In America’s ever roving commercial eye, Día de Muertos has become an extension of Halloween. Retailers have realized that people will spend a lot on their fear, and the autumnal holidays delve into that primal territory. Since the Day of the Dead, being a mix of indigenous Mexican religions and the Catholic celebration of All Souls’ Day, comes two days after Halloween why not blur them together with greenbacks? So capitalist thinking goes. While certainly not free of monied interests, the Disney/Pixar movie Coco has the virtue of addressing Día de Muertos as the separate holiday that it is. A form of ancestor worship—a religion extremely common around the world—the thought-world of the film shares in common with Tim Burton’s Corpse Bride this idea that the afterlife is colorful, if not joyous.
I realize I’m jumping the gun here, but I just saw Coco for the first time over the weekend. Not just a culturally sensitive treatment of an indigenous holiday, it is also a celebration of music. In a very real sense, music is life in the film, and even the dead continue to thrive in its presence. Again, the connection with Corpse Bride suggests itself. The key difference, from a religionist’s point of view, is that Coco is based on, to an extent, actual religious traditions. An irony of this is that, together with the worship of Santa Muerte, the focus on death sometimes makes the Catholic Church nervous. Focus should be on resurrection, not death. But what if death isn’t seen as evil? Where is thy sting? This can be a real challenge when your organization is offering escape from death.
The fear of death is natural enough. It’s the ultimate unknown. It fuels both religion and horror. In that sense films like Coco that show a joyful aspect of the hereafter do an end-run around traditions that base their wares on ways to avoid the consequences of death. Hell becomes a threat to be avoided—the forgotten dead in Coco face annihilation, a fate that Héctor notes comes to everyone eventually. Eternal torment isn’t in the picture. I have to wonder if this view doesn’t present a form of salvation that is unwelcome among rival religions. Although Catholics don’t have the hostility toward Halloween that many Evangelicals display, there is a challenge of rival faiths here. Stores have already begun offering this year’s Halloween wares, and increasingly among them are Day of the Dead decorations. The holidays are quite distinct, although related, and movies like Coco suggest what we fear may be more a matter of perspective than of the decree of an angry deity.
Posted in American Religion, Consciousness, Holidays, Movies, Popular Culture, Posts, Sects
Tagged All Souls Day, Catholicism, Coco, Corpse Bride, Day of the Dead, Día de Muertos, Halloween, Hell, indigenous religion, music, Santa Muerte, Tim Burton
Inside, outside, upside-down. The more life moves toward binary code—what isn’t computerized these days?—the more scholars are moving away from simple binaries. Just when I thought I was getting used to this sacred/profane divide, academics are scrapping it for more nuanced paradigms not based on any assumptions of presumed deities and their projected wishes. Nothing as simple as “either/or” could justify all these salaries for stuff you can just look up on the internet, after all. Still, binaries are a very human way of looking at the world. Light and dark doesn’t mean there aren’t all the shades in between. And the very basic difference between inside and outside may be far more helpful than it might appear.
Being inside a religious tradition—really being inside—creates a pattern of thinking that frames all of one’s experience of life. While reading about the Book of Mormon recently this became clear to me. Looking at it from the outside is something those on the inside have great trouble doing. The same is true of various Eastern Orthodox Christian traditions, or Evangelicalism. Those living on the inside of tightly constrained ways of thinking—believing—can’t see what it looks like from the outside. I suspect that not all religions traditions fall into such ways of thinking; there are shades here. “Mainstream” Christianities, for example, tend to blend at the edges and those inside might have an idea of how those on the outside view them. Lutherans know the jokes about their outlooks and can even tell them. Methodists and Presbyterians too. They tend to conform a bit to expectations and tend not to be extremist about things. Being mainstream will do that to you.
It is unusual for a person to change religious traditions. Those who do can see their former tradition from the outside—whether mainstream of not—with a kind of objectivity that frightens true believers. Most religions have some tenets that look a bit unbelievable when viewed from outside. Once seen from that perspective, however, there’s no unseeing it. I grew up Fundamentalist. After some time in the mainstream Methodist tradition I could see Fundamentalism from the outside. When I eventually joined the Episcopal Church I had been viewing it from the outside my entire life up to that point. Looking at faith traditions inside out offers perspectives otherwise not to be had. Nobody wants to believe the wrong religion. Perhaps that’s why it’s so difficult to look at your own from the outside. You have to be willing to accept shades of gray, even if looking at it in a binary way.
