"religion often advocates for and is even at the forefront of change"
My view of history is limited to a few books I have read as an adult, and a couple of college courses in history of religion, or general history of Western Europe.
I failed to see ANY examples of that assertion: "religion often advocates for and is even at the forefront of change".
The most history I probably studied over the years was American History, from pre-colonial times to the present day, (well, maybe up until Eisenhower and Kennedy, thereabouts). I didn't see religion as being at the forefront of the period of discovery and exploration, (indeed some religions predicted explorers would simply fall off the edge of the Earth) nor within the period of colonization, (when various religious efforts made claims to a certain territory for their own people, and letting in few if any others, with two exceptions in PA and RI), nor within the founding letters and papers of the Federalist period, (where there was explicit insistence upon no religious favoritism in any government), nor within the efforts to peacefully resolve that uniquely American enigma, slavery, without bloodshed, (indeed, many draft notices were filled with calls to do "God's work" of fighting for one side or the other).
I'm sure you don't need me to quote the literally dozens of Biblical references to the treatment of slaves, nor to the rights of some people to own slaves. I fail to see where religion has been out front about slavery, until, at least, there was a humanistic and secular movement toward abolishing one of the last institutions of ancient society here in America, decades or centuries after it had been abolished in most of the rest of the Western civilized world.
Perhaps treatment of gay folks has been ambiguous at best, from a religious viewpoint, in modern times, but the treatment of fellow human beings in the institution of slavery in America has to be the lowest, most despicable point of ancient religious influence upon the New World. Perhaps only a few thousand churches this Sunday preached against gay marriages, but that pales in comparison to the hundreds of years of acceptance of slavery, yes, even in the Northern American colonial times, all of which was never in dispute on Sunday mornings in the 1700's. Slavery was part of our nation, from the very start, and was (and is) enshrined in the careful evasive original wording of our nation's Constitution. Gay people today may not be free to marry in certain states, mostly because of present-day religious objections (while free to do so in other states, where religion's place in governance is not so paramount), but back then, slaves were given a religious blessing to be slaves, and religion required that the Founding Fathers spoke little, if at all, about the status of men and women of black skin who were NEVER free to move, to seek employment in a free market, for well over 150 years from the earliest days of our colonies. Well into the 1850's, Dred Scott was not free in certain places, while free in others. There seems to be a distinct lack of religious writings upon this obvious logical contradiction. Only Lincoln's "secular" Emancipation Proclamation addresses this "forefront of change".
Nor within the period of reconstruction, (a time wherein the concept of "manifest destiny" became enshrined within religious sermons, white over black, man over women, all in the name of Jesus). Nor within the efforts to gain suffrage for women, wherein a Bible once again was invoked as the reason to turn down an Amendment to the Constitution granting both genders equality at the ballot box. I saw more of a secular, more of a humanistic element in all of those change events. I seem to recall more advocacy NOT to change than to change as arguments coming from the religiously inclined. I could be wrong, I could have missed a lot of the literature, but what stands out is that literature filled with religious reference in favor of conservation of the customs, all emanating from those who stood steadfast AGAINST a change in the status quo.
Show me where I missed all that progressive religious effort, leading the way, over the last 500 years, where religion forged a new and egalitarian identity for us all, men and women, gay and straight, black and white, I must have been very poorly educated to have missed all that "forefront" activity by the religious leadership of our Western society! What I read from historical documents came mostly from the secular press, from the non-religious, from the political writers, not the thousands of preachers in each and every town and village. To be sure, there were exceptions, Jonathan Edwards stands out somewhat. But basically, change never originated within the churches on Sunday mornings, rather the churches seemed to react to the changes in the world around them, at least that is how I read American history, perhaps I am completely wrong.
In 1920, the United States "allowed" women to have an equal voice at the ballot box. Ninety two years later, the Church of England will "allow" women to hold a place equal to men in their church? Ninety-two years later! How is this church at the "forefront" of change?
= new reply since forum marked as read
