Freedom of religion and other Wikipedia pages

Psychology of religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Religion and mental illness)
Jump to: navigation, search


Psychology
The Greek letter 'psi', a symbol for psychology
Outline ·
 History ·
 Subfields
 
Basic types
Abnormal ·
 Biological ·
 Cognitive ·
 Comparative ·
 Cross-cultural ·
 Cultural ·
 Differential ·
 Developmental ·
 Evolutionary ·
 Experimental ·
 Mathematical ·
 Neuropsychology ·
 Personality ·
 Positive ·
 Quantitative ·
 Social
 
Applied psychology
Applied behavior analysis ·
 Clinical ·
 Community ·
 Consumer ·
 Counseling ·
 Educational ·
 Environmental ·
 Ergonomics ·
 Forensic ·
 Health ·
 Humanistic ·
 Industrial and organizational ·
 Interpretive ·
 Legal ·
 Medical ·
 Military ·
 Music ·
 Occupational health ·
 Political ·
 Religion ·
 School ·
 Sport ·
 Traffic
 
Lists
Disciplines ·
 Organizations ·
 Psychologists ·
 Psychotherapies ·
 Publications ·
 Research methods ·
 Theories ·
 Timeline ·
 Topics
 
Portal icon Psychology portal
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Psychology of religion consists of the application of psychological methods and interpretive frameworks to religious traditions, as well as to both religious and irreligious individuals. The science attempts to accurately describe the details, origins, and uses of religious beliefs and behaviors. Although the psychology of religion first arose as a self-conscious discipline as recently as the late 19th century, all three of these tasks have a history going back many centuries before that.[1]
Many areas of religion remain unexplored by psychology. While religion and spirituality play a role in many people’s lives, it is uncertain how they lead to outcomes that are at times positive, and at other times negative. Thus, the pathways and outcomes that underlie these associations (and sometimes causations) need additional research. Continued dialogue between psychology and theology may foster greater understanding and benefit both fields.


Contents  [hide]
1 Overview
2 History 2.1 William James
2.2 Other early theorists 2.2.1 G.W.F. Hegel
2.2.2 Sigmund Freud
2.2.3 Carl Jung
2.2.4 Alfred Adler
2.2.5 Gordon Allport
2.2.6 Erik H. Erikson
2.2.7 Erich Fromm
2.2.8 Rudolf Otto
2.3 Modern thinkers 2.3.1 Allen Bergin
2.3.2 Robert Emmons
2.3.3 Kenneth Pargament
2.3.4 James Hillman
2.3.5 Julian Jaynes

3 Hypotheses on the role of religion 3.1 Secularization
3.2 Religious transformation
3.3 Cultural divide
4 Psychometric approaches to religion 4.1 Religious orientations and religious dimensions
4.2 Questionnaires to assess religious experience
5 Developmental approaches to religion
6 Religion and prayer
7 Religion and ritual
8 Religion and health 8.1 Religion and physical health
8.2 Religion and personality
8.3 Religion and mental health
8.4 Religion and prejudice
9 Evolutionary psychology of religion
10 Religion and drugs 10.1 James H. Leuba
10.2 Drug-induced religious experiences
11 Religion and meditation
12 Controversy
13 Other views
14 Religion and psychotherapy
15 Pastoral psychology
16 See also
17 References
18 Bibliography 18.1 Further reading
19 External links

Overview[edit]
The challenge for the psychology of religion is essentially threefold: (1) to provide a thoroughgoing description of the objects of investigation, whether they be shared religious content (e.g., a tradition's ritual observances) or individual experiences, attitudes, or conduct; (2) to account in psychological terms for the rise of such phenomena; and (3) to clarify the outcomes—the fruits, as William James put it—of these phenomena, for individuals and for the larger society.[1]
The first, descriptive task naturally requires a clarification of one's terms, above all, the word religion. Historians of religion have long underscored the problematic character of this term, noting that its usage over the centuries has changed in significant ways, generally in the direction of reification.[2] The early psychologists of religion were fully aware of these difficulties, typically acknowledging that the definitions they were choosing to use were to some degree arbitrary.[3] With the rise of positivistic trends in psychology over the course of the 20th century, especially the demand that all phenomena be measured, psychologists of religion developed a multitude of scales, most of them developed for use with Protestant Christians.[4] Factor analysis was also brought into play by both psychologists and sociologists of religion, in an effort to establish a fixed core of dimensions and a corresponding set of scales. The justification and adequacy of these efforts, especially in the light of constructivist and other postmodern viewpoints, remains a matter of debate.
In the last several decades, especially among clinical psychologists, a preference for the terms "spirituality" and "spiritual" has emerged, along with efforts to distinguish them from "religion" and "religious." Especially in the United States, "religion" has for many become associated with sectarian institutions and their obligatory creeds and rituals, thus giving the word a negative cast; "spirituality," in contrast, is positively constructed as deeply individual and subjective, as a universal capacity to apprehend and accord one's life with higher realities.[5] In fact, "spirituality" has likewise undergone an evolution in the West, from a time when it was essentially a synonym for religion in its original, subjective meaning.[6] Pargament (1997) suggests that rather than limiting the usage of “religion” to functional terms, a search for meaning, or substantive terms, anything related to the sacred, we can consider the interplay of these two vantage points. He proposes that religion can be considered the process of searching for meaning in relationship with the sacred.[7] Today, efforts are ongoing to "operationalize" these terms, with little regard for their history in their Western context, and with the apparent realist assumption that underlying them are fixed qualities identifiable by means of empirical procedures.[8]
History[edit]


 This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (January 2012)
William James[edit]
American psychologist and philosopher William James (1842–1910) is regarded by most psychologists of religion as the founder of the field.[9] He served as president of the American Psychological Association, and wrote one of the first psychology textbooks. In the psychology of religion, James' influence endures. His Varieties of Religious Experience is considered to be the classic work in the field, and references to James' ideas are common at professional conferences.
James distinguished between institutional religion and personal religion. Institutional religion refers to the religious group or organization, and plays an important part in a society's culture. Personal religion, in which the individual has mystical experience, can be experienced regardless of the culture. James was most interested in understanding personal religious experience.
In studying personal religious experiences, James made a distinction between healthy-minded and sick-souled religiousness. Individuals predisposed to healthy-mindedness tend to ignore the evil in the world and focus on the positive and the good. James used examples of Walt Whitman and the "mind-cure" religious movement to illustrate healthy-mindedness in The Varieties of Religious Experience. In contrast, individuals predisposed to having a sick-souled religion are unable to ignore evil and suffering, and need a unifying experience, religious or otherwise, to reconcile good and evil. James included quotations from Leo Tolstoy and John Bunyan to illustrate the sick soul.
William James' hypothesis of pragmatism stems from the efficacy of religion. If an individual believes in and performs religious activities, and those actions happen to work, then that practice appears the proper choice for the individual. However, if the processes of religion have little efficacy, then there is no rationality for continuing the practice.
Other early theorists[edit]
G.W.F. Hegel[edit]
Hegel (1770-1831) described all systems of religion, philosophy, and social science as expressions of the basic urge of consciousness to learn about itself and its surroundings, and record its findings and hypotheses. Thus, religion is only a form of that search for knowledge, within which humans record various experiences and reflections. Others, compiling and categorizing these writings in various ways, form the consolidated worldview as articulated by that religion, philosophy, social science, etc. His work The Phenomenology of Spirit was a study of how various types of writing and thinking draw from and re-combine with the individual and group experiences of various places and times, influencing the current forms of knowledge and worldviews that are operative in a population. This activity is the functioning of an incomplete group mind, where each individual is accessing the recorded wisdom of others. His works often include detailed descriptions of the psychological motivations involved in thought and behavior, e.g., the struggle of a community or nation to know itself and thus correctly govern itself. In Hegel's system, Religion is one of the major repositories of wisdom to be used in these struggles, representing a huge body of recollections from humanity's past in various stages of its development.
Sigmund Freud[edit]
Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) gave explanations of the genesis of religion in his various writings. In Totem and Taboo, he applied the idea of the Oedipus complex (involving unresolved sexual feelings of, for example, a son toward his mother and hostility toward his father) and postulated its emergence in the primordial stage of human development.



 Group photo 1909 in front of Clark University. Front row: Sigmund Freud, G. Stanley Hall, Carl Jung. Back row: Abraham Brill, Ernest Jones, Sándor Ferenczi.
In Moses and Monotheism, Freud reconstructed biblical history in accordance with his general theory. His ideas were also developed in The Future of an Illusion. When Freud spoke of religion as an illusion, he maintained that it is a fantasy structure from which a man must be set free if he is to grow to maturity.
Freud views the idea of God as being a version of the father image, and religious belief as at bottom infantile and neurotic. Authoritarian religion, Freud believed, is dysfunctional and alienates man from himself.
Carl Jung[edit]
The Swiss psychoanalyst Carl Jung (1875–1961) adopted a very different posture, one that was more sympathetic to religion and more concerned with a positive appreciation of religious symbolism. Jung considered the question of the existence of God to be unanswerable by the psychologist and adopted a kind of agnosticism.[10]
Jung postulated, in addition to the personal unconscious (roughly adopting Freud's concept), the collective unconscious, which is the repository of human experience and which contains "archetypes" (i.e. basic images that are universal in that they recur regardless of culture). The irruption of these images from the unconscious into the realm of consciousness he viewed as the basis of religious experience and often of artistic creativity. Some of Jung's writings have been devoted to elucidating some of the archetypal symbols, and include his work in comparative mythology.
Alfred Adler[edit]
Austrian psychiatrist Alfred Adler (1870–1937), who parted ways with Freud, emphasised the role of goals and motivation in his Individual Psychology. One of Adler's most famous ideas is that we try to compensate for inferiorities that we perceive in ourselves. A lack of power often lies at the root of feelings of inferiority. One way that religion enters into this picture is through our beliefs in God, which are characteristic of our tendency to strive for perfection and superiority. For example, in many religions God is considered to be perfect and omnipotent, and commands people likewise to be perfect. If we, too, achieve perfection, we become one with God. By identifying with God in this way, we compensate for our imperfections and feelings of inferiority.
Our ideas about God are important indicators of how we view the world. According to Adler, these ideas have changed over time, as our vision of the world – and our place in it – has changed. Consider this example that Adler offers: the traditional belief that people were placed deliberately on earth as God's ultimate creation is being replaced with the idea that people have evolved by natural selection. This coincides with a view of God not as a real being, but as an abstract representation of nature's forces. In this way our view of God has changed from one that was concrete and specific to one that is more general. From Adler's vantage point, this is a relatively ineffective perception of God because it is so general that it fails to convey a strong sense of direction and purpose.
An important thing for Adler is that God (or the idea of God) motivates people to act, and that those actions do have real consequences for ourselves and for others. Our view of God is important because it embodies our goals and directs our social interactions.
Compared to science, another social movement, religion is more efficient because it motivates people more effectively. According to Adler, only when science begins to capture the same religious fervour, and promotes the welfare of all segments of society, will the two be more equal in peoples' eyes.
Gordon Allport[edit]
In his classic book The Individual and His Religion (1950), Gordon Allport (1897–1967) illustrates how people may use religion in different ways.[11] He makes a distinction between Mature religion and Immature religion. Mature religious sentiment is how Allport characterized the person whose approach to religion is dynamic, open-minded, and able to maintain links between inconsistencies. In contrast, immature religion is self-serving and generally represents the negative stereotypes that people have about religion. More recently, this distinction has been encapsulated in the terms "intrinsic religion", referring to a genuine, heartfelt devout faith, and "extrinsic religion", referring to a more utilitarian use of religion as a means to an end, such as church attendance to gain social status. These dimensions of religion were measured on the Religious Orientation Scale of Allport and Ross (1967). A third form of religious orientation has been described by Daniel Batson. This refers to treatment of religion as an open-ended search (Batson, Schoenrade & Ventis, 1993). More specifically, it has been seen by Batson as comprising a willingness to view religious doubts in a positive manner, acceptance that religious orientation can change and existential complexity, the belief that one's religious beliefs should be shaped from personal crises that one has experienced in one's life. Batson refers to extrinsic, intrinsic and quest respectively as Religion-as-means, religion-as-end and religion-as-quest, and measures these constructs on the Religious Life Inventory (Batson, Schoenrade & Ventis, 1993).
Erik H. Erikson[edit]
Erik Erikson (1902–1994) is best known for his theory of psychological development, which has its roots in the psychoanalytic importance of identity in personality. His biographies of Gandhi and Martin Luther reveal Erikson's positive view of religion. He considered religions to be important influences in successful personality development because they are the primary way that cultures promote the virtues associated with each stage of life. Religious rituals facilitate this development. Erikson's theory has not benefited from systematic empirical study, but it remains an influential and well-regarded theory in the psychological study of religion.
Erich Fromm[edit]
The American scholar Erich Fromm (1900–1980) modified the Freudian theory and produced a more complex account of the functions of religion. In his book Psychoanalysis and Religion he responded to Freud's theories by explaining that part of the modification is viewing the Oedipus complex as based not so much on sexuality as on a "much more profound desire", namely, the childish desire to remain attached to protecting figures. The right religion, in Fromm's estimation, can, in principle, foster an individual's highest potentialities, but religion in practice tends to relapse into being neurotic.[12]
According to Fromm, humans have a need for a stable frame of reference. Religion apparently fills this need. In effect, humans crave answers to questions that no other source of knowledge has an answer to, which only religion may seem to answer. However, a sense of free will must be given in order for religion to appear healthy. An authoritarian notion of religion appears detrimental.[13]
Rudolf Otto[edit]
Rudolf Otto (1869–1937) was a German Protestant theologian and scholar of comparative religion. Otto's most famous work, The Idea of the Holy (published first in 1917 as Das Heilige), defines the concept of the holy as that which is numinous. Otto explained the numinous as a "non-rational, non-sensory experience or feeling whose primary and immediate object is outside the self." It is a mystery (Latin: mysterium tremendum) that is both fascinating (fascinans) and terrifying at the same time; A mystery that causes trembling and fascination, attempting to explain that inexpressible and perhaps supernatural emotional reaction of wonder drawing us to seemingly ordinary and/or religious experiences of grace. This sense of emotional wonder appears evident at the root of all religious experiences. Through this emotional wonder, we suspend our rational mind for non-rational possibilities.
It also sets a paradigm for the study of religion that focuses on the need to realise the religious as a non-reducible, original category in its own right. This paradigm was under much attack between approximately 1950 and 1990 but has made a strong comeback since then.
Modern thinkers[edit]
Autobiographal accounts of 20th century psychology of religion as a field have been supplied by numerous modern psychologists of religion, primarily based in Europe, but also by several US-based psychologists such as Ralph W. Hood and Donald Capps.[14]
Allen Bergin[edit]
Allen Bergin is noted for his 1980 paper "Psychotherapy and Religious Values," which is known as a landmark in scholarly acceptance that religious values do, in practice, influence psychotherapy.[15][16] He received the Distinguished Professional Contributions to Knowledge award from the American Psychological Association in 1989 and was cited as challenging "psychological orthodoxy to emphasize the importance of values and religion in therapy."[17]
Robert Emmons[edit]
Robert Emmons offered a theory of "spiritual strivings" in his 1999 book, The Psychology of Ultimate Concerns.[18] With support from empirical studies, Emmons argued that spiritual strivings foster personality integration because they exist at a higher level of the personality.
Kenneth Pargament[edit]
Kenneth Pargament is noted for his book Psychology of Religion and Coping (1997; see article),[19] as well as for a 2007 book on religion and psychotherapy, and a sustained research program on religious coping. He is professor of psychology at Bowling Green State University (Ohio, USA), and has published more than 100 papers on the subject of religion and spirituality in psychology. Pargament led the design of a questionnaire called the "RCOPE" to measure Religious Coping strategies.[20] Pargament has distinguished between three types of styles for coping with stress:[21] 1) Collaborative, in which people co-operate with God to deal with stressful events; 2) Deferring, in which people leave everything to God; and 3) Self-directed, in which people do not rely on God and try exclusively to solve problems by their own efforts. He also describes four major stances toward religion that have been adopted by psychotherapists in their work with clients, which he calls the religiously rejectionist, exclusivist, constructivist, and pluralist stances.[19][22]
James Hillman[edit]
James Hillman, at the end of his book Re-Visioning Psychology, reverses James' position of viewing religion through psychology, urging instead that we view psychology as a variety of religious experience. He concludes: "Psychology as religion implies imagining all psychological events as effects of Gods in the soul.[23]"
Julian Jaynes[edit]
Julian Jaynes, primarily in his book The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, proposed that religion (and some other psychological phenomena such as hypnosis and schizophrenia) is a remnant of a relatively recent time in human development, prior to the advent of consciousness. Jaynes hypothesized that hallucinated verbal commands helped non-conscious early man to perform tasks promoting human survival. Starting about 10,000 BCE, selective pressures favored the hallucinated verbal commands for social control, and they came to be perceived as an external, rather than internal, voice commanding the person to take some action. These were hence often explained as originating from invisible gods, spirits, ancestors, etc.[24]
Hypotheses on the role of religion[edit]
There are three primary hypotheses on the role of religion in the modern world.
Secularization[edit]
The first hypothesis, secularization, holds that science and technology will take the place of religion.[25] Secularization supports the separation of religion from politics, ethics, and psychology. Taking this position even further, Taylor explains that secularization denies transcendence, divinity, and rationality in religious beliefs.[26]
Religious transformation[edit]
Challenges to the secularization hypothesis led to significant revisions, resulting in the religious transformation hypothesis.[27] This perspective holds that general trends towards individualism and social disintegration will produce changes in religion, making religious practice more individualized and spiritually focused.[28] This in turn is expected to produce more spiritual seeking, although not exclusive to religious institutions.[29] Eclecticism, which draws from multiple religious/spiritual systems and New Age movements are also predicted to result.[30][31]
Cultural divide[edit]
In response to the religious transformation hypothesis, Ronald Inglehart piloted the renewal of the secularization hypothesis. His argument hinges on the premise that religion develops to fill the human need for security. Therefore the development of social and economic security in Europe explains its corresponding secularization due to a lack of need for religion.[32] However, religion continues in the third world where social and economic insecurity are rampant. The overall effect is expected to be a growing cultural disparity.[33]
The idea that religiosity arises from the human need for security has also been furthered by studies examining religious beliefs as a compensatory mechanism of control. These studies are motivated by the idea that people are invested in maintaining beliefs in order and structure to prevent beliefs in chaos and randomness [34][35]
In the experimental setting, researchers have also tested compensatory control in regard to individuals’ perceptions of external systems, such as religion or government. For example, Kay and colleagues [36] found that in a laboratory setting, individuals are more likely to endorse broad external systems (e.g., religion or sociopolitical systems) that impose order and control on their lives when they are induced with lowered levels of personal control. In this study, researchers suggest that when a person’s personal control is lessened, their motivation to believe in order is threatened, resulting in compensation of this threat through adherence to other external sources of control.
Psychometric approaches to religion[edit]
Since the 1960s psychologists of religion have used the methodology of psychometrics to assess ways in which a person may be religious. An example is the Religious Orientation Scale of Allport and Ross,[37] which measures how respondents stand on intrinsic and extrinsic religion as described by Allport. More recent questionnaires include the Age-Universal I-E Scale of Gorsuch and Venable,[38] the Religious Life Inventory of Batson, Schoenrade and Ventis,[39] and the Spiritual Experiences Index-Revised of Genia.[40] The first provides an age-independent measure of Allport and Ross's two religious orientations. The second measures three forms of religious orientation: religion as means (intrinsic), religion as end (extrinsic), and religion as quest. The third assesses spiritual maturity using two factors: Spiritual Support and Spiritual Openness.
Religious orientations and religious dimensions[edit]
Some questionnaires, such as the Religious Orientation Scale, relate to different religious orientations, such as intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness, referring to different motivations for religious allegiance. A rather different approach, taken, for example, by Glock and Stark (1965), has been to list different dimensions of religion rather than different religious orientations, which relates to how an individual may manifest different forms of being religious. (More on Stark's work can be found in the article on Sociology of Religion.) Glock and Stark's famous typology described five dimensions of religion – the doctrinal, the intellectual, the ethical-consequential, the ritual, and the experiential. In later work these authors subdivided the ritual dimension into devotional and public ritual, and also clarified that their distinction of religion along multiple dimensions was not identical to distinguishing religious orientations. Although some psychologists of religion have found it helpful to take a multidimensional approach to religion for the purpose of psychometric scale design, there has been, as Wulff (1997) explains, considerable controversy about whether religion should really be seen as multidimensional.
Questionnaires to assess religious experience[edit]
What we call religious experiences can differ greatly. Some reports exist of supernatural happenings that it would be difficult to explain from a rational, scientific point of view. On the other hand, there also exist the sort of testimonies that simply seem to convey a feeling of peace or oneness – something which most of us, religious or not, may possibly relate to. In categorizing religious experiences it is perhaps helpful to look at them as explicable through one of two theories: the Objectivist thesis or the Subjectivist thesis.
An objectivist would argue that the religious experience is a proof of God's existence. However, others have criticised the reliability of religious experiences. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes asked how it was possible to tell the difference between talking to God in a dream, and dreaming about talking to God.[41]
The Subjectivist view argues that it is not necessary to think of religious experiences as evidence for the existence of an actual being whom we call God. From this point of view, the important thing is the experience itself and the effect that it has on the individual.[42]
Developmental approaches to religion[edit]
Main articles: James W. Fowler and Stages of faith development
Many have looked at stage models, like those of Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg, to explain how children develop ideas about God and religion in general.
The most well known stage model of spiritual or religious development is that of James W. Fowler, a developmental psychologist at the Candler School of Theology, in his Stages of Faith.[43] He follows Piaget and Kohlberg and has proposed a holistic staged development of faith (or spiritual development) across the lifespan.
The book-length study contains a framework and ideas which have generated a good deal of response from those interested in religion[who?], so it appears to have face validity. James Fowler proposes six stages of faith development: 1. Intuitive-projective 2. Symbolic Literal 3. Synthetic Conventional 4. Individuating 5. Paradoxical (conjunctive) 6. Universalising. Although there is evidence that children up to the age of twelve years do tend to be in the first two of these stages[citation needed], adults over the age of sixty-one show considerable variation in displays of qualities of Stages 3 and beyond[citation needed], most adults remaining in Stage 3 (Synthetic Conventional). Fowler's model has generated some empirical studies, and fuller descriptions of this research (and of these six stages) can be found in Wulff (1991).
Fowler's scientific research has been criticized for methodological weaknesses. Of Fowler's six stages, only the first two found empirical support[citation needed], and these were heavily based upon Piaget's stages of cognitive development. The tables and graphs in the book were presented in such a way that the last four stages appeared to be validated, but the requirements of statistical verification of the stages were not met. His study was not published in a journal, so was not peer-reviewed. Other critics[who?] of Fowler have questioned whether his ordering of the stages really reflects his own commitment to a rather liberal Christian Protestant outlook, as if to say that people who adopt a similar viewpoint to Fowler are at higher stages of faith development. Nevertheless, the concepts Fowler introduced seemed to hit home with those in the circles of academic religion[who?], and have been an important starting point for various theories and subsequent studies[citation needed].
Other theorists in developmental psychology have suggested that religiosity comes naturally to young children. Specifically, children may have a natural-born conception of mind-body dualism, which lends itself to beliefs that the mind may live on after the body dies. In addition, children have a tendency to see agency and human design where there is not, and prefer a creationist explanation of the world even when raised by parents who do not.[44][45]
Researchers have also investigated attachment system dynamics as a predictor of the religious conversion experience throughout childhood and adolescence. One hypothesis is the correspondence hypothesis,[46] which posits that individuals with secure parental attachment are more likely to experience a gradual conversion experience. Under the correspondence hypothesis, internal working models of a person’s attachment figure is thought to perpetuate his or her perception of God as a secure base. Another hypothesis relating attachment style to the conversion experience is the compensation hypothesis,[47] which states that individuals with insecure attachments are more likely to have a sudden conversion experience as they compensate for their insecure attachment relationship by seeking a relationship with God. Researchers have tested these hypotheses using longitudinal studies and individuals’ self narratives of their conversation experience. For example, one study investigating attachment styles and adolescent conversions at Young Life religious summer camps resulted in evidence supporting the correspondence hypothesis through analysis of personal narratives and a prospective longitudinal follow-up of Young Life campers, with mixed results for the compensation hypothesis.[48]
Religion and prayer[edit]
Religious practice oftentimes manifests itself in some form of prayer. Recent studies have focused specifically on the effects of prayer on health. Measures of prayer and the above measures of spirituality evaluate different characteristics and should not be considered synonymous.
Prayer is fairly prevalent in the United States. About 75% of the United States reports praying at least once a week.[49] However, the practice of prayer is more prevalent and practiced more consistently among Americans who perform other religious practices.[50] There are four primary types of prayer in the West. Poloma and Pendleton,[51][52] utilized factor analysis to delineate these four types of prayer: meditative (more spiritual, silent thinking), ritualistic (reciting), petitionary (making requests to God), and colloquial (general conversing with God). Further scientific study of prayer using factor analysis has revealed three dimensions of prayer.[53] Ladd and Spilka’s first factor was awareness of self, inward reaching. Their second and third factors were upward reaching (toward God) and outward reaching (toward others). This study appears to support the contemporary model of prayer as connection (whether to the self, higher being, or others).
Dein and Littlewood (2008) suggest that an individual’s prayer life can be viewed on a spectrum ranging from immature to mature. A progression on the scale is characterized by a change in the perspective of the purpose of prayer. Rather than using prayer as a means of changing the reality of a situation, a more mature individual will use prayer to request assistance in coping with immutable problems and draw closer to God or others. This change in perspective has been shown to be associated with an individual’s passage through adolescence.[54]
Prayer appears to have health implications. Empirical studies suggest that mindfully reading and reciting the Psalms (from scripture) can help a person calm down and focus.[55][56] Prayer is also positively correlated with happiness and religious satisfaction (Poloma & Pendleton, 1989, 1991). A study conducted by Franceis, Robbins, Lewis, and Barnes (2008) investigated the relationship between self-reported prayer frequency and measures of psychoticism and neuroticism according to the abbreviated form of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQR-A). The study included a sample size of 2306 students attending Protestant and Catholic schools in the highly religious culture of Northern Ireland. The data shows a negative correlation between prayer frequency and psychoticism. The data also shows that, in Catholic students, frequent prayer has a positive correlation to neuroticism scores.[57] Ladd and McIntosh (2008) suggest that prayer-related behaviors, such as bowing the head and clasping the hands together in an almost fetal position, are suggestive of “social touch” actions. Prayer in this manner may prepare an individual to carry out positive pro-social behavior after praying, due to factors such as increased blood flow to the head and nasal breathing.[58] Overall, slight health benefits have been found fairly consistently across studies.[59]
Three main pathways to explain this trend have been offered: placebo effect, focus and attitude adjustment, and activation of healing processes.[60] These offerings have been expanded by Breslan and Lewis (2008) who have constructed a five pathway model between prayer and health with the following mediators: physiological, psychological, placebo, social support, and spiritual. The spiritual mediator is a departure from the rest in that its potential for empirical investigation is not currently feasible. Although the conceptualizations of chi, the universal mind, divine intervention, and the like breach the boundaries of scientific observation, they are included in this model as possible links between prayer and health so as to not unnecessarily exclude the supernatural from the broader conversation of psychology and religion.[61] (However, whether the activation of healing processes explanation is supernatural or biological, or even both, is beyond the scope of this study and this article.)
Religion and ritual[edit]
Another significant form of religious practice is ritual.[62] Religious rituals encompass a wide array of practices, but can be defined as the performance of similar actions and vocal expressions based on prescribed tradition and cultural norms.[63] Examples include the Jewish Bar Mitzvah, Christian Holy Eucharist, Hindu Puja, and Muslim Salat and Hajj.
Scheff suggests that ritual provides catharsis, emotional purging, through distancing.[64] This emotional distancing enables an individual to experience feelings with an amount of separation, and thus less intensity. However, the conception of religious ritual as an interactive process has since matured and become more scientifically established. From this view, ritual offers a means to catharsis through behaviors that foster connection with others, allowing for emotional expression.[65] This focus on connection contrasts to the separation that seems to underlie Scheff’s view.
Additional research suggests the social component of ritual. For instance, findings suggest that ritual performance indicates group commitment and prevents the uncommitted from gaining membership benefits.[66] Ritual may aid in emphasizing moral values that serve as group norms and regulate societies.[67] It may also strengthen commitment to moral convictions and likelihood of upholding these social expectations.[68] Thus, performance of rituals may foster social group stability.
Religion and health[edit]
Main article: Impacts of religion on health
See also: Handbook of Religion and Health and Religion and happiness
There is considerable literature on the relationship between religion and health. More than 3000 empirical studies have examined relationships between religion and health, including more than 1200 in the 20th century,[69] and more than 2000 additional studies between 2000 and 2009.[70]
Psychologists consider that there are various ways in which religion may benefit both physical and mental health, including encouraging healthy lifestyles, providing social support networks and encouraging an optimistic outlook on life; prayer and meditation may also help to benefit physiological functioning.[71] The journal "American Psychologist" published important papers on this topic in 2003.[72] Haber, Jacob and Spangler have considered how different dimensions of religiosity may relate to health benefits in different ways.[73]
Religion and physical health[edit]
Some studies indicate that religiosity appears to positively correlate with physical health.[74] For instance, mortality rates are lower among people who frequently attend religious events and consider themselves both religious and spiritual.[75] One possibility is that religion provides physical health benefits indirectly. Church attendees present with lower rates of alcohol consumption and improvement in mood, which is associated with better physical health.[76] Kenneth Pargament is a major contributor to the theory of how individuals may use religion as a resource in coping with stress, His work seems to show the influence of attribution theory. Additional evidence suggests that this relationship between religion and physical health may be causal.[77] Religion may reduce likelihood of certain diseases. Studies suggest that it guards against cardiovascular disease by reducing blood pressure, and also improves immune system functioning.[78] Similar studies have been done investigating religious emotions and health. Although religious emotions, such as humility, forgiveness, and gratitude confer health benefits, it is unclear if religious people cultivate and experience those emotions more frequently than non-religious peoples.[79]
However, randomized controlled trials of intercessory prayer have not yielded significant effects on health. These trials have compared personal, focused, committed and organized intercessory prayer with those interceding holding some belief that they are praying to God or a god versus any other intervention. A Cochrane collaboration review of these trials concluded that 1) results were equivocal, 2) evidence does not support a recommendation either in favor or against the use of intercessory prayer and 3) any resources available for future trials should be used to investigate other questions in health research.[80] In a case-control study done following 5,286 Californians over a 28-year period in which variables were controlled for (i.e. age, race/ethnicity, gender, education level), participants who went to church on a frequent basis (defined as attending a religious service once a week or more) were 36% less likely to die during that period.[81] However, this can be partly be attributed to a better lifestyle since religious people tend to drink and smoke less and eat a healthier diet.
Another study detailing the connection between religion and physical health was done in Israel as a prospective cohort case study. In a study done of almost 4,000 Israelis, over 16 years (beginning in 1970), death rates were compared between the experimental group (people belonging to 11 religious kibbutzim) versus the control group (people belonging to secular kibbutzim). Some determining factors for the groups included the date the kibbutz was created, geography of the different groups, and the similarity in age. It was determined that “belonging to a religious collective was associated with a strong protective effect".[82] Not only do religious people tend to exhibit healthier lifestyles, they also have a strong support system that secular people would not normally have. A religious community can provide support especially through a stressful life event such as the death of a loved one or illness. There is the belief that a higher power will provide healing and strength through the rough times which also can explain the lower mortality rate of religious people vs. secular people.
Religion and personality[edit]
Main article: Religion and personality
Some studies have examined whether there is a “religious personality.” Research suggests that people who identify as religious are more likely to be high on agreeableness and conscientiousness, and low on psychoticism, but unrelated to other Big Five traits. However, people endorsing fundamentalist religious beliefs are more likely to be low on Openness.[83] Similarly, people who identify as spiritual are more likely to be high on Extraversion and Openness, although this varied based on the type of spirituality endorsed.[84]
Religion and mental health[edit]
Evidence suggests that religiosity can be a pathway to both mental health and mental disorder. For example, religiosity is positively associated with mental disorders that involve an excessive amount of self-control and negatively associated with mental disorders that involve a lack of self-control.[85] Other studies have found indications of mental health among both the religious and the secular. For instance, Vilchinsky & Kravetz found negative correlations with psychological distress among religious and secular subgroups of Jewish students.[86] In addition, intrinsic religiosity has been inversely related to depression in the elderly, while extrinsic religiosity has no relation or even a slight positive relation to depression.[87] [88]
The link between religion and mental health may be due to the guiding framework or social support that it offers to individuals.[89] By these routes, religion has the potential to offer security and significance in life, as well as valuable human relationships, to foster mental health. Some theorists have suggested that the benefits of religion and religiosity are accounted for by the social support afforded by membership in a religious group.[90]
Religion may also provide coping skills to deal with stressors, or demands perceived as straining. Pargament’s three primary styles of religious coping are 1) self-directing, characterized by self-reliance and acknowledgement of God, 2) deferring, in which a person passively attributes responsibility to God, and 3) collaborative, which involves an active partnership between the individual and God and is most commonly associated with positive adjustment.[91][92] This model of religious coping has been criticized for its over-simplicity and failure to take into account other factors, such as level of religiosity, specific religion, and type of stressor.[93] Additional work by Pargament involves a detailed delineation of positive and negative forms of religious coping, captured in the BREIF-RCOPE questionnaire which have been linked to a range of positive and negative psychological outcomes.[94][95]
Spirituality has been ascribed many different definitions in different contexts, but a general definition is: an individual’s search for meaning and purpose in life. Spirituality is distinct from organized religion in that spirituality does not necessarily need a religious framework. That is, one does not necessarily need to follow certain rules, guidelines or practices to be spiritual, but an organized religion often has some combination of these in place. People who report themselves to be spiritual people may not observe any specific religious practices or traditions.[96] Studies have shown a negative relationship between spiritual well-being and depressive symptoms. In one study, those who were assessed to have a higher spiritual quality of life on a spiritual well-being scale had less depressive symptoms.[97] Cancer and AIDS patients who were more spiritual had lower depressive symptoms than religious patients. Spirituality shows beneficial effects possibly because it speaks to one’s ability to intrinsically find meaning in life, strength, and inner peace, which is especially important for very ill patients.[96] Studies have reported beneficial effects of spirituality on the lives of patients with schizophrenia, major depression, and other psychotic disorders. Schizophrenic patients were less likely to be re-hospitalized if families encouraged religious practice, and in depressed patients who underwent religiously based interventions, their symptoms improved faster than those who underwent secular interventions. Furthermore, a few cross-sectional studies have shown that more religiously involved people had less instance of psychosis.[98]
Religion and prejudice[edit]
To investigate the salience of religious beliefs in establishing group identity, researchers have also conducted studies looking at religion and prejudice. Some studies have shown that greater religious attitudes may be significant predictors of negative attitudes towards racial or social outgroups.[99][100] These effects are often conceptualized under the framework of intergroup bias, where religious individuals favor members of their ingroup (ingroup favoritism) and exhibit disfavor towards members of their outgroup (outgroup derogation). Evidence supporting religious intergroup bias has been supported in multiple religious groups, including non-Christian groups, and is thought to reflect the role of group dynamics in religious identification. Many studies regarding religion and prejudice implement religious priming both in the laboratory and in naturalistic settings [101][102] with evidence supporting the perpetuation of ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation in individuals who are high in religiosity.
Evolutionary psychology of religion[edit]
Main article: Evolutionary psychology of religion
Evolutionary psychology is based on the hypothesis that, just like the cardiac, pulmonary, urinary, and immune systems, cognition has a functional structure with a genetic basis, and therefore appeared through natural selection. Like other organs and tissues, this functional structure should be universally shared among humans and should solve important problems of survival and reproduction. Evolutionary psychologists seek to understand cognitive processes by understanding the survival and reproductive functions they might serve.
Pascal Boyer is one of the leading figures in the cognitive psychology of religion, a new field of inquiry that is less than fifteen years old, which accounts for the psychological processes that underlie religious thought and practice. In his book Religion Explained, Boyer shows that there is no simple explanation for religious consciousness. Boyer is mainly concerned with explaining the various psychological processes involved in the acquisition and transmission of ideas concerning the gods. Boyer builds on the ideas of cognitive anthropologists Dan Sperber and Scott Atran, who first argued that religious cognition represents a by-product of various evolutionary adaptations, including folk psychology, and purposeful violations of innate expectations about how the world is constructed (for example, bodiless beings with thoughts and emotions) that make religious cognitions striking and memorable.
Religious persons acquire religious ideas and practices through social exposure. The child of a Zen Buddhist will not become an evangelical Christian or a Zulu warrior without the relevant cultural experience. While mere exposure does not cause a particular religious outlook (a person may have been raised a Roman Catholic but leave the church), nevertheless some exposure seems required – this person will never invent Roman Catholicism out of thin air. Boyer says cognitive science can help us to understand the psychological mechanisms that account for these manifest correlations and in so doing enable us to better understand the nature of religious belief and practice. To the extent that the mechanisms controlling the acquisitions and transmission of religious concepts rely on human brains, the mechanisms are open to computational analysis. All thought is computationally structured, including religious thought. So presumably, computational approaches can shed light on the nature and scope of religious cognition[citation needed].
Boyer moves outside the leading currents in mainstream cognitive psychology and suggests that we can use evolutionary biology to unravel the relevant mental architecture. Our brains are, after all, biological objects, and the best naturalistic account of their development in nature is Darwin's theory of evolution. To the extent that mental architecture exhibits intricate processes and structures, it is plausible to think that this is the result of evolutionary processes working over vast periods of time. Like all biological systems, the mind is optimised to promote survival and reproduction in the evolutionary environment. On this view all specialised cognitive functions broadly serve those reproductive ends.
For Steven Pinker the universal propensity toward religious belief is a genuine scientific puzzle. He thinks that adaptationist explanations for religion do not meet the criteria for adaptations. An alternative explanation is that religious psychology is a by-product of many parts of the mind that evolved for other purposes.
Religion and drugs[edit]
James H. Leuba[edit]


