(LifeSiteNews) — It’s common to hear people say that they are against “organized religion.” Such people will often also claim to be “spiritual, but not religious.”  

We looked at this latter idea in a previous piece. We saw that “religion” simply means “all our relations and duties towards God”; and as such, religion is a fact of life, obligatory on each and every man. Those who think that the whole of these duties is fulfilled in nothing more than a simple trust in God are still engaged in religion.  

For this reason, the idea of being “spiritual, but not religious” is nothing more than a misunderstanding of what religion is; and rhetorical arguments that set up an opposition between “religion” and “following Christ” are misleading and unhelpful.  

But after having established this, along with the merely natural rationale for religion (leading to what is known as “natural religion”), as well as why religion is obligatory and also beneficial for every person, family and state, we are still left with a key question:  

What exactly should real religion be like, in order to be worthy of the name? Should it be organized, external and communal to some degree – or should it be solely spontaneous, internal and personal?  

Should it consist of a great number of rules and regulations, along with a highly specific set of truths to be believed, and with some sort of external expression and worship – or should it be as simple as possible?   

And if worship is the appropriate expression of the duties of religion, does it matter how God is worshipped? 

The answers to these question can be found in man’s own nature. Man is a “rational animal” – a physical creature, with an intellect and will.  

This intellect is made to attain the truth, and the will to attain the good. We were made to know the truth, to love the good, and so to attain happiness.  

As we shall now see, each of these aspects of human nature determine the nature of the duties of religion.   

The intellectual and moral duties of religion 

We previously saw that natural reason alone tells us that God is the infinitely highest being, the self-existent creator, and worthy of the highest and most perfect worship possible.  

Our first duty to God – i.e., the first act of religion – is to accept these propositions about him, along with whatever other conclusions that flow from this.  

But we cannot assent to such propositions without knowing what they are.   

The movement known as “modernism” says that the propositions to which we must assent arise from some sort of internal “religious sense” – which is at least an implicit denial of an objective basis of these truths, as well as the possibility of reason or God himself providing us with these truths. This, they say, is the cause of the diversity of religious ideas in the world, but as this “religious sense” is what directs us to God, all of these religions are paths to God too.  

But as has already been discussed, this is false and impossible. Our minds cannot legitimately assent to anything except the truth – this theory denies this. Further, natural religion really is based on truths about God, knowable through natural reason – and known with certainty.  

As material creatures, our external behaviour should be in conformity with our interior state. A fundamental discrepancy between the two is simply hypocrisy, from which we all naturally shrink. For this reason, human nature requires us to acknowledge the truths about God in some sort of external way.  

However, in addition to the intellect’s obligation to assent to truth, man’s will is obliged to adhere to the good. This has two consequences:  

• First, it means that our will must adhere to God, recognizing him as the highest and most perfect good; which is to say, we must love God more than we love anything else in the world, and that we must manifest this love in whatever external ways are required. 

• Second, it means that our will must adhere to what God wants us to do in our practical conduct; which is to say that we must act in accordance with God’s law, choosing what is morally good, and avoiding what is morally bad. 

As we previously discussed, “the natural law,” knowable through reason, “is a participation in us of [God’s] eternal law.”^[1] St. Thomas Aquinas continues: 

The light of natural reason, whereby we discern what is good and what is evil, which is the function of the natural law, is nothing else than an imprint on us of the Divine light.^[2] 

But our will cannot adhere to what is right and avoid what is wrong unless we first know what is right and wrong. This means that religion requires our intellect to assent not just to propositions about God himself, but also about his moral law.  

The objectivity of these duties  

Many men have neither the time, ability nor will to work their way to truths about God or the moral law through natural reason. Would it not therefore be unreasonable to say that all men have an obligation to assent to such propositions and to put them into practice? 

It is not unreasonable. Some men can and some men have attained such knowledge of God and his moral law. These are the great philosophers of history, particularly Aristotle, whom Dante called “the master of those who know.” 

These philosophers, and natural reason itself, show us that God exists; that he is a person and is one; and that he is immaterial, perfect, all-powerful, all-good and all-loving. These attributes, known through natural reason, come with an obligation in justice to render him the honor, obedience, love and gratitude previously discussed. 

