Dealing with Blasphemy in Media - Coursework Example

Dealing with Blasphemy Introduction No one has ever seen the so called “Supreme Being” but many have been faithful to Thee. This devotion has been transformed into a duty in certain religions. The never-ending loyalty has successfully influenced the different sectors of the society. Even politics and economy have been utilizing these bounden duties. The media in fact has been active in transmitting religious information anywhere in the world. Truly, religion has played a vital role in the community. It has the capacity to unite human beings and defeat government. As such, the doctrine of separation of church and state has been formulated. This principle acknowledges the fact that there are matters in one’s society which the state has no control of and would be better regulated by the church. Significantly, the advancement in technology has distorted moral and religious precepts. It has been easy for anyone to convey a message that destroys the value of religion. Nowadays, the various forms of media have been exhausted by religious critics to voice out their concerns. In another case, religion has been used by the business world for profit. For the people of faith, such acts are to be condemned and punished just like “blasphemy.” Over the years, blasphemy has been recognized as a sin by the ruling religion of the world. In light of the foregoing facts, this essay shall explain the evolution of the term blasphemy, its available definitions and the way of dealing it. Moreover, how the media has impacted the worldview of religion shall also be included. Overall, this literary piece will show one aspect of the complex relationship of religion, media and the workplace. Blasphemy Generally, if a person is to define the term blasphemy, one would readily answer it in relation to the teaching of Christian churches. He or she may say that it is simply putting the name of the Lord in vain or by being skeptical about the legitimacy or divinity of Jesus Christ (Lawton, 1993). According to David Nash (2007, p.1), blasphemy is the attacking, damaging and wounding of religious belief. It is an expression of what individuals think about the sacred and their God. Moreover, it can be considered as a showing of power, and a species of defective social interaction contravening acceptable behavior and norms of manners (Nash, 2007). As a result of the struggle between and among religions, blasphemous acts can be done by religious members. Blasphemy is a sort of frustrated belief. It is a logical consequence of lack of faith. The use of the term blasphemy has been famous all throughout the world due to Christian faith. Currently, Christianity is the dominating religion on earth. Stated in another sense, if not because of Christianity, blasphemy would not be widely known. Once in history, blasphemy had been punishable by the state and church. Such event happened in Great Britain. The law on blasphemy was primarily passed to protect the feelings of the Christian community in case of ridicule and contempt. The Christians then were very influential in Great Britain. With the increasing pluralistic British society, Scarman (cited in Lawton, 1993, p.8) suggested that, “the common law offence of blasphemous libel” should be extended to non-Christian religions. He said that there is a need to protect the various religious beliefs, practices and feelings from vilification and scurrility (Scarman, n.d. cited in Lawton, 1993, p. 8). Nevertheless, this call has never been heeded. Later on, in 2008, the offence of blasphemy was abolished. From the viewpoint of someone who has been a long time member of a particular religion, blasphemy is to be considered as always something else (Lawton, 1993). It is an idea of the unknown. It is one that deviates the understanding of the many. It is a different ideology which has no authoritative basis. David Lawton (1993, p. 2) specifically describes it as a by-product of sedition, heresy or plain free thinking and an emotional sign of mental disturbance or social dislocation. It may happen that an individual of superior intelligence questions his or her being beyond the boundary set up by the church. It is not to be regarded as violative of freedom of expression since freedom after all is not absolute -- there will always be limitations. It could not be denied that there are persons who are not satisfied by religious teachings alone. As a result, they tend to formulate their own principles and try to distort the beliefs of the society. Majority of these kinds of people found themselves to be an atheist. Atheists do not believe in religion. They adhere to the idea that they make their own destiny. Others on the other hand, due to curiosity and for the sake of expressing a catchy or controversial opinion have the tendency to create something which one would not normally do. In another circumstance, an individual who faces a great struggle in life may doubt his or her belief and ends up blaming someone. Sometimes, this someone refers to the Supreme Being. Lawton (1993, p. 2) also believes that blasphemy is “more often than not, someone else’s.” He may have related this to a work done by the devil. Someone who utters a blasphemous message may have been occupied by an evil spirit. In this sense, blasphemy therefore is a spiritual endeavor and not a human undertaking. As a controversial concept, blasphemy has changing definitions. David Nash (2007, p.1) attributed this to the fact that it has been “stubbornly defiant of disciplinary boundaries” and has been caught up with various legal and religious preoccupations of past communities. Over the years, the evolution of