Print

Print


On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 14:12:02 +0100, Sam Stutter <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Coincidentally, there's a show on tonight (BBC1 I think) with *some bishop*
discussing how modern Britain needs religion to fix all its apparent
problems. Which made me think that perhaps "religion" is too loose a term in
itself and can probably be (in my mind at least) broken down into three
components of which a person can have varying levels of pursuit of.
[...]
>What we *need* are terms for people who have *faith* alone, *belief* and
*faith*, *belief* *faith* and *ritual* and any of the other possible
combinations.

At least as regards religions, this is quite close to the standard contrast
between _orthodoxy_ and _orthopraxy_.  An orthodox religion is one for which
holding the correct beliefs is paramount; an orthoprax one is one for which
maintaining the correct conduct is.  I guess the latter is close to your
"faith"; it includes ethical conduct, but has also been taken to include
various other traditions and even liturgical activity, and of course these
may bleed together.  (Thing is, the word "faith" is more usually used for
orthodoxy as well.)
Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthopraxy) sets out _ritualism_ as
a third pole of this opposition; that division then seems quite close to yours.

Alex