There is great danger of a final, and we believe fatal, identification of the word religion with doctrines and methods which have lost their significance and which are powerless to solve the problem of human living in the Twentieth Century.

These were the words of the original Humanist Manifesto, written in 1933 by a conglomerate of freethinkers, skeptics, atheists, and agnostics who sought to create a “religion of Man.” In order to transcend the limitations of the various disparate belief systems and worldviews that had previously influenced the ordering of society and the turning of history, they took a radical departure from what had come before. It was not enough to recognize that God had created everything; the next step was to recognize that Man had created God. This kaleidoscopic reversal of the creation myth necessitated a change in values: we must now believe in humanity. But what exactly does that entail?

There’s a tendency within the more modern secular humanism to define itself along the lines of “atheism plus.” It explicitly assigns itself the task of replacing religion, even going so far as to provoke confrontation through the motto “good without God,” as if the religious majority really believes that atheists are immoral monsters. Outside the contentious realm of religious versus secular debates, I roll my eyes at the supposedly ubiquitous proposed objection to Humanism. My long experience with the religious community of which I myself had been a part has taught me otherwise. They do not see Humanism as a valid religion – not because it is a “religion of Man” – but because Humanism has yet to truly fulfill the social role religion has historically played.

Religions have always been means for realizing the highest values of life. Their end has been accomplished through the interpretation of the total environing situation (theology or world view), the sense of values resulting therefrom (goal or ideal), and the technique (cult), established for realizing the satisfactory life.

Or so continues the manifesto. If a belief in Man is to replace a belief in God, then it is paramount that Humanism provide a renewed account of human nature. For too long we have been sinners: beings incapable of being infallible. Lionizing humanity lends us to acknowledging our animal nature, our flaws and our defects are what make us human, as much as our ability to envision an idealized future and bring it to fruition makes us our own creators. This is why Humanism places faith in our capacity to interpret reality through reason and observation, and why the resulting worldview is always open to correction. And thus science usurps tradition and ritual as our gateway to the flourishing of human potential, eudaimonia.

Lastly, if Humanism is to fulfill the role of religion, it must be a religion. Etymologically, religion is rooted in the Latin “re” and “ligare,” meaning “again” and “connect” respectively. Christianity once “reconnected” disparate minorities under the thumb of the Roman regime and transformed it. Humanism’s goal is similarly to rally what secular forces exist, eliminating the schisms that divide humanity not only along the lines of religion, but of race, nation, and ideology, in the founding of a truly humane society. It is for these reasons that I remain optimistic in the face of current events that inspire pessimism in my peers. And it is for the purpose of leveraging human potential that I adopt the label “humanist” before any other. To believe in Humanism is to believe that Man must save himself.