A taste:
An atheist is rarely asked to write an essay on “religion’s positive role in society,” but it is fitting that this request came from the Acton Institute. Lord Acton (1834-1902) was a Catholic, a classical liberal, and a great historian who devoted his life to the history of liberty.
Acton always stressed this important truth: No one group or movement, religious or secular, deserves exclusive credit for the theory and evolution of free institutions. All historians should avoid the unpardonable sin of “making history into the proof of their theories.” Instead, the historian should try “to do the best he can for the other side, and to avoid pertinacity or emphasis on his own.”
.... Ironically, Acton’s Catholicism and my atheism give us something in common. In Protestant countries, Catholics and atheists were often lumped together and branded as subversive minorities whose doctrines, if permitted to circulate freely, would jeopardize the core values of a free society.
This “dark myth” was especially popular in seventeenth-century England, where it found adherents even among some of liberalism’s most distinguished founding fathers. John Locke, for example, argued that religious liberty is a “natural right” that should be enjoyed by everyone–except Catholics and atheists. The doctrines of these minorities, Locke believed, are incompatible with the moral foundations of a free society (though for different reasons), so they should be legally suppressed.
Acton attacked this dark myth in two ways. First, he identified minority rights as a defining characteristic of a free society: “The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities.” Second, according to Acton, the history of liberty is inextricably linked to the history of minorities:
Read the rest here.
2 comments:
Jon says, "... Ironically, Acton’s Catholicism and my atheism give us something in common. In Protestant countries, Catholics and atheists were often lumped together and branded as subversive minorities whose doctrines, if permitted to circulate freely, would jeopardize the core values of a free society."
and then you say, "
Acton attacked this dark myth in two ways. First, he identified minority rights as a defining characteristic of a free society: “The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities.” Second, according to Acton, the history of liberty is inextricably linked to the history of minorities:
HOW can you say that these minority positions must be suppressed on one hand, and yet, say that minority rights are the basis of a free society?
Protestantism is the minority right to revolt, resist or question the majority...this is what Luther did. It is what atheist are doind today. So, how come you say that atheist are to be suppressed?
The article illustrated how social evolution occurs. How a minority gains authority and then brings domination upon another minority. This is the history of kingdoms, and political take overs.
The story is set within a religious context and a particular religious one, at that, the Christian Church.
I don't think that Church History is any different than any other political power group, and social behavior.
Spiritualized truth is a claim to a transcendental truth, but not every person believes that the transcendent is of value, or important to affirm.
Both Catholic and atheist see "human value" and social structures as one defining agent in human societies.
Post a Comment