religions has either extended or limited the scope of the term blasphemy. Some religions have very strict rules regarding literary and film works about God. There are also others which have practiced the culture of openness in terms of religious ideas. They have learned considering several factors before judging an act as blasphemous. Blasphemy has actually no fix criteria. It evolves with time. A blasphemous message before may have been considered just a plain comment today. Historically, in the Roman and Greek societies, blasphemy was related to acts of treason (Nash, 2007). It was originally a political offence. Blasphemy was regarded as an act of non-allegiance to the government. Writers of literary works that contain libelous words against the Greek and Roman governments were to be sentenced with blasphemy. For Christians, blasphemy has always been considered as an act of betrayal of the covenant made by God and his followers (Nash, 2007). In the bible, it is clearly prohibited by God based on His ten commandments. The particular biblical passage is to be found in Exodus 22:28 (Lawton, 1993). The commission of blasphemy therefore is deemed as a sin by the followers of Christian faith. It can be likened to a capital offence in common law. In the West, the roots of blasphemous behaviors were the improper use of God’s name and religious images (Nash, 2007). In everyday dealings, the use of God’s name was to be avoided. For instance, in a conversation, accidentally speaking about Jesus Christ or His father was already a violation of the commandment. Also, placing an image of Jesus in any place was a sign of disrespect. Blasphemy can actually be dealt with as an intellectual problem. It is purely a state of mind. This goes to say that blasphemy is not to be considered as a crime. It is not a public offence for it only serves the Christian community. State laws should not favor any and all religions. Just like a pure critic or opinion, works attacking the churches should be treated with impartiality. They are not to be entertained seriously. What could be a worthy endeavor is to face the issues truthfully and conscientiously. Freedom of expression should not be discriminatory. Religion and the Media “The lines between religion and the media” have become blurred (Hoover & Clark, 2002). It seems that the two have joined together to advance their individual interests. The realms of both are transforming and being changed (Hoover & Clark, 2002). This development is in accordance with the benefits that the media offers. Nonetheless, the convergence of both has placed religion in a critical situation. The media does not always bring good effects to religious congregations. At worst, it strips away the holiness of religious scriptures and images. Hoover and Clark (2002, p.2) cited that as of the present, religion has been commodified, therapeutic, personalized and public. It can also be stated that the media has over exposed the religions of the world. This could be one of the possible reasons why many people have been skeptical about God’s existence. One may think that it would be better for religion and media to be separated than converged. A solution for this problem could be strict and limited exposure. This is due to the fact that nowadays, the use of the media to transmit information is a necessity. The public characterization of religion can be best illustrated by the media. Issues about religion has been well-documented by print and broadcast media. Significantly, many religions have their own TV and radio stations. One could just watch through the television to be updated of church activities. This proves that rather than being independent actors engaged in institutionalized projects, religion and the “media are increasingly converging” (Hoover & Clark, 2002). However, the convergence of the supposedly autonomous actors has brought destructive effects to the church. Mockery of religion has been easy for atheists and mentally disturbed people. One could just write a blasphemous message through a computer and make it available to millions of Internet users. In another case, one could portray any character relating to Jesus Christ in movies and films. It is possible that a film-maker has misinterpreted the bible. Movies could portray the public image of Jesus in another sense. In other words, media can distort the truth as contained in the scripture. Evidently, the bible does not give a physical description of Jesus Christ. Also, Christian religions have different interpretation of biblical passages (Baugh, 1997). These are the two problems that film-makers always encounter. Another important consideration also is the actor of the film portraying Jesus Christ -- that is, if the actor is a Christian believer or not (Baugh, 1997). An actor who believes in Jesus seems to act in the most conscientious way possible -- one that gives his utmost care and attention in correctly portraying the divinity of Jesus Christ. Lloyd Baugh (1997, p.4) has observed that the authenticity controversy of the cinematographic portrayal of Jesus becomes more complicated due to the many non-canonical biographies of Jesus Christ -- documents which most of the time reflect biblical fiction rather than biblical fact. On the side of British Muslim community, after the September 11 attack, the media has represented them as violent people (Poole, 2002). Islam was actually considered as a violent religion. Some writings consider them as terrorists. In a way, media reports never intended to portray Muslims as violent; it is just that images of the attack clearly point out that it was done by a Muslim. Bombing is a violent act condemned by the international