For many years, there has
been much talk about the fall of religions as a result of enlightenment and
modernity, leading to “disenchantment” as Max Weber argued. Some extreme
movements even sought to eliminate religion completely.
But religions are still
alive and strong. They have a wide and deep influence on the public sphere.
Does that present a threat
to secularism? Is religion part of the problem in the rise of extremism
globally, or can it be part of the solution?
This is not an advocacy of
the religious state in all its forms; rather, it is an attempt to understand
how sufficient is the globally dominant Western secularism. It is a critique of
particular forms of adjustment of the separation between religiosity and
politics.
Cause of extremism?
In the
modern era, it is very common to attack religion as a problem-maker. We see
this following any violent incident in any part of the world where religion is
merely one factor among many others in the violence.
This
shows that ideas about secularism (at least in the Western context) have gone
beyond the formal separation of state and religion. This has evolved to the
level of what Charles Taylor calls “the condition of belief”: there is a clear
emphasis on the necessity of disappearance of God and religion combined with a
strong rejection of religious involvement in public activities.
This
“ethical secularism,” as Rajeev Bhargava puts it, regards religion as merely a
disease in the public sphere, which should be forced to retreat to a very
secluded part of the private life. It leaves no space for acknowledging the
strong potential of spirituality and religion in conflict resolution and
peacemaking.
Ethical
secularism as an ideology has the potential for being radicalized itself by
privileging secular humanism, exclusive humanism or atheism over religions. The
unfairness of favoring one part of society over others and the potential for
radical secularism point to the need for a moderate version of secularism.
From
this perspective, the correlation between religion and extremism would be
understood differently, as radical secularism produces extremism as well. This
is the case in the Middle East, for instance. The forcible imposition of
the secular nation-state upon the Muslim world led to not just despotism,
suppression and massacres in the last century, but also paved the way for
Islamic fundamentalism to come to the surface at the expense of moderates.
Secularism
as a critique of religious hegemony must not just be a “mechanical repetition
of violence-enacting critique, but rather the manifestation of critique as a
receptivity-enacting, possibility-disclosing practice” as Nikolas
Kompridis argues. Secularism as a system of “mediation,” using
Abdullahi an-Naim’s description, must promote compromise between religious and
non-religious groups, rather than prioritizing or privileging a non-religious
lifestyle.
Another
issue with blaming religion is that a distinction needs to be made between
religion as an abstract phenomenon and the actions of specific adherents.
Religion, secularism, atheism and other such concepts need to be viewed through
an agency. Consequently, a particular religious institute, a specific secular
state or a certain religious or non-religious conduct can usefully be
discussed.
Religion
is a far more complex entity, with a broad variety of interpretations. It is
not necessarily tyrannical or oppressive by nature.
Record of peacemaking
Religions
with a long history of traditions, wisdom and spiritual experience have a very
big potential to be a part of the solution, not the problem. According to
the Institute of Peace, religious or faith-based peacemaking “is becoming
much more common, and the number of cases cited is growing at an increasing
pace.”
Some
faith-based peacemaking has successfully averted civil war. As an instance, the
Christian-rooted Community of Sant’Egidio in its 50-year history has
contributed to many cases of peacemaking. With 70,000 active volunteers of
various religions in more than 70 countries, it has vast experience in conflict
resolution and in promoting peace worldwide.
The
community has contributed to peace negotiations in Algeria, Mozambique,
the Philippines and elsewhere. It recently hosted two dialogue
meetings between high-ranking Shiite and Sunni leaders in Iraq, and Shiite
and Catholic religious leaders to confront global challenges in terms of
extremism and conflicts.
In
another example, the Muslim-Shiite cleric Ayatollah Sistani has had a
prominent role in countering religious extremism and promoting forgiveness and
peace. He has acted wisely during Iraq’s occupation and sectarian strife; his
presence has helped avoid even worse humanitarian catastrophes. He never asked
for an “Islamic state”; rather, he calls for a democratic civil state in Iraq.
The
religious contribution to peacemaking and resolution of various social issues
must be recognized and encouraged, instead of simplistically blaming religions
and pushing them out of the public sphere based on an extreme understanding of
secularism.
Ali
Mamouri is a PhD candidate at the Institute for Social Justice at the
Australian Catholic University. (EPA
Photo/Osservatore Romano)
No comments:
Post a Comment