However, this situation – in which most men lack the time, ability or will to attain the necessary truths and certainty – is one of the chief reasons why religion must be organized and traditional, in that it involves the careful passing on (tradition) of the objective truths which are known about God.  

Nor is there anything surprising about this: any important body of knowledge (be it mathematics, electronics, medicine, logic, music, or anything else) is organized and passed down in this way.  

We might be alarmed if a brain surgeon said that in his operations, he believed in spontaneity animated by personal sentiment, and that he was opposed to the stifling influence of tradition and organized medicine. The same goes for a policeman or judge who is against “organized law.” The alternative is not freedom, but tyranny and chaos.  

What all this demonstrates is that the duties of religion include an intellectual assent to a certain number of propositions about God and the moral law.  

This is just another way of saying that religion entails some sort of obligatory and objective creed or doctrine to be believed and professed as well as to a code or discipline of life to be practiced. 

Further, we are intrinsically social animals. Each individual, family and society depends on God, and therefore also have a duty to submit to this objective doctrine and code. 

But it is impossible to have an obligatory or objective creed and code without some level of external organization of the matter. It would be absurd and unfair for man to be obliged in this way without it.  

Therefore, the objective intellectual and moral duties owed to God mean that any form of true religion will necessarily be organized.  

The ‘cultic’ (ceremonial) duties of religion 

God’s infinite majesty means that there is a disparity or “debt” of this love and worship which cannot be bridged by any natural efforts of our own.  

(We could mention in passing that man’s constant offenses against God and the moral order which he has established add a further “unpayable debt” to our accounts. If we are naturally unable to ever fully discharge our duties to God, still more are we able to repair the injustice which we do to his infinite majesty.) 

Nonetheless, we are each obliged to try to give God what he is owed in justice. This “unpayable debt” is why the virtue of religion is related to the virtue of piety, namely the unpayable duties we owe to our parents and our nation. 

God does not need our external or internal worship, nor does he benefit from worship per se. He has no need for our prostrations or songs, or anything else – such worship only pertains to his extrinsic glory – but we are not thereby excused from this obligation.   

All this means that God has a right to everything we have and are, and that our worship consists in giving this to him – at least symbolized in giving him the best of this “everything.” We must acknowledge his greatness and authority, and stimulate our internal acts of love for him. 

But because we are rational animals, (i.e., bodily creatures), God also has a right to the worship of our bodies. Our whole selves are dependent on God, and so our whole selves need to be involved in his worship. This necessarily means that we are obliged to offer God exterior worship. 

Our animal nature requires us to make use of physical, material and visible signs in nearly every aspect of life. For this reason, St. Thomas says:     

[I]t is a dictate of natural reason that man should use certain sensibles, by offering them to God in sign of the subjection and honor due to Him, like those who make certain offerings to their lord in recognition of his authority.^[3]  

However, using physical means is not just a duty – it is also very beneficial for us: external worship is necessary to keep our ability to offer internal worship alive. This is why St. Thomas says that we must use material things to offer external worship, because “the human mind, if it is to be joined to God, needs the helping hand of the senses.”^[4]   

External means are also necessary to ensure that our interior acts are worthy of God, and as perfect as they can be. Merely interior worship would be weaker and feebler without the aid of external acts of worship.  

Worship is also communal 

We are obliged to worship God not only as individuals, but as members of families and of society. This communal worship is obligatory because families and societies are as dependent on God’s sustaining power as any individual.  

But this is not all. As mentioned, each individual, family and society also depend on God. This means: 

• That society itself as a whole has a duty to offer communal worship to God, acknowledging him and professing its dependence on him

• That each individual and family has an obligation to take part in such communal worship as well 

The natural law does not show us exactly what actions must take place in worship. St. Thomas says that, while the natural law does require man to manifest his reverence for God, the particular ceremonial acts are to be determined by human or divine law. 