 This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (January 2012)
The American psychologist James H. Leuba (1868–1946), in A Psychological Study of Religion, accounts for mystical experience psychologically and physiologically, pointing to analogies with certain drug-induced experiences. Leuba argued forcibly for a naturalistic treatment of religion, which he considered to be necessary if religious psychology were to be looked at scientifically. Shamans all over the world and in different cultures have traditionally used drugs, especially psychedelics, for their religious experiences. In these communities the absorption of drugs leads to dreams (visions) through sensory distortion.
William James was also interested in mystical experiences from a drug-induced perspective, leading him to make some experiments with nitrous oxide and even peyote. He concludes that while the revelations of the mystic hold true, they hold true only for the mystic; for others they are certainly ideas to be considered, but hold no claim to truth without personal experience of such.
Drug-induced religious experiences[edit]
See main article entheogen on the use of psychoactive substances in a religious or shamanic context.
The drugs used by religious communities for their hallucinogenic effects were adopted for explicit and implicit religious functions and purposes. The drugs were and are reported to enhance religious experience through visions and a distortion of the sensory perception (like in dreams in a state of sleep).
Cannabis, which grows all over the world except in very cold climates, is used in religious practices in Indian and African communities
Certain psychedelic mushrooms are used by Indians in Latin America, especially in the state of Oaxaca in southern Mexico[citation needed] The chief species is Psilocybe mexicana, of which the active principles are psilocin and its derivative psilocybin, in their chemical composition and activity not unlike LSD (D-lysergic acid diethylamide); the latter is synthesized from the alkaloids (principally ergotamine and ergonovine) that are constituents of ergot, a growth present in grasses affected by the disease also called ergot. Amanita muscaria (fly agaric) is another mushroom having hallucinogenic properties that has not been thoroughly studied. Fly agaric is mildly toxic at high dosages and is said to have, in addition to its hallucinogenic properties, the ability to increase strength and endurance.[citation needed] It is said also to be a soporific. Fly agaric may be extremely important, since it may have been the natural source of the ritual soma drink of the ancient Hindus and the comparable haoma used by the Zoroastrians. However most researchers point toward ephedra as the main ingredient of Soma.[103][104] Henry Falk stated that "there is no need to look for a plant other than Ephedra, the one plant used to this day by the Parsis." [105] Ephedra is both a stimulant and a thermogenic; its biological effects are due to its ephedrine and pseudoephedrine content.[106] These compounds stimulate the brain and also body metabolism.
Peyote used by some Indian communities of Mexico. The chief active principle of peyote is an alkaloid called mescaline. Like psilocin and psilocybin, mescaline is reputed to produce visions and other evidences of a mystical nature. Despite claims of missionaries and some government agents that peyote – from the Nahuatl word peyotl ("divine messenger") – is a degenerative and dangerous drug, there appears to be no evidence of this among the members of the Native American Church, a North American Indian cult that uses peyote in its chief religious ceremony. Peyote, like most other hallucinogenic drugs, is not considered to be addictive and, far from being a destructive influence, is reputed by cultists and some observers to promote morality and ethical behaviour among the Indians who use it ritually.
Ayahuasca, caapi, or yajé, is produced from the stem bark of the vines Banisteriopsis caapi and B. inebrians. Indians who use it claim that its virtues include healing powers and the power to induce clairvoyance, among others. This drink has been certified by investigators to produce remarkable effects, often involving the sensation of flying. The effects are thought to be attributable to the action of harmine, a very stable indole that is the active principle in the plant. While the Indians themselves attribute the properties of the drink Ayahuasca to B. caapi, this is not the common scientific view; the MAOIs present in the B. caapi instead allow the extremely psychedelic ingredients in other plants added to the brew, noticeably plants containing DMT, to be activated and produce an intense experience.
Kava drink, prepared from the roots of Piper methysticum, a species of pepper, and seemingly more of a hypnotic-narcotic than a hallucinogen, is used both socially and ritually in the South Pacific, especially in Polynesia.
Iboga, a stimulant and hallucinogen derived from the root bark of the African shrub Tabernanthe iboga is used within the Bwiti religion in Central Africa. The active ingredient in T. iboga is ibogaine, a drug that has been studied for its use in treating addiction.
Coca, source of cocaine, has had both ritual and social use chiefly in Peru.
Datura, one species of which is the jimsonweed, is used by native peoples in North and South America; the active principle, however, is highly toxic and dangerous. A drink prepared from the shrub *Mimosa hostilis, which is said to produce glorious visions in warriors before battle, is used ritually in the ajuca ceremony of the Jurema cult in eastern Brazil.
Salvia divinorum, a member of the sage family of plants, is a hallucinogen used by Mazatec shamans for "spiritual journeys" during healing.
Religion and meditation[edit]
The large variety of meditation techniques shares the common goal of shifting attention away from habitual or customary modes of thinking and perception, in order to permit experiencing in a different way. Many religious and spiritual traditions that employ meditation assert that the world most of us know is an illusion. This illusion is said to be created by our habitual mode of separating, classifying and labelling our perceptual experiences. Meditation is empirical in that it involves direct experience. However it is also subjective in that the meditative state can be directly known only by the experiencer, and may be difficult or impossible to fully describe in words. Meditation can induce an altered state of consciousness characterised by a loss of awareness of extraneous stimuli, one-pointed attention to the meditation object to the exclusion of all other thoughts, and feelings of bliss.[107]
Controversy[edit]
Many psychologists reject religion. For instance, Sigmund Freud viewed religion as an illusion, a sign of psychological neurosis. Additionally Eric Fromm’s humanistic psychology centers on man and rejects authoritarian religion.[108] However, religious scholars and psychologists advocating the study of religion have contested such views. Paul Vitz critiqued Fromm’s self-centered approach to psychology and labeled humanist psychology as a religion, unsupported by scientific inquiry.[109] Reber asserted that exclusion of the study of religion only limits psychology’s understanding of human behavior.[110] Others argue that a psychological study of human personality necessitates, at minimum, an acknowledgment of the impact religion has on many humans.[111]
Other views[edit]
A 2012 paper suggested that psychiatric conditions associated with psychotic spectrum symptoms may be possible explanations for revelatory driven experiences and activities such as those of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Saint Paul.[112]
Religion and psychotherapy[edit]
Various forms of explicitly religious psychotherapies that maintain the traditional psychological framework have recently become more prevalent. Clients’ religious beliefs are increasingly being considered in psychotherapy with the goal of improving service and effectiveness of treatment.[113] A resulting development was theistic psychotherapy. Conceptually, it consists of theological principles, a theistic view of personality, and a theistic view of psychotherapy.[114] Following an explicit minimizing strategy, therapists attempt to minimize conflict by acknowledging their religious views while being respectful of client’s religious views.[115] This opens up the potential for therapists to directly utilize religious practices and principles in therapy, such as prayer, forgiveness, and grace.
Pastoral psychology[edit]
One application of the psychology of religion is in pastoral psychology, the use of psychological findings to improve the pastoral care provided by pastors and other clergy, especially in how they support ordinary members of their congregations. Pastoral psychology is also concerned with improving the practice of chaplains in healthcare and in the military. One major concern of pastoral psychology is to improve the practice of pastoral counseling. Pastoral psychology is a topic of interest for professional journals such as Pastoral Psychology, Journal of Psychology and Christianity, and Journal of Psychology and Theology. In 1984, Thomas Oden severely criticized mid-20th century pastoral care and the pastoral psychology that guided it as having entirely abandoned its classical/traditional sources, and having become overwhelmingly dominated by modern psychological influences from Freud, Rogers, and others.[116] More recently, others have described pastoral psychology as a field that experiences a tension between psychology and theology.[117]
See also[edit]
Altered state of consciousness
Cognitive science of religion
Issues in Science and Religion
Journals for the Psychology of religion
Magical thinking
Neurotheology
Philosophy of religion
Religion and personality
Religiosity
Social Evolution
Sociology of religion
Attachment theory and psychology of religion
Transpersonal psychology
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b Wulff, D. M. (2010). Psychology of Religion. In D. A. Leeming, K. Madden, & S. Marian (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion (pp. 732–735). New York; London: Springer.
2.Jump up ^ Smith, W. C. (1963). The Meaning and End of Religion: A New Approach to the Religious Traditions of Mankind. New York: Macmillan.
3.Jump up ^ Wulff, D. M. (1999). Psychologists Define Religion: Patterns and Prospects of a Century-Long Quest. In J. G. Platvoet and A. L. Molendijk (Eds.), The Pragmatics of Defining Religion: Contexts, Concepts, and Contests (pp. 207–224). Leiden: Brill
4.Jump up ^ Hill, P. C., and Hood, R. W., Jr. (Eds.). (1999). Measures of Religiosity." Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press.
5.Jump up ^ Schlehofer M. M., Omoto A. M., Adelman J. R. (2008). "How Do "Religion" and "Spirituality" Differ? Lay Definitions Among Older Adults". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 47 (3): 411–425. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2008.00418.x.
6.Jump up ^ Principe W (1983). "Toward Defining Spirituality". Sciences Religieuses/Studies in Religion 12: 127–141.
7.Jump up ^ Pargament, Kenneth I. The Psychology of Religion and Coping: Theory, Research, Practice. New York: Guilford, 1997. Print.
8.Jump up ^ Hill, P. C. (2005). Measurement in the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality: Current Status and Evaluation. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. New York, London: Guilford Press.
9.Jump up ^ Spilka, Hood, Hunsberger and Gorsuch, 2003, The Psychology of Religion, p. 24
10.Jump up ^ Jung, 'On the Nature of the Psyche', C.W.8, Aphorisms 362, 420.
11.Jump up ^ Leak, Gary K (2002). "Exploratory factor analysis of the religious maturity scale". BNET UK. CBS Interactive Inc. Retrieved 22 March 2010.
12.Jump up ^ Fromm, Erich (1950). Psychoanalysis and Religion. New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-00089-8. Retrieved 10 February 2010.
13.Jump up ^ Burger, Jerry (2007). Personality. Stamford, CT, USA: Cengage Learning. pp. 122–123. ISBN 0-495-09786-1. Retrieved 10 February 2010.
14.Jump up ^ Belzen, Jacob A., ed. (2012). Psychology of religion: autobiographical accounts. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4614-1601-2. OCLC 773924284
15.Jump up ^ Bergin, A. E. (1980). Psychotherapy and religious values. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 4895-105
16.Jump up ^ Slife, B.D. & Whoolery, M. (2003). Understanding disciplinary significance: The story of Allen Bergin’s 1980 article on values. In R. Sternberg (Ed.) The anatomy of impact: What has made the great works of psychology great? Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
17.Jump up ^ American Psychological Association (1990). Allen E. Bergin: Citation – Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Knowledge. American Psychologist, 45(4), 474. As cited in Swedin, E. G. (2003). Book Review: Eternal Values and Personal Growth: A Guide on Your Journey to Spiritual, Emotional, and Social Wellness, by Allen E Bergin. AMCAP Journal, 28(1), 41.
18.Jump up ^ Emmons, Robert A. (1999). The psychology of ultimate concerns: Motivation and spirituality in personality. New York: Guilford. ISBN 978-1-57230-935-7.
19.^ Jump up to: a b Kenneth I. Pargament (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, practice. New York: Guilford. ISBN 978-1-57230-664-6
20.Jump up ^ Kenneth I. Pargament, Harold G. Koenig & Lisa M. Perez (2000). The many methods of religious coping: Development and initial validation of the RCOPE. Journal of Clinical Psychology, v56 n4, pp519–543. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(200004)56:4<519::AID-JCLP6>3.0.CO;2-1
21.Jump up ^ Kenneth I. Pargament, Joseph Kennell, William Hathaway, Nancy Grevengoed, Jon Newman & Wendy Jones (1988). Religion and the problem-solving process: Three styles of coping. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, v27 n1, pp90-104. ISSN 0021-8294
22.Jump up ^ Brian J. Zinnbauer & Kenneth I. Pargament (2000). Working with the sacred: Four approaches to religious and spiritual issues in counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development, v78 n2, pp162–171. ISSN 0748-9633
23.Jump up ^ James Hillman, Re-Visioning Psychology, HarperCollins, NY, 1977, p227
24.Jump up ^ Jaynes, Julian (2000). The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind. Houghton Mifflin. pp. 131–143. ISBN 0-618-05707-2.
25.Jump up ^ Gill, R. (2001). "The future of religious participation and belief in Britain and beyond". In R. K. Fenn. The Blackwell companion to the sociology of religion. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 279–291. ISBN 978-0-631-21241-6. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
26.Jump up ^ Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. Cambridge, MA: Belknap. ISBN 978-0-674-02676-6. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
27.Jump up ^ Roof, W. C. (1993). A generation of seekers: The spiritual journeys of the baby boom generation. San Francisco: HaperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-066963-2. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
28.Jump up ^ Hill, P. C., Pargament, K. I., Hood, R. W., McCullough, M. E., Swyers, J. P., Larson, D. B. et al. (2000). "Conceptualizing religion and spirituality: Points of commonality, points of departure" (PDF) 30. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior. pp. 51–77. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
29.Jump up ^ Wuthnow, R (1998). After heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950s. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-22228-1. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
30.Jump up ^ Besecke, K. (2007). "Beyond literalism: Reflexive spirituality and religious meaning". In N. T. Ammerman. Everyday religion: Observing modern religious lives. New York: Oxford University. pp. 169–186. ISBN 978-0-19-530541-8. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
31.Jump up ^ Hervieu-Leger, D. (2001). "Individualism, the validation of faith, and the social nature of religion in modernity". In R. K. Fenn. The Blackwell companion to sociology of religion. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 161–175. ISBN 978-0-631-21241-6. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
32.Jump up ^ Casey, M. (1996). Toward God: The ancient wisdom of the Western prayer. Liguori, MO: Liguori/ Triumph. p. 25. ISBN 0-89243-890-8. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
33.Jump up ^ Norris, P., Inglehart, R. (2004). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-83984-X. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
34.Jump up ^ Dechesne, M., Janssen, J., & van Knippenberg, A. (2000). "Derogation and distancing as terror management strategies: the moderating role of need for closure and permeability of group boundaries". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (6): 923. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.923.
35.Jump up ^ Kay, A.C., Jimenez, M.C., Jost, J.T. (2002). "Sour Grapes, Sweet Lemons, and the Anticipatory Rationalization of the Status Quo". Pers Soc Psychol Bull 28 (9): 1300–1312. doi:10.1177/01461672022812014.
36.Jump up ^ Kay, A.C., Gaucher, D., Napier, J.L., Callan, M.J., Laurin, K. (2008). "God and the government: Testing a compensatory control mechanism for the support of external systems". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 95 (1): 18–35. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.18.
37.Jump up ^ Allport, G.W. & J. Michael Ross (1967). "Personal Religious Orientation and Prejudice". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 5 (4): 432. doi:10.1037/h0021212.
38.Jump up ^ Gorsuch, R. & Venable (1983). "Development of an Age-Universal I-E Scale". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Blackwell Publishing) 22 (2): 181. doi:10.2307/1385677. JSTOR 1385677.
39.Jump up ^ Batson, C.D., Schoenrade, P. & Ventis, L. (1993). Religion and the Individual. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-506208-6.
40.Jump up ^ Genia, V. (1997). "The Spiritual Experience Index: Revision and Reformulation". Review of Religious Research (Religious Research Association, Inc.) 38 (4): 344–361. doi:10.2307/3512195. JSTOR 3512195.
41.Jump up ^ Southwell, G. "Philosophy of Religion". UK. Retrieved 26 April 2010. |chapter= ignored (help)
42.Jump up ^ Southwell, G. "Philosophy of Religion". UK. Retrieved 26 April 2010. |chapter= ignored (help)
43.Jump up ^ ISBN 0-06-062866-9
44.Jump up ^ Bloom, P. (January 2007). "Religion is natural". Developmental Science 10 (1): 147–151. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00577.x.
45.Jump up ^ Evans, E (May 2001). "Cognitive and contextual factors in the emergence of diverse belief systems: creation versus evolution.". Cogn Psychol 42 (3): 217–66. doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0749. PMID 11305883.
46.Jump up ^ Bloom, P. (January 2007). "Religion is natural". Developmental Science 10 (1): 147–151. doi:10.1207/s15327582ijpr1404_1.
47.Jump up ^ Kirkpatrick, L.A., Shaver, P.R. (1990). "Attachment theory and religion: Childhood attachments, religious beliefs, and conversion". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion: 315–334.
48.Jump up ^ Sarah A. Schnitkera; Tenelle J. Porterb (7 June 2012). "Attachment Predicts Adolescent Conversions at Young Life". International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 22 (3): 198–215. doi:10.1080/10508619.2012.670024.
49.Jump up ^ Bader, C., Dougherty, K., Froese, P., Johnson, B., Mencken, F. C., Park, J. et al. (2006). "American piety in the 21st century: New insights to the depth and complexity of religion in the US: Selected findings from the Baylor Religion Survey" (PDF). Waco, TX: Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
50.Jump up ^ Francis, L. & Evans, T. (2001). "The psychology of Christian prayer: A review of empirical research". In L. Francis, & J. Astley. Psychological perspectives on prayer. Leominster, UK: Gracewing. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
51.Jump up ^ Poloma, M. M., & Pendleton, B. F. (1989). "Exploring types of prayer and quality of life: A research note" 31. Review of Religious Research. pp. 46–53. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
52.Jump up ^ Poloma, M. M., & Pendleton, B. F. (1991). "The effects of prayer and prayer experiences" (PDF) 19. Journal of Psychology and Theology. pp. 71–83. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
53.Jump up ^ Ladd, K. L., & Spilka, B. (2002). "Inward, outward, and upwards: Cognitive aspects of prayer" (PDF) 41. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. pp. 475–484. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
54.Jump up ^ Dein, Simon, and Roland Littlewood. "The Psychology of Prayer and the Development of the Prayer Experience Questionnaire." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11.1 (2008): 39-52. Print.
55.Jump up ^ Dysinger, L. (2005). Psalmody and prayer in the in writings of Evagrius Ponticus. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-927320-1. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
56.Jump up ^ Kadloubovsky, E., & Palmer, G. E. H., (Trans.). (1992. (Original work published 1951).). Writings from the ‘Philokalia’ prayer of the heart. London: Faber & Faber. Retrieved 25 April 2010. Check date values in: |date= (help)
57.Jump up ^ Francis, Leslie J., Mandy Robbins, Christopher Alan Lewis, and L. Philip Barnes. "Prayer and Psychological Health: A Study among Sixth-form Pupils Attending Catholic and Protestant Schools in Northern Ireland." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11.1 (2008): 85-92. Print.
58.Jump up ^ Ladd, Kevin L., and Daniel N. McIntosh. "Meaning, God, and Prayer: Physical and Metaphysical Aspects of Social Support." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11.1 (2008): 23-38. Print.
59.Jump up ^ Nelson, J. M (2009). Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. New York: Springer. p. 456. ISBN 0-387-87572-7. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
60.Jump up ^ Robinson, P. W., Thiel, M., Backus, M., & Meyer, E. (2006). "Matters of spirituality at the end of life in the pediatric intensive care unit". Pediatrics (Pediatrics) 118 (3): e719–e729. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-2298. PMID 16950963. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
61.Jump up ^ Breslin, Michael J., and Christopher Alan Lewis. "Theoretical Models of the Nature of Prayer and Health: A Review." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11.1 (2008): 9-21. Print.
62.Jump up ^ Stark, R., & Clock, C. (1968). American piety: The nature of religious commitment. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
63.Jump up ^ Rappaport, R. (1990). Ritual and religion in the making of humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 24. ISBN 0-521-22873-5. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
64.Jump up ^ Scheff, T. J. (1979). Catharsis in Healing, Ritual, and Drama. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-04125-7. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
65.Jump up ^ Schumaker, J. F. (1992). Religion and Mental Health. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-506985-3. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
66.Jump up ^ Sosis, R. (2004). "The adaptive value of religious ritual: Rituals promote group cohesion by requiring members to engage in behavior that is too costly to fake" 92. American Scientist. pp. 166–172. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
67.Jump up ^ Reich, K. (1990). "Rituals and social structure: The moral dimension.". In H.-G. Heimbrock, & H. B. Bougewinjinse. Current studies on rituals: Perspectives for the psychology of religion. Amsterdam: Rodopi. pp. 121–134. ISBN 978-90-5183-178-8. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
68.Jump up ^ Hinde, R. A. (2005). "Modes theory: Some theoretical considerations.". In H. Whitehouse, & R McCauley. Mind and religion: Psychological and cognitive foundations of religiosity. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira. pp. 31–55. ISBN 978-0-7591-0619-2. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
69.Jump up ^ Koenig, Harold G.; McCullough, Michael E.; Larson, David B. (2001). Handbook of Religion and Health (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-511866-7. OCLC 468554547
70.Jump up ^ Koenig, Harold G.; King, Dana E.; Carson, Verna Benner (2012). Handbook of Religion and Health (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195335958. OCLC 691927968
71.Jump up ^ Levin, 2001
72.Jump up ^ see those by Miller and Thoresen (2003) and Powell, Shahabi and Thorsen (2003); see also the article by Oman and Thoresen, in Paloutzian and Park (2005)
73.Jump up ^ Haber, Jacob & Spangler, 2007)
74.Jump up ^ Ellison, C. G., & Levin, J. S. (1998). "The religion-health connection: Evidence, theory, and future directions". Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education (Health Education and Behavior.) 25 (6): 700–720. doi:10.1177/109019819802500603. PMID 9813743. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
75.Jump up ^ Shahabi, L., Powell, L. H., Musick, M. A., Pargament, K. I., Thoresen, C. E., Williams, D. et al. (2002). "Correlates of self-perceptions of spirituality in American adults". Annals of Behavioral Medicine 24 (1): 59–68. doi:10.1207/s15324796abm2401_07. PMID 12008795.
76.Jump up ^ Koenig, L. B., & Vaillant, G. E. (2009). "A prospective study of church attendance and health over the lifespan" 28. Health Psychology. pp. 117–124. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
77.Jump up ^ Chatters, L. M. (2000). "Religion and health: Public health research and practices" 21. Annual Review of Public Health. pp. 335–367. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
78.Jump up ^ Seeman, T., Dubin, L. F., & Seeman, M. (2003). "Religiosity/spirituality and health: A critical review of the evidence for biological pathways" 58 (1). American Psychologist. pp. 53–63. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
79.Jump up ^ Emmons RA, Paloutzian RF (2003). "The psychology of religion". Annual Review of Psychology 54 (1): 377–402. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145024. PMID 12171998.
80.Jump up ^ Roberts L, Ahmed I, Hall S, Davison A (2009). "Intercessory prayer for the alleviation of ill health". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2): CD000368. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000368.pub3. PMID 19370557.
81.Jump up ^ Strawbridge WJ, Cohen RD, Shema SJ, Kaplan GA (June 1997). "Frequent attendance at religious services and mortality over 28 years". American Journal of Public Health 87 (6): 957–61. doi:10.2105/ajph.87.6.957. PMC 1380930. PMID 9224176.
82.Jump up ^ Kark JD, Shemi G, Friedlander Y, Martin O, Manor O, Blondheim SH (March 1996). "Does religious observance promote health? mortality in secular vs religious kibbutzim in Israel". American Journal of Public Health 86 (3): 341–6. doi:10.2105/ajph.86.3.341. PMC 1380514. PMID 8604758.
83.Jump up ^ Saroglou, V. (2002). "Religion and the five factors of personality: A meta-analytic review" 32. "Personality and Individual Differences". pp. 15–25.
84.Jump up ^ MacDonald DA (February 2000). "Spirituality: description, measurement, and relation to the five factor model of personality". Journal of Personality 68 (1): 153–97. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.t01-1-00094. PMID 10820684.
85.Jump up ^ Gartner, J., Larson, D. B., Allen, G. D. (1991). "Religious commitment and mental health: A review of the empirical literature" 19. Journal of Psychology & Theology. pp. 6–25. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
86.Jump up ^ Vilchinsky, N, & Kravetz, S. (2005). "How are religious belief and behavior good for you? An investigation of mediators relating religion to mental health in a sample of Israeli Jewish students". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.) 44 (4): 459–471. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00297.x. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
87.Jump up ^ Fehring, R.J., Miller, J.F., Shaw, C. (1997). "Spiritual well-being, religiosity, hope, depression, and other mood states in elderly people coping with cancer" 24. Oncology Nursing Forum. pp. 663–671.
88.Jump up ^ Nelson, P.B. (1989). "Ethnic differences in intrinsic/extrinsic religious orientation and depression in the elderly". Archives of Psychiatric Nursing.
89.Jump up ^ Hill, P. C., Pargament, K. I. (2008). "Advanced in the conceptualization and measurement of religion and spirituality: Implications for physical and mental health research". The American Psychologist (Psychology and Religion and Spirituality.) 58 (1): 3–17. PMID 12674819.
90.Jump up ^ Graham, J. (Feb 2010). "Beyond beliefs: religions bind individuals into moral communities.". Personality and Social Psychology Review 14 (1): 140–50. doi:10.1177/1088868309353415. PMID 20089848.
91.Jump up ^ Pargament, K., I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Guilford. pp. 180–182. ISBN 978-1-57230-664-6. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
92.Jump up ^ Bickel, C., Ciarrocchi, J., Sheers, N., & Estadt, B. (1998). "Perceived stress, religious coping styles and depressive affect" 17. Journal of Psychology & Christianity. pp. 33–42. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
93.Jump up ^ Nelson, J. M. (2009). Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. New York: Springer. pp. 326–327. ISBN 0-387-87572-7. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
94.Jump up ^ Ano, Gene G. (Apr 2005). "Religious coping and psychological adjustment to stress: a meta-analysis.". J Clin Psychol 61 (4): 461–80. doi:10.1002/jclp.20049. PMID 15503316.
95.Jump up ^ Pargament, Kenneth I. (Apr 2000). "The many methods of religious coping: development and initial validation of the RCOPE.". J Clin Psychol 56 (4): 519–43. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(200004)56:4<519::AID-JCLP6>3.0.CO;2-1. PMID 10775045.
96.^ Jump up to: a b Nelson, C.J., Rosenfeld, B., Breitbart, W., Galietta, M. (2002). Spirituality, religion, and depression in the terminally ill 43. Psychosomatics. pp. 213–220.
97.Jump up ^ Fehring, R.J., Miller, J.F., Shaw, C. (1997). Spiritual well-being, religiosity, hope, depression, and other mood states in elderly people coping with cancer 24. Oncology Nursing Forum. pp. 663–671.
98.Jump up ^ Koenig, H. G. (2008) Research on religion, spirituality, and mental health: A review. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry.
99.Jump up ^ Hall, D. L. (Feb 2010). "Why don't we practice what we preach? A meta-analytic review of religious racism.". Personality and Social Psychology Review 14 (1): 126–39. doi:10.1177/1088868309352179. PMID 20018983.
100.Jump up ^ Whitley, Bernard E. (2009). "(full text)". The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 19 (1): 21–38. doi:10.1080/10508610802471104.
101.Jump up ^ Hall, D.; Matz, D. & Wood, W. (April 2010). "Priming Christian Religious Concepts Increases Racial Prejudice". Social Psychological and Personality Science 1 (2): 119–126. doi:10.1177/1948550609357246.
102.Jump up ^ Jordan P. LaBouffa; W. Rowatt; M. Johnson & C. Finkle (June 18, 2012). "Differences in Attitudes toward Outgroups in Religious and Nonreligious Contexts". Journal for the Psychology of Religion 22 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1080/10508619.2012.634778.
103.Jump up ^ Aitchison, 1888
104.Jump up ^ Bakels, C.C. 2003. "The contents of ceramic vessels in the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, Turkmenistan." Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies, Vol. 9. Issue 1c (May 5)
105.Jump up ^ Falk, 1989
106.Jump up ^ Abourashed E, El-Alfy A, Khan I, Walker L (2003). "Ephedra in perspective--a current review". Phytother Res 17 (7): 703–12. doi:10.1002/ptr.1337. PMID 12916063.
107.Jump up ^ Jevning, R., Wallace, R. K., Beidebach, M. (1992). "The physiology of meditation: A review. A wakeful hypometabolic integrated response". Neuroscience (Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews.) 16 (3): 415–424. doi:10.1016/S0149-7634(05)80210-6. PMID 1528528.
108.Jump up ^ Fromm, E. (1950). Psychoanalysis and religion. New Haven: Yale University Press. p. 37. ISBN 978-0-300-00089-4. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
109.Jump up ^ Vitz, P. T. (1997). Psychology as religion: The cult of self-worship. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
110.Jump up ^ Reber, J. S. (2006). "Secular psychology: What’s the problem?" 34. Journal of Psychology and Theology. pp. 193–204. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
111.Jump up ^ Jung, C. G. (1938). Psychology & Religion. 'Binghampton, NY: Vail-Ballou Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-300-00137-2. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
112.Jump up ^ Murray ED, Cunningham MG, Price BH (2012). "The role of psychotic disorders in religious history considered". J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 24 (4): 410–26. doi:10.1176/appi.neuropsych.11090214. PMID 23224447.
113.Jump up ^ Bergin, A. E. (1980). "Psychotherapy and religious values" 48 (1). Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. pp. 95–105. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
114.Jump up ^ Richards, P. S. (2005). "A theistic integrative psychotherapy.". In L. Sperry, & E. P. Shafranske. Spiritually oriented psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. pp. 259–285. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
115.Jump up ^ Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. (1997). A spiritual strategy for counseling and psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ISBN 1-55798-434-4. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
116.Jump up ^ Oden, Thomas C. (1984). Care of souls in the classic tradition. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. ISBN 978-0-8006-1729-5. (full text online). In Tables 1 through 3, he demonstrated that in pastoral care textbooks, citations to psychologists (such as Freud, Jung, and Rogers) had entirely replaced citations to traditional pastoral care thinkers (such as Augustine, Gregory the Great, and Chrysostom) between the late 19th century and the mid-20th century.
117.Jump up ^ Ermanno Pavesi (2010). "Pastoral psychology as a field of tension between theology and psychology". Christian Bioethics 16 (1): 9–29. doi:10.1093/cb/cbq001. ISSN 1744-4195.
Bibliography[edit]
Adler, A., & Jahn, E., Religion and Psychology, Frankfurt, 1933.
Allport, G.W. & Ross, J.M., Personal Religious Orientation and Prejudice, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967.
Allport, G. W., The individual and his religion, New York, Macmillan, 1950.
Atran, S., In Gods We Trust: The Evolutionary Landscape of Religion, New York, Oxford University Press, 2002.
Batson, C.D., Schoenrade, P. & Ventis, L., Religion and the Individual, New York, Oxford University Press, 1993.
Erikson, E., Young man Luther: A Study in Psychoanalysis and History, New York, W. W. Norton, 1958.
Dykstra, C. (1986). Youth and language of faith. Religious Education, 81, 164–184.
Fowler, J. Stages of Faith, Harper and Row, San Francisco, 1971.
Francis, L.J. & Louden, S.H., The Francis-Louden Mystical Orientation Scale: A Study Among Male Anglican Priests, Research in the Scientific Study of Religion, 2000.
Freud, S., The future of an illusion, translated by W.D. Robson-Scott, New York, Liveright, 1928.
Freud, S., Totem and Taboo: Resemblances Between the Psychic Lives of Savages and Neurotics, New-York, Dodd, 1928.
Freud, S., Moses and Monotheism, London, The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1939.
Fromm, E., Psychoanalysis and Religion, New Haven, Yale University, 1950.
Genia, V., The Spiritual Experience Index: Revision and Reformulation, Review of Religious Research, 38, 344–361, 1997.
Glock, C.Y. & Stark, R., Religion and Society in Tension, Chicago, Rand McNally, 1965.
Gorsuch, R. & Venable, Development of an Age-Universal I-E Scale, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1983.
Haber J., Jacob R., Spangler J.D.C. (2007). "Dimensions of religion and their relationship to health". The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 17 (4): 265–288. doi:10.1080/10508610701572770.
Hill, P. C. & Hood, R., Measures of Religiosity, Birmingham, Alabama, Religious Education Press,1999.
Hill, P. C. & Pargament, K., Advances in the Conceptualisation and Measurement of Spirituality. American Psychologist, 58, p64–74, 2003.
Hood, R. W., The Construction and Preliminary Validation of a Measure of Reported Mystical Experience, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1975.
James, W., The Varieties of Religious Experience, Cambridge, Ma., Harvard University, 1985.
Jung, C. G., Modern Man in Search of a Soul, New York, Harcourt Brace, 1933.
Jung, C. G., Psychology and Religion, Yale University Press, 1962.
Jung, C. G., Psychology and Religion, Yale Univ. Press, 1992.
Jung, C. G., Psychology and Western Religion, Princeton Univ. Press, 1984.
Hood, R. W., The Construction and Preliminary Validation of a Measure of Reported Mystical Experience, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1975.
Leuba, J. H., The Psychology of Religious Mysticism, New York, Harcourt, Brace, 1925.
Leuba, J. H., The Psychological Origin and the Nature of Religion. Wikisource text
Levin, J. (2001). God, Faith and Spirituality: Exploring the Spirituality-Health Connection. New York: Wiley
Paloutzian, R. F. & Park, C. L. (2005). Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality.
Saroglou, V. (Ed). (2014). Religion, Personality, and Social Behavior. New York: Psychology Press.
Miller & Thoresen (2003) American Psychologist
Powell, L.H., Shahabi, L. & Thoresen, C. (2003). Religion and spirituality.
Links to physical health. American Psychologist. 58 pp36–52Wulff, D. M., Psychology of Religion: Classic and Contemporary (2nd ed), New York, Wiley, 1997.
Further reading[edit]
Aziz, Robert (1990). C.G. Jung's Psychology of Religion and Synchronicity (10 ed.). The State University of New York Press. ISBN 0-7914-0166-9.
Bendeck Sotillos, S. (Ed.). (2013). Psychology and the Perennial Philosophy: Studies in Comparative Religion. Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom. ISBN 978-1-936597-20-8.
Fontana, D., Psychology, Religion and Spirituality, Oxford, Blackwell, 2003.
Fuller, A. R. (1994). Psychology & religion: Eight points of view (3rd ed.). Lanham, MD: Littlefield Adams. ISBN 0-8226-3036-2.
Hood, R. W. Jr., Spilka, B., Hunsberger, B., & Gorsuch, R. (1996). The psychology of religion: An empirical approach. New York: Guilford. ISBN 1-57230-116-3
Jones, David., The Psychology of Jesus. Valjean Press: Nashville. ISBN 978-09820757-2-2
Kugelmann, Robert., Psychology and Catholicism: Contested Boundaries, Cambridge University Press, 2011 ISBN 1-107-00608-2
Levin, J., God, Faith and Health: Exploring the Spirituality-Health Connection, New York, Wiley, 2001.
Loewenthal, K. M., Psychology of Religion: A Short Introduction, Oxford, Oneworld, 2000.
McNamara, R. (Ed.) (2006), Where God and Science Meet [3 Volumes]: How Brain and Evolutionary Studies Alter Our Understanding of Religion. Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood.
Paloutzian, R. (1996). Invitation to the Psychology of Religion, 2nd Ed. New York: Allyn and Bacon. ISBN 0-205-14840-9.
Meissner, W., Psychoanalysis and Religious Experience, London and New Haven, Yale University Press, 1984.
Roberts, T. B., and Hruby, P. J. (1995–2002). Religion and Psychoactive Sacraments An Entheogen Chrestomathy. Online archive. [1]
Tsakiridis, George. Evagrius Ponticus and Cognitive Science: A Look at Moral Evil and the Thoughts. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2010.
Wulff, D. M. (1997). Psychology of religion: Classic and contemporary (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley. ISBN 0-471-03706-0.
External links[edit]
Religiosity and Emotion
Psychology of religion pages
International Association for the Psychology of Religion
Varieties of Religious Experience, a Study in Human Nature by William James
Psychology of Religious Doubt
Psychology of religion in Germany
International Association for the Scientific Study of Religion
Centre for Psychology of Religion


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Social science and religion











[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Psychology

















































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion

























































































































































































































































































































































































































































  


Categories: Psychology of religion
















Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Български
Čeština
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
Қазақша
Magyar
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Türkçe
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 19 March 2015, at 01:33.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_religion












Psychology of religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Religion and mental illness)
Jump to: navigation, search


Psychology
The Greek letter 'psi', a symbol for psychology
Outline ·
 History ·
 Subfields
 
Basic types
Abnormal ·
 Biological ·
 Cognitive ·
 Comparative ·
 Cross-cultural ·
 Cultural ·
 Differential ·
 Developmental ·
 Evolutionary ·
 Experimental ·
 Mathematical ·
 Neuropsychology ·
 Personality ·
 Positive ·
 Quantitative ·
 Social
 
Applied psychology
Applied behavior analysis ·
 Clinical ·
 Community ·
 Consumer ·
 Counseling ·
 Educational ·
 Environmental ·
 Ergonomics ·
 Forensic ·
 Health ·
 Humanistic ·
 Industrial and organizational ·
 Interpretive ·
 Legal ·
 Medical ·
 Military ·
 Music ·
 Occupational health ·
 Political ·
 Religion ·
 School ·
 Sport ·
 Traffic
 
Lists
Disciplines ·
 Organizations ·
 Psychologists ·
 Psychotherapies ·
 Publications ·
 Research methods ·
 Theories ·
 Timeline ·
 Topics
 
Portal icon Psychology portal
 
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Psychology of religion consists of the application of psychological methods and interpretive frameworks to religious traditions, as well as to both religious and irreligious individuals. The science attempts to accurately describe the details, origins, and uses of religious beliefs and behaviors. Although the psychology of religion first arose as a self-conscious discipline as recently as the late 19th century, all three of these tasks have a history going back many centuries before that.[1]
Many areas of religion remain unexplored by psychology. While religion and spirituality play a role in many people’s lives, it is uncertain how they lead to outcomes that are at times positive, and at other times negative. Thus, the pathways and outcomes that underlie these associations (and sometimes causations) need additional research. Continued dialogue between psychology and theology may foster greater understanding and benefit both fields.


Contents  [hide]
1 Overview
2 History 2.1 William James
2.2 Other early theorists 2.2.1 G.W.F. Hegel
2.2.2 Sigmund Freud
2.2.3 Carl Jung
2.2.4 Alfred Adler
2.2.5 Gordon Allport
2.2.6 Erik H. Erikson
2.2.7 Erich Fromm
2.2.8 Rudolf Otto
2.3 Modern thinkers 2.3.1 Allen Bergin
2.3.2 Robert Emmons
2.3.3 Kenneth Pargament
2.3.4 James Hillman
2.3.5 Julian Jaynes

3 Hypotheses on the role of religion 3.1 Secularization
3.2 Religious transformation
3.3 Cultural divide
4 Psychometric approaches to religion 4.1 Religious orientations and religious dimensions
4.2 Questionnaires to assess religious experience
5 Developmental approaches to religion
6 Religion and prayer
7 Religion and ritual
8 Religion and health 8.1 Religion and physical health
8.2 Religion and personality
8.3 Religion and mental health
8.4 Religion and prejudice
9 Evolutionary psychology of religion
10 Religion and drugs 10.1 James H. Leuba
10.2 Drug-induced religious experiences
11 Religion and meditation
12 Controversy
13 Other views
14 Religion and psychotherapy
15 Pastoral psychology
16 See also
17 References
18 Bibliography 18.1 Further reading
19 External links

Overview[edit]
The challenge for the psychology of religion is essentially threefold: (1) to provide a thoroughgoing description of the objects of investigation, whether they be shared religious content (e.g., a tradition's ritual observances) or individual experiences, attitudes, or conduct; (2) to account in psychological terms for the rise of such phenomena; and (3) to clarify the outcomes—the fruits, as William James put it—of these phenomena, for individuals and for the larger society.[1]
The first, descriptive task naturally requires a clarification of one's terms, above all, the word religion. Historians of religion have long underscored the problematic character of this term, noting that its usage over the centuries has changed in significant ways, generally in the direction of reification.[2] The early psychologists of religion were fully aware of these difficulties, typically acknowledging that the definitions they were choosing to use were to some degree arbitrary.[3] With the rise of positivistic trends in psychology over the course of the 20th century, especially the demand that all phenomena be measured, psychologists of religion developed a multitude of scales, most of them developed for use with Protestant Christians.[4] Factor analysis was also brought into play by both psychologists and sociologists of religion, in an effort to establish a fixed core of dimensions and a corresponding set of scales. The justification and adequacy of these efforts, especially in the light of constructivist and other postmodern viewpoints, remains a matter of debate.
In the last several decades, especially among clinical psychologists, a preference for the terms "spirituality" and "spiritual" has emerged, along with efforts to distinguish them from "religion" and "religious." Especially in the United States, "religion" has for many become associated with sectarian institutions and their obligatory creeds and rituals, thus giving the word a negative cast; "spirituality," in contrast, is positively constructed as deeply individual and subjective, as a universal capacity to apprehend and accord one's life with higher realities.[5] In fact, "spirituality" has likewise undergone an evolution in the West, from a time when it was essentially a synonym for religion in its original, subjective meaning.[6] Pargament (1997) suggests that rather than limiting the usage of “religion” to functional terms, a search for meaning, or substantive terms, anything related to the sacred, we can consider the interplay of these two vantage points. He proposes that religion can be considered the process of searching for meaning in relationship with the sacred.[7] Today, efforts are ongoing to "operationalize" these terms, with little regard for their history in their Western context, and with the apparent realist assumption that underlying them are fixed qualities identifiable by means of empirical procedures.[8]
History[edit]


 This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (January 2012)
William James[edit]
American psychologist and philosopher William James (1842–1910) is regarded by most psychologists of religion as the founder of the field.[9] He served as president of the American Psychological Association, and wrote one of the first psychology textbooks. In the psychology of religion, James' influence endures. His Varieties of Religious Experience is considered to be the classic work in the field, and references to James' ideas are common at professional conferences.
James distinguished between institutional religion and personal religion. Institutional religion refers to the religious group or organization, and plays an important part in a society's culture. Personal religion, in which the individual has mystical experience, can be experienced regardless of the culture. James was most interested in understanding personal religious experience.
In studying personal religious experiences, James made a distinction between healthy-minded and sick-souled religiousness. Individuals predisposed to healthy-mindedness tend to ignore the evil in the world and focus on the positive and the good. James used examples of Walt Whitman and the "mind-cure" religious movement to illustrate healthy-mindedness in The Varieties of Religious Experience. In contrast, individuals predisposed to having a sick-souled religion are unable to ignore evil and suffering, and need a unifying experience, religious or otherwise, to reconcile good and evil. James included quotations from Leo Tolstoy and John Bunyan to illustrate the sick soul.
William James' hypothesis of pragmatism stems from the efficacy of religion. If an individual believes in and performs religious activities, and those actions happen to work, then that practice appears the proper choice for the individual. However, if the processes of religion have little efficacy, then there is no rationality for continuing the practice.
Other early theorists[edit]
G.W.F. Hegel[edit]
Hegel (1770-1831) described all systems of religion, philosophy, and social science as expressions of the basic urge of consciousness to learn about itself and its surroundings, and record its findings and hypotheses. Thus, religion is only a form of that search for knowledge, within which humans record various experiences and reflections. Others, compiling and categorizing these writings in various ways, form the consolidated worldview as articulated by that religion, philosophy, social science, etc. His work The Phenomenology of Spirit was a study of how various types of writing and thinking draw from and re-combine with the individual and group experiences of various places and times, influencing the current forms of knowledge and worldviews that are operative in a population. This activity is the functioning of an incomplete group mind, where each individual is accessing the recorded wisdom of others. His works often include detailed descriptions of the psychological motivations involved in thought and behavior, e.g., the struggle of a community or nation to know itself and thus correctly govern itself. In Hegel's system, Religion is one of the major repositories of wisdom to be used in these struggles, representing a huge body of recollections from humanity's past in various stages of its development.
Sigmund Freud[edit]
Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) gave explanations of the genesis of religion in his various writings. In Totem and Taboo, he applied the idea of the Oedipus complex (involving unresolved sexual feelings of, for example, a son toward his mother and hostility toward his father) and postulated its emergence in the primordial stage of human development.



 Group photo 1909 in front of Clark University. Front row: Sigmund Freud, G. Stanley Hall, Carl Jung. Back row: Abraham Brill, Ernest Jones, Sándor Ferenczi.
In Moses and Monotheism, Freud reconstructed biblical history in accordance with his general theory. His ideas were also developed in The Future of an Illusion. When Freud spoke of religion as an illusion, he maintained that it is a fantasy structure from which a man must be set free if he is to grow to maturity.
Freud views the idea of God as being a version of the father image, and religious belief as at bottom infantile and neurotic. Authoritarian religion, Freud believed, is dysfunctional and alienates man from himself.
Carl Jung[edit]
The Swiss psychoanalyst Carl Jung (1875–1961) adopted a very different posture, one that was more sympathetic to religion and more concerned with a positive appreciation of religious symbolism. Jung considered the question of the existence of God to be unanswerable by the psychologist and adopted a kind of agnosticism.[10]
Jung postulated, in addition to the personal unconscious (roughly adopting Freud's concept), the collective unconscious, which is the repository of human experience and which contains "archetypes" (i.e. basic images that are universal in that they recur regardless of culture). The irruption of these images from the unconscious into the realm of consciousness he viewed as the basis of religious experience and often of artistic creativity. Some of Jung's writings have been devoted to elucidating some of the archetypal symbols, and include his work in comparative mythology.
Alfred Adler[edit]
Austrian psychiatrist Alfred Adler (1870–1937), who parted ways with Freud, emphasised the role of goals and motivation in his Individual Psychology. One of Adler's most famous ideas is that we try to compensate for inferiorities that we perceive in ourselves. A lack of power often lies at the root of feelings of inferiority. One way that religion enters into this picture is through our beliefs in God, which are characteristic of our tendency to strive for perfection and superiority. For example, in many religions God is considered to be perfect and omnipotent, and commands people likewise to be perfect. If we, too, achieve perfection, we become one with God. By identifying with God in this way, we compensate for our imperfections and feelings of inferiority.
Our ideas about God are important indicators of how we view the world. According to Adler, these ideas have changed over time, as our vision of the world – and our place in it – has changed. Consider this example that Adler offers: the traditional belief that people were placed deliberately on earth as God's ultimate creation is being replaced with the idea that people have evolved by natural selection. This coincides with a view of God not as a real being, but as an abstract representation of nature's forces. In this way our view of God has changed from one that was concrete and specific to one that is more general. From Adler's vantage point, this is a relatively ineffective perception of God because it is so general that it fails to convey a strong sense of direction and purpose.
An important thing for Adler is that God (or the idea of God) motivates people to act, and that those actions do have real consequences for ourselves and for others. Our view of God is important because it embodies our goals and directs our social interactions.
Compared to science, another social movement, religion is more efficient because it motivates people more effectively. According to Adler, only when science begins to capture the same religious fervour, and promotes the welfare of all segments of society, will the two be more equal in peoples' eyes.
Gordon Allport[edit]
In his classic book The Individual and His Religion (1950), Gordon Allport (1897–1967) illustrates how people may use religion in different ways.[11] He makes a distinction between Mature religion and Immature religion. Mature religious sentiment is how Allport characterized the person whose approach to religion is dynamic, open-minded, and able to maintain links between inconsistencies. In contrast, immature religion is self-serving and generally represents the negative stereotypes that people have about religion. More recently, this distinction has been encapsulated in the terms "intrinsic religion", referring to a genuine, heartfelt devout faith, and "extrinsic religion", referring to a more utilitarian use of religion as a means to an end, such as church attendance to gain social status. These dimensions of religion were measured on the Religious Orientation Scale of Allport and Ross (1967). A third form of religious orientation has been described by Daniel Batson. This refers to treatment of religion as an open-ended search (Batson, Schoenrade & Ventis, 1993). More specifically, it has been seen by Batson as comprising a willingness to view religious doubts in a positive manner, acceptance that religious orientation can change and existential complexity, the belief that one's religious beliefs should be shaped from personal crises that one has experienced in one's life. Batson refers to extrinsic, intrinsic and quest respectively as Religion-as-means, religion-as-end and religion-as-quest, and measures these constructs on the Religious Life Inventory (Batson, Schoenrade & Ventis, 1993).
Erik H. Erikson[edit]
Erik Erikson (1902–1994) is best known for his theory of psychological development, which has its roots in the psychoanalytic importance of identity in personality. His biographies of Gandhi and Martin Luther reveal Erikson's positive view of religion. He considered religions to be important influences in successful personality development because they are the primary way that cultures promote the virtues associated with each stage of life. Religious rituals facilitate this development. Erikson's theory has not benefited from systematic empirical study, but it remains an influential and well-regarded theory in the psychological study of religion.
Erich Fromm[edit]
The American scholar Erich Fromm (1900–1980) modified the Freudian theory and produced a more complex account of the functions of religion. In his book Psychoanalysis and Religion he responded to Freud's theories by explaining that part of the modification is viewing the Oedipus complex as based not so much on sexuality as on a "much more profound desire", namely, the childish desire to remain attached to protecting figures. The right religion, in Fromm's estimation, can, in principle, foster an individual's highest potentialities, but religion in practice tends to relapse into being neurotic.[12]
According to Fromm, humans have a need for a stable frame of reference. Religion apparently fills this need. In effect, humans crave answers to questions that no other source of knowledge has an answer to, which only religion may seem to answer. However, a sense of free will must be given in order for religion to appear healthy. An authoritarian notion of religion appears detrimental.[13]
Rudolf Otto[edit]
Rudolf Otto (1869–1937) was a German Protestant theologian and scholar of comparative religion. Otto's most famous work, The Idea of the Holy (published first in 1917 as Das Heilige), defines the concept of the holy as that which is numinous. Otto explained the numinous as a "non-rational, non-sensory experience or feeling whose primary and immediate object is outside the self." It is a mystery (Latin: mysterium tremendum) that is both fascinating (fascinans) and terrifying at the same time; A mystery that causes trembling and fascination, attempting to explain that inexpressible and perhaps supernatural emotional reaction of wonder drawing us to seemingly ordinary and/or religious experiences of grace. This sense of emotional wonder appears evident at the root of all religious experiences. Through this emotional wonder, we suspend our rational mind for non-rational possibilities.
It also sets a paradigm for the study of religion that focuses on the need to realise the religious as a non-reducible, original category in its own right. This paradigm was under much attack between approximately 1950 and 1990 but has made a strong comeback since then.
Modern thinkers[edit]
Autobiographal accounts of 20th century psychology of religion as a field have been supplied by numerous modern psychologists of religion, primarily based in Europe, but also by several US-based psychologists such as Ralph W. Hood and Donald Capps.[14]
Allen Bergin[edit]
Allen Bergin is noted for his 1980 paper "Psychotherapy and Religious Values," which is known as a landmark in scholarly acceptance that religious values do, in practice, influence psychotherapy.[15][16] He received the Distinguished Professional Contributions to Knowledge award from the American Psychological Association in 1989 and was cited as challenging "psychological orthodoxy to emphasize the importance of values and religion in therapy."[17]
Robert Emmons[edit]
Robert Emmons offered a theory of "spiritual strivings" in his 1999 book, The Psychology of Ultimate Concerns.[18] With support from empirical studies, Emmons argued that spiritual strivings foster personality integration because they exist at a higher level of the personality.
Kenneth Pargament[edit]
Kenneth Pargament is noted for his book Psychology of Religion and Coping (1997; see article),[19] as well as for a 2007 book on religion and psychotherapy, and a sustained research program on religious coping. He is professor of psychology at Bowling Green State University (Ohio, USA), and has published more than 100 papers on the subject of religion and spirituality in psychology. Pargament led the design of a questionnaire called the "RCOPE" to measure Religious Coping strategies.[20] Pargament has distinguished between three types of styles for coping with stress:[21] 1) Collaborative, in which people co-operate with God to deal with stressful events; 2) Deferring, in which people leave everything to God; and 3) Self-directed, in which people do not rely on God and try exclusively to solve problems by their own efforts. He also describes four major stances toward religion that have been adopted by psychotherapists in their work with clients, which he calls the religiously rejectionist, exclusivist, constructivist, and pluralist stances.[19][22]
James Hillman[edit]
James Hillman, at the end of his book Re-Visioning Psychology, reverses James' position of viewing religion through psychology, urging instead that we view psychology as a variety of religious experience. He concludes: "Psychology as religion implies imagining all psychological events as effects of Gods in the soul.[23]"
Julian Jaynes[edit]
Julian Jaynes, primarily in his book The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, proposed that religion (and some other psychological phenomena such as hypnosis and schizophrenia) is a remnant of a relatively recent time in human development, prior to the advent of consciousness. Jaynes hypothesized that hallucinated verbal commands helped non-conscious early man to perform tasks promoting human survival. Starting about 10,000 BCE, selective pressures favored the hallucinated verbal commands for social control, and they came to be perceived as an external, rather than internal, voice commanding the person to take some action. These were hence often explained as originating from invisible gods, spirits, ancestors, etc.[24]
Hypotheses on the role of religion[edit]
There are three primary hypotheses on the role of religion in the modern world.
Secularization[edit]
The first hypothesis, secularization, holds that science and technology will take the place of religion.[25] Secularization supports the separation of religion from politics, ethics, and psychology. Taking this position even further, Taylor explains that secularization denies transcendence, divinity, and rationality in religious beliefs.[26]
Religious transformation[edit]
Challenges to the secularization hypothesis led to significant revisions, resulting in the religious transformation hypothesis.[27] This perspective holds that general trends towards individualism and social disintegration will produce changes in religion, making religious practice more individualized and spiritually focused.[28] This in turn is expected to produce more spiritual seeking, although not exclusive to religious institutions.[29] Eclecticism, which draws from multiple religious/spiritual systems and New Age movements are also predicted to result.[30][31]
Cultural divide[edit]
In response to the religious transformation hypothesis, Ronald Inglehart piloted the renewal of the secularization hypothesis. His argument hinges on the premise that religion develops to fill the human need for security. Therefore the development of social and economic security in Europe explains its corresponding secularization due to a lack of need for religion.[32] However, religion continues in the third world where social and economic insecurity are rampant. The overall effect is expected to be a growing cultural disparity.[33]
The idea that religiosity arises from the human need for security has also been furthered by studies examining religious beliefs as a compensatory mechanism of control. These studies are motivated by the idea that people are invested in maintaining beliefs in order and structure to prevent beliefs in chaos and randomness [34][35]
In the experimental setting, researchers have also tested compensatory control in regard to individuals’ perceptions of external systems, such as religion or government. For example, Kay and colleagues [36] found that in a laboratory setting, individuals are more likely to endorse broad external systems (e.g., religion or sociopolitical systems) that impose order and control on their lives when they are induced with lowered levels of personal control. In this study, researchers suggest that when a person’s personal control is lessened, their motivation to believe in order is threatened, resulting in compensation of this threat through adherence to other external sources of control.
Psychometric approaches to religion[edit]
Since the 1960s psychologists of religion have used the methodology of psychometrics to assess ways in which a person may be religious. An example is the Religious Orientation Scale of Allport and Ross,[37] which measures how respondents stand on intrinsic and extrinsic religion as described by Allport. More recent questionnaires include the Age-Universal I-E Scale of Gorsuch and Venable,[38] the Religious Life Inventory of Batson, Schoenrade and Ventis,[39] and the Spiritual Experiences Index-Revised of Genia.[40] The first provides an age-independent measure of Allport and Ross's two religious orientations. The second measures three forms of religious orientation: religion as means (intrinsic), religion as end (extrinsic), and religion as quest. The third assesses spiritual maturity using two factors: Spiritual Support and Spiritual Openness.
Religious orientations and religious dimensions[edit]
Some questionnaires, such as the Religious Orientation Scale, relate to different religious orientations, such as intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness, referring to different motivations for religious allegiance. A rather different approach, taken, for example, by Glock and Stark (1965), has been to list different dimensions of religion rather than different religious orientations, which relates to how an individual may manifest different forms of being religious. (More on Stark's work can be found in the article on Sociology of Religion.) Glock and Stark's famous typology described five dimensions of religion – the doctrinal, the intellectual, the ethical-consequential, the ritual, and the experiential. In later work these authors subdivided the ritual dimension into devotional and public ritual, and also clarified that their distinction of religion along multiple dimensions was not identical to distinguishing religious orientations. Although some psychologists of religion have found it helpful to take a multidimensional approach to religion for the purpose of psychometric scale design, there has been, as Wulff (1997) explains, considerable controversy about whether religion should really be seen as multidimensional.
Questionnaires to assess religious experience[edit]
What we call religious experiences can differ greatly. Some reports exist of supernatural happenings that it would be difficult to explain from a rational, scientific point of view. On the other hand, there also exist the sort of testimonies that simply seem to convey a feeling of peace or oneness – something which most of us, religious or not, may possibly relate to. In categorizing religious experiences it is perhaps helpful to look at them as explicable through one of two theories: the Objectivist thesis or the Subjectivist thesis.
An objectivist would argue that the religious experience is a proof of God's existence. However, others have criticised the reliability of religious experiences. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes asked how it was possible to tell the difference between talking to God in a dream, and dreaming about talking to God.[41]
The Subjectivist view argues that it is not necessary to think of religious experiences as evidence for the existence of an actual being whom we call God. From this point of view, the important thing is the experience itself and the effect that it has on the individual.[42]
Developmental approaches to religion[edit]
Main articles: James W. Fowler and Stages of faith development
Many have looked at stage models, like those of Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg, to explain how children develop ideas about God and religion in general.
The most well known stage model of spiritual or religious development is that of James W. Fowler, a developmental psychologist at the Candler School of Theology, in his Stages of Faith.[43] He follows Piaget and Kohlberg and has proposed a holistic staged development of faith (or spiritual development) across the lifespan.
The book-length study contains a framework and ideas which have generated a good deal of response from those interested in religion[who?], so it appears to have face validity. James Fowler proposes six stages of faith development: 1. Intuitive-projective 2. Symbolic Literal 3. Synthetic Conventional 4. Individuating 5. Paradoxical (conjunctive) 6. Universalising. Although there is evidence that children up to the age of twelve years do tend to be in the first two of these stages[citation needed], adults over the age of sixty-one show considerable variation in displays of qualities of Stages 3 and beyond[citation needed], most adults remaining in Stage 3 (Synthetic Conventional). Fowler's model has generated some empirical studies, and fuller descriptions of this research (and of these six stages) can be found in Wulff (1991).
Fowler's scientific research has been criticized for methodological weaknesses. Of Fowler's six stages, only the first two found empirical support[citation needed], and these were heavily based upon Piaget's stages of cognitive development. The tables and graphs in the book were presented in such a way that the last four stages appeared to be validated, but the requirements of statistical verification of the stages were not met. His study was not published in a journal, so was not peer-reviewed. Other critics[who?] of Fowler have questioned whether his ordering of the stages really reflects his own commitment to a rather liberal Christian Protestant outlook, as if to say that people who adopt a similar viewpoint to Fowler are at higher stages of faith development. Nevertheless, the concepts Fowler introduced seemed to hit home with those in the circles of academic religion[who?], and have been an important starting point for various theories and subsequent studies[citation needed].
Other theorists in developmental psychology have suggested that religiosity comes naturally to young children. Specifically, children may have a natural-born conception of mind-body dualism, which lends itself to beliefs that the mind may live on after the body dies. In addition, children have a tendency to see agency and human design where there is not, and prefer a creationist explanation of the world even when raised by parents who do not.[44][45]
Researchers have also investigated attachment system dynamics as a predictor of the religious conversion experience throughout childhood and adolescence. One hypothesis is the correspondence hypothesis,[46] which posits that individuals with secure parental attachment are more likely to experience a gradual conversion experience. Under the correspondence hypothesis, internal working models of a person’s attachment figure is thought to perpetuate his or her perception of God as a secure base. Another hypothesis relating attachment style to the conversion experience is the compensation hypothesis,[47] which states that individuals with insecure attachments are more likely to have a sudden conversion experience as they compensate for their insecure attachment relationship by seeking a relationship with God. Researchers have tested these hypotheses using longitudinal studies and individuals’ self narratives of their conversation experience. For example, one study investigating attachment styles and adolescent conversions at Young Life religious summer camps resulted in evidence supporting the correspondence hypothesis through analysis of personal narratives and a prospective longitudinal follow-up of Young Life campers, with mixed results for the compensation hypothesis.[48]
Religion and prayer[edit]
Religious practice oftentimes manifests itself in some form of prayer. Recent studies have focused specifically on the effects of prayer on health. Measures of prayer and the above measures of spirituality evaluate different characteristics and should not be considered synonymous.
Prayer is fairly prevalent in the United States. About 75% of the United States reports praying at least once a week.[49] However, the practice of prayer is more prevalent and practiced more consistently among Americans who perform other religious practices.[50] There are four primary types of prayer in the West. Poloma and Pendleton,[51][52] utilized factor analysis to delineate these four types of prayer: meditative (more spiritual, silent thinking), ritualistic (reciting), petitionary (making requests to God), and colloquial (general conversing with God). Further scientific study of prayer using factor analysis has revealed three dimensions of prayer.[53] Ladd and Spilka’s first factor was awareness of self, inward reaching. Their second and third factors were upward reaching (toward God) and outward reaching (toward others). This study appears to support the contemporary model of prayer as connection (whether to the self, higher being, or others).
Dein and Littlewood (2008) suggest that an individual’s prayer life can be viewed on a spectrum ranging from immature to mature. A progression on the scale is characterized by a change in the perspective of the purpose of prayer. Rather than using prayer as a means of changing the reality of a situation, a more mature individual will use prayer to request assistance in coping with immutable problems and draw closer to God or others. This change in perspective has been shown to be associated with an individual’s passage through adolescence.[54]
Prayer appears to have health implications. Empirical studies suggest that mindfully reading and reciting the Psalms (from scripture) can help a person calm down and focus.[55][56] Prayer is also positively correlated with happiness and religious satisfaction (Poloma & Pendleton, 1989, 1991). A study conducted by Franceis, Robbins, Lewis, and Barnes (2008) investigated the relationship between self-reported prayer frequency and measures of psychoticism and neuroticism according to the abbreviated form of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQR-A). The study included a sample size of 2306 students attending Protestant and Catholic schools in the highly religious culture of Northern Ireland. The data shows a negative correlation between prayer frequency and psychoticism. The data also shows that, in Catholic students, frequent prayer has a positive correlation to neuroticism scores.[57] Ladd and McIntosh (2008) suggest that prayer-related behaviors, such as bowing the head and clasping the hands together in an almost fetal position, are suggestive of “social touch” actions. Prayer in this manner may prepare an individual to carry out positive pro-social behavior after praying, due to factors such as increased blood flow to the head and nasal breathing.[58] Overall, slight health benefits have been found fairly consistently across studies.[59]
Three main pathways to explain this trend have been offered: placebo effect, focus and attitude adjustment, and activation of healing processes.[60] These offerings have been expanded by Breslan and Lewis (2008) who have constructed a five pathway model between prayer and health with the following mediators: physiological, psychological, placebo, social support, and spiritual. The spiritual mediator is a departure from the rest in that its potential for empirical investigation is not currently feasible. Although the conceptualizations of chi, the universal mind, divine intervention, and the like breach the boundaries of scientific observation, they are included in this model as possible links between prayer and health so as to not unnecessarily exclude the supernatural from the broader conversation of psychology and religion.[61] (However, whether the activation of healing processes explanation is supernatural or biological, or even both, is beyond the scope of this study and this article.)
Religion and ritual[edit]
Another significant form of religious practice is ritual.[62] Religious rituals encompass a wide array of practices, but can be defined as the performance of similar actions and vocal expressions based on prescribed tradition and cultural norms.[63] Examples include the Jewish Bar Mitzvah, Christian Holy Eucharist, Hindu Puja, and Muslim Salat and Hajj.
Scheff suggests that ritual provides catharsis, emotional purging, through distancing.[64] This emotional distancing enables an individual to experience feelings with an amount of separation, and thus less intensity. However, the conception of religious ritual as an interactive process has since matured and become more scientifically established. From this view, ritual offers a means to catharsis through behaviors that foster connection with others, allowing for emotional expression.[65] This focus on connection contrasts to the separation that seems to underlie Scheff’s view.
Additional research suggests the social component of ritual. For instance, findings suggest that ritual performance indicates group commitment and prevents the uncommitted from gaining membership benefits.[66] Ritual may aid in emphasizing moral values that serve as group norms and regulate societies.[67] It may also strengthen commitment to moral convictions and likelihood of upholding these social expectations.[68] Thus, performance of rituals may foster social group stability.
Religion and health[edit]
Main article: Impacts of religion on health
See also: Handbook of Religion and Health and Religion and happiness
There is considerable literature on the relationship between religion and health. More than 3000 empirical studies have examined relationships between religion and health, including more than 1200 in the 20th century,[69] and more than 2000 additional studies between 2000 and 2009.[70]
Psychologists consider that there are various ways in which religion may benefit both physical and mental health, including encouraging healthy lifestyles, providing social support networks and encouraging an optimistic outlook on life; prayer and meditation may also help to benefit physiological functioning.[71] The journal "American Psychologist" published important papers on this topic in 2003.[72] Haber, Jacob and Spangler have considered how different dimensions of religiosity may relate to health benefits in different ways.[73]
Religion and physical health[edit]
Some studies indicate that religiosity appears to positively correlate with physical health.[74] For instance, mortality rates are lower among people who frequently attend religious events and consider themselves both religious and spiritual.[75] One possibility is that religion provides physical health benefits indirectly. Church attendees present with lower rates of alcohol consumption and improvement in mood, which is associated with better physical health.[76] Kenneth Pargament is a major contributor to the theory of how individuals may use religion as a resource in coping with stress, His work seems to show the influence of attribution theory. Additional evidence suggests that this relationship between religion and physical health may be causal.[77] Religion may reduce likelihood of certain diseases. Studies suggest that it guards against cardiovascular disease by reducing blood pressure, and also improves immune system functioning.[78] Similar studies have been done investigating religious emotions and health. Although religious emotions, such as humility, forgiveness, and gratitude confer health benefits, it is unclear if religious people cultivate and experience those emotions more frequently than non-religious peoples.[79]
However, randomized controlled trials of intercessory prayer have not yielded significant effects on health. These trials have compared personal, focused, committed and organized intercessory prayer with those interceding holding some belief that they are praying to God or a god versus any other intervention. A Cochrane collaboration review of these trials concluded that 1) results were equivocal, 2) evidence does not support a recommendation either in favor or against the use of intercessory prayer and 3) any resources available for future trials should be used to investigate other questions in health research.[80] In a case-control study done following 5,286 Californians over a 28-year period in which variables were controlled for (i.e. age, race/ethnicity, gender, education level), participants who went to church on a frequent basis (defined as attending a religious service once a week or more) were 36% less likely to die during that period.[81] However, this can be partly be attributed to a better lifestyle since religious people tend to drink and smoke less and eat a healthier diet.
Another study detailing the connection between religion and physical health was done in Israel as a prospective cohort case study. In a study done of almost 4,000 Israelis, over 16 years (beginning in 1970), death rates were compared between the experimental group (people belonging to 11 religious kibbutzim) versus the control group (people belonging to secular kibbutzim). Some determining factors for the groups included the date the kibbutz was created, geography of the different groups, and the similarity in age. It was determined that “belonging to a religious collective was associated with a strong protective effect".[82] Not only do religious people tend to exhibit healthier lifestyles, they also have a strong support system that secular people would not normally have. A religious community can provide support especially through a stressful life event such as the death of a loved one or illness. There is the belief that a higher power will provide healing and strength through the rough times which also can explain the lower mortality rate of religious people vs. secular people.
Religion and personality[edit]
Main article: Religion and personality
Some studies have examined whether there is a “religious personality.” Research suggests that people who identify as religious are more likely to be high on agreeableness and conscientiousness, and low on psychoticism, but unrelated to other Big Five traits. However, people endorsing fundamentalist religious beliefs are more likely to be low on Openness.[83] Similarly, people who identify as spiritual are more likely to be high on Extraversion and Openness, although this varied based on the type of spirituality endorsed.[84]
Religion and mental health[edit]
Evidence suggests that religiosity can be a pathway to both mental health and mental disorder. For example, religiosity is positively associated with mental disorders that involve an excessive amount of self-control and negatively associated with mental disorders that involve a lack of self-control.[85] Other studies have found indications of mental health among both the religious and the secular. For instance, Vilchinsky & Kravetz found negative correlations with psychological distress among religious and secular subgroups of Jewish students.[86] In addition, intrinsic religiosity has been inversely related to depression in the elderly, while extrinsic religiosity has no relation or even a slight positive relation to depression.[87] [88]
The link between religion and mental health may be due to the guiding framework or social support that it offers to individuals.[89] By these routes, religion has the potential to offer security and significance in life, as well as valuable human relationships, to foster mental health. Some theorists have suggested that the benefits of religion and religiosity are accounted for by the social support afforded by membership in a religious group.[90]
Religion may also provide coping skills to deal with stressors, or demands perceived as straining. Pargament’s three primary styles of religious coping are 1) self-directing, characterized by self-reliance and acknowledgement of God, 2) deferring, in which a person passively attributes responsibility to God, and 3) collaborative, which involves an active partnership between the individual and God and is most commonly associated with positive adjustment.[91][92] This model of religious coping has been criticized for its over-simplicity and failure to take into account other factors, such as level of religiosity, specific religion, and type of stressor.[93] Additional work by Pargament involves a detailed delineation of positive and negative forms of religious coping, captured in the BREIF-RCOPE questionnaire which have been linked to a range of positive and negative psychological outcomes.[94][95]
Spirituality has been ascribed many different definitions in different contexts, but a general definition is: an individual’s search for meaning and purpose in life. Spirituality is distinct from organized religion in that spirituality does not necessarily need a religious framework. That is, one does not necessarily need to follow certain rules, guidelines or practices to be spiritual, but an organized religion often has some combination of these in place. People who report themselves to be spiritual people may not observe any specific religious practices or traditions.[96] Studies have shown a negative relationship between spiritual well-being and depressive symptoms. In one study, those who were assessed to have a higher spiritual quality of life on a spiritual well-being scale had less depressive symptoms.[97] Cancer and AIDS patients who were more spiritual had lower depressive symptoms than religious patients. Spirituality shows beneficial effects possibly because it speaks to one’s ability to intrinsically find meaning in life, strength, and inner peace, which is especially important for very ill patients.[96] Studies have reported beneficial effects of spirituality on the lives of patients with schizophrenia, major depression, and other psychotic disorders. Schizophrenic patients were less likely to be re-hospitalized if families encouraged religious practice, and in depressed patients who underwent religiously based interventions, their symptoms improved faster than those who underwent secular interventions. Furthermore, a few cross-sectional studies have shown that more religiously involved people had less instance of psychosis.[98]
Religion and prejudice[edit]
To investigate the salience of religious beliefs in establishing group identity, researchers have also conducted studies looking at religion and prejudice. Some studies have shown that greater religious attitudes may be significant predictors of negative attitudes towards racial or social outgroups.[99][100] These effects are often conceptualized under the framework of intergroup bias, where religious individuals favor members of their ingroup (ingroup favoritism) and exhibit disfavor towards members of their outgroup (outgroup derogation). Evidence supporting religious intergroup bias has been supported in multiple religious groups, including non-Christian groups, and is thought to reflect the role of group dynamics in religious identification. Many studies regarding religion and prejudice implement religious priming both in the laboratory and in naturalistic settings [101][102] with evidence supporting the perpetuation of ingroup favoritism and outgroup derogation in individuals who are high in religiosity.
Evolutionary psychology of religion[edit]
Main article: Evolutionary psychology of religion
Evolutionary psychology is based on the hypothesis that, just like the cardiac, pulmonary, urinary, and immune systems, cognition has a functional structure with a genetic basis, and therefore appeared through natural selection. Like other organs and tissues, this functional structure should be universally shared among humans and should solve important problems of survival and reproduction. Evolutionary psychologists seek to understand cognitive processes by understanding the survival and reproductive functions they might serve.
Pascal Boyer is one of the leading figures in the cognitive psychology of religion, a new field of inquiry that is less than fifteen years old, which accounts for the psychological processes that underlie religious thought and practice. In his book Religion Explained, Boyer shows that there is no simple explanation for religious consciousness. Boyer is mainly concerned with explaining the various psychological processes involved in the acquisition and transmission of ideas concerning the gods. Boyer builds on the ideas of cognitive anthropologists Dan Sperber and Scott Atran, who first argued that religious cognition represents a by-product of various evolutionary adaptations, including folk psychology, and purposeful violations of innate expectations about how the world is constructed (for example, bodiless beings with thoughts and emotions) that make religious cognitions striking and memorable.
Religious persons acquire religious ideas and practices through social exposure. The child of a Zen Buddhist will not become an evangelical Christian or a Zulu warrior without the relevant cultural experience. While mere exposure does not cause a particular religious outlook (a person may have been raised a Roman Catholic but leave the church), nevertheless some exposure seems required – this person will never invent Roman Catholicism out of thin air. Boyer says cognitive science can help us to understand the psychological mechanisms that account for these manifest correlations and in so doing enable us to better understand the nature of religious belief and practice. To the extent that the mechanisms controlling the acquisitions and transmission of religious concepts rely on human brains, the mechanisms are open to computational analysis. All thought is computationally structured, including religious thought. So presumably, computational approaches can shed light on the nature and scope of religious cognition[citation needed].
Boyer moves outside the leading currents in mainstream cognitive psychology and suggests that we can use evolutionary biology to unravel the relevant mental architecture. Our brains are, after all, biological objects, and the best naturalistic account of their development in nature is Darwin's theory of evolution. To the extent that mental architecture exhibits intricate processes and structures, it is plausible to think that this is the result of evolutionary processes working over vast periods of time. Like all biological systems, the mind is optimised to promote survival and reproduction in the evolutionary environment. On this view all specialised cognitive functions broadly serve those reproductive ends.
For Steven Pinker the universal propensity toward religious belief is a genuine scientific puzzle. He thinks that adaptationist explanations for religion do not meet the criteria for adaptations. An alternative explanation is that religious psychology is a by-product of many parts of the mind that evolved for other purposes.
Religion and drugs[edit]
James H. Leuba[edit]


