Three Articles Reviewed

Phil Helliwell

[1.] Religious Diversity: Some Implications for Monotheism – Rita M. Gross
[2.] Religious Resurgence, Conflict and the Transformation of Boundaries – Gary D. Bouma
[3.] Religion in Global Culture: New Directions in an Increasingly Self-conscious World – James V. Spikard


[1.]
In her article, Religious Diversity: Some Implications for Monotheism, Gross’ seeks not only to challenge the core beliefs of monotheistic faiths, but also to promote religious pluralism. Her article works on the assumption that the main tenets of religious pluralism are true, and so religious doctrines running against these tenets are highly problematic, as they assumedly ruin the goals of religious pluralism, which are/either truth/peace/right conduct/tolerance/etc.

Gross begins with a brief and selected historical overview of the development of the world’s most famous monotheistic faiths, namely Judaism and the subsequent Christianity. She makes important observations about when these faiths became universalising - the idea that one god is the god of all - and raises good points concerning the cultural and ethnic creative forces that combine (with other factors) to produce the aptly named ethnoreligions.

But after Gross finishes her brief historical run-through of the formation of (the) classical monotheistic faiths, she moves directly onto an attack of these faiths. She raises some good points, such as the susceptibility of these religions to create an “us and them” mentality, thus creating religious tension, bigotry and violence. But though she raises these good points, it’s the underlying assumptions that weaken the articles’ validity, especially to those who do not subscribe to religious pluralism.

The primary assumption of Gross’ seems to be that religious conflict stems directly from doctrine. She explains this position through her opposition to universal truth claims, something all religions clearly do, but how the ones particular to monotheistic faiths are directly responsible for creating the most religious mischief. While it is perfectly reasonable to say that the great monotheisms have created a lot of the religiously motivated violence in human history, her reasons for this being so are stretched considerably. Surely there were and are other forces at work?

Gross ends on a call-to-arms, an offer to everyone to embrace her brand of religious pluralism, which is clearly set out, complete with stages. But to someone who is sceptical of those claims – sceptical of the possibility of society embracing such a viewpoint, of the democratisation of truth, of an alleged religious neutrality actually modelled after a particular religious doctrine, of the mutually exclusive claims of almost all religions and of the impossibility of tolerating something one actually likes – her article is problematic.



[2.]
Religious Resurgence, Conflict and the Transformation of Boundaries by Gary D. Bouma, succinctly addresses the challenges facing religion today in terms of its very defining qualities. He begins by outlining several possibilities that may explain the current resurgence in religious commitment today; traditional organised religion losing touch with the religious needs of the population (a recurring trend), failures of the justice system, the failure of the secular humanist paradigm, migration, and the rise of evangelical or “emotive” religious practices.

With the increased religious commitment comes increased religious competition and conflict, but the situation is not simply a build-up of religious fervour; the “External Other”, once the so-called great powers of Communism in times passed, is now manifested as an ideological and belief-based Other, or, a religious-based Other. But Bouma makes a poignant observation in the very lack of the traditional Other being a vacuum for ecumenical attitudes; as a “great enemy” is not present, internal religious tension takes prime focus. The resulting conflict, internal or otherwise, is strictly concerned with the drawing of boundaries. The problems that arise from this situation however is an “Imagined Other”, and if this is acted upon, serious problems are probable, as the Imagined Other has no basis in reality.

Since religious boundaries are no longer defined by the state, the forces of ideology take spotlight. For example, the event of September 11 turned attitudes from ethnic and racial differences to those of the religious. The Post-modern climate ushers forth continuous hyper-differentiation, as opposed to High Modernity, which espoused solid authority. The modern world now does not make defining religious boundaries easy. With Globalisation, the speed at which the great volume of people and religious ideas is spread exponentially increases the instances and likelihood of religious competition and conflict. Bouma’s article is insightful, brilliantly realised and probably right.


[3.]
In James V. Spickard’s article, Religion in Global Culture: New Directions in an Increasingly Self-conscious World, Globalisation’s direct effect on religion is expertly illustrated. Spickard begins with some key ideas that have been in play for the last several hundred years, which have become the cultural assumptions held universally in the modern world. These ideas, the ideas of the individual and human rights, are so commonly held that they have gravitated into a state of “naturalness” and are firmly knitted to the modern man.

This modern ideal had its genesis in the Treaty of Westphalia, which created a new idea of sovereignty, giving the State a new meaning; the power over sovereignty itself. Included in the package was Ethnic Nationalism, which grew in strength right up until after World War Two, when the idea exploded in a show of officialdom in the 1948 United Nations Declaration. But running alongside the wildfire growth of nationalism was the more pragmatic spread of the idea, which was the injection of Christian missionaries to all parts of the globe. With those missionaries, Christianity was spread, but not without the equally striking ideas of Western thought. These ideas have since stuck and have since outlasted their imperialistic origins.

The modern world has gone through continuous global shifting, and though ideas of the individual and human rights have made themselves resolutely home, uncertainty prevails in many areas. The decline of the power and importance of the state is synonymous with the rise in the global economic state, and so for many people a solid base of protection is found in religion. What the homogenising effect of Globalisation has spawned is a thirst for social certainty (not ideological certainty), a sense of solidarity, of something tangible, with boundaries; a cultural localism. And with the continuing growth of Globalisation, the economic integration will, as purported by Spickard, result in the incubation and creation of many more localisms. Thus Spickard ends with the conclusion that religious fundamentalism and ethnic nationalism have more in common than most realise.