Friday, May 25, 2007

Post 19

This is a response to Cate Frazier's post titled "Response to Tammi", in which she agrees with her. So, I guess that would mean that this is actually a response in opposition to Tammi's post.

Cate states that she thinks the Hull House website is "set up in a way that allows a person to interpret the website as religious but I don't think Jane Addams' mission was religious...Addams was raised a Quaker and more nondenominational".

This statement seems odd to me. After all the discussion in class about what qualifies as religious and what is strictly spiritual I disagree with what Cate is saying. Granted, Addams may have been extremely tolerant to other religions and faiths, she clearly had a solid religion. Her religion was not a pronounced Christian or Jew or Hindu, it was humanitarian. She set up beliefs, morals, and guidelines to live by that gelled together and founded her religion based on public servitude, especially to women. Hull House could easily be defended in a rational argument as her house of worship. It became the sanctuary in which women were welcome and could live comfortably. Religion, to Addams, was bringing together humans in peace, and helping them to strengthen their lives. I don't think it can be said that the Hull House was not founded because of her religion. Though, it may not have been a strikingly direct effect, it was obviously a reflection of her beliefs and an indirect result of them.

Cate also wrote that Addams "was giving support to women rather then showing them a religious path." I can agree with this statement to an extent. She was giving these women support because of her religious path. And though she wasn't trying to convert them to a specific religious path, her service to them came out of her humanitarian religious beliefs. I would make the argument that this statement is true, but has nothing to do with the question of whether or not Hull House was religious.

No comments: