Religious shunning

[Fervent]

Religious shunning is not equivocal with broader social sanctions on bad behavior. I know about anthropology and have studied Asian societies. Shunning people because of their religious creed is not normative in any developed nation, whether they are individualistic or not. In Japan, nobody really cares if you are a Christian. They care if you cause problems for other people. The idea of cutting off longstanding relationships because of religious creeds is the stuff of cults, even in a group-oriented society like Japan.

There's generally a range of tolerance, and highlighting a nation or nations with low religiosity regarding their tolerance of religious pluralism doesn't speak much to the issue. Shunning is generally done over values that are held in high regard, and group-oriented cultures will shun over deviation from socially acceptable beliefs ranging from a variety of views. If a culture holds religion in high esteem and has high group orientation, religious shunning would be expected. Committed Christians are going to have high religiosity, so the legitimacy of shunning is going to come down to individualist ethics vs valuing conformity.

 

[FireDragon76]

There's generally a range of tolerance, and highlighting a nation or nations with low religiosity regarding their tolerance of religious pluralism doesn't speak much to the issue.

Japan isn't "irreligious" in that sense. Participation in religious festivals and religious rites are relatively high in Japan. The difference is that up until the 19th century, Japanese had no word that meant what we mean by "religion". That word had to be coined to describe the western concept of religion, shukyo, and it is clinical and technical sounding to the average Japanese person, and can have negative connotations.

 

[RileyG]

Does your denomination not practice excommunication anymore?

Not the same thing.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Religious shunning is not equivocal with broader social sanctions on bad behavior. I know about anthropology and have studied Asian societies. Shunning people because of their religious creed is not normative in any developed nation, whether they are individualistic or not. In Japan, nobody really cares if you are a Christian. They care if you cause problems for other people. The idea of cutting off longstanding relationships because of religious creeds is the stuff of cults, even in a group-oriented society like Japan.

I don't know if you consider China to be a developed nation. In China, shunning is both a cultural and a political force. If a religious person, whether Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Daoist, or Confucianist to name but five distinct groups, does not cooperate with the Department of Religious Affairs, there are very serious repercussions, not the least of which is shunning by the broader society. China is also extremely racist with a highly nuanced societal gradation according to the lightness of one's skin. It is also heavily divided according to one's origins. I have a wonderful Chinese Christian friend who happened to grow up in a small city of less than a million people. He married a Chinese Christian lady from a major city and he spent years in the marriage during which she and her mother openly despised him for his village origins. They are still married, by the way.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Not the same thing.

Excommunication - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The word excommunication means putting a specific individual or group out of communion. In some denominations, excommunication includes spiritual condemnation of the member or group. Excommunication may involve banishment, shunning, and shaming, depending on the group, the offense that caused excommunication, or the rules or norms of the religious community. The grave act is often revoked in response to manifest repentance.

 

[RileyG]

Excommunication - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The word excommunication means putting a specific individual or group out of communion. In some denominations, excommunication includes spiritual condemnation of the member or group. Excommunication may involve banishment, shunning, and shaming, depending on the group, the offense that caused excommunication, or the rules or norms of the religious community. The grave act is often revoked in response to manifest repentance.

In the RCC it means they are no longer in Communion with the Church and cannot receive Sacraments because of some major rule violation (e.g. attacking the Pope, women being ordained, desecrating the Eucharist etc). They are not "shunned" in the traditional sense. They are welcome back once they repent.

 

[FireDragon76]

I don't know if you consider China to be a developed nation. In China, shunning is both a cultural and a political force. If a religious person, whether Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Daoist, or Confucianist to name but five distinct groups, does not cooperate with the Department of Religious Affairs, there are very serious repercussions, not the least of which is shunning by the broader society.

One fear in China is of religious cults, because China has a real history of extremist groups overthrowing the government in the name of religion, or of foreign powers using religion to weaken and divide Chinese society. It has little to do with personal prejudice against Christianity as a mere notion or private belief (indeed, the founder of the Chinese republic, Sun Yat Sen, was a Christian, but he was opposed to the interference of foreign religious bodies in China, which is one reason China expelled missionaries).

 

[Fervent]

Japan isn't "irreligious" in that sense. Participation in religious festivals and religious rites are relatively high in Japan. The difference is that up until the 19th century, Japanese had no word that meant what we mean by "religion". That word had to be coined to describe the western concept of religion, shukyo, and it is clinical and technical sounding to the average Japanese person, and can have negative connotations.