One of the things I miss the most about my teaching career is learning from the young. While some professors in my experience believed the learning only went one way, I always found a kind of reciprocity in it. I passed on what I learned from taking classes and having my face in a book all the time, and they taught me about popular culture. Academics don’t get out much, you see. It’s a basic issue of time—we all have a limited amount of it and research, if done right, takes an incredible chunk. In fact, when hot on the trail of an idea, it’s difficult to think of anything else. Pop culture, on the other hand, is what the majority of people share. Now it’s largely mediated by the internet, a place that some academics get bored.
Speaking to a young person recently, I was initially surprised when he said that his generation was more interested in the Devil than in God. Parents have always been concerned that their children not go astray, but this was, it seemed to me, more of an intellectual curiosity than any kind of devotion. God, he averred, was thought of as aloof, pious, self-righteous; in a word, Evangelical. The internet can be downright ecclesiastical in its affirmation that our inclinations can be what used to be called “sinful.” Not that these things are always bad, but they are the kinds of things we’re taught to feel guilty about. The divine response? Anger. Displeasure. Shaming. Young people, my interlocutor thought, found the Devil more understanding.
Perhaps this is the ultimate result of Evangelical thinking. We’re watching in real time as the party of Jesus is becoming the party of intolerance for anyone different than ourselves. Rather than turning the other cheek, it’s fire when ready. Eager to retain the “brand” of “Christianity,” they slap the secular label on any outlook different than their own, although their own faith is without form and void. It used to be that this was the realm of the Devil. This sheds a different perspective on what my young colleague was saying. Instead of bringing people to God, the Evangelical movement is driving them away. Traditionally, the Devil was after the destruction of human souls. That seems to be one of the new values of the right wing of the church. There’s quite a bit to think about in this observation by this young one. I’m glad to know that traffic still moves both directions on this street.
Posted in American Religion, Current Events, Higher Education, Memoirs, Popular Culture, Posts, Religious Violence, Sects
Tagged Christianity, Devil, Evangelical, God, Higher Education
At various points of my career I’ve applied for museum curator positions. Since those who actually land those jobs have degrees in museum studies, I’ve never gotten as far as an interview. Still, I like to think I’d be good at it. I spend time in museums and I’ve been told I have an okay eye for design. And I recently read that museums are educational institutions. That makes sense since people tend to be visual learners. (This is something I took into account in my classes as well, illustrating lectures to make a point. The traditional academic feels that pictures are somehow “soft” learning as opposed to the harsh realities of text and word-based instruction, but I beg to differ.) We see things and they stick with us.
On a visit to the New York Historical Society museum I once looked at their somewhat abbreviated sculpture collection. This isn’t the Met, after all. One of the tricks I’ve learned about museum displays is that some curators place subtle humor in their framing of objects. For example, my gaze was drawn to a figure of a pilgrim. A stern-looking fellow, he’s captured in full stride, massive Bible tucked under his arm, determined frown on his face. This is a man trying to create Heaven on earth, dour though it may be. Taking a step back, my camera found a smile in this image. On either side of this angry Christian were two naked women: one was apparently Artemis with her bow, the other perhaps a Muse. The lines of the display draw attention to this juxtaposition. There’s some humor here, intentional or not.
This also takes me back to yesterday’s post about Heaven. Perceptions of what it is differ. There’s a mindset like the pilgrim that sees a life of suffering being rewarded in the hereafter with endless bliss. I do have to wonder whether too much hardship down here might not make one forget how to enjoy oneself. It’s difficult to picture a Puritan in rapture. It’s as if the journey—the hard road—is the real source of enjoyment here. Each of us, I suppose, has her or his own view of Heaven. Mine’s kind of like a library with all the time in the world without end to read. Others, I suspect, would find paradise as a garden. Yet others would see Heaven as a kind of museum, but it would be one where laughing out loud was okay, for the Curator definitely has a sense of humor.
