Anne Rice has publicly proclaimed what so many of us have privately held for so long: that the Church and/or Christianity no longer walks the walk it demands of it's followers, if it ever did. I've had much the same discussion with friends and family over the years, with much the same result she has received from the christian religious - a stunned "How can you say you're not a Christian?" My response to that question is simply this. I draw a line between what I believe and what I know. I can believe something that is impossible for me to directly know,or experience, whereas I cannot know something that is impossible for me to experience.Where spirituality is concerned I believe many things to be true. Our existence after death in some form is one of them. Do I know this for sure? Absolutely not, as I am still alive to write this. Treating others the way I wish to be treated, absolutely I believe this. And I know from experience that acting on this belief generally works better than the alternative.
There can be a tremendous difference between belief and knowledge. Believing something to be true and knowing through experience that it is true is one thing . Holding something as true while doing the exact opposite is hypocrisy, and a different matter entirely. Historically, Christianity has preached one thing, love for God and neighbor, while acting in the exact opposite manner. And it continues to do so. This is the crux of Anne's argument. The fact that individuals have sometimes done great and good things in the name of God for their fellow man does not excuse an institution itself for poor behavior.
Is this a secular humanist argument against organized religion? Perhaps, but perhaps not. I would say that it's more a matter of calling a spade a spade.
