Author's foreword: Below is an excerpt of writing I'd been working on for a few days. If I ever write a book in my lifetime, this would be one of several topics I would choose, either as a stand-alone book or a chapter. With more research, this argument will become more polished, but for now, I humbly present this piece, with hopes of using it in a more prestigious place down the line.
________________________________________________________________
A few weeks ago I bought and read this book ["http://www.amazon.com/Year-Living-Biblically-Literally-Possible/dp/0743291476/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1215441601&sr=8-2"]. I’d seen the online video ["http://www.ted.com/talks/a_j_jacobs_year_of_living_biblically.html"] about this adventure several months before, but I came across it again at a bookstore. I was curious as to other people’s forays into religious/spiritual disciplines, specifically the forays of skeptics. The book itself is quite something. AJ Jacobs ["http://www.ted.com/speakers/a_j_jacobs.html"] spent a year—a little more, actually—studying and living the Bible, obeying every single law with no questions asked (no picking and choosing for this guy!). That meant growing his beard out, wearing only clothes with single linens (it’s sinful to mix fibers), stoning adulterers, praying multiple times each day.
Ultimately, his thoughts at the end of the book on the Bible and “Cafeteria Religion” hit the nail on the head, for the most part. Due to copyright concerns, I will only quote bits and pieces, and try and outline his argument as best as I can.
Argument one: everyone practices cafeteria religion, including fundamentalists. How do we know this? If they didn’t, “they'd kick women out of church for saying hello ("the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak..."--1 Corinthians 14:34) and boot out men for talking about the "Tennessee Titans" ("make no mention of the names of other gods..."--Exodus 23:13)” (AJ Jacobs, The Year of Living Biblically, p. 328). In other words, people would treat each other like crap for the sake of staying true to the Bible. Many of the fundamentalists I have met are quite nice, and treat others around them well. There is no way I see them criticizing their fellow human beings for putting their hand over the heart during the American national anthem, for instance (as this would be an act of worshiping the United States of America).
Also, some self-professed “true Christians” (like Pat Robertson) have a penchant for running their mouth. For in James 3, leaders are encouraged to discipline their words; if they fail, they are judged by God with greater harshness than lay persons: “Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers and sister, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. For all of us make many mistakes. Anyone who makes no mistakes in speaking is perfect, able to keep the whole body in check with a bridle.” (3:1-2) James’ reason for this? “How great a forest is set ablaze by a small fire! And the tongue is a fire. The tongue is placed among our members as a world of iniquity; it stains the whole body, sets on fire the cycle of nature, and is itself set on fire by hell.” In other words, if you read the tabloids about the latest celebrity gossip, even false rumors ruin their lives and the lives of everyone who care about them.
I bring up the last paragraph largely to show that many of these critics pick and choose themselves. They accuse moderate Christians (and their counterparts criticize moderate Jews, and Muslims) of being sinners in this regard, when in fact they too are sinners. Major sinners. Not to mention cafeteria practitioners themselves.
Argument two: practicing cafeteria religion is not only unavoidable, but necessary for true faith. Sounds heretical, right? Let me explain. The concepts of faith and religion have long been based on doctrine, beliefs taught either by God or by humans, interpreted by humans over the centuries, and enforced by humans. The Roman Catholic Church, in all its storied history, had held the distinction for being the sole link between mortals and God. In this arrangement, the Church was the authority, thereby interpreting God’s laws as its human leaders saw fit. After the Reformation shifted a good chunk of the population’s perspective away from the theocratic institution, the Bible became the new source of theological authority. Unlike the RCC, the Bible contained presumed-to-be-unblemished wisdom (at the very least, said wisdom was comparatively unblemished), and allowed commoners to have direct access to God; whereas RCC bishops and cardinals often took passages out of context to support their own personal values, precisely the “cafeteria religion” that many people decry.
However, the Scriptures are just that: scriptures. Without some level of interpretation, the written word is stale, stuck only in the time period in which it was set. It is necessary to look beyond the text that appears, to find a proper transposition of the original meaning of a particular law or value. Morever, for the purpose of having a strong faith in God, one must actually look to him (i.e. outside of the Bible as well as in) to find the Truth. Consider the passage from John 5:39-40: “You search the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that testify on my behalf. Yet you refuse to come to me to have life.”
The thing about the very existence of cafeteria religion is that there are a lot of written holy words in the Bible. A stack of rules, a list of values, a plethora of advice. Jacobs is right: there is only so much we can heap on our plate. He explains, using an actual cafeteria metaphor: “I’ve had some great meals at cafeterias. I've also had some turkey tetrazzini that gave me the dry heaves for sixteen hours. The key is choosing the right dishes” (Jacobs, p. 328). There are a lot of marriage-related laws, and yet there are a lot of single people in the world right now, a group certain to increase in size. Those same people, so long as they remain single, will supposedly never have to worry about violating the commandment on adultery. Vegetarians will never have to worry about eating sacrificial meat. The point is not that these laws are useless and should be ignored. By no means! Rather, those individuals can choose other guidelines (“laws” is so black-and-white) that would fit them better to focus on.
Now, I understand the opponent’s fear. Cafeteria religion can enable people to conform the Bible to their own potentially sinful values. I can hear various people’s justifications towards this end: “Divorce is OK if it’s mutual or amicable.” “I don’t have to give my money to the poor, because the government will tax me anyway.” “It’s OK to watch/play football on Sunday.” “It’s OK to commit adultery if my significant other is fine with it.” “It’s only a bee! If I hadn’t squashed it, it would have stung me.” “It’s only a fetus! If I don’t want the kid I don’t have to have it.” “Jesus wants me to live the American dream and to have a good life! After all, he advocates the capitalistic system. Just look up his parable about the five bags of gold!” “God doesn’t really care about homosexuality.” “Nothing I do matters. So I’ll raise hell while I’m young and convert to Christianity on my deathbed.”
The problem with this attitude is that the individual doesn’t really spend time actually thinking about the bit of Scriptural wisdom that he/she may come across. This is a part of human nature: we find something we like and live by it. So for those who fall in love with “the American dream” will be drawn toward any statement that’s remotely pro-capitalism. Supporters of gay marriage will naturally steer away from any anti-homosexual reference, and toward anything that says God is love. And so on and so forth.
Many people are also afraid to deal with challenge, or differing interpretations of a particular phrase or concept. Many of these same people also grew up with the idea of putting their trust into a doctrine or series of doctrines for their faith. Those who were taught that either their church (or synagogue, or mosque, etc) or a collection of books (that’s what the Bible is, anyway) where the only sources of truth will have issues with new ideas. They will not be curious; rather, they will either run away from them, or attack them, and neither option allows them to grow in their faith.
I know where I am. I am often afraid of challenge and confrontation myself. But I also know that, to grow in faith, I must combat these fears. And it hasn’t been easy. A couple summers ago while I was staying up in Minneapolis looking for work, I listened in on a religious discussion between two friends on opposite sides of the issue of cafeteria religion. At the time I didn’t feel comfortable contributing (partially because I was somewhat biased), but my Biblically-religious friend raised this issue of picking and choosing. That question stuck with me for some time. I didn’t have an answer. I’d like to think, after having spent some time picking apart this topic, that I do have one now. But for me to truly justify following my own cafeteria religion, I still have to do it right. I have to actively practice what I preach, pick my spots when doling out criticism, and above all look to God for guidance. After all, since this is a faith, it’s all about God. Far too many religious people forget that.