This week in class groups of students took turns presenting case studies from books they read. These case studies each dealt with different religious groups. One dealt with Catholics, another with orthodox Jews, one dealt with a cult from the late 20^th century, one dealt with newer mega churches, and there were one or two others. Each of these case studies dealt with particular places that the authors of the books focused in on for their study samples. The authors spent certain amounts of time at these places, getting to know the people and the way they did things, and they even participated in activities sometimes. They also would interview people within their case study groups as well. Then in their books, they wrote down what they discovered. For example, the case study my group talked about and presented was about a Catholic community church in the Midwest that was dealing with the changing demographic of its attendance. (The Shared Parish, Hoover) Before, it had been primarily attended by Euro-American families. (The Shared Parish, Hoover) However in more recent years, immigration from Latin America created a parish that now has both Caucasian and Hispanic families attending services. (The Shared Parish, Hoover) The book talked about this change, how it affected both groups, and how it created two separate church communities who just happen to share the same church facilities. (The Shared Parish, Hoover) It really had some interesting stuff to talk about. Another case study that was presented talked about why certain women were converting to Orthodox Judaism. Another talked about the properties of mega churches and why they’ve become so popular with people. In the end, this is all interesting stuff to read and learn about, and it offers people a glimpse into these communities and what they’re about.

There seems to be a pattern in what draws people to a religion, especially the more conservative ones. Many people who flocked to a religion are trying to find structure in their lives. This was shown in Tradition in a Rootless World. In Tradition in a Rootless World the women in the book were seeking conformation that their traditional roles are not being complete lost to the feminist movement. Orthodox Jews have a very traditional view of a women’s role, meaning they believe that a women’s duty is to become  wife and a mother and take care of the household. These women felt isolated and were confused about their gender roles in the new womens landscape. These women as Orthodox Jews. were trying to find something that is bigger than themselves and find structure that  can help them with their everyday lives and actions. Once people get out of institutions like schools, they start to feel lost or feel like they have a lack of purpose. It becomes harder to meet people and find a community when you step out into the world on your own. People start to look for other places of structure and people find religion to guide them. Due to the strict nature of Orthodox Jews, their religion effects every aspect of their lives, from what they eat to how they should feel about things in the changing world around them. Religion provides structure in a time the world seems to be in disarray and people crave that structure.

Last week’s discussions were a little different as we started our presentations on our specific books. Having presented on Wednesday on my book Passionate Journeys, I thought it was really interesting to think about religion from the point of view of God Needs No Passport. Passionate Journeys focused on the Rajneesh cult and how thousands of men and woman found fullfillment within the teachings and values of Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, while God Needs No Passport had a broader focus on religion. It was very interesting to think about the different types of religious acceptance, like religious tolerance, pluralism, and exclusivism, and especially how they relate to today’s current events. Especially in the US, it is very important to accept new religions regardless of whether or not you agree/ believe in them, as our country’s founders were also escaping religious persecution. The question of whether or not a pluralistic society can successfully exist was raised during the presentation, and while a pluralistic society may be unreasonable in today’s political climate, I believe it is possible to acheive a tolerant society.

It is quite interesting reading about how religion can hold people together, but just as well tear them apart while we are living in this time in history. Durkheim stated that social cohesion occurred through people who were similar with each other and religion being central to this similarity. Now when we bring civil religion and nationalism into the same topic, we see a pattern especially in the United States. Civil religion tells us that God has a relationship with the U.S. if we lead the country in the “right” way. Now since the beginning of this country’s history this idea led to “Manifest Destiny” which has become cause and justification for genocide against Native Americans, racism against slaves, xenophobia, etc. It’s this idea that religion and nationalism go together because God loves this country IF we run it a certain way, and I’d go far as to say, exclude some people out. This priestly civil religion states that “our kind of people” are the best and therefore, what we say goes. It’s quite interesting that Trump is running this country under this very same rhetoric. “America 1st” is not a new concept and involves putting us before anyone else because God has a special relationship with us. It’s truly disheartening because this kind of belief is not inclusive of all people. Obama heavily stressed a more prophetic civil religion view in that we have a higher calling and certain ideals to meet if we are to call ourselves great. This focused on more caring about your neighbor, and reminding us that what makes this country great is our diversity.

