What Has Religion Done For Mankind?

CHAPTER I

RELIGION or no religion—what shall it be for me? That is the question every full-grown, intelligent person must decide today. Upon each one's personal decision depends his everlasting destiny. It is as serious as all that. We have to face the question and answer it, because religion, all religion, is on judgment in this most trying time.

² Now, for the first time in human history, all the civilizations that have survived till today are in turmoil at the same time. This is most unusual. It must be very significant. Religion cannot be divorced from responsibility for the situation, for from the beginning religion has been connected with every civilization that has arisen on the face of the earth. That is why it is sorely feeling the effects of the worsening situation. That is why it is under judgment. Is history now overtaking religion? Are its sins, long indulged in, catching up with it and finding it out while the whole world looks on? Is it now reaping the fruitage of what it has sown for centuries? As we endeavor to answer all these vital questions we cannot escape

investigating the question, What has religion done for mankind? We must be honest with ourselves and courageously face the facts. The truth may hurt but will be beneficial. The grand climax of testing is certain to come shortly, and only the truth will endure.

³ This word "religion" has a broad meaning. There is much that is called by this name, and we want to know whether the truth, the pure, absolute truth, is associated with religion. So it becomes necessary for us at the start to set out the meaning of the term as here used, in order to understand what we are talking about and to come to right conclusions. In various languages this word has some equivalent. The word the Hebrews used for it literally meant "service". The Germans have long called it "Gottesdienst", which means "service of God". The Russian Communists, following the German Socialist Karl Marx, call it "the opium of the people". But the English, French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Italians, whose languages are drawn largely from the Latin of the Roman empire, use the term "religion". In Latin it is religio. This word, says the great Roman orator and author Cicero, is made up of two words re and legere, which, together, mean "to read over again", to reflect upon or to study the sacred books in which religion is delivered.* So he called it the "pious worship of God". But according to a later Latin author Lactantius it

comes from re-ligáre, meaning "to bind back", because it reveals to us the obligation which binds us to a higher power.*

⁴ The word occurs in the Latin Vulgate Bible. There it is applied to the Jewish religion, to worship of angels, and to Christianity. Testifying before a Roman law court, the Christian apostle Paul tells of when he was a Jewish Pharisee and says: "According to the strictest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee, "† Writing to Christian believers at Colossae, he warns them: "Let no man seduce you, willing in humility, and religion of angels."‡ Still earlier the book of The Wisdom of Solomon (14:18,27) applied the word to the worship of idols. Now, although Paul calls by the name "religion" the cult of the Pharisees and the worship of angels, things which he considers to be wrong, his fellow writer James applies the name to true Christianity, saying: "If any man think himself to be religious, not bridling his tongue, but deceiving his own heart, this man's religion is vain. Religion clean and undefiled before God and the Father, is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their tribulation: and to keep one's self unspotted from this world."‡.

⁵ Taken according to the way it is used, "religion" in its simplest definition means a system of worship, a form of worship, without regard to whether it is true or false worship. This agrees with the meaning of the Hebrew word for it, 'aboh-dah, which literally means "service", regardless of to whom it is rendered. Adopting this plain meaning of the word, notice how the New World Translation of James' words above reads: "If any man seems to himself to be a formal worshiper and yet does not bridle his tongue, but goes on deceiving his own heart, this man's form of worship is futile. The form of worship that is clean and undefiled from the standpoint of our God and Father is this: to care for orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself without spot from the world." It is in the sense of system or form of worship that we use the term "religion" in this book.

⁶ Religion is universal. No matter how loudly they claim to be godless, religion is practiced even by the Red Fascists or Communists, as we shall show to their embarrassment. Despite this fact, the world of today is not bound together in one. More so than political beliefs, religion is a divisive force today. It itself is divided. There are many kinds of religion. Each conscientious devotee of a religion will insist that his own is the true one, which is why he sticks to it. But he finds in it something which keeps him from enjoying complete harmony with someone who holds some oth-

er belief. For him to get along with the other person he must practice religious toleration. Intolerance has been a curse to mankind, but it is still rife today and threatens to do more damage than it has already wrought throughout the centuries. So divisive is religion that the Assembly of the United Nations, an organization which represented sixty different member nations in 1951, cannot open its sessions with united prayer to a common deity, through one religious spokesman. At most they can only rise and all have a minute of silent meditation. A chapel has been proposed for use of all in common, where anyone of any belief may go of his own accord and indulge in individual prayer to his own deity.

