Religion is gradually losing its grip on the societies playing lesser role in defining the values or guiding people’s daily lives and countries’ politics. This process is irreversible though it may take many more years to strip the religion off of all its powers making it nothing more than just an exotic ritual, symbolic Christmas tree, lavish Iftar or just a fairy tale told to the kids before they fall asleep. This is simply due to the fact that the services and products monopolised by the religion in the past are now being offered by many others in more diverse shapes and better qualities – some may call this result of the free-market economy! In my opinion, set of values, morale, ethics and spirituality are the services and products manufactured and offered to the consumers like any other goods and services. To some extent capitalism contributed towards the demise of the monopolies by creating competitive environment including monopoly on manufacturing values and morale.
Contemporary radicalisation on the
religious grounds of some parts of societies (both Christian and Muslim),
recurrence of fundamentalists in seemingly odd
period specifically points to the religion’s crisis – a desperate
move before it begins crumbling and collapsing. Ironically, this is
best understood by the clergy itself, so this process is going to
intensify, in my opinion, during next several decades – survival
tactics.
In early and mid stages of human
evolution religion played a very progressive role
in building communities and societies. Moral,
ethical, behavioural and
social regulatory norms were first introduced by religion and clergy.
Clearly humans collaborated and communicated much better and
efficiently having common ground rules. At a later stage religion acquired
more political function as it grew larger and its influence expanded
to all aspects of human life. As human societies became larger, more
complex and more sophisticated so did the
clergy and religion forming themselves as a separate entity, at first
dominant and later parallel authority to the civilian, military,
political and economic “management” of the early societies and states. Religion
and clergy positioned themselves strategically by being the only
authority defining set of values and daily behavioural norms
i.e. mainstream around which social cohesion of
smaller groups occurred. Hence, its authority and powers were not or
were rarely questioned by either public or its ruling elites.
While religion and clergy played a
unifying role it inevitably highlighted the differences with other
societies. Faith and religion became one of the discriminatory
criteria among various societies often used as a pretext and
justification for acquiring political, military, demographic and/or economic
gains by one group over another.
In the
past religion was an excellent tool for managing societies and
states, internal and foreign affairs, regulating relationships with other
nations, allies and rivals. As science, communication and human collaboration
expanded defying national and geographical boundaries religion became
an obstacle rather than a facilitator of human cooperation.
It became an outdated tool, forum and reference for those humans and
nations aspiring to global contemporary values that
primarily means forming open societies, tolerant communities where
diversity (racial, ethnic, cultural, religious, etc.) is more celebrated rather
thanfeared. Economic interests will increasingly guide and define
human cooperationacross the borders undermining significance and
importance of the ethical and moral values.
Religion
had several components and ingredients in it making it appealing to
the societies: 1) Faith – higher philosophical values and conviction;
understanding and interpretation of the universe; what is good and
what is evil; link with the universe, the God; what is eternity, how
we get there i.e. hope and promise of immortality;
2) Social – behavioural norms and morale, ethics and
guiding principles for managing daily life, which is largely defined
by and is specific to cultural environment offering sense
of belonging to a group, to like-minded people – justification for
social belonging; 3) Political – foundations of unity against others,
shaping the cult of an enemy, mobilising communities to
commit violence and to sacrifice themselves for the sake of higher
values such as religion, nation, homeland, etc.; 4) Science - “objective”
or a third-party answers/explanations of the wonders of this world
and unexplainable events. All in all religion covered
all aspects of human lives and provided guidance on all questions and
dilemmas. It entered its crisis as alternatives to the religion
emerged offering choice as well as the means of a broader view and
more independent judgment. Each component mentioned above evolved
into independent, self-sustainable disciplines distancing itself from the
religion.
Societal values evolved
and besides religion people have now other reasons
and motivators to bond, cooperate and coexist. Politics
became more elaborate and more linked to the economy and resources
whereby religion is not any more in position to ensure convenient
foundation for the political doctrines. Science has developed to
the extent that it has challenged religion itself.
