I've read snippets of this discussion, so I apologize in advance for not being familiar with what everyone has contributed.
Last Friday, Bill Moyer's program Now, on PBS, aired a panel discussion about religion and politics. It was articulate and thought provoking, with all participants showing respect for differing opinions without yielding their own beliefs. Following the panel discussion, Bill Moyers interviewed author and scholar Paul Woodruff, who has examined the notion of reverence in his book Reverence: Revewing a Forgotten Virtue. I'm still waiting for my copy of the book, but I thought it might be interesting to some to read a very brief excerpt. (My apologies for a bit of copyright infringement, but perhaps Mr. Woodruff wouldn't mind if it leads to others reading his work.) "Reverence begins in a deep understanding of human limitations; from this grows the capacity to be in awe of whatever we believe lies outside our control - God, truth, justice, nature, even death. The capacity for awe, as it grows, brings with it the capacity for respecting fellow human beings, flaws and all." By this definition, which I applaud, much organized religion does not seem to incorporate reverence as a primary element. If it did, religion would not divide humans into "believers" and "infidels." (And, honestly, is respect, nevermind awe, ever accorded an infidel?) The panel discussion's transcript is still on the PBS site (http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/transcript_whosegod.html). My own view is that no one is chosen or special, or holy. That, or everyone is. I like this notion of reverence. It's like a prism that puts my jumble of beliefs into focus. lots of love Anne
