Religion and Violence - Report Example

RELIGION AND VIOLENCE Introduction Among the main religious traditions of the world are Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam and Judaism. Allreligious traditions underscore ethical values, and peaceful coexistence based on justice and harmony with the earth. To counteract violence, it is important for all individuals to go beyond religious idealism, as well as narrow political, national or economic objectives1. Only intensive and concrete planning, prevention and interventions can help to reduce violence caused by religious extremism and misinterpretation of holy doctrines in adverse ways. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to investigate religion and violence by examining the historicity of religious violence, the ways religions promote or oppose violence, and effective initiatives to support inter-religious harmony. The Historicity of Religious Violence There are four historical moments that reveal the origins of religious violence. The first is associated with the diffusion of world religions during the 4th to 7th centuries of the Christian era. Christianity became the dominant religion of Europe through displacement of the religions native to the continent, and through the officialization of the new religion in the Roman empire. While Christianity spread to Ethiopia in Africa and to South Asia, Hinduism spread to Indonesia, Buddhism to China, Korea and Japan from India. By the beginning of the 8th CE, Islam covered Spain and the Arab world, and went to Sind in the Indian subcontinent. “Much violence was involved in the transcontinental spread of the world religions”2. Although most of the pre-colonial spread of religion was associated with political conquest and physical violence, this was not always the rule. For example, violence did not characterize the spread of Hinduism. Christianity scarcely used violence in spreading to South Asia. King Ashoka converted to Buddhism, unable to bear the carnage of the Kalinga war, and propagated the religion through peaceful means. The second historical moment was colonialism characterized by racial superiority and cultural conquest through the “civilizing mission”. This was in addition to political and economic domination, and was charged with religious violence. “The European missionaries did not even recognize the religions of the New World as religion”3, not even as human beings. Not only were the First Nations not allowed their cultural identity, they were physically liquidated. The people of Africa were considered as primitive, without history and without religion. Hence it was thought to be necessary to convert them to Christianity in large numbers. However, in the case of Islam, they put up a stiff resistance, resulting in violent conflicts between the two imported religions. Today, the leading religion of 50 percent of the African states is Christianity, the other main religion being Islam, thereby relegating native religions to the background. In the Orient composed of the three great civilizations of China, India and Egypt, dominant religions prevailed, related to Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam respectively. Therefore, the scope of Christianizination of these regions through colonialism was limited. The third historical moment is that the European model of the nation-state has been endorsed by religious nationalists in most parts of the world, establishing political hegemony by the religious majority, and the cultural assimilation of the religious minorities into the “nation”. The diasporic Jewish community in Europe which was economically prosperous, were the object of European wrath through the holocaust4. The cold-war era which saw a rapid spread of the concept of the nation-state experienced great violence based on religion, by Christians. Homogenization that erases the cultural identity of peoples and nations is a violent process. The cold-war period which occurred for four decades, divided the world into three: the capitalist democracies of the world, the socialist one-party system of the second world, and the third-world which was mainly ex-colonial and non-aligned, but underdeveloped. The fourth historical moment is the collapse of the second world in the late 1980s, when globalization5 began, accelerating the movement of population and capital, while bringing in a new type of violence. The economic success of the overseas Chinese community is making them soft targets in some Asian countries such as Indonesia and Thailand. Although disparity in wealth is the main reason for unleashing violence against the Chinese, the immigrant Chinese are also predominantly Christians, thus rendering them vulnerable. “The media sensationalizes the issue by focusing selectively on the religious identity of the aggressors and the victims”6.   The Ways in which Relgions Promote or Oppose Violence Silence: Religious communities maintain silence when there is violence taking place. This may be due to concern for the survival of their own communities and structures, or lack of consideration for the marginalized so long as their own prosperity is not threatened. Sanctification: The use of violence by the state or extra-state entities is overlooked by religious communities. Examples are adherence to “militaristic objectives of the state and the textual/ canonical legitimization of violence against women”7. Expansion: This is when religious communities engage in violence for spreading themselves or ensuring their own growth. Images of God: Some religious beliefs create violent images of the Divine, which may result in difficulties in self-understanding and consequent actions of the believers. Images of self: Relgious traditions promote violence by assessing the value of the adherents in terms of the lesser worth of others. Opposing and unmasking violence: This is carried out by religious communities both within their own groups and in support of people of other religion when they are injured in religious conflicts. Models of non-violence: In each relgious tradition, there are significant individuals and groups who have lived lives as testaments to religious peace and harmony. Limiting violence: Religions play dominant roles in checking violence. Sometimes limited violence is permitted towards achieving good results, “but with the understanding that we are falling short of the ideal and thus in need of forgiveness”8. Initiatives to Promote Inter-Religious Harmony Various inter-religious initiatives differ with respect to scope, impact and the participants involved. They attempt to “promote and stimulate debate and exchange of ideas, facilitate the recognition of shared values, and foster respect and tolerance for diversity”9. Several initiatives concerning world peace are based on religions as peacemakers, as an alternative to fuelling conflicts. Thus, fostering cooperation for global good among people of the world’s religions, while promoting the realization that each religious tradition has the potential for peace-building. Similarly, encouraging cooperation around issues of shared moral concerns, would greatly enhance the future life of all people. Supporting the work of the United Nations by representatives of world religions help to alleviate conflicts from religious, moral and ethical perspectives. Other inter-religious initiatives address societal and global issues such as “injustice, physical poverty, violence, and environmental destruction”10, thereby supporting global peace. Conclusion This paper has highlighted the relationship between religion and violence. The evidence indicates that most religions of the world have been propagated through violence and blood-shed, and have often been intertwined with prevailing politics or the economy. The ways in which religions usually promote violence, even in contemporary times, and world initiatives to encourage inter-religious peace and harmony have been examined. Only through integrated efforts can be achieved a unified and tolerant world. References Faubion, James D. “Violence and the vitalistic economy”. Anthropological Quarterly 76: 1 (2003): pp.71-85. Oommen, T.K. “Religion as a source of violence”. The Ecumenical Review 53: 2 (2001): p.168-179. Ter Haar, Gerrie, and James J. Busuttil. Bridge or barrier: Religion, violence and visions for peace. Boston: Brill, 2005. Ucko, Hans. “Religion and violence – An inter-religious exploration: Introduction to a Multifaith consultation”. The Ecumenical Review 55: 2 (2003): pp.105-112. Read More