Isolera inte religionen från politiken « Dagen.se: "Tron är, enligt min uppfattning, inte mycket värd om den är isolerad från tankar och handlingar."
Alf Svensson defends the person who is religious all week and not only during the week-end. He claims it is necessary to avoid such a double nature. He is against a person that has religion as something private. However, religion is not isolated from politics when considering the hospital and the social service. They are governed by politicians and medical professionals these days. However, what is left of religion for the individual and its expressions is more private today. It has to do with faith and not so much by the Congregation. Especially in Sweden where so few attend Church each week. There are other communes and I guess they require etiquette as well. This is probably why there are so many "seekers".
I can't help remembering a recent article in SvD.se where a priest Tysk from Ovansjö says that he feels embarrassed over the attempt of Jan Björklund, the politician, when he did what Alf Svensson does in his article right now, namely defends Christianity's place in the Swedish society. Tysk meant that it is up to the Congregations to teach religion to their members. It is not so important for Björklund's school to furnish this knowledge any more. I think Tysk has a good point. The priest's attitude towards the politician, however, could be discussed.
Svensson says that faith is not much worth if isolated from thoughts and acts. He also cites the Ten Commandments which are also guidance for acts which seems then to be what Svensson believes is important with religion and with faith. He seeks guidance on the path of life. I am more interested in the meaning of life. I, as a person of the faith Religious Humanism, search God via science. I consider myself an insignificant part of Nature, or God, that tries to understand more of the whole. The unknown as revealed by science will continue to enlighten us all. Björklund's school must then handle more of the interrelationships since so few children attend Church and all go to school. Here the critique from 'Humanisterna' is also relevant. Ethics is not solely a Christian affair.
The most relevant aspect of Religious Humanism is that it suggests that the image of God and religion should be set free to evolve with science rather than being so strongly tied down by tradition. Right now I believe religions should be private but in a future not only science and religion will fuse but political science will guide politics more. I have understood that political conservatives have me down as someone preaching "scientism" which apparently has the reputation of collectivism. Probably because of scientific racism of the 1920s to 1940s. It will become clear, however, that science will guide politics more in the future and this means that Religious Humanism will engage also politics. After all, God wants us all to get along together.
In summary, Jesus healed the sick, donated to the poor, helped the orphan and the widow. Today the secular society does all this in addition it furnishes an education and work ethic, even teaches the kids to love each other. What is left of religion currently is more private, no doubt.