 This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (January 2012)
The American psychologist James H. Leuba (1868–1946), in A Psychological Study of Religion, accounts for mystical experience psychologically and physiologically, pointing to analogies with certain drug-induced experiences. Leuba argued forcibly for a naturalistic treatment of religion, which he considered to be necessary if religious psychology were to be looked at scientifically. Shamans all over the world and in different cultures have traditionally used drugs, especially psychedelics, for their religious experiences. In these communities the absorption of drugs leads to dreams (visions) through sensory distortion.
William James was also interested in mystical experiences from a drug-induced perspective, leading him to make some experiments with nitrous oxide and even peyote. He concludes that while the revelations of the mystic hold true, they hold true only for the mystic; for others they are certainly ideas to be considered, but hold no claim to truth without personal experience of such.
Drug-induced religious experiences[edit]
See main article entheogen on the use of psychoactive substances in a religious or shamanic context.
The drugs used by religious communities for their hallucinogenic effects were adopted for explicit and implicit religious functions and purposes. The drugs were and are reported to enhance religious experience through visions and a distortion of the sensory perception (like in dreams in a state of sleep).
Cannabis, which grows all over the world except in very cold climates, is used in religious practices in Indian and African communities
Certain psychedelic mushrooms are used by Indians in Latin America, especially in the state of Oaxaca in southern Mexico[citation needed] The chief species is Psilocybe mexicana, of which the active principles are psilocin and its derivative psilocybin, in their chemical composition and activity not unlike LSD (D-lysergic acid diethylamide); the latter is synthesized from the alkaloids (principally ergotamine and ergonovine) that are constituents of ergot, a growth present in grasses affected by the disease also called ergot. Amanita muscaria (fly agaric) is another mushroom having hallucinogenic properties that has not been thoroughly studied. Fly agaric is mildly toxic at high dosages and is said to have, in addition to its hallucinogenic properties, the ability to increase strength and endurance.[citation needed] It is said also to be a soporific. Fly agaric may be extremely important, since it may have been the natural source of the ritual soma drink of the ancient Hindus and the comparable haoma used by the Zoroastrians. However most researchers point toward ephedra as the main ingredient of Soma.[103][104] Henry Falk stated that "there is no need to look for a plant other than Ephedra, the one plant used to this day by the Parsis." [105] Ephedra is both a stimulant and a thermogenic; its biological effects are due to its ephedrine and pseudoephedrine content.[106] These compounds stimulate the brain and also body metabolism.
Peyote used by some Indian communities of Mexico. The chief active principle of peyote is an alkaloid called mescaline. Like psilocin and psilocybin, mescaline is reputed to produce visions and other evidences of a mystical nature. Despite claims of missionaries and some government agents that peyote – from the Nahuatl word peyotl ("divine messenger") – is a degenerative and dangerous drug, there appears to be no evidence of this among the members of the Native American Church, a North American Indian cult that uses peyote in its chief religious ceremony. Peyote, like most other hallucinogenic drugs, is not considered to be addictive and, far from being a destructive influence, is reputed by cultists and some observers to promote morality and ethical behaviour among the Indians who use it ritually.
Ayahuasca, caapi, or yajé, is produced from the stem bark of the vines Banisteriopsis caapi and B. inebrians. Indians who use it claim that its virtues include healing powers and the power to induce clairvoyance, among others. This drink has been certified by investigators to produce remarkable effects, often involving the sensation of flying. The effects are thought to be attributable to the action of harmine, a very stable indole that is the active principle in the plant. While the Indians themselves attribute the properties of the drink Ayahuasca to B. caapi, this is not the common scientific view; the MAOIs present in the B. caapi instead allow the extremely psychedelic ingredients in other plants added to the brew, noticeably plants containing DMT, to be activated and produce an intense experience.
Kava drink, prepared from the roots of Piper methysticum, a species of pepper, and seemingly more of a hypnotic-narcotic than a hallucinogen, is used both socially and ritually in the South Pacific, especially in Polynesia.
Iboga, a stimulant and hallucinogen derived from the root bark of the African shrub Tabernanthe iboga is used within the Bwiti religion in Central Africa. The active ingredient in T. iboga is ibogaine, a drug that has been studied for its use in treating addiction.
Coca, source of cocaine, has had both ritual and social use chiefly in Peru.
Datura, one species of which is the jimsonweed, is used by native peoples in North and South America; the active principle, however, is highly toxic and dangerous. A drink prepared from the shrub *Mimosa hostilis, which is said to produce glorious visions in warriors before battle, is used ritually in the ajuca ceremony of the Jurema cult in eastern Brazil.
Salvia divinorum, a member of the sage family of plants, is a hallucinogen used by Mazatec shamans for "spiritual journeys" during healing.
Religion and meditation[edit]
The large variety of meditation techniques shares the common goal of shifting attention away from habitual or customary modes of thinking and perception, in order to permit experiencing in a different way. Many religious and spiritual traditions that employ meditation assert that the world most of us know is an illusion. This illusion is said to be created by our habitual mode of separating, classifying and labelling our perceptual experiences. Meditation is empirical in that it involves direct experience. However it is also subjective in that the meditative state can be directly known only by the experiencer, and may be difficult or impossible to fully describe in words. Meditation can induce an altered state of consciousness characterised by a loss of awareness of extraneous stimuli, one-pointed attention to the meditation object to the exclusion of all other thoughts, and feelings of bliss.[107]
Controversy[edit]
Many psychologists reject religion. For instance, Sigmund Freud viewed religion as an illusion, a sign of psychological neurosis. Additionally Eric Fromm’s humanistic psychology centers on man and rejects authoritarian religion.[108] However, religious scholars and psychologists advocating the study of religion have contested such views. Paul Vitz critiqued Fromm’s self-centered approach to psychology and labeled humanist psychology as a religion, unsupported by scientific inquiry.[109] Reber asserted that exclusion of the study of religion only limits psychology’s understanding of human behavior.[110] Others argue that a psychological study of human personality necessitates, at minimum, an acknowledgment of the impact religion has on many humans.[111]
Other views[edit]
A 2012 paper suggested that psychiatric conditions associated with psychotic spectrum symptoms may be possible explanations for revelatory driven experiences and activities such as those of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Saint Paul.[112]
Religion and psychotherapy[edit]
Various forms of explicitly religious psychotherapies that maintain the traditional psychological framework have recently become more prevalent. Clients’ religious beliefs are increasingly being considered in psychotherapy with the goal of improving service and effectiveness of treatment.[113] A resulting development was theistic psychotherapy. Conceptually, it consists of theological principles, a theistic view of personality, and a theistic view of psychotherapy.[114] Following an explicit minimizing strategy, therapists attempt to minimize conflict by acknowledging their religious views while being respectful of client’s religious views.[115] This opens up the potential for therapists to directly utilize religious practices and principles in therapy, such as prayer, forgiveness, and grace.
Pastoral psychology[edit]
One application of the psychology of religion is in pastoral psychology, the use of psychological findings to improve the pastoral care provided by pastors and other clergy, especially in how they support ordinary members of their congregations. Pastoral psychology is also concerned with improving the practice of chaplains in healthcare and in the military. One major concern of pastoral psychology is to improve the practice of pastoral counseling. Pastoral psychology is a topic of interest for professional journals such as Pastoral Psychology, Journal of Psychology and Christianity, and Journal of Psychology and Theology. In 1984, Thomas Oden severely criticized mid-20th century pastoral care and the pastoral psychology that guided it as having entirely abandoned its classical/traditional sources, and having become overwhelmingly dominated by modern psychological influences from Freud, Rogers, and others.[116] More recently, others have described pastoral psychology as a field that experiences a tension between psychology and theology.[117]
See also[edit]
Altered state of consciousness
Cognitive science of religion
Issues in Science and Religion
Journals for the Psychology of religion
Magical thinking
Neurotheology
Philosophy of religion
Religion and personality
Religiosity
Social Evolution
Sociology of religion
Attachment theory and psychology of religion
Transpersonal psychology
References[edit]
1.^ Jump up to: a b Wulff, D. M. (2010). Psychology of Religion. In D. A. Leeming, K. Madden, & S. Marian (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion (pp. 732–735). New York; London: Springer.
2.Jump up ^ Smith, W. C. (1963). The Meaning and End of Religion: A New Approach to the Religious Traditions of Mankind. New York: Macmillan.
3.Jump up ^ Wulff, D. M. (1999). Psychologists Define Religion: Patterns and Prospects of a Century-Long Quest. In J. G. Platvoet and A. L. Molendijk (Eds.), The Pragmatics of Defining Religion: Contexts, Concepts, and Contests (pp. 207–224). Leiden: Brill
4.Jump up ^ Hill, P. C., and Hood, R. W., Jr. (Eds.). (1999). Measures of Religiosity." Birmingham, AL: Religious Education Press.
5.Jump up ^ Schlehofer M. M., Omoto A. M., Adelman J. R. (2008). "How Do "Religion" and "Spirituality" Differ? Lay Definitions Among Older Adults". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 47 (3): 411–425. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2008.00418.x.
6.Jump up ^ Principe W (1983). "Toward Defining Spirituality". Sciences Religieuses/Studies in Religion 12: 127–141.
7.Jump up ^ Pargament, Kenneth I. The Psychology of Religion and Coping: Theory, Research, Practice. New York: Guilford, 1997. Print.
8.Jump up ^ Hill, P. C. (2005). Measurement in the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality: Current Status and Evaluation. In R. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality. New York, London: Guilford Press.
9.Jump up ^ Spilka, Hood, Hunsberger and Gorsuch, 2003, The Psychology of Religion, p. 24
10.Jump up ^ Jung, 'On the Nature of the Psyche', C.W.8, Aphorisms 362, 420.
11.Jump up ^ Leak, Gary K (2002). "Exploratory factor analysis of the religious maturity scale". BNET UK. CBS Interactive Inc. Retrieved 22 March 2010.
12.Jump up ^ Fromm, Erich (1950). Psychoanalysis and Religion. New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-00089-8. Retrieved 10 February 2010.
13.Jump up ^ Burger, Jerry (2007). Personality. Stamford, CT, USA: Cengage Learning. pp. 122–123. ISBN 0-495-09786-1. Retrieved 10 February 2010.
14.Jump up ^ Belzen, Jacob A., ed. (2012). Psychology of religion: autobiographical accounts. New York: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4614-1601-2. OCLC 773924284
15.Jump up ^ Bergin, A. E. (1980). Psychotherapy and religious values. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 4895-105
16.Jump up ^ Slife, B.D. & Whoolery, M. (2003). Understanding disciplinary significance: The story of Allen Bergin’s 1980 article on values. In R. Sternberg (Ed.) The anatomy of impact: What has made the great works of psychology great? Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
17.Jump up ^ American Psychological Association (1990). Allen E. Bergin: Citation – Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Knowledge. American Psychologist, 45(4), 474. As cited in Swedin, E. G. (2003). Book Review: Eternal Values and Personal Growth: A Guide on Your Journey to Spiritual, Emotional, and Social Wellness, by Allen E Bergin. AMCAP Journal, 28(1), 41.
18.Jump up ^ Emmons, Robert A. (1999). The psychology of ultimate concerns: Motivation and spirituality in personality. New York: Guilford. ISBN 978-1-57230-935-7.
19.^ Jump up to: a b Kenneth I. Pargament (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, practice. New York: Guilford. ISBN 978-1-57230-664-6
20.Jump up ^ Kenneth I. Pargament, Harold G. Koenig & Lisa M. Perez (2000). The many methods of religious coping: Development and initial validation of the RCOPE. Journal of Clinical Psychology, v56 n4, pp519–543. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(200004)56:4<519::AID-JCLP6>3.0.CO;2-1
21.Jump up ^ Kenneth I. Pargament, Joseph Kennell, William Hathaway, Nancy Grevengoed, Jon Newman & Wendy Jones (1988). Religion and the problem-solving process: Three styles of coping. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, v27 n1, pp90-104. ISSN 0021-8294
22.Jump up ^ Brian J. Zinnbauer & Kenneth I. Pargament (2000). Working with the sacred: Four approaches to religious and spiritual issues in counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development, v78 n2, pp162–171. ISSN 0748-9633
23.Jump up ^ James Hillman, Re-Visioning Psychology, HarperCollins, NY, 1977, p227
24.Jump up ^ Jaynes, Julian (2000). The origin of consciousness in the breakdown of the bicameral mind. Houghton Mifflin. pp. 131–143. ISBN 0-618-05707-2.
25.Jump up ^ Gill, R. (2001). "The future of religious participation and belief in Britain and beyond". In R. K. Fenn. The Blackwell companion to the sociology of religion. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 279–291. ISBN 978-0-631-21241-6. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
26.Jump up ^ Taylor, C. (2007). A secular age. Cambridge, MA: Belknap. ISBN 978-0-674-02676-6. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
27.Jump up ^ Roof, W. C. (1993). A generation of seekers: The spiritual journeys of the baby boom generation. San Francisco: HaperSanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-066963-2. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
28.Jump up ^ Hill, P. C., Pargament, K. I., Hood, R. W., McCullough, M. E., Swyers, J. P., Larson, D. B. et al. (2000). "Conceptualizing religion and spirituality: Points of commonality, points of departure" (PDF) 30. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior. pp. 51–77. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
29.Jump up ^ Wuthnow, R (1998). After heaven: Spirituality in America since the 1950s. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-22228-1. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
30.Jump up ^ Besecke, K. (2007). "Beyond literalism: Reflexive spirituality and religious meaning". In N. T. Ammerman. Everyday religion: Observing modern religious lives. New York: Oxford University. pp. 169–186. ISBN 978-0-19-530541-8. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
31.Jump up ^ Hervieu-Leger, D. (2001). "Individualism, the validation of faith, and the social nature of religion in modernity". In R. K. Fenn. The Blackwell companion to sociology of religion. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 161–175. ISBN 978-0-631-21241-6. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
32.Jump up ^ Casey, M. (1996). Toward God: The ancient wisdom of the Western prayer. Liguori, MO: Liguori/ Triumph. p. 25. ISBN 0-89243-890-8. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
33.Jump up ^ Norris, P., Inglehart, R. (2004). Sacred and secular: Religion and politics worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-83984-X. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
34.Jump up ^ Dechesne, M., Janssen, J., & van Knippenberg, A. (2000). "Derogation and distancing as terror management strategies: the moderating role of need for closure and permeability of group boundaries". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (6): 923. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.923.
35.Jump up ^ Kay, A.C., Jimenez, M.C., Jost, J.T. (2002). "Sour Grapes, Sweet Lemons, and the Anticipatory Rationalization of the Status Quo". Pers Soc Psychol Bull 28 (9): 1300–1312. doi:10.1177/01461672022812014.
36.Jump up ^ Kay, A.C., Gaucher, D., Napier, J.L., Callan, M.J., Laurin, K. (2008). "God and the government: Testing a compensatory control mechanism for the support of external systems". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 95 (1): 18–35. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.18.
37.Jump up ^ Allport, G.W. & J. Michael Ross (1967). "Personal Religious Orientation and Prejudice". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 5 (4): 432. doi:10.1037/h0021212.
38.Jump up ^ Gorsuch, R. & Venable (1983). "Development of an Age-Universal I-E Scale". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Blackwell Publishing) 22 (2): 181. doi:10.2307/1385677. JSTOR 1385677.
39.Jump up ^ Batson, C.D., Schoenrade, P. & Ventis, L. (1993). Religion and the Individual. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-506208-6.
40.Jump up ^ Genia, V. (1997). "The Spiritual Experience Index: Revision and Reformulation". Review of Religious Research (Religious Research Association, Inc.) 38 (4): 344–361. doi:10.2307/3512195. JSTOR 3512195.
41.Jump up ^ Southwell, G. "Philosophy of Religion". UK. Retrieved 26 April 2010. |chapter= ignored (help)
42.Jump up ^ Southwell, G. "Philosophy of Religion". UK. Retrieved 26 April 2010. |chapter= ignored (help)
43.Jump up ^ ISBN 0-06-062866-9
44.Jump up ^ Bloom, P. (January 2007). "Religion is natural". Developmental Science 10 (1): 147–151. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00577.x.
45.Jump up ^ Evans, E (May 2001). "Cognitive and contextual factors in the emergence of diverse belief systems: creation versus evolution.". Cogn Psychol 42 (3): 217–66. doi:10.1006/cogp.2001.0749. PMID 11305883.
46.Jump up ^ Bloom, P. (January 2007). "Religion is natural". Developmental Science 10 (1): 147–151. doi:10.1207/s15327582ijpr1404_1.
47.Jump up ^ Kirkpatrick, L.A., Shaver, P.R. (1990). "Attachment theory and religion: Childhood attachments, religious beliefs, and conversion". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion: 315–334.
48.Jump up ^ Sarah A. Schnitkera; Tenelle J. Porterb (7 June 2012). "Attachment Predicts Adolescent Conversions at Young Life". International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 22 (3): 198–215. doi:10.1080/10508619.2012.670024.
49.Jump up ^ Bader, C., Dougherty, K., Froese, P., Johnson, B., Mencken, F. C., Park, J. et al. (2006). "American piety in the 21st century: New insights to the depth and complexity of religion in the US: Selected findings from the Baylor Religion Survey" (PDF). Waco, TX: Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
50.Jump up ^ Francis, L. & Evans, T. (2001). "The psychology of Christian prayer: A review of empirical research". In L. Francis, & J. Astley. Psychological perspectives on prayer. Leominster, UK: Gracewing. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
51.Jump up ^ Poloma, M. M., & Pendleton, B. F. (1989). "Exploring types of prayer and quality of life: A research note" 31. Review of Religious Research. pp. 46–53. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
52.Jump up ^ Poloma, M. M., & Pendleton, B. F. (1991). "The effects of prayer and prayer experiences" (PDF) 19. Journal of Psychology and Theology. pp. 71–83. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
53.Jump up ^ Ladd, K. L., & Spilka, B. (2002). "Inward, outward, and upwards: Cognitive aspects of prayer" (PDF) 41. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. pp. 475–484. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
54.Jump up ^ Dein, Simon, and Roland Littlewood. "The Psychology of Prayer and the Development of the Prayer Experience Questionnaire." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11.1 (2008): 39-52. Print.
55.Jump up ^ Dysinger, L. (2005). Psalmody and prayer in the in writings of Evagrius Ponticus. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-927320-1. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
56.Jump up ^ Kadloubovsky, E., & Palmer, G. E. H., (Trans.). (1992. (Original work published 1951).). Writings from the ‘Philokalia’ prayer of the heart. London: Faber & Faber. Retrieved 25 April 2010. Check date values in: |date= (help)
57.Jump up ^ Francis, Leslie J., Mandy Robbins, Christopher Alan Lewis, and L. Philip Barnes. "Prayer and Psychological Health: A Study among Sixth-form Pupils Attending Catholic and Protestant Schools in Northern Ireland." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11.1 (2008): 85-92. Print.
58.Jump up ^ Ladd, Kevin L., and Daniel N. McIntosh. "Meaning, God, and Prayer: Physical and Metaphysical Aspects of Social Support." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11.1 (2008): 23-38. Print.
59.Jump up ^ Nelson, J. M (2009). Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. New York: Springer. p. 456. ISBN 0-387-87572-7. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
60.Jump up ^ Robinson, P. W., Thiel, M., Backus, M., & Meyer, E. (2006). "Matters of spirituality at the end of life in the pediatric intensive care unit". Pediatrics (Pediatrics) 118 (3): e719–e729. doi:10.1542/peds.2005-2298. PMID 16950963. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
61.Jump up ^ Breslin, Michael J., and Christopher Alan Lewis. "Theoretical Models of the Nature of Prayer and Health: A Review." Mental Health, Religion & Culture 11.1 (2008): 9-21. Print.
62.Jump up ^ Stark, R., & Clock, C. (1968). American piety: The nature of religious commitment. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
63.Jump up ^ Rappaport, R. (1990). Ritual and religion in the making of humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 24. ISBN 0-521-22873-5. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
64.Jump up ^ Scheff, T. J. (1979). Catharsis in Healing, Ritual, and Drama. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-04125-7. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
65.Jump up ^ Schumaker, J. F. (1992). Religion and Mental Health. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-506985-3. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
66.Jump up ^ Sosis, R. (2004). "The adaptive value of religious ritual: Rituals promote group cohesion by requiring members to engage in behavior that is too costly to fake" 92. American Scientist. pp. 166–172. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
67.Jump up ^ Reich, K. (1990). "Rituals and social structure: The moral dimension.". In H.-G. Heimbrock, & H. B. Bougewinjinse. Current studies on rituals: Perspectives for the psychology of religion. Amsterdam: Rodopi. pp. 121–134. ISBN 978-90-5183-178-8. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
68.Jump up ^ Hinde, R. A. (2005). "Modes theory: Some theoretical considerations.". In H. Whitehouse, & R McCauley. Mind and religion: Psychological and cognitive foundations of religiosity. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira. pp. 31–55. ISBN 978-0-7591-0619-2. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
69.Jump up ^ Koenig, Harold G.; McCullough, Michael E.; Larson, David B. (2001). Handbook of Religion and Health (1st ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-511866-7. OCLC 468554547
70.Jump up ^ Koenig, Harold G.; King, Dana E.; Carson, Verna Benner (2012). Handbook of Religion and Health (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195335958. OCLC 691927968
71.Jump up ^ Levin, 2001
72.Jump up ^ see those by Miller and Thoresen (2003) and Powell, Shahabi and Thorsen (2003); see also the article by Oman and Thoresen, in Paloutzian and Park (2005)
73.Jump up ^ Haber, Jacob & Spangler, 2007)
74.Jump up ^ Ellison, C. G., & Levin, J. S. (1998). "The religion-health connection: Evidence, theory, and future directions". Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education (Health Education and Behavior.) 25 (6): 700–720. doi:10.1177/109019819802500603. PMID 9813743. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
75.Jump up ^ Shahabi, L., Powell, L. H., Musick, M. A., Pargament, K. I., Thoresen, C. E., Williams, D. et al. (2002). "Correlates of self-perceptions of spirituality in American adults". Annals of Behavioral Medicine 24 (1): 59–68. doi:10.1207/s15324796abm2401_07. PMID 12008795.
76.Jump up ^ Koenig, L. B., & Vaillant, G. E. (2009). "A prospective study of church attendance and health over the lifespan" 28. Health Psychology. pp. 117–124. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
77.Jump up ^ Chatters, L. M. (2000). "Religion and health: Public health research and practices" 21. Annual Review of Public Health. pp. 335–367. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
78.Jump up ^ Seeman, T., Dubin, L. F., & Seeman, M. (2003). "Religiosity/spirituality and health: A critical review of the evidence for biological pathways" 58 (1). American Psychologist. pp. 53–63. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
79.Jump up ^ Emmons RA, Paloutzian RF (2003). "The psychology of religion". Annual Review of Psychology 54 (1): 377–402. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145024. PMID 12171998.
80.Jump up ^ Roberts L, Ahmed I, Hall S, Davison A (2009). "Intercessory prayer for the alleviation of ill health". The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2): CD000368. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD000368.pub3. PMID 19370557.
81.Jump up ^ Strawbridge WJ, Cohen RD, Shema SJ, Kaplan GA (June 1997). "Frequent attendance at religious services and mortality over 28 years". American Journal of Public Health 87 (6): 957–61. doi:10.2105/ajph.87.6.957. PMC 1380930. PMID 9224176.
82.Jump up ^ Kark JD, Shemi G, Friedlander Y, Martin O, Manor O, Blondheim SH (March 1996). "Does religious observance promote health? mortality in secular vs religious kibbutzim in Israel". American Journal of Public Health 86 (3): 341–6. doi:10.2105/ajph.86.3.341. PMC 1380514. PMID 8604758.
83.Jump up ^ Saroglou, V. (2002). "Religion and the five factors of personality: A meta-analytic review" 32. "Personality and Individual Differences". pp. 15–25.
84.Jump up ^ MacDonald DA (February 2000). "Spirituality: description, measurement, and relation to the five factor model of personality". Journal of Personality 68 (1): 153–97. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.t01-1-00094. PMID 10820684.
85.Jump up ^ Gartner, J., Larson, D. B., Allen, G. D. (1991). "Religious commitment and mental health: A review of the empirical literature" 19. Journal of Psychology & Theology. pp. 6–25. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
86.Jump up ^ Vilchinsky, N, & Kravetz, S. (2005). "How are religious belief and behavior good for you? An investigation of mediators relating religion to mental health in a sample of Israeli Jewish students". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.) 44 (4): 459–471. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2005.00297.x. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
87.Jump up ^ Fehring, R.J., Miller, J.F., Shaw, C. (1997). "Spiritual well-being, religiosity, hope, depression, and other mood states in elderly people coping with cancer" 24. Oncology Nursing Forum. pp. 663–671.
88.Jump up ^ Nelson, P.B. (1989). "Ethnic differences in intrinsic/extrinsic religious orientation and depression in the elderly". Archives of Psychiatric Nursing.
89.Jump up ^ Hill, P. C., Pargament, K. I. (2008). "Advanced in the conceptualization and measurement of religion and spirituality: Implications for physical and mental health research". The American Psychologist (Psychology and Religion and Spirituality.) 58 (1): 3–17. PMID 12674819.
90.Jump up ^ Graham, J. (Feb 2010). "Beyond beliefs: religions bind individuals into moral communities.". Personality and Social Psychology Review 14 (1): 140–50. doi:10.1177/1088868309353415. PMID 20089848.
91.Jump up ^ Pargament, K., I. (1997). The psychology of religion and coping: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Guilford. pp. 180–182. ISBN 978-1-57230-664-6. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
92.Jump up ^ Bickel, C., Ciarrocchi, J., Sheers, N., & Estadt, B. (1998). "Perceived stress, religious coping styles and depressive affect" 17. Journal of Psychology & Christianity. pp. 33–42. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
93.Jump up ^ Nelson, J. M. (2009). Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. New York: Springer. pp. 326–327. ISBN 0-387-87572-7. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
94.Jump up ^ Ano, Gene G. (Apr 2005). "Religious coping and psychological adjustment to stress: a meta-analysis.". J Clin Psychol 61 (4): 461–80. doi:10.1002/jclp.20049. PMID 15503316.
95.Jump up ^ Pargament, Kenneth I. (Apr 2000). "The many methods of religious coping: development and initial validation of the RCOPE.". J Clin Psychol 56 (4): 519–43. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(200004)56:4<519::AID-JCLP6>3.0.CO;2-1. PMID 10775045.
96.^ Jump up to: a b Nelson, C.J., Rosenfeld, B., Breitbart, W., Galietta, M. (2002). Spirituality, religion, and depression in the terminally ill 43. Psychosomatics. pp. 213–220.
97.Jump up ^ Fehring, R.J., Miller, J.F., Shaw, C. (1997). Spiritual well-being, religiosity, hope, depression, and other mood states in elderly people coping with cancer 24. Oncology Nursing Forum. pp. 663–671.
98.Jump up ^ Koenig, H. G. (2008) Research on religion, spirituality, and mental health: A review. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry.
99.Jump up ^ Hall, D. L. (Feb 2010). "Why don't we practice what we preach? A meta-analytic review of religious racism.". Personality and Social Psychology Review 14 (1): 126–39. doi:10.1177/1088868309352179. PMID 20018983.
100.Jump up ^ Whitley, Bernard E. (2009). "(full text)". The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 19 (1): 21–38. doi:10.1080/10508610802471104.
101.Jump up ^ Hall, D.; Matz, D. & Wood, W. (April 2010). "Priming Christian Religious Concepts Increases Racial Prejudice". Social Psychological and Personality Science 1 (2): 119–126. doi:10.1177/1948550609357246.
102.Jump up ^ Jordan P. LaBouffa; W. Rowatt; M. Johnson & C. Finkle (June 18, 2012). "Differences in Attitudes toward Outgroups in Religious and Nonreligious Contexts". Journal for the Psychology of Religion 22 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1080/10508619.2012.634778.
103.Jump up ^ Aitchison, 1888
104.Jump up ^ Bakels, C.C. 2003. "The contents of ceramic vessels in the Bactria-Margiana Archaeological Complex, Turkmenistan." Electronic Journal of Vedic Studies, Vol. 9. Issue 1c (May 5)
105.Jump up ^ Falk, 1989
106.Jump up ^ Abourashed E, El-Alfy A, Khan I, Walker L (2003). "Ephedra in perspective--a current review". Phytother Res 17 (7): 703–12. doi:10.1002/ptr.1337. PMID 12916063.
107.Jump up ^ Jevning, R., Wallace, R. K., Beidebach, M. (1992). "The physiology of meditation: A review. A wakeful hypometabolic integrated response". Neuroscience (Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews.) 16 (3): 415–424. doi:10.1016/S0149-7634(05)80210-6. PMID 1528528.
108.Jump up ^ Fromm, E. (1950). Psychoanalysis and religion. New Haven: Yale University Press. p. 37. ISBN 978-0-300-00089-4. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
109.Jump up ^ Vitz, P. T. (1997). Psychology as religion: The cult of self-worship. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
110.Jump up ^ Reber, J. S. (2006). "Secular psychology: What’s the problem?" 34. Journal of Psychology and Theology. pp. 193–204. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
111.Jump up ^ Jung, C. G. (1938). Psychology & Religion. 'Binghampton, NY: Vail-Ballou Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-300-00137-2. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
112.Jump up ^ Murray ED, Cunningham MG, Price BH (2012). "The role of psychotic disorders in religious history considered". J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci 24 (4): 410–26. doi:10.1176/appi.neuropsych.11090214. PMID 23224447.
113.Jump up ^ Bergin, A. E. (1980). "Psychotherapy and religious values" 48 (1). Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. pp. 95–105. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
114.Jump up ^ Richards, P. S. (2005). "A theistic integrative psychotherapy.". In L. Sperry, & E. P. Shafranske. Spiritually oriented psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. pp. 259–285. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
115.Jump up ^ Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. (1997). A spiritual strategy for counseling and psychotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ISBN 1-55798-434-4. Retrieved 25 April 2010.
116.Jump up ^ Oden, Thomas C. (1984). Care of souls in the classic tradition. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. ISBN 978-0-8006-1729-5. (full text online). In Tables 1 through 3, he demonstrated that in pastoral care textbooks, citations to psychologists (such as Freud, Jung, and Rogers) had entirely replaced citations to traditional pastoral care thinkers (such as Augustine, Gregory the Great, and Chrysostom) between the late 19th century and the mid-20th century.
117.Jump up ^ Ermanno Pavesi (2010). "Pastoral psychology as a field of tension between theology and psychology". Christian Bioethics 16 (1): 9–29. doi:10.1093/cb/cbq001. ISSN 1744-4195.
Bibliography[edit]
Adler, A., & Jahn, E., Religion and Psychology, Frankfurt, 1933.
Allport, G.W. & Ross, J.M., Personal Religious Orientation and Prejudice, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1967.
Allport, G. W., The individual and his religion, New York, Macmillan, 1950.
Atran, S., In Gods We Trust: The Evolutionary Landscape of Religion, New York, Oxford University Press, 2002.
Batson, C.D., Schoenrade, P. & Ventis, L., Religion and the Individual, New York, Oxford University Press, 1993.
Erikson, E., Young man Luther: A Study in Psychoanalysis and History, New York, W. W. Norton, 1958.
Dykstra, C. (1986). Youth and language of faith. Religious Education, 81, 164–184.
Fowler, J. Stages of Faith, Harper and Row, San Francisco, 1971.
Francis, L.J. & Louden, S.H., The Francis-Louden Mystical Orientation Scale: A Study Among Male Anglican Priests, Research in the Scientific Study of Religion, 2000.
Freud, S., The future of an illusion, translated by W.D. Robson-Scott, New York, Liveright, 1928.
Freud, S., Totem and Taboo: Resemblances Between the Psychic Lives of Savages and Neurotics, New-York, Dodd, 1928.
Freud, S., Moses and Monotheism, London, The Hogarth Press and The Institute of Psychoanalysis, 1939.
Fromm, E., Psychoanalysis and Religion, New Haven, Yale University, 1950.
Genia, V., The Spiritual Experience Index: Revision and Reformulation, Review of Religious Research, 38, 344–361, 1997.
Glock, C.Y. & Stark, R., Religion and Society in Tension, Chicago, Rand McNally, 1965.
Gorsuch, R. & Venable, Development of an Age-Universal I-E Scale, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1983.
Haber J., Jacob R., Spangler J.D.C. (2007). "Dimensions of religion and their relationship to health". The International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 17 (4): 265–288. doi:10.1080/10508610701572770.
Hill, P. C. & Hood, R., Measures of Religiosity, Birmingham, Alabama, Religious Education Press,1999.
Hill, P. C. & Pargament, K., Advances in the Conceptualisation and Measurement of Spirituality. American Psychologist, 58, p64–74, 2003.
Hood, R. W., The Construction and Preliminary Validation of a Measure of Reported Mystical Experience, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1975.
James, W., The Varieties of Religious Experience, Cambridge, Ma., Harvard University, 1985.
Jung, C. G., Modern Man in Search of a Soul, New York, Harcourt Brace, 1933.
Jung, C. G., Psychology and Religion, Yale University Press, 1962.
Jung, C. G., Psychology and Religion, Yale Univ. Press, 1992.
Jung, C. G., Psychology and Western Religion, Princeton Univ. Press, 1984.
Hood, R. W., The Construction and Preliminary Validation of a Measure of Reported Mystical Experience, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 1975.
Leuba, J. H., The Psychology of Religious Mysticism, New York, Harcourt, Brace, 1925.
Leuba, J. H., The Psychological Origin and the Nature of Religion. Wikisource text
Levin, J. (2001). God, Faith and Spirituality: Exploring the Spirituality-Health Connection. New York: Wiley
Paloutzian, R. F. & Park, C. L. (2005). Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality.
Saroglou, V. (Ed). (2014). Religion, Personality, and Social Behavior. New York: Psychology Press.
Miller & Thoresen (2003) American Psychologist
Powell, L.H., Shahabi, L. & Thoresen, C. (2003). Religion and spirituality.
Links to physical health. American Psychologist. 58 pp36–52Wulff, D. M., Psychology of Religion: Classic and Contemporary (2nd ed), New York, Wiley, 1997.
Further reading[edit]
Aziz, Robert (1990). C.G. Jung's Psychology of Religion and Synchronicity (10 ed.). The State University of New York Press. ISBN 0-7914-0166-9.
Bendeck Sotillos, S. (Ed.). (2013). Psychology and the Perennial Philosophy: Studies in Comparative Religion. Bloomington, IN: World Wisdom. ISBN 978-1-936597-20-8.
Fontana, D., Psychology, Religion and Spirituality, Oxford, Blackwell, 2003.
Fuller, A. R. (1994). Psychology & religion: Eight points of view (3rd ed.). Lanham, MD: Littlefield Adams. ISBN 0-8226-3036-2.
Hood, R. W. Jr., Spilka, B., Hunsberger, B., & Gorsuch, R. (1996). The psychology of religion: An empirical approach. New York: Guilford. ISBN 1-57230-116-3
Jones, David., The Psychology of Jesus. Valjean Press: Nashville. ISBN 978-09820757-2-2
Kugelmann, Robert., Psychology and Catholicism: Contested Boundaries, Cambridge University Press, 2011 ISBN 1-107-00608-2
Levin, J., God, Faith and Health: Exploring the Spirituality-Health Connection, New York, Wiley, 2001.
Loewenthal, K. M., Psychology of Religion: A Short Introduction, Oxford, Oneworld, 2000.
McNamara, R. (Ed.) (2006), Where God and Science Meet [3 Volumes]: How Brain and Evolutionary Studies Alter Our Understanding of Religion. Westport, CT: Praeger/Greenwood.
Paloutzian, R. (1996). Invitation to the Psychology of Religion, 2nd Ed. New York: Allyn and Bacon. ISBN 0-205-14840-9.
Meissner, W., Psychoanalysis and Religious Experience, London and New Haven, Yale University Press, 1984.
Roberts, T. B., and Hruby, P. J. (1995–2002). Religion and Psychoactive Sacraments An Entheogen Chrestomathy. Online archive. [1]
Tsakiridis, George. Evagrius Ponticus and Cognitive Science: A Look at Moral Evil and the Thoughts. Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2010.
Wulff, D. M. (1997). Psychology of religion: Classic and contemporary (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley. ISBN 0-471-03706-0.
External links[edit]
Religiosity and Emotion
Psychology of religion pages
International Association for the Psychology of Religion
Varieties of Religious Experience, a Study in Human Nature by William James
Psychology of Religious Doubt
Psychology of religion in Germany
International Association for the Scientific Study of Religion
Centre for Psychology of Religion


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Social science and religion











[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Psychology

















































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion

























































































































































































































































































































































































































































  


Categories: Psychology of religion
















Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Български
Čeština
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
한국어
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
Қазақша
Magyar
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Русский
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Türkçe
Українська
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 19 March 2015, at 01:33.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology_of_religion

























Page semi-protected

Happiness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Religion and happiness)
Jump to: navigation, search

Several terms redirect here. For other uses, see Happiness (disambiguation), Happy (disambiguation), and Jolly (disambiguation).
"Happy" redirects here. For the Pharrell Williams song, see Happy (Pharrell Williams song).



 The smiley face is a well-known symbol of happiness
Happiness is a mental or emotional state of well-being defined by positive or pleasant emotions ranging from contentment to intense joy.[1] A variety of biological, psychological, religious, and philosophical approaches have striven to define happiness and identify its sources. Various research groups, including positive psychology, are employing the scientific method to research questions about what "happiness" is, and how it might be attained.
The United Nations declared 20 March the International Day of Happiness to recognise the relevance of happiness and wellbeing as universal goals.


Contents  [hide]
1 Definition
2 Research results
3 Happiness and religion 3.1 Terror management
3.2 Religious views on happiness 3.2.1 Buddhism
3.2.2 Judaism
3.2.3 Catholicism

4 Spirituality and happiness
5 Philosophical views
6 Economic views
7 Measures
8 Health
9 At work
10 See also
11 References
12 Further reading
13 External links

Definition
Philosophers and religious thinkers often define happiness in terms of living a good life, or flourishing, rather than simply as an emotion. Happiness in this sense was used to translate the Greek Eudaimonia, and is still used in virtue ethics. There has been a transition over time from emphasis on the happiness of virtue to the virtue of happiness.[2]
A widely discussed political value expressed in the United States Declaration of Independence of 1776, written by Thomas Jefferson, is the universal right to "the pursuit of happiness."[3]
Happiness is a fuzzy concept and can mean many different things to many people. Part of the challenge of a science of happiness is to identify different concepts of happiness, and where applicable, split them into their components. Related concepts are well-being, quality of life and flourishing. At least one author defines happiness as contentment.[4] Some commentators focus on the difference between the hedonistic tradition of seeking pleasant and avoiding unpleasant experiences, and the eudaimonic tradition of living life in a full and deeply satisfying way.[5]
The 2012 World Happiness Report stated that in subjective well-being measures, the primary distinction is between cognitive life evaluations and emotional reports.[6] Happiness is used in both life evaluation, as in “How happy are you with your life as a whole?”, and in emotional reports, as in “How happy are you now?,” and people seem able to use happiness as appropriate in these verbal contexts. Using these measures, the World Happiness Report identifies the countries with the highest levels of happiness.
Research results
See also: Positive psychology



 A smiling Rebecca L. Felton
Since the 1960s, happiness research has been conducted in a wide variety of scientific disciplines, including gerontology, social psychology, clinical and medical research and happiness economics. During the past two decades, however, the field of happiness studies has expanded drastically in terms of scientific publications, and cultural theorist Sara Ahmed has called this trend the "happiness turn".[7]
Research has produced many different views on causes of happiness, and on factors that correlate with happiness,[8] but no validated method has been found to substantially improve long-term happiness in a meaningful way for most people.
Sonja Lyubomirsky concludes in her book The How of Happiness that 50 percent of a given human's happiness level is genetically determined (based on twin studies), 10 percent is affected by life circumstances and situation, and a remaining 40 percent of happiness is subject to self-control.
The results of the 75 year Grant study of Harvard undergraduates show a high correlation of loving relationship, especially with parents, with later life wellbeing.[9]
In the 2nd Edition of the Handbook of Emotions (2000), evolutionary psychologists Leda Cosmides and John Tooby say that happiness comes from "encountering unexpected positive events". In the 3rd Edition of the Handbook of Emotions (2008), Michael Lewis says "happiness can be elicited by seeing a significant other". According to Mark Leary, as reported in a November 1995 issue of Psychology Today, "we are happiest when basking in the acceptance and praise of others". Sara Algoe and Jonathan Haidt say that "happiness" may be the label for a family of related emotional states, such as joy, amusement, satisfaction, gratification, euphoria, and triumph.[10]
It has been argued that money cannot effectively "buy" much happiness unless it is used in certain ways.[11][full citation needed] "Beyond the point at which people have enough to comfortably feed, clothe, and house themselves, having more money - even a lot more money - makes them only a little bit happier."[according to whom?] A Harvard Business School study found that "spending money on others actually makes us happier than spending it on ourselves".[12]
Meditation has been found to lead to high activity in the brain's left prefrontal cortex, which in turn has been found to correlate with happiness.[13]



 A smiling 95-year-old man from Pichilemu, Chile.
Psychologist Martin Seligman asserts that happiness is not solely derived from external, momentary pleasures,[14] and provides the acronym PERMA to summarize Positive Psychology's correlational findings: humans seem happiest when they have
1.Pleasure (tasty food, warm baths, etc.),
2.Engagement (or flow, the absorption of an enjoyed yet challenging activity),
3.Relationships (social ties have turned out to be extremely reliable indicator of happiness),
4.Meaning (a perceived quest or belonging to something bigger), and
5.Accomplishments (having realized tangible goals).
There have also been some studies of how religion relates to happiness. Causal relationships remain unclear, but more religion is seen in happier people. This correlation may be the result of community membership and not necessarily belief in religion itself. Another component may have to do with ritual.[15][full citation needed]
Abraham Harold Maslow, an American professor of psychology, founded humanistic psychology in the 1930s. A visual aid he created to explain his theory, which he called the hierarchy of needs, is a pyramid depicting the levels of human needs, psychological, and physical. When a human being ascends the steps of the pyramid, he reaches self-actualization. Beyond the routine of needs fulfillment, Maslow envisioned moments of extraordinary experience, known as peak experiences, profound moments of love, understanding, happiness, or rapture, during which a person feels more whole, alive, self-sufficient, and yet a part of the world. This is similar to the flow concept of Mihály Csíkszentmihályi.
Self-determination theory relates intrinsic motivation to three needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness.
Happiness and religion
See also: Religious studies and Positive Psychology
Religion and happiness have been studied by a number of researchers, and religion features many elements addressing the components of happiness, as identified by positive psychology. Its association with happiness is facilitated in part by the social connections of organized religion,[16] and by the neuropsychological benefits of prayer[17] and belief.



