Download `Religion can be both a conservative force and an initiator of social

‘Religion can be both a conservative force and an
initiator of social change.’ To what extent do
sociological arguments and evidence support this
view of religion?
Sociological arguments such as Marxists think religion inhibits social
change and is kept as a conservative force. However, Functionalists think
religion is an initiator of social change.
Marx said religion inhibits social change and helps to oppress workers.
Karl Marx said that in a capitalist society there was conflict between the
ruling class and the working class because the ruling class exploit the
working class to get the most profit out of them. Marx says the working
class are in a state of false consciousness. This is where religion comes in.
Marx is very critical of religion. He says it keeps the working class in a
state of false consciousness. Marx said ‘Religion is the opium of the
people’ meaning it dulls the pain of oppression like opium. It doesn’t take
away the pain though.
Marx says that religion justifies social inequality. Peop le have heaven to
look forward to if they’re good, so they don’t break the rules and don’t
challenge the capitalist system. Religion consoles people with the
promise of life after death and so they put up with their suffering on
Earth more easily. Religion often tells people that their position is decided
by God. This encourages false consciousness by blaming God instead of
blaming capitalism. If God is all powerful he could do something about
the suffering if he wanted to. He doesn’t do anything – so this must be
how society is meant to be.
So Marxism says that religion passes on beliefs that oppress the working
class. Religion is a conservative force which prevents revolution. The rich
stay rich and the poor keep on working. It’s a neat social control.
There’s evidence that religion is a conservative and oppressive force.
Hymns like ‘All Things Bright and Beautiful’ contain really clear ideologies
like ‘’the rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate, God made them
high and lowly and ordered their estate.’’
But in some cases, there was evidence to suggest that religion can
encourage social change. Engels thought that in some circumstances
religion could actually be a revolutionary force. Sometimes religion is the
only means of change because all oth er routes have been blocked. Neo Marxist Otto Maduro (1982) claimed that religion isn’t always a
conservative force. In the 1960s and 1970s, Catholic priests in Latin
America criticised the bourgeoisie and preached Liberation Theology using religion to fr ee people from their oppression. This led to resistance
and social change - in 1979 Catholic revolutionaries threw out the
oppressive government in Nicaragua. Maduro said religion is often ‘one
of the main available channels to bring about a social revolution.’
Functionalists on the other hand see religion as something that inhibits
change and helps keep society as it is. They think this is a positive role
which creates social order based on value consensus.
Durkheim studied Aboriginal society and found th at the sacred worship of
totems was equivalent to worshipping society itself. Durkheim said that
sacred religious worship encourages shared values.
Maliniski (1954) looked at how religion deals with situations of emotional
stress that threaten social orde r. Unpredictable or stressful events like
births and deaths create disruption. Religion manages these tensions and
recreates stability.
Parsons wrote in the 1930s and 1940s that religion provides guidelines
for human action in terms of ‘core values’ Relig ion helps to integrate
people into a value consensus and allows them to make sense of their
lives.
There’s also a Functionalist idea of civil religion, which is when secular
symbols and rituals create social cohesion in a similar way to religion.
Flags, famous political figures and even royal deaths bring about some
kind of collective feeling that generates order and stability.
Functionalism ignores dysfunctional aspects of religion. There are religious
conflicts all over the world. Religion can be a sour ce of oppression.
Religion can also bring about social change which Functionalists ignore as
well.
The sociologist Weber said that religion can indirectly cause social
change. His book ‘The Protestant Work Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism’
looked at how the religious ideas of Calvinism brought about social
change. Weber spot ted two important things in Calvinism:
Predestination- Early Calvinists believed in predestination which says your
life and whether you have a place in heaven is predetermined by God. On ly
a specific few were chosen for heaven. This created anxiety - you didn’t
know if you’d been chosen.
Ascetic Ideal – Working hard in your job was a solution to this anxiety.
Success might be a sign that you were chosen for heaven. Early Calvinists
lived a strict and disciplined life of hard work and simple pleasures.
Weber claimed that the ascetic ideal created an ethic of disciplined hard
work. This is the spirit of capitalism. Not only was there a build up of capital
and business, there was the right wo rk ethic for capitalism. Religion
indirectly brought about change.
However Eisenstadt (1967) contradicts Weber’s theory by claiming that
capitalism occurred in Catholic countries like Italy before Protestant
Reformation happened and before the ideas of Ca lvin ever came out.
In conclusion, sociologists both have good arguments and evidence to
suggest that religion is both a conservative force and an initiator of social
change.