True Religion

  

         Our scripture reading for today from James 1:27 talks about the meaning of religion. But before we discuss how James utilizes this term, I think we should first look at how the term is utilized in our culture today. So, what do you think about when you hear the term religion? Unfortunately, from my perspective, it seems that that term often has quite the negative connotation nowadays, among both Christians and non-Christians. Among non-Christians, there is a large segment of people who do not identify with any world religion who nevertheless do not identify as atheists. This group often calls themselves “spiritual but not religious”. So there is a sense in which people are far more willing to call themselves spiritual than religious. But even within Christianity, you’ll often hear people denigrate religion. One person really capitalized on this sentiment. Jefferson Bethke garnered 35 million views from a YouTube video published in 2012 titled “Why I love Jesus but hate Religion.” He then transformed that concept into a New York Times bestselling book titled “Jesus is Greater than Religion.” This same sentiment is commonly expressed in a phrase that says of Christianity, “It’s not a religion, it’s a relationship.”

So, let’s slowly talk through these negative connotations with the word religion, and see if the criticisms are warranted. Let’s criticize ourselves as Christians first. The issue with us saying we hate religion or we’re not a religion is twofold. 1. The Bible here in James speaks positively of religion. 2. Christianity is very obviously a religion. Religion is defined as a system of faith with belief in and worship of a supernatural being. Christianity very much fits that definition. Saying that Christianity is a relationship, not a religion is like saying that a marriage is a relationship, not a contract. Well, it’s both. The relationship part is probably the more important part, but it’s both. The contract part of a marriage hopefully lays some ground rules that help the relationship flourish by binding people to each other legally and financially. Similarly, in Christianity, our relationship with God is of the utmost importance. But the religion hopefully helps that relationship flourish. Going to church regularly on Sundays helps a relationship with God stay strong and grow just like going on regular dates with your spouse helps that relationship grow. Partaking of communion reminds us of God’s love and gives us a chance to recommit to accepting his love. We too often pit religion against relationship, but that is a false dichotomy. They are so often complementary, not contradictory. 

Jefferson Bethke peddled in that false dichotomy between Jesus and religion speaking of how he loves Jesus but hates religion. But here’s the problem: Jesus himself was very religious. He regularly attended synagogue. He read the Old Testament scriptures diligently. He was circumcised on the eighth day. He obeyed the law of God. He underwent baptism. Instead of saying I love Jesus but hate religion, we should be saying I love Jesus, therefore I love religion, because Jesus loved religion, and I know that participating in various religious things can help me better love Jesus.

But here’s why I think religion gets a bad rap. It’s because when people think about religion they think about pharisaical distortions of religion. When they think of religion they think about the Pharisees who had such a strict interpretation of Sabbath rules that they would criticize Jesus for healing someone on the Sabbath, as if Sabbath regulations were meant to take precedence over God’s commands for mercy. Or they think of the hypocrisy of the Pharisees who made sure to tithe even the spices in their spice cabinet, but neglected to act in justice. Or they think of the hypocrisy of Levites who might pass a half-dead man on the side of road and not help him out of fear of becoming ritually unclean by risking touching a dead body

To the people who bring up these type of critiques of religion, I would say that you bring up valid concerns, but your issue is not really with religion. Your issue is with perhaps religious legalism, or perhaps religious hypocrisy. What you’re against is bad religion or false religion or distorted religion, but you’re not actually against true religion. Because James tells us what true religion is. He says, “Religion that is pure and undefiled is to care for orphans and widows in their distress.” Who is against that? That is something that hopefully everyone supports or at least knows that they should support. James shows us that true religion is the exact opposite of those pharisaical distortions we criticize. Religion, properly defined should not be reflective of the Levite who passes the half-dead man on the side of the road, true religion is being the Good Samaritan who goes and helps. James defines religion in terms of our care for the needy because he knows that belief in God should cause to us to act lovingly towards the people whom God created. And he knows that belief in a God of love should make us merciful towards those in need.

Well let’s explore the motives of the spiritual but not religious group. I wonder why they dislike the term religious. I think for some of them religion feels constricting. They don’t want to have to abide by a huge list of rules and regulations. They want to have individual freedom to choose what to believe, to choose what makes sense for them. But, it’s interesting, this individual freedom, when they utilize it, they almost always predictably utilize it to believe and think the exact same things that everyone else in the secular world is believing right now. In other words, more so than choosing things for themselves to believe, they are mostly just substituting the constraints of biblical revelation for the constraints of the cultural zeitgeist. And though the spiritual but not religious group often prides themselves on their critical thinking skills and their reasoning skills as things that have led them to disbelieve the Bible, it’s interesting how they nevertheless often fall for believing things that are seemingly far more implausible. I’ve noticed that many of the spiritual but not religious group believe, for example, in the magical powers of crystals, or believe in the power of positive thinking, that you can basically just manifest blessings into your life, that you can think dreams into reality.