 Joy, tacuinum sanitatis casanatensis (14th century)
There are a number of mechanisms through which religion may make a person happier, including social contact and support that result from religious pursuits, the mental activity that comes with optimism and volunteering, learned coping strategies that enhance one's ability to deal with stress, and psychological factors such as "reason for being." It may also be that religious people engage in behaviors related to good health, such as less substance abuse, since the use of psychotropic substances is sometimes considered abuse.[18][19][20][21][22][23]
The Handbook of Religion and Health describes a survey by Feigelman (1992) that examined happiness in Americans who have given up religion, in which it was found that there was little relationship between religious disaffiliation and unhappiness.[24] A survey by Kosmin & Lachman (1993), also cited in this handbook, indicates that people with no religious affiliation appear to be at greater risk for depressive symptoms than those affiliated with a religion.[25] A review of studies by 147 independent investigators found, "the correlation between religiousness and depressive symptoms was -.096, indicating that greater religiousness is mildly associated with fewer symptoms."[26]
The Legatum Prosperity Index reflects the repeated finding of research on the science of happiness that there is a positive link between religious engagement and wellbeing: people who report that God is very important in their lives are on average more satisfied with their lives, after accounting for their income, age and other individual characteristics.[27]
Surveys by Gallup, the National Opinion Research Centre and the Pew Organisation conclude that spiritually committed people are twice as likely to report being "very happy" than the least religiously committed people.[28] An analysis of over 200 social studies contends that "high religiousness predicts a lower risk of depression and drug abuse and fewer suicide attempts, and more reports of satisfaction with sex life and a sense of well-being. However, the links between religion and happiness are always very broad in nature, highly reliant on scripture and small sample number. To that extent there is a much larger connection between religion and suffering (Lincoln 1034)."[26] And a review of 498 studies published in peer-reviewed journals concluded that a large majority of them showed a positive correlation between religious commitment and higher levels of perceived well-being and self-esteem and lower levels of hypertension, depression, and clinical delinquency.[29] A meta-analysis of 34 recent studies published between 1990 and 2001 found that religiosity has a salutary relationship with psychological adjustment, being related to less psychological distress, more life satisfaction, and better self-actualization.[30] Finally, a recent systematic review of 850 research papers on the topic concluded that "the majority of well-conducted studies found that higher levels of religious involvement are positively associated with indicators of psychological well-being (life satisfaction, happiness, positive affect, and higher morale) and with less depression, suicidal thoughts and behaviour, drug/alcohol use/abuse."[31]
Terror management
Terror management theory maintains that people suffer cognitive dissonance (anxiety) when they are reminded of their inevitable death. Through terror management, individuals are motivated to seek consonant elements – symbols which make sense of mortality and death in satisfactory ways (i.e. boosting self-esteem).
Research has found that strong belief in religious or secular meaning systems affords psychological security and hope. It is moderates (e.g. agnostics, slightly religious individuals) who likely suffer the most anxiety from their meaning systems. Religious meaning systems are especially adapted to manage death anxiety because they are unlikely to be disconfirmed (for various reasons), they are all encompassing, and they promise literal immortality.[32][33]
Whether emotional effects are beneficial or adverse seems to vary with the nature of the belief. Belief in a benevolent God is associated with lower incidence of general anxiety, social anxiety, paranoia, obsession, and compulsion whereas belief in a punitive God is associated with greater symptoms. (An alternative explanation is that people seek out beliefs that fit their psychological and emotional states.)[34]
Citizens of the world's poorest countries are the most likely to be religious, and researchers suggest this is because of religion's powerful coping abilities.[35][36] Luke Galen also supports terror management theory as a partial explanation of the above findings. Galen describes evidence (including his own research) that the benefits of religion are due to strong convictions and membership in a social group.[37][38][39]
Religious views on happiness



 Tibetan Buddhist Monk
Buddhism
Happiness forms a central theme of Buddhist teachings.[dubious – discuss] For ultimate freedom from suffering, the Noble Eightfold Path leads its practitioner to Nirvana, a state of everlasting peace. Ultimate happiness is only achieved by overcoming craving in all forms. More mundane forms of happiness, such as acquiring wealth and maintaining good friendships, are also recognized as worthy goals for lay people (see sukha). Buddhism also encourages the generation of loving kindness and compassion, the desire for the happiness and welfare of all beings.[40][41][unreliable source?]
Judaism
Main article: Happiness in Judaism
Happiness or simcha (Hebrew: שמחה‎) in Judaism is considered an important element in the service of God.[42] The biblical verse "worship The Lord with gladness; come before him with joyful songs,"[43] stresses joy in the service of God. A popular teaching by Rabbi Nachman of Breslov, a 19th-century Chassidic Rabbi, is "Mitzvah Gedolah Le'hiyot Besimcha Tamid," it is a great mitzvah (commandment) to always be in a state of happiness. When a person is happy they are much more capable of serving God and going about their daily activities than when depressed or upset.[44]
Catholicism
The primary meaning of "happiness" in various European languages involves good fortune, chance or happening. The meaning in Greek philosophy, however, refers primarily to ethics. In Catholicism, the ultimate end of human existence consists in felicity, Latin equivalent to the Greek eudaimonia, or "blessed happiness", described by the 13th-century philosopher-theologian Thomas Aquinas as a Beatific Vision of God's essence in the next life.[45] Human complexities, like reason and cognition, can produce well-being or happiness, but such form is limited and transitory. In temporal life, the contemplation of God, the infinitely Beautiful, is the supreme delight of the will. Beatitudo, or perfect happiness, as complete well-being, is to be attained not in this life, but the next.[46]
Spirituality and happiness
While religion is often formalised and community-oriented, spirituality tends to be individually based and not as formalised. In a 2014 study, 320 children, ages 8–12, in both public and private schools, were given a Spiritual Well-Being Questionnaire assessing the correlation between spirituality and happiness. Spirituality – and not religious practices (praying, attending church services) – correlated positively with the child's happiness; the more spiritual the child was, the happier the child was. Spirituality accounted for about 3–26% of the variance in happiness.[47]
Philosophical views



 The Love Letter
Main article: Philosophy of happiness
The Chinese Confucian thinker Mencius, who 2300 years ago sought to give advice to the ruthless political leaders of the warring states period, was convinced that the mind played a mediating role between the "lesser self" (the physiological self) and the "greater self" (the moral self) and that getting the priorities right between these two would lead to sage-hood. He argued that if we did not feel satisfaction or pleasure in nourishing one's "vital force" with "righteous deeds", that force would shrivel up (Mencius,6A:15 2A:2). More specifically, he mentions the experience of intoxicating joy if one celebrates the practice of the great virtues, especially through music.[48]
Al-Ghazali (1058–1111) the Muslim Sufi thinker wrote the Alchemy of Happiness, a manual of spiritual instruction throughout the Muslim world and widely practiced today.
The Hindu thinker Patanjali, author of the Yoga Sutras, wrote quite exhaustively on the psychological and ontological roots of bliss.[49]
In the Nicomachean Ethics, written in 350 BCE, Aristotle stated that happiness (also being well and doing well) is the only thing that humans desire for its own sake, unlike riches, honor, health or friendship. He observed that men sought riches, or honor, or health not only for their own sake but also in order to be happy. Note that eudaimonia, the term we translate as "happiness", is for Aristotle an activity rather than an emotion or a state.[50] Thus understood, the happy life is the good life, that is, a life in which a person fulfills human nature in an excellent way. Specifically, Aristotle argues that the good life is the life of excellent rational activity. He arrives at this claim with the Function Argument. Basically, if it's right, every living thing has a function, that which it uniquely does. For humans, Aristotle contends, our function is to reason, since it is that alone that we uniquely do. And performing one's function well, or excellently, is one's good. Thus, the life of excellent rational activity is the happy life. Aristotle does not leave it that, however. For he argues that there is a second best life for those incapable of excellent rational activity. This second best life is the life of moral virtue.
Many ethicists make arguments for how humans should behave, either individually or collectively, based on the resulting happiness of such behavior. Utilitarians, such as John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham, advocated the greatest happiness principle as a guide for ethical behavior.
Also according to St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, man's last end is happiness: "all men agree in desiring the last end, which is happiness."[51] However, where utilitarians focused on reasoning about consequences as the primary tool for reaching happiness, Aquinas agreed with Aristotle that happiness cannot be reached solely through reasoning about consequences of acts, but also requires a pursuit of good causes for acts, such as habits according to virtue.[52] In turn, which habits and acts that normally lead to happiness is according to Aquinas caused by laws: natural law and divine law. These laws, in turn, were according to Aquinas caused by a first cause, or God.
According to Aquinas, happiness consists in an "operation of the speculative intellect": "Consequently happiness consists principally in such an operation, viz. in the contemplation of Divine things." And, "the last end cannot consist in the active life, which pertains to the practical intellect." So: "Therefore the last and perfect happiness, which we await in the life to come, consists entirely in contemplation. But imperfect happiness, such as can be had here, consists first and principally in contemplation, but secondarily, in an operation of the practical intellect directing human actions and passions."[53]
Economic views



 Newly commissioned officers celebrate their new positions by throwing their midshipmen covers into the air as part of the U.S. Naval Academy class of 2011 graduation and commissioning ceremony.
Main article: Happiness economics
Common market health measures such as GDP and GNP have been used as a measure of successful policy. On average richer nations tend to be happier than poorer nations, but this effect seems to diminish with wealth.[54][55] This has been explained by the fact that the dependency is not linear but logarithmic, i.e., the same percentual increase in the GNP produces the same increase in happiness for wealthy countries as for poor countries.[56][57][58][59]
Libertarian think tank Cato Institute claims that economic freedom correlates strongly with happiness[60] preferably within the context of a western mixed economy, with free press and a democracy. According to certain standards, East European countries (ruled by Communist parties) were less happy than Western ones, even less happy than other equally poor countries.[61]
It has been argued that happiness measures could be used not as a replacement for more traditional measures, but as a supplement.[62] According to professor Edward Glaeser, people constantly make choices that decrease their happiness, because they have also more important aims. Therefore, the government should not decrease the alternatives available for the citizen by patronizing them but let the citizen keep a maximal freedom of choice.[63]
It has been argued that happiness at work is one of the driving forces behind positive outcomes at work, rather than just being a resultant product.[64]
Measures
Several scales have been used to measure happiness:
The Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS) is a four-item scale, measuring global subjective happiness. The scale requires participants to use absolute ratings to characterize themselves as happy or unhappy individuals, as well as it asks to what extent they identify themselves with descriptions of happy and unhappy individuals.[65][66]
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is used to detect the relation between personality traits and positive or negative affects at this moment, today, the past few days, the past week, the past few weeks, the past year, and generally (on average). PANAS is a 20-item questionnaire, which uses a five-point Likert scale (1 = very slightly or not at all, 5 = extremely).[67][68] A longer version with additional affect scales is available in a manual.[69]
The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) is a global cognitive assessment of life satisfaction. The SWLS requires a person to use a seven-item scale to state their agreement or disagreement (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = neither agree nor disagree, 7 = strongly agree) with five statements about their life.[70][71]
The UK began to measure national well being in 2012,[72] following Bhutan which already measured gross national happiness.[citation needed]
Health



 Happy St. Patrick's Day from Boston
Richard Davidson's 2012 bestseller The Emotional Life of Your Brain argues that positive emotion and happiness benefit your long-term health. From a study conducted in 2005 by Andrew Steptow and Michael Marmot, findings have found that happiness is clearly related to biological markers that play an important role in health.
At University College London, Steptow and Marmot collected health and well-being data from 116 men and 100 women. All 216 participants were middle-aged, British civil servants between the ages of 45 and 59. The researchers aimed to analyze whether there was any association between well-being and three biological markers: heart rate, cortisol levels, and plasma fibrinogen levels. Interestingly, the participants who rated themselves the least happy had cortisol levels that were 48% higher than those who rated themselves as the most happy. The least happy subjects also had a large plasma fibrinogen response to two stress-inducing tasks: the Stroop test, and tracing a star seen in a mirror image.
In Happy People Live Longer,[73] Frey reports that happy people live 14% longer, increasing longevity 7.5 to 10 years.
Steptow and Marmot furthered their studies by using their participants three years later to repeat the physiological measurements. They found that participants who scored high in positive emotion continued to have lower levels of cortisol and fibrinogen, as well as a lower heart rate.
At work
Main article: Happiness at work
Despite a large body of positive psychological research into the relationship between happiness and productivity,[74][75][76] happiness at work has traditionally been seen as a potential by-product of positive outcomes at work, rather than a pathway to success in business. However a growing number of scholars, including Boehm and Lyubomirsky, argue that it should be viewed as one of the major sources of positive outcomes in the workplace.[77][78]
See also
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Happiness.
Biopsychosocial model
Extraversion, introversion and happiness
Hedonic treadmill
Mania
Paradox of hedonism
Philosophy of happiness
Pleasure
Psychological well-being
Serotonin
Subjective well-being
References
1.Jump up ^ Wordnet 3.0 (accessed 2011-Feb-24 via Wolfram Alpha)
2.Jump up ^ Darrin M. McMahon, "From the happiness of virtue to the virtue of happiness: 400 BC–AD 1780." Daedalus 133.2 (2004): 5-17.
3.Jump up ^ Arthur M. Schlesinger, "The Lost Meaning of 'The Pursuit of Happiness'," William and Mary Quarterly (1964): 326-327. in JSTOR
4.Jump up ^ Graham, Michael C. (2014). Facts of Life: ten issues of contentment. Outskirts Press. pp. 6–10. ISBN 978-1-4787-2259-5.
5.Jump up ^ [1][dead link]
6.Jump up ^ http://www.earth.columbia.edu/sitefiles/file/Sachs%20Writing/2012/World%20Happiness%20Report.pdf
7.Jump up ^ Kullenberg, Christopher; Gustaf Nelhans (February 2015). "The happiness turn? Mapping the emergence of "happiness studies" using cited references". Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1536-3. Retrieved 2015-04-03.
8.Jump up ^ Wallis, Claudia (2005-01-09). "Science of Happiness: New Research on Mood, Satisfaction". TIME. Retrieved 2011-02-07.
9.Jump up ^ Scott Stossel. "What Makes Us Happy, Revisited - Scott Stossel". The Atlantic. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
10.Jump up ^ The Journal of Positive Psychology, March 2009
11.Jump up ^ Boston.com, August 23, 2009
12.Jump up ^ Dunn, E. W., Aknin, L. B., & Norton, M. I. (2008). Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science, 319, 1687-1688..
13.Jump up ^ Claire Bates (2012-10-31). "Is this the world's happiest man? Brain scans reveal French monk found to have 'abnormally large capacity' for joy, and it could be down to meditation | Mail Online". Dailymail.co.uk. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
14.Jump up ^ Seligman, M.E.P. (2004). Can Happiness be Taught?. Daedalus journal, Spring 2004.
15.Jump up ^ 2009 article in Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience
16.Jump up ^ Routledge, Clay (2012), "Are Religious People Happier Than Non-religious People?", Psychology Today, retrieved 2014-01-24
17.Jump up ^ Tahor, Grundtvig (2011-04-01). "Praying for Dopamine" (PDF). Lab Times. p. 12. Retrieved 2014-01-24. "Religious prayer is a form of frequently recurring behaviour capable of stimulating the dopaminergic reward system in practicing individuals"
18.Jump up ^ Clinical Implications of Research on Religion, Spirituality, and Mental Health. Marilyn Baetz & John Toews. La Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, vol 54, no 5, mai 2009
19.Jump up ^ Ellison, C.G. Religious involvement, social ties, and social support in a southeastern community. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion1994;33:46–61.
20.Jump up ^ McCullough, M.E. & Larson, D.B. Religion and depression: a review of the literature. Twin Res. 1999;2:126–136.
21.Jump up ^ Strawbridge, W.J., Shema, S.J., Cohen, R.D., et al. Religious attendance increases survival by improving and maintaining good health behaviors, mental health, and social relationships. Ann Behav Med. 2001;23:68–74.
22.Jump up ^ Burris, C.T. Religious Orientation Scale. In: Hill, P.C. & Hood, R.W. Jr., editors. Measures of religiosity. Birmingham (AL): Religious Education Press; 1999. p 144–153.
23.Jump up ^ Paul, Pamela (2005-01-09). "The New Science of Happiness". Time.
24.Jump up ^ Koenig. Harold G., Larson, David B., and Mcculloug, Michael E. –Handbook of Religion and Health (see article), p.122, Oxford University Press (2001), ISBN 0-8133-6719-0
 Feigelman et al. (1992) examined happiness in Americans who have given up religion. Using pooled data from the General Social Surveys conducted between 1972 and 1990, investigators identified more than 20,000 adults for their study. Subjects of particular interest were “disaffiliates”—those who were affiliated with a religion at age 16 but who were not affiliated at the time of the survey (disaffiliates comprised from 4.4% to 6.0% of respondents per year during the 18 years of surveys). “Actives” were defined as persons who reported a religious affiliation at age 16 and a religious affiliation at the time of the survey (these ranged from 84.7% to 79.5% of respondents per year between 1972 and 1990). Happiness was measured by a single question that assessed general happiness (very happy, pretty happy, not too happy). When disaffiliates (n = 1,420) were compared with actives (n = 21,052), 23.9% of disaffiliates indicated they were “very happy, ” as did 34.2% of actives. When the analysis was stratified by marital status, the likelihood of being very happy was about 25% lower (i.e., 10% difference) for married religious disaffiliates compared with married actives. Multiple regression analysis revealed that religious disaffiliation explained only 2% of the variance in overall happiness, after marital status and other covariates were controlled. Investigators concluded that there was little relationship between religious disaffiliation and unhappiness (quality rating 7)
25.Jump up ^ Koenig. Harold G., Larson, David B., and Mcculloug, Michael E. –Handbook of Religion and Health(see article), p.111, Oxford University Press (2001)
 Currently, approximately 8% of the U.S. population claim no religious affiliation (Kosmin & Lachman, 1993). People with no affiliation appear to be at greater risk for depressive symptoms than those affiliated with a religion. In a sample of 850 medically ill men, Koenig, Cohen, Blazer, Pieper, et al. (1992) examined whether religious affiliation predicted depression after demographics, medical status, and a measure of religious coping were controlled. They found that, when relevant covariates were controlled, men who indicated that they had “no religious affiliation” had higher scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (an observer-administered rating scale) than did men who identified themselves as moderate Protestants, Catholics, or nontraditional Christians.
26.^ Jump up to: a b Smith, Timothy; Michael McCullough; Justin Poll (2003). "Religiousness and Depression: Evidence for a Main Effect and Moderating Influence of Stressful Life Events". Psychological Bulletin 129 (4): 614–36. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.614. PMID 12848223.
27.Jump up ^ The 2008 Legatum Prosperity Index, Summary p.40.
 Research suggests that religious people's happiness is less vulnerable to fluctuations in economic and political uncertainty, personal unemployment and income changes. The Prosperity Index identifies similar effects at the country level, with a number of highly religious countries reporting higher levels of happiness than might be expected based on the standard of living alone: this effect is most pronounced in Mexico, El Salvador, the Dominican republic, Indonesia, Venezuela and Nigeria.
28.Jump up ^ Is Religion Dangerous?p156, citing David Myers The Science of Subjective Well-Being Guilford Press 2007
29.Jump up ^ Is Religion Dangerous? cites similar results from theHandbook of Religion and Mental Health Harold Koenig (ed.) ISBN 978-0-12-417645-4
30.Jump up ^ Hackney, Charles H; Glenn S. Sanders (2003). "Religiosity and Mental Health: A Meta–Analysis of Recent Studies". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42 (1): 43–55. doi:10.1111/1468-5906.t01-1-00160.
31.Jump up ^ Moreira-Almeida, Alexander; Francisco Lotufo Neto, and Harold G. Koenig (September 2006). "Religiousness and mental health: a review". Rev. Bras. Psiquiatr. [serial on the Internet] 28 (3): 242–250. doi:10.1590/S1516-44462006005000006. PMID 16924349.
32.Jump up ^ Terror Management Analysis of the Psychological Functions of Religion
33.Jump up ^ Reasonable Doubts Podcast Episode 81: Sacfificial Lambs
34.Jump up ^ Beliefs About God and Mental Health in American Adults; Nava R. Silton, Kevin J. Flannelly, Kathleen Galek, Christopher G. Ellison; Journal of Religion and Health; April 2013
35.Jump up ^ Religiosity Highest in World's Poorest Nations, Gallup Global Reports, August 31, 2010.
36.Jump up ^ Religion Provides Emotional Boost to World’s Poor, Gallup Global Reports, March 6, 2009.
37.Jump up ^ Luke Galen Center Stage Podcast, Episode 104 - Profiles of the Godless: Results from the Non-Religious Identification Survey.
38.Jump up ^ Personality and social integration factors distinguishing nonreligious from religious groups: The importance of controlling for attendance and demographics, 2011, Luke Galen and Jim Kloet, Archive for the Psychology of Religions
39.Jump up ^ Reasonable Doubts Podcast, Luke Galen, "Terror Management: How Our Worldviews Help Us Deny Death. "
40.Jump up ^ "Buddhist studies for primary and secondary students, Unit Six: The Four Immeasurables". Buddhanet.net. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
41.Jump up ^ Bhikkhu, Thanissaro (1999). "A Guided Meditation".
42.Jump up ^ Yanklowitz, Shmuly. "Judaism's value of happiness living with gratitude and idealism." Bloggish. The Jewish Journal. March 9, 2012.
43.Jump up ^ Psalms, 100:2.
44.Jump up ^ Breslov.org. Accessed November 11, 2014.
45.Jump up ^ Aquinas, Thomas. "Question 3. What is happiness". Summa Theologiae.
46.Jump up ^ [New Advent|http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07131b.htm]
47.Jump up ^ Holder, Mark D.; Coleman, Ben, Wallace, Judi M. (April 2010). "Spirituality, Religiousness, and Happiness in Children Aged 8-12 Years". Journal of Happiness Studies 11 (2): 131–150. doi:10.1007/s10902-008-9126-1. Retrieved April 12, 2014.
48.Jump up ^ Chan, Wing-tsit (1963). A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton, NJ, US: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01964-9.
49.Jump up ^ Levine, Marvin (2000). The Positive Psychology of Buddhism and Yoga : Paths to a Mature Happiness. Lawrence Erlbaum. ISBN 0-8058-3833-3.
50.Jump up ^ Eudaimonia (Greek: εὐδαιμονία) is a classical Greek word commonly translated as 'happiness' or, better yet, 'flourishing'. Etymologically, it consists of the word "eu" ("good" or "well being") and "daimōn" ("spirit" or "minor deity", used by extension to mean one's lot or fortune).
51.Jump up ^ "SUMMA THEOLOGICA: Man's last end (Prima Secundae Partis, Q. 1)". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
52.Jump up ^ "SUMMA THEOLOGICA: Secunda Secundae Partis". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
53.Jump up ^ "SUMMA THEOLOGICA: What is happiness (Prima Secundae Partis, Q. 3)". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
54.Jump up ^ Frey, Bruno S.; Alois Stutzer (December 2001). Happiness and Economics. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-06998-0.
55.Jump up ^ "In Pursuit of Happiness Research. Is It Reliable? What Does It Imply for Policy?". The Cato institute. 2007-04-11.
56.Jump up ^ "Wealth and happiness revisited Growing wealth of nations does go with greater happiness" (PDF). Retrieved 2013-04-26.
57.Jump up ^ Leonhardt, David (2008-04-16). "Maybe Money Does Buy Happiness After All". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-04-10.
58.Jump up ^ Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox
59.Jump up ^ "Boston.com". Boston.com. 2008-11-23. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
60.Jump up ^ In Pursuit of Happiness Research. Is It Reliable? What Does It Imply for Policy? The Cato institute. April 11, 2007
61.Jump up ^ The Scientist's Pursuit of Happiness, Policy, Spring 2005.
62.Jump up ^ Weiner, Eric J. (2007-11-13). "Four months of boom, bust, and fleeing foreign credit". Los Angeles Times.
63.Jump up ^ Coercive regulation and the balance of freedom, Edward Glaeser, Cato Unbound 11.5.2007
64.Jump up ^ Boehm, J K.; S Lyubomirsky (February 2008). "Journal of Career Assessment". Sage.
65.Jump up ^ http://www.ppc.sas.upenn.edu/subjectivehappinessscale.pdf
66.Jump up ^ Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137-155.
67.Jump up ^ http://www.camden.rutgers.edu/~bwhitlow/Courses/Experimental/SURVEY04/sld010.htm
68.Jump up ^ Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
69.Jump up ^ http://www.psychology.uiowa.edu/faculty/clark/panas-x.pdf
70.Jump up ^ http://www.tbims.org/combi/swls/swlsrat.html
71.Jump up ^ Diener, E., Emmons, R., Larsen, J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.
72.Jump up ^ "Measuring National Well-being: Life in the UK, 2012". Ons.gov.uk. 2012-11-20. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
73.Jump up ^ Happy People Live Longer, Bruno S. Frey, Science 4 February 2011: 542-543
74.Jump up ^ Carr, A.: "Positive Psychology: The Science of Happiness and Human Strengths" Hove, Brunner-Routledge 2004
75.Jump up ^ Isen, A.; Positive Affect and Decision-making. In M. Lewis and J. Haviland Jones (eds), "Handbook of Emotions" (2nd edition), pp. 417-436. New York, Guilford Press 2000
76.Jump up ^ Buss, D. The Evolution of Happiness, "American Psychologist" Vol. 55 (2000) pp. 15-23
77.Jump up ^ Boehm, J K. & S. Lyubomirsky, Journal of Career Assessment. Vol 16(1), Feb 2008, 101-116
78.Jump up ^ http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/bul-1316803.pdf
Further reading
BooksSara Ahmed, "The Promise of Happiness", 2010
Michael Argyle "The psychology of happiness", 1987
Boehm, J K. & S. Lyubomirsky, Journal of Career Assessment. Vol 16(1), Feb 2008, 101–116.
Norman M. Bradburn "The structure of psychological well-being", 1969
C. Robert Cloninger, Feeling Good: The Science of Well-Being, Oxford, 2004.
Gregg Easterbrook "The progress paradox – how life gets better while people feel worse", 2003
Michael W. Eysenck "Happiness – facts and myths", 1990
Daniel Gilbert, Stumbling on Happiness, Knopf, 2006.
Carol Graham "Happiness Around the World: The Paradox of Happy Peasants and Miserable Millionaires", OUP Oxford, 2009. ISBN 978-0-19-954905-4
W. Doyle Gentry "Happiness for dummies", 2008
James Hadley, Happiness: A New Perspective, 2013, ISBN 978-1493545261
Joop Hartog & Hessel Oosterbeek "Health, wealth and happiness", 1997
Hills P., Argyle M. (2002). "The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire: a compact scale for the measurement of psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences". Psychological Wellbeing 33: 1073–1082.
Robert Holden "Happiness now!", 1998
Barbara Ann Kipfer, 14,000 Things to Be Happy About, Workman, 1990/2007, ISBN 978-0-7611-4721-3.
Neil Kaufman "Happiness is a choice", 1991
Stefan Klein, The Science of Happiness, Marlowe, 2006, ISBN 1-56924-328-X.
Koenig HG, McCullough M, & Larson DB. Handbook of religion and health: a century of research reviewed (see article). New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.
McMahon, Darrin M., Happiness: A History, Atlantic Monthly Press, November 28, 2005. ISBN 0-87113-886-7
McMahon, Darrin M., The History of Happiness: 400 B.C. – A.D. 1780, Daedalus journal, Spring 2004.
Richard Layard, Happiness: Lessons From A New Science, Penguin, 2005, ISBN 978-0-14-101690-0.
Luskin, Frederic, Kenneth R. Pelletier, Dr. Andrew Weil (Foreword). "Stress Free for Good: 10 Scientifically Proven Life Skills for Health and Happiness." 2005
James Mackaye "Economy of happiness", 1906
Desmond Morris "The nature of happiness", 2004
David G. Myers, Ph. D., The Pursuit of Happiness: Who is Happy—and Why, William Morrow and Co., 1992, ISBN 0-688-10550-5.
Niek Persoon "Happiness doesn't just happen", 2006
Ben Renshaw "The secrets of happiness", 2003
Fiona Robards, "What makes you happy?" Exisle Publishing, 2014, ISBN 978-1-921966-31-6
Bertrand Russell "The conquest of happiness", orig. 1930 (many reprints)
Martin E.P. Seligman, Authentic Happiness, Free Press, 2002, ISBN 0-7432-2298-9.
Alexandra Stoddard "Choosing happiness – keys to a joyful life", 2002
Władysław Tatarkiewicz, Analysis of Happiness, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1976
Elizabeth Telfer "Happiness : an examination of a hedonistic and a eudaemonistic concept of happiness and of the relations between them...", 1980
Ruut Veenhoven "Bibliography of happiness – world database of happiness : 2472 studies on subjective appreciation of life", 1993
Ruut Veenhoven "Conditions of happiness", 1984
Joachim Weimann, Andreas Knabe, and Ronnie Schob, eds. Measuring Happiness: The Economics of Well-Being (MIT Press; 2015) 206 pages
Eric G. Wilson "Against Happiness", 2008
Articles and videosJournal of happiness studies: an interdisciplinary forum on subjective well-being, International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS), quarterly since 2000, also online
A Point of View: The pursuit of happiness (January 2015), BBC News Magazine
Srikumar Rao: Plug into your hard-wired happiness – Video of a short lecture on how to be happy
Dan Gilbert: Why are we happy? – Video of a short lecture on how our "psychological immune system" lets us feel happy even when things don’t go as planned.
TED Radio Hour: Simply Happy - various guest speakers, with some research results
External links

Find more about
Happiness
 at Wikipedia's sister projects

Search Wiktionary Definitions from Wiktionary
Search Wikinews News stories from Wikinews
Search Wikiquote Quotations from Wikiquote
Search Wikisource Source texts from Wikisource
Search Commons Media from Commons
Search Wikibooks Textbooks from Wikibooks
Search Wikiversity Learning resources from Wikiversity
History of Happiness – concise survey of influential theories
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry "Pleasure" – ancient and modern philosophers' and neuroscientists' approaches to happiness
The World Happiness Forum promotes dialogue on tools and techniques for human happiness and wellbeing.
Action For Happiness is a UK movement committed to building a happier society
Improving happiness through humanistic leadership- University of Bath, U.K.
The World Database of Happiness – a register of scientific research on the subjective appreciation of life.
Oxford Happiness Questionnaire – Online psychological test to measure your happiness.
Track Your Happiness - research project with downloadable app that surveys users periodically and determines personal factors


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Emotions (list)






















































































Plutchik-wheel.svg











  


Categories: Happiness
Personal life
Positive mental attitude
Concepts in ethics
Philosophy of love
Emotions
Pleasure
Philosophy of religion



















Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

View source

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Avañe'ẽ
বাংলা
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
贛語
한국어
Հայերեն
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Magyar
Македонски
मराठी
Bahasa Melayu
Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄
Mirandés
Nederlands
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русиньскый
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
తెలుగు
ไทย
Тоҷикӣ
Türkçe
Türkmençe
Українська
اردو
Vepsän kel’
Tiếng Việt
吴语
ייִדיש
粵語
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 19 April 2015, at 14:36.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   






http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happiness#Happiness_and_religion











Page semi-protected

Happiness

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Religion and happiness)
Jump to: navigation, search

Several terms redirect here. For other uses, see Happiness (disambiguation), Happy (disambiguation), and Jolly (disambiguation).
"Happy" redirects here. For the Pharrell Williams song, see Happy (Pharrell Williams song).



 The smiley face is a well-known symbol of happiness
Happiness is a mental or emotional state of well-being defined by positive or pleasant emotions ranging from contentment to intense joy.[1] A variety of biological, psychological, religious, and philosophical approaches have striven to define happiness and identify its sources. Various research groups, including positive psychology, are employing the scientific method to research questions about what "happiness" is, and how it might be attained.
The United Nations declared 20 March the International Day of Happiness to recognise the relevance of happiness and wellbeing as universal goals.


Contents  [hide]
1 Definition
2 Research results
3 Happiness and religion 3.1 Terror management
3.2 Religious views on happiness 3.2.1 Buddhism
3.2.2 Judaism
3.2.3 Catholicism

4 Spirituality and happiness
5 Philosophical views
6 Economic views
7 Measures
8 Health
9 At work
10 See also
11 References
12 Further reading
13 External links

Definition
Philosophers and religious thinkers often define happiness in terms of living a good life, or flourishing, rather than simply as an emotion. Happiness in this sense was used to translate the Greek Eudaimonia, and is still used in virtue ethics. There has been a transition over time from emphasis on the happiness of virtue to the virtue of happiness.[2]
A widely discussed political value expressed in the United States Declaration of Independence of 1776, written by Thomas Jefferson, is the universal right to "the pursuit of happiness."[3]
Happiness is a fuzzy concept and can mean many different things to many people. Part of the challenge of a science of happiness is to identify different concepts of happiness, and where applicable, split them into their components. Related concepts are well-being, quality of life and flourishing. At least one author defines happiness as contentment.[4] Some commentators focus on the difference between the hedonistic tradition of seeking pleasant and avoiding unpleasant experiences, and the eudaimonic tradition of living life in a full and deeply satisfying way.[5]
The 2012 World Happiness Report stated that in subjective well-being measures, the primary distinction is between cognitive life evaluations and emotional reports.[6] Happiness is used in both life evaluation, as in “How happy are you with your life as a whole?”, and in emotional reports, as in “How happy are you now?,” and people seem able to use happiness as appropriate in these verbal contexts. Using these measures, the World Happiness Report identifies the countries with the highest levels of happiness.
Research results
See also: Positive psychology



 A smiling Rebecca L. Felton
Since the 1960s, happiness research has been conducted in a wide variety of scientific disciplines, including gerontology, social psychology, clinical and medical research and happiness economics. During the past two decades, however, the field of happiness studies has expanded drastically in terms of scientific publications, and cultural theorist Sara Ahmed has called this trend the "happiness turn".[7]
Research has produced many different views on causes of happiness, and on factors that correlate with happiness,[8] but no validated method has been found to substantially improve long-term happiness in a meaningful way for most people.
Sonja Lyubomirsky concludes in her book The How of Happiness that 50 percent of a given human's happiness level is genetically determined (based on twin studies), 10 percent is affected by life circumstances and situation, and a remaining 40 percent of happiness is subject to self-control.
The results of the 75 year Grant study of Harvard undergraduates show a high correlation of loving relationship, especially with parents, with later life wellbeing.[9]
In the 2nd Edition of the Handbook of Emotions (2000), evolutionary psychologists Leda Cosmides and John Tooby say that happiness comes from "encountering unexpected positive events". In the 3rd Edition of the Handbook of Emotions (2008), Michael Lewis says "happiness can be elicited by seeing a significant other". According to Mark Leary, as reported in a November 1995 issue of Psychology Today, "we are happiest when basking in the acceptance and praise of others". Sara Algoe and Jonathan Haidt say that "happiness" may be the label for a family of related emotional states, such as joy, amusement, satisfaction, gratification, euphoria, and triumph.[10]
It has been argued that money cannot effectively "buy" much happiness unless it is used in certain ways.[11][full citation needed] "Beyond the point at which people have enough to comfortably feed, clothe, and house themselves, having more money - even a lot more money - makes them only a little bit happier."[according to whom?] A Harvard Business School study found that "spending money on others actually makes us happier than spending it on ourselves".[12]
Meditation has been found to lead to high activity in the brain's left prefrontal cortex, which in turn has been found to correlate with happiness.[13]



 A smiling 95-year-old man from Pichilemu, Chile.
Psychologist Martin Seligman asserts that happiness is not solely derived from external, momentary pleasures,[14] and provides the acronym PERMA to summarize Positive Psychology's correlational findings: humans seem happiest when they have
1.Pleasure (tasty food, warm baths, etc.),
2.Engagement (or flow, the absorption of an enjoyed yet challenging activity),
3.Relationships (social ties have turned out to be extremely reliable indicator of happiness),
4.Meaning (a perceived quest or belonging to something bigger), and
5.Accomplishments (having realized tangible goals).
There have also been some studies of how religion relates to happiness. Causal relationships remain unclear, but more religion is seen in happier people. This correlation may be the result of community membership and not necessarily belief in religion itself. Another component may have to do with ritual.[15][full citation needed]
Abraham Harold Maslow, an American professor of psychology, founded humanistic psychology in the 1930s. A visual aid he created to explain his theory, which he called the hierarchy of needs, is a pyramid depicting the levels of human needs, psychological, and physical. When a human being ascends the steps of the pyramid, he reaches self-actualization. Beyond the routine of needs fulfillment, Maslow envisioned moments of extraordinary experience, known as peak experiences, profound moments of love, understanding, happiness, or rapture, during which a person feels more whole, alive, self-sufficient, and yet a part of the world. This is similar to the flow concept of Mihály Csíkszentmihályi.
Self-determination theory relates intrinsic motivation to three needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness.
Happiness and religion
See also: Religious studies and Positive Psychology
Religion and happiness have been studied by a number of researchers, and religion features many elements addressing the components of happiness, as identified by positive psychology. Its association with happiness is facilitated in part by the social connections of organized religion,[16] and by the neuropsychological benefits of prayer[17] and belief.



 Joy, tacuinum sanitatis casanatensis (14th century)
There are a number of mechanisms through which religion may make a person happier, including social contact and support that result from religious pursuits, the mental activity that comes with optimism and volunteering, learned coping strategies that enhance one's ability to deal with stress, and psychological factors such as "reason for being." It may also be that religious people engage in behaviors related to good health, such as less substance abuse, since the use of psychotropic substances is sometimes considered abuse.[18][19][20][21][22][23]
The Handbook of Religion and Health describes a survey by Feigelman (1992) that examined happiness in Americans who have given up religion, in which it was found that there was little relationship between religious disaffiliation and unhappiness.[24] A survey by Kosmin & Lachman (1993), also cited in this handbook, indicates that people with no religious affiliation appear to be at greater risk for depressive symptoms than those affiliated with a religion.[25] A review of studies by 147 independent investigators found, "the correlation between religiousness and depressive symptoms was -.096, indicating that greater religiousness is mildly associated with fewer symptoms."[26]
The Legatum Prosperity Index reflects the repeated finding of research on the science of happiness that there is a positive link between religious engagement and wellbeing: people who report that God is very important in their lives are on average more satisfied with their lives, after accounting for their income, age and other individual characteristics.[27]
Surveys by Gallup, the National Opinion Research Centre and the Pew Organisation conclude that spiritually committed people are twice as likely to report being "very happy" than the least religiously committed people.[28] An analysis of over 200 social studies contends that "high religiousness predicts a lower risk of depression and drug abuse and fewer suicide attempts, and more reports of satisfaction with sex life and a sense of well-being. However, the links between religion and happiness are always very broad in nature, highly reliant on scripture and small sample number. To that extent there is a much larger connection between religion and suffering (Lincoln 1034)."[26] And a review of 498 studies published in peer-reviewed journals concluded that a large majority of them showed a positive correlation between religious commitment and higher levels of perceived well-being and self-esteem and lower levels of hypertension, depression, and clinical delinquency.[29] A meta-analysis of 34 recent studies published between 1990 and 2001 found that religiosity has a salutary relationship with psychological adjustment, being related to less psychological distress, more life satisfaction, and better self-actualization.[30] Finally, a recent systematic review of 850 research papers on the topic concluded that "the majority of well-conducted studies found that higher levels of religious involvement are positively associated with indicators of psychological well-being (life satisfaction, happiness, positive affect, and higher morale) and with less depression, suicidal thoughts and behaviour, drug/alcohol use/abuse."[31]
Terror management
Terror management theory maintains that people suffer cognitive dissonance (anxiety) when they are reminded of their inevitable death. Through terror management, individuals are motivated to seek consonant elements – symbols which make sense of mortality and death in satisfactory ways (i.e. boosting self-esteem).
Research has found that strong belief in religious or secular meaning systems affords psychological security and hope. It is moderates (e.g. agnostics, slightly religious individuals) who likely suffer the most anxiety from their meaning systems. Religious meaning systems are especially adapted to manage death anxiety because they are unlikely to be disconfirmed (for various reasons), they are all encompassing, and they promise literal immortality.[32][33]
Whether emotional effects are beneficial or adverse seems to vary with the nature of the belief. Belief in a benevolent God is associated with lower incidence of general anxiety, social anxiety, paranoia, obsession, and compulsion whereas belief in a punitive God is associated with greater symptoms. (An alternative explanation is that people seek out beliefs that fit their psychological and emotional states.)[34]
Citizens of the world's poorest countries are the most likely to be religious, and researchers suggest this is because of religion's powerful coping abilities.[35][36] Luke Galen also supports terror management theory as a partial explanation of the above findings. Galen describes evidence (including his own research) that the benefits of religion are due to strong convictions and membership in a social group.[37][38][39]
Religious views on happiness



 Tibetan Buddhist Monk
Buddhism
Happiness forms a central theme of Buddhist teachings.[dubious – discuss] For ultimate freedom from suffering, the Noble Eightfold Path leads its practitioner to Nirvana, a state of everlasting peace. Ultimate happiness is only achieved by overcoming craving in all forms. More mundane forms of happiness, such as acquiring wealth and maintaining good friendships, are also recognized as worthy goals for lay people (see sukha). Buddhism also encourages the generation of loving kindness and compassion, the desire for the happiness and welfare of all beings.[40][41][unreliable source?]
Judaism
Main article: Happiness in Judaism
Happiness or simcha (Hebrew: שמחה‎) in Judaism is considered an important element in the service of God.[42] The biblical verse "worship The Lord with gladness; come before him with joyful songs,"[43] stresses joy in the service of God. A popular teaching by Rabbi Nachman of Breslov, a 19th-century Chassidic Rabbi, is "Mitzvah Gedolah Le'hiyot Besimcha Tamid," it is a great mitzvah (commandment) to always be in a state of happiness. When a person is happy they are much more capable of serving God and going about their daily activities than when depressed or upset.[44]
Catholicism
The primary meaning of "happiness" in various European languages involves good fortune, chance or happening. The meaning in Greek philosophy, however, refers primarily to ethics. In Catholicism, the ultimate end of human existence consists in felicity, Latin equivalent to the Greek eudaimonia, or "blessed happiness", described by the 13th-century philosopher-theologian Thomas Aquinas as a Beatific Vision of God's essence in the next life.[45] Human complexities, like reason and cognition, can produce well-being or happiness, but such form is limited and transitory. In temporal life, the contemplation of God, the infinitely Beautiful, is the supreme delight of the will. Beatitudo, or perfect happiness, as complete well-being, is to be attained not in this life, but the next.[46]
Spirituality and happiness
While religion is often formalised and community-oriented, spirituality tends to be individually based and not as formalised. In a 2014 study, 320 children, ages 8–12, in both public and private schools, were given a Spiritual Well-Being Questionnaire assessing the correlation between spirituality and happiness. Spirituality – and not religious practices (praying, attending church services) – correlated positively with the child's happiness; the more spiritual the child was, the happier the child was. Spirituality accounted for about 3–26% of the variance in happiness.[47]
Philosophical views



 The Love Letter
Main article: Philosophy of happiness
The Chinese Confucian thinker Mencius, who 2300 years ago sought to give advice to the ruthless political leaders of the warring states period, was convinced that the mind played a mediating role between the "lesser self" (the physiological self) and the "greater self" (the moral self) and that getting the priorities right between these two would lead to sage-hood. He argued that if we did not feel satisfaction or pleasure in nourishing one's "vital force" with "righteous deeds", that force would shrivel up (Mencius,6A:15 2A:2). More specifically, he mentions the experience of intoxicating joy if one celebrates the practice of the great virtues, especially through music.[48]
Al-Ghazali (1058–1111) the Muslim Sufi thinker wrote the Alchemy of Happiness, a manual of spiritual instruction throughout the Muslim world and widely practiced today.
The Hindu thinker Patanjali, author of the Yoga Sutras, wrote quite exhaustively on the psychological and ontological roots of bliss.[49]
In the Nicomachean Ethics, written in 350 BCE, Aristotle stated that happiness (also being well and doing well) is the only thing that humans desire for its own sake, unlike riches, honor, health or friendship. He observed that men sought riches, or honor, or health not only for their own sake but also in order to be happy. Note that eudaimonia, the term we translate as "happiness", is for Aristotle an activity rather than an emotion or a state.[50] Thus understood, the happy life is the good life, that is, a life in which a person fulfills human nature in an excellent way. Specifically, Aristotle argues that the good life is the life of excellent rational activity. He arrives at this claim with the Function Argument. Basically, if it's right, every living thing has a function, that which it uniquely does. For humans, Aristotle contends, our function is to reason, since it is that alone that we uniquely do. And performing one's function well, or excellently, is one's good. Thus, the life of excellent rational activity is the happy life. Aristotle does not leave it that, however. For he argues that there is a second best life for those incapable of excellent rational activity. This second best life is the life of moral virtue.
Many ethicists make arguments for how humans should behave, either individually or collectively, based on the resulting happiness of such behavior. Utilitarians, such as John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham, advocated the greatest happiness principle as a guide for ethical behavior.
Also according to St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, man's last end is happiness: "all men agree in desiring the last end, which is happiness."[51] However, where utilitarians focused on reasoning about consequences as the primary tool for reaching happiness, Aquinas agreed with Aristotle that happiness cannot be reached solely through reasoning about consequences of acts, but also requires a pursuit of good causes for acts, such as habits according to virtue.[52] In turn, which habits and acts that normally lead to happiness is according to Aquinas caused by laws: natural law and divine law. These laws, in turn, were according to Aquinas caused by a first cause, or God.
According to Aquinas, happiness consists in an "operation of the speculative intellect": "Consequently happiness consists principally in such an operation, viz. in the contemplation of Divine things." And, "the last end cannot consist in the active life, which pertains to the practical intellect." So: "Therefore the last and perfect happiness, which we await in the life to come, consists entirely in contemplation. But imperfect happiness, such as can be had here, consists first and principally in contemplation, but secondarily, in an operation of the practical intellect directing human actions and passions."[53]
Economic views



 Newly commissioned officers celebrate their new positions by throwing their midshipmen covers into the air as part of the U.S. Naval Academy class of 2011 graduation and commissioning ceremony.
Main article: Happiness economics
Common market health measures such as GDP and GNP have been used as a measure of successful policy. On average richer nations tend to be happier than poorer nations, but this effect seems to diminish with wealth.[54][55] This has been explained by the fact that the dependency is not linear but logarithmic, i.e., the same percentual increase in the GNP produces the same increase in happiness for wealthy countries as for poor countries.[56][57][58][59]
Libertarian think tank Cato Institute claims that economic freedom correlates strongly with happiness[60] preferably within the context of a western mixed economy, with free press and a democracy. According to certain standards, East European countries (ruled by Communist parties) were less happy than Western ones, even less happy than other equally poor countries.[61]
It has been argued that happiness measures could be used not as a replacement for more traditional measures, but as a supplement.[62] According to professor Edward Glaeser, people constantly make choices that decrease their happiness, because they have also more important aims. Therefore, the government should not decrease the alternatives available for the citizen by patronizing them but let the citizen keep a maximal freedom of choice.[63]
It has been argued that happiness at work is one of the driving forces behind positive outcomes at work, rather than just being a resultant product.[64]
Measures
Several scales have been used to measure happiness:
The Subjective Happiness Scale (SHS) is a four-item scale, measuring global subjective happiness. The scale requires participants to use absolute ratings to characterize themselves as happy or unhappy individuals, as well as it asks to what extent they identify themselves with descriptions of happy and unhappy individuals.[65][66]
The Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) is used to detect the relation between personality traits and positive or negative affects at this moment, today, the past few days, the past week, the past few weeks, the past year, and generally (on average). PANAS is a 20-item questionnaire, which uses a five-point Likert scale (1 = very slightly or not at all, 5 = extremely).[67][68] A longer version with additional affect scales is available in a manual.[69]
The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) is a global cognitive assessment of life satisfaction. The SWLS requires a person to use a seven-item scale to state their agreement or disagreement (1 = strongly disagree, 4 = neither agree nor disagree, 7 = strongly agree) with five statements about their life.[70][71]
The UK began to measure national well being in 2012,[72] following Bhutan which already measured gross national happiness.[citation needed]
Health



 Happy St. Patrick's Day from Boston
Richard Davidson's 2012 bestseller The Emotional Life of Your Brain argues that positive emotion and happiness benefit your long-term health. From a study conducted in 2005 by Andrew Steptow and Michael Marmot, findings have found that happiness is clearly related to biological markers that play an important role in health.
At University College London, Steptow and Marmot collected health and well-being data from 116 men and 100 women. All 216 participants were middle-aged, British civil servants between the ages of 45 and 59. The researchers aimed to analyze whether there was any association between well-being and three biological markers: heart rate, cortisol levels, and plasma fibrinogen levels. Interestingly, the participants who rated themselves the least happy had cortisol levels that were 48% higher than those who rated themselves as the most happy. The least happy subjects also had a large plasma fibrinogen response to two stress-inducing tasks: the Stroop test, and tracing a star seen in a mirror image.
In Happy People Live Longer,[73] Frey reports that happy people live 14% longer, increasing longevity 7.5 to 10 years.
Steptow and Marmot furthered their studies by using their participants three years later to repeat the physiological measurements. They found that participants who scored high in positive emotion continued to have lower levels of cortisol and fibrinogen, as well as a lower heart rate.
At work
Main article: Happiness at work
Despite a large body of positive psychological research into the relationship between happiness and productivity,[74][75][76] happiness at work has traditionally been seen as a potential by-product of positive outcomes at work, rather than a pathway to success in business. However a growing number of scholars, including Boehm and Lyubomirsky, argue that it should be viewed as one of the major sources of positive outcomes in the workplace.[77][78]
See also
 Wikimedia Commons has media related to Happiness.
Biopsychosocial model
Extraversion, introversion and happiness
Hedonic treadmill
Mania
Paradox of hedonism
Philosophy of happiness
Pleasure
Psychological well-being
Serotonin
Subjective well-being
References
1.Jump up ^ Wordnet 3.0 (accessed 2011-Feb-24 via Wolfram Alpha)
2.Jump up ^ Darrin M. McMahon, "From the happiness of virtue to the virtue of happiness: 400 BC–AD 1780." Daedalus 133.2 (2004): 5-17.
3.Jump up ^ Arthur M. Schlesinger, "The Lost Meaning of 'The Pursuit of Happiness'," William and Mary Quarterly (1964): 326-327. in JSTOR
4.Jump up ^ Graham, Michael C. (2014). Facts of Life: ten issues of contentment. Outskirts Press. pp. 6–10. ISBN 978-1-4787-2259-5.
5.Jump up ^ [1][dead link]
6.Jump up ^ http://www.earth.columbia.edu/sitefiles/file/Sachs%20Writing/2012/World%20Happiness%20Report.pdf
7.Jump up ^ Kullenberg, Christopher; Gustaf Nelhans (February 2015). "The happiness turn? Mapping the emergence of "happiness studies" using cited references". Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1536-3. Retrieved 2015-04-03.
8.Jump up ^ Wallis, Claudia (2005-01-09). "Science of Happiness: New Research on Mood, Satisfaction". TIME. Retrieved 2011-02-07.
9.Jump up ^ Scott Stossel. "What Makes Us Happy, Revisited - Scott Stossel". The Atlantic. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
10.Jump up ^ The Journal of Positive Psychology, March 2009
11.Jump up ^ Boston.com, August 23, 2009
12.Jump up ^ Dunn, E. W., Aknin, L. B., & Norton, M. I. (2008). Spending money on others promotes happiness. Science, 319, 1687-1688..
13.Jump up ^ Claire Bates (2012-10-31). "Is this the world's happiest man? Brain scans reveal French monk found to have 'abnormally large capacity' for joy, and it could be down to meditation | Mail Online". Dailymail.co.uk. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
14.Jump up ^ Seligman, M.E.P. (2004). Can Happiness be Taught?. Daedalus journal, Spring 2004.
15.Jump up ^ 2009 article in Frontiers in Evolutionary Neuroscience
16.Jump up ^ Routledge, Clay (2012), "Are Religious People Happier Than Non-religious People?", Psychology Today, retrieved 2014-01-24
17.Jump up ^ Tahor, Grundtvig (2011-04-01). "Praying for Dopamine" (PDF). Lab Times. p. 12. Retrieved 2014-01-24. "Religious prayer is a form of frequently recurring behaviour capable of stimulating the dopaminergic reward system in practicing individuals"
18.Jump up ^ Clinical Implications of Research on Religion, Spirituality, and Mental Health. Marilyn Baetz & John Toews. La Revue canadienne de psychiatrie, vol 54, no 5, mai 2009
19.Jump up ^ Ellison, C.G. Religious involvement, social ties, and social support in a southeastern community. Journal of the Scientific Study of Religion1994;33:46–61.
20.Jump up ^ McCullough, M.E. & Larson, D.B. Religion and depression: a review of the literature. Twin Res. 1999;2:126–136.
21.Jump up ^ Strawbridge, W.J., Shema, S.J., Cohen, R.D., et al. Religious attendance increases survival by improving and maintaining good health behaviors, mental health, and social relationships. Ann Behav Med. 2001;23:68–74.
22.Jump up ^ Burris, C.T. Religious Orientation Scale. In: Hill, P.C. & Hood, R.W. Jr., editors. Measures of religiosity. Birmingham (AL): Religious Education Press; 1999. p 144–153.
23.Jump up ^ Paul, Pamela (2005-01-09). "The New Science of Happiness". Time.
24.Jump up ^ Koenig. Harold G., Larson, David B., and Mcculloug, Michael E. –Handbook of Religion and Health (see article), p.122, Oxford University Press (2001), ISBN 0-8133-6719-0
 Feigelman et al. (1992) examined happiness in Americans who have given up religion. Using pooled data from the General Social Surveys conducted between 1972 and 1990, investigators identified more than 20,000 adults for their study. Subjects of particular interest were “disaffiliates”—those who were affiliated with a religion at age 16 but who were not affiliated at the time of the survey (disaffiliates comprised from 4.4% to 6.0% of respondents per year during the 18 years of surveys). “Actives” were defined as persons who reported a religious affiliation at age 16 and a religious affiliation at the time of the survey (these ranged from 84.7% to 79.5% of respondents per year between 1972 and 1990). Happiness was measured by a single question that assessed general happiness (very happy, pretty happy, not too happy). When disaffiliates (n = 1,420) were compared with actives (n = 21,052), 23.9% of disaffiliates indicated they were “very happy, ” as did 34.2% of actives. When the analysis was stratified by marital status, the likelihood of being very happy was about 25% lower (i.e., 10% difference) for married religious disaffiliates compared with married actives. Multiple regression analysis revealed that religious disaffiliation explained only 2% of the variance in overall happiness, after marital status and other covariates were controlled. Investigators concluded that there was little relationship between religious disaffiliation and unhappiness (quality rating 7)
25.Jump up ^ Koenig. Harold G., Larson, David B., and Mcculloug, Michael E. –Handbook of Religion and Health(see article), p.111, Oxford University Press (2001)
 Currently, approximately 8% of the U.S. population claim no religious affiliation (Kosmin & Lachman, 1993). People with no affiliation appear to be at greater risk for depressive symptoms than those affiliated with a religion. In a sample of 850 medically ill men, Koenig, Cohen, Blazer, Pieper, et al. (1992) examined whether religious affiliation predicted depression after demographics, medical status, and a measure of religious coping were controlled. They found that, when relevant covariates were controlled, men who indicated that they had “no religious affiliation” had higher scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (an observer-administered rating scale) than did men who identified themselves as moderate Protestants, Catholics, or nontraditional Christians.
26.^ Jump up to: a b Smith, Timothy; Michael McCullough; Justin Poll (2003). "Religiousness and Depression: Evidence for a Main Effect and Moderating Influence of Stressful Life Events". Psychological Bulletin 129 (4): 614–36. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.614. PMID 12848223.
27.Jump up ^ The 2008 Legatum Prosperity Index, Summary p.40.
 Research suggests that religious people's happiness is less vulnerable to fluctuations in economic and political uncertainty, personal unemployment and income changes. The Prosperity Index identifies similar effects at the country level, with a number of highly religious countries reporting higher levels of happiness than might be expected based on the standard of living alone: this effect is most pronounced in Mexico, El Salvador, the Dominican republic, Indonesia, Venezuela and Nigeria.
28.Jump up ^ Is Religion Dangerous?p156, citing David Myers The Science of Subjective Well-Being Guilford Press 2007
29.Jump up ^ Is Religion Dangerous? cites similar results from theHandbook of Religion and Mental Health Harold Koenig (ed.) ISBN 978-0-12-417645-4
30.Jump up ^ Hackney, Charles H; Glenn S. Sanders (2003). "Religiosity and Mental Health: A Meta–Analysis of Recent Studies". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 42 (1): 43–55. doi:10.1111/1468-5906.t01-1-00160.
31.Jump up ^ Moreira-Almeida, Alexander; Francisco Lotufo Neto, and Harold G. Koenig (September 2006). "Religiousness and mental health: a review". Rev. Bras. Psiquiatr. [serial on the Internet] 28 (3): 242–250. doi:10.1590/S1516-44462006005000006. PMID 16924349.
32.Jump up ^ Terror Management Analysis of the Psychological Functions of Religion
33.Jump up ^ Reasonable Doubts Podcast Episode 81: Sacfificial Lambs
34.Jump up ^ Beliefs About God and Mental Health in American Adults; Nava R. Silton, Kevin J. Flannelly, Kathleen Galek, Christopher G. Ellison; Journal of Religion and Health; April 2013
35.Jump up ^ Religiosity Highest in World's Poorest Nations, Gallup Global Reports, August 31, 2010.
36.Jump up ^ Religion Provides Emotional Boost to World’s Poor, Gallup Global Reports, March 6, 2009.
37.Jump up ^ Luke Galen Center Stage Podcast, Episode 104 - Profiles of the Godless: Results from the Non-Religious Identification Survey.
38.Jump up ^ Personality and social integration factors distinguishing nonreligious from religious groups: The importance of controlling for attendance and demographics, 2011, Luke Galen and Jim Kloet, Archive for the Psychology of Religions
39.Jump up ^ Reasonable Doubts Podcast, Luke Galen, "Terror Management: How Our Worldviews Help Us Deny Death. "
40.Jump up ^ "Buddhist studies for primary and secondary students, Unit Six: The Four Immeasurables". Buddhanet.net. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
41.Jump up ^ Bhikkhu, Thanissaro (1999). "A Guided Meditation".
42.Jump up ^ Yanklowitz, Shmuly. "Judaism's value of happiness living with gratitude and idealism." Bloggish. The Jewish Journal. March 9, 2012.
43.Jump up ^ Psalms, 100:2.
44.Jump up ^ Breslov.org. Accessed November 11, 2014.
45.Jump up ^ Aquinas, Thomas. "Question 3. What is happiness". Summa Theologiae.
46.Jump up ^ [New Advent|http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07131b.htm]
47.Jump up ^ Holder, Mark D.; Coleman, Ben, Wallace, Judi M. (April 2010). "Spirituality, Religiousness, and Happiness in Children Aged 8-12 Years". Journal of Happiness Studies 11 (2): 131–150. doi:10.1007/s10902-008-9126-1. Retrieved April 12, 2014.
48.Jump up ^ Chan, Wing-tsit (1963). A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy. Princeton, NJ, US: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-01964-9.
49.Jump up ^ Levine, Marvin (2000). The Positive Psychology of Buddhism and Yoga : Paths to a Mature Happiness. Lawrence Erlbaum. ISBN 0-8058-3833-3.
50.Jump up ^ Eudaimonia (Greek: εὐδαιμονία) is a classical Greek word commonly translated as 'happiness' or, better yet, 'flourishing'. Etymologically, it consists of the word "eu" ("good" or "well being") and "daimōn" ("spirit" or "minor deity", used by extension to mean one's lot or fortune).
51.Jump up ^ "SUMMA THEOLOGICA: Man's last end (Prima Secundae Partis, Q. 1)". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
52.Jump up ^ "SUMMA THEOLOGICA: Secunda Secundae Partis". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
53.Jump up ^ "SUMMA THEOLOGICA: What is happiness (Prima Secundae Partis, Q. 3)". Newadvent.org. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
54.Jump up ^ Frey, Bruno S.; Alois Stutzer (December 2001). Happiness and Economics. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-06998-0.
55.Jump up ^ "In Pursuit of Happiness Research. Is It Reliable? What Does It Imply for Policy?". The Cato institute. 2007-04-11.
56.Jump up ^ "Wealth and happiness revisited Growing wealth of nations does go with greater happiness" (PDF). Retrieved 2013-04-26.
57.Jump up ^ Leonhardt, David (2008-04-16). "Maybe Money Does Buy Happiness After All". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-04-10.
58.Jump up ^ Economic Growth and Subjective Well-Being: Reassessing the Easterlin Paradox
59.Jump up ^ "Boston.com". Boston.com. 2008-11-23. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
60.Jump up ^ In Pursuit of Happiness Research. Is It Reliable? What Does It Imply for Policy? The Cato institute. April 11, 2007
61.Jump up ^ The Scientist's Pursuit of Happiness, Policy, Spring 2005.
62.Jump up ^ Weiner, Eric J. (2007-11-13). "Four months of boom, bust, and fleeing foreign credit". Los Angeles Times.
63.Jump up ^ Coercive regulation and the balance of freedom, Edward Glaeser, Cato Unbound 11.5.2007
64.Jump up ^ Boehm, J K.; S Lyubomirsky (February 2008). "Journal of Career Assessment". Sage.
65.Jump up ^ http://www.ppc.sas.upenn.edu/subjectivehappinessscale.pdf
66.Jump up ^ Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137-155.
67.Jump up ^ http://www.camden.rutgers.edu/~bwhitlow/Courses/Experimental/SURVEY04/sld010.htm
68.Jump up ^ Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
69.Jump up ^ http://www.psychology.uiowa.edu/faculty/clark/panas-x.pdf
70.Jump up ^ http://www.tbims.org/combi/swls/swlsrat.html
71.Jump up ^ Diener, E., Emmons, R., Larsen, J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75.
72.Jump up ^ "Measuring National Well-being: Life in the UK, 2012". Ons.gov.uk. 2012-11-20. Retrieved 2013-04-26.
73.Jump up ^ Happy People Live Longer, Bruno S. Frey, Science 4 February 2011: 542-543
74.Jump up ^ Carr, A.: "Positive Psychology: The Science of Happiness and Human Strengths" Hove, Brunner-Routledge 2004
75.Jump up ^ Isen, A.; Positive Affect and Decision-making. In M. Lewis and J. Haviland Jones (eds), "Handbook of Emotions" (2nd edition), pp. 417-436. New York, Guilford Press 2000
76.Jump up ^ Buss, D. The Evolution of Happiness, "American Psychologist" Vol. 55 (2000) pp. 15-23
77.Jump up ^ Boehm, J K. & S. Lyubomirsky, Journal of Career Assessment. Vol 16(1), Feb 2008, 101-116
78.Jump up ^ http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/bul-1316803.pdf
Further reading
BooksSara Ahmed, "The Promise of Happiness", 2010
Michael Argyle "The psychology of happiness", 1987
Boehm, J K. & S. Lyubomirsky, Journal of Career Assessment. Vol 16(1), Feb 2008, 101–116.
Norman M. Bradburn "The structure of psychological well-being", 1969
C. Robert Cloninger, Feeling Good: The Science of Well-Being, Oxford, 2004.
Gregg Easterbrook "The progress paradox – how life gets better while people feel worse", 2003
Michael W. Eysenck "Happiness – facts and myths", 1990
Daniel Gilbert, Stumbling on Happiness, Knopf, 2006.
Carol Graham "Happiness Around the World: The Paradox of Happy Peasants and Miserable Millionaires", OUP Oxford, 2009. ISBN 978-0-19-954905-4
W. Doyle Gentry "Happiness for dummies", 2008
James Hadley, Happiness: A New Perspective, 2013, ISBN 978-1493545261
Joop Hartog & Hessel Oosterbeek "Health, wealth and happiness", 1997
Hills P., Argyle M. (2002). "The Oxford Happiness Questionnaire: a compact scale for the measurement of psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences". Psychological Wellbeing 33: 1073–1082.
Robert Holden "Happiness now!", 1998
Barbara Ann Kipfer, 14,000 Things to Be Happy About, Workman, 1990/2007, ISBN 978-0-7611-4721-3.
Neil Kaufman "Happiness is a choice", 1991
Stefan Klein, The Science of Happiness, Marlowe, 2006, ISBN 1-56924-328-X.
Koenig HG, McCullough M, & Larson DB. Handbook of religion and health: a century of research reviewed (see article). New York: Oxford University Press; 2001.
McMahon, Darrin M., Happiness: A History, Atlantic Monthly Press, November 28, 2005. ISBN 0-87113-886-7
McMahon, Darrin M., The History of Happiness: 400 B.C. – A.D. 1780, Daedalus journal, Spring 2004.
Richard Layard, Happiness: Lessons From A New Science, Penguin, 2005, ISBN 978-0-14-101690-0.
Luskin, Frederic, Kenneth R. Pelletier, Dr. Andrew Weil (Foreword). "Stress Free for Good: 10 Scientifically Proven Life Skills for Health and Happiness." 2005
James Mackaye "Economy of happiness", 1906
Desmond Morris "The nature of happiness", 2004
David G. Myers, Ph. D., The Pursuit of Happiness: Who is Happy—and Why, William Morrow and Co., 1992, ISBN 0-688-10550-5.
Niek Persoon "Happiness doesn't just happen", 2006
Ben Renshaw "The secrets of happiness", 2003
Fiona Robards, "What makes you happy?" Exisle Publishing, 2014, ISBN 978-1-921966-31-6
Bertrand Russell "The conquest of happiness", orig. 1930 (many reprints)
Martin E.P. Seligman, Authentic Happiness, Free Press, 2002, ISBN 0-7432-2298-9.
Alexandra Stoddard "Choosing happiness – keys to a joyful life", 2002
Władysław Tatarkiewicz, Analysis of Happiness, The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1976
Elizabeth Telfer "Happiness : an examination of a hedonistic and a eudaemonistic concept of happiness and of the relations between them...", 1980
Ruut Veenhoven "Bibliography of happiness – world database of happiness : 2472 studies on subjective appreciation of life", 1993
Ruut Veenhoven "Conditions of happiness", 1984
Joachim Weimann, Andreas Knabe, and Ronnie Schob, eds. Measuring Happiness: The Economics of Well-Being (MIT Press; 2015) 206 pages
Eric G. Wilson "Against Happiness", 2008
Articles and videosJournal of happiness studies: an interdisciplinary forum on subjective well-being, International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies (ISQOLS), quarterly since 2000, also online
A Point of View: The pursuit of happiness (January 2015), BBC News Magazine
Srikumar Rao: Plug into your hard-wired happiness – Video of a short lecture on how to be happy
Dan Gilbert: Why are we happy? – Video of a short lecture on how our "psychological immune system" lets us feel happy even when things don’t go as planned.
TED Radio Hour: Simply Happy - various guest speakers, with some research results
External links

Find more about
Happiness
 at Wikipedia's sister projects

Search Wiktionary Definitions from Wiktionary
Search Wikinews News stories from Wikinews
Search Wikiquote Quotations from Wikiquote
Search Wikisource Source texts from Wikisource
Search Commons Media from Commons
Search Wikibooks Textbooks from Wikibooks
Search Wikiversity Learning resources from Wikiversity
History of Happiness – concise survey of influential theories
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry "Pleasure" – ancient and modern philosophers' and neuroscientists' approaches to happiness
The World Happiness Forum promotes dialogue on tools and techniques for human happiness and wellbeing.
Action For Happiness is a UK movement committed to building a happier society
Improving happiness through humanistic leadership- University of Bath, U.K.
The World Database of Happiness – a register of scientific research on the subjective appreciation of life.
Oxford Happiness Questionnaire – Online psychological test to measure your happiness.
Track Your Happiness - research project with downloadable app that surveys users periodically and determines personal factors


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Emotions (list)






















































































Plutchik-wheel.svg











  


Categories: Happiness
Personal life
Positive mental attitude
Concepts in ethics
Philosophy of love
Emotions
Pleasure
Philosophy of religion



















Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

View source

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Avañe'ẽ
বাংলা
Беларуская
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
Euskara
فارسی
Français
Galego
贛語
한국어
Հայերեն
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
ქართული
Қазақша
Кыргызча
Latina
Latviešu
Lietuvių
Magyar
Македонски
मराठी
Bahasa Melayu
Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄
Mirandés
Nederlands
नेपाल भाषा
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
Polski
Português
Română
Runa Simi
Русиньскый
Русский
Shqip
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Татарча/tatarça
తెలుగు
ไทย
Тоҷикӣ
Türkçe
Türkmençe
Українська
اردو
Vepsän kel’
Tiếng Việt
吴语
ייִדיש
粵語
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 19 April 2015, at 14:36.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   






http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happiness#Happiness_and_religion













Religious violence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Religion and violence)
Jump to: navigation, search




 The Crusades were a series of a military campaigns fought mainly between Christian Europe and Muslims. Shown here is a battle scene from the First Crusade.
Religious violence is a term that covers phenomena where religion is either the subject or object of violent behavior.[1] Religious violence is, specifically, violence that is motivated by or in reaction to religious precepts, texts, or doctrines. This includes violence against religious institutions, people, objects, or when the violence is motivated to some degree by some religious aspect of the target or precept of the attacker. Religious violence does not refer exclusively to acts committed by religious groups, but also includes acts committed by secular groups against religious groups.
Religious violence, like all violence, is an inherently cultural process whose meanings are context-dependent. Religious violence often tends to place great emphasis on the symbolic aspect of the act. Religious violence is primarily the domain of the violent "actor", which may be distinguished between individual and collective forms of violence. Overall, religious violence is perpetrated for a wide variety of ideological reasons and is generally only one of the contributing social and political factors that leads to unrest.


