How Well Does Religion Work as a Social Glue Uniting People?

[Sunstone]

How well does religion work as a social glue uniting people politically and socially?





I'm of the opinion most of the major religions have had mixed results with that. At best, they've created large "in-groups" but have always thereby created even larger "out-groups" of people. Thus religions have united some folks, but in a larger sense, they have been divisive.

 

[Estro Felino]

Not very well...in some cases. When I came out to the religious congregation of my parish, they ostracized and forced me to quit the group..

but when people share the same lifestyle and religious principles, they easily stick together.

 

[Trailblazer]

How well does religion work as a social glue uniting people politically and socially?

How can the major religions unite people when they all have different beliefs and they all believe that only they are right? Christians for example believe that Jesus was the Only way, Jews believe that they are the Chosen Ones...

The Baha'i Faith wants to unite all the religions under one tent but nobody wants that, they want to remain separate and special. We are not taking away from them or saying the older religions are wrong, only that we have a new message from God that is more pertinent to the needs of the times... What is so wrong about that?

That just reminded me of this... Edward Browne has left us a pen-portrait of Baha’u’llah. It is the only one of its kind in existence, and therefore of tremendous value to the student of the Baha’i Faith. Today a visitor to Bahji (north of Haifa, Israel) can read this document, before venturing into Baha’u’llah’s chamber. Thus can one try to recreate in one’s mind the interview granted to the English orientalist:

“A mild dignified voice bade me be seated, and then continued: - “Praise be to God that thou hast attained! . . . Thou hast come to see a prisoner and an exile. . . . We desire but the good of the world and the happiness of the nations; yet they deem us a stirrer-up of strife and sedition worthy of bondage and banishment. . . . That all nations should become one in faith and all men as brothers; that the bonds of affection and unity between the sons of men should be strengthened; that diversity of religion should cease, and differences of race be annulled – what harm is there in this? . . . Yet so it shall be; these fruitless strifes, these ruinous wars shall pass away, and the ‘Most Great Peace’ shall come. . . . Do not you in Europe need this also? Is not this that which Christ foretold? … Yet do we see your kings and rulers lavishing their treasures more freely on means for the destruction of the human race than on that which would conduce to the happiness of mankind. . . These strifes and this bloodshed and discord must cease, and all men be as one kindred and one family. . . . Let not a man glory in this, that he loves his country; let him rather glory in this, that he loves his kind . . .”

After returning home Browne wrote “Such, so far as I can recall them, were the words which, besides many others, I heard from Baha. Let those who read them consider well with themselves whether such doctrines merit death and bonds, and whether the world is more likely to gain or lose by their diffusion.”
(cited in Baha’u’llah by H. M. Balyuzi, pp 62-63).

I'm of the opinion most of the major religions have had mixed results with that. At best, they've created large "in-groups" but have always thereby created even larger "out-groups" of people. Thus religions have united some folks, but in a larger sense, they have been divisive.

Yes, that is what they have done. This will not change until people of all religions realize that mankind is one.

“The utterance of God is a lamp, whose light is these words: Ye are the fruits of one tree, and the leaves of one branch. Deal ye one with another with the utmost love and harmony, with friendliness and fellowship. He Who is the Day Star of Truth beareth Me witness! So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth. The one true God, He Who knoweth all things, Himself testifieth to the truth of these words.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 288

 

[lewisnotmiller]

How well does religion work as a social glue uniting people politically and socially?





I'm of the opinion most of the major religions have had mixed results with that. At best, they've created large "in-groups" but have always thereby created even larger "out-groups" of people. Thus religions have united some folks, but in a larger sense, they have been divisive.

C'mon now...historically, the best way to forge unity is to identify 'them'. The outsiders.

Hence the prevailing nature of nationalism.

 

[Mock Turtle]

This is one of the basic reasons why I am opposed to religions. For all the benefits of uniting so many in a common belief and community, they also, by doing so, set themselves as apart from others - and inevitably - even though they will usually try to get on with other belief systems. Our history tells a different story and continues to do so - of conflict and carnage. It's easy enough to say many things also do these - nationalism, culture, race, etc. - but fundamental beliefs are perhaps the worst because they are such core values for many. The Islamic belief of some for example - placing their allegiance to Allah above all else.

 

[Kapalika]

I'd say with things like Hinduism it's more inclusive than exclusive... ultimately it depends on the integrity of the practitioners as with anything it can be twisted. We can examine the religious systems themselves as presented in scriptures, commentaries or elsewhere as well, in which case we can see that some religions are simply ethically superior (at least, by the standard I'd use).