⁷ What, then, are we to do with religion in order to unify the world? Are we to say that all the many kinds stand for a sincere worship, and so, because of the sincerity of heart, they will all be accepted? Are we to encourage each and every one to be religious according to his own way, because the kind of religion does not matter, just so the person is religious and this makes him a better person? That may stand for toleration, but mere religious toleration will never unify this world. No more so than the provision for this in the Constitution of the United States of America has unified this country. What, then, are we to do? Try to synthesize all kinds and build up a fusion religion? Is that the way it will be able to survive in this perilous day? We see movements

toward unification, especially among the Protestant sects and organizations, to protect themselves and to create internal strength. And the head of the mighty papal system at Vatican City is constantly pleading for the Protestant systems to return to the Roman Catholic fold. In fact, the pope designated the 1950 "Holy Year" as the "year of the great return". However, the cleavage between the great systems still continues. In some instances the rift widens.

⁸ A movement toward a world fusion-religion was begun toward the close of the last century. In Chicago, Illinois, during the World's Columbian Exposition, what was called the World's Parliament of Religions was held in September of 1893. It was promoted mainly by the Protestant systems, but it extended the honors of opening and closing the parliament to clergymen of the Catholic church. Representatives of the great systems of belief and worship in all parts of the world were invited to attend and deliver speeches, explaining their creeds and their way.

⁹ For seventeen days so-called Christian met with pagan, Jew with Gentile, Hindu with Presbyterian, Buddhist with Baptist, Confucian with Methodist, Christian Scientist with Lutheran, Monotheist with Polytheist, apparently to come to a better understanding of what the other believed and to find some common ground for blending with one another in belief and practice. It was to be a grand

meeting of compromise, with each one admitting he did not have "the whole truth and nothing but the truth". Those who most showed themselves willing to compromise on even their basic principles were the Protestants. No conviction of having the truth, but peace at any price! As one Protestant clergyman, of the Disciples church, expressed himself: "This first Parliament of Religions seems to be the harbinger of a still larger fraternity —a fraternity that will combine into one world-religion what is best, not in one alone, but in all of the great historic faiths. It may be that, under the guidance of this larger hope, we shall need to revise our phraseology and speak more of Religious unity, than of Christian unity. I rejoice that all the great cults are to be brought into touch with each other, and that Jesus will take his place in the companionship of Gautama, Confucius and Zoroaster."*

¹⁰ Did that World's Parliament of Religions have heaven's blessing and work toward world peace and unity? Evidently not. Twenty years later the world entered into a period of disunity and turmoil such as it had never before known, with the outbreak of the first world war in 1914. The rupture of peace and harmony began, not in so-called "heathendom", but in Christendom where all are supposed to be Christian brothers who show that they follow Christ because they love one another and lay down their lives for one an-

other, not kill one another. Catholic and Protestant clergymen ignored the rule laid down by their professed Leader Jesus Christ, when he said: "I am giving you a new commandment, that you love one another; just as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love among yourselves."* Contrary to this, these sectarian leaders patriotically divided on the national and political issues of the time and prayed to this one and the same Christ to bless and prosper the death-dealing weapons of whichever side they were on. This same course was followed in World War II, and every indication is that it is to be the course followed in further international conflicts.

¹¹ For the duration of the conflict each great religion of Christendom becomes nationalized, while the clergy on top reap the benefit, win or lose their side militarily. No second World's Parliament of Religions is proposed, not even on the basis of the United Nations of many religions. To judge from the results of the first one, world unity would not be furthered by such a parliament with its efforts toward a fusion world-religion. Besides, conditions are even far more unfavorable toward one now than in 1893.