The presence of religion in politics and questioning of its presence has been a relevant issue in American politics for some time now with the rise of the religious right movement. The religious right and the Republican party’s platform were thought to have truly aligned with one another in response to the many social liberation movements that stemmed from the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. An issue that has remained relevant throughout the decades of religious and political discourse is abortion. In chapter 8 of Chaves’ American Religion, he discusses the controversial presence of religion in politics and vice versa. Chaves writes, “A second cause of the increasingly tight connection between religious service attendance and some kinds of social and political conservatism is that people have been changing their religion to match their political and social views.” (pg. 104). With recent shifting bipartisan political tensions, many people have been looking to and relying more on the views of those that are of the same religious affiliation. Some individuals who do not have a clear stance on a political issue may look to the views of their religious organization for clarification on what “their people” believe. On the other hand, there has also been an increase of some individuals who abandon or even discredit their childhood or previous religious affiliation because their views on social and political issues do not align. Because of political and social tensions that many religious organizations show their stances on, the lines of the political and the religious often blur, which can be especially worrisome when these religious political stances are preached by individuals in high public offices.

The social role of religion has long gone back and forth. Northern Ireland is a prime example as to how religion has and continues to divide people and tear societies apart. Across Northern Ireland the struggle between the Catholics and Protestants is clearly expressed in street art we saw, but the divide goes deeper influencing the development of different communities and the political structure as well. The argument could be made that though the larger community is torn apart, the smaller contending communities within are brought closer together. In contrast where religion tears societies apart, religion also holds societies together. Civil religion unites societies as it has done in the United States. The historical mythology of the United States binds citizens together, like the heroic stories of George Washington or Johnny Appleseed in the early legends of bravery surrounding the pioneer day. Civil religion is reflective of the society on a general basis, allowing each person to relate to the mythology and values at a rudimentary level and then build upon that belief, like American Exceptionalism. To each person of the United States American Exceptionalism means something different, but overall it is a general sense of pride and superiority of the United States, uniting the public behind that idea. Passionate Journeys further emphasizes the impact of religion to build a community. Women from all walks of life came and joined together around a singular belief system that has largely unified a previously nonexistent community. Whereas God Needs No Passport, contributes to the idea that conflicting outlooks on different religions threatens the societal makeup especially in the case of Alice in a particularly developing part of Massachusetts.

In our last class we learned about two different presentations.  The presentation on the book, “God Needs No Passport” made me think about how we see the people around us who are involved with religion and those who aren’t.  I studied abroad in Copenhagen, Denmark for four months, and while I was there I noticed how secular the people seem to be as well as their emphasis on humanism, equality, fairness etc.  This reminded me of the two terms discussed in the presentation.  What I saw in Denmark appeared to be a great example of religious tolerance.  Religion isn’t something that is really talked about to your friends or people you know and is something private in Denmark.  The majority of the Danish people seem to be accepting of other religions, but the next step to pluralism doesn’t seem to be there.  It takes effort to be able to find communities or spaces in which to practice your religion with others, so in this way Denmark seems to be tolerant, but not pluralist.  All of this is just my opinion from what I have learned and experienced in Denmark.

The presentation on different types of people in terms of their relationship to religion was interesting.  I think it is hard to have only four categories of people just because the relationship an individual can have with their religion and how they treat others can not be reduced to four archetypes. There are many factors that can play into how one sees religion in the world versus in their lives versus in their communities and I think people and nations need to learn to be more tolerant of different beliefs to allow people to coexist.

Religion provides an experience that is larger than oneself. After our discussion on Monday and the presentations on Wednesday, this thought has rang true. Religion, throughout history, has caused tremendous conflict. Whether it be through wars, colonialism, or a passive judgement between individuals, official and unofficial religion persists. One who is devout in their religion holds it dear to his or her heart, and will often defend it relentlessly. We’ve seen conflict between Ted and his Born Again brother, we have seen conflict in the daily lives of the characters of God Needs No Passport, and with Sheela in the Rajneesh cult who poisoned 750 people. Despite the fact that many of the foundational values of dominant religions are similar, historically, people have had a tendency to find their personal beliefs superior. This trend has declined with time.

But why have people been so persistent with their religious beliefs? Religion provides an experience that is bigger than oneself. Those who were apart of Rajneesh in Oregon felt that their religion provided an opportunity to be the truest form of themselves. Their religion provided a platform for self discovery, and an opportunity to live more freely, openly and peacefully than a typical society would allow. The feeling evoked from dynamic meditation made the sannyasins feel beyond an individual living a mortal life– they felt as if they were apart of a movement and connected to a greater spiritual being. Members of the Fundamentalist Baptist Church in the film Born Again, felt a purpose in life greater than just living day to day. They felt that their life’s purpose was to live and spread the word of God, and by doing so, they were apart of a grander experience.

Religion has pulled people apart. But religion also coheres people together, with others who desire to feel something bigger than oneself, making it worth some strife.