RE: Modern Excommunication

The prevalence of those who claim to believe, but who know almost nothing about the claimed religion is a little scary.

I find it amusing that they brought it on themselves.

Well, in a nutshell, you've outlined the thesis of Prothero's book.

He proposes that it be remedied by introducing two religion-related classes to the public high school curriculum.

First, a "Bible 101" course in which the students read all of Genesis, Mark, and one of the Pauline epistles, with the primary goal of familiarizing the students with the book itself: key phrases, stories, and characters.

Second, a "World Religion 101" course in which the students encounter a wider range of world scripture - "the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita, ... how the Jain ideal of ahimsa inspired Ghandi's program of non-violent direct action, how the Protestant Reformation changed the face of Europe, and what the US Supreme Court has said about the religious rights of Native Americans."

The course would cover the seven major religious traditions: Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, studying the founders, reading portions of the scriptures, and understanding the role of the scriptures in context.

The greater emphasis is placed on the Bible and Christianity because, as religions go, Christianity has had far and away the most significant effect on US history and culture. It's not emphasized because Christianity is the majority - both the emphasis and the fact of the Christian majority are rooted in the same cause. So arguments that other religions should be given "equal time" are counter to the whole point of the effort. American students learn lots more American history than British or Chinese history for the same reason.

None of this is unconstitutional - the Supreme Court has ruled that teaching about religion is fine, so long as you don't proselytize. That can be a very fine line, so there'd certainly need to be some kind of training and certification of teachers to prepare them to teach the courses properly.

Now, personally, I think religious "faith" is a social disease, not a goal. I want to see less of it in society, not more. But I also recognize that religion is a very powerful force in the world. Leaving people ignorant of religion is no better than leaving them ignorant of history. It's difficult to even understand history without understanding how religion is involved. I would favor introducing courses like this into the curriculum.

Nor am I particularly concerned that it would cause an upward trend in religious belief. Those who don't believe aren't likely to be converted by exposure to the scriptures. This can really only affect the "ignorant believers" - those who say they believe, but know almost nothing about their religion. Some of them may be led to a more knowledgeable belief, but I have confidence in my fellow Americans - more of them will realize, "Oh. Well, no, of course I don't believe that."

Well, it certainly doesn't help that the various churches have actually said those kinds of things in the past. In the rhetoric of the Protestant Reformation, it wasn't unusual for the Catholics to condemn the Protestants as "atheists" because they didn't venerate the virgin or the saints.

And it doesn't really stop today. People like Michael Bray believe in all of the major elements of Christianity. Theologically, I'm certain he's quite an orthodox Lutheran. That I can tell, he has just one somewhat unorthodox interpretation of those beliefs. He believes that doctors who practice abortion (along with their staff) are committing murder against innocents and that if the law won't protect these innocents, he is ethically bound to do so - to include the murder of practitioners and the bombing of clinics. He's known as the "preacher of the Army of God", an American Christian terrorist organization.

Ask most American Christians - let's forget the ignorant majority, and ask the relatively educated faithful - and they'll explain how this guy "really isn't a Christian".