The Fallacies of Religious Clerics by N. Fakhr - HTML preview

Making the Critic’s Questions Seem Sacred and Untouchable

In many cases, clerics treat questioning or doubting religious matters as if it were an insult to sacred beliefs. This method is especially effective when the believers listening to the cleric do not know the details of the debate or what the critic has actually said, which is often the case.

By saying that a certain person or group has “insulted what is sacred,” a cleric can make believers angry with that person without the believers necessarily knowing what the critic actually said or what arguments were presented. Sometimes even reading a critical book or following such a debate may be presented as wrong or forbidden. In more extreme cases, the critic may even face threats to his life. In this way, not only is the critic less likely to be heard, but other people may also become afraid to ask questions, while nonbelievers may become afraid to openly express their doubts or beliefs.

This method has appeared in different religious traditions and societies. When religious authorities also possess political power, social and religious pressure can more easily turn into legal restrictions or official punishment.

Even when clerics do not directly control the government, however, their social influence over believers, together with the considerable financial and institutional power sometimes held by major religious authorities, can give them significant power. Under such conditions, governments may tolerate extreme actions or threats against critics even when they do not fully support them. The various institutions of the Inquisition in Christian Europe, particularly those associated with the Catholic Church, provide historical examples of religious authority being used to restrict and punish certain beliefs and views considered unacceptable.