With a trembling hand, Nietzsche declared God dead – and I, for one, agree with him. For Nietzsche, however, the realization was hardly a triumph: he envisioned the dissolution of the Western world, he shook with insecurity. Our world, according to Nietzsche, was recast as “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” In sum, man couldn’t continue without his myth, reason couldn’t maintain the State – and Nietzsche prepared for the unraveling. Cue fiery decline.
But the State has stood; and it was modernism, not nihilism that emerged from the rubble of the old myths. We’ve taken careful steps towards the secular and the foundations of society have remained intact. What are the consequences for the future of our religious institutions? Assuming the nonexistence of God – and this is a point I won’t attempt to defend – can we expect a reimagining of the church? Does it alter our values? Change the way we raise our children?
For me, the absence of anything above is empowering – you are free from fate and what you make of this world is your own doing, your own responsibility. More importantly, for our purposes, it presents the opportunity to reopen the debate in logical terms about the way we want to live. We can be free ourselves from the superstitions of past cultures and instead be a part of actively, guiltlessly shaping our values. Free from the threat of judgment and liberated from past dogmas we can discuss and debate what the “great truths” of our time, our history will be.
Still, a godless world is not without its flaws: for me, the role of the church is difficult to let go. I spent my childhood in the arms of a comforting church and it’s something I regard as both valuable and formative. It was a place to grow up gently, a sense of grounding and security. But we can do better. We can recognize new realities and evolve away from the church – from religion entirely. Using perspective to our advantage we can take that which is advantageous and leave the undesirable. We can adapt the strong sense of community and fellowship that religion provides, without reproducing the reliance on mysticism. We can create an institution that imparts morality and educates our children without intellectual close-mindedness.
Religion has been outmoded and I propose “the Center” to take its place. My hypothetical “Center” – and I’ve been told there’s something like it somewhere in Chicago – would meld the indispensable qualities of the church with a progressive, modernist perspective. I imagine something like the following:
The Center would meet weekly – preferably somewhere geographically “central” to the community it serves. The sanctuary of the church would be replaced by the lecture hall of the Center. As an important feature of the Center would be its role in imparting basic – though democratically determined – moral values, the Center would be for children as much as adults. The Center would strive to present models for children to aspire to. Each lecture would begin with a colorful biography of great figures in world or American history. Themes and morals would be highlighted – though interpretation would be flexible. Next, the children of the congregation would be presented with an “ethical dilemma of the week” which they would “solve” in small groups during the adult-oriented section of the lecture. Additionally, in order to foster cultured young men and women – and to facilitate the sense of community – music would be a regular part of the lecture. From Chopin to Bob Dylan, each lecture would feature a musical performance or offer an opportunity for the congregation to sing together. Having been presented a useful biography, a light lecture, a constructive ethical dilemma and some music, the children would leave the lecture to discuss together in groups arranged by age.
With the children gone, the adult portion of the lecture would begin. Ideally, the lecture would be led by a different professor each week. The lectures would vary greatly from speaker to speaker: one might offer social criticism, another a review of a classic text; art history lectures and a review of recent progressions in the natural sciences would be equally common. The Center would aim to be a home for debates, book reviews, documentaries, politics – all things cultural. While the topics addressed would be wide-ranging, the mission of the Center would be simple: inform and engage the community in an attempt to refine our values.
Now to be sure, my Center is just a hypothetical, a fiction; still, with a little work we could remake our religious institutions and find an agreeable, secular alternative.