Relationships Between Society and Religion Essay

The relationship between religion and society has provided the focus for some of the greatest works of sociology (one thinks of Durkheim, Pareto, and Weber, as well as Marx and Parsons). Samuel Delbert, a Canadian sociologist, rebelled against what he saw as the static concerns of American sociologists, trained his eyes on the process of social change, and placed the study of religion as a major item on the agenda of social analysis in Canada. In three important works, Clark argues that the changing structure of religious organization provided a measure of the pace and character of social change. Clark undoubtedly made the study of religion an important topic in Canadian sociology. At the same time, however, his work intended to limit the range of sociological concerns by linking the study of religion to questions of the forms of religious organization and politics (Artibise, 1990). The Essence of Religion In order to further understand the context between the relationship between religion and society, it becomes clear only after we have determined the basic essence of religion, that which is common to them all. Many different attempts to conceptualize the essence of religions have been made. These definitions usually reflect the viewpoint of the defining subject more than the essence of the defined object. When, for instance, Immanuel Kant defines religion as the â€Å"fulfillment of all of our duties as divine commands,† this doesn’t reflect the essence of religion which is concerned with a completely different sphere, but rather the rationalistic standpoint of Kant, for whom religion is essentially theonomic ethics. Often the essence of a specific historical religion is held up as the ideal and norm for all religion (Mensching, 1976). Prophecy presupposes a relationship between religion and society that conflicts profoundly with established religion. Established religion sees religion as the sacred ideology of the established social order. It is the â€Å"handmaiden† of the ruling class. It pronounces the established social order to be created by God and to be a reflection of the divine will (Riemer, 1996). The Founding Fathers In their sociological writing, Marx, Weber, and Durkheim were responding to the economic and social changes of the 19th and early 20th centuries, timely more often than not by the disastrous effects that fleeting industrialization had imposed on the European community of which they were sector. The course of religion could scarcely be averted with this foundation, for religion was seen as an important area of the society that seemed to be shifting beyond identification. By at least a period, Karl Marx (1818-83) predates the other. There are known two important factors in the Marxist thoughts on religion: The first is descriptive, the second evaluative. His dependent variable is religion; in other words, its structure and nature are liable on social and most importantly economic relations, which constitute the foundation of social examination. It can never be understood separate from the economic form and the association of the capitalist or worker to the basis of formulation. The second factor connects from this however, has an assessing component. Religion is said to be a form of indifference or alienation; it is a symptom of social malformation which disguises the exploitative relationships of capitalist society. Religion persuades people that such relationships are natural and, therefore, acceptable. It follows that the real causes of social distress cannot be tackled until the religious element in society is stripped away to reveal the injustices of the capitalist system; everything else is a distraction. Subsequent debates concerning Marx/s approach to religion have to be approached with care. It has become increasingly difficult to distinguish between (a) Marx’s own analysis of religious phenomena, (b) a subsequent school of Marxism as a form of sociological thinking, and (c) what has occurred in the twentieth century in the name of Marxism as a political ideology. The essential and enduring point to grasp from Marx himself us that religion cannot be understood apart from the world of which it is a part; this is a crucial sociological insight and central to the evolution of the sub discipline. It needs, however, to be distinguished from an over deterministic interpretation of Marx that postulates the dependence of religion on economic forces in mechanical terms; this is unhelpful. The final point is more political. It may indeed be the case that one function of religion is to mitigate the very evident hardships of this world and so disguise them.