 

[PureX]

How well does religion work as a social glue uniting people politically and socially?

I'm of the opinion most of the major religions have had mixed results with that. At best, they've created large "in-groups" but have always thereby created even larger "out-groups" of people. Thus religions have united some folks, but in a larger sense, they have been divisive.

We humans are most commonly united by setting ourselves apart from (and usually above) others. Religious unity is no different.

 

[Augustus]

How well does religion work as a social glue uniting people politically and socially?

Avoiding the question of whether or not it is a 'good' thing, it seems to be one of the most effective, if not the most effective, method for producing enduring communities on a large scale.

By defining community according to a somewhat abstract and vague quality like religion, you allow a range of flexibility for people to belong and for the community to evolve (extreme, rigid forms of religion tend not to endure outside of a minority) which may be hard to achieve in some other systems . In addition, the ritual component means members undertake a cost to belong to the community, reinforcing their membership.

I'm of the opinion most of the major religions have had mixed results with that. At best, they've created large "in-groups" but have always thereby created even larger "out-groups" of people. Thus religions have united some folks, but in a larger sense, they have been divisive.

I suppose the question is to what extent can out groups not be created when manufacturing identities? Identities are as much about who we are not, as they are about who we are.

One thing that is as close to certain as you can get, is that there will always be a diversity of worldview and ideologies, many of which are incompatible.

Any universalist ideology is basically a desire for your belief system to become the paradigm for all of humanity, and this will always result in pushback from those who disagree.

If the qualification for divisive is simply 'fails to unite the whole world' then all ideologies are divisive. If the qualification is 'does worse than the alternatives', then it is a different question.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

How well does religion work as a social glue uniting people politically and socially?

Pretty well, in fairly small, localised communities. I have written before about my theory that affordable transport and affordable long distance communication have done more to disrupt "traditional" religion than just about anything else.

 

[idav]

How well does religion work as a social glue uniting people politically and socially?





I'm of the opinion most of the major religions have had mixed results with that. At best, they've created large "in-groups" but have always thereby created even larger "out-groups" of people. Thus religions have united some folks, but in a larger sense, they have been divisive.

Depends on the religion but some seem to have a diversity of social class, ethnicity and political affiliations. Some more than others but those manage to put their differences aside on Sunday and fight then fight the rest of the week.

 

[Augustus]

Pretty well, in fairly small, localised communities. I have written before about my theory that affordable transport and affordable long distance communication have done more to disrupt "traditional" religion than just about anything else.

Urbanisation would be more impactful in this regard, wouldn't it?

 

[Revoltingest]

It doesn't work very well.
The fighting is seldom more vicious than among people who mostly agree.
Believers often treat this fire breathing heathen better than their ilk.

 

[sun rise]

How well does religion work as a social glue uniting people politically and socially?

Christianity? Not so much given the propensity to sects and denominations. Judaism worked very well during times of acute oppression. Buddhism historically probably worked the best.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Urbanisation would be more impactful in this regard, wouldn't it?

Urbanisation is part of the same general trend, yes.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Christianity? Not so much given the propensity to sects and denominations. Judaism worked very well during times of acute oppression. Buddhism historically probably worked the best.

Different flavours of Christianity until quite recently tended to be almost pathologically ubiquitous in local areas. For a long time everyone you would ever expect to meet you could reasonably expect to be from your own denomination.

 

[LuisDantas]

"Mixed results" sounds just about right.

It is IMO undeniable that it has some of that effect, but far too often it happens only at the expense of raising ill will towards "outsiders" and "foreigners".

The ill effects are probably administrable if the teachings are enlightened enough to counter them effectively. But that is not a given; some doctrines will not really accept such wisdom; and some xenophoby is probably unavoidable.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Pretty well until they decide someone is doing something they don't like. And then it becomes so violently corrosive that on the mild end they bully the "sinner," and on the more extreme end they fly an airplanes into things.

 

[arthra]

I'm of the opinion most of the major religions have had mixed results with that. At best, they've created large "in-groups" but have always thereby created even larger "out-groups" of people. Thus religions have united some folks, but in a larger sense, they have been divisive.

In the Baha'i Faith we generally don't have in-groups or out-groups. Everyone has a vote and can serve the Faith in various capacities but there is no clergy or elite as such. We have an administration that is elected annually from Unit Conventions and local elections coming up in Ridvan (April) each year and there are no election campaigns or caucuses.

Baha'is also accept the Divine origin of other religions and most communities are involved in inter-faith activities of various kinds.