OK, you made me haul out the OED. Parenthetically, I am pleased to note that with the new bifocals, I can again read the tiny print in the condensed version without a magnifying glass. Here 'tis, and as far as I am aware, this ought to be definitive:
>>>>>[AF, religiun, (11th c.), F. religion, or ad. L. religion-em [there's a long mark over that o, but I can't make it], of doubtful etymology, by Cicero connected with religere, to read over again, but by later authors with religare [long mark over the a], to bind, RELIGATE (see Lewis and Short, s.v.); the latter view has usually been favored by modern writers in explaining the force of the word by its supposed etymological meaning.]
1. A state of life bound by monastic vows; the condition of one who is a member of a religious order, esp. in the Roman Catholic Church.<<<<<
I suppose that for centuries, there was no need to call one's beliefs a "religion", as there was only one Church, only one God, only one true faith, the word they used was creed or credo, wasn't it?
The way you used it, I think is definition 5:
>>>>>Recognition on the part of man of some higher unseen power as having control of his destiny, and as being entitled to obedience, reverence, and worship; the general mental and moral attitude resulting from his belief, with reference to its effect upon the individual in the community; personal or general acceptance of this feeling as a standard of spiritual and practical life.<<<<<
Which seems to come into usage sometime in the 15th century, although some of the 13th century stuff looks close, too. I wonder if it came to be used that way because of the Protestants, I am sure some very erudite person knows, but I don't.
Time to make pancakes. |