community. This demonstrates how powerful media can be in tainting an image. The effects were swift and lasting for those who were not informed of the truth. In another instance, the media has been an important tool to expose religious scandals (Mitchell & Marriage, 2003). The church fears that media coverage of scandals might threaten its institutional authority (Mitchell & Marriage, 2003). This can be the possible reason why people transfer to other religions or choose to have no religion at all. On the side of the church, the exposure could be deemed improper and should be better solved privately. Analytically, media exposure is not completely good for the religions of the world. There are matters that are ought to be kept confidential so as to preserve the sanctity of religious teachings. The impact of media on its viewers and listeners could not be manipulated. Humans have different perceptions. One could not expect someone to know the correctness of information in an instant. Media can thus be bias. It could set an agenda (Potter, 2010). It has the capacity to change the people’s mind and phase out religion. Since sects are up to now very active in using the media, it is possible that they have already accepted the disadvantages of using it or they have formulated ways to prevent any miscommunication. Nonetheless, religions should think twice as the effects of media are deliberate and instant. Religion and the Workplace In the workplace, religion is being referred to as “spirituality” (Carrette & King, 2004). The use of such term is safe and free from any bias. It may happen that a worker believes in spiritual healing but he or she does not belong to a particular religion. Spirituality can be treated then as a corporate attitude or culture. It does not specifically refer to a religious belief but it brings the feeling of oneness with other humans. In contrast with the word religion, spirituality is not associated with a negative representation (Carrette & King, 2004). It is always seen as having good and helpful effects. Instilling spirituality in the workplace is beneficial. As mentioned by Carrette and King (2004, p.134), there are three reasons why spirituality should be introduced in the workplace. First, they contended that by introducing such feeling in the working environment, workers may “feel a sense of corporate community and allegiance to the company” (Carrette & King, 2004). This method eliminates the dehumanising environment of the workplace (Carrette & King, 2004). Spirituality seems to activate human relationship and inspires a person. For example, a spiritual care assessment is appropriated to the nursing profession because many nurses have been receiving low salary and experiencing low prestige. Accordingly, nurses have been encouraged to participate “in the spiritual care of patients” -- such is seen as a powerful medicine to occupational frustration (Carrette & King, 2004). In this sense, spirituality has psychological effects. It conditions the mind and body of an employee. Also, it can help control emotions. Needless to say, spirituality has healing power. Second, spirituality contributes “the all-important feel-good factor” for increasing worker loyalty and efficiency (Carrette & King, 2004). Feeling good about one’s work truly improves productivity. It enhances skill and implores a good relationship between employees. Escriva da Balaguer has declared that for an employee to be holy, he or she must consecrate work, his or her self and others in work (Estruch, 1996 cited in Carrette & King, 2004, p.136). Third, employees having social conscience can appreciate the idea of spirituality as an “alternative, counter-cultural or subversive of mainstream materialistic values” (Carrette & King, 2004). Appreciation of a corporate attitude always leads to greater loyalty. One could expect these kinds of employees to be proud and caring of their company. This technique is considered as an attempt at controlling one’s thought (Carrette & King, 2004). It is about mood-altering which is dedicated to explore “the spiritual dimension of life” (Roberts, 2002 cited in Carrette & King, 2004, p.135). According to Colin Turner (1997 cited in Carrette & King, 2004, p.135), this type of search is an essential ingredient for an organization to succeed. Conclusion The media has extended the scope of blasphemous act. From being focused on the misuse of religious images, it has now covered blasphemy done through the electronic media. The media has greatly influenced how the new generation views religion. It has shaped how religion lives on in the minds of the people. It is almost impossible to separate religion and the media in this technological era. Nevertheless, regulation had to prevent its disastrous effects. References Baugh, L., 1997. Imaging the divine: jesus and christ-figures in film. Franklim, WI: Sheed and Ward. Carrette, J. & King, R., 2004. Selling spirituality: the silent takeover of religion. New York: Routledge. Hoover, S. & Clark, L. S., 2002. Practicing Religion in the age of the media: explorations in media, religion, and culture. New York: Columbia University Press. Lawton, D., 1993. Blasphemy. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Mitchell, J. & Marriage, S., 2003. Mediating religion: conversations in media, religion and culture. London: Continuum International Publishing Group. Nash, D., 2007. Blasphemy in the christian world: a history. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Poole, E., 2002. Reporting islam: media representations of british muslims. London: I.B. Tauris. Potter, W. J., 2010. Media literacy. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE. Read More