Contents  [hide]
1 Definition of violence
2 Relationships between religion and violence
3 Criticism of religion as being violent
4 Secularism as a response
5 Challenges to the concept 5.1 Interpretation of Holy Texts
5.2 Arguments against mutual exclusivity of the religious and the secular
6 Secular violence 6.1 Religious-secular congruency and overlap
7 Abrahamic religions 7.1 Christianity 7.1.1 Mormonism
7.2 Islam 7.2.1 Terrorism and Islam
7.3 Judaism
8 Other religions 8.1 Buddhism
8.2 Hinduism
8.3 Sikhism
9 Conflicts and Wars
10 Ritual violence
11 See also
12 References
13 Further reading
14 External links

Definition of violence[edit]
Ralph Tanner cites the definition of violence in the Oxford English Dictionary as going "far beyond (the infliction of) pain and the shedding of blood". He argues that, although violence clearly encompasses injury to persons or property, it also includes "the forcible interference with personal freedom, violent or passionate conduct or language (and) finally passion or fury".[2] Similarly, Abhijit Nayak writes:

The word "violence" can be defined to extend far beyond pain and shedding blood. It carries the meaning of physical force, violent language, fury and, more importantly, forcible interference.[3]
Terence Fretheim writes:

For many people, ... only physical violence truly qualifies as violence. But, certainly, violence is more than killing people, unless one includes all those words and actions that kill people slowly. The effect of limitation to a “killing fields” perspective is the widespread neglect of many other forms of violence. We must insist that violence also refers to that which is psychologically destructive, that which demeans, damages, or depersonalizes others. In view of these considerations, violence may be defined as follows: any action, verbal or nonverbal, oral or written, physical or psychical, active or passive, public or private, individual or institutional/societal, human or divine, in whatever degree of intensity, that abuses, violates, injures, or kills. Some of the most pervasive and most dangerous forms of violence are those that are often hidden from view (against women and children, especially); just beneath the surface in many of our homes, churches, and communities is abuse enough to freeze the blood. Moreover, many forms of systemic violence often slip past our attention because they are so much a part of the infrastructure of life (e.g., racism, sexism, ageism).[4]
Relationships between religion and violence[edit]
Charles Selengut characterizes the phrase "religion and violence" as "jarring", asserting that "religion is thought to be opposed to violence and a force for peace and reconciliation. He acknowledges, however, that "the history and scriptures of the world's religions tell stories of violence and war even as they speak of peace and love."[5]
Ralph Tanner similarly describes the combination of religion and violence as "uncomfortable", asserting that religious thinkers generally avoid the conjunction of the two and argue that religious violence is "only valid in certain circumstances which are invariably one-sided".[6]
While religion can be used as a means of rallying support for violence, religious leaders regularly denounce such manipulations as contrary to the teachings of their belief.[7][8]
Criticism of religion as being violent[edit]
Tanner asserts that many who have no particular religious beliefs would even argue that violence is a highly likely if not inevitable consequence of the "irrationality" of religious precepts.[6] Similarly, Hector Avalos argues that religions claim "scarce resources" for themselves over and against other groups. Consequently, this may lead to violence because conflicting claims to superiority are based on unverifiable appeals to the supernatural which cannot be adjudicated objectively.[9]
Some general critics of religion and polemics such as Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins go farther and argue that religions do tremendous harm to society in three ways:[10][page needed][11][page needed]
Religions sometimes use war, violence, and terrorism to promote their religious goals,
Religious leaders contribute to secular wars and terrorism by endorsing or supporting the violence, and
Religious fervor is exploited by secular leaders to support war and terrorism.
Amartya Sen adds that political leaders frequently use religious differences to initiate or perpetuate violence: [12]
Secularism as a response[edit]
Byron Bland asserts that one of the most prominent reasons for the "rise of the secular in Western thought" was the reaction against the religious violence of the 16th and 17th centuries. He asserts that "(t)he secular was a way of living with the religious differences that had produced so much horror. Under secularity, political entities have a warrant to make decisions independent from the need to enforce particular versions of religious orthodoxy. Indeed, they may run counter to certain strongly held beliefs if made in the interest of common welfare. Thus, one of the important goals of the secular is to limit violence."[13]
Challenges to the concept[edit]
Interpretation of Holy Texts[edit]
One idea that many fail to consider when reading holy texts is the concept of translation. The Bible itself has been translated from Hebrew and Greek and retranslated into hundreds of languages. Certain words have changed meaning and others do not directly translate so there is a lot of estimation. The original text may have been clear and easy to understand, but that original language will never be able to be actually heard. Plus, the Bible was written down after going through years of oral tradition, so there could be a substantial amount of story lost or gained along the way. The Quran is a newer text and is generally read in Arabic. Those stories too were belayed from Allah to Mohammad to scribes, so it is entirely possible that there were mix-ups and different additions. Even with the translation discrepancies, it seems that all religions boil down to analysis. Interpretation of holy texts is highly important to consider when reading about religious violence. Depending on one’s point of view, aspects of any religion can appear to be violent or peaceful. For both the Bible and the Quran, there are accounts of peace and conflict. It is up to the person reading the passages to judge what they see. The world is a changing entity. To keep these texts relevant and away from the extremities, interpretation must flow along with society.
Arguments against mutual exclusivity of the religious and the secular[edit]
Others such as William Cavanaugh have argued that it is unreasonable to attempt to differentiate "religious violence" and "secular violence" as separate categories. Cavanaugh asserts that "the idea that religion has a tendency to promote violence is part of the conventional wisdom of Western societies and it underlies many of our institutions and policies, from limits on the public role of churches to efforts to promote liberal democracy in the Middle East." Cavanaugh challenges this conventional wisdom, arguing that there is a "myth of religious violence", basing his argument on the assertion that "attempts to separate religious and secular violence are incoherent".[14] Cavanaugh asserts:
Religion is not a universal and transhistorical phenomenon. What counts as "religious" or "secular" in any context is a function of configurations of power both in the West and lands colonized by the West. The distinctions of "Religious/Secular" and "Religious/Political" are modern Western inventions.
The invention of the concept of "religious violence" helps the West reinforce superiority of Western social orders to "nonsecular" social orders, namely Muslims at the time of publication.
The concept of "religious violence" can be and is used to legitimate violence against non-Western "Others".
Peace depends on a balanced view of violence and recognition that so-called secular ideologies and institutions can be just as prone to absolutism, divisiveness, and irrationality.
Anthropologist Jack David Eller asserts that religion is not inherently violent, arguing "religion and violence are clearly compatible, but they are not identical." He asserts that "violence is neither essential to nor exclusive to religion" and that " virtually every form of religious violence has its nonreligious corollary."[15][16] Moreover, he argues that religion "may be more a marker of the [conflicting] groups than an actual point of contention between them".[17] John Teehan takes a position that integrates the two opposing sides of this debate. He describes the traditional response in defense of religion as "draw(ing) a distinction between the religion and what is done in the name of that religion or its faithful." Teehan argues, "this approach to religious violence may be understandable but it is ultimately untenable and prevents us from gaining any useful insight into either religion or religious violence." He takes the position that "violence done in the name of religion is not a perversion of religious belief... but flows naturally from the moral logic inherent in many religious systems, particularly monotheistic religions...." However, Teehan acknowledges that "religions are also powerful sources of morality." He asserts, "religious morality and religious violence both spring from the same source, and this is the evolutionary psychology underlying religious ethics."[18]
Secular violence[edit]
Religious-secular congruency and overlap[edit]
Tanner notes that secular regimes and leaders have used violence to promote their own agendas.[19] Violence committed by secular governments and people, including the anti-religious, have been documented including violence or persecutions focused on religious believers and those who believe in the supernatural.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] For example, in the 20th century, over 25 million believers perished from the antireligious violence which occurred in many atheist states.[29] Non-religious ideological fervour is commonly and regularly exploited to support war and other aggressive acts. People who wish to wage war and terror will find diverse ways to gather support. Secular ideologies have and will likely continue to use violence, oppression, and manipulation to further their own objectives, with or without the availability of religion as a tool. Wars that are secular in nature need no specifically religious endorsement and regularly operate with and without the support of non-religious ideologies. In addition, there exist few examples of wars waged for specifically religious reasons.[26][30] Examples of violence and conflict that have been secular include World War I, World War II, many civil wars (American, El Salvador, Russia, Sri Lanka, China etc.), revolutionary wars (American, French, Russian, etc.), Vietnam War, Korean War, War on Terrorism, and common conflicts such as gang and drug wars (e.g. Mexican Drug War). In the 'Encyclopedia of Wars' by Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod, there were 1763 wars listed overall,[30] of which some have identified only 123 (7%) as having been primarily religiously motivated.[26][31][32] Talal Asad, an anthropologist, notes that equating institutional religion with violence and fanaticism is incorrect and that devastating cruelties and atrocities done by non-religious institutions in the 20th century should not be overlooked. He also notes that nationalism has been argued as being a secularized religion.[33]
Historians such as Jonathan Kirsch have made links between the European inquisitions, for example, and Stalin's persecutions in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, McCarthy blacklists, and other secular events as being the same type of phenomenon as the inquisitions.[34]
Others, such as Robert Pape, a political scientist who specializes in suicide terrorism, have made a case for secular motivations and reasons as being foundations of most suicide attacks that are oftentimes labeled as "religious".[35] Pape compiled the first complete database of every documented suicide bombing during 1980–2003. He argues that the news reports about suicide attacks are profoundly misleading — "There is little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world's religions". After studying 315 suicide attacks carried out over the last two decades, he concludes that suicide bombers' actions stem fundamentally from political conflict, not religion.[36]
Abrahamic religions[edit]



 The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre of French Protestants in 1572
Some critics of religion such as Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer argue that all monotheistic religions are inherently violent. For example, Nelson-Pallmeyer writes that "Judaism, Christianity and Islam will continue to contribute to the destruction of the world until and unless each challenges violence in "sacred texts" and until each affirms nonviolent power of God."[37]
Hector Avalos argues that, because religions claim divine favor for themselves, over and against other groups, this sense of righteousness leads to violence because conflicting claims to superiority, based on unverifiable appeals to God, cannot be adjudicated objectively.[38]
Similarly, Eric Hickey writes, "(t)he history of religious violence in the West is as long as the historical record of its three major religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, with their involved mutual antagonisms and struggles to adapt and survive the secular forces that threaten their continued existence."[39]
Regina Schwartz argues that all monotheistic religions, including Christianity, are inherently violent because of an exclusivism that inevitably fosters violence against those that are considered outsiders.[40] Lawrence Wechsler asserts that Schwartz isn't just arguing that Abrahamic religions have a violent legacy, but that the legacy is actually genocidal in nature.[41]
Bruce Feiler writes that "Jews and Christians who smugly console themselves that Islam is the only violent religion are willfully ignoring their past. Nowhere is the struggle between faith and violence described more vividly, and with more stomach-turning details of ruthlessness, than in the Hebrew Bible".[42]
However Tom O'Golo declares that religious fundamentalists that use violence to further their cause contravene the root truth of all faiths:

A genuine fundamentalist is also a radical, someone who tries to get the root of the matter. A major weakness with many or perhaps most radicals is not that they don't dig, but that they don't dig deep enough. Consequently many fundamentalists end up defending or acting upon beliefs which are not really at the heart of their doctrine. For example any religious fundamentalist who harms others in the pursuit of his or her radicalism is strictly out of order as no true religion ever encounters anything but love, tolerance and understanding. 'Thou shalt not kill' is at the heart of all genuine faiths, certainly the three based upon Abraham and God. That trio comprehensively condemns intentional harm to others (and to the self as well) for what ever reason. Dying to protect one's faith is acceptable; killing to promote it isn't. Arguably, it is blasphemous to say that God needs an earthly army to fight Its battles, or perform Its revenge. God is quite capable of fighting Its own battles.[43]
Christianity[edit]
Main article: Christianity and violence
See also: Sectarian violence among Christians, Crusade and Christian terrorism



I Believe in the Sword and Almighty God (1914) by Boardman Robinson.
The relationship between Christianity and violence is the subject of controversy because one view is that Christianity advocates peace, love and compassion while it is also viewed as a violent religion.[38][40][44] Peace, compassion and forgiveness of wrongs done by others are key elements of Christian teaching. However, Christians have struggled since the days of the Church fathers with the question of when the use of force is justified (e.g. the Just war theory of Saint Augustine). Such debates have led to concepts such as just war theory. Throughout history, certain teachings from the Old Testament, the New Testament and Christian theology have been used to justify the use of force against heretics, sinners and external enemies. Heitman and Hagan identify the Inquisitions, Crusades, wars of religion, and antisemitism as being "among the most notorious examples of Christian violence".[45] To this list J. Denny Weaver adds "warrior popes, support for capital punishment, corporal punishment under the guise of 'spare the rod and spoil the child,' justifications of slavery, world-wide colonialism in the name of conversion to Christianity, the systemic violence of women subjected to men".[improper synthesis?] Weaver employs a broader definition of violence that extends the meaning of the word to cover "harm or damage", not just physical violence per se. Thus, under his definition, Christian violence includes "forms of systemic violence such as poverty, racism, and sexism".[46]
Another Christian thought is of opposition to the use of force and violence. Sects that have emphasized pacificism as a central tenet of faith have resulted from the latter thought. However, Christians have also engaged in violence against those that they classify as heretics and non-believers specifically to enforce orthodoxy of their faith.
Christian theologians point to a strong doctrinal and historical imperative within Christianity against violence, particularly Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, which taught nonviolence and "love of enemies". For example, Weaver asserts that Jesus' pacifism was "preserved in the justifiable war doctrine that declares all war as sin even when declaring it occasionally a necessary evil, and in the prohibition of fighting by monastics and clergy as well as in a persistent tradition of Christian pacifism".[46]
Many authors highlight the ironical contradiction between Christianity's claims to be centered on "love and peace" while, at the same time, harboring a "violent side". For example, Mark Juergensmeyer argues: "that despite its central tenets of love and peace, Christianity—like most traditions—has always had a violent side. The bloody history of the tradition has provided images as disturbing as those provided by Islam or Sikhism, and violent conflict is vividly portrayed in the Bible. This history and these biblical images have provided the raw material for theologically justifying the violence of contemporary Christian groups. For example, attacks on abortion clinics have been viewed not only as assaults on a practice that Christians regard as immoral, but also as skirmishes in a grand confrontation between forces of evil and good that has social and political implications.",[47]:19–20 sometimes referred to as Spiritual warfare. The statement attributed to Jesus "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" has been interpreted by some as a call to arms to Christians.[47]
Maurice Bloch also argues that Christian faith fosters violence because Christian faith is a religion, and religions are by their very nature violent; moreover, he argues that religion and politics are two sides of the same coin—power.[48] Others have argued that religion and the exercise of force are deeply intertwined, but that religion may pacify, as well as channel and heighten violent impulses [49]



Forward with God! (1915) by Boardman Robinson.
In response to criticism that Christianity and violence are intertwined, Christian apologists such as Miroslav Volf and J. Denny Weaver reject charges that Christianity is a violent religion, arguing that certain aspects of Christianity might be misused to support violence but that a genuine interpretation of its core elements would not sanction human violence but would instead resist it. Among the examples that are commonly used to argue that Christianity is a violent religion, J. Denny Weaver lists "(the) crusades, the multiple blessings of wars, warrior popes, support for capital punishment, corporal punishment under the guise of 'spare the rod and spoil the child,' justifications of slavery, world-wide colonialism in the name of conversion to Christianity, the systemic violence of women subjected to men". Weaver characterizes the counter-argument as focusing on "Jesus, the beginning point of Christian faith,... whose Sermon on the Mount taught nonviolence and love of enemies,; who faced his accusers nonviolent death;whose nonviolent teaching inspired the first centuries of pacifist Christian history and was subsequently preserved in the justifiable war doctrine that declares all war as sin even when declaring it occasionally a necessary evil, and in the prohibition of fighting by monastics and clergy as well as in a persistent tradition of Christian pacifism."[46]
Miroslav Volf acknowledges that "many contemporaries see religion as a pernicious social ill that needs aggressive treatment rather than a medicine from which cure is expected." However, Volf contests this claim that "(the) Christian faith, as one of the major world religions, predominantly fosters violence." Instead of this negative assessment, Volf argues that Christianity "should be seen as a contributor to more peaceful social environments".[50] Volf examines the question of whether Christianity fosters violence, and has identified four main arguments that it does: that religion by its nature is violent, which occurs when people try to act as "soldiers of God"; that monotheism entails violence, because a claim of universal truth divides people into "us versus them"; that creation, as in the Book of Genesis, is an act of violence; and that the intervention of a "new creation", as in the Second Coming, generates violence.[44] Writing about the latter, Volf says: "Beginning at least with Constantine's conversion, the followers of the Crucified have perpetrated gruesome acts of violence under the sign of the cross. Over the centuries, the seasons of Lent and Holy Week were, for the Jews, times of fear and trepidation; Christians have perpetrated some of the worst pogroms as they remembered the crucifixion of Christ, for which they blamed the Jews. Muslims also associate the cross with violence; crusaders' rampages were undertaken under the sign of the cross."[51] In each case, Volf concluded that the Christian faith was misused in justifying violence. Volf argues that "thin" readings of Christianity might be used mischievously to support the use of violence. He counters, however, by asserting that "thick" readings of Christianity's core elements will not sanction human violence and would, in fact, resist it.[44]
Volf asserts that Christian churches suffer from a "confusion of loyalties". He asserts that "rather than the character of the Christian faith itself, a better explanation of why Christian churches are either impotent in the face of violent conflicts or actively participate in them derives from the proclivities of its adherents which are at odds with the character of the Christian faith." Volf observes that "(although) explicitly giving ultimate allegiance to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, many Christians in fact seem to have an overriding commitment to their respective cultures and ethnic groups."[52]
Mormonism[edit]
Main article: Mormonism and violence
Mormonism had an early history of violence. This began with religious persecution by well respected citizens, law enforcement, and government officials. Ultimately such persecution lead to several historically well-known acts of violence. These range from attacks on early Mormons, such as the Haun's Mill massacre following the Mormon Extermination Order to one of the most controversial and well-known cases of retaliation violence, the Mountain Meadows massacre. This was the result of an unprovoked response to religious persecution whereby an innocent party traveling through Mormon occupied territory was attacked on September 11, 1857. Since this turbulent beginning, most conflicts in relation to Mormonism have been isolated and have little or no historical significance.
Islam[edit]
Main article: Islam and violence
See also: Islamic terrorism, Islamism, Jihad and Mujahideen



 Sketch by an eye-witness of the massacre of Armenians in Sasun in 1894
Islam has been associated with violence in a variety of contexts, including Jihads (holy wars), violent acts by Muslims against perceived enemies of Islam, violence against women ostensibly supported by Islam's tenets, references to violence in the Qur'an, and acts of terrorism motivated and/or justified by Islam. Muslims, including clerics and leaders have used Islamic ideas, concepts, texts, and themes to justify violence, especially against non-Muslims.
Jihad is a religious duty of Muslims. In Arabic, the word jihād translates into English as "struggle". Jihad appears in the Qur'an and frequently in the idiomatic expression "striving in the way of Allah (al-jihad fi sabil Allah)".[53][54] A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid; the plural is mujahideen. Jihad is an important religious duty for Muslims. A minority among the Sunni scholars sometimes refer to this duty as the sixth pillar of Islam, though it occupies no such official status.[55] In Twelver Shi'a Islam, however, Jihad is one of the ten Practices of the Religion. Islamic extremists have used jihad to condone acts of terror, claiming the support of their religion’s followers and Allah himself. Jihad has also been used by non-Muslims to explain the so-called “insanity” of the Islamic faith. Specific verses in the Quran call for bloodshed, such as: “Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress…And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing…But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers”(2:190-191). Some interpret this section in the Al-Baqarah as justification for irrational violence, but fail to understand the most important word. To “transgress” is to go beyond the socially accepted limits, and the Quran specifically says to not transgress. If this passage is interpreted with the intention of finding reasons to fight, it can easily be found. If one looks deeper into the scripture, we see that Allah doesn’t hope that people will go to the extremes.
Muslims use the word in a religious context to refer to three types of struggles: an internal struggle to maintain faith, the struggle to improve the Muslim society, or the struggle in a holy war.[56] The prominent British orientalist Bernard Lewis argues that in the Qur'an and the ahadith jihad implies warfare in the large majority of cases.[57] In a commentary of the hadith Sahih Muslim, entitled al-Minhaj, the medieval Islamic scholar Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi stated that "one of the collective duties of the community as a whole (fard kifaya) is to lodge a valid protest, to solve problems of religion, to have knowledge of Divine Law, to command what is right and forbid wrong conduct".[58]



 Indonesian military forces evacuate refugees from Ambon during the Maluku sectarian conflict in 1999
Terrorism and Islam[edit]
See also: Islamic terrorism
In western societies the term jihad is often translated as "holy war".[59][60] Scholars of Islamic studies often stress that these words are not synonymous.[61] Muslim authors, in particular, tend to reject such an approach, stressing non-militant connotations of the word.[62][63]
Terrorism refers to terrorism by Muslim or individuals and motivated by either politics, religion or both. Terrorist acts have included airline hijacking, kidnapping, assassination, suicide bombing, and mass murder.[64][65][66] As an ideology in the 20th century, only Communism, with its murder and mass killings, is responsible for more deaths and violence than is Islam. In terms of Islamic violence, both ancient and modern history are replete with Islamic intolerance and ensuing violence against every other ideology, such as modern violence against Western institutions, as well as historical violence against Hindus, and perpetual violence against Christians.[67][68][69] are a few examples.
The tension reached a climax on September 11th, 2001 when Islamic terrorists flew hijacked commercial airplanes into the World Trade Center in New York City. The “War on Terror” has caused anti-Muslim sentiments throughout Christianity and the rest of the world. Al-Qaeda is one of the most well known Islamic extremist groups, created by Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden. The goal of al-Qaeda was to spread the “purest” form of Islam and Islamic law. For bin Laden, in order to do “good” by the Quran, he had to inflict terror upon millions. Following the terror attacks on September 11, bin Laden praised the suicide bombers in his statement: “the great action you did which was first and foremost by the grace of Allah. This is the guidance of Allah and the blessed fruit of jihad”. What was sacrifice to Osama bin Laden and his followers is terror to the American people and the rest of the world, furthering the fear of Islam that many people possess. Despite the few severe sects, Islam is not a fundamentally violent religion. Certain groups hold that the Quran should be interpreted literally, while others believe that with the changing course of history, interpretation should change too.
There are controversies surrounding the subject include whether the terrorist act is self-defense or aggression, national self-determination or Islamic supremacy; whether Islam can ever condone the targeting of non-combatants; whether some attacks described as Islamic terrorism are merely terrorist acts committed by Muslims or motivated by nationalism; whether Zionism and the Arab-Israeli Conflict is the root of Islamic terrorism, or simply one cause; how much support there is in the Muslim world for Islamic terrorism[70] and whether support for terror is a temporary phenomenon, a "bubble", now fading away.[71]
Judaism[edit]
Main article: Judaism and violence
Burggraeve and Vervenne describe the Old Testament as full of violence and as evidence of both a violent society and a violent god. They write that, "(i)n numerous Old Testament texts the power and glory of Israel's God is described in the language of violence." They assert that more than one thousand passages refer to YHWH as acting violently or supporting the violence of humans and that more than one hundred passages involve divine commands to kill humans.[72]
On the basis of these passages in the Old Testament, some Christian churches and theologians argue that Judaism is a violent religion and that the god of Israel is a violent god. Reuven Firestone asserts that these assertions are usually made in the context of claims that Christianity is a religion of peace and that the god of Christianity is one that expresses only love.[73]
Some scholars such as Deborah Weissman readily acknowledge that "normative Judaism is not pacifist" and that "violence is condoned in the service of self-defense."[74] J. Patout Burns asserts that, although Judaism condones the use of violence in certain cases, Jewish tradition clearly posits the principle of minimization of violence. This principle can be stated as "(wherever) Jewish law allows violence to keep an evil from occurring, it mandates that the minimal amount of violence be used to accomplish one's goal."[75]
The love of peace and the pursuit of peace, as well as laws requiring the eradication of evil, sometimes using violent means, co-exist in the Jewish tradition.[76][77]
The Hebrew Bible contains instances of religiously mandated wars[78] which often contain explicit instructions from God to the Israelites to exterminate other tribes, as in Deut 7:1–2 orDeut 20:16-18. Examples include the story of Amalekites (Deut 25:17–19, 1 Sam 15:1-6),[79] the story of the Midianites (Numbers 31:1–18),[80] and the battle of Jericho (Joshua 6:1–27).[81]
These wars of extermination have been characterized as "genocide" by several authorities,[82] because the Torah states that the Israelites annihilated entire ethnic groups or tribes: the Israelites killed all Amalekites, including men, women, and children (1 Samuel 15:1–20 ); the Israelites killed all men, women, and children in the battle of Jericho(Joshua 6:15–21), and the Israelites killed all men, women and children of several Canaanite tribes (Joshua 10:28–42).[83] However, some scholars believe that these accounts in the Torah are exaggerated or metaphorical.
Zionist leaders sometimes used religious references as justification for the violent treatment of Arabs in Palestine.[84] Palestinians have been several times associated with a Biblical antagonists, Amalekites. For example, rabbi Israel Hess has recommended to kill Palestinians, basing on biblical verses such as 1 Samuel 15.[85] Shulamit Aloni, a member of the Israeli Knesset indicated in 2003 that Jewish children in Israel were being taught in religious schools that Palestinians were Amalek, and therefore an act of total genocide was a religious obligation.[86]
Other religions[edit]



Thuggee was a secret cult of assassins who were both Hindus and Muslims.
Buddhism[edit]
Main articles: Sohei, 969 Movement and Buddhism and violence
Hinduism[edit]
Main article: Hindu extremism
Sikhism[edit]
Main article: Sikh extremism
Conflicts and Wars[edit]



 Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople by Gustave Doré (1832–1883)
Main article: Religious war
It has been noted that "religious" conflicts are not based on religious beliefs exclusively and instead should be seen as clashes of communities, identities, and interests that are secular-religious or at least very much secular.[17][26][35]
Some have asserted that attacks are carried out by those with very strong religious convictions such as terrorists in the context of global religious war.[87] Robert Pape, a political scientist who specializes in suicide terroism argues that much of the modern Muslim suicide terrorism is secular based.[35] Although the causes of terrorism are complex, it may be that terrorists are partially reassured by their religious views that God is on their side and will reward them in heaven for punishing unbelievers.[88][89]
These conflicts are among the most difficult to resolve, particularly where both sides believe that God is on their side and has endorsed the moral righteousness of their claims.[88] One of the most infamous quotes associated with religious fanaticism was made in 1209 during the siege of Béziers, a Crusader asked the Papal Legate Arnaud Amalric how to tell Catholics from Cathars when the city was taken, to which Amalric replied: "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius," or "Kill them all; God will recognize his."[90]
Ritual violence[edit]
Further information: ritual slaughter, human sacrifice and animal sacrifice
Ritual violence may be directed against victims (human sacrifice) or self-inflicted (religious self-flagellation).
According to the hunting hypothesis, created by Walter Burkert in Homo Necans, carnivorous behavior is considered a form of violence. Burkett suggests that the anthropological phenomenon of religion itself grew out of rituals connected with hunting and the feelings of guilt associated with the violence involved.[91]
See also[edit]
List of countries by discrimination and violence against minorities
Witch-hunt
Hundred Years' War
Religion and peacebuilding
Religious fanaticism
Pacifism and religion
Taliban
Religions for Peace
Peace in Islamic philosophy
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Wellman, James; Tokuno, Kyoko (2004). "Is Religious Violence Inevitable?". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion) 43 (3): 291. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2004.00234.x.
2.Jump up ^ Violence and religion: cross-cultural opinions and consequences. Concept Publishing Company. 2007. pp. 5–6. ISBN 9788180693762. |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)
3.Jump up ^ Nayak, Abhijit (July–October 2008). "Crusade Violence: Understanding and Overcoming the Impact of Mission Among Muslims". International Review of Mission (World Council of Churches) 97 (386–387): 273–291. doi:10.1111/j.1758-6631.2008.tb00645.x. Retrieved 2010-11-23.
4.Jump up ^ Freitheim, Terence (Winter 2004). "God and Violence in the Old Testament" (PDF). Word & World 24 (1). Retrieved 2010-11-21.
5.Jump up ^ Selengut, Charles (2008-04-28). Sacred fury: understanding religious violence. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-7425-6084-0.
6.^ Jump up to: a b Tanner, Ralph E. S. (2007). Violence and religion: cross-cultural opinions and consequences. Concept Publishing Company. p. 1. ISBN 9788180693762.
7.Jump up ^ "Pope Benedict apologises for Christian violence through the ages after condemning terrorism in the name of religion". London: Daily Mail. 2011-10-28. |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)
8.Jump up ^ "Vatican: Pope speaks out against 'violence in God's name". Adn Kronos International. 2011. |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)
9.Jump up ^ Avalos, Hector (2005). Fighting Words: The Origins of Religious Violence. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-59102-284-3.
10.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is not Great. Twelve. ISBN 0-446-57980-7.
11.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Bantam Books. ISBN 1-4303-1230-0.
12.Jump up ^ Sen, Amartya (21 November 2001). "A World Not Neatly Divided". New York Times. p. 23.
13.Jump up ^ Bland, Byron (May 2003). "Evil Enemies: The Convergence of Religion and Politics" (PDF). p. 4.
14.Jump up ^ Cavanaugh, William (2009). The Myth of Religious Violence. Oxford University Press US,. p. 4.
15.Jump up ^ Eller, Jack David (2010). Cruel Creeds, Virtuous Violence: Religious Violence Across Culture and History. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1-61614-218-6. "As we have insisted previously, religion is not inherently and irredeemably violent; it certainly is not the essence and source of all violence."
16.Jump up ^ Eller, Jack David (2010). Cruel Creeds, Virtuous Violence: Religious Violence Across Culture and History. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1-61614-218-6. "Religion and violence are clearly compatible, but they are not identical. Violence is one phenomenon in human (and natural existence), religion is another, and it is inevitable that the two would become intertwined. Religion is complex and modular, and violence is one of the modules—not universal, but recurring. As a conceptual and behavioral module, violence is by no means exclusive to religion. There are plenty of other groups, institutions, interests, and ideologies to promote violence. Violence is, therefore, neither essential to nor exclusive to religion. Nor is religious violence all alike... And virtually every form of religious violence has its nonreligious corollary."
17.^ Jump up to: a b Eller, Jack David (2007). Introducing Anthropology of Religion. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-40896-7. "When a pure or hybrid religious group and/or its interests are threatened, or merely blocked from achieving its interests by another group, conflict and violence may ensue. In such cases, although religion is part of the issue and religious groups form the competitors, or combatants, it would be simplistic or wrong to assume the religion is the "cause" of the trouble or that the parties are "fighting about religion". Religion in the circumstances may be more a marker of the groups than an actual point of contention between them."
18.Jump up ^ Teehan, John (2010). In the Name of God: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Ethics and Violence. John Wiley and Sons. pp. 145–147.
19.Jump up ^ "The Harmful Secular Ideologies". Ames Tribune. 2011. |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)
20.Jump up ^ Rummel, Rudolph J. (1994). Death By Government. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-1-56000-927-6.
21.Jump up ^ Rummel, Rudolph J. (1997). Statistics of Democide: Genocide and Mass Murder since 1900. Lit Verlag. ISBN 978-3-8258-4010-5.
22.Jump up ^ Froese, Paul (2008). The Plot to Kill God: Findings from the Soviet Experiment in Secularization. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-25529-6.
23.Jump up ^ Gabel, Paul (2005). And God Created Lenin: Marxism Vs. Religion in Russia, 1917–1929. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1-59102-306-7.
24.Jump up ^ Kiernan, Ben (2008). The Pol Pot Regime: Race, Power, and Genocide in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, 1975-79. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-14434-5.
25.Jump up ^ Peris, Daniel (1998). Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless. Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8014-3485-3.
26.^ Jump up to: a b c d Day, Vox (2008). The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, And Hitchens. BenBella Books. ISBN 978-1-933771-36-6.
27.Jump up ^ Bantjes, Adrian (1997). "Idolatry and Iconoclasm in Revolutionary Mexico: The De-Christianization. Campaigns, 1929–1940". Mexican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos 13 (1): 87–121.
28.Jump up ^ Meisner, Maurice (1999). Mao's China and After: A History of the People's Republic. Free Press. ISBN 978-0-684-85635-3.
29.Jump up ^ Nelson, James M. (2009-02-27). Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. Springer. p. 427. ISBN 9780387875729. Retrieved 2012-12-19.
30.^ Jump up to: a b Charles Phillips, Alan Axelrod (2005). The Encyclopaedia of War.
31.Jump up ^ Sheiman, Bruce (2009). An Atheist Defends Religion : Why Humanity is Better Off with Religion than Without It. Alpha Books. pp. 117–118. ISBN 1592578543.
32.Jump up ^ Lurie, Alan. "Is Religion the Cause of Most Wars?". Huffington Post.
33.Jump up ^ Asad, Talal (2003). Formations of the Secular : Christianity, Islam, Modernity (10. printing. ed.). Stanford University Press. pp. 100, 187–190. ISBN 0804747687.
34.Jump up ^ Kirsch, Jonathan (2009). The Grand Inquisitor's Manual: A History of Terror in the Name of God. HarperOne. ISBN 978-0-06-173276-8.
35.^ Jump up to: a b c Pape, Robert (2005). Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. Random House. ISBN 978-0-8129-7338-9.
36.Jump up ^ Pape 2005.
37.Jump up ^ Nelson-Pallmeyer, Jack (2005). Is religion killing us?: violence in the Bible and the Quran. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 136. ISBN 9780826417794.
38.^ Jump up to: a b Avalos, Hector (2005). Fighting Words: The Origins of Religious Violence. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.
39.Jump up ^ Hickey, Eric W. (2003). Encyclopedia of murder and violent crime. SAGE. p. 217. ISBN 978-0-7619-2437-1.
40.^ Jump up to: a b Regina M. Schwartz (1998). The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. University of Chicago Press.
41.Jump up ^ Wechsler, Lawrence. "Mayhem and Monotheism" (PDF).
42.Jump up ^ Feiler, Bruce S. (2005). Where God was born: a journey by land to the roots of religion. HarperCollins. p. 4. ISBN 9780060574871.
43.Jump up ^ Tom O'Golo (2011). Christ? No! Jesus? Yes!: A radical reappraisal of a very important life. p. 105.
44.^ Jump up to: a b c Volf, Miroslav (2008). "Christianity and Violence". In Hess, Richard S.; Martens, E.A. War in the Bible and terrorism in the twenty-first century. Eisenbrauns. pp. 1–17. ISBN 978-1-57506-803-9. Retrieved June 1, 2010.
45.Jump up ^ International encyclopedia of violence research, Volume 2. Springer. 2003. ISBN 9781402014666.
46.^ Jump up to: a b c J. Denny Weaver (2001). "Violence in Christian Theology". Cross Currents. Retrieved 2010-10-27. "I am using broad definitions of the terms "violence" and "nonviolence". "Violence" means harm or damage, which obviously includes the direct violence of killing -- in war, capital punishment, murder --but also covers the range of forms of systemic violence such as poverty, racism, and sexism. "Nonviolence" also covers a spectrum of attitudes and actions, from the classic Mennonite idea of passive nonresistance through active nonviolence and nonviolent resistance that would include various kinds of social action, confrontations and posing of alternatives that do not do bodily harm or injury."
47.^ Jump up to: a b Mark Juergensmeyer (2004). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24011-1.
48.Jump up ^ Bloch, Maurice (1992). Prey into Hunter. The Politics of Religious Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49.Jump up ^ Andrew McKinnon. 'Religion and the Civilizing Process: The Pax Dei Movement and the Christianization of Violence in the Process of Feudalization'. in A McKinnon & M Trzebiatowska (eds), Sociological Theory and the Question of Religion. Ashgate, 2014 [1].
50.Jump up ^ Volf, Miroslav (2002). "Christianity and Violence". Retrieved 2010-10-27.
51.Jump up ^ Volf 2008, p. 13
52.Jump up ^ Volf, Miroslav. "The Social Meaning of Reconciliation" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-11-17.
53.Jump up ^ Wendy Doniger, ed. (1999). Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions. Merriam-Webster. ISBN 0-87779-044-2.,Jihad, p. 571
54.Jump up ^ Josef W. Meri, ed. (2005). Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-96690-6., Jihad, p. 419
55.Jump up ^ John Esposito(2005), Islam: The Straight Path, p. 93
56.Jump up ^ "Jihad". BBC. 2009-08-03.
57.Jump up ^ Lewis, Bernard (1988). The Political Language of Islam. University of Chicago Press. p. 72. ISBN 0226476928. Cf. Watt, William M. (1976). "Islamic Conceptions of the Holy War". In Murphy, Thomas P. The Holy War. Ohio State University Press. p. 143. ISBN 978-0814202456.
58.Jump up ^ Shaykh Hisham Kabbani; Shaykh Seraj Hendricks; Shaykh Ahmad Hendricks. "Jihad—A Misunderstood Concept from Islam". The Muslim Magazine. Retrieved 16 August 2006.
59.Jump up ^ cf. e.g. BBC news article "Libya's Gaddafi urges 'holy war' against Switzerland". BBC News. 26 February 2010. Retrieved 30 September 2012.
60.Jump up ^ Peters, Rudolph (1977). Jihad in Medieval and Modern Islam. Brill Academic Pub. p. 3. ISBN 978-9004048546.
61.Jump up ^ Crone, Patricia (2005). Medieval Islamic Political Thought. Edinburgh University. p. 363. ISBN 978-0748621941.
62.Jump up ^ Jihad and the Islamic Law of War. Jordan: The Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought. 2009.
63.Jump up ^ Peters, Rudolph (1979). Islam and colonialism: the doctrine of Jihad in modern history. Mouton Publishers. p. 118. ISBN 9027933472.
64.Jump up ^ "Captured Iraqi Terrorist Ramzi Hashem Abed: Zarqawi Participated in the Plot to Assassinate Baqer Al-Hakim. We Bombed Jalal Talabani's Headquarters, the Turkish Embassy, and the Red Cross, Took Drugs, Raped University Students Who "Collaborated with the Americans"". The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). (login required)
65.Jump up ^ "Abductions of and Assaults on Women". The Massacre in Mazar-I Sharif. Human Rights Watch. Retrieved September 30, 2012.
66.Jump up ^ Youssef M. Ibrahim (14 April 1988). "Algeria to Permit Abortions for Rape Victims". The New York Times. Retrieved 30 September 2012.
67.Jump up ^ "Time to Air Muslim Violence Against Christians", Real Clear Politics, March 23, 2012 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/03/23/time_to_air_muslim_violence_against_christians_113595.html
68.Jump up ^ "37 Muslim nations persecuting Christians", WND Faith, Published: 01/11/2014, http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/37-muslim-nations-persecuting-christians/
69.Jump up ^ "The Existential Elephant in the ‘Christian Persecution’ Room", By Raymond Ibrahim on January 17, 2014 in Muslim Persecution of Christians, http://www.raymondibrahim.com/muslim-persecution-of-christians/the-existential-elephant-in-the-christian-persecution-room/
70.Jump up ^ Tony Blair, "Speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council", http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page9948.asp
71.Jump up ^ Thomas L. Friedman (April 20, 2003). "The Third Bubble". The New York Times. Retrieved 30 September 2012.
72.Jump up ^ Burggraeve, Roger; Vervenne, Marc (1991). Swords into plowshares: theological reflections on peace. Peeters Publishers. pp. 82,109. ISBN 9789068313727.
73.Jump up ^ Heft, James, ed. (2004). Beyond violence: religious sources of social transformation in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Fordham University Press. ISBN 9780823223350.
74.Jump up ^ "The Co-existence of Violence and Non-Violence in Judaism". Retrieved 2010-12-09.
75.Jump up ^ Burns, J. Patout (1996). War and its discontents: pacifism and quietism in the Abrahamic traditions. Georgetown University Press. p. 18.
76.Jump up ^ Fighting the War and the Peace: Battlefield Ethics, Peace Talks, Treaties, and Pacifism in the Jewish Tradition. Michael J. Broyde, 1998, p. 1
77.Jump up ^ *Reuven Firestone (2004), "Judaism on Violence and Reconciliation: An examination of key sources" in Beyond violence: religious sources of social transformation in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Fordham University Press, 2004, pp. 77, 81. Goldsmith (Ed.), Emanuel S. (1991). Dynamic Judaism: the essential writings of Mordecai M. Kaplan. Fordham University Press. p. 181. ISBN 0-8232-1310-2.
Spero, Shubert (1983). Morality, Halakha, and the Jewish Tradition. Ktav Publishing House, Inc. pp. 137–318. ISBN 0-87068-727-1.
78.Jump up ^ Salaita, Steven George (2006). The Holy Land in transit: colonialism and the quest for Canaan. Syracuse University Press. p. 54. ISBN 0-8156-3109-X.
Lustick, Ian (1988). For the Land and the Lord: Jewish fundamentalism in Israel. Council on Foreign Relations. pp. 131–132. ISBN 0-87609-036-6.
Armstrong, Karen (2007). The Bible: a biography. Atlantic Monthly Press. pp. 211–216. ISBN 0-87113-969-3.
79.Jump up ^ A. G. Hunter "Denominating Amalek: Racist stereotyping in the Bible and the Justification of Discrimination", in Sanctified aggression: legacies of biblical and post biblical vocabularies of violence, Jonneke Bekkenkamp, Yvonne Sherwood (Eds.). 2003, Continuum Internatio Publishing Group, pp. 92–108
80.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. p. 245. ISBN 0-618-68000-4.
81.Jump up ^ Carl. S. Ehrlich (1999) "Joshua, Judaism, and Genocide", in Jewish Studies at the Turn of the Twentieth Century, Judit Targarona Borrás, Ángel Sáenz-Badillos (Eds). 1999, Brill. p. 117–124.
Dawkins, Richard, The God Delusion', pp. 289–296
Hitchens, Christopher, God is Not Great p. 117
Selengut, Charles, Sacred fury: understanding religious violence, p. 20
Cowles, C. S., Show them no mercy: 4 views on God and Canaanite genocide, p. 79
82.Jump up ^ Kravitz, Leonard, "What is Crime?", in Crime and punishment in Jewish law: essays and responsa, Editors Walter Jacob, Moshe Zemer Berghahn Books, 1999, p. 31
Cohn, Robert L, "Before Israel: The Canaanites as Other in Biblical Tradition", in The Other in Jewish thought and history: constructions of Jewish culture and identity, Laurence Jay Silberstein, (Ed.), NYU Press, 1994, pp. 76-77
Violence, Scripture, and Textual Practice in Early Judaism and Christianity By Ra'anan S. Boustan, pp. 3-5
83.Jump up ^ The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies, Donald Bloxham, A. Dirk Moses, p. 242
84.Jump up ^ Saleh Abdel Jawad (2007) "Zionist Massacres: the Creation of the Palestinian Refugee Problem in the 1948 War" in Israel and the Palestinian refugees, Eyal Benvenistî, Chaim Gans, Sari Hanafi (Eds.), Springer, p. 78:
".. the Zionist movement, which claims to be secular, found it necessary to embrace the idea of 'the promised land' of Old Testament prophecy, to justify the confiscation of land and the expulsion of the Palestinians. For example, the speeches and letter of Chaim Weizman, the secular Zionist leader, are filled with references to the biblical origins of the Jewish claim to Palestine, which he often mixes liberally with more pragmatic and nationalistic claims. By the use of this premise, embraced in 1937, Zionists alleged that the Palestinians were usurpers in the Promised Land, and therefore their expulsion and death was justified. The Jewish-American writer Dan Kurzman, in his book Genesis 1948 ... describes the view of one of the Deir Yassin's killers: 'The Sternists followed the instructions of the Bible more rigidly than others. They honored the passage (Exodus 22:2): 'If a thief be found ...' This meant, of course, that killing a thief was not really murder. And were not the enemies of Zionism thieves, who wanted to steal from the Jews what God had granted them?' Carl. S. Ehrlich (1999) "Joshua, Judaism, and Genocide", in Jewish Studies at the Turn of the Twentieth Century, Judit Targarona Borrás, Ángel Sáenz-Badillos (Eds). 1999, Brill. pp. 117–124.
85.Jump up ^ Masalha, Nur, Imperial Israel and the Palestinians: the politics of expansion, Pluto Press, 2000, pp. 129–131.
"Frequently Jewish fundamentalists refer to the Palestinians as the 'Amalekites' ... of today.... According to the Old Testament, the Amalek ... were regarded as the Israelites' inveterate foe, whose 'annihilation' became a sacred duty and against whom war should be waged until their 'memory be blotted out' forever (Ex 17:16; Deut 25:17–19).... Some of the [modern] political messianics insist on giving the biblical commandment to 'blot out the memory of the Amalek' an actual contemporary relevance in the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. In February 1980, Rabbi Israel Hess ... published an article [titled] 'The Genocide Commandment in the Torah' ... which ends with the following: 'The day is not far when we shall all be called to this holy war, this commandment of the annihilation of the Amalek'. Hess quotes the biblical commandment ... 'Do not spare him, but kill man and woman, baby and suckling, ox and sheep, camel, and donkey'.... In his book On the Lord's Side Danny Rubinstein has shown that this notion permeates the Gush Emunim movement's bulletins [one of which] carried an article ... which reads 'In every generation there is an Amalek.... The Amalekism of our generation finds expression in the deep Arab hatred towards our national revival ...'... Professor Uriel Tal ... conducted his study in the early 1980s ... and pointed out that the totalitarian political messianic stream refers to the Palestinian Arabs in three stages or degrees: ... [stage] (3) the implementation of the commandment of Amalek, as expressed in Rabbi Hess's article 'The Commandment of Genocide in the Torah', in other words 'annihilating' the Palestinian Arabs'".See also Hunter, p. 103
Also describing Palestinians as targets of violence due to association with Amalek is: Geaves, Ron, Islam and the West post 9/11, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2004, p. 30
86.Jump up ^ Murder Under the Cover of Righteousness - CounterPunch
87.Jump up ^ Full text: bin Laden's 'letter to America' accessed may 24, 2007
88.^ Jump up to: a b Juergensmeyer, Mark (2001-09-21). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Updated edition. University of California Press.
89.Jump up ^ Christian Jihad: The Crusades and Killing in the Name of Christ
90.Jump up ^ "Kill Them All; For The Lord Knoweth Them That Are His Steve Locks (Reply) (9-00)". Retrieved 2007-08-18.
91.Jump up ^ Burkert, Walter. 1983. Homo Necans: the Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Further reading[edit]
AcademicAppleby, R. Scott (2000) The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Avalos, Hector (2005) Fighting Words: the Origins of Religious Violence. New York: Prometheus.
Burkert, Walter. (1983). Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth. Berkeley: University of California Press
Crocket, Clayton (ed.) (2006) Religion and Violence in a Secular World: Toward a New Political Theology. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
Flood, Derek (2012) The way of peace and grace. Sojourners Magazine. Jan 2012.
Girard, René. (1977) Violence et le Sacré (eng. Violence and the Sacred). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hamerton-Kelly, Robert G. (ed.) (1987) Violent Origins: Walter Burkert, René Girard and Jonathan Z. Smith on Ritual Killing and Cultural Formation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Juergensmeyer, Mark. (2000) Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Berkeley: University of California Press.
McKinnon, A. (2014). 'Religion and the Civilizing Process: The Pax Dei Movement and the Christianization of Violence in the Process of Feudalization'; in A. McKinnon & M, Trzebiatowska (eds), Sociological Theory and the Question of Religion. Ashgate [2].
Pedahzur, Ami and Weinberg, Leonard (eds.) (2004) Religious Fundamentalism and Political Extremism. New York: Routledge.
Pape, Robert (2005) Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism Random House LLC
Regina M. Schwartz (1998). The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. University of Chicago Press.
Selengut, C. (2003) Sacred Fury: Understanding Religious Violence. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira
Steffen, Lloyd. (2007) Holy War, Just War: Exploring the Moral Meaning of Religious Violence. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Takim, Liyakat (2011) Peace and war in the Qur'an and juridical literature: A comparative perspective. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare 38 (2) (06): 137-57.
Venkatraman, Amritha( 2007) Religious basis for islamic terrorism: The quran and its interpretations. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 30 (3) (03): 229-48.
ScriptureAli, Abdullah Yusuf. The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and Commentary. Elmhurst, NY: Published by Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, 2001. Print.
Coogan, Michael David, Marc Zvi Brettler, Carol A. Newsom, and Pheme Perkins. The New Oxford Annotated Bible: With the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books. New York: Oxford UP, 2001. Print.
OtherNelson-Pallmeyer, Jack (2003) Is Religion Killing Us? Harrisburg: Trinity Press International ISBN 1-56338-408-6
Stern, Jessica. (2004) Terror in the Name of God: Why Religious Militants Kill. New York: Harper Perennial.
Perry, Simon (2011). All Who Came Before. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock. ISBN 978-1-60899-659-9.
External links[edit]
William T. Cavanaugh Resources from Jesus Radicals
Myth of Religious conflict in Africa
Interview with William Cavanaugh


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion



























































































































































































































































































































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion


































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religious persecution and discrimination























































































  


Categories: Religion and violence
Dispute resolution







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Català
Eesti
Español
فارسی
Italiano
Simple English
Slovenčina
Suomi
தமிழ்
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 February 2015, at 23:13.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence













Religious violence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Religion and violence)
Jump to: navigation, search




 The Crusades were a series of a military campaigns fought mainly between Christian Europe and Muslims. Shown here is a battle scene from the First Crusade.
Religious violence is a term that covers phenomena where religion is either the subject or object of violent behavior.[1] Religious violence is, specifically, violence that is motivated by or in reaction to religious precepts, texts, or doctrines. This includes violence against religious institutions, people, objects, or when the violence is motivated to some degree by some religious aspect of the target or precept of the attacker. Religious violence does not refer exclusively to acts committed by religious groups, but also includes acts committed by secular groups against religious groups.
Religious violence, like all violence, is an inherently cultural process whose meanings are context-dependent. Religious violence often tends to place great emphasis on the symbolic aspect of the act. Religious violence is primarily the domain of the violent "actor", which may be distinguished between individual and collective forms of violence. Overall, religious violence is perpetrated for a wide variety of ideological reasons and is generally only one of the contributing social and political factors that leads to unrest.