Importantly faith became more personal, private and independent
self-exploration inner process taking into consideration values
of many differentcultures, religions, different sets of beliefs,
morals and principles – more and more people have “tailor-made” and individual,
unique faiths. Humans saw the world beyond a dogmatic and orthodox
set of norms, realising that they can choose
and design them themselves rather than submitting to the
imposed templates and blueprints.
While religion is
a communal phenomenon - presumably unity of people with similar faith -
the faith itself is rather individual, private and intimate
matter to me as I do not think that any two persons can have
identical faith. Simply because the faith is formulated, shaped,
and defined through personal experiences, information, education,
exposure, reflections, analysis and conclusions.
Faith is more sincere, honest and self-driven inner process of
understanding and subsequent independent conclusions about life and
the world around us.
Religion seems to
me a public manifestation of just one type of faith, communally
agreed upon by self-selected groups of individuals. This is an
agreement among these people who believe that they have seen and
understood the truth and therefore, it is their duty to enlighten others.
In principle, this is a noble mission and I think that “the fathers
of religion” meant good for people. However, such groups miss to understand or
accept that their faith is one among many others and by portraying them
as the only right ones they try to dominate others, depriving others of
their own intimate process of unreserved self-exploration. In essence this is a
very orthodox (my way is the only right way), patronizing and rather
arrogant attitude.
To me faith is so
private, intimate and personal – opposite to the religion which
is group-based and public - that in broad terms I compare it with sex.
Faith, like sex, is about the relationship between the two
(could be more than just two, but only by very few): communication
and relationship between a person and the God. In that sense religion is like
an orgy – it’s a relationship among many through a third-party with
the God. Manifestation of one's private and intimate things to the
public and telling others that they should share the same -
like religion does - is like having sex with your partner publicly
and trying convincing others to practice sex exactly in the same way
as you do it. This is to say that faith became religion when
self-selected individuals i.e. clergy, brought their privacy to
the masses rejecting that faith could be diverse and personal.
Religion
and faith of a person - in my opinion in the majority of cases
– do not necessarily match, or are the same. Unfortunately, many
people do not realize this, or they are trying to avoid lengthy and
perpetual self-exploration, which could be quite painful. Eventually
they submit to a franchise “ready-to-eat”
beliefs’ systems i.e. religion.
To me the role and
place of a religion in any society is about extent to
which individuals are entitled to their private and intimate
matters without patronizing and dogmatic interference of the society.
Do we call these personal liberties and the right to privacy? Well, I
do and I think that in those countries where religion and clergy are
strong, personal liberties and respect of privacy is very weak.
I do
not think that it is about the existence of the (or a) God. I do
not have anything against him or her being around in any form or a
shape, or even not being there at all - each person can believe in
whatever he/she wants. I do have a problem though when personal
beliefs and faith become societal - this is what clergy and religion
do.
As also
said earlier, religion just lost its role and function, it just
became outdated. Simply because there are many other alternative tools these
days to stimulate and conduct social bonding and cooperation process
among people. Similarly, in the modern politics and the governance
there are quite a few andmore effective means of acquiring
and maintaining the power. Therefore, religion stopped serving its
original purpose (it has exhausted itself): neither societies nor
the politicians need it any more… but not necessarily either realizes
this.
I think that
the contrary is happening to the faith. It has
traditionally been based and linked with the religion, but now on the
wake of the religion’s weakening and with many more societies
questioning it, it had acquired a new meaning: itcould be very unique,
individual and it does not have to fall within the framework
of a “franchise”. Therefore, many people are in search, or trying to
define their faith looking closer into the science,
politics … referring to the new sets of moral values such as human
rights, environment, globalization, etc.
Eventually individual,
personal and intimate outlook on the world (faith) is going
to ostracize collective, dogmatic and orthodox one (religion). I
will cheer to this, if and when this happens.
No comments:
Post a Comment