You are hereBlogs / defaithed's blog / John Cleese on religion
John Cleese on religion
Fabled comedian/actor/writer John Cleese, is well-known for Monty Python works that include The Holy Grail and The Life of Brian. In an interview, he has this to say about religion. (Note: AVC is A.V. Club, not Atheist Vs Christian.)
AVC: Religious traditions as a whole are constantly revised, yet you kind of have to hold onto the fiction that there's an objective truth that stands the test of time.
JC: Here's what I think in a single sentence: I think that the real religion is about the understanding that if we can only still our egos for a few seconds, we might have a chance of experiencing something that is divine in nature. But in order to do that, we have to slice away at our egos and try to get them down to a manageable size, and then still work some practiced light meditation. So real religion is about reducing our egos, whereas all the churches are interested in is egotistical activities, like getting as many members and raising as much money and becoming as important and high-profile and influential as possible. All of which are egotistical attitudes. So how can you have an egotistical organization trying to teach a non-egotistical ideal? It makes no sense, unless you regard religion as crowd control. What I think most organized religion—simply crowd control.
Nice. It touches upon what religion could be (and maybe already is for some): a celebration of the amazing natural world, a pursuit of the resulting feelings of inspiration and awe. (And, I'll add, if those feelings stem from sources neurological rather than supernatural, then so be it!)
That's why I avoid a blanket attack against all religion, preferring to, like Mr Cleese here, disdain dangerous organized religion. What's bad about organized religion, to me, is not organization itself – we like organization in most things, right? – but rather the fact that all known organized religions require and exhort faith (belief not based upon evidence). If the "real religion" that Mr Cleese espouses can offer some good while carrying no requirement of faith, then that'd be a religion worth looking into.
It's interesting that the entertainer JC gets this while the other JC doesn't.
IF by the other JC you were refferin to Jesus Christ, then obviouslyyou have no understanding of the bible, scripture or history. Jesus was not intereted in Crowd control and did not start a church. Rather he lectured about the human condition and the need for love.Don't mistake organized religion for Jesus' teaching or you end up looking ridiculous in the process
You're (in part) agreeing with what I said. A wise man saying wise things about the human condition and love? Sounds great! The self-interested power structures of organized religion? Not great. Agreed, right?
Where we might disagree: I'd say that the Jesus of the Bible falls short of that "wise man" ideal. "Believe in ME. Salvation is through ME. Worship MY father (who is me... in a way... it's complicated.) Do these things or go to Hell. Literally. Oh, and slaves: No, I'm not going to condemn slavery. Be good pieces of property and obey your masters."
(All according to Christians, anyway. Who knows what the real Jesus actually said. If he existed.)
Bleah. Sure, there's some good, human common sense and wisdom in the alleged words of Jesus. And if he truly avoided the trappings of organized religion and its pursuit of power, I commend him on that too. But there are some warts in his words too, and nothing in the whole that suggests superhuman wisdom, inspiration, or perfection.
Overall, I much prefer the Monty Python JC's image of religion to the Nazareth JC's! (I'll happily bet a thousand pounds that Mr Cleese would condemn slavery, and the idea of roasting people in Hell, without hesitation.)
Anyway, thanks for the input. Your reminder that organized religion can be separated from specific individual teaching(s) is both correct and welcome.
Post new comment