hear influential godparents stand to say that they ‘renounce the devil’?
Taken together, do these ideas of sin and evil define religion from birth as a ministry of threat, fear and inferiority? In modern mental health terms, do these beliefs risk producing harm and self-doubt, and even psychological abuse? Does just hearing a single mention of a fearful notion of evil, perhaps from a known authority figure, risk inducing long-term psychological harm?
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child associates, at its core, the best interests of the child with freedom of thought, belief and religion. Quakers and others believe in original blessing, not original sin, with something of God or the Light in everyone. Faith is creative; affirming; non-threatening; questioning; and based on modern study and putting personal experience above dogma. Important national and local school curriculum bodies on religion are worryingly contentious between conservatives and liberals. The BBC has a website on ‘religion’ which refers to twenty world beliefs, including atheism, and an open introduction for enquirers. This approach would be helpful in pamphlet form, for instance to assist Quaker Quest outreach.
Outreach that promotes the conservative belief in evil is often well-resourced worldwide, including by the Vatican. Anglican courses such as Alpha and ‘Explore Life’ use modern media for groups or individuals, in a one-to-one setting. The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) defines itself as ‘a global family of authentic Anglicans standing together to retain and restore the Bible to the heart of the Anglican Communion’. It has significant support in Africa.
Is the conservative view of evil the single most harmful area in religious belief? Is it a major obstacle to contemporary spiritual exploration and understanding? Is the term ‘evil’ one that feeds hatred and violence? These beliefs are the core of atheist criticism and tragically deflect faith enquirers. Surely the contemporary biblical, scientific, mental health and neurological studies have superseded the religious views of evil that were understandable in early history? The index of Quaker faith & practice does not list ‘evil’ – but it has many references to ‘dark’, ‘darkness’ and ‘light’. The booklet Twelve Quakers and Evil and the weekly outreach meetings of Quaker Quest echo these beliefs. Are Quakers well placed to lift the self-defeating taboo topic of evil and liaise with like bodies, expressing serious concerns and beginning a major effort to counter conservative theology of evil?
Comments
The GAFCON definition of itself mentioned in the article, contained on the ‘about us’ page of its website, refers to their standing together not just for the Bible but for the ‘unchanging Bible’.
By BobR on 23rd March 2017 - 18:12
Please login to add a comment
