Bill Maher has said that his goal for Religulous is to make people laugh.
And that it does.
I saw it opening weekend along with other Maher faithful who lined up the sidewalk to see the Larry Charles (of Seinfeld, Curb Your Enthusiasm, Borat) directed film, and we were not disappointed.
The film mustn’t be mistaken as a “no holds barred” critical analysis of religion. It isn’t. It is however a send up of fundamentalist religion in its many guises.

Fundamentalist faith is a easy target, we’ve all got to admit. The affiable Maher seems at ease in his role as the Eternal Skeptic and he makes his comedic interviews look easy because let’s face it: its easy.

But the film is bookended by matters more serious than the common South Park faire: Armeggedon.
Here Maher stands at Meggido, the titular site of the End of Days showdown where Jesus is said in Revelation to open some serious Whoop-Ass cans. The only thing more frightening, says Maher, than apocalyptic prophecies are self fulfilling apocalyptic prophecies. He then points to the necro-fetishism of Fundamentalist religion-the hatred and bigotry it fosters, the lack of environmental concern, the eager willingness to push the world towards final cataclysm as the greatest threat to humanity.

This did not have us laughing. Here I heard sighs, gasps. With a backdrop of images none too subtle, including 9/11, nuclear mushrooms, and belching smokestacks, Maher ends the film with a not too agnostic sounding challenge: “Grow up or perish.”

This is a sentiment that many social critics and theologians are airing recently. Our world is too small and fragile; our societies too vulnerable to messages of absolutism to condone the worldviews that got us where we are today.

And like some other voices critical to fundamentalisms, he implores the open-minded or secularized religious to come out of their traditions-their support only implicitly giving credibility to the extremists of their faith.

I liked this film. But I’m not sure if I completely I buy Maher’s thesis.
I do agree that fundamental religion is a great threat to our world-but it’s posed as ‘Religion’ often in the film-not fundamentalism. Maher and Charles could have strengthened their argument if they had separated faithful people who work for the betterment of the world from those who are antagonistic towards justice, love, and understanding.

The next morning after seeing the film, I went to a local church to check it out. What I found there would have been interesting to get Maher’s response on. Without naming its denomination, I will say that it is an ‘open and affirming’ Christian denomination that celebrates the LGBTQ community and individuals. The congregation was outspoken in their desire to be radically inclusive to all people and sought to build bridges among cultures and communities with mutual respect. The pastor referenced St. Francis, the Jewish Days of Awe, Jesus, Lesbian activist and feminist Del Martin as sources of spiritual strength and inspiration. He read Jesus’ words of comfort to those who mourned while adding that the Bible was only one source of spiritual truth among many.
Was this the religion that Maher had in mind to skewer? I don’t think so.
Its too bad that he didn’t focus on the diversity of religion’s cultural effects because it would only give better critique of those who decide to accept fundamentalism.

Now, Maher does give time to gay muslims, the Catholic Church’s teaching deriding erroneous Young Earth beliefs (a la Sarah Palin’s ‘dinos and people lived simultaneously’), and a Catholic priest who brushes off theologies of sin and hell, but only with the feeling that these types of religious believers are in a vast minority.

The best argument against misanthropic and culturally destructive religions are those individuals who are faithfully religious while remaining open-minded, considerate, and impressionable by new scientific developments.
The less effective argument is one that remains sarcastic, finger pointing, and dismissive.

The type of ineffective thought that Fundamentalism represents happens all the time and is not restricted to its religious incarnations. Dogmaticism of thought, stubbornness, cultural colonialism, bigotry, and devout ignorance occurs all around us- in academia, the business world, Nationalism, and the slavish adherence to your particular political party. 

Hopefully the discussion surrounding Maher’s (well worth seeing) film will be more articulate and patient without losing any of the good humor and playfulness.

In all, I give Religulous: 8 prayer beads out of 10.  

 

Ryan McGivern

www.jewishmosaic.org
www.uua.org
www.mccchurch.org
www.sojo.net

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)