¹² Since hope does not rest in a synthesized re-

ligion for all mankind, what then? Does it rest with any one kind? Back there, one of the leading promoters of the parliament of 1893, a Protestant clergyman, expressed it this way: "Some one has said that the time is now ripe for the best religion to come to the front. The time for a man to put on any airs of superiority about his particular religion is past."* The task of making certain which is the best religion in Christendom or in heathendom would be an endless one, a fruitless one, especially when even such "best" one is examined in the face of the question, What has religion done for mankind? Another thing, the task of getting all mankind to adopt such "best" one, even for the sake of world unity, would be humanly impossible. This is not the time of opportunity for what men may decide is the "best religion". This most crucial time in human history is the ripe time for the true religion to come to the front and unite all honest hearts that yearn for justice, truth, peace and brotherly love.

¹³ No one can escape this issue. Since the radi-

cals who boast of their godless materialism have a form of worship which differs from other kinds only in the naming of things, even they have been forced by this day of judgment of the nations into choosing a religion. With this they hope to integrate the world under one political control allowing for only one allegiance. That they will not succeed, we propose to prove on reliable authority. But, then, what other religion of this world will succeed in unifying all nations, races, colors, and languages? Based on past performance, upon what they have already done for mankind, not one, not even the "best", if there be such, will prove able to do so. We owe it to our fellow man to respect his right to worship according to what mode or system he prefers. But because sentimental people view worship as sacred and beautiful when it is conscientious and sincere, this does not make all beliefs and forms of adoring some higher power right and leading to endless life, liberty and happiness. They cannot all be right and leading to the same happy end, for they all differ and disagree with one another and contradict one another.

¹⁴ Though all other kinds disagree with it, there must be only one kind of worship, one religion, that is right. This is the one in harmony with the absolute truth. Since there is just the one that is true, set against so many hundreds of others that prove to be false, it follows that those who adopt and practice the true must necessarily be

in the minority. History proves that this has always been so. The contradiction of the minority by the majority does not prove they are in the wrong. While not tolerating falsehood for themselves, they exercise most genuine tolerance toward all others in the world in their privilege of choosing the gods whom they want to serve. Unjustly they are rewarded with the greatest intolerance in political, social, economic, legal and religious ways. But this will not crush them out of existence. The intolerant religionists who oppose them are the ones that are in fear for their form of belief and worship, both fear from the truth as well as fear from the violent radical classes who claim to be antigod.

¹⁵ The truth has endured till now, and those who have it need not fear. The truth is eternal. It will last forever, after all error has been exposed and perishes. So those who worship with spirit and truth can afford to exercise true toleration toward all other religions as long as this old world of which such are a part lasts. But this toleration does not mean they are obliged to put the quietus on the proclamation of the truth by which men may be turned from darkness to light, from false worship to right worship. The fact is, they are under moral obligation to their fellow men to let them hear and examine it and then say, "It is the truth."

¹⁶ It is with a sense of this obligation that this

book is published. Nothing is accomplished by saying that your religion is good enough for you, and his is good enough for him, and ours is good enough for us; so do not cause religious disturbance but let everything stay as it is. That which is false has come to its day of reckoning and will perish amid the great ruin which it is bringing upon itself. Those who hold to it, even in their ignorance, will perish with it, just as, when a blind guide falls into the ditch, the blind person he is guiding will tumble in with him. So those blinded with falsehood have a right to hear the truth and need to hear it to escape destruction.

¹⁷ Truth is one and is for all who love it, the same way as proved science is for all. Being for all, it is the only thing that will bind all men together. By modern developments the whole earth is now one close neighborhood, and we are one human race, from one original human father, and on one earth, and faced with a world-wide trouble in common. The pure worship is the one thing that will unify the universe in a new world and lead to the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. The rule is sure, By the fruitage of a tree you will know the tree for what it is. So with tolerance toward the rights of all, but in the interests of unity and salvation by the truth, we now proceed to examine the fruitage and see what religion has done for mankind. Indifference toward the true religion puts you in peril.