Contents  [hide]
1 Definition of violence
2 Relationships between religion and violence
3 Criticism of religion as being violent
4 Secularism as a response
5 Challenges to the concept 5.1 Interpretation of Holy Texts
5.2 Arguments against mutual exclusivity of the religious and the secular
6 Secular violence 6.1 Religious-secular congruency and overlap
7 Abrahamic religions 7.1 Christianity 7.1.1 Mormonism
7.2 Islam 7.2.1 Terrorism and Islam
7.3 Judaism
8 Other religions 8.1 Buddhism
8.2 Hinduism
8.3 Sikhism
9 Conflicts and Wars
10 Ritual violence
11 See also
12 References
13 Further reading
14 External links

Definition of violence[edit]
Ralph Tanner cites the definition of violence in the Oxford English Dictionary as going "far beyond (the infliction of) pain and the shedding of blood". He argues that, although violence clearly encompasses injury to persons or property, it also includes "the forcible interference with personal freedom, violent or passionate conduct or language (and) finally passion or fury".[2] Similarly, Abhijit Nayak writes:

The word "violence" can be defined to extend far beyond pain and shedding blood. It carries the meaning of physical force, violent language, fury and, more importantly, forcible interference.[3]
Terence Fretheim writes:

For many people, ... only physical violence truly qualifies as violence. But, certainly, violence is more than killing people, unless one includes all those words and actions that kill people slowly. The effect of limitation to a “killing fields” perspective is the widespread neglect of many other forms of violence. We must insist that violence also refers to that which is psychologically destructive, that which demeans, damages, or depersonalizes others. In view of these considerations, violence may be defined as follows: any action, verbal or nonverbal, oral or written, physical or psychical, active or passive, public or private, individual or institutional/societal, human or divine, in whatever degree of intensity, that abuses, violates, injures, or kills. Some of the most pervasive and most dangerous forms of violence are those that are often hidden from view (against women and children, especially); just beneath the surface in many of our homes, churches, and communities is abuse enough to freeze the blood. Moreover, many forms of systemic violence often slip past our attention because they are so much a part of the infrastructure of life (e.g., racism, sexism, ageism).[4]
Relationships between religion and violence[edit]
Charles Selengut characterizes the phrase "religion and violence" as "jarring", asserting that "religion is thought to be opposed to violence and a force for peace and reconciliation. He acknowledges, however, that "the history and scriptures of the world's religions tell stories of violence and war even as they speak of peace and love."[5]
Ralph Tanner similarly describes the combination of religion and violence as "uncomfortable", asserting that religious thinkers generally avoid the conjunction of the two and argue that religious violence is "only valid in certain circumstances which are invariably one-sided".[6]
While religion can be used as a means of rallying support for violence, religious leaders regularly denounce such manipulations as contrary to the teachings of their belief.[7][8]
Criticism of religion as being violent[edit]
Tanner asserts that many who have no particular religious beliefs would even argue that violence is a highly likely if not inevitable consequence of the "irrationality" of religious precepts.[6] Similarly, Hector Avalos argues that religions claim "scarce resources" for themselves over and against other groups. Consequently, this may lead to violence because conflicting claims to superiority are based on unverifiable appeals to the supernatural which cannot be adjudicated objectively.[9]
Some general critics of religion and polemics such as Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins go farther and argue that religions do tremendous harm to society in three ways:[10][page needed][11][page needed]
Religions sometimes use war, violence, and terrorism to promote their religious goals,
Religious leaders contribute to secular wars and terrorism by endorsing or supporting the violence, and
Religious fervor is exploited by secular leaders to support war and terrorism.
Amartya Sen adds that political leaders frequently use religious differences to initiate or perpetuate violence: [12]
Secularism as a response[edit]
Byron Bland asserts that one of the most prominent reasons for the "rise of the secular in Western thought" was the reaction against the religious violence of the 16th and 17th centuries. He asserts that "(t)he secular was a way of living with the religious differences that had produced so much horror. Under secularity, political entities have a warrant to make decisions independent from the need to enforce particular versions of religious orthodoxy. Indeed, they may run counter to certain strongly held beliefs if made in the interest of common welfare. Thus, one of the important goals of the secular is to limit violence."[13]
Challenges to the concept[edit]
Interpretation of Holy Texts[edit]
One idea that many fail to consider when reading holy texts is the concept of translation. The Bible itself has been translated from Hebrew and Greek and retranslated into hundreds of languages. Certain words have changed meaning and others do not directly translate so there is a lot of estimation. The original text may have been clear and easy to understand, but that original language will never be able to be actually heard. Plus, the Bible was written down after going through years of oral tradition, so there could be a substantial amount of story lost or gained along the way. The Quran is a newer text and is generally read in Arabic. Those stories too were belayed from Allah to Mohammad to scribes, so it is entirely possible that there were mix-ups and different additions. Even with the translation discrepancies, it seems that all religions boil down to analysis. Interpretation of holy texts is highly important to consider when reading about religious violence. Depending on one’s point of view, aspects of any religion can appear to be violent or peaceful. For both the Bible and the Quran, there are accounts of peace and conflict. It is up to the person reading the passages to judge what they see. The world is a changing entity. To keep these texts relevant and away from the extremities, interpretation must flow along with society.
Arguments against mutual exclusivity of the religious and the secular[edit]
Others such as William Cavanaugh have argued that it is unreasonable to attempt to differentiate "religious violence" and "secular violence" as separate categories. Cavanaugh asserts that "the idea that religion has a tendency to promote violence is part of the conventional wisdom of Western societies and it underlies many of our institutions and policies, from limits on the public role of churches to efforts to promote liberal democracy in the Middle East." Cavanaugh challenges this conventional wisdom, arguing that there is a "myth of religious violence", basing his argument on the assertion that "attempts to separate religious and secular violence are incoherent".[14] Cavanaugh asserts:
Religion is not a universal and transhistorical phenomenon. What counts as "religious" or "secular" in any context is a function of configurations of power both in the West and lands colonized by the West. The distinctions of "Religious/Secular" and "Religious/Political" are modern Western inventions.
The invention of the concept of "religious violence" helps the West reinforce superiority of Western social orders to "nonsecular" social orders, namely Muslims at the time of publication.
The concept of "religious violence" can be and is used to legitimate violence against non-Western "Others".
Peace depends on a balanced view of violence and recognition that so-called secular ideologies and institutions can be just as prone to absolutism, divisiveness, and irrationality.
Anthropologist Jack David Eller asserts that religion is not inherently violent, arguing "religion and violence are clearly compatible, but they are not identical." He asserts that "violence is neither essential to nor exclusive to religion" and that " virtually every form of religious violence has its nonreligious corollary."[15][16] Moreover, he argues that religion "may be more a marker of the [conflicting] groups than an actual point of contention between them".[17] John Teehan takes a position that integrates the two opposing sides of this debate. He describes the traditional response in defense of religion as "draw(ing) a distinction between the religion and what is done in the name of that religion or its faithful." Teehan argues, "this approach to religious violence may be understandable but it is ultimately untenable and prevents us from gaining any useful insight into either religion or religious violence." He takes the position that "violence done in the name of religion is not a perversion of religious belief... but flows naturally from the moral logic inherent in many religious systems, particularly monotheistic religions...." However, Teehan acknowledges that "religions are also powerful sources of morality." He asserts, "religious morality and religious violence both spring from the same source, and this is the evolutionary psychology underlying religious ethics."[18]
Secular violence[edit]
Religious-secular congruency and overlap[edit]
Tanner notes that secular regimes and leaders have used violence to promote their own agendas.[19] Violence committed by secular governments and people, including the anti-religious, have been documented including violence or persecutions focused on religious believers and those who believe in the supernatural.[20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28] For example, in the 20th century, over 25 million believers perished from the antireligious violence which occurred in many atheist states.[29] Non-religious ideological fervour is commonly and regularly exploited to support war and other aggressive acts. People who wish to wage war and terror will find diverse ways to gather support. Secular ideologies have and will likely continue to use violence, oppression, and manipulation to further their own objectives, with or without the availability of religion as a tool. Wars that are secular in nature need no specifically religious endorsement and regularly operate with and without the support of non-religious ideologies. In addition, there exist few examples of wars waged for specifically religious reasons.[26][30] Examples of violence and conflict that have been secular include World War I, World War II, many civil wars (American, El Salvador, Russia, Sri Lanka, China etc.), revolutionary wars (American, French, Russian, etc.), Vietnam War, Korean War, War on Terrorism, and common conflicts such as gang and drug wars (e.g. Mexican Drug War). In the 'Encyclopedia of Wars' by Charles Phillips and Alan Axelrod, there were 1763 wars listed overall,[30] of which some have identified only 123 (7%) as having been primarily religiously motivated.[26][31][32] Talal Asad, an anthropologist, notes that equating institutional religion with violence and fanaticism is incorrect and that devastating cruelties and atrocities done by non-religious institutions in the 20th century should not be overlooked. He also notes that nationalism has been argued as being a secularized religion.[33]
Historians such as Jonathan Kirsch have made links between the European inquisitions, for example, and Stalin's persecutions in the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, McCarthy blacklists, and other secular events as being the same type of phenomenon as the inquisitions.[34]
Others, such as Robert Pape, a political scientist who specializes in suicide terrorism, have made a case for secular motivations and reasons as being foundations of most suicide attacks that are oftentimes labeled as "religious".[35] Pape compiled the first complete database of every documented suicide bombing during 1980–2003. He argues that the news reports about suicide attacks are profoundly misleading — "There is little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world's religions". After studying 315 suicide attacks carried out over the last two decades, he concludes that suicide bombers' actions stem fundamentally from political conflict, not religion.[36]
Abrahamic religions[edit]



 The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre of French Protestants in 1572
Some critics of religion such as Jack Nelson-Pallmeyer argue that all monotheistic religions are inherently violent. For example, Nelson-Pallmeyer writes that "Judaism, Christianity and Islam will continue to contribute to the destruction of the world until and unless each challenges violence in "sacred texts" and until each affirms nonviolent power of God."[37]
Hector Avalos argues that, because religions claim divine favor for themselves, over and against other groups, this sense of righteousness leads to violence because conflicting claims to superiority, based on unverifiable appeals to God, cannot be adjudicated objectively.[38]
Similarly, Eric Hickey writes, "(t)he history of religious violence in the West is as long as the historical record of its three major religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, with their involved mutual antagonisms and struggles to adapt and survive the secular forces that threaten their continued existence."[39]
Regina Schwartz argues that all monotheistic religions, including Christianity, are inherently violent because of an exclusivism that inevitably fosters violence against those that are considered outsiders.[40] Lawrence Wechsler asserts that Schwartz isn't just arguing that Abrahamic religions have a violent legacy, but that the legacy is actually genocidal in nature.[41]
Bruce Feiler writes that "Jews and Christians who smugly console themselves that Islam is the only violent religion are willfully ignoring their past. Nowhere is the struggle between faith and violence described more vividly, and with more stomach-turning details of ruthlessness, than in the Hebrew Bible".[42]
However Tom O'Golo declares that religious fundamentalists that use violence to further their cause contravene the root truth of all faiths:

A genuine fundamentalist is also a radical, someone who tries to get the root of the matter. A major weakness with many or perhaps most radicals is not that they don't dig, but that they don't dig deep enough. Consequently many fundamentalists end up defending or acting upon beliefs which are not really at the heart of their doctrine. For example any religious fundamentalist who harms others in the pursuit of his or her radicalism is strictly out of order as no true religion ever encounters anything but love, tolerance and understanding. 'Thou shalt not kill' is at the heart of all genuine faiths, certainly the three based upon Abraham and God. That trio comprehensively condemns intentional harm to others (and to the self as well) for what ever reason. Dying to protect one's faith is acceptable; killing to promote it isn't. Arguably, it is blasphemous to say that God needs an earthly army to fight Its battles, or perform Its revenge. God is quite capable of fighting Its own battles.[43]
Christianity[edit]
Main article: Christianity and violence
See also: Sectarian violence among Christians, Crusade and Christian terrorism



I Believe in the Sword and Almighty God (1914) by Boardman Robinson.
The relationship between Christianity and violence is the subject of controversy because one view is that Christianity advocates peace, love and compassion while it is also viewed as a violent religion.[38][40][44] Peace, compassion and forgiveness of wrongs done by others are key elements of Christian teaching. However, Christians have struggled since the days of the Church fathers with the question of when the use of force is justified (e.g. the Just war theory of Saint Augustine). Such debates have led to concepts such as just war theory. Throughout history, certain teachings from the Old Testament, the New Testament and Christian theology have been used to justify the use of force against heretics, sinners and external enemies. Heitman and Hagan identify the Inquisitions, Crusades, wars of religion, and antisemitism as being "among the most notorious examples of Christian violence".[45] To this list J. Denny Weaver adds "warrior popes, support for capital punishment, corporal punishment under the guise of 'spare the rod and spoil the child,' justifications of slavery, world-wide colonialism in the name of conversion to Christianity, the systemic violence of women subjected to men".[improper synthesis?] Weaver employs a broader definition of violence that extends the meaning of the word to cover "harm or damage", not just physical violence per se. Thus, under his definition, Christian violence includes "forms of systemic violence such as poverty, racism, and sexism".[46]
Another Christian thought is of opposition to the use of force and violence. Sects that have emphasized pacificism as a central tenet of faith have resulted from the latter thought. However, Christians have also engaged in violence against those that they classify as heretics and non-believers specifically to enforce orthodoxy of their faith.
Christian theologians point to a strong doctrinal and historical imperative within Christianity against violence, particularly Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, which taught nonviolence and "love of enemies". For example, Weaver asserts that Jesus' pacifism was "preserved in the justifiable war doctrine that declares all war as sin even when declaring it occasionally a necessary evil, and in the prohibition of fighting by monastics and clergy as well as in a persistent tradition of Christian pacifism".[46]
Many authors highlight the ironical contradiction between Christianity's claims to be centered on "love and peace" while, at the same time, harboring a "violent side". For example, Mark Juergensmeyer argues: "that despite its central tenets of love and peace, Christianity—like most traditions—has always had a violent side. The bloody history of the tradition has provided images as disturbing as those provided by Islam or Sikhism, and violent conflict is vividly portrayed in the Bible. This history and these biblical images have provided the raw material for theologically justifying the violence of contemporary Christian groups. For example, attacks on abortion clinics have been viewed not only as assaults on a practice that Christians regard as immoral, but also as skirmishes in a grand confrontation between forces of evil and good that has social and political implications.",[47]:19–20 sometimes referred to as Spiritual warfare. The statement attributed to Jesus "I come not to bring peace, but to bring a sword" has been interpreted by some as a call to arms to Christians.[47]
Maurice Bloch also argues that Christian faith fosters violence because Christian faith is a religion, and religions are by their very nature violent; moreover, he argues that religion and politics are two sides of the same coin—power.[48] Others have argued that religion and the exercise of force are deeply intertwined, but that religion may pacify, as well as channel and heighten violent impulses [49]



Forward with God! (1915) by Boardman Robinson.
In response to criticism that Christianity and violence are intertwined, Christian apologists such as Miroslav Volf and J. Denny Weaver reject charges that Christianity is a violent religion, arguing that certain aspects of Christianity might be misused to support violence but that a genuine interpretation of its core elements would not sanction human violence but would instead resist it. Among the examples that are commonly used to argue that Christianity is a violent religion, J. Denny Weaver lists "(the) crusades, the multiple blessings of wars, warrior popes, support for capital punishment, corporal punishment under the guise of 'spare the rod and spoil the child,' justifications of slavery, world-wide colonialism in the name of conversion to Christianity, the systemic violence of women subjected to men". Weaver characterizes the counter-argument as focusing on "Jesus, the beginning point of Christian faith,... whose Sermon on the Mount taught nonviolence and love of enemies,; who faced his accusers nonviolent death;whose nonviolent teaching inspired the first centuries of pacifist Christian history and was subsequently preserved in the justifiable war doctrine that declares all war as sin even when declaring it occasionally a necessary evil, and in the prohibition of fighting by monastics and clergy as well as in a persistent tradition of Christian pacifism."[46]
Miroslav Volf acknowledges that "many contemporaries see religion as a pernicious social ill that needs aggressive treatment rather than a medicine from which cure is expected." However, Volf contests this claim that "(the) Christian faith, as one of the major world religions, predominantly fosters violence." Instead of this negative assessment, Volf argues that Christianity "should be seen as a contributor to more peaceful social environments".[50] Volf examines the question of whether Christianity fosters violence, and has identified four main arguments that it does: that religion by its nature is violent, which occurs when people try to act as "soldiers of God"; that monotheism entails violence, because a claim of universal truth divides people into "us versus them"; that creation, as in the Book of Genesis, is an act of violence; and that the intervention of a "new creation", as in the Second Coming, generates violence.[44] Writing about the latter, Volf says: "Beginning at least with Constantine's conversion, the followers of the Crucified have perpetrated gruesome acts of violence under the sign of the cross. Over the centuries, the seasons of Lent and Holy Week were, for the Jews, times of fear and trepidation; Christians have perpetrated some of the worst pogroms as they remembered the crucifixion of Christ, for which they blamed the Jews. Muslims also associate the cross with violence; crusaders' rampages were undertaken under the sign of the cross."[51] In each case, Volf concluded that the Christian faith was misused in justifying violence. Volf argues that "thin" readings of Christianity might be used mischievously to support the use of violence. He counters, however, by asserting that "thick" readings of Christianity's core elements will not sanction human violence and would, in fact, resist it.[44]
Volf asserts that Christian churches suffer from a "confusion of loyalties". He asserts that "rather than the character of the Christian faith itself, a better explanation of why Christian churches are either impotent in the face of violent conflicts or actively participate in them derives from the proclivities of its adherents which are at odds with the character of the Christian faith." Volf observes that "(although) explicitly giving ultimate allegiance to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, many Christians in fact seem to have an overriding commitment to their respective cultures and ethnic groups."[52]
Mormonism[edit]
Main article: Mormonism and violence
Mormonism had an early history of violence. This began with religious persecution by well respected citizens, law enforcement, and government officials. Ultimately such persecution lead to several historically well-known acts of violence. These range from attacks on early Mormons, such as the Haun's Mill massacre following the Mormon Extermination Order to one of the most controversial and well-known cases of retaliation violence, the Mountain Meadows massacre. This was the result of an unprovoked response to religious persecution whereby an innocent party traveling through Mormon occupied territory was attacked on September 11, 1857. Since this turbulent beginning, most conflicts in relation to Mormonism have been isolated and have little or no historical significance.
Islam[edit]
Main article: Islam and violence
See also: Islamic terrorism, Islamism, Jihad and Mujahideen



 Sketch by an eye-witness of the massacre of Armenians in Sasun in 1894
Islam has been associated with violence in a variety of contexts, including Jihads (holy wars), violent acts by Muslims against perceived enemies of Islam, violence against women ostensibly supported by Islam's tenets, references to violence in the Qur'an, and acts of terrorism motivated and/or justified by Islam. Muslims, including clerics and leaders have used Islamic ideas, concepts, texts, and themes to justify violence, especially against non-Muslims.
Jihad is a religious duty of Muslims. In Arabic, the word jihād translates into English as "struggle". Jihad appears in the Qur'an and frequently in the idiomatic expression "striving in the way of Allah (al-jihad fi sabil Allah)".[53][54] A person engaged in jihad is called a mujahid; the plural is mujahideen. Jihad is an important religious duty for Muslims. A minority among the Sunni scholars sometimes refer to this duty as the sixth pillar of Islam, though it occupies no such official status.[55] In Twelver Shi'a Islam, however, Jihad is one of the ten Practices of the Religion. Islamic extremists have used jihad to condone acts of terror, claiming the support of their religion’s followers and Allah himself. Jihad has also been used by non-Muslims to explain the so-called “insanity” of the Islamic faith. Specific verses in the Quran call for bloodshed, such as: “Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress…And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing…But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers”(2:190-191). Some interpret this section in the Al-Baqarah as justification for irrational violence, but fail to understand the most important word. To “transgress” is to go beyond the socially accepted limits, and the Quran specifically says to not transgress. If this passage is interpreted with the intention of finding reasons to fight, it can easily be found. If one looks deeper into the scripture, we see that Allah doesn’t hope that people will go to the extremes.
Muslims use the word in a religious context to refer to three types of struggles: an internal struggle to maintain faith, the struggle to improve the Muslim society, or the struggle in a holy war.[56] The prominent British orientalist Bernard Lewis argues that in the Qur'an and the ahadith jihad implies warfare in the large majority of cases.[57] In a commentary of the hadith Sahih Muslim, entitled al-Minhaj, the medieval Islamic scholar Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi stated that "one of the collective duties of the community as a whole (fard kifaya) is to lodge a valid protest, to solve problems of religion, to have knowledge of Divine Law, to command what is right and forbid wrong conduct".[58]



 Indonesian military forces evacuate refugees from Ambon during the Maluku sectarian conflict in 1999
Terrorism and Islam[edit]
See also: Islamic terrorism
In western societies the term jihad is often translated as "holy war".[59][60] Scholars of Islamic studies often stress that these words are not synonymous.[61] Muslim authors, in particular, tend to reject such an approach, stressing non-militant connotations of the word.[62][63]
Terrorism refers to terrorism by Muslim or individuals and motivated by either politics, religion or both. Terrorist acts have included airline hijacking, kidnapping, assassination, suicide bombing, and mass murder.[64][65][66] As an ideology in the 20th century, only Communism, with its murder and mass killings, is responsible for more deaths and violence than is Islam. In terms of Islamic violence, both ancient and modern history are replete with Islamic intolerance and ensuing violence against every other ideology, such as modern violence against Western institutions, as well as historical violence against Hindus, and perpetual violence against Christians.[67][68][69] are a few examples.
The tension reached a climax on September 11th, 2001 when Islamic terrorists flew hijacked commercial airplanes into the World Trade Center in New York City. The “War on Terror” has caused anti-Muslim sentiments throughout Christianity and the rest of the world. Al-Qaeda is one of the most well known Islamic extremist groups, created by Osama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden. The goal of al-Qaeda was to spread the “purest” form of Islam and Islamic law. For bin Laden, in order to do “good” by the Quran, he had to inflict terror upon millions. Following the terror attacks on September 11, bin Laden praised the suicide bombers in his statement: “the great action you did which was first and foremost by the grace of Allah. This is the guidance of Allah and the blessed fruit of jihad”. What was sacrifice to Osama bin Laden and his followers is terror to the American people and the rest of the world, furthering the fear of Islam that many people possess. Despite the few severe sects, Islam is not a fundamentally violent religion. Certain groups hold that the Quran should be interpreted literally, while others believe that with the changing course of history, interpretation should change too.
There are controversies surrounding the subject include whether the terrorist act is self-defense or aggression, national self-determination or Islamic supremacy; whether Islam can ever condone the targeting of non-combatants; whether some attacks described as Islamic terrorism are merely terrorist acts committed by Muslims or motivated by nationalism; whether Zionism and the Arab-Israeli Conflict is the root of Islamic terrorism, or simply one cause; how much support there is in the Muslim world for Islamic terrorism[70] and whether support for terror is a temporary phenomenon, a "bubble", now fading away.[71]
Judaism[edit]
Main article: Judaism and violence
Burggraeve and Vervenne describe the Old Testament as full of violence and as evidence of both a violent society and a violent god. They write that, "(i)n numerous Old Testament texts the power and glory of Israel's God is described in the language of violence." They assert that more than one thousand passages refer to YHWH as acting violently or supporting the violence of humans and that more than one hundred passages involve divine commands to kill humans.[72]
On the basis of these passages in the Old Testament, some Christian churches and theologians argue that Judaism is a violent religion and that the god of Israel is a violent god. Reuven Firestone asserts that these assertions are usually made in the context of claims that Christianity is a religion of peace and that the god of Christianity is one that expresses only love.[73]
Some scholars such as Deborah Weissman readily acknowledge that "normative Judaism is not pacifist" and that "violence is condoned in the service of self-defense."[74] J. Patout Burns asserts that, although Judaism condones the use of violence in certain cases, Jewish tradition clearly posits the principle of minimization of violence. This principle can be stated as "(wherever) Jewish law allows violence to keep an evil from occurring, it mandates that the minimal amount of violence be used to accomplish one's goal."[75]
The love of peace and the pursuit of peace, as well as laws requiring the eradication of evil, sometimes using violent means, co-exist in the Jewish tradition.[76][77]
The Hebrew Bible contains instances of religiously mandated wars[78] which often contain explicit instructions from God to the Israelites to exterminate other tribes, as in Deut 7:1–2 orDeut 20:16-18. Examples include the story of Amalekites (Deut 25:17–19, 1 Sam 15:1-6),[79] the story of the Midianites (Numbers 31:1–18),[80] and the battle of Jericho (Joshua 6:1–27).[81]
These wars of extermination have been characterized as "genocide" by several authorities,[82] because the Torah states that the Israelites annihilated entire ethnic groups or tribes: the Israelites killed all Amalekites, including men, women, and children (1 Samuel 15:1–20 ); the Israelites killed all men, women, and children in the battle of Jericho(Joshua 6:15–21), and the Israelites killed all men, women and children of several Canaanite tribes (Joshua 10:28–42).[83] However, some scholars believe that these accounts in the Torah are exaggerated or metaphorical.
Zionist leaders sometimes used religious references as justification for the violent treatment of Arabs in Palestine.[84] Palestinians have been several times associated with a Biblical antagonists, Amalekites. For example, rabbi Israel Hess has recommended to kill Palestinians, basing on biblical verses such as 1 Samuel 15.[85] Shulamit Aloni, a member of the Israeli Knesset indicated in 2003 that Jewish children in Israel were being taught in religious schools that Palestinians were Amalek, and therefore an act of total genocide was a religious obligation.[86]
Other religions[edit]



Thuggee was a secret cult of assassins who were both Hindus and Muslims.
Buddhism[edit]
Main articles: Sohei, 969 Movement and Buddhism and violence
Hinduism[edit]
Main article: Hindu extremism
Sikhism[edit]
Main article: Sikh extremism
Conflicts and Wars[edit]



 Entry of the Crusaders into Constantinople by Gustave Doré (1832–1883)
Main article: Religious war
It has been noted that "religious" conflicts are not based on religious beliefs exclusively and instead should be seen as clashes of communities, identities, and interests that are secular-religious or at least very much secular.[17][26][35]
Some have asserted that attacks are carried out by those with very strong religious convictions such as terrorists in the context of global religious war.[87] Robert Pape, a political scientist who specializes in suicide terroism argues that much of the modern Muslim suicide terrorism is secular based.[35] Although the causes of terrorism are complex, it may be that terrorists are partially reassured by their religious views that God is on their side and will reward them in heaven for punishing unbelievers.[88][89]
These conflicts are among the most difficult to resolve, particularly where both sides believe that God is on their side and has endorsed the moral righteousness of their claims.[88] One of the most infamous quotes associated with religious fanaticism was made in 1209 during the siege of Béziers, a Crusader asked the Papal Legate Arnaud Amalric how to tell Catholics from Cathars when the city was taken, to which Amalric replied: "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius," or "Kill them all; God will recognize his."[90]
Ritual violence[edit]
Further information: ritual slaughter, human sacrifice and animal sacrifice
Ritual violence may be directed against victims (human sacrifice) or self-inflicted (religious self-flagellation).
According to the hunting hypothesis, created by Walter Burkert in Homo Necans, carnivorous behavior is considered a form of violence. Burkett suggests that the anthropological phenomenon of religion itself grew out of rituals connected with hunting and the feelings of guilt associated with the violence involved.[91]
See also[edit]
List of countries by discrimination and violence against minorities
Witch-hunt
Hundred Years' War
Religion and peacebuilding
Religious fanaticism
Pacifism and religion
Taliban
Religions for Peace
Peace in Islamic philosophy
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Wellman, James; Tokuno, Kyoko (2004). "Is Religious Violence Inevitable?". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion) 43 (3): 291. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2004.00234.x.
2.Jump up ^ Violence and religion: cross-cultural opinions and consequences. Concept Publishing Company. 2007. pp. 5–6. ISBN 9788180693762. |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)
3.Jump up ^ Nayak, Abhijit (July–October 2008). "Crusade Violence: Understanding and Overcoming the Impact of Mission Among Muslims". International Review of Mission (World Council of Churches) 97 (386–387): 273–291. doi:10.1111/j.1758-6631.2008.tb00645.x. Retrieved 2010-11-23.
4.Jump up ^ Freitheim, Terence (Winter 2004). "God and Violence in the Old Testament" (PDF). Word & World 24 (1). Retrieved 2010-11-21.
5.Jump up ^ Selengut, Charles (2008-04-28). Sacred fury: understanding religious violence. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-7425-6084-0.
6.^ Jump up to: a b Tanner, Ralph E. S. (2007). Violence and religion: cross-cultural opinions and consequences. Concept Publishing Company. p. 1. ISBN 9788180693762.
7.Jump up ^ "Pope Benedict apologises for Christian violence through the ages after condemning terrorism in the name of religion". London: Daily Mail. 2011-10-28. |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)
8.Jump up ^ "Vatican: Pope speaks out against 'violence in God's name". Adn Kronos International. 2011. |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)
9.Jump up ^ Avalos, Hector (2005). Fighting Words: The Origins of Religious Violence. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books. ISBN 1-59102-284-3.
10.Jump up ^ Hitchens, Christopher (2007). God is not Great. Twelve. ISBN 0-446-57980-7.
11.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Bantam Books. ISBN 1-4303-1230-0.
12.Jump up ^ Sen, Amartya (21 November 2001). "A World Not Neatly Divided". New York Times. p. 23.
13.Jump up ^ Bland, Byron (May 2003). "Evil Enemies: The Convergence of Religion and Politics" (PDF). p. 4.
14.Jump up ^ Cavanaugh, William (2009). The Myth of Religious Violence. Oxford University Press US,. p. 4.
15.Jump up ^ Eller, Jack David (2010). Cruel Creeds, Virtuous Violence: Religious Violence Across Culture and History. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1-61614-218-6. "As we have insisted previously, religion is not inherently and irredeemably violent; it certainly is not the essence and source of all violence."
16.Jump up ^ Eller, Jack David (2010). Cruel Creeds, Virtuous Violence: Religious Violence Across Culture and History. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1-61614-218-6. "Religion and violence are clearly compatible, but they are not identical. Violence is one phenomenon in human (and natural existence), religion is another, and it is inevitable that the two would become intertwined. Religion is complex and modular, and violence is one of the modules—not universal, but recurring. As a conceptual and behavioral module, violence is by no means exclusive to religion. There are plenty of other groups, institutions, interests, and ideologies to promote violence. Violence is, therefore, neither essential to nor exclusive to religion. Nor is religious violence all alike... And virtually every form of religious violence has its nonreligious corollary."
17.^ Jump up to: a b Eller, Jack David (2007). Introducing Anthropology of Religion. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-40896-7. "When a pure or hybrid religious group and/or its interests are threatened, or merely blocked from achieving its interests by another group, conflict and violence may ensue. In such cases, although religion is part of the issue and religious groups form the competitors, or combatants, it would be simplistic or wrong to assume the religion is the "cause" of the trouble or that the parties are "fighting about religion". Religion in the circumstances may be more a marker of the groups than an actual point of contention between them."
18.Jump up ^ Teehan, John (2010). In the Name of God: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Ethics and Violence. John Wiley and Sons. pp. 145–147.
19.Jump up ^ "The Harmful Secular Ideologies". Ames Tribune. 2011. |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)
20.Jump up ^ Rummel, Rudolph J. (1994). Death By Government. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-1-56000-927-6.
21.Jump up ^ Rummel, Rudolph J. (1997). Statistics of Democide: Genocide and Mass Murder since 1900. Lit Verlag. ISBN 978-3-8258-4010-5.
22.Jump up ^ Froese, Paul (2008). The Plot to Kill God: Findings from the Soviet Experiment in Secularization. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-25529-6.
23.Jump up ^ Gabel, Paul (2005). And God Created Lenin: Marxism Vs. Religion in Russia, 1917–1929. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1-59102-306-7.
24.Jump up ^ Kiernan, Ben (2008). The Pol Pot Regime: Race, Power, and Genocide in Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge, 1975-79. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-14434-5.
25.Jump up ^ Peris, Daniel (1998). Storming the Heavens: The Soviet League of the Militant Godless. Cornell University Press. ISBN 978-0-8014-3485-3.
26.^ Jump up to: a b c d Day, Vox (2008). The Irrational Atheist: Dissecting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Harris, And Hitchens. BenBella Books. ISBN 978-1-933771-36-6.
27.Jump up ^ Bantjes, Adrian (1997). "Idolatry and Iconoclasm in Revolutionary Mexico: The De-Christianization. Campaigns, 1929–1940". Mexican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos 13 (1): 87–121.
28.Jump up ^ Meisner, Maurice (1999). Mao's China and After: A History of the People's Republic. Free Press. ISBN 978-0-684-85635-3.
29.Jump up ^ Nelson, James M. (2009-02-27). Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality. Springer. p. 427. ISBN 9780387875729. Retrieved 2012-12-19.
30.^ Jump up to: a b Charles Phillips, Alan Axelrod (2005). The Encyclopaedia of War.
31.Jump up ^ Sheiman, Bruce (2009). An Atheist Defends Religion : Why Humanity is Better Off with Religion than Without It. Alpha Books. pp. 117–118. ISBN 1592578543.
32.Jump up ^ Lurie, Alan. "Is Religion the Cause of Most Wars?". Huffington Post.
33.Jump up ^ Asad, Talal (2003). Formations of the Secular : Christianity, Islam, Modernity (10. printing. ed.). Stanford University Press. pp. 100, 187–190. ISBN 0804747687.
34.Jump up ^ Kirsch, Jonathan (2009). The Grand Inquisitor's Manual: A History of Terror in the Name of God. HarperOne. ISBN 978-0-06-173276-8.
35.^ Jump up to: a b c Pape, Robert (2005). Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism. Random House. ISBN 978-0-8129-7338-9.
36.Jump up ^ Pape 2005.
37.Jump up ^ Nelson-Pallmeyer, Jack (2005). Is religion killing us?: violence in the Bible and the Quran. Continuum International Publishing Group. p. 136. ISBN 9780826417794.
38.^ Jump up to: a b Avalos, Hector (2005). Fighting Words: The Origins of Religious Violence. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.
39.Jump up ^ Hickey, Eric W. (2003). Encyclopedia of murder and violent crime. SAGE. p. 217. ISBN 978-0-7619-2437-1.
40.^ Jump up to: a b Regina M. Schwartz (1998). The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. University of Chicago Press.
41.Jump up ^ Wechsler, Lawrence. "Mayhem and Monotheism" (PDF).
42.Jump up ^ Feiler, Bruce S. (2005). Where God was born: a journey by land to the roots of religion. HarperCollins. p. 4. ISBN 9780060574871.
43.Jump up ^ Tom O'Golo (2011). Christ? No! Jesus? Yes!: A radical reappraisal of a very important life. p. 105.
44.^ Jump up to: a b c Volf, Miroslav (2008). "Christianity and Violence". In Hess, Richard S.; Martens, E.A. War in the Bible and terrorism in the twenty-first century. Eisenbrauns. pp. 1–17. ISBN 978-1-57506-803-9. Retrieved June 1, 2010.
45.Jump up ^ International encyclopedia of violence research, Volume 2. Springer. 2003. ISBN 9781402014666.
46.^ Jump up to: a b c J. Denny Weaver (2001). "Violence in Christian Theology". Cross Currents. Retrieved 2010-10-27. "I am using broad definitions of the terms "violence" and "nonviolence". "Violence" means harm or damage, which obviously includes the direct violence of killing -- in war, capital punishment, murder --but also covers the range of forms of systemic violence such as poverty, racism, and sexism. "Nonviolence" also covers a spectrum of attitudes and actions, from the classic Mennonite idea of passive nonresistance through active nonviolence and nonviolent resistance that would include various kinds of social action, confrontations and posing of alternatives that do not do bodily harm or injury."
47.^ Jump up to: a b Mark Juergensmeyer (2004). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. University of California Press. ISBN 0-520-24011-1.
48.Jump up ^ Bloch, Maurice (1992). Prey into Hunter. The Politics of Religious Experience. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49.Jump up ^ Andrew McKinnon. 'Religion and the Civilizing Process: The Pax Dei Movement and the Christianization of Violence in the Process of Feudalization'. in A McKinnon & M Trzebiatowska (eds), Sociological Theory and the Question of Religion. Ashgate, 2014 [1].
50.Jump up ^ Volf, Miroslav (2002). "Christianity and Violence". Retrieved 2010-10-27.
51.Jump up ^ Volf 2008, p. 13
52.Jump up ^ Volf, Miroslav. "The Social Meaning of Reconciliation" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-11-17.
53.Jump up ^ Wendy Doniger, ed. (1999). Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions. Merriam-Webster. ISBN 0-87779-044-2.,Jihad, p. 571
54.Jump up ^ Josef W. Meri, ed. (2005). Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia. Routledge. ISBN 0-415-96690-6., Jihad, p. 419
55.Jump up ^ John Esposito(2005), Islam: The Straight Path, p. 93
56.Jump up ^ "Jihad". BBC. 2009-08-03.
57.Jump up ^ Lewis, Bernard (1988). The Political Language of Islam. University of Chicago Press. p. 72. ISBN 0226476928. Cf. Watt, William M. (1976). "Islamic Conceptions of the Holy War". In Murphy, Thomas P. The Holy War. Ohio State University Press. p. 143. ISBN 978-0814202456.
58.Jump up ^ Shaykh Hisham Kabbani; Shaykh Seraj Hendricks; Shaykh Ahmad Hendricks. "Jihad—A Misunderstood Concept from Islam". The Muslim Magazine. Retrieved 16 August 2006.
59.Jump up ^ cf. e.g. BBC news article "Libya's Gaddafi urges 'holy war' against Switzerland". BBC News. 26 February 2010. Retrieved 30 September 2012.
60.Jump up ^ Peters, Rudolph (1977). Jihad in Medieval and Modern Islam. Brill Academic Pub. p. 3. ISBN 978-9004048546.
61.Jump up ^ Crone, Patricia (2005). Medieval Islamic Political Thought. Edinburgh University. p. 363. ISBN 978-0748621941.
62.Jump up ^ Jihad and the Islamic Law of War. Jordan: The Royal Aal al-Bayt Institute for Islamic Thought. 2009.
63.Jump up ^ Peters, Rudolph (1979). Islam and colonialism: the doctrine of Jihad in modern history. Mouton Publishers. p. 118. ISBN 9027933472.
64.Jump up ^ "Captured Iraqi Terrorist Ramzi Hashem Abed: Zarqawi Participated in the Plot to Assassinate Baqer Al-Hakim. We Bombed Jalal Talabani's Headquarters, the Turkish Embassy, and the Red Cross, Took Drugs, Raped University Students Who "Collaborated with the Americans"". The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). (login required)
65.Jump up ^ "Abductions of and Assaults on Women". The Massacre in Mazar-I Sharif. Human Rights Watch. Retrieved September 30, 2012.
66.Jump up ^ Youssef M. Ibrahim (14 April 1988). "Algeria to Permit Abortions for Rape Victims". The New York Times. Retrieved 30 September 2012.
67.Jump up ^ "Time to Air Muslim Violence Against Christians", Real Clear Politics, March 23, 2012 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/03/23/time_to_air_muslim_violence_against_christians_113595.html
68.Jump up ^ "37 Muslim nations persecuting Christians", WND Faith, Published: 01/11/2014, http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/37-muslim-nations-persecuting-christians/
69.Jump up ^ "The Existential Elephant in the ‘Christian Persecution’ Room", By Raymond Ibrahim on January 17, 2014 in Muslim Persecution of Christians, http://www.raymondibrahim.com/muslim-persecution-of-christians/the-existential-elephant-in-the-christian-persecution-room/
70.Jump up ^ Tony Blair, "Speech to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council", http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page9948.asp
71.Jump up ^ Thomas L. Friedman (April 20, 2003). "The Third Bubble". The New York Times. Retrieved 30 September 2012.
72.Jump up ^ Burggraeve, Roger; Vervenne, Marc (1991). Swords into plowshares: theological reflections on peace. Peeters Publishers. pp. 82,109. ISBN 9789068313727.
73.Jump up ^ Heft, James, ed. (2004). Beyond violence: religious sources of social transformation in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Fordham University Press. ISBN 9780823223350.
74.Jump up ^ "The Co-existence of Violence and Non-Violence in Judaism". Retrieved 2010-12-09.
75.Jump up ^ Burns, J. Patout (1996). War and its discontents: pacifism and quietism in the Abrahamic traditions. Georgetown University Press. p. 18.
76.Jump up ^ Fighting the War and the Peace: Battlefield Ethics, Peace Talks, Treaties, and Pacifism in the Jewish Tradition. Michael J. Broyde, 1998, p. 1
77.Jump up ^ *Reuven Firestone (2004), "Judaism on Violence and Reconciliation: An examination of key sources" in Beyond violence: religious sources of social transformation in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Fordham University Press, 2004, pp. 77, 81. Goldsmith (Ed.), Emanuel S. (1991). Dynamic Judaism: the essential writings of Mordecai M. Kaplan. Fordham University Press. p. 181. ISBN 0-8232-1310-2.
Spero, Shubert (1983). Morality, Halakha, and the Jewish Tradition. Ktav Publishing House, Inc. pp. 137–318. ISBN 0-87068-727-1.
78.Jump up ^ Salaita, Steven George (2006). The Holy Land in transit: colonialism and the quest for Canaan. Syracuse University Press. p. 54. ISBN 0-8156-3109-X.
Lustick, Ian (1988). For the Land and the Lord: Jewish fundamentalism in Israel. Council on Foreign Relations. pp. 131–132. ISBN 0-87609-036-6.
Armstrong, Karen (2007). The Bible: a biography. Atlantic Monthly Press. pp. 211–216. ISBN 0-87113-969-3.
79.Jump up ^ A. G. Hunter "Denominating Amalek: Racist stereotyping in the Bible and the Justification of Discrimination", in Sanctified aggression: legacies of biblical and post biblical vocabularies of violence, Jonneke Bekkenkamp, Yvonne Sherwood (Eds.). 2003, Continuum Internatio Publishing Group, pp. 92–108
80.Jump up ^ Dawkins, Richard (2006). The God Delusion. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. p. 245. ISBN 0-618-68000-4.
81.Jump up ^ Carl. S. Ehrlich (1999) "Joshua, Judaism, and Genocide", in Jewish Studies at the Turn of the Twentieth Century, Judit Targarona Borrás, Ángel Sáenz-Badillos (Eds). 1999, Brill. p. 117–124.
Dawkins, Richard, The God Delusion', pp. 289–296
Hitchens, Christopher, God is Not Great p. 117
Selengut, Charles, Sacred fury: understanding religious violence, p. 20
Cowles, C. S., Show them no mercy: 4 views on God and Canaanite genocide, p. 79
82.Jump up ^ Kravitz, Leonard, "What is Crime?", in Crime and punishment in Jewish law: essays and responsa, Editors Walter Jacob, Moshe Zemer Berghahn Books, 1999, p. 31
Cohn, Robert L, "Before Israel: The Canaanites as Other in Biblical Tradition", in The Other in Jewish thought and history: constructions of Jewish culture and identity, Laurence Jay Silberstein, (Ed.), NYU Press, 1994, pp. 76-77
Violence, Scripture, and Textual Practice in Early Judaism and Christianity By Ra'anan S. Boustan, pp. 3-5
83.Jump up ^ The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies, Donald Bloxham, A. Dirk Moses, p. 242
84.Jump up ^ Saleh Abdel Jawad (2007) "Zionist Massacres: the Creation of the Palestinian Refugee Problem in the 1948 War" in Israel and the Palestinian refugees, Eyal Benvenistî, Chaim Gans, Sari Hanafi (Eds.), Springer, p. 78:
".. the Zionist movement, which claims to be secular, found it necessary to embrace the idea of 'the promised land' of Old Testament prophecy, to justify the confiscation of land and the expulsion of the Palestinians. For example, the speeches and letter of Chaim Weizman, the secular Zionist leader, are filled with references to the biblical origins of the Jewish claim to Palestine, which he often mixes liberally with more pragmatic and nationalistic claims. By the use of this premise, embraced in 1937, Zionists alleged that the Palestinians were usurpers in the Promised Land, and therefore their expulsion and death was justified. The Jewish-American writer Dan Kurzman, in his book Genesis 1948 ... describes the view of one of the Deir Yassin's killers: 'The Sternists followed the instructions of the Bible more rigidly than others. They honored the passage (Exodus 22:2): 'If a thief be found ...' This meant, of course, that killing a thief was not really murder. And were not the enemies of Zionism thieves, who wanted to steal from the Jews what God had granted them?' Carl. S. Ehrlich (1999) "Joshua, Judaism, and Genocide", in Jewish Studies at the Turn of the Twentieth Century, Judit Targarona Borrás, Ángel Sáenz-Badillos (Eds). 1999, Brill. pp. 117–124.
85.Jump up ^ Masalha, Nur, Imperial Israel and the Palestinians: the politics of expansion, Pluto Press, 2000, pp. 129–131.
"Frequently Jewish fundamentalists refer to the Palestinians as the 'Amalekites' ... of today.... According to the Old Testament, the Amalek ... were regarded as the Israelites' inveterate foe, whose 'annihilation' became a sacred duty and against whom war should be waged until their 'memory be blotted out' forever (Ex 17:16; Deut 25:17–19).... Some of the [modern] political messianics insist on giving the biblical commandment to 'blot out the memory of the Amalek' an actual contemporary relevance in the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians. In February 1980, Rabbi Israel Hess ... published an article [titled] 'The Genocide Commandment in the Torah' ... which ends with the following: 'The day is not far when we shall all be called to this holy war, this commandment of the annihilation of the Amalek'. Hess quotes the biblical commandment ... 'Do not spare him, but kill man and woman, baby and suckling, ox and sheep, camel, and donkey'.... In his book On the Lord's Side Danny Rubinstein has shown that this notion permeates the Gush Emunim movement's bulletins [one of which] carried an article ... which reads 'In every generation there is an Amalek.... The Amalekism of our generation finds expression in the deep Arab hatred towards our national revival ...'... Professor Uriel Tal ... conducted his study in the early 1980s ... and pointed out that the totalitarian political messianic stream refers to the Palestinian Arabs in three stages or degrees: ... [stage] (3) the implementation of the commandment of Amalek, as expressed in Rabbi Hess's article 'The Commandment of Genocide in the Torah', in other words 'annihilating' the Palestinian Arabs'".See also Hunter, p. 103
Also describing Palestinians as targets of violence due to association with Amalek is: Geaves, Ron, Islam and the West post 9/11, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2004, p. 30
86.Jump up ^ Murder Under the Cover of Righteousness - CounterPunch
87.Jump up ^ Full text: bin Laden's 'letter to America' accessed may 24, 2007
88.^ Jump up to: a b Juergensmeyer, Mark (2001-09-21). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Updated edition. University of California Press.
89.Jump up ^ Christian Jihad: The Crusades and Killing in the Name of Christ
90.Jump up ^ "Kill Them All; For The Lord Knoweth Them That Are His Steve Locks (Reply) (9-00)". Retrieved 2007-08-18.
91.Jump up ^ Burkert, Walter. 1983. Homo Necans: the Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Further reading[edit]
AcademicAppleby, R. Scott (2000) The Ambivalence of the Sacred: Religion, Violence, and Reconciliation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Avalos, Hector (2005) Fighting Words: the Origins of Religious Violence. New York: Prometheus.
Burkert, Walter. (1983). Homo Necans: The Anthropology of Ancient Greek Sacrificial Ritual and Myth. Berkeley: University of California Press
Crocket, Clayton (ed.) (2006) Religion and Violence in a Secular World: Toward a New Political Theology. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press.
Flood, Derek (2012) The way of peace and grace. Sojourners Magazine. Jan 2012.
Girard, René. (1977) Violence et le Sacré (eng. Violence and the Sacred). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Hamerton-Kelly, Robert G. (ed.) (1987) Violent Origins: Walter Burkert, René Girard and Jonathan Z. Smith on Ritual Killing and Cultural Formation. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Juergensmeyer, Mark. (2000) Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Berkeley: University of California Press.
McKinnon, A. (2014). 'Religion and the Civilizing Process: The Pax Dei Movement and the Christianization of Violence in the Process of Feudalization'; in A. McKinnon & M, Trzebiatowska (eds), Sociological Theory and the Question of Religion. Ashgate [2].
Pedahzur, Ami and Weinberg, Leonard (eds.) (2004) Religious Fundamentalism and Political Extremism. New York: Routledge.
Pape, Robert (2005) Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism Random House LLC
Regina M. Schwartz (1998). The Curse of Cain: The Violent Legacy of Monotheism. University of Chicago Press.
Selengut, C. (2003) Sacred Fury: Understanding Religious Violence. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira
Steffen, Lloyd. (2007) Holy War, Just War: Exploring the Moral Meaning of Religious Violence. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Takim, Liyakat (2011) Peace and war in the Qur'an and juridical literature: A comparative perspective. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare 38 (2) (06): 137-57.
Venkatraman, Amritha( 2007) Religious basis for islamic terrorism: The quran and its interpretations. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism 30 (3) (03): 229-48.
ScriptureAli, Abdullah Yusuf. The Holy Qur'an: Text, Translation and Commentary. Elmhurst, NY: Published by Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, 2001. Print.
Coogan, Michael David, Marc Zvi Brettler, Carol A. Newsom, and Pheme Perkins. The New Oxford Annotated Bible: With the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books. New York: Oxford UP, 2001. Print.
OtherNelson-Pallmeyer, Jack (2003) Is Religion Killing Us? Harrisburg: Trinity Press International ISBN 1-56338-408-6
Stern, Jessica. (2004) Terror in the Name of God: Why Religious Militants Kill. New York: Harper Perennial.
Perry, Simon (2011). All Who Came Before. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock. ISBN 978-1-60899-659-9.
External links[edit]
William T. Cavanaugh Resources from Jesus Radicals
Myth of Religious conflict in Africa
Interview with William Cavanaugh


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion



























































































































































































































































































































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Criticism of religion


































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religious persecution and discrimination























































































  


Categories: Religion and violence
Dispute resolution







Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
العربية
Català
Eesti
Español
فارسی
Italiano
Simple English
Slovenčina
Suomi
தமிழ்
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 23 February 2015, at 23:13.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
 

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_violence

















Freedom of religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Freedom of worship" and "Freedom to Worship" redirect here. For the 1943 painting/poster, see Freedom to Worship (painting).

Freedom of religion


Concepts[show]





Status by country[show]













































































































Religious persecution[show]


























Religion portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Freedom of religion or freedom of belief is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion.[1] The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group—in religious terms called "apostasy"—is also a fundamental[peacock term] part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of United Nations' 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[2]
Freedom of religion is considered by many people and nations to be a fundamental human right.[3][4] In a country with a state religion, freedom of religion is generally considered to mean that the government permits religious practices of other sects besides the state religion, and does not persecute believers in other faiths.


