Religious Violence

In order to make any headway on the question of what religious violence is, one must first have a working definition of religion. � In his book, Holy Terrors, Bruce Lincoln lays out such a definition in four parts. � In order to be called a religion, according to Lincoln, a group must first posses "a discourse whose concerns transcend the human, temporal and contingent, and that claims for itself a similarly transcendent status." � (Lincoln, 5) � Such a discourse must make claims to authority and truth in an inspirational way, which will engage its followers. � The second requirement is "a set of practices whose goal is to produce a proper world and/or proper human subjects, as defined by a religious discourse to which these practices are connected." � (Lincoln, 6) � Practice allows the followers to connect in a deeper way with the discourse, because it brings the discourse to life in a tangible way, through "embodied material action". � (Lincoln, 6)

Requirement three is "a community whose members construct their identity with reference to a religious discourse and its attendant practices." � (Lincoln, 6) � A religion must have followers who adhere to its texts and practices to be classified as such. � The final condition for defining a religion is "an institution for regulating religious discourse, practices, and community, reproducing them over time and modifying them as necessary, while asserting their eternal validity and transcendent value." � (Lincoln, 7) � A religion needs a governing body whose concerns include the institutionalization of the discourse in school, legislation of discourse and practice, and propagation of religious ideals throughout the community. ��

This definition of religion is better than most because it addresses the question of what religion is, rather than what it does. � Its vagueness allows it to encompass non-theistic religions, but it is concrete enough to exclude that which is non-religious. � Using Lincoln's example, "Astrophysicists do not engage in religious speech when they discuss cosmogony, so long as they frame their statements as hypotheses and provisional conclusions based on experimentation, calculation and human reason." � (Lincoln, 5) � Taking this example a little further, one discovers that in astrophysics, there are universal practices for the study and furthered learning on the subject, a community of people who identify themselves as astrophysicists, and an institution, usually a university or professional group, who defines the scope of astrophysics, while recording the facts as they have been gathered over time. � However, using Lincoln's definition, they can not be a religion, because their discourse is not rooted in transcendent authority. � (Lincoln,�5)

Now that religion has been adequately defined, the next step is to identify the types of people within it. � Within every religion there are people who hold "the conviction that religion ought to permeate all aspects of social, indeed of human existence." �� (Lincoln, 5) � This type of person is usually termed as an "extremist" or "fundamentalist". � However, these terms carry such negative connotations in American society that they are more appropriately, as well as objectively, termed "maximalists". � On the opposite side of the spectrum in every religion, people who are termed "minimalists" also exist. � They "restrict religion to an important set of (chiefly metaphysical) concerns, protect its privileges against state intrusion, but restrict its activities and influence to this specialized sphere." � (Lincoln, 5) ��

This difference in views is especially important when studying the relations between religion and the secular state. � The modern secular state is a Western export that holds to the same definition as a religious minimalist. � It sequesters religion to the private realm, especially in places where religious diversity is commonplace, thus preventing the issue from turning into public controversy. � The goal of the religious maximalist, to spread religion to more realms of life, comes into direct opposition to the concept of the secular state. � The secular state will always support the minimalists, while always trying to diffuse the maximalists. � (Lincoln, 65)

Both the minimalists and maximalists are prone to violence under the right circumstances. � Minimalist violence is usually undertaken under the banner of the state, in oppression and persecution of the maximalists who threaten its security or authority. � (Lincoln, 64) � Maximalist violence is a little more complicated. � They typically want to overthrow the secular state in order to form a new religious state, indoctrinating their religious system as law, especially at times when the secular government begins to lose its hold over the people. � When the maximalist movement begins to pick up its pace, its members decide the state is illegitimate, and all institutions therein become targets for violence in the name of religious authority. (Lincoln, 65)

Lincoln also claims that three types of religion exist in societies. � The first type is the religion of the status quo. � "The dominant fraction disseminates a characteristic ideology through all segments of society, propounding a set of fundamental values and principles that, while expressed in terms of lofty abstraction or eternal truth, nevertheless serves to further the interests of those who hold power. � Most often this ideology is couched in religious or para-religious forms." � (Lincoln, 79) � The religion of the status quo serves to reconcile those who have power to those who have none. � In their reliance on keeping the status quo, they must repress and annihilate those who challenge it. � Usually the power-holding elites see this as a positive thing, feeling that they are preserving the souls of the righteous "non-heretics" in the society. � (Lincoln, 83)

The second type of religion Lincolndiscusses is termed "religions of resistance". �� "Within such groups there regularly exist or come into being religious ideologies quite different from that propagated by the religion of the status quo, together with institutional structures for their preservation. � Such ideologies and institutions...result from the inevitable failure of the religion of the status quo to permeate and persuade all segments of society." � (Lincoln, 82) � Religions of resistance do not claim to want the elites removed from power, they merely disagree with the religion of the status quo. � (Lincoln, 85) � They are usually small, deeply committed groups who wish to be left alone, and who, in most cases, promote pacifist and non-violent resistance. � (Lincoln, 85) � However, religions of resistance can often turn into the third type of religion - religions of revolution.

Three important factors must be in place for a religion of resistance to turn into a religion of revolution. � First, "objective conditions within society (e.g., fiscal, economic, political, medical, nutritional, military, etc.) must worsen." � (Lincoln, 86) � Once conditions start to worsen, more and more people within the society begin to question the validity and truth behind the elite claims to power, and start joining religions of resistance in protest to the religion of the status quo. Next, "the religion of resistance must successfully articulate a new theory of political legitimacy, which denies the right of the dominant fraction to occupy its privileged position and the right of the religion of the status quo to dictate normative values." � (Lincoln, 86) � Presenting a theory of political legitimacy enables the group to appear credible in the eyes of a society who feels they are being torn apart. ��

The final condition for religions of resistance to become religions of revolution is that "the religion of resistance must overcome its insularity and begin to recruit actively, incorporating new adherents from segments of society previously absent from its membership." � (Lincoln, 86) � Once the religion of revolution is firmly in place, it will usually enact an act of violence to usher in the "new" age of their dominance. � The more outrageous the violent act, the further it distances itself from the religion of the status quo. � (Lincoln, 90) � At this point, it is either persecuted out of existence or it overthrows the elites to become the new religion of the status quo. � (Lincoln, 91)

Lincoln's categorizations of religion and religious people are very applicable in the modern world. �� Religious minimalists make up the basis for western power structures, while maximalism is still a very influential force in the world. � The current American military situation in is an excellent example of this. � Every day in 's cities its maximalist inhabitants fight against Western minimalism. � Every country on earth holds a religion of the status quo, while harboring small pockets of religions of resistance. � (Nations) � Lincoln helps to shed light on the intricacies of the religious violence issue, as well as its cynical nature, and to wake the world to the fact that the problem is not going away anytime soon.