That's certainly interesting, but I'm not sure how it's supposed to bolster your argument or refute mine. Rituals and festivals are certainly a part of religosity, but for shunning to occur over doctrinal disputes would require a high value on systematic theology which your statement seems to indicate is basically unheard of in Japanese religions. The question ultimately comes down to whether or not any sanction is appropriate for religious differences, and that answer seems to come down to the priority placed on such religious doctrines. Historically death has been the primary punishment rather than shunning within guilt cultures, which has been the dominant thread in Western church history.

 

[RileyG]

Japan isn't "irreligious" in that sense. Participation in religious festivals and religious rites are relatively high in Japan. The difference is that up until the 19th century, Japanese had no word that meant what we mean by "religion". That word had to be coined to describe the western concept of religion, shukyo, and it is clinical and technical sounding to the average Japanese person, and can have negative connotations.

Not to go off topic, but it is my understanding that most Japanese practice both Shintoism and Buddhism. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. (?)

 

[Fervent]

One fear in China is of religious cults, because China has a real history of extremist groups overthrowing the government in the name of religion, or of foreign powers using religion to weaken and divide Chinese society. It has little to do with personal prejudice against Christianity as a mere notion or private belief (indeed, the founder of the Chinese republic, Sun Yat Sen, was a Christian, but he was opposed to the interference of foreign religious bodies in China, which is one reason China expelled missionaries).

Your contention about "private belief" is exactly where the cultural notions come in...Christianity is not a private faith or conviction, but a communal one so there is no such thing as "private belief" properly. The communal aspect is what makes shunning a possible tool in some cases to curb polluting the body politic. The question ultimately comes down to whether or not religious sanction in general is appropriate, and if what we believe matters and we are to contend for the faith then they must be.

 

[FireDragon76]

Not to go off topic, but it is my understanding that most Japanese practice both Shintoism and Buddhism. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. (?)

That's true. People don't even think of it as "belonging to a religion" in the usual sense. The concept of shukyo has a clinical, technical, and sometimes negative connotation (especially after the Tokyo sarin gas attacks).

There's little about Shinto that has a dogmatic creed. You can be a skeptic, for instance, and practice Shinto. Some people that practice Shinto interpret their religion non-literally, similar to liberal Protestantism. Shinto isn't also necessarily "polytheistic", like Hinduism there a wide variety of interpretations and schools of thought.

In the US, Japanese-Americans tend to identify more personally with their religion, and usually it's Buddhism or Shinto, but not both, due to acculturation to a religiously self-identifying society, and the needs of an immigrant community. Buddhism is more common, but there are also Shinto sects in the US, especially in Hawaii.

 

[FireDragon76]

Your contention about "private belief" is exactly where the cultural notions come in...Christianity is not a private faith or conviction, but a communal one so there is no such thing as "private belief" properly. The communal aspect is what makes shunning a possible tool in some cases to curb polluting the body politic. The question ultimately comes down to whether or not religious sanction in general is appropriate, and if what we believe matters and we are to contend for the faith then they must be.

I believe the cuelty of shunning generally contradicts Jesus' ethics. For instance, what @Xeno.of.athens describes sounds positively cruel, and I can't see Jesus requiring that. Jesus ate with all kinds of people, even many no doubt that didn't agree with him or doubted him.

 

[FireDragon76]

That's certainly interesting, but I'm not sure how it's supposed to bolster your argument or refute mine. Rituals and festivals are certainly a part of religosity, but for shunning to occur over doctrinal disputes would require a high value on systematic theology which your statement seems to indicate is basically unheard of in Japanese religions. The question ultimately comes down to whether or not any sanction is appropriate for religious differences, and that answer seems to come down to the priority placed on such religious doctrines. Historically death has been the primary punishment rather than shunning within guilt cultures, which has been the dominant thread in Western church history.

Oh yeah, I don't agree with that, either... definitely. The widespread use of state murder to punish religious dissent is an ugly stain on Christianity.

One of my favorite Reformed Christian figures was Sebastian Castellio. He was a friend of Calvin, and a Reformed pastor. When there was a plague in Geneva one year, only he and Calvin remained tending to the sick, everyone else fled. Eventually, he grew weary of Calvin's increasingly vindictive behavior, though, and he denounced the killing of Michael Servetus. He believed murdering somebody for not agreeing with their religion was wrong, and he believed we had a general duty to love everyone, to live in peace as much as possible, even with people that do not agree with our religion. In this way, he was merely echoing St. Martin of Tours, an early Christian bishop who also opposed the killing of heretics.