Contents  [hide]
1 History 1.1 Muslim world
1.2 India
1.3 Europe 1.3.1 Religious intolerance
1.3.2 Early steps and attempts in the way of tolerance
1.3.3 Early laws and legal guarantees for religious freedom 1.3.3.1 Poland

1.4 United States
1.5 Canada
1.6 International
2 Contemporary debates 2.1 Theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs
2.2 Liberal secular
2.3 Hinduism
2.4 Judaism
2.5 Christianity
2.6 Islam
2.7 Changing religion 2.7.1 Apostasy in Islam
2.8 Secular law
3 Children's rights
4 International Religious Freedom Day
5 Modern concerns 5.1 Social hostilities and government restrictions
6 See also 6.1 Lawsuits
7 References
8 Further reading
9 External links

History[edit]

Text document with red question mark.svg
 This section may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text. Please help improve this article by checking for inaccuracies. (help, talk, get involved!) (September 2010)



Minerva as a symbol of enlightened wisdom protects the believers of all religions (Daniel Chodowiecki, 1791)
Historically, freedom of religion has been used to refer to the tolerance of different theological systems of belief, while freedom of worship has been defined as freedom of individual action. Each of these have existed to varying degrees. While many countries have accepted some form of religious freedom, this has also often been limited in practice through punitive taxation, repressive social legislation, and political disenfranchisement. Compare examples of individual freedom in Italy or the Muslim tradition of dhimmis, literally "protected individuals" professing an officially tolerated non-Muslim religion.



 The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) guarantees freedom of religion, as long as religious activities do not infringe on public order in ways detrimental to society.
In Antiquity, a syncretic point of view often allowed communities of traders to operate under their own customs. When street mobs of separate quarters clashed in a Hellenistic or Roman city, the issue was generally perceived to be an infringement of community rights.
Cyrus the Great established the Achaemenid Empire ca. 550 BC, and initiated a general policy of permitting religious freedom throughout the empire, documenting this on the Cyrus Cylinder.[5][6]
Some of the historical exceptions have been in regions where one of the revealed religions has been in a position of power: Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Islam. Others have been where the established order has felt threatened, as shown in the trial of Socrates in 399 BC or where the ruler has been deified, as in Rome, and refusal to offer token sacrifice was similar to refusing to take an oath of allegiance. This was the core for resentment and the persecution of early Christian communities.
Freedom of religious worship was established in the Buddhist Maurya Empire of ancient India by Ashoka the Great in the 3rd century BC, which was encapsulated in the Edicts of Ashoka.
Greek-Jewish clashes at Cyrene in 73 AD and 117 AD and in Alexandria in 115 AD provide examples of cosmopolitan cities as scenes of tumult.
Muslim world[edit]
Following a period of fighting lasting around a hundred years before 620 AD which mainly involved Arab and Jewish inhabitants of Medina (then known as Yathrib), religious freedom for Muslims, Jews and pagans were declared by Muhammad in the Constitution of Medina. The Islamic Caliphate later guaranteed religious freedom under the conditions that non-Muslim communities accept dhimmi (second class) status and their adult males pay the jizya tax as a substitute for the zakat paid by Muslim citizens.[7][8]
Religious pluralism existed in classical Islamic ethics and Sharia law, as the religious laws and courts of other religions, including Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism, were usually accommodated within the Islamic legal framework, as seen in the early Caliphate, Al-Andalus, Indian subcontinent, and the Ottoman Millet system.[9][10] In medieval Islamic societies, the qadi (Islamic judges) usually could not interfere in the matters of non-Muslims unless the parties voluntarily choose to be judged according to Islamic law, thus the dhimmi communities living in Islamic states usually had their own laws independent from the Sharia law, such as the Jews who would have their own Halakha courts.[11]
Dhimmis were allowed to operate their own courts following their own legal systems in cases that did not involve other religious groups, or capital offences or threats to public order.[12] Non-Muslims were allowed to engage in religious practices that was usually forbidden by Islamic law, such as the consumption of alcohol and pork, as well as religious practices which Muslims found repugnant, such as the Zoroastrian practice of incestuous "self-marriage" where a man could marry his mother, sister or daughter. According to the famous Islamic legal scholar Ibn Qayyim (1292–1350), non-Muslims had the right to engage in such religious practices even if it offended Muslims, under the conditions that such cases not be presented to Islamic Sharia courts and that these religious minorities believed that the practice in question is permissible according to their religion.[13]
India[edit]
Main article: Freedom of religion in India
Religious freedom and the right to worship freely were practices that had been appreciated and promoted by most ancient Indian dynasties.[citation needed] As a result, people fleeing religious persecution in other parts of the world including Christians, Jews, Bahá'í Faith and Zoroastrians fled to India as a place of refuge to enjoy religious freedom.[14][15][16]
Ancient Jews fleeing from persecution in their homeland 2,500 years ago settled in India and never faced anti-Semitism.[17] Freedom of religion edicts have been found written during Ashoka the Great's reign in the 3rd century BC. Freedom to practise, preach and propagate any religion is a constitutional right in Modern India. Most major religious festivals of the main communities are included in the list of national holidays.
Although India is an 80% Hindu country, three out of the twelve presidents of India have been Muslims.
Many scholars and intellectuals believe that India's predominant religion, Hinduism, has long been a most tolerant religion.[18] Rajni Kothari, founder of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies has written, "[India] is a country built on the foundations of a civilisation that is fundamentally non-religious."[19]
The Dalai Lama, the Tibetan leader in exile said that religious tolerance of 'Aryabhoomi,' a reference to India found in Mahabharata, has been in existence in this country from thousands of years. "Not only Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism which are the native religions but also Christianity and Islam have flourished here. Religious tolerance is inherent in Indian tradition," the Dalai Lama said.[20]
Freedom of religion in the Indian subcontinent is exemplified by the reign of King Piyadasi (304 BC to 232 BC) (Ashoka). One of King Ashoka's main concerns was to reform governmental institutes and exercise moral principles in his attempt to create a just and humane society. Later he promoted the principles of Buddhism, and the creation of a just, understanding and fair society was held as an important principle for many ancient rulers of this time in the East.
The importance of freedom of worship in India was encapsulated in an inscription of Ashoka:

King Piyadasi (Ashok) dear to the Gods, honours all sects, the ascetics (hermits) or those who dwell at home, he honours them with charity and in other ways. But the King, dear to the Gods, attributes less importance to this charity and these honours than to the vow of seeing the reign of virtues, which constitutes the essential part of them. For all these virtues there is a common source, modesty of speech. That is to say, one must not exalt one's creed discrediting all others, nor must one degrade these others without legitimate reasons. One must, on the contrary, render to other creeds the honour befitting them.
The initial entry of Islam into South Asia came in the first century after the death of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad. When around 1210 AD the Islamic Sultanates invaded India from the north-west, gradually the principle of freedom of religion deteriorated in this part of the world. They were subsequently replaced by another Islamic invader in the form of Babur. The Mughal empire was founded by the Mongol leader Babur in 1526, when he defeated Ibrahim Lodi, the last of the Delhi Sultans at the First Battle of Panipat. The word "Mughal" is the Indo-Iranian version of Mongol.
On the main Asian continent, the Mongols were tolerant of religions. People could worship as they wished freely and openly, though the formation of 2 nations i.e. Pakistan and Bangladesh has been on basis of religious intolerance.
After arrival of Europeans, Christians in zeal to convert local as per belief in conversion as service of God, have also been seen to fall into frivolous methods since their arrival. Though by and large there are hardly any reports of law and order disturbance from mobs with Christian beliefs except perhaps in the north eastern region of India.[21]
Freedom of religion in contemporary India is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 25 of the nation's constitution. Accordingly every citizen of India has a right to profess, practice and propagate their religions peacefully.[22] Vishwa Hindu Parishad counters this argument by saying that evangelical Christians are forcefully (or through money) converting rural, illiterate populations and they are only trying to stop this.
In September 2010, Indian state Kerala's State Election Commissioner announced that "Religious heads cannot issue calls to vote for members of a particular community or to defeat the nonbelievers".[23] The Catholic Church comprising Latin, Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara rites used to give clear directions to the faithful on exercising their franchise during elections through pastoral letters issued by bishops or council of bishops. The pastoral letter issued by Kerala Catholic Bishops' Council (KCBC) on the eve of the poll urged the faithful to shun atheists.[23]
Even today, most Indians celebrate all religious festivals with equal enthusiasm and respect. Hindu festivals like Deepavali and Holi, Muslim festivals like Eid al-Fitr, Eid-Ul-Adha, Muharram, Christian festivals like Christmas and other festivals like Buddha Purnima, Mahavir Jayanti, Gur Purab etc. are celebrated and enjoyed by all Indians.
Europe[edit]
Religious intolerance[edit]
Most Roman Catholic kingdoms kept a tight rein on religious expression throughout the Middle Ages. Jews were alternately tolerated and persecuted, the most notable examples of the latter being the expulsion of all Jews from Spain in 1492. Some of those who remained and converted were tried as heretics in the Inquisition for allegedly practicing Judaism in secret. Despite the persecution of Jews, they were the most tolerated non-Catholic faith in Europe.
However, the latter was in part a reaction to the growing movement that became the Reformation. As early as 1380, John Wycliffe in England denied transubstantiation and began his translation of the Bible into English. He was condemned in a Papal Bull in 1410, and all his books were burned.
In 1414, Jan Hus, a Bohemian preacher of reformation, was given a safe conduct by the Holy Roman Emperor to attend the Council of Constance. Not entirely trusting in his safety, he made his will before he left. His forebodings proved accurate, and he was burned at the stake on 6 July 1415. The Council also decreed that Wycliffe's remains be disinterred and cast out. This decree was not carried out until 1429.
After the fall of the city of Granada, Spain, in 1492, the Muslim population was promised religious freedom by the Treaty of Granada, but that promise was short-lived. In 1501, Granada's Muslims were given an ultimatum to either convert to Christianity or to emigrate. The majority converted, but only superficially, continuing to dress and speak as they had before and to secretly practice Islam. The Moriscos (converts to Christianity) were ultimately expelled from Spain between 1609 (Castile) and 1614 (rest of Spain), by Philip III.
Martin Luther published his famous 95 Theses in Wittenberg on 31 October 1517. His major aim was theological, summed up in the three basic dogmas of Protestantism:
The Bible only is infallible
Every Christian can interpret it
Human sins are so wrongful that no deed or merit, only God's grace, can lead to salvation.
In consequence, Luther hoped to stop the sale of indulgences and to reform the Church from within. In 1521, he was given the chance to recant at the Diet of Worms before Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, then only 19. After he refused to recant, he was declared heretic. Partly for his own protection, he was sequestered on the Wartburg in the possessions of Frederick III, Elector of Saxony, where he translated the New Testament into German. He was excommunicated by Papal Bull in 1521.
However, the movement continued to gain ground in his absence and spread to Switzerland. Huldrych Zwingli preached reform in Zürich from 1520 to 1523. He opposed the sale of indulgences, celibacy, pilgrimages, pictures, statues, relics, altars, and organs. This culminated in outright war between the Swiss cantons that accepted Protestantism and the Catholics. The Catholics were victorious, and Zwingli was killed in battle in 1531. The Catholic cantons were magnanimous in victory.[citation needed]
The defiance of Papal authority proved contagious, and in 1533, when Henry VIII of England was excommunicated for his divorce and remarriage to Anne Boleyn, he promptly established a state church with bishops appointed by the crown. This was not without internal opposition, and Thomas More, who had been his Lord Chancellor, was executed in 1535 for opposition to Henry.
In 1535, the Swiss canton of Geneva became Protestant. In 1536, the Bernese imposed the reformation on the canton of Vaud by conquest. They sacked the cathedral in Lausanne and destroyed all its art and statuary. John Calvin, who had been active in Geneva was expelled in 1538 in a power struggle, but he was invited back in 1540.



 A US Postage Stamp commemorating religious freedom and the Flushing Remonstrance.
The same kind of seesaw back and forth between Protestantism and Catholicism was evident in England when Mary I of England returned that country briefly to the Catholic fold in 1553 and persecuted Protestants. However, her half-sister, Elizabeth I of England was to restore the Church of England in 1558, this time permanently, and began to persecute Catholics again. The King James Bible commissioned by King James I of England and published in 1611 proved a landmark for Protestant worship, with official Catholic forms of worship being banned.
In France, although peace was made between Protestants and Catholics at the Treaty of Saint Germain in 1570, persecution continued, most notably in the Massacre of Saint Bartholomew's Day on 24 August 1572, in which thousands of Protestants throughout France were killed. A few years before, at the "Michelade" of Nîmes in 1567, Protestants had massacred the local Catholic clergy.
Early steps and attempts in the way of tolerance[edit]



 The cross of the war memorial and a menorah coexist in Oxford, Oxfordshire, England.
The Norman Kingdom of Sicily under Roger II was characterized by its multi-ethnic nature and religious tolerance. Normans, Jews, Muslim Arabs, Byzantine Greeks, Lombards, and native Sicilians lived in harmony.[24][25][not in citation given] Rather than exterminate the Muslims of Sicily, Roger II's grandson Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen (1215—1250) allowed them to settle on the mainland and build mosques. Not least, he enlisted them in his – Christian – army and even into his personal bodyguards[26][need quotation to verify][27][need quotation to verify]
Bohemia (present-day Czech Republic) enjoyed religious freedom between 1436 and 1520, and became one of the most liberal countries of the Christian world during that period of time. The so-called Basel Compacts of 1436 declared the freedom of religion and peace between Catholics and Utraquists. In 1609 Emperor Rudolf II granted Bohemia greater religious liberty with his Letter of Majesty. The privileged position of the Catholic Church in the Czech kingdom was firmly established after the Battle of White Mountain in 1620. Gradually freedom of religion in Bohemian lands came to an end and Protestants fled or were expelled from the country. A devout Catholic, Emperor Ferdinand II forcibly converted Austrian and Bohemian Protestants.[citation needed]
In the meantime, in Germany Philip Melanchthon drafted the Augsburg Confession as a common confession for the Lutherans and the free territories. It was presented to Charles V in 1530.
In the Holy Roman Empire, Charles V agreed to tolerate Lutheranism in 1555 at the Peace of Augsburg. Each state was to take the religion of its prince, but within those states, there was not necessarily religious tolerance. Citizens of other faiths could relocate to a more hospitable environment.
In France, from the 1550s, many attempts to reconcile Catholics and Protestants and to establish tolerance failed because the State was too weak to enforce them. It took the victory of prince Henry IV of France, who had converted into Protestantism, and his accession to the throne, to impose religious tolerance formalized in the Edict of Nantes in 1598. It would remain in force for over 80 years until its revocation in 1685 by Louis XIV of France. Intolerance remained the norm until Louis XVI, who signed the Edict of Versailles (1787), then the constitutional text of 24 December 1789, granting civilian rights to Protestants. The French Revolution then abolished state religion and confiscated all Church property, turning intolerance against Catholics.[citation needed]
Early laws and legal guarantees for religious freedom[edit]
In 1558, the Transylvanian Diet of Torda declared free practice of both the Catholic and Lutheran religions, but prohibited Calvinism. Ten years later, in 1568, the Diet extended the freedom to all religions, declaring that "It is not allowed to anybody to intimidate anybody with captivity or expelling for his religion". However, it was more than a religious tolerance, it declared the equality of the religions. The emergence in social hierarchy wasn't depend on the religion of the person thus Transylvania had also Catholic and Protestant monarchs (Princes). The lack of state religion was unique for centuries in Europe. Therefore, the Edict of Torda is considered by mostly Hungarian historians as the first legal guarantee of religious freedom in Christian Europe.

ACT OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE AND FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE:
His majesty, our Lord, in what manner he – together with his realm – legislated in the matter of religion at the previous Diets, in the same matter now, in this Diet, reaffirms that in every place the preachers shall preach and explain the Gospel each according to his understanding of it, and if the congregation like it, well. If not, no one shall compel them for their souls would not be satisfied, but they shall be permitted to keep a preacher whose teaching they approve. Therefore none of the superintendents or others shall abuse the preachers, no one shall be reviled for his religion by anyone, according to the previous statutes, and it is not permitted that anyone should threaten anyone else by imprisonment or by removal from his post for his teaching. For faith is the gift of God and this comes from hearing, which hearings is by the word of God.
— Diet at Torda, 1568 : King John Sigismund[28]
In the Union of Utrecht (20 January 1579), personal freedom of religion was declared in the struggle between the Northern Netherlands and Spain. The Union of Utrecht was an important step in the establishment of the Dutch Republic (from 1581 to 1795). Under Calvinist leadership, the Netherlands became the most tolerant country in Europe. It granted asylum to persecuted religious minorities, e.g. French Huguenots, English Dissenters, and Jews who had been expelled from Spain and Portugal.[29] The establishment of a Jewish community in the Netherlands and New Amsterdam (present-day New York) during the Dutch Republic is an example of religious freedom. When New Amsterdam surrendered to the English in 1664, freedom of religion was guaranteed in the Articles of Capitulation. It benefitted also the Jews who had landed on Manhattan Island in 1654, fleeing Portuguese persecution in Brazil. During the 18th century, other Jewish communities were established at Newport, Rhode Island, Philadelphia, Charleston, Savannah, and Richmond.[30]
Intolerance of dissident forms of Protestantism also continued, as evidenced by the exodus of the Pilgrims, who sought refuge, first in the Netherlands, and ultimately in America, founding Plymouth Colony in Massachusetts in 1620. William Penn, the founder of Philadelphia, was involved in a case which had a profound effect upon future American laws and those of England. In a classic case of jury nullification the jury refused to convict William Penn of preaching a Quaker sermon, which was illegal. Even though the jury was imprisoned for their acquittal, they stood by their decision and helped establish the freedom of religion.
Poland[edit]
Main article: Warsaw Confederation



 Original act of the Warsaw Confederation 1573. The beginning of religious freedom in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
Poland has a long tradition of religious freedom. The right to worship freely was a basic right given to all inhabitants of the Commonwealth throughout the 15th and early 16th century, however, complete freedom of religion was officially recognized in Poland in 1573 during the Warsaw Confederation. Poland kept religious freedom laws during an era when religious persecution was an everyday occurrence in the rest of Europe.[31]
The General Charter of Jewish Liberties known as the Statute of Kalisz was issued by the Duke of Greater Poland Boleslaus the Pious on 8 September 1264 in Kalisz. The statute served as the basis for the legal position of Jews in Poland and led to creation of the Yiddish-speaking autonomous Jewish nation until 1795. The statute granted exclusive jurisdiction of Jewish courts over Jewish matters and established a separate tribunal for matters involving Christians and Jews. Additionally, it guaranteed personal liberties and safety for Jews including freedom of religion, travel, and trade. The statute was ratified by subsequent Polish Kings: Casimir III of Poland in 1334, Casimir IV of Poland in 1453 and Sigismund I of Poland in 1539. The Commonwealth set a precedent by allowing Jews to become ennobled.
United States[edit]
See also: Freedom of religion in the United States
Most of the early colonies were generally not tolerant of dissident forms of worship, with Maryland being one of the exceptions. For example, Roger Williams found it necessary to found a new colony in Rhode Island to escape persecution in the theocratically dominated colony of Massachusetts. The Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were the most active of the New England persecutors of Quakers, and the persecuting spirit was shared by Plymouth Colony and the colonies along the Connecticut river.[32] In 1660, one of the most notable victims of the religious intolerance was English Quaker Mary Dyer, who was hanged in Boston, Massachusetts for repeatedly defying a Puritan law banning Quakers from the colony.[32] As one of the four executed Quakers known as the Boston martyrs, the hanging of Dyer on the Boston gallows marked the beginning of the end of the Puritan theocracy and New England independence from English rule, and in 1661 King Charles II explicitly forbade Massachusetts from executing anyone for professing Quakerism.[33]
Freedom of religion was first applied as a principle of government in the founding of the colony of Maryland, founded by the Catholic Lord Baltimore, in 1634.[34] Fifteen years later (1649), the Maryland Toleration Act, drafted by Lord Baltimore, provided: "No person or persons...shall from henceforth be any waies troubled, molested or discountenanced for or in respect of his or her religion nor in the free exercise thereof." The Maryland Toleration Act was repealed during the Cromwellian Era with the assistance of Protestant assemblymen and a new law barring Catholics from openly practicing their religion was passed.[35] In 1657, the Catholic Lord Baltimore regained control after making a deal with the colony's Protestants, and in 1658 the Act was again passed by the colonial assembly. This time, it would last more than thirty years, until 1692[36] when, after Maryland's Protestant Revolution of 1689, freedom of religion was again rescinded.[34][37] In addition, in 1704, an Act was passed "to prevent the growth of Popery in this Province", preventing Catholics from holding political office.[37] Full religious toleration would not be restored in Maryland until the American Revolution, when Maryland's Charles Carroll of Carrollton signed the American Declaration of Independence.
Rhode Island (1636), Connecticut (1636), New Jersey, and Pennsylvania (1682)—founded by Protestants Roger Williams, Thomas Hooker, and William Penn, respectively—combined the democratic form of government which had been developed by the Puritans and the Separatist Congregationalists in Massachusetts with religious freedom.[38][39][40][41] These colonies became sanctuaries for persecuted religious minorities. Catholics and later on Jews also had full citizenship and free exercise of their religions.[42][43][44] Williams, Hooker, Penn, and their friends were firmly convinced that freedom of conscience was the will of God. Williams gave the most profound argument: As faith is the free work of the Holy Spirit, it cannot be forced on a person. Therefore strict separation of church and state has to be kept.[45] Pennsylvania was the only colony that retained unlimited religious freedom until the foundation of the United States in 1776. It was the inseparable connection between democracy, religious freedom, and the other forms of freedom which became the political and legal basis of the new nation. In particular, Baptists and Presbyterians demanded the disestablishment of state churches - Anglican and Congregationalist - and the protection of religious freedom.[46]
Reiterating Maryland's and the other colonies' earlier colonial legislation, the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, written in 1779 by Thomas Jefferson, proclaimed:

[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.
Those sentiments also found expression in the First Amendment of the national constitution, part of the United States' Bill of Rights: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
The United States formally considers religious freedom in its foreign relations. The International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 established the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom which investigates the records of over 200 other nations with respect to religious freedom, and makes recommendations to submit nations with egregious records to ongoing scrutiny and possible economic sanctions. Many human rights organizations have urged the United States to be still more vigorous in imposing sanctions on countries that do not permit or tolerate religious freedom.
Canada[edit]
Further information: Freedom of religion in Canada
Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally protected right, allowing believers the freedom to assemble and worship without limitation or interference. Canadian law goes further, requiring that private citizens and companies provide reasonable accommodation to those, for example, with strong religious beliefs. The Canadian Human Rights Act allows an exception to reasonable accommodation with respect to religious dress, such as a Sikh turban, when there is a bona fide occupational requirement, such as a workplace requiring a hard hat.[47]
International[edit]
On 25 November 1981, the United Nations General Assembly passed the "Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief". This declaration recognizes freedom of religion as a fundamental human right in accordance with several other instruments of international law, but the international community has not passed any binding legal instruments that guarantee the right to freedom of religion.[48]
Contemporary debates[edit]

Freedom of religion


Concepts[show]





Status by country[show]













































































































Religious persecution[show]


























Religion portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs[edit]
In 1993, the UN's human rights committee declared that article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights "protects theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief."[49] The committee further stated that "the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief necessarily entails the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right to replace one's current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views." Signatories to the convention are barred from "the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers" to recant their beliefs or convert. Despite this, minority religions still are still persecuted in many parts of the world.[50][51]
Within the United States, the Freedom From Religion Foundation argues that the United States Constitution not only prohibits the intrusion of religion into the processes of government, but also guarantees equal rights to citizens who choose not to follow any religion.[52] Conservative sociopolitical commentator Bryan Fischer has responded: "The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion."[53]
Liberal secular[edit]

A man posing for a print

Adam Smith argued in favour of freedom of religion.
Adam Smith, in his book The Wealth of Nations (using an argument first put forward by his friend and contemporary David Hume), states that in the long run it is in the best interests of society as a whole and the civil magistrate (government) in particular to allow people to freely choose their own religion, as it helps prevent civil unrest and reduces intolerance. So long as there are enough different religions and/or religious sects operating freely in a society then they are all compelled to moderate their more controversial and violent teachings, so as to be more appealing to more people and so have an easier time attracting new converts. It is this free competition amongst religious sects for converts that ensures stability and tranquillity in the long run.
Smith also points out that laws that prevent religious freedom and seek to preserve the power and belief in a particular religion will, in the long run, only serve to weaken and corrupt that religion, as its leaders and preachers become complacent, disconnected and unpractised in their ability to seek and win over new converts:[54]

The interested and active zeal of religious teachers can be dangerous and troublesome only where there is either but one sect tolerated in the society, or where the whole of a large society is divided into two or three great sects; the teachers of each acting by concert, and under a regular discipline and subordination. But that zeal must be altogether innocent, where the society is divided into two or three hundred, or, perhaps, into as many thousand small sects, of which no one could be considerable enough to disturb the public tranquillity. The teachers of each sect, seeing themselves surrounded on all sides with more adversaries than friends, would be obliged to learn that candour and moderation which are so seldom to be found among the teachers of those great sects.[55]
Hinduism[edit]
Hinduism is one of the more open-minded religions when it comes to religious freedom.[56] It respects the right of everyone to reach God in their own way. Hindus believe in different ways to preach attainment of God and religion as a philosophy and hence respect all religions as equal. One of the famous Hindu sayings about religion is: "Truth is one; sages call it by different names."[56]
Judaism[edit]
Judaism includes multiple streams, such as Orthodox, Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Reconstructionist Judaism, Jewish Renewal and Humanistic Judaism. Israel, viewed as the Jewish homeland, has been evaluated in research by the Pew organization as having "high" government restrictions on religion. The government recognizes only Orthodox Judaism in certain matters of personal status, and marriages can only be performed by religious authorities. The government provides the greatest funding to Orthodox Judaism, even though adherents represent a minority of citizens.[57] Jewish women have been arrested at the Western Wall for praying and singing while wearing religious garments the Orthodox feel should be reserved for men. Women of the Wall have organized to promote religious freedom at the Wall.[58] In November 2014, a group of 60 non-Orthodox rabbinical students were told they would not be allowed to pray in the Knesset synagogue because it is reserved for Orthodox. Rabbi Joel Levy, director of the Conservative Yeshiva in Jerusalem, said that he had submitted the request on behalf of the students and saw their shock when the request was denied. He noted: "paradoxically, this decision served as an appropriate end to our conversation about religion and state in Israel." MK Dov Lipman expressed the concern that many Knesset workers are unfamiliar with non-Orthodox and American practices and would view "an egalitarian service in the synagogue as an affront."[59]
Christianity[edit]



 Part of the Oscar Straus Memorial in Washington, D.C. honoring the right to worship.
According to the Catholic Church in the Vatican II document on religious freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, "the human person has a right to religious freedom", which is described as "immunity from coercion in civil society".[60] This principle of religious freedom "leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion."[60] In addition, this right "is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right."[60]
Prior to this, Pope Pius IX had written a document called the Syllabus of Errors. The Syllabus was made up of phrases and paraphrases from earlier papal documents, along with index references to them, and presented as a list of "condemned propositions". It does not explain why each particular proposition is wrong, but it cites earlier documents to which the reader can refer for the Pope's reasons for saying each proposition is false. Among the statements included in the Syllabus are: "[It is an error to say that] Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true" (15); "[It is an error to say that] In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship" (77); "[It is an error to say that] Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship" (78).[61]
Some Orthodox Christians, especially those living in democratic countries, support religious freedom for all, as evidenced by the position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Many Protestant Christian churches, including some Baptists, Churches of Christ, Seventh-day Adventist Church and main line churches have a commitment to religious freedoms. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also affirms religious freedom.[62]
However others, such as African scholar Makau Mutua, have argued that Christian insistence on the propagation of their faith to native cultures as an element of religious freedom has resulted in a corresponding denial of religious freedom to native traditions and led to their destruction. As he states in the book produced by the Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief, "Imperial religions have necessarily violated individual conscience and the communal expressions of Africans and their communities by subverting African religions."[63][64]
In their book Breaking India, Rajiv Malhotra and Aravindan Neelakandan discussed the "US Church" funding activities in India, such as the popularly advertised campaigns to "save" poor children by feeding, clothing, and educating them, with the book arguing that the funds collected were being used not so much for the purposes indicated to sponsors, but for indoctrination and conversion activities. They suggest that India is the prime target of a huge enterprise—a "network" of organizations, individuals, and churches—that, they argue, seem intensely devoted to the task of creating a separatist identity, history, and even religion for the vulnerable sections of India. They suggest that this nexus of players includes not only church groups, government bodies, and related organizations, but also private think tanks and academics.[65]
Joel Spring has written about the Christianization of the Roman Empire:

Christianity added new impetus to the expansion of empire. Increasing the arrogance of the imperial project, Christians insisted that the Gospels and the Church were the only valid sources of religious beliefs. Imperialists could claim that they were both civilizing the world and spreading the true religion. By the 5th century, Christianity was thought of as co-extensive with the Imperium romanum. This meant that to be human, as opposed to being a natural slave, was to be "civilized" and Christian. Historian Anthony Pagden argues, "just as the civitas; had now become coterminous with Christianity, so to be human—to be, that is, one who was 'civil', and who was able to interpret correctly the law of nature—one had now also to be Christian." After the fifteenth century, most Western colonialists rationalized the spread of empire with the belief that they were saving a barbaric and pagan world by spreading Christian civilization.[66]
Islam[edit]
Main articles: Political aspects of Islam, Sharia, Caliphate, Islamic religious police and Islamism
Conversion to Islam is simple (cf. shahada), but Muslims are forbidden to convert from Islam to another religion (cf. Apostasy in Islam). Certain Muslim-majority countries are known for their restrictions on religious freedom, highly favoring Muslim citizens over non-Muslim citizens. Other countries[who?] having the same restrictive laws tend to be more liberal when imposing them. Even other Muslim-majority countries are secular and thus do not regulate religious belief.[67][not in citation given]
Some Islamic theologians[who?] quote the Qur'an (“There is no compulsion in religion”[2:256] and “Say: O you who reject faith, I do not worship what you worship, nor do you worship what I worship...To you be your religion, and to me be mine”[109:1–6], i.e., Sura Al-Kafirun) to show scriptural support for religious freedom.
Quran 2:190–194, referring to the war against Pagans during the Battle of Badr in Medina, indicates that Muslims are only allowed to fight against those who intend to harm them (right of self-defense) and that if their enemies surrender, they must also stop because God does not like those who transgress limits.
In Bukhari:V9 N316, Jabir ibn 'Abdullah narrated that a Bedouin accepted Islam and then when he got a fever he demanded that Muhammad to cancel his pledge (allow him to renounce Islam). Muhammad refused to do so. The Bedouin man repeated his demand once, but Muhammad once again refused. Then, he (the Bedouin) left Medina. Muhammad said, "Madinah is like a pair of bellows (furnace): it expels its impurities and brightens and clear its good." In this narration, there was no evidence demonstrating that Muhammad ordered the execution of the Bedouin for wanting to renounce Islam.
In addition, Quran 5:3, which is believed to be God's final revelation to Muhammad, states that Muslims are to fear God and not those who reject Islam, and Quran 53:38–39 states that one is accountable only for one's own actions. Therefore, it postulates that in Islam, in the matters of practising a religion, it does not relate to a worldly punishment, but rather these actions are accountable to God in the afterlife. Thus, this supports the argument against the execution of apostates in Islam.
However, on the other hand, some Muslims support the practice of executing apostates who leave Islam, as in Bukhari:V4 B52 N260; "The Prophet said, 'If a Muslim discards his religion, kill him.'"
In Iran, the constitution recognizes four religions whose status is formally protected: Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.[50] The constitution, however, also set the groundwork for the institutionalized persecution of Bahá'ís,[68] who have been subjected to arrests, beatings, executions, confiscation and destruction of property, and the denial of civil rights and liberties, and the denial of access to higher education.[50] There is no freedom of conscience in Iran, as converting from Islam to any other religion is forbidden.
In Egypt, a 16 December 2006 judgment of the Supreme Administrative Council created a clear demarcation between recognized religions – Islam, Christianity and Judaism – and all other religious beliefs;[69][70] no other religious affiliation is officially admissible.[71] The ruling leaves members of other religious communities, including Bahá'ís, without the ability to obtain the necessary government documents to have rights in their country, essentially denying them of all rights of citizenship.[71] They cannot obtain ID cards, birth certificates, death certificates, marriage or divorce certificates, and passports; they also cannot be employed, educated, treated in public hospitals or vote, among other things.[71] See Egyptian identification card controversy.
Changing religion[edit]
Main article: Religious conversion
Among the most contentious areas of religious freedom is the right of an individual to change or abandon his or her own religion (apostasy), and the right to evangelize individuals seeking to convince others to make such a change.
Other debates have centered around restricting certain kinds of missionary activity by religions. Many Islamic states, and others such as China, severely restrict missionary activities of other religions. Greece, among European countries, has generally looked unfavorably on missionary activities of denominations others than the majority church and proselytizing is constitutionally prohibited.[72]
A different kind of critique of the freedom to propagate religion has come from non-Abrahamic traditions such as the African and Indian. African scholar Makau Mutua criticizes religious evangelism on the ground of cultural annihilation by what he calls "proselytizing universalist faiths" (Chapter 28: Proselytism and Cultural Integrity, page 652):

...the (human) rights regime incorrectly assumes a level playing field by requiring that African religions compete in the marketplace of ideas. The rights corpus not only forcibly imposes on African religions the obligation to compete—a task for which as nonproselytizing, noncompetitive creeds they are not historically fashioned—but also protects the evangelizing religions in their march towards universalization ... it seems inconceivable that the human rights regime would have intended to protect the right of certain religions to destroy others.[73]
Some Indian scholars[74] have similarly argued that the right to propagate religion is not culturally or religiously neutral.
In Sri Lanka, there have been debates regarding a bill on religious freedom that seeks to protect indigenous religious traditions from certain kinds of missionary activities. Debates have also occurred in various states of India regarding similar laws, particularly those that restrict conversions using force, fraud or allurement.
In 2008, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, a Christian human rights non-governmental organisation which specializes in religious freedom, launched an in-depth report on the human rights abuses faced by individuals who leave Islam for another religion. The report is the product of a year long research project in six different countries. It calls on Muslim nations, the international community, the UN and the international media to resolutely address the serious violations of human rights suffered by apostates.[75]
Apostasy in Islam[edit]
Main articles: Apostasy in Islam, Takfir and Mutaween



 Legal opinion on apostasy by the Fatwa committee at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the highest Islamic institution in the world, concerning the case of a man who converted to Christianity: "Since he left Islam, he will be invited to express his regret. If he does not regret, he will be killed pertaining to rights and obligations of the Islamic law."
In Islam, apostasy is called "ridda" ("turning back") and is considered to be a profound insult to God. A person born of Muslim parents that rejects Islam is called a "murtad fitri" (natural apostate), and a person that converted to Islam and later rejects the religion is called a "murtad milli" (apostate from the community).[76]
In Islamic law (Sharia), the consensus view is that a male apostate must be put to death unless he suffers from a mental disorder or converted under duress, for example, due to an imminent danger of being killed. A female apostate must be either executed, according to Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), or imprisoned until she reverts to Islam as advocated by the Sunni Hanafi school and by Shi'a scholars.[77]
Ideally, the one performing the execution of an apostate must be an imam.[77] At the same time, all schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that any Muslim can kill an apostate without punishment.[78]
However, while almost all scholars agree about the punishment, many disagree on the allowable time to retract the apostasy. Many scholars push this as far as allowing the apostate till he/she dies. Thus, practically making the death penalty just a theoretical statement/exercise.[citation needed] S. A. Rahman, a former Chief Justice of Pakistan, argues that there is no indication of the death penalty for apostasy in the Qur'an.[79]
Secular law[edit]
Religious practice may also conflict with secular law, creating debates on religious freedom. For instance, even though polygamy is permitted in Islam, it is prohibited in secular law in many countries. This raises the question of whether prohibiting the practice infringes on the beliefs of certain Muslims. The US and India, both constitutionally secular nations, have taken two different views of this. In India, polygamy is permitted, but only for Muslims, under Muslim Personal Law. In the US, polygamy is prohibited for all. This was a major source of conflict between the early LDS Church and the United States until the Church amended its position on practicing polygamy.
Similar issues have also arisen in the context of the religious use of psychedelic substances by Native American tribes in the United States as well as other Native practices.
In 1955, Chief Justice of California Roger J. Traynor neatly summarized the American position on how freedom of religion cannot imply freedom from law: "Although freedom of conscience and the freedom to believe are absolute, the freedom to act is not."[80] But with respect to the religious use of animals within secular law and those acts, the US Supreme Court decision in the case of the Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah in 1993 upheld the right of Santeria adherents to practice ritual animal sacrifice, with Justice Anthony Kennedy stating in the decision: "religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection" (quoted by Justice Kennedy from the opinion by Justice Burger in Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division 450 U.S. 707 (1981)).[81]
Children's rights[edit]
The law in Germany provides the term of "religious majority" (Religiöse Mündigkeit) with a minimum age for minors to follow their own religious beliefs even if their parents don't share those or don't approve. Children 14 and older have the unrestricted right to enter or exit any religious community. Children 12 and older cannot be compelled to change to a different belief. Children 10 and older have to be heard before their parents change their religious upbringing to a different belief.[82] There are similar laws in Austria[83] and in Switzerland.[84]
International Religious Freedom Day[edit]
27 October is International Religious Freedom Day, in commemoration of the execution of the Boston martyrs for their religious convictions 1659–1661.[85] The US proclaimed 16 January Religious Freedom Day.[86]
Modern concerns[edit]
In its 2011 annual report, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom designated fourteen nations as "countries of particular concern". The commission chairman commented that these are nations whose conduct marks them as the world's worst religious freedom violators and human rights abusers. The fourteen nations designated were Burma, China, Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. Other nations on the commission's watchlist include Afghanistan, Belarus, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Laos, Russia, Somalia, Tajikistan, Turkey, and Venezuela.[87]
There are concerns about the restrictions on public religious dress in some European countries (including the Hijab, Kippah, and Christian cross).[88][89] Article 18 of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights limits restrictions on freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs to those necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.[90] Freedom of religion as a legal concept is related to, but not identical with, religious toleration, separation of church and state, or secular state (laïcité).
Social hostilities and government restrictions[edit]



 Freedom of religion by country (Pew Research Center study, 2009). Light yellow: low restriction; red: very high restriction on freedom of religion.
The Pew Research Center has performed studies on international religious freedom between 2009 and 2015, compiling global data from 16 governmental and non-governmental organizations–including the United Nations, the United States State Department, and Human Rights Watch–and representing over 99.5 percent of the world's population.[91][92] In 2009, nearly 70 percent of the world's population lived in countries classified as having heavy restrictions on freedom of religion.[91][92] This concerns restrictions on religion originating from government prohibitions on free speech and religious expression as well as social hostilities undertaken by private individuals, organisations and social groups. Social hostilities were classified by the level of communal violence and religion-related terrorism.
While most countries provided for the protection of religious freedom in their constitutions or laws, only a quarter of those countries were found to fully respect these legal rights in practice. In 75 countries governments limit the efforts of religious groups to proselytise and in 178 countries religious groups must register with the government. In 2013, Pew classified 30% of countries as having restrictions that tend to target religious minorities, and 61% of countries have social hostilities that tend to target religious minorities.[93]
The countries in North and South America reportedly had some of the lowest levels of government and social restrictions on religion, while The Middle East and North Africa were the regions with the highest. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Iran were the countries that top the list of countries with the overall highest levels of restriction on religion. Topping the Pew government restrictions index were Saudi Arabia, Iran, Uzbekistan, China, Egypt, Burma, Maldives, Eritrea, Malaysia and Brunei.
Of the world's 25 most populous countries, Iran, Egypt, Indonesia and Pakistan had the most restrictions, while Brazil, Japan, Italy, South Africa, the UK, and the US had some of the lowest levels, as measured by Pew.
Vietnam and China were classified as having high government restrictions on religion but were in the moderate or low range when it came to social hostilities. Nigeria, Bangladesh and India were high in social hostilities but moderate in terms of government actions.
Restrictions on religion across the world increased between mid-2009 and mid-2010, according to a 2012 study by the Pew Research Center. Restrictions in each of the five major regions of the world increased—including in the Americas and sub-Saharan Africa, the two regions where overall restrictions previously had been declining. In 2010, Egypt, Nigeria, the Palestinian territories, Russia, and Yemen were added to the "very high" category of social hostilities.[94] The five highest social hostility scores were for Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Iraq, and Bangladesh.[95] In 2015, Pew published that social hostilities declined in 2013, but Harassment of Jews increased.[93]
See also[edit]

Portal icon Human rights portal
Portal icon Religion portal
Adiaphora
Forum 18
Freedom of thought
International Association for Religious Freedom
International Center for Law and Religion Studies
International Coalition for Religious Freedom
International Religious Liberty Association
Missouri Executive Order 44
General Order No. 11 (1862)
North American Religious Liberty Association
Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses in the United States
Religious discrimination
Status of religious freedom by country
Religious education in primary and secondary education
Witch-hunt
Witch trials in the early modern period
Lawsuits[edit]
C. H. v. Oliva et al.
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18.
2.Jump up ^ "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights". The United Nations.
3.Jump up ^ Davis, Derek H. "The Evolution of Religious Liberty as a Universal Human Right". Archived from the original on 1 February 2008. Retrieved 5 December 2006. (archived from the original on 1 February 2008).
4.Jump up ^ Congressional Record #29734 – 19 November 2003. Google Books. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
5.Jump up ^ Cyrus Cylinder, livius.org.
6.Jump up ^ Richard A. Taylor; E. Ray Clendenen (15 October 2004). Haggai, Malachi. B&H Publishing Group. pp. 31–32. ISBN 978-0-8054-0121-9.
7.Jump up ^ Natan, Yoel (2006). Moon-o-theism, Volume II of II. Yoel Natan. p. 514. ISBN 978-1-4392-9717-9.
8.Jump up ^ Njeuma, Martin Z. (2012). Fulani Hegemony in Yola (Old Adamawa) 1809-1902. African Books Collective. p. 82. ISBN 978-9956-726-95-0.
9.Jump up ^ (Weeramantry 1997, p. 138)[citation needed]
10.Jump up ^ Sachedina, Abdulaziz Abdulhussein (2001). The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-513991-7.
11.Jump up ^ Mark R. Cohen (1995). Under Crescent and Cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages. Princeton University Press. p. 74. ISBN 0-691-01082-X. Retrieved 10 April 2010.
12.Jump up ^ al-Qattan, Najwa (1999). "Dhimmis in the Muslim Court: Legal Autonomy and Religious Discrimination". International Journal of Middle East Studies (University of Cambridge) 31 (3): 429–444. doi:10.1017/S0020743800055501. ISSN 00207438.
13.Jump up ^ Sherman A. Jackson (2005). Islam and the Blackamerican: looking toward the third resurrection. Oxford University Press. p. 144. ISBN 0-19-518081-X. Retrieved 10 April 2010.
14.Jump up ^ The Last Jews of Kerala, p98
15.Jump up ^ Katz 2000; Koder 1973; Thomas Puthiakunnel 1973; David de Beth Hillel, 1832; Lord, James Henry 1977.
16.Jump up ^ Parsis#History
17.Jump up ^ Who are the Jews of India? – The S. Mark Taper Foundation imprint in Jewish studies. University of California Press. 2000. p. 26. ISBN 978-0-520-21323-4. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=ZWX6pF2PTJwC&pg=PA26.; "When the Portuguese arrived in 1498, they brought a spirit of intolerance utterly alien to India. They soon established an Office of Inquisition at Goa, and at their hands Indian Jews experienced the only instance of anti-Semitism ever to occur in Indian soil."
18.Jump up ^ David E. Ludden (1996). Contesting the Nation: Religion, Community, and the Politics of Democracy in India. University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 257–258. ISBN 0-8122-1585-0.
19.Jump up ^ Rajni Kothari (1998). Communalism in Indian Politics. Rainbow Publishers. pp. 134. ISBN 978-81-86962-00-8.
20.Jump up ^ "India's religious tolerance lauded". Deccan Herald. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
21.Jump up ^ "Christian Persecution in India: The Real Story". Stephen-knapp.com. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
22.Jump up ^ "The Constitution of India" (PDF). Retrieved 3 September 2011.
23.^ Jump up to: a b "'Using places of worship for campaigning in Kerala civic polls is violation of poll code'". Indian Orthodox Herald. 18 September 2010. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
24.Jump up ^ "Roger II". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
25.Jump up ^ "Tracing The Norman Rulers of Sicily". New York Times. 26 April 1987. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
26.Jump up ^ Christopher Gravett (15 November 1997). German Medieval Armies 1000–1300. Osprey Publishing. pp. 17. ISBN 978-1-85532-657-6.
27.Jump up ^ Thomas Curtis Van Cleve's The Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen: Immutator Mundi (Oxford, 1972)
28.Jump up ^ Unitarian Universalist Partner Church Council. "Edict of Torda" (DOC). Retrieved on 2008-01-23.
29.Jump up ^ Karl Heussi, Kompendium der Kirchengeschichte, 11. Auflage (1956), Tübingen (Germany), pp. 396-397
30.Jump up ^ Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), History of Religion in the United States, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Ciffs, N.J., p. 124
31.Jump up ^ Zamoyski, Adam. The Polish Way. New York: Hippocrene Books, 1987
32.^ Jump up to: a b Rogers, Horatio, 2009. Mary Dyer of Rhode Island: The Quaker Martyr That Was Hanged on Boston Common, 1 June 1660 pp.1–2. BiblioBazaar, LLC
33.Jump up ^ Puritans and Puritanism in Europe and America: a comprehensive encyclopedia. Google Books. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
34.^ Jump up to: a b Zimmerman, Mark, Symbol of Enduring Freedom, p. 19, Columbia Magazine, March 2010
35.Jump up ^ Brugger, Robert J. (1988). Maryland: A Middle Temperament. , p 21, Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-3399-X.
36.Jump up ^ Finkelman, Paul, Maryland Toleration Act, The Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties, New York: CRC Press. ISBN 0-415-94342-6.
37.^ Jump up to: a b id=6ybHa6D24qQC&pg=PA78&dq=henry+darnall&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_brr=3&ei=fcKDS_qNIKjoygTH_rnxCg&cd=5#v=onepage&q=henry%20darnall&f=false Roark, Elisabeth Louise, p.78, Artists of colonial America Retrieved 22 February 2010
38.Jump up ^ Christopher Fennell (1998), Plymouth Colony Legal Structure (http://www.histarch.uiuc.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html)
39.Jump up ^ Hanover Historical Texts Project (http://history.hanover.edu/texts/masslib.html)
40.Jump up ^ M. Schmidt, Pilgerväter, in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 3. Auflage, Tübingen (Germany), Band V (1961), col. 384
41.Jump up ^ M. Schmidt, Hooker, Thomas, in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 3. Auflage, Band III (1959), col. 449
42.Jump up ^ Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), History of Religion in the United States, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., pp. 74-75, 99, 102-105, 113-115
43.Jump up ^ Edwin S. Gaustad (1999), Liberty of Conscience: Roger Williams in America, Judson Press, Valley Forge
44.Jump up ^ Hans Fantel (1974), William Penn: Apostel of Dissent, William Morrow & Co., New York, N.Y.
45.Jump up ^ Heinrich Bornkamm, Toleranz. In der Geschichte der Christenheit, in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 3. Auflage, Band VI (1962), col. 943
46.Jump up ^ Robert Middlekauff (2005), The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789, Revised and Expanded Edition, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-531588-2, p. 635
47.Jump up ^ Freedom of Religion and Religious Symbols in the Public Sphere. 2.2.2 Headcoverings. Parliament of Canada. Publication No. 2011-60-E. Published 2011-07-25. Retrieved 21 December 2011.
48.Jump up ^ "A/RES/36/55. Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief". United Nations. 25 November 1981. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
49.Jump up ^ "CCPR General Comment 22: 30/07/93 on ICCPR Article 18". Minorityrights.org.
50.^ Jump up to: a b c International Federation for Human Rights (1 August 2003). "Discrimination against religious minorities in Iran" (PDF). fdih.org. Retrieved 3 March 2009.
51.Jump up ^ Davis, Derek H. "The Evolution of Religious Liberty as a Universal Human Right" (PDF). Retrieved 3 March 2009.
52.Jump up ^ "The Constitution Guarantees Freedom From Religion". Freedom From Religion Foundation. August 28, 2000. Retrieved December 27, 2012.
53.Jump up ^ Elena Garcia, Atheist Billboard Hits Idaho, 10 March 2009, The Christian Post.
54.Jump up ^ Smith, Adam (1776), Wealth of Nations, Penn State Electronic Classics edition, republished 2005, p.643-649
55.Jump up ^ Smith, Adam (1776), Wealth of Nations, Penn State Electronic Classics edition, republished 2005, p.647
56.^ Jump up to: a b "Hindu Beliefs". religionfacts.com.
57.Jump up ^ "Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life: Global restrictions on Religion (2009" http://www.pewforum.org/files/2009/12/restrictions-fullreport1.pdf
58.Jump up ^ "Police arrest 5 women at Western Wall for wearing tallitot" Jerusalem Post (Apr 11, 2013)
59.Jump up ^ "Maltz, Judy 'Non-Orthodox Jews prohibited from praying in Knesset synagogue' (Nov 26, 2014) Haaretz" http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.628571
60.^ Jump up to: a b c "Declaration on religious freedom – Dignitatis humanae". Vatican.va. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
61.Jump up ^ Pope Pius IX. "THE SYLLABUS". Global Catholic Neetwork.
62.Jump up ^ "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may", the eleventh Article of Faith.
63.Jump up ^ Mutua, Makau. 2004. Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief.
64.Jump up ^ J. D. Van der Vyver; John Witte (1996). Religious human rights in global perspective: legal perspectives 2. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. [1]. ISBN 90-411-0177-2.
65.Jump up ^ Introduction | Breaking India
66.Jump up ^ Joel H. Spring (2001). Globalization and educational rights: an intercivilizational analysis. Routledge. p. 92. ISBN 978-0-8058-3882-4.
67.Jump up ^ United States of America, Department of State. "2010 International Religious Freedom Report". International Religious Freedom Report. US Department of State. Retrieved 15 February 2012.
68.Jump up ^ Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (2007). "A Faith Denied: The Persecution of the Baha'is of Iran" (PDF). Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-11-27. Retrieved 3 March 2007.
69.Jump up ^ Mayton, Joseph (19 December 2006). "Egypt's Bahais denied citizenship rights". Middle East Times. Archived from the original on 2009-04-06. Retrieved 23 January 2007.
70.Jump up ^ Otterman, Sharon (17 December 2006). "Court denies Bahai couple document IDs". The Washington Times. Retrieved 23 January 2007.
71.^ Jump up to: a b c Nkrumah, Gamal (21 December 2006). "Rendered faithless and stateless". Al-Ahram weekly. Retrieved 23 January 2007.
72.Jump up ^ "US State Department report on Greece". State.gov. 8 November 2005. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
73.Jump up ^ Mutua, Makau (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief. p. 652. ISBN 978-90-04-13783-7.
74.Jump up ^ Sanu, Sankrant (2006). "Re-examining Religious Freedom" (PDF). Manushi. Retrieved 26 July 2008.
75.Jump up ^ "No place to call home" (PDF). Christian Solidarity Worldwide. 29 April 2008.
76.Jump up ^ [2] from "Leaving Islam: Apostates speak out" by Ibn Warraq
77.^ Jump up to: a b Heffening, W. "Murtadd". In P.J. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Encyclopaedia of Islam Online Edition. Brill Academic Publishers. ISSN 1573-3912.
78.Jump up ^ Adbul Qadir Oudah (1999). Kitab Bhavan. New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan. ISBN 81-7151-273-9., Volume II. pp. 258–262; Volume IV. pp. 19–21
79.Jump up ^ S. A. Rahman (2007). "Summary and Conclusions". Punishment of Apostasy in Islam. The Other Press. pp. 132–142. ISBN 978-983-9541-49-6.
80.Jump up ^ Pencovic v. Pencovic, 45 Cal. 2d 67 (1955).
81.Jump up ^ Criminal Law and Procedure, Daniel E. Hall. Cengage Learning, July 2008. p. 266. [3]
82.Jump up ^ "Gesetz über die religiöse Kindererziehung". Bundesrecht.juris.de. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
83.Jump up ^ Bundesgesetz 1985 über die religiöse Kindererziehung (pdf)
84.Jump up ^ "Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch Art 303: Religiöse Erziehung". Gesetze.ch. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
85.Jump up ^ Margery Post Abbott (2011). Historical Dictionary of the Friends (Quakers). Scarecrow Press. pp. 102. ISBN 978-0-8108-7088-8.
86.Jump up ^ Religious Freedom Day, 2006 – A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America, Religious Freedom Day, 2001 – Proclamation by the President of the United States of America 15 January 2001
87.Jump up ^ "US commission names 14 worst violators of religious freedom". Christianity Today. 29 April 2011. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
 ^ "USCIRF Identifies World's Worst Religious Freedom Violators: Egypt Cited for First Time" (Press release). United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. 28 April 2011. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
 ^ Annual Report 2011 (PDF) (Report). United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. May 2011. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
88.Jump up ^ "France Passes Religious Symbol Ban". Christianity Today. 9 February 2004. Retrieved 29 April 2011.
89.Jump up ^ "The Islamic veil across Europe". BBC News. 17 November 2006. Retrieved 2 December 2006.
90.Jump up ^ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved 4 July 2009.
91.^ Jump up to: a b "Global Restrictions on Religion (Executive summary)". The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. December 2009. Retrieved 29 December 2009.
92.^ Jump up to: a b "Global Restrictions on Religion (Full report)" (PDF). The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. December 2009. Retrieved 12 September 2013.
93.^ Jump up to: a b "Latest Trends in Religious Restrictions and Hostilities". Pew Forum. 26 Feb 2015.
94.Jump up ^ Rising Tide of Restrictions on Religion (Report). Pew Research Center. September 20, 2012.
95.Jump up ^ "Table: Social Hostilities Index by country" (PDF). Pew Research Center. 2012.
Further reading[edit]
Daniel L. Dreisbach and Mark David Hall. The Sacred Rights of Conscience: Selected Readings on Religious Liberty and Church-State Relations in the American Founding (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Press, 2009).
Barzilai, Gad (2007). Law and Religion. Ashgate. ISBN 978-0-7546-2494-3.
Beneke, Chris (20 September 2006). Beyond Toleration: The Religious Origins of American Pluralism. Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 0-19-530555-8.
Curry, Thomas J. (19 December 1989). Church and State in America to the Passage of the First Amendment. Oxford University Press; Reprint edition (19 December 1989). ISBN 0-19-505181-5.
Frost, J. William (1990) A Perfect Freedom: Religious Liberty in Pennsylvania (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press).
Gaustad, Edwin S. (2004, 2nd ed.) Faith of the Founders: Religion and the New Nation, 1776–1826 (Waco: Baylor University Press).
Hamilton, Marci A. (17 June 2005). God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law. Edward R. Becker (Foreword). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-85304-4.
Hanson, Charles P. (1998). Necessary Virtue: The Pragmatic Origins of Religious Liberty in New England. University Press of Virginia. ISBN 0-8139-1794-8.
Hasson, Kevin 'Seamus', The Right to be Wrong: Ending the Culture War Over Religion in America, Encounter Books, 2005, ISBN 1-59403-083-9
McLoughlin, William G. (1971). New England Dissent: The Baptists and the Separation of Church and State (2 VOLS.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Murphy, Andrew R. (July 2001). Conscience and Community: Revisiting Toleration and Religious Dissent in Early Modern England and America. Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN 0-271-02105-5.
Mutua, Makau (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief.
Stokes, Anson Phelps (1950) Church and State in the United States, Historic Development and Contemporary Problems of Religious Freedom under the Constitution, 3 Volumes (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers).
Stokes, DaShanne (In Press). Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom at the Wayback Machine (archived October 27, 2009)
Stüssi Marcel, MODELS OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: Switzerland, the United States, and Syria by Analytical, Methodological, and Eclectic Representation, 375 ff. (Lit 2012)., by Marcel Stüssi, research fellow at the University of Lucerne.
Associated Press (2002). Appeals court upholds man's use of eagle feathers for religious practices
American Indian Religious Freedom Act (1978)
Policy Concerning Distribution of Eagle Feathers for Native American Religious
Ban on Minarets: On the Validity of a Controversial Swiss Popular Initiative (2008), , by Marcel Stuessi, research fellow at the University of Lucerne.
"Religious Liberty: The legal framework in selected OSCE countries." (PDF). Law Library, U.S. Library of Congress. May 2000. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 June 2008. Retrieved 6 April 2007.
Utt, Walter C. (1964). "Brickbats and Dead Cats" (PDF). Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 59 (4, July–August): 18–21. Retrieved 23 June 2011.
Utt, Walter C. (1960). "A Plea for the Somewhat Disorganized Man" (PDF). Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 55 (4, July–August): 15, 16, 29. Retrieved 24 June 2011.
Utt, Walter C. (1974). "Toleration is a Nasty Word" (PDF). Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 69 (2, March–April): 10–13. Retrieved 24 June 2011.
Zippelius, Reinhold (2009). Staat und Kirche, ch.13. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. ISBN 978-3-16-150016-9.
External links[edit]
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Freedom of religion
Religion and Foreign Policy Initiative, Council on Foreign Relations.
The Complexity of Religion and the Definition of "Religion" in International Law Harvard Human Rights Journal article from the President and Fellows of Harvard College (2003)
Human Rights Brief No. 3, Freedom Of Religion and Belief Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC)
U.S. State Department country reports
Institute for Global Engagement
Institute for Religious Freedom


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Liberty













Liberty





































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Substantive human rights






























































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion



























































































































































































































































































































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Christianity and politics















































  


Categories: Freedom of religion






















Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Alemannisch
العربية
Беларуская
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Føroyskt
Français
Galego
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Latina
Magyar
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
پښتو
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 15 April 2015, at 01:44.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion














Freedom of religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

"Freedom of worship" and "Freedom to Worship" redirect here. For the 1943 painting/poster, see Freedom to Worship (painting).

