Christian practice is greatly diminishing in the western world largely due to the impact of science on western consciousness. The conflict between the two disciplines has got to the stage where popular science writers such as Richard Dawkins are claiming that science can and should replace religion.
Their arguments are grounded mainly in criticism of what they perceive as the irrationality of religion and the rationality and practical achievements of science.
Contemporary public discourse is now increasingly influenced by scientism, a view that, due to its reliance on empirical experimentation and evidence, science is the highest and perhaps even the only valid form of knowledge. Atheistic scientists are also critical of what they term irrational violence and wars between and within religions.
Religious intolerance operates of course both within and between religious groups. All too often religious dogmas are used as weapons to attack and marginalise those considered to be non-conformist within religious communities.
As a theologian and author of a recent Christologically focused book, I am frequently challenged by atheists who declare that there is no proof of the miracles depicted in the Gospel texts or of the divinity of Jesus.
The scientific mindset now tends to define the Gospel stories as forms of mythology. As a result, the theological disagreements that caused church schisms have been reduced to a meaningless level.
The only non-negotiable doctrine is the divinity of Jesus which is the definitive doctrine of all traditional Christian denominations.
Interestingly and ironically, evolutionary science has expanded on our knowledge of human nature in a way that can emphasise the divinity of Jesus.
Social justice
Evolutionary biologists have explained how religion and politics evolved in tandem with one another to support male patriarchal power structures and also how religion has always been used as a force for social control.
An important distinction must therefore be made between religion as a phenomenon and the defining characteristics of individual religions while they are under the control of their founders. Christianity was unique while under the control of Jesus, who was the ultimate exemplar of social justice for all.
As regards the relationship between religion and violence, Jesus, who clearly had the potential to be the political messiah whom the Jews were expecting would take up arms and liberate them from the Roman Empire, refused to do so. As a result, he left himself vulnerable to execution by an unholy alliance of church and state.
Jesus refused to conform to the many petty and overly burdensome rules of the religious establishment of his day
With regard to religious dogmas and norms that are used as weapons to attack and marginalise those considered “other” within religious communities, the ministry of Jesus was also notable for challenging those aspects of evolved religion.
Jesus himself refused to conform to the many petty and overly burdensome rules of the religious establishment of his day and took huge social risks in championing those considered sinners and outsiders.
Legalism vs love
For Jesus, the worst kind of religious leaders are those who prioritise legalism over love. The early church community was highly reflective of the teachings of its founder thanks to St Paul’s appreciation of them. The above tendencies began to emerge however when Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire.
The Creed, a seminal book on the Nicene Creed by Franciscan priest and leading theologian Berard L Marthaler, contrasts the early Pauline church with modern-era Christianity. In it, he explains how the "one" church confessed in the creed's third article implies both unity and diversity.
This is illustrated by St Paul’s use of the metaphor of a body and its members to emphasise how his church community is composed of individuals from various backgrounds and with diverse gifts.
The unity of the church should be a unity of love, not a unity of dogma
Their unity and harmony is achieved in their confession of Jesus Christ as the Lord and as their saviour. Marthaler then refers to the modern church's reliance on authority to maintain unity along with its equation of unity with uniformity and compliance with church rules.
As Jesus himself said, “By this everyone will know that you are my disciples if you have love for one another.” The unity of his church should be a unity of love, not a unity of dogma. Another of Jesus’s most celebrated statements is “If you continue in my word, you are truly my disciples; and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”
Those who follow in the loving path of Jesus will therefore gain a knowledge of how to behave that transcends and frees them from formal moral systems.
A decrease in authoritarianism and an increase in love will not only increase unity within denominations, but also facilitate the restoration of unity among all Christians. A unified church of love would not only be truly Catholic, but would also provide powerful evidence of the divinity of Jesus.