BTW, Japan has always had execution as a punishment, and still has capital punishment (though it is rarely used). Most Asian nations do. Social shaming and physical punishment aren't mutually exclusive. Most Japanese people value polite and respecful behavior to a high degree, so their crime rates are alot lower than in western countries. This isn't merely due to the influence of legalism and social sanctions, but also due to Confucian and Buddhist values and aesthetics than inspire people. Just like it would be inaccurate to characterize Christianity as being all about hellfire and brimstone, East Asian societies aren't merely driven by social shaming, but also a vision of an ideal society based on harmony, respect, and care. Great Unity - Wikipedia

 

[Fervent]

Oh yeah, I don't agree with that, either... definitely. The widespread use of state murder to punish religious dissent is an ugly stain on Christianity.

One of my favorite Reformed Christian figures was Sebastian Castellio. He was a friend of Calvin, and a Reformed pastor. When there was a plague in Geneva one year, only he and Calvin remained tending to the sick, everyone else fled. Eventually, he grew weary of Calvin's increasingly vindictive behavior, though, and he denounced the killing of Michael Servetus. He believed murdering somebody for not agreeing with their religion was wrong, and he believed we had a general duty to love everyone, to live in peace as much as possible, even with people that do not agree with our religion. In this way, he was merely echoing St. Martin of Tours, an early Christian bishop who also opposed the killing of heretics.

BTW, Japan has always had execution as a punishment, and still has capital punishment (though it is rarely used). Most Asian nations do. Social shaming and physical punishment aren't mutually exclusive.

I think that's getting a bit far afield from the question at hand, or rather seems to indicate a broader disagreement than simply shunning to a general opposition of religious sanctioning or communal control. Let's not forget that Jesus is the one who gave the Mosaic law that called for the killing of those who try to entice them to go after other gods without mercy.

BTW it's not that I was saying they are mutually exclusive, but that the primary tool for social engineering in group-oriented cultures is shame and shunning and it is a bit of an aberation in individualistic cultures that focus on guilt and punishment so appears far more extreme than it is because it must take extreme forms to have any effect.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think that's getting a bit far afield from the question at hand, or rather seems to indicate a broader disagreement than simply shunning to a general opposition of religious sanctioning or communal control. Let's not forget that Jesus is the one who gave the Mosaic law that called for the killing of those who try to entice them to go after other gods without mercy.

As a mainline Protestant, I simply don't think of Jesus primarily in those terms. Jesus often critiqued how the Mosaic law was used.

BTW it's not that I was saying they are mutually exclusive, but that the primary tool for social engineering in group-oriented cultures is shame and shunning and it is a bit of an aberation in individualistic cultures that focus on guilt and punishment so appears far more extreme than it is because it must take extreme forms to have any effect.

I disagree. Visions of a better world play a role in many religions, going back as far as Zoroaster, the Hebrew prophets, and Confucius. Reducing religion to punishment, prohibitions and sanctions misses the role that more positive, life affirming values share in forming societies.

 

[bbbbbbb]

One fear in China is of religious cults, because China has a real history of extremist groups overthrowing the government in the name of religion, or of foreign powers using religion to weaken and divide Chinese society. It has little to do with personal prejudice against Christianity as a mere notion or private belief (indeed, the founder of the Chinese republic, Sun Yat Sen, was a Christian, but he was opposed to the interference of foreign religious bodies in China, which is one reason China expelled missionaries).

The Peoples Republic of China has no particular grudge against any religion or cult - as long as it is recognized by and complies with the Department of Religious Affairs. Many professing Christians actively engage within the two government denominations - one being Catholic and the other non-Catholic (which, curiously also includes Orthodox). I was quite startled on one of my train trips when the train pulled into a sizable city (although hardly large) where I spotted a full-sized replica of St. Basil's Cathedral in the central area of the city.

For members of religions (hardly limited to Christians) who do not participate with the Department of Religious Affairs, there can be severe consequences as we have witnessed with the government's treatment of the Muslim Uyghurs. Prior to the current problem, the province of Xinjiang actually funded air travel for Muslim pilgrims to Mecca.

The Communist Party of China has an official stance of atheism and tolerates what it considers to be superstitions in the belief that they will disappear when citizens are properly educated. This includes the prohibition of parents speaking to their children (or any person under the age of 18) about religion. This prohibition is still actively enforced in all areas of China except Hong Kong, which is undergoing much turmoil, as we all know.

 

[Fervent]

As a mainline Protestant, I simply don't think of Jesus primarily in those terms. Jesus often critiqued how the Mosaic law was used.



I disagree. Visions of a better world play a role in many religions, going back as far as Zoroaster, the Hebrew prophets, and Confucius. Reducing religion to punishment, prohibitions and sanctions misses the role that more positive, life affirming values share in forming societies.

