In a recent talk I explored the difference between religious belief and action. It is interesting to note that the original church probably concerned itself more with action than with beliefs. In fact, Paul spent a good deal of time telling his growing congregations how they should act towards one another (acts of charity, communal sharing, etc) rather than denouncing acts over faith. The change occurred during the Roman persecution of the early Christian church. When the Christians realized that they weren't going to defeat the Romans in battle - especially after witnessing that the Jews were nearly annihilated for taking a stand at Masada - they decided to undertake a new strategy, one which would win them countless of conversions for the next 1000 years. They simply took Roman philosophy and "adopted" it by showing quite simply how the Christ figure could be seen as the fulfillment of Roman philosophical striving.
The predicament this created is that the neo-Platonic religion they adopted/adapted had a mistrust of the physical world built within it. As the physical was seen as corrupt, one should focus instead on the pure, eternal, and immutable world of ideas (which worked well for Christianity). Theologians point out that in order to accomplish this goal, the "humanity" of Jesus had to be downplayed, and hence the use of the more popular term of "Christ," a name which had ancient "otherworldly" connotations. In addition, the physical world had to be likewise deemed corrupt, a necessity which Augustine was happy to oblige.
The marriage of Roman philosophy and Christianity was both successful and sad. Successful because it allowed Christianity to rise to the forefront of Roman politics, supported mostly by the emperors many of which were proponents of neo-Platonism, and sad because the merger radically reshaped and redefined Christian thinking. Historians point out that the distrust of the physical world (and by extension the humans that inhabit that world), laid the seeds for witch hunts, slavery, colonialism and exploitation, divine right of kings, puritanical oppression of women and sex, environmental degradation, and a host of other maladies.
The growing mistrust of the physical world, which was eventually deemed wholly corrupt and Satanic, saw it's fruition in the Reformation and within theologies of Calvin and Martin Luther's that emphasized the absolute necessity of "faith over works." Human striving, reason, and good "deeds" were regarded as sinful or at the least inconsequential. The tide was luckily stemmed eventually by the swelling revelations of science and with flirtations with democracy.
Two thousand years later has religion began to emphasize works again? The answer depends on whom you ask. Some religions have consistently preached the need for good deeds, and in fact many church groups have built hospitals, schools, and championed human and civil rights. Has any religion adopted an emphasis of works above faith? No...except one; Ethical Culture. What makes this movement so radically different is that from its inception it has placed "deeds before creeds," the first religious movement, mind you, in the history of the world.
I think we have so much to be proud of, but only if we continue our legacy. I believe strongly in a reverence for life, but without action, that reverence is merely paying lip-service to that ideal. I challenge this community to continue its involvement, to continue to work for change and for justice. On each and every glorious day we can ask; "what shall I do today that nurtures life?" And finally, thanks to those of you who have already done so much to help this community keep our chief spiritual practice alive.