I’ve also noticed that negative connotations about religion are strongest when they speak of so called “organized religion”, and yet, so often, in rejecting organized religion people merely fall into “disorganized religion”. They leave a system of beliefs rooted in history and revelation and instead take part in a disorganized, muddled and confused mess of ideas they call spirituality. They create an à la carte system of belief where they pick and choose portions of many different religions and belief systems and puzzle piece things together that aren’t always compatible. Instead of subscribing to a religion and having one’s thoughts and beliefs reined in by theological doctrines formed over millennia by some of the greatest prophets and theologians that ever existed, a vague spirituality can sometimes become a free-for-all where the opinion of any random, average Joe who has thought about spiritual matters for 30 seconds becomes as valid as the writings of someone like Jesus or Paul.

All this is to say that I think we Christians have work to do in helping religion gain back more positive connotations in the popular consciousness of our culture. Because I think that among both Christians and non-Christians alike religion is unfairly looked down upon.

But let’s focus in now more on the precise claims of what James thinks makes for pure and undefiled religion. Again, he says it is caring for orphans and widows in their distress. And what a beautiful sentiment that is. But James is not really coming up with anything new when he says this. He is mostly just requoting a sentiment that shows up in the Bible time and time again. In Exodus and Deuteronomy, in Jeremiah and Zechariah, and over and over in the psalms, we are told to care for the orphan and the widow, and that God has a special heart for orphans and widows. This is repeated so many times I think because repetition is a way for God to stress to us just how important this is.

So why are orphans and widows the ones listed specifically? Well, because in ancient times they were among the most vulnerable people. Think how much infants and children are reliant upon having parents to care for them. And widows are similarly vulnerable. Having lost their husband, who in ancient times was often the provider for the family, they could quickly become impoverished. Interestingly, 1 Timothy 5 speaks of prioritizing widows who are really widows. Not as if some widows are more truly widows than others, but in the sense that some are truly in need and others are not. Paul speaks of how if a widow has children or grandchildren who can care for her, those people need to do so. In that case she may not be in economic need at all. He also says that if a woman is young enough when she becomes a widow, she should remarry and so find economic sustainability that way. Some are more in need of outside aid than others are.

But I want to stress that the Bible, in talking of orphans and widows, is not really trying to limit our compassion and care to these two groups. In listing them they are trying to make those two groups representative of any who are impoverished and unable to help themselves and in need of our aid. Thus, many of the Old Testament verses that speak of our duty to orphans and widows actually add in one other group: sojourners or aliens. Also known as foreigners or immigrants. For that is a group of people often traveling due to a crisis or a hardship that often needs our help, at least for a time, until they are settled and have stability. As a side note, I think the way that a lot of people talk about sojourners and aliens and immigrants nowadays is not at all compatible with how God talks about them, as people he has a special heart for.

Let’s, for a second, take James’ definition of religion, and just invert what he said. If we do this, we can make out that he thinks that our religion is impure and defiled if we are not about caring for those in need. We saw this same thing in our scripture reading from Isaiah 1: our religious sacrifices, our worship rituals, our religious festivals, God is not pleased by them if they are not partnered with lives that do good and seek justice and rescue the oppressed. If all of our religion that we do here at church is not causing us to be more merciful, more empathetic, more loving, and more generous to those in need, then we’ve missed the big picture.

But the good news is that I think it is helping us grow in love and mercy. Statistics show us that religiously affiliated people volunteer more and give more than those who aren’t religiously affiliated. Statistics show that Christians are the group with by far the highest rate of adoption in the U.S. We’re doing a decent job at living up to that call of ours to care for orphans, at least compared to others, even if we certainly have a long way to go to fully live into that call of ours. And ministries of mercy, that is something that I think our congregation does really well. I love hearing stories from you all about different compassion ministries in town that were largely started by our church. I know that many of you have a deep heart for feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, clothing the naked. And I know so many of you who care about taking care of the elderly or people in ill health. You all are great about visiting people in the hospitals or their homes, at writing a card to one going through a tough time, at praying for those within our church. Today, I have to largely commend you all for your good work in this area, even as I must urge you onward, to do just a little bit more if you are able.

Like I’ve said, religion need not be contrasted with mercy. The religious can be quite merciful. Even some very irreligious politicians have had to concede that if churches were to be absent from communities, it would leave a huge gap in social services that would be incredibly difficult, nigh impossible, to make up wholly with government programs.

But James, when he talks about true and pure religion he does not just say that it is about caring for orphans and widows, he actually says it is also about keeping oneself unstained by the world. This may remind you of my sermon from a couple months ago about how we are not to be conformed to this world. But I bring this up again today because James’ idea of religion is twofold: it is external piety seen in compassion for the needy, but it is also inward piety seen in holiness of life. For many people, religion is either one or the other for them: it is only about justice and generosity or it is only about obedience and prayer. Another way to phrase it would be that for many people religion is either only for them about loving neighbor or only for them about loving God. But it needs to be both! If it is missing either, our religion is impure and defiled. We need both external compassion and inward piety. We need mercy and religion. We need love and obedience.

So reflect inwardly for just a moment which side of that pendulum you tend to swing more towards: loving God or loving neighbor. I think most of us can identify which of those two areas we are often better at. Now, think about what it would look like for you to reach a better balance of the two.

            May we be a people who care deeply about both loving God and loving neighbor. May we be a church who cares for orphans and widows and a church that keeps ourselves unstained by the world. May we be a church transformed by God inwardly, and thus transformed in how we treat others outwardly.