You don't think of Jesus as being the same God as the one who gave the law of Moses? I'm not talking about interpretations, but direct statements in the Torah. And let's not pretend Jesus was anti-death penalty since he quoted positively laws about putting children to death for cursing their parents, among other statements clearly affirming Mosaic penalties.

A better world, certainly. But part of that better world is through conforming society to godliness which requires some form of sanctioning. Whether that be formal penalties for violating or some form of informal shunning. What it ultimately comes down to is a modern conception that religion is a matter of personal and private conviction rather than an all-encompassing commitment both communally and privately.

 

[FireDragon76]

The Peoples Republic of China has no particular grudge against any religion or cult - as long as it is recognized by and complies with the Department of Religious Affairs. Many professing Christians actively engage within the two government denominations - one being Catholic and the other non-Catholic (which, curiously also includes Orthodox). I was quite startled on one of my train trips when the train pulled into a sizable city (although hardly large) where I spotted a full-sized replica of St. Basil's Cathedral in the central area of the city.

For members of religions (hardly limited to Christians) who do not participate with the Department of Religious Affairs, there can be severe consequences as we have witnessed with the government's treatment of the Muslim Uyghurs. Prior to the current problem, the province of Xinjiang actually funded air travel for Muslim pilgrims to Mecca.

The Communist Party of China has an official stance of atheism and tolerates what it considers to be superstitions in the belief that they will disappear when citizens are properly educated. This includes the prohibition of parents speaking to their children (or any person under the age of 18) about religion. This prohibition is still actively enforced in all areas of China except Hong Kong, which is undergoing much turmoil, as we all know.

While China is officially atheistic, in practice it isn't, at least if that means no religion. Lots of European societies also have elites that believe religion will one day disappear, too. A country like Germany doesn't recognize many religions as actually being religions (like Scientology), but considers them scams or cults. It's hardly different except a question of criteria, perhaps.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Not to go off topic, but it is my understanding that most Japanese practice both Shintoism and Buddhism. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong. (?)

There is no firmly-established theological system in Japan. Shintoism, which is a default religion which deified the emperor, took a major hit when Japan lost face in World War II and surrendered to the United States, thereby admitting that the emperor was not actually divine. Curiously, the educational system in Japan has worked overtime to teach their version of the War which defines Japan as the helpless victim of American aggression which had orchestrated the attack on Pearl Harbor.

Buddhism is not a native religion in Japan but originated in India and found its way to Japan via China. The Japanese developed Buddhism in their own particular way, commonly known as Zen.

Neither Shintoism or Buddhism makes exclusive claims to truth, such that many people can visit both sorts of temples and engage in rituals in them without any reservations. This is also true of Daoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism in China. In Japan, as in China, there is a very strong adulation of all things American, including Christianity. It is now extremely popular in Japan to have one's wedding on one day at a Shinto temple and on another day at a Christian chapel attached to a luxury hotel. The chapels are excellent renditions of Modern American Protestant churches. The Christian services performed are not by an actual Christian pastor, but a paid employee of the hotel who goes through the typical wedding ritual one will find in most American church weddings. If one was not aware of this situation, one would conclude that all involved are believing Christians.

 

[FireDragon76]

You don't think of Jesus as being the same God as the one who gave the law of Moses? I'm not talking about interpretations, but direct statements in the Torah

I don't interpret Jesus as God in a human skin suit, no. I don't even think of divinity in those terms. I don't pretend to understand the mystery of the Incarnation, but I don't believe that Jesus literally handed Moses the Ten Commandments.

Keep in mind I am a mainline Protestant and I attend a relatively liberal church, the UCC, that has a wide latitude in beliefs.

. And let's not pretend Jesus was anti-death penalty since he quoted positively laws about putting children to death for cursing their parents, among other statements clearly affirming Mosaic penalties.

I don't recall that. At the very least, I don't remember him approving that specific punishment. If anything, he always sought ways to abrogate Mosaic law if it meant having to kill people.

BTW, what makes you think I am opposed to the death penalty in the abstract? I never said I was. I just don't believe it's right to execute people for their religious beliefs.

A better world, certainly. But part of that better world is through conforming society to godliness which requires some form of sanctioning. Whether that be formal penalties for violating or some form of informal shunning. What it ultimately comes down to is a modern conception that religion is a matter of personal and private conviction rather than an all-encompassing commitment both communally and privately.

Sinful people aren't very good at applying social sanctions about such matters. It is a recipe for hypocrisy. Perhaps we should let God judge some things, and work out our own salvation.