There was a time when the Catholic Church burnt witches, tortured people to death for not believing that God and devils exist, excommunicated priests for not adhering to “strict” church doctrine, and imprisoned people for following strict scientific method that inevitably went against the Church’s explanation of natural phenomena.  Things have changed.  Not long ago, the Catholic Church invited a famous physicist to speak, reminding him that he was welcome to speak about everything except the concept of an evolutionary universe. Recently the Catholic Church, in relative quiet, announced that evolutionary theories were indeed accepted.  This is ironic if one recognizes the evolution of theological doctrine over the years as well as the evolution of social norms that are often the product of theological doctrine.  The continued evolution of theological and social norms has today given us what has been described as liberal theology and simply spirituality.

Liberal theology (as the name implies) is simply a term that denotes a broader, less strict interpretation of theology.  This can include not only the Catholic doctrines, but protestant, Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, Jainism, Hindu and any other form of organized religious or cult explanation of the universe that over-extends the scientific explanation, any form or fashion of belief that includes God, a universal power, a fundamental ground for existence, reason for life, purpose, natural intention, non-human intelligence that exceeds that of humans, cause for continuation, supreme idea or otherwise really big thing that can intentionally wipe us out if it gets pissed off enough.  Spirituality is simply an off-shoot of liberal theology. Rather than deducing a way of explaining a supreme idea or otherwise really big thing that can intentionally wipe us out if it gets pissed off enough, spirituality glistens with pride in its ignorance by seeding doubt that it is impossible yet somehow more probable that there is a supreme idea or otherwise really big thing that can intentionally wipe us out if it gets pissed off enough than not.

If one travels to Europe and Asia to visit the Cathedrals that spot those continents, it is evident that those places are religious symbols specifically celebrating Christian Gods and saints.  By the same token, one can visit Buddhist and Hindu temples and hurriedly find unmistakable icons that symbolize those religions.  The same is true for Islamic and other traditional forms of religious temples.  But, one of my favorite iconoclasts, Robert Ingersoll, pointed out with pride that the Unitarian churches were graciously void of any particular icon.  Instead, he claims, they are havens in which people can intelligently discuss religious and spiritual aspects of life.  Many Unitarian churches have no iconic symbol whatsoever but simply collections of hymns together with tables covered with chess boards (so I am told).  It cannot be surprising that most traditional churches that are aware of Unitarians do not give them much respect, and go so far as to equate them with satanic dens of iniquity, or simply communists (the preferred demon of the WWII crowd).  Today, there is a popular protestant evangelist by the name of Joel Olsteen who preaches to tens of thousands of people in football stadiums with the usual “smiling hyena” smile but with no Christian cross.  I have watched this man, caked with make-up, with perfectly white teeth preach an obvious version of Christianity and found it extremely strange that nowhere on the stage upon which he stood was there a cross, that very rarely was God’s vengeful ways ever mentioned, and that almost never was Hell alluded to.  Instead, there was the skeleton of the globe and a message of understanding and love.  Organized religion is being forced to evolve into first a more liberal theology than its history would allow, and secondly into the inevitable ambiguity of spirituality.  Common sense, the natural selection of theological evolution, forces the card.  Modern crowds seem less intent upon hearing how horrible they are, and how most likely they will be punished by an almighty punisher.  The reaction of traditional organized religion to the evolution of, well… itself, is not met with a welcome mat.  Rather, the evolution of traditional organized religion is fought tooth and claw…but evolve it must nevertheless.

With the continued evolution of our knowledge about the universe around us the old, forced religious explanations become more and more ridiculous.  Fundamentalists, those true religious fascists, adhere to old doctrines and the hopes of a vengeful god, but for the most part such persons are coming to be seen as backwards and backwoods by the young, up and coming religious intelligentsia.  These intellectual inhabitants of modern civilization would have nothing to do with old-time tent revivals, the screaming and sweaty, red-faced religious rogues that were the norm not too long ago even if they had a chance.  Rather, they prefer the idea of a more kind and more gentle granddad sort of God that looks out over us all with pity and if not with disdain, then a kind of chuckling light-heartedness that only a really big thing that could intentionally wipe us out if it got pissed off enough (but never would do such a horrible and unspeakable act) is capable of.  Old religion, however entertaining, intolerant and ignorant it might have been, is going to the wayside to join other antiquated acts of human amusement, prejudice and ignorance.  What is taking its place is in some ways more acidic and detrimental to human knowledge than was the direct assault of anthropomorphosis ignorance.

I recently read a book that is exemplary of modern day spirituality.  In it the main character poses a thought: “If there’s only one nation in the sky [God], shouldn’t all passports [religion] be valid for it?”  This question, of course, causes a stir because this character is intent upon being Hindu, Islamic and Christian.  The story is a good one, but the underlying message is spiritual: truth depends upon how we perceive it.  The argument is an old one, but no less dangerous in its consequences.  The ontological argument is entailed in modern spirituality, except that modern spirituality, instead of proving through rationality, steeps itself in mystery and at the same time indirectly demands truth for its claims.  Spirituality of this sort is not agnostic by nature, but theological and as such is nothing more than a new twist on an old idea: that a God exists and hence purpose exists.

There are some that have tried to argue that religion is a dying form of human belief, but they are mistaken.  While there are forms of religious zealotry, one can simply refer to the Falwells and Tilton’s of the world, that are becoming more and more ridiculous as they become more and more recognized for what they are: snake-oil salesmen, a new and improved version of theology emerges from the ashes of evolution: spirituality. This is the new breed of religion that while not offering revenge and destruction of all of our enemies, does offer a smiling and self-righteous face to cover up its true intent: the survival and elevation of snake-oil sales.