Freedom of religion


Concepts[show]





Status by country[show]













































































































Religious persecution[show]


























Religion portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Freedom of religion or freedom of belief is a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or community, in public or private, to manifest religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship, and observance; the concept is generally recognized also to include the freedom to change religion or not to follow any religion.[1] The freedom to leave or discontinue membership in a religion or religious group—in religious terms called "apostasy"—is also a fundamental[peacock term] part of religious freedom, covered by Article 18 of United Nations' 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights.[2]
Freedom of religion is considered by many people and nations to be a fundamental human right.[3][4] In a country with a state religion, freedom of religion is generally considered to mean that the government permits religious practices of other sects besides the state religion, and does not persecute believers in other faiths.


Contents  [hide]
1 History 1.1 Muslim world
1.2 India
1.3 Europe 1.3.1 Religious intolerance
1.3.2 Early steps and attempts in the way of tolerance
1.3.3 Early laws and legal guarantees for religious freedom 1.3.3.1 Poland

1.4 United States
1.5 Canada
1.6 International
2 Contemporary debates 2.1 Theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs
2.2 Liberal secular
2.3 Hinduism
2.4 Judaism
2.5 Christianity
2.6 Islam
2.7 Changing religion 2.7.1 Apostasy in Islam
2.8 Secular law
3 Children's rights
4 International Religious Freedom Day
5 Modern concerns 5.1 Social hostilities and government restrictions
6 See also 6.1 Lawsuits
7 References
8 Further reading
9 External links

History[edit]

Text document with red question mark.svg
 This section may contain inappropriate or misinterpreted citations that do not verify the text. Please help improve this article by checking for inaccuracies. (help, talk, get involved!) (September 2010)



Minerva as a symbol of enlightened wisdom protects the believers of all religions (Daniel Chodowiecki, 1791)
Historically, freedom of religion has been used to refer to the tolerance of different theological systems of belief, while freedom of worship has been defined as freedom of individual action. Each of these have existed to varying degrees. While many countries have accepted some form of religious freedom, this has also often been limited in practice through punitive taxation, repressive social legislation, and political disenfranchisement. Compare examples of individual freedom in Italy or the Muslim tradition of dhimmis, literally "protected individuals" professing an officially tolerated non-Muslim religion.



 The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789) guarantees freedom of religion, as long as religious activities do not infringe on public order in ways detrimental to society.
In Antiquity, a syncretic point of view often allowed communities of traders to operate under their own customs. When street mobs of separate quarters clashed in a Hellenistic or Roman city, the issue was generally perceived to be an infringement of community rights.
Cyrus the Great established the Achaemenid Empire ca. 550 BC, and initiated a general policy of permitting religious freedom throughout the empire, documenting this on the Cyrus Cylinder.[5][6]
Some of the historical exceptions have been in regions where one of the revealed religions has been in a position of power: Judaism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Islam. Others have been where the established order has felt threatened, as shown in the trial of Socrates in 399 BC or where the ruler has been deified, as in Rome, and refusal to offer token sacrifice was similar to refusing to take an oath of allegiance. This was the core for resentment and the persecution of early Christian communities.
Freedom of religious worship was established in the Buddhist Maurya Empire of ancient India by Ashoka the Great in the 3rd century BC, which was encapsulated in the Edicts of Ashoka.
Greek-Jewish clashes at Cyrene in 73 AD and 117 AD and in Alexandria in 115 AD provide examples of cosmopolitan cities as scenes of tumult.
Muslim world[edit]
Following a period of fighting lasting around a hundred years before 620 AD which mainly involved Arab and Jewish inhabitants of Medina (then known as Yathrib), religious freedom for Muslims, Jews and pagans were declared by Muhammad in the Constitution of Medina. The Islamic Caliphate later guaranteed religious freedom under the conditions that non-Muslim communities accept dhimmi (second class) status and their adult males pay the jizya tax as a substitute for the zakat paid by Muslim citizens.[7][8]
Religious pluralism existed in classical Islamic ethics and Sharia law, as the religious laws and courts of other religions, including Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism, were usually accommodated within the Islamic legal framework, as seen in the early Caliphate, Al-Andalus, Indian subcontinent, and the Ottoman Millet system.[9][10] In medieval Islamic societies, the qadi (Islamic judges) usually could not interfere in the matters of non-Muslims unless the parties voluntarily choose to be judged according to Islamic law, thus the dhimmi communities living in Islamic states usually had their own laws independent from the Sharia law, such as the Jews who would have their own Halakha courts.[11]
Dhimmis were allowed to operate their own courts following their own legal systems in cases that did not involve other religious groups, or capital offences or threats to public order.[12] Non-Muslims were allowed to engage in religious practices that was usually forbidden by Islamic law, such as the consumption of alcohol and pork, as well as religious practices which Muslims found repugnant, such as the Zoroastrian practice of incestuous "self-marriage" where a man could marry his mother, sister or daughter. According to the famous Islamic legal scholar Ibn Qayyim (1292–1350), non-Muslims had the right to engage in such religious practices even if it offended Muslims, under the conditions that such cases not be presented to Islamic Sharia courts and that these religious minorities believed that the practice in question is permissible according to their religion.[13]
India[edit]
Main article: Freedom of religion in India
Religious freedom and the right to worship freely were practices that had been appreciated and promoted by most ancient Indian dynasties.[citation needed] As a result, people fleeing religious persecution in other parts of the world including Christians, Jews, Bahá'í Faith and Zoroastrians fled to India as a place of refuge to enjoy religious freedom.[14][15][16]
Ancient Jews fleeing from persecution in their homeland 2,500 years ago settled in India and never faced anti-Semitism.[17] Freedom of religion edicts have been found written during Ashoka the Great's reign in the 3rd century BC. Freedom to practise, preach and propagate any religion is a constitutional right in Modern India. Most major religious festivals of the main communities are included in the list of national holidays.
Although India is an 80% Hindu country, three out of the twelve presidents of India have been Muslims.
Many scholars and intellectuals believe that India's predominant religion, Hinduism, has long been a most tolerant religion.[18] Rajni Kothari, founder of the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies has written, "[India] is a country built on the foundations of a civilisation that is fundamentally non-religious."[19]
The Dalai Lama, the Tibetan leader in exile said that religious tolerance of 'Aryabhoomi,' a reference to India found in Mahabharata, has been in existence in this country from thousands of years. "Not only Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Sikhism which are the native religions but also Christianity and Islam have flourished here. Religious tolerance is inherent in Indian tradition," the Dalai Lama said.[20]
Freedom of religion in the Indian subcontinent is exemplified by the reign of King Piyadasi (304 BC to 232 BC) (Ashoka). One of King Ashoka's main concerns was to reform governmental institutes and exercise moral principles in his attempt to create a just and humane society. Later he promoted the principles of Buddhism, and the creation of a just, understanding and fair society was held as an important principle for many ancient rulers of this time in the East.
The importance of freedom of worship in India was encapsulated in an inscription of Ashoka:

King Piyadasi (Ashok) dear to the Gods, honours all sects, the ascetics (hermits) or those who dwell at home, he honours them with charity and in other ways. But the King, dear to the Gods, attributes less importance to this charity and these honours than to the vow of seeing the reign of virtues, which constitutes the essential part of them. For all these virtues there is a common source, modesty of speech. That is to say, one must not exalt one's creed discrediting all others, nor must one degrade these others without legitimate reasons. One must, on the contrary, render to other creeds the honour befitting them.
The initial entry of Islam into South Asia came in the first century after the death of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad. When around 1210 AD the Islamic Sultanates invaded India from the north-west, gradually the principle of freedom of religion deteriorated in this part of the world. They were subsequently replaced by another Islamic invader in the form of Babur. The Mughal empire was founded by the Mongol leader Babur in 1526, when he defeated Ibrahim Lodi, the last of the Delhi Sultans at the First Battle of Panipat. The word "Mughal" is the Indo-Iranian version of Mongol.
On the main Asian continent, the Mongols were tolerant of religions. People could worship as they wished freely and openly, though the formation of 2 nations i.e. Pakistan and Bangladesh has been on basis of religious intolerance.
After arrival of Europeans, Christians in zeal to convert local as per belief in conversion as service of God, have also been seen to fall into frivolous methods since their arrival. Though by and large there are hardly any reports of law and order disturbance from mobs with Christian beliefs except perhaps in the north eastern region of India.[21]
Freedom of religion in contemporary India is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 25 of the nation's constitution. Accordingly every citizen of India has a right to profess, practice and propagate their religions peacefully.[22] Vishwa Hindu Parishad counters this argument by saying that evangelical Christians are forcefully (or through money) converting rural, illiterate populations and they are only trying to stop this.
In September 2010, Indian state Kerala's State Election Commissioner announced that "Religious heads cannot issue calls to vote for members of a particular community or to defeat the nonbelievers".[23] The Catholic Church comprising Latin, Syro-Malabar and Syro-Malankara rites used to give clear directions to the faithful on exercising their franchise during elections through pastoral letters issued by bishops or council of bishops. The pastoral letter issued by Kerala Catholic Bishops' Council (KCBC) on the eve of the poll urged the faithful to shun atheists.[23]
Even today, most Indians celebrate all religious festivals with equal enthusiasm and respect. Hindu festivals like Deepavali and Holi, Muslim festivals like Eid al-Fitr, Eid-Ul-Adha, Muharram, Christian festivals like Christmas and other festivals like Buddha Purnima, Mahavir Jayanti, Gur Purab etc. are celebrated and enjoyed by all Indians.
Europe[edit]
Religious intolerance[edit]
Most Roman Catholic kingdoms kept a tight rein on religious expression throughout the Middle Ages. Jews were alternately tolerated and persecuted, the most notable examples of the latter being the expulsion of all Jews from Spain in 1492. Some of those who remained and converted were tried as heretics in the Inquisition for allegedly practicing Judaism in secret. Despite the persecution of Jews, they were the most tolerated non-Catholic faith in Europe.
However, the latter was in part a reaction to the growing movement that became the Reformation. As early as 1380, John Wycliffe in England denied transubstantiation and began his translation of the Bible into English. He was condemned in a Papal Bull in 1410, and all his books were burned.
In 1414, Jan Hus, a Bohemian preacher of reformation, was given a safe conduct by the Holy Roman Emperor to attend the Council of Constance. Not entirely trusting in his safety, he made his will before he left. His forebodings proved accurate, and he was burned at the stake on 6 July 1415. The Council also decreed that Wycliffe's remains be disinterred and cast out. This decree was not carried out until 1429.
After the fall of the city of Granada, Spain, in 1492, the Muslim population was promised religious freedom by the Treaty of Granada, but that promise was short-lived. In 1501, Granada's Muslims were given an ultimatum to either convert to Christianity or to emigrate. The majority converted, but only superficially, continuing to dress and speak as they had before and to secretly practice Islam. The Moriscos (converts to Christianity) were ultimately expelled from Spain between 1609 (Castile) and 1614 (rest of Spain), by Philip III.
Martin Luther published his famous 95 Theses in Wittenberg on 31 October 1517. His major aim was theological, summed up in the three basic dogmas of Protestantism:
The Bible only is infallible
Every Christian can interpret it
Human sins are so wrongful that no deed or merit, only God's grace, can lead to salvation.
In consequence, Luther hoped to stop the sale of indulgences and to reform the Church from within. In 1521, he was given the chance to recant at the Diet of Worms before Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, then only 19. After he refused to recant, he was declared heretic. Partly for his own protection, he was sequestered on the Wartburg in the possessions of Frederick III, Elector of Saxony, where he translated the New Testament into German. He was excommunicated by Papal Bull in 1521.
However, the movement continued to gain ground in his absence and spread to Switzerland. Huldrych Zwingli preached reform in Zürich from 1520 to 1523. He opposed the sale of indulgences, celibacy, pilgrimages, pictures, statues, relics, altars, and organs. This culminated in outright war between the Swiss cantons that accepted Protestantism and the Catholics. The Catholics were victorious, and Zwingli was killed in battle in 1531. The Catholic cantons were magnanimous in victory.[citation needed]
The defiance of Papal authority proved contagious, and in 1533, when Henry VIII of England was excommunicated for his divorce and remarriage to Anne Boleyn, he promptly established a state church with bishops appointed by the crown. This was not without internal opposition, and Thomas More, who had been his Lord Chancellor, was executed in 1535 for opposition to Henry.
In 1535, the Swiss canton of Geneva became Protestant. In 1536, the Bernese imposed the reformation on the canton of Vaud by conquest. They sacked the cathedral in Lausanne and destroyed all its art and statuary. John Calvin, who had been active in Geneva was expelled in 1538 in a power struggle, but he was invited back in 1540.



 A US Postage Stamp commemorating religious freedom and the Flushing Remonstrance.
The same kind of seesaw back and forth between Protestantism and Catholicism was evident in England when Mary I of England returned that country briefly to the Catholic fold in 1553 and persecuted Protestants. However, her half-sister, Elizabeth I of England was to restore the Church of England in 1558, this time permanently, and began to persecute Catholics again. The King James Bible commissioned by King James I of England and published in 1611 proved a landmark for Protestant worship, with official Catholic forms of worship being banned.
In France, although peace was made between Protestants and Catholics at the Treaty of Saint Germain in 1570, persecution continued, most notably in the Massacre of Saint Bartholomew's Day on 24 August 1572, in which thousands of Protestants throughout France were killed. A few years before, at the "Michelade" of Nîmes in 1567, Protestants had massacred the local Catholic clergy.
Early steps and attempts in the way of tolerance[edit]



 The cross of the war memorial and a menorah coexist in Oxford, Oxfordshire, England.
The Norman Kingdom of Sicily under Roger II was characterized by its multi-ethnic nature and religious tolerance. Normans, Jews, Muslim Arabs, Byzantine Greeks, Lombards, and native Sicilians lived in harmony.[24][25][not in citation given] Rather than exterminate the Muslims of Sicily, Roger II's grandson Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen (1215—1250) allowed them to settle on the mainland and build mosques. Not least, he enlisted them in his – Christian – army and even into his personal bodyguards[26][need quotation to verify][27][need quotation to verify]
Bohemia (present-day Czech Republic) enjoyed religious freedom between 1436 and 1520, and became one of the most liberal countries of the Christian world during that period of time. The so-called Basel Compacts of 1436 declared the freedom of religion and peace between Catholics and Utraquists. In 1609 Emperor Rudolf II granted Bohemia greater religious liberty with his Letter of Majesty. The privileged position of the Catholic Church in the Czech kingdom was firmly established after the Battle of White Mountain in 1620. Gradually freedom of religion in Bohemian lands came to an end and Protestants fled or were expelled from the country. A devout Catholic, Emperor Ferdinand II forcibly converted Austrian and Bohemian Protestants.[citation needed]
In the meantime, in Germany Philip Melanchthon drafted the Augsburg Confession as a common confession for the Lutherans and the free territories. It was presented to Charles V in 1530.
In the Holy Roman Empire, Charles V agreed to tolerate Lutheranism in 1555 at the Peace of Augsburg. Each state was to take the religion of its prince, but within those states, there was not necessarily religious tolerance. Citizens of other faiths could relocate to a more hospitable environment.
In France, from the 1550s, many attempts to reconcile Catholics and Protestants and to establish tolerance failed because the State was too weak to enforce them. It took the victory of prince Henry IV of France, who had converted into Protestantism, and his accession to the throne, to impose religious tolerance formalized in the Edict of Nantes in 1598. It would remain in force for over 80 years until its revocation in 1685 by Louis XIV of France. Intolerance remained the norm until Louis XVI, who signed the Edict of Versailles (1787), then the constitutional text of 24 December 1789, granting civilian rights to Protestants. The French Revolution then abolished state religion and confiscated all Church property, turning intolerance against Catholics.[citation needed]
Early laws and legal guarantees for religious freedom[edit]
In 1558, the Transylvanian Diet of Torda declared free practice of both the Catholic and Lutheran religions, but prohibited Calvinism. Ten years later, in 1568, the Diet extended the freedom to all religions, declaring that "It is not allowed to anybody to intimidate anybody with captivity or expelling for his religion". However, it was more than a religious tolerance, it declared the equality of the religions. The emergence in social hierarchy wasn't depend on the religion of the person thus Transylvania had also Catholic and Protestant monarchs (Princes). The lack of state religion was unique for centuries in Europe. Therefore, the Edict of Torda is considered by mostly Hungarian historians as the first legal guarantee of religious freedom in Christian Europe.

ACT OF RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE AND FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE:
His majesty, our Lord, in what manner he – together with his realm – legislated in the matter of religion at the previous Diets, in the same matter now, in this Diet, reaffirms that in every place the preachers shall preach and explain the Gospel each according to his understanding of it, and if the congregation like it, well. If not, no one shall compel them for their souls would not be satisfied, but they shall be permitted to keep a preacher whose teaching they approve. Therefore none of the superintendents or others shall abuse the preachers, no one shall be reviled for his religion by anyone, according to the previous statutes, and it is not permitted that anyone should threaten anyone else by imprisonment or by removal from his post for his teaching. For faith is the gift of God and this comes from hearing, which hearings is by the word of God.
— Diet at Torda, 1568 : King John Sigismund[28]
In the Union of Utrecht (20 January 1579), personal freedom of religion was declared in the struggle between the Northern Netherlands and Spain. The Union of Utrecht was an important step in the establishment of the Dutch Republic (from 1581 to 1795). Under Calvinist leadership, the Netherlands became the most tolerant country in Europe. It granted asylum to persecuted religious minorities, e.g. French Huguenots, English Dissenters, and Jews who had been expelled from Spain and Portugal.[29] The establishment of a Jewish community in the Netherlands and New Amsterdam (present-day New York) during the Dutch Republic is an example of religious freedom. When New Amsterdam surrendered to the English in 1664, freedom of religion was guaranteed in the Articles of Capitulation. It benefitted also the Jews who had landed on Manhattan Island in 1654, fleeing Portuguese persecution in Brazil. During the 18th century, other Jewish communities were established at Newport, Rhode Island, Philadelphia, Charleston, Savannah, and Richmond.[30]
Intolerance of dissident forms of Protestantism also continued, as evidenced by the exodus of the Pilgrims, who sought refuge, first in the Netherlands, and ultimately in America, founding Plymouth Colony in Massachusetts in 1620. William Penn, the founder of Philadelphia, was involved in a case which had a profound effect upon future American laws and those of England. In a classic case of jury nullification the jury refused to convict William Penn of preaching a Quaker sermon, which was illegal. Even though the jury was imprisoned for their acquittal, they stood by their decision and helped establish the freedom of religion.
Poland[edit]
Main article: Warsaw Confederation



 Original act of the Warsaw Confederation 1573. The beginning of religious freedom in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
Poland has a long tradition of religious freedom. The right to worship freely was a basic right given to all inhabitants of the Commonwealth throughout the 15th and early 16th century, however, complete freedom of religion was officially recognized in Poland in 1573 during the Warsaw Confederation. Poland kept religious freedom laws during an era when religious persecution was an everyday occurrence in the rest of Europe.[31]
The General Charter of Jewish Liberties known as the Statute of Kalisz was issued by the Duke of Greater Poland Boleslaus the Pious on 8 September 1264 in Kalisz. The statute served as the basis for the legal position of Jews in Poland and led to creation of the Yiddish-speaking autonomous Jewish nation until 1795. The statute granted exclusive jurisdiction of Jewish courts over Jewish matters and established a separate tribunal for matters involving Christians and Jews. Additionally, it guaranteed personal liberties and safety for Jews including freedom of religion, travel, and trade. The statute was ratified by subsequent Polish Kings: Casimir III of Poland in 1334, Casimir IV of Poland in 1453 and Sigismund I of Poland in 1539. The Commonwealth set a precedent by allowing Jews to become ennobled.
United States[edit]
See also: Freedom of religion in the United States
Most of the early colonies were generally not tolerant of dissident forms of worship, with Maryland being one of the exceptions. For example, Roger Williams found it necessary to found a new colony in Rhode Island to escape persecution in the theocratically dominated colony of Massachusetts. The Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony were the most active of the New England persecutors of Quakers, and the persecuting spirit was shared by Plymouth Colony and the colonies along the Connecticut river.[32] In 1660, one of the most notable victims of the religious intolerance was English Quaker Mary Dyer, who was hanged in Boston, Massachusetts for repeatedly defying a Puritan law banning Quakers from the colony.[32] As one of the four executed Quakers known as the Boston martyrs, the hanging of Dyer on the Boston gallows marked the beginning of the end of the Puritan theocracy and New England independence from English rule, and in 1661 King Charles II explicitly forbade Massachusetts from executing anyone for professing Quakerism.[33]
Freedom of religion was first applied as a principle of government in the founding of the colony of Maryland, founded by the Catholic Lord Baltimore, in 1634.[34] Fifteen years later (1649), the Maryland Toleration Act, drafted by Lord Baltimore, provided: "No person or persons...shall from henceforth be any waies troubled, molested or discountenanced for or in respect of his or her religion nor in the free exercise thereof." The Maryland Toleration Act was repealed during the Cromwellian Era with the assistance of Protestant assemblymen and a new law barring Catholics from openly practicing their religion was passed.[35] In 1657, the Catholic Lord Baltimore regained control after making a deal with the colony's Protestants, and in 1658 the Act was again passed by the colonial assembly. This time, it would last more than thirty years, until 1692[36] when, after Maryland's Protestant Revolution of 1689, freedom of religion was again rescinded.[34][37] In addition, in 1704, an Act was passed "to prevent the growth of Popery in this Province", preventing Catholics from holding political office.[37] Full religious toleration would not be restored in Maryland until the American Revolution, when Maryland's Charles Carroll of Carrollton signed the American Declaration of Independence.
Rhode Island (1636), Connecticut (1636), New Jersey, and Pennsylvania (1682)—founded by Protestants Roger Williams, Thomas Hooker, and William Penn, respectively—combined the democratic form of government which had been developed by the Puritans and the Separatist Congregationalists in Massachusetts with religious freedom.[38][39][40][41] These colonies became sanctuaries for persecuted religious minorities. Catholics and later on Jews also had full citizenship and free exercise of their religions.[42][43][44] Williams, Hooker, Penn, and their friends were firmly convinced that freedom of conscience was the will of God. Williams gave the most profound argument: As faith is the free work of the Holy Spirit, it cannot be forced on a person. Therefore strict separation of church and state has to be kept.[45] Pennsylvania was the only colony that retained unlimited religious freedom until the foundation of the United States in 1776. It was the inseparable connection between democracy, religious freedom, and the other forms of freedom which became the political and legal basis of the new nation. In particular, Baptists and Presbyterians demanded the disestablishment of state churches - Anglican and Congregationalist - and the protection of religious freedom.[46]
Reiterating Maryland's and the other colonies' earlier colonial legislation, the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, written in 1779 by Thomas Jefferson, proclaimed:

[N]o man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.
Those sentiments also found expression in the First Amendment of the national constitution, part of the United States' Bill of Rights: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
The United States formally considers religious freedom in its foreign relations. The International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 established the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom which investigates the records of over 200 other nations with respect to religious freedom, and makes recommendations to submit nations with egregious records to ongoing scrutiny and possible economic sanctions. Many human rights organizations have urged the United States to be still more vigorous in imposing sanctions on countries that do not permit or tolerate religious freedom.
Canada[edit]
Further information: Freedom of religion in Canada
Freedom of religion in Canada is a constitutionally protected right, allowing believers the freedom to assemble and worship without limitation or interference. Canadian law goes further, requiring that private citizens and companies provide reasonable accommodation to those, for example, with strong religious beliefs. The Canadian Human Rights Act allows an exception to reasonable accommodation with respect to religious dress, such as a Sikh turban, when there is a bona fide occupational requirement, such as a workplace requiring a hard hat.[47]
International[edit]
On 25 November 1981, the United Nations General Assembly passed the "Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief". This declaration recognizes freedom of religion as a fundamental human right in accordance with several other instruments of international law, but the international community has not passed any binding legal instruments that guarantee the right to freedom of religion.[48]
Contemporary debates[edit]

Freedom of religion


Concepts[show]





Status by country[show]













































































































Religious persecution[show]


























Religion portal
v ·
 t ·
 e
   
Theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs[edit]
In 1993, the UN's human rights committee declared that article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights "protects theistic, non-theistic and atheistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess any religion or belief."[49] The committee further stated that "the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief necessarily entails the freedom to choose a religion or belief, including the right to replace one's current religion or belief with another or to adopt atheistic views." Signatories to the convention are barred from "the use of threat of physical force or penal sanctions to compel believers or non-believers" to recant their beliefs or convert. Despite this, minority religions still are still persecuted in many parts of the world.[50][51]
Within the United States, the Freedom From Religion Foundation argues that the United States Constitution not only prohibits the intrusion of religion into the processes of government, but also guarantees equal rights to citizens who choose not to follow any religion.[52] Conservative sociopolitical commentator Bryan Fischer has responded: "The Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion."[53]
Liberal secular[edit]

A man posing for a print

Adam Smith argued in favour of freedom of religion.
Adam Smith, in his book The Wealth of Nations (using an argument first put forward by his friend and contemporary David Hume), states that in the long run it is in the best interests of society as a whole and the civil magistrate (government) in particular to allow people to freely choose their own religion, as it helps prevent civil unrest and reduces intolerance. So long as there are enough different religions and/or religious sects operating freely in a society then they are all compelled to moderate their more controversial and violent teachings, so as to be more appealing to more people and so have an easier time attracting new converts. It is this free competition amongst religious sects for converts that ensures stability and tranquillity in the long run.
Smith also points out that laws that prevent religious freedom and seek to preserve the power and belief in a particular religion will, in the long run, only serve to weaken and corrupt that religion, as its leaders and preachers become complacent, disconnected and unpractised in their ability to seek and win over new converts:[54]

The interested and active zeal of religious teachers can be dangerous and troublesome only where there is either but one sect tolerated in the society, or where the whole of a large society is divided into two or three great sects; the teachers of each acting by concert, and under a regular discipline and subordination. But that zeal must be altogether innocent, where the society is divided into two or three hundred, or, perhaps, into as many thousand small sects, of which no one could be considerable enough to disturb the public tranquillity. The teachers of each sect, seeing themselves surrounded on all sides with more adversaries than friends, would be obliged to learn that candour and moderation which are so seldom to be found among the teachers of those great sects.[55]
Hinduism[edit]
Hinduism is one of the more open-minded religions when it comes to religious freedom.[56] It respects the right of everyone to reach God in their own way. Hindus believe in different ways to preach attainment of God and religion as a philosophy and hence respect all religions as equal. One of the famous Hindu sayings about religion is: "Truth is one; sages call it by different names."[56]
Judaism[edit]
Judaism includes multiple streams, such as Orthodox, Reform Judaism, Conservative Judaism, Reconstructionist Judaism, Jewish Renewal and Humanistic Judaism. Israel, viewed as the Jewish homeland, has been evaluated in research by the Pew organization as having "high" government restrictions on religion. The government recognizes only Orthodox Judaism in certain matters of personal status, and marriages can only be performed by religious authorities. The government provides the greatest funding to Orthodox Judaism, even though adherents represent a minority of citizens.[57] Jewish women have been arrested at the Western Wall for praying and singing while wearing religious garments the Orthodox feel should be reserved for men. Women of the Wall have organized to promote religious freedom at the Wall.[58] In November 2014, a group of 60 non-Orthodox rabbinical students were told they would not be allowed to pray in the Knesset synagogue because it is reserved for Orthodox. Rabbi Joel Levy, director of the Conservative Yeshiva in Jerusalem, said that he had submitted the request on behalf of the students and saw their shock when the request was denied. He noted: "paradoxically, this decision served as an appropriate end to our conversation about religion and state in Israel." MK Dov Lipman expressed the concern that many Knesset workers are unfamiliar with non-Orthodox and American practices and would view "an egalitarian service in the synagogue as an affront."[59]
Christianity[edit]



 Part of the Oscar Straus Memorial in Washington, D.C. honoring the right to worship.
According to the Catholic Church in the Vatican II document on religious freedom, Dignitatis Humanae, "the human person has a right to religious freedom", which is described as "immunity from coercion in civil society".[60] This principle of religious freedom "leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion."[60] In addition, this right "is to be recognized in the constitutional law whereby society is governed and thus it is to become a civil right."[60]
Prior to this, Pope Pius IX had written a document called the Syllabus of Errors. The Syllabus was made up of phrases and paraphrases from earlier papal documents, along with index references to them, and presented as a list of "condemned propositions". It does not explain why each particular proposition is wrong, but it cites earlier documents to which the reader can refer for the Pope's reasons for saying each proposition is false. Among the statements included in the Syllabus are: "[It is an error to say that] Every man is free to embrace and profess that religion which, guided by the light of reason, he shall consider true" (15); "[It is an error to say that] In the present day it is no longer expedient that the Catholic religion should be held as the only religion of the State, to the exclusion of all other forms of worship" (77); "[It is an error to say that] Hence it has been wisely decided by law, in some Catholic countries, that persons coming to reside therein shall enjoy the public exercise of their own peculiar worship" (78).[61]
Some Orthodox Christians, especially those living in democratic countries, support religious freedom for all, as evidenced by the position of the Ecumenical Patriarchate. Many Protestant Christian churches, including some Baptists, Churches of Christ, Seventh-day Adventist Church and main line churches have a commitment to religious freedoms. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also affirms religious freedom.[62]
However others, such as African scholar Makau Mutua, have argued that Christian insistence on the propagation of their faith to native cultures as an element of religious freedom has resulted in a corresponding denial of religious freedom to native traditions and led to their destruction. As he states in the book produced by the Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief, "Imperial religions have necessarily violated individual conscience and the communal expressions of Africans and their communities by subverting African religions."[63][64]
In their book Breaking India, Rajiv Malhotra and Aravindan Neelakandan discussed the "US Church" funding activities in India, such as the popularly advertised campaigns to "save" poor children by feeding, clothing, and educating them, with the book arguing that the funds collected were being used not so much for the purposes indicated to sponsors, but for indoctrination and conversion activities. They suggest that India is the prime target of a huge enterprise—a "network" of organizations, individuals, and churches—that, they argue, seem intensely devoted to the task of creating a separatist identity, history, and even religion for the vulnerable sections of India. They suggest that this nexus of players includes not only church groups, government bodies, and related organizations, but also private think tanks and academics.[65]
Joel Spring has written about the Christianization of the Roman Empire:

Christianity added new impetus to the expansion of empire. Increasing the arrogance of the imperial project, Christians insisted that the Gospels and the Church were the only valid sources of religious beliefs. Imperialists could claim that they were both civilizing the world and spreading the true religion. By the 5th century, Christianity was thought of as co-extensive with the Imperium romanum. This meant that to be human, as opposed to being a natural slave, was to be "civilized" and Christian. Historian Anthony Pagden argues, "just as the civitas; had now become coterminous with Christianity, so to be human—to be, that is, one who was 'civil', and who was able to interpret correctly the law of nature—one had now also to be Christian." After the fifteenth century, most Western colonialists rationalized the spread of empire with the belief that they were saving a barbaric and pagan world by spreading Christian civilization.[66]
Islam[edit]
Main articles: Political aspects of Islam, Sharia, Caliphate, Islamic religious police and Islamism
Conversion to Islam is simple (cf. shahada), but Muslims are forbidden to convert from Islam to another religion (cf. Apostasy in Islam). Certain Muslim-majority countries are known for their restrictions on religious freedom, highly favoring Muslim citizens over non-Muslim citizens. Other countries[who?] having the same restrictive laws tend to be more liberal when imposing them. Even other Muslim-majority countries are secular and thus do not regulate religious belief.[67][not in citation given]
Some Islamic theologians[who?] quote the Qur'an (“There is no compulsion in religion”[2:256] and “Say: O you who reject faith, I do not worship what you worship, nor do you worship what I worship...To you be your religion, and to me be mine”[109:1–6], i.e., Sura Al-Kafirun) to show scriptural support for religious freedom.
Quran 2:190–194, referring to the war against Pagans during the Battle of Badr in Medina, indicates that Muslims are only allowed to fight against those who intend to harm them (right of self-defense) and that if their enemies surrender, they must also stop because God does not like those who transgress limits.
In Bukhari:V9 N316, Jabir ibn 'Abdullah narrated that a Bedouin accepted Islam and then when he got a fever he demanded that Muhammad to cancel his pledge (allow him to renounce Islam). Muhammad refused to do so. The Bedouin man repeated his demand once, but Muhammad once again refused. Then, he (the Bedouin) left Medina. Muhammad said, "Madinah is like a pair of bellows (furnace): it expels its impurities and brightens and clear its good." In this narration, there was no evidence demonstrating that Muhammad ordered the execution of the Bedouin for wanting to renounce Islam.
In addition, Quran 5:3, which is believed to be God's final revelation to Muhammad, states that Muslims are to fear God and not those who reject Islam, and Quran 53:38–39 states that one is accountable only for one's own actions. Therefore, it postulates that in Islam, in the matters of practising a religion, it does not relate to a worldly punishment, but rather these actions are accountable to God in the afterlife. Thus, this supports the argument against the execution of apostates in Islam.
However, on the other hand, some Muslims support the practice of executing apostates who leave Islam, as in Bukhari:V4 B52 N260; "The Prophet said, 'If a Muslim discards his religion, kill him.'"
In Iran, the constitution recognizes four religions whose status is formally protected: Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.[50] The constitution, however, also set the groundwork for the institutionalized persecution of Bahá'ís,[68] who have been subjected to arrests, beatings, executions, confiscation and destruction of property, and the denial of civil rights and liberties, and the denial of access to higher education.[50] There is no freedom of conscience in Iran, as converting from Islam to any other religion is forbidden.
In Egypt, a 16 December 2006 judgment of the Supreme Administrative Council created a clear demarcation between recognized religions – Islam, Christianity and Judaism – and all other religious beliefs;[69][70] no other religious affiliation is officially admissible.[71] The ruling leaves members of other religious communities, including Bahá'ís, without the ability to obtain the necessary government documents to have rights in their country, essentially denying them of all rights of citizenship.[71] They cannot obtain ID cards, birth certificates, death certificates, marriage or divorce certificates, and passports; they also cannot be employed, educated, treated in public hospitals or vote, among other things.[71] See Egyptian identification card controversy.
Changing religion[edit]
Main article: Religious conversion
Among the most contentious areas of religious freedom is the right of an individual to change or abandon his or her own religion (apostasy), and the right to evangelize individuals seeking to convince others to make such a change.
Other debates have centered around restricting certain kinds of missionary activity by religions. Many Islamic states, and others such as China, severely restrict missionary activities of other religions. Greece, among European countries, has generally looked unfavorably on missionary activities of denominations others than the majority church and proselytizing is constitutionally prohibited.[72]
A different kind of critique of the freedom to propagate religion has come from non-Abrahamic traditions such as the African and Indian. African scholar Makau Mutua criticizes religious evangelism on the ground of cultural annihilation by what he calls "proselytizing universalist faiths" (Chapter 28: Proselytism and Cultural Integrity, page 652):

...the (human) rights regime incorrectly assumes a level playing field by requiring that African religions compete in the marketplace of ideas. The rights corpus not only forcibly imposes on African religions the obligation to compete—a task for which as nonproselytizing, noncompetitive creeds they are not historically fashioned—but also protects the evangelizing religions in their march towards universalization ... it seems inconceivable that the human rights regime would have intended to protect the right of certain religions to destroy others.[73]
Some Indian scholars[74] have similarly argued that the right to propagate religion is not culturally or religiously neutral.
In Sri Lanka, there have been debates regarding a bill on religious freedom that seeks to protect indigenous religious traditions from certain kinds of missionary activities. Debates have also occurred in various states of India regarding similar laws, particularly those that restrict conversions using force, fraud or allurement.
In 2008, Christian Solidarity Worldwide, a Christian human rights non-governmental organisation which specializes in religious freedom, launched an in-depth report on the human rights abuses faced by individuals who leave Islam for another religion. The report is the product of a year long research project in six different countries. It calls on Muslim nations, the international community, the UN and the international media to resolutely address the serious violations of human rights suffered by apostates.[75]
Apostasy in Islam[edit]
Main articles: Apostasy in Islam, Takfir and Mutaween



 Legal opinion on apostasy by the Fatwa committee at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the highest Islamic institution in the world, concerning the case of a man who converted to Christianity: "Since he left Islam, he will be invited to express his regret. If he does not regret, he will be killed pertaining to rights and obligations of the Islamic law."
In Islam, apostasy is called "ridda" ("turning back") and is considered to be a profound insult to God. A person born of Muslim parents that rejects Islam is called a "murtad fitri" (natural apostate), and a person that converted to Islam and later rejects the religion is called a "murtad milli" (apostate from the community).[76]
In Islamic law (Sharia), the consensus view is that a male apostate must be put to death unless he suffers from a mental disorder or converted under duress, for example, due to an imminent danger of being killed. A female apostate must be either executed, according to Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), or imprisoned until she reverts to Islam as advocated by the Sunni Hanafi school and by Shi'a scholars.[77]
Ideally, the one performing the execution of an apostate must be an imam.[77] At the same time, all schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that any Muslim can kill an apostate without punishment.[78]
However, while almost all scholars agree about the punishment, many disagree on the allowable time to retract the apostasy. Many scholars push this as far as allowing the apostate till he/she dies. Thus, practically making the death penalty just a theoretical statement/exercise.[citation needed] S. A. Rahman, a former Chief Justice of Pakistan, argues that there is no indication of the death penalty for apostasy in the Qur'an.[79]
Secular law[edit]
Religious practice may also conflict with secular law, creating debates on religious freedom. For instance, even though polygamy is permitted in Islam, it is prohibited in secular law in many countries. This raises the question of whether prohibiting the practice infringes on the beliefs of certain Muslims. The US and India, both constitutionally secular nations, have taken two different views of this. In India, polygamy is permitted, but only for Muslims, under Muslim Personal Law. In the US, polygamy is prohibited for all. This was a major source of conflict between the early LDS Church and the United States until the Church amended its position on practicing polygamy.
Similar issues have also arisen in the context of the religious use of psychedelic substances by Native American tribes in the United States as well as other Native practices.
In 1955, Chief Justice of California Roger J. Traynor neatly summarized the American position on how freedom of religion cannot imply freedom from law: "Although freedom of conscience and the freedom to believe are absolute, the freedom to act is not."[80] But with respect to the religious use of animals within secular law and those acts, the US Supreme Court decision in the case of the Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v. City of Hialeah in 1993 upheld the right of Santeria adherents to practice ritual animal sacrifice, with Justice Anthony Kennedy stating in the decision: "religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection" (quoted by Justice Kennedy from the opinion by Justice Burger in Thomas v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division 450 U.S. 707 (1981)).[81]
Children's rights[edit]
The law in Germany provides the term of "religious majority" (Religiöse Mündigkeit) with a minimum age for minors to follow their own religious beliefs even if their parents don't share those or don't approve. Children 14 and older have the unrestricted right to enter or exit any religious community. Children 12 and older cannot be compelled to change to a different belief. Children 10 and older have to be heard before their parents change their religious upbringing to a different belief.[82] There are similar laws in Austria[83] and in Switzerland.[84]
International Religious Freedom Day[edit]
27 October is International Religious Freedom Day, in commemoration of the execution of the Boston martyrs for their religious convictions 1659–1661.[85] The US proclaimed 16 January Religious Freedom Day.[86]
Modern concerns[edit]
In its 2011 annual report, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom designated fourteen nations as "countries of particular concern". The commission chairman commented that these are nations whose conduct marks them as the world's worst religious freedom violators and human rights abusers. The fourteen nations designated were Burma, China, Egypt, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. Other nations on the commission's watchlist include Afghanistan, Belarus, Cuba, India, Indonesia, Laos, Russia, Somalia, Tajikistan, Turkey, and Venezuela.[87]
There are concerns about the restrictions on public religious dress in some European countries (including the Hijab, Kippah, and Christian cross).[88][89] Article 18 of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights limits restrictions on freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs to those necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.[90] Freedom of religion as a legal concept is related to, but not identical with, religious toleration, separation of church and state, or secular state (laïcité).
Social hostilities and government restrictions[edit]



 Freedom of religion by country (Pew Research Center study, 2009). Light yellow: low restriction; red: very high restriction on freedom of religion.
The Pew Research Center has performed studies on international religious freedom between 2009 and 2015, compiling global data from 16 governmental and non-governmental organizations–including the United Nations, the United States State Department, and Human Rights Watch–and representing over 99.5 percent of the world's population.[91][92] In 2009, nearly 70 percent of the world's population lived in countries classified as having heavy restrictions on freedom of religion.[91][92] This concerns restrictions on religion originating from government prohibitions on free speech and religious expression as well as social hostilities undertaken by private individuals, organisations and social groups. Social hostilities were classified by the level of communal violence and religion-related terrorism.
While most countries provided for the protection of religious freedom in their constitutions or laws, only a quarter of those countries were found to fully respect these legal rights in practice. In 75 countries governments limit the efforts of religious groups to proselytise and in 178 countries religious groups must register with the government. In 2013, Pew classified 30% of countries as having restrictions that tend to target religious minorities, and 61% of countries have social hostilities that tend to target religious minorities.[93]
The countries in North and South America reportedly had some of the lowest levels of government and social restrictions on religion, while The Middle East and North Africa were the regions with the highest. Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Iran were the countries that top the list of countries with the overall highest levels of restriction on religion. Topping the Pew government restrictions index were Saudi Arabia, Iran, Uzbekistan, China, Egypt, Burma, Maldives, Eritrea, Malaysia and Brunei.
Of the world's 25 most populous countries, Iran, Egypt, Indonesia and Pakistan had the most restrictions, while Brazil, Japan, Italy, South Africa, the UK, and the US had some of the lowest levels, as measured by Pew.
Vietnam and China were classified as having high government restrictions on religion but were in the moderate or low range when it came to social hostilities. Nigeria, Bangladesh and India were high in social hostilities but moderate in terms of government actions.
Restrictions on religion across the world increased between mid-2009 and mid-2010, according to a 2012 study by the Pew Research Center. Restrictions in each of the five major regions of the world increased—including in the Americas and sub-Saharan Africa, the two regions where overall restrictions previously had been declining. In 2010, Egypt, Nigeria, the Palestinian territories, Russia, and Yemen were added to the "very high" category of social hostilities.[94] The five highest social hostility scores were for Pakistan, India, Sri Lanka, Iraq, and Bangladesh.[95] In 2015, Pew published that social hostilities declined in 2013, but Harassment of Jews increased.[93]
See also[edit]

Portal icon Human rights portal
Portal icon Religion portal
Adiaphora
Forum 18
Freedom of thought
International Association for Religious Freedom
International Center for Law and Religion Studies
International Coalition for Religious Freedom
International Religious Liberty Association
Missouri Executive Order 44
General Order No. 11 (1862)
North American Religious Liberty Association
Persecution of Jehovah's Witnesses in the United States
Religious discrimination
Status of religious freedom by country
Religious education in primary and secondary education
Witch-hunt
Witch trials in the early modern period
Lawsuits[edit]
C. H. v. Oliva et al.
References[edit]
1.Jump up ^ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18.
2.Jump up ^ "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights". The United Nations.
3.Jump up ^ Davis, Derek H. "The Evolution of Religious Liberty as a Universal Human Right". Archived from the original on 1 February 2008. Retrieved 5 December 2006. (archived from the original on 1 February 2008).
4.Jump up ^ Congressional Record #29734 – 19 November 2003. Google Books. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
5.Jump up ^ Cyrus Cylinder, livius.org.
6.Jump up ^ Richard A. Taylor; E. Ray Clendenen (15 October 2004). Haggai, Malachi. B&H Publishing Group. pp. 31–32. ISBN 978-0-8054-0121-9.
7.Jump up ^ Natan, Yoel (2006). Moon-o-theism, Volume II of II. Yoel Natan. p. 514. ISBN 978-1-4392-9717-9.
8.Jump up ^ Njeuma, Martin Z. (2012). Fulani Hegemony in Yola (Old Adamawa) 1809-1902. African Books Collective. p. 82. ISBN 978-9956-726-95-0.
9.Jump up ^ (Weeramantry 1997, p. 138)[citation needed]
10.Jump up ^ Sachedina, Abdulaziz Abdulhussein (2001). The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-513991-7.
11.Jump up ^ Mark R. Cohen (1995). Under Crescent and Cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages. Princeton University Press. p. 74. ISBN 0-691-01082-X. Retrieved 10 April 2010.
12.Jump up ^ al-Qattan, Najwa (1999). "Dhimmis in the Muslim Court: Legal Autonomy and Religious Discrimination". International Journal of Middle East Studies (University of Cambridge) 31 (3): 429–444. doi:10.1017/S0020743800055501. ISSN 00207438.
13.Jump up ^ Sherman A. Jackson (2005). Islam and the Blackamerican: looking toward the third resurrection. Oxford University Press. p. 144. ISBN 0-19-518081-X. Retrieved 10 April 2010.
14.Jump up ^ The Last Jews of Kerala, p98
15.Jump up ^ Katz 2000; Koder 1973; Thomas Puthiakunnel 1973; David de Beth Hillel, 1832; Lord, James Henry 1977.
16.Jump up ^ Parsis#History
17.Jump up ^ Who are the Jews of India? – The S. Mark Taper Foundation imprint in Jewish studies. University of California Press. 2000. p. 26. ISBN 978-0-520-21323-4. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=ZWX6pF2PTJwC&pg=PA26.; "When the Portuguese arrived in 1498, they brought a spirit of intolerance utterly alien to India. They soon established an Office of Inquisition at Goa, and at their hands Indian Jews experienced the only instance of anti-Semitism ever to occur in Indian soil."
18.Jump up ^ David E. Ludden (1996). Contesting the Nation: Religion, Community, and the Politics of Democracy in India. University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 257–258. ISBN 0-8122-1585-0.
19.Jump up ^ Rajni Kothari (1998). Communalism in Indian Politics. Rainbow Publishers. pp. 134. ISBN 978-81-86962-00-8.
20.Jump up ^ "India's religious tolerance lauded". Deccan Herald. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
21.Jump up ^ "Christian Persecution in India: The Real Story". Stephen-knapp.com. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
22.Jump up ^ "The Constitution of India" (PDF). Retrieved 3 September 2011.
23.^ Jump up to: a b "'Using places of worship for campaigning in Kerala civic polls is violation of poll code'". Indian Orthodox Herald. 18 September 2010. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
24.Jump up ^ "Roger II". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
25.Jump up ^ "Tracing The Norman Rulers of Sicily". New York Times. 26 April 1987. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
26.Jump up ^ Christopher Gravett (15 November 1997). German Medieval Armies 1000–1300. Osprey Publishing. pp. 17. ISBN 978-1-85532-657-6.
27.Jump up ^ Thomas Curtis Van Cleve's The Emperor Frederick II of Hohenstaufen: Immutator Mundi (Oxford, 1972)
28.Jump up ^ Unitarian Universalist Partner Church Council. "Edict of Torda" (DOC). Retrieved on 2008-01-23.
29.Jump up ^ Karl Heussi, Kompendium der Kirchengeschichte, 11. Auflage (1956), Tübingen (Germany), pp. 396-397
30.Jump up ^ Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), History of Religion in the United States, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Ciffs, N.J., p. 124
31.Jump up ^ Zamoyski, Adam. The Polish Way. New York: Hippocrene Books, 1987
32.^ Jump up to: a b Rogers, Horatio, 2009. Mary Dyer of Rhode Island: The Quaker Martyr That Was Hanged on Boston Common, 1 June 1660 pp.1–2. BiblioBazaar, LLC
33.Jump up ^ Puritans and Puritanism in Europe and America: a comprehensive encyclopedia. Google Books. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
34.^ Jump up to: a b Zimmerman, Mark, Symbol of Enduring Freedom, p. 19, Columbia Magazine, March 2010
35.Jump up ^ Brugger, Robert J. (1988). Maryland: A Middle Temperament. , p 21, Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0-8018-3399-X.
36.Jump up ^ Finkelman, Paul, Maryland Toleration Act, The Encyclopedia of American Civil Liberties, New York: CRC Press. ISBN 0-415-94342-6.
37.^ Jump up to: a b id=6ybHa6D24qQC&pg=PA78&dq=henry+darnall&lr=&as_drrb_is=q&as_minm_is=0&as_miny_is=&as_maxm_is=0&as_maxy_is=&as_brr=3&ei=fcKDS_qNIKjoygTH_rnxCg&cd=5#v=onepage&q=henry%20darnall&f=false Roark, Elisabeth Louise, p.78, Artists of colonial America Retrieved 22 February 2010
38.Jump up ^ Christopher Fennell (1998), Plymouth Colony Legal Structure (http://www.histarch.uiuc.edu/plymouth/ccflaw.html)
39.Jump up ^ Hanover Historical Texts Project (http://history.hanover.edu/texts/masslib.html)
40.Jump up ^ M. Schmidt, Pilgerväter, in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 3. Auflage, Tübingen (Germany), Band V (1961), col. 384
41.Jump up ^ M. Schmidt, Hooker, Thomas, in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 3. Auflage, Band III (1959), col. 449
42.Jump up ^ Clifton E. Olmstead (1960), History of Religion in the United States, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., pp. 74-75, 99, 102-105, 113-115
43.Jump up ^ Edwin S. Gaustad (1999), Liberty of Conscience: Roger Williams in America, Judson Press, Valley Forge
44.Jump up ^ Hans Fantel (1974), William Penn: Apostel of Dissent, William Morrow & Co., New York, N.Y.
45.Jump up ^ Heinrich Bornkamm, Toleranz. In der Geschichte der Christenheit, in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 3. Auflage, Band VI (1962), col. 943
46.Jump up ^ Robert Middlekauff (2005), The Glorious Cause: The American Revolution, 1763-1789, Revised and Expanded Edition, Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19-531588-2, p. 635
47.Jump up ^ Freedom of Religion and Religious Symbols in the Public Sphere. 2.2.2 Headcoverings. Parliament of Canada. Publication No. 2011-60-E. Published 2011-07-25. Retrieved 21 December 2011.
48.Jump up ^ "A/RES/36/55. Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief". United Nations. 25 November 1981. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
49.Jump up ^ "CCPR General Comment 22: 30/07/93 on ICCPR Article 18". Minorityrights.org.
50.^ Jump up to: a b c International Federation for Human Rights (1 August 2003). "Discrimination against religious minorities in Iran" (PDF). fdih.org. Retrieved 3 March 2009.
51.Jump up ^ Davis, Derek H