Posted in American Religion, Art, Higher Education, Posts, Sects, Travel
Tagged Artemis, Heaven, Muses, museums, New York City, New York Historical Society Museum, Pilgrims
One of the dynamics we see in present-day America is the worship of belief itself. This is nothing new since faith is the “substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” It’s hard to trust in what you can’t see. Trusting in trust may be tautological, but it’s also a natural development for something that evades proof. If it goes too far, however, such religion becomes an idol. Its teachings become secondary to its very existence. Its rules, no matter how contradictory, must all be followed. And those who believe are encouraged not to think too deeply about it since, if they did, this inherent inconsistency would be obvious. The knee-jerk reaction of “the Bible says” is one such defensive measure. I saw this all the time while teaching in seminary.
The other day I heard the melody of “Faith of Our Fathers” playing on the local church bells. Interestingly, this is a Catholic hymn adopted by Protestants. It’s kind of an anthem to this idea of worshipping the faith rather than the deity to which it points. Consider the chorus: “Faith of our fathers, holy faith!/We will be true to thee til death.” Originally a celebration of martyrs—those who found the courage to die in their steadfast belief—the hymn survives into an era when the perils besetting what used to be Christianity are less political and more scientific. We live in a universe compellingly explained by science while politics has appropriated religion and counts on it to keep worshipping faith as an entity, regardless of distorted beliefs. The hymn plays on.
Many public intellectuals are wondering about how evangelical Christianity could so easily divest itself of Jesus’ teachings and accept Trumpism. Some have already begun to suggest that Trumpism is a “cult.” (Religionists would say the proper term is “New Religious Movement,” since we no longer judge religions, no matter what forms of mind control they might prefer.) The problem with experts on religion is that anyone can claim that sobriquet, bona fides or no. Some of us have documented decades of official study of the phenomenon—those who paid attention in seminary and continued to pay for many years for a doctorate in this elusive field—but we’re are easily outshouted by those who take the words of this hymn literally, as they were meant to be taken. Martyrdom comes in many varieties. As I listen to the bells, I consider the implications.
Posted in American Religion, Bibliolatry, Current Events, Posts, Religious Violence, Sects
Tagged Catholic, evangelicalism, faith, Faith of Our Fathers, martyrs, New Religious Movement, Protestant, Trumpism
Religions have always fascinated me. Having grown up in one that was self-assured that it alone was right, I didn’t have much opportunity, as a child, to look closely at others. I had to assume that other religions took their beliefs just as seriously as we did, but that they were dead wrong. Majoring in religion requires a bit more broadmindedness. We looked, as objectively as possible, at other traditions. Still, Grove City College is unapologetically evangelical, so some professors weren’t shy about stating this or that belief was just plain wrong. Things improved from then on, academically speaking. By the time of my doctorate, and as an Episcopalian, I learned to distance myself a bit; dispassionate was the only way to be in the face of sometimes conflicting accounts.
The other day, following my natural curiosity, I was researching Unitarian Universalists. Having a strong biblical background, I was curious about this denomination that represents Scriptures quite differently. The Google metrics brought up a page with logos of various traditions: the Unitarian one I recognized, as I did the Episcopal and United Methodist Churches, having been a member of both. Then I noticed the symbol used for the Quakers: the Quaker oats man. I was inclined to laugh and be horrified simultaneously. The “Quaker” Oats symbol is a commercial mock-up, and had Google read Wikipedia it would’ve known that the company has nothing to do with the faith. Capitalizing (literally) on the reputation of Quakers for purity, the company used William Penn as a model for a guy who wouldn’t cheat you.
Now that I live in the Quaker State (again), I’ve grown curious about the Society of Friends. This is particularly so since they are one of the few Christian groups to have been expropriated by the commercial world. Who’s ever heard of Presbyterian laundry detergent? Well, with the exception of hospitals and caregiving institutions, which are happy to take the name of a denomination, religion is hardly a trusted commodity these days in these parts. The Quakers do have a symbol—two superimposed, four-pointed stars. Metrics, however, are based on search frequencies, I suspect. As far as religious denominations go, the Society of Friends isn’t massive. Far more people search for Quaker Oats than the actual religion whose name the company borrowed. Such is life in these United States—the ultimate corporate venture. Now a wholly owned subsidiary of The Trump Organization.