Stop, Drop, and Reconsider: On the Relation Between Religious Belief and Action

Last updated on: October 5, 2015 at 11:15 am by Kyle Roberts

Stop, Drop, and Reconsider: On the Relation Between Religious Belief and Action 2015-10-05T11:15:13-05:00 Kyle Roberts

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Kathryn Tanner is a first-rate theologian. Her book, The Politics of God: Christian Theologies and Social Justice, is by no means hot-off-the-press (it was published in 1992), but it is still an important resource for exploring the relation between theology and politics.

Tobias Lindman, via Flickr, CC

In the book, she tries to untangle the intricate relationship between religious belief (Christian theological doctrines, ideas, concepts, etc.) and practices and attitudes. The question she explores is whether it is possible to extricate Christian beliefs, or elements of Christian beliefs, in order to determine which beliefs or which elements of beliefs are most productive in the project of progressive politics–or, in less ideological terms–in the pursuit of social justice.

This is a daunting task, as she notes, because Christian beliefs have so often detracted from the pursuit of social justice and have even contributed to the intensity of social injustice so often in the sordid history of Christianity. But this has not always been the case, nor is it always the case in every generation. Christian theological ideas have in fact been a powerful motivator in the work of social justice; among other things, they have spawned creative action, have motivated prophetic critiques of the status quo, and they have provided hope and empowerment for marginalized and suppressed people.

A tricky thing about her project, Tanner admits, is that the very same religious belief can be used in the service of a good end (in the project of social justice) or in the service of a bad end (maintaining an unjust status quo or even perpetuating injustice or inhumane treatment of others).

So, it is not always the particular belief that is the crux of the issue; there are often other factors, other motivators. Nonetheless, Tanner holds that beliefs have a kind of logical priority over actions. Thus, they call for a rigorous examination–either for their possibilities of appropriation, application (i.e. usefulness) or for the need to critically analyze, refine, or dispense with altogether.

Here is how she explains the relationship between belief and action:

This whole account of the logical relations among beliefs, attitudes, and actions highlights the way beliefs about what is the case influence action, either directly or by way of the attitudes that motivate or favor such action. Beliefs have power over actions and attitudes to the extent that such beliefs are necessary in order for those actions and attitudes to make sense. Beliefs have power over actions since beliefs about what is the case are necessary in order for action to appear reasonable, meaningful, practically possible, and motivated.

Because these relations of intelligibility hold, beliefs can promote certain forms of action and attitude–those that make sense given those beliefs. Or beliefs can counterman certain forms of action and attitude, undercutting attitudes by making them appear out of place, bizarrely quixotic, or nonsensical, and undercutting forms of action by making them seem unreasonable, unmotivated, irrelevant, or pointless. In short, a philosophical perspective on the connection between Christian beliefs and comportment [a “happy” alignment of beliefs with corresponding action] shows that it is wrong to account for variations in Christian actions and attitudes by bypassing the influence of Christian beliefs. Christian beliefs have the power to direct the attitudes and behaviors that Christians display (p. 16).

I appreciate her point because, as a theology professor, I am of course observant of the ways that theological convictions impact–or at least have the potential to impact in a variety of ways–attitudes, values, behaviors, and practical actions. This impact could be observed in individuals and in communities or entire societies.

Tanner’s book was published over 30 years ago. Since then, the neurosciences have discovered a great deal about the dominating role of the brain, and in particular the extent that sub-conscious intuitions play in shaping moral behavior and the extent to which such intuitions predict behavior. This does not mean that theology is not involved or that religious beliefs cannot be analyzed as an element of human action.

But it does make me wonder if Tanner would revise or soften (maybe she has?) her emphasis on the theological beliefs as a grounding source for action and attitude, given that so many of our political and social actions are motivated by something other than cognition? The ideas often only serve as confirmation of our intuitive biases. Nonetheless, those ideas are still real; they are still powerful; and it is still possible to stop, drop, and reconsider our religious beliefs in light of their real-world impact–or lack thereof.

Previous Post

October 1, 2015

"We've Become Numb to this"

Next Post

October 6, 2015 California is Now a "Right to Die" State (and That's a Good Thing)

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month December 2020 November 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 December 2018 July 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz