Once again my religious nerdiness has me reading a new book by a mainstream author released through an Evangelical publisher. Ross Douthat is a politically conservative New York Times<\/em> columnist who is also a practicing Catholic. Would this be yet another reactionary piece of proselytization<\/a> that subtly (or not-so-subtly) says that any religion that isn\u2019t the author\u2019s is dangerous and\/or evil?<\/p>\n For the most part, no.<\/p>\n Believe<\/em> skips the practical benefits of religion like friendship and community and instead makes an intuitive and experiential case for why being religious (in the commonly-understood meaning of the term) is a more reasonable approach to life than being non-religious. I find most of Douthat\u2019s arguments persuasive.<\/p>\n I should \u2013 I\u2019ve made many of them myself, either here on the blog or in The Path of Paganism<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n And that led me to wonder: since it\u2019s not attempting \u201cproofs\u201d of Christian doctrine and it\u2019s respectful of all religions (though it argues some are better \u2013 or at least, more likely \u2013 than others), who is this book for?<\/p>\n First, let\u2019s look at the case Ross Douthat makes for why we should all believe.<\/p>\n The first chapter \u201cThe Fashioned Universe\u201d is the weakest link in his case. Douthat looks at the orderliness of the universe and concludes \u2013 like many before him including Aristotle, who was a Pagan \u2013 that there must be a Prime Mover. Perhaps there is, but there are other possibilities that are at least as likely. I wrote about this in 2023 in A Pagan Look at the Origins of the Universe<\/a>. Perhaps God (in the sense Douthat understands God) and the universe are one and have always existed. Perhaps there is a Creator God, but they are so far outside the Universe that we can never hope to know them. Or perhaps the origin of the universe is not just beyond our knowledge, but beyond our ability to know.<\/p>\n More troubling, Douthat claims that the universe appears to be designed \u201cfor us\u201d \u2013 that humans are special. Evolution shows that this isn\u2019t the case, while animism tells us that all living beings have mind. It\u2019s not that we\u2019re no better than the animals, it\u2019s that the other animals are conscious beings just like we are. And what of the intelligent life forms that almost certain populate at least a few other planets in this universe that is so large we struggle to imagine it?<\/p>\n Fortunately, Believe <\/em>gets better after that.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Mind and the Cosmos\u201d argues that the essence of who and what we are is more than the product of brain activity. I\u2019m in total agreement.<\/p>\n Douthat says that \u201cwhen intellectuals stopped taking mystical experiences seriously, actual human beings kept on having the experiences.\u201d I\u2019m to the point where it\u2019s easier to accept that magic is real than to keep trying to rationalize it away, plus I\u2019ve had numerous first-hand experiences of Gods and other spirits. And also, the Myth of Disenchantment is not a new thing<\/a>.<\/p>\n He says that \u201cbecoming a religious seeker raises your odds of some kind of mystical experience or communion.\u201d Again, that matches my own experience (both first and second hand), and it matches Dr. Dean Radin\u2019s research<\/a>. I found myself nodding in agreement with most of this section.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Case for Commitment\u201d argues that diligently following any positive religious path is likely to bring tangible results, and also likely to bring you closer to Ultimate Truth even if you can never be sure you understand what that is.<\/p>\n He makes \u201cThe Case for the Big Religions.\u201d As a follower of a rather small religion, I\u2019m uncomfortable with that, but I completely agree that the average person is more likely to find a helpful path and get closer to Ultimate Truth by following in the steps of those who\u2019ve gone before us than by trying to start from a blank slate and figure it all out themselves.<\/p>\n When he points out that individual religious traditions (i.e. \u2013 Christian denominations and their functional equivalents in other religions) have different emphases on \u201cthe ethical, the experiential, and the liturgical\u201d and that those different emphases will speak to different people, he\u2019s absolutely correct. As I\u2019ve mentioned before, I sometimes wonder what would have happened if I had grown up in a more liturgical church instead of the \u201cpreachin\u2019 prayin\u2019 singin\u2019\u201d of the independent fundamentalist Baptists.<\/p>\n I wanted to get angry with him for saying that \u201cthe popular forms of Paganism [are] fundamentally na\u00efve about the kind of terrain they\u2019re encouraging people to navigate.\u201d But while I and many of my co-religionists who\u2019ve been doing this work for years know exactly who and what we\u2019re dealing with<\/a>, I know a lot of Pagans and witches who don\u2019t. So I can\u2019t complain too much.<\/p>\n Douthat addresses three serious objections to orthodox religions and their claims. His treatment of the Problem of Evil<\/a> isn\u2019t bad. But the Problem of Evil simply isn\u2019t an issue in polytheism, with its many Gods of limited power and scope. It\u2019s a major concern in monotheism, and no one \u2013 including Douthat \u2013 has ever answered it satisfactorily.<\/p>\n His answer to why religious institutions do so many wicked things is adequate, but it overlooks the simplest explanation: because religious institutions are human institutions and even the best humans have the capacity for great evil.<\/p>\n His answer to \u201cwhy are traditional religions so hung up on sex?\u201d ignores the biological and social needs of the times when the traditional religions were founded \u2013 needs that are very different in our time of overflowing population and modern medicine. But he\u2019s correct that sex is dangerous: it presents serious risks of unwanted pregnancy, disease, and heartbreak. The answer is education and consent<\/a>, not abstinence, control, and forcing people into sex and gender roles that don\u2019t fit them.<\/p>\n I struggled with this question from the first page: who is Douthat trying to convince?<\/p>\n It\u2019s not atheists. His arguments aren\u2019t likely to persuade the hardcore anti-theists, and in any case New Atheism is in decline. It\u2019s not Christians who are leaving the Church because of hateful and exclusionary politics \u2013 the book really doesn\u2019t address that problem. And while he argues that New Agers and other DIY religionists should pick something and dive into it deeply, most of them don\u2019t have a problem with the basic supernatural premises of Believe<\/em>.<\/p>\n On the day the book was launched, Douthat posted a Twitter thread<\/a> that explained his approach:<\/p>\n I think now more than ever the Christian writer needs, if not a theory that justifies *all* the \u201cdifferent religious experiences\u201d in the world, at least a theory that puts religion as a general phenomenon in some kind of coherent relationship to Christian faith.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n And also<\/p>\n I think you\u2019re just clearing away some impediments specific to our culture \u2013 both the sense that religious belief is irrational and the sense that a successful religious quest is impossible \u2013 so that people can make progress toward the Truth.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Douthat is trying to keep people who grew up without much formal religion from sliding from shallow belief and agnosticism into atheism. And he\u2019s trying to \u201cprepare the ground\u201d for them to be receptive to more explicit Christian proselytization in the future.<\/p>\n And for all the respect he shows toward other religions and for as open as he is to people finding truth where ever it presents itself to them, in the final pages Douthat engages in the kind of explicit Christian proselytization he avoided through most of the book.<\/p>\n The final chapter is titled \u201cA Case Study: Why I Am a Christian.\u201d Douthat tells his story of Episcopalian to Pentecostal<\/a> to Roman Catholic. That\u2019s not a common journey, but it\u2019s not much of a stretch, either. Religiously, he stayed pretty close to home, as most people do.<\/p>\n At some point, those of us who take religion seriously have to set aside our comfort \u2013 or discomfort \u2013 with what we were taught, engage with the truth claims of the world\u2019s various religions, examine the evidence, search our hearts and souls, and make a decision. I\u2019ve done that. So have many of you.<\/p>\n Ross Douthat has done that too. He finds the evidence for the historicity of the Gospels to be convincing. I do not. He sees the success of Christianity in its early centuries as evidence of divine favor. I see it as fortunate timing, political support, and missionary zeal. So be it \u2013 we don\u2019t have to agree to respect each other\u2019s choices.<\/p>\n But while he is willing to trust that his God will not turn away those who did the best they could but ended up on another path, he is unwilling to do the same when it comes to his own soul. When he says \u201cwhat Jesus brings especially, that cuts against my temperament, is a special sort of urgency\u201d he makes it clear he fears what may happen if he strays too far from the Holy Mother Church.<\/p>\n And that really puts a damper on the whole book. It takes what is otherwise an imperfect but highly useful argument for the rationality and helpfulness of theistic, supernatural religion in the context of \u201cwe can\u2019t know the truth so make an honest effort and be kind to each other\u201d and turns it into a fear-based sales pitch for conservative Christianity.<\/p>\n I would expect a Christian author to make a case for the Christian religion \u2013 I\u2019ve done the equivalent in my own Pagan writing. But the first seven chapters of this book led me to expect that Douthat would not argue for the absolute supremacy of Christianity. Certainly other writers have argued more explicitly, but his intent is clear enough.<\/p>\n And so I cannot recommend Believe <\/em>to Pagans and other non-Christians who are struggling with the question of whether or not they should believe. Instead, I encourage these people to find other resources that will point them in a helpful direction while not implying the author knows what is ultimately unknowable.<\/p>\n Or at least, believes it so strongly he might as well claim he knows it.<\/p>\n I\u2019m very sympathetic to the core premise of Believe<\/em>. I\u2019m eternally curious \u2013 whatever the question, I want to know the answer. And if I can\u2019t know, I want to investigate and examine and speculate and come up with the best provisional answer I can.<\/p>\n But Christianity \u2013 far more than any of the world\u2019s other religions \u2013 puts an inordinate emphasis on belief, especially on believing the \u201cright\u201d things. And so after reviewing a Christian book, I would be an irresponsible Pagan if I did not remind everyone that while what you believe is important, what you do is far more important.<\/p>\n Marcus Aurelius almost certainly did not say it<\/a>, but it\u2019s still true:<\/p>\n Live a good life. If there are Gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are Gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no Gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Facts and Reason in Paganism \u2013 Avoiding Materialist Assumptions<\/a> (November 2017)<\/p>\n Why I Believe in the Gods<\/a> (October 2019)<\/p>\n Animism: Relating to Persons Who Aren\u2019t Human<\/a> (February 2020)<\/p>\n We Are Immortal<\/a> (August 2020)<\/p>\n A Pagan Look at the Origins of the Universe<\/a> (January 2023)<\/p>\n![\"photo](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/243\/2025\/02\/Believe-02.20.25-02.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nThe origin of the universe is likely unknowable<\/h2>\n
We are more than the product of brain activity<\/h2>\n
Commitment and tradition are good and necessary<\/h2>\n
Three stumbling blocks<\/h2>\n
<\/a><\/p>\nWho is Believe<\/em> written for?<\/h2>\n
Choosing a path<\/h2>\n
A subtle altar call is still an altar call<\/h2>\n
Believing is not the most important thing<\/h2>\n
For Further Reading<\/h2>\n