Nonetheless, certain expressions are definitely necessary. These expressions include: 

• Adoration (recognising God as the greatest good, and subjecting ourselves to him and his providence, and loving him accordingly) 

• Contrition (sorrow for offences and failures against him) 

• Thanksgiving (for all his gifts) 

• Supplication (or petition, asking for further help) 

As previously discussed, these acts of religion are supremely symbolized in sacrifice – the offering of something to God to express his supreme power over all creation, and our dependence upon him.^[5] 

These kinds of communal acts must be in conformity with the true, objective knowledge of God already discussed – which requires some form of organization. It would be absurd to think that every individual, family and society is obliged to engage in public, communal worship on the basis of – as the modernists would say – a blind sentiment of religion bubbling up from within each person. 

After all, such a sentiment could direct us to worship God as the author of evil and sin; or as raw, irrational power; or as a finite “god” like Zeus – all of which would be blasphemous.  

On the contrary, true worship must be an expression of the known truths about God, our relations to him and the duties which we owe him – which can only be known to most men through some form of traditional and organized religion. 

For similar reasons, external and communal worship cannot be based on such blind sentiments, or on the emotions of the worshiper. The emotions, while very good in themselves, are secondary: unless they are guided by reason and objectivity, they can destroy religion in various ways.  

Overall, as communal worship is necessarily external by its very nature, and must be based on the objective truth about God, it would be impossible if it were not organized to some degree.   

Therefore, as with the intellectual and moral duties discussed above, the cultic or ceremonial duties which man, families and society owe to God mean that any form of true religion will necessarily be organized.  

Conclusion: Organized and revealed religion 

We have seen that religion is based on an objective knowledge of God, moral duties, and how he must be worshiped. It follows that the only good, legitimate or obligatory form of religion will be one which teaches the truth about these matters, and rightly orders our actions towards God.   

The foundation of all religion is reality, the reality about God. But reality is one: there is one set of objective truths to which we must assent, from which the other duties of religion flow. Therefore, there can fundamentally be only one form of true natural religion, even if subject to different interpretations and emphases.   

But here we have a problem. The idea of a true organized natural religion is an abstraction: the evidently imperfect situation of man leaves us liable to falling into error and confusion, and to many different ways of perverting the duties of religion. We cannot point to a single example in which man has been able to maintain an organized form of natural religion without falling into some form of superstition or perversion.  

A further problem is this: true religion is that which teaches the truth and commands what is right. But how is the average person – on whom the duty lies – to know what is true or what is right, unless he is taught and commanded?  

Abstracting from what we already know to be the case regarding the religion of Jesus Christ, these two factors would be powerful reasons for thinking that God, an all-good God, would himself offer us a revealed religion, along with some means of preserving its body of truths, actions and worship from falling into error.  

In such an abstraction, the revealed religion might contain truths within the reach of natural reason per se, and thus make them available to those unable to reach these truths themselves. It may also contain truths which are above the reach of natural reason. 

Such a revelation, in order to attain the purpose of making religion available to all men, would need to be attested by signs of its authenticity (e.g., miracles or prophecies) independent of truth of the revealed religion’s doctrine, morals and worship. Only this would allow both the learned and unlearned to be certain of its divine origin. This is, of course, what God has done through the work of Jesus Christ and his Church. 

Thse difficulties are also circumstantial evidence for there having been a “primitive revelation” – namely, of truths (natural and supernatural) revealed at the beginning by God, which had been handed down ever since. This primitive revelation has been distorted in various ways, especially through the creation of idols and the loss of these truths.   

In fact, this – and not the diversity of peoples and their blind religious sentiments – is what explains the diversity of religions, and why they are not all paths to God.  

But whether there was a primitive revelation, or a subsequent and definitive revelation, it is certain that the objective nature of the duties of man means that the true religion must necessarily be external and therefore organized.  

For these reasons, objections against “organized religion” fail. One also cannot help but wonder whether those who make this objection would prefer “disorganized religion.” 

In any case, the question is not whether organized religion is good or bad. Religion is necessarily organized. 

Instead, we might ask the question: “How organized should religion be?”  

And the answer to that question is: “As organized as God wants it.” The objective nature of the duties of religion mean we are obliged to seek and to find the true religion, and to embrace it, whether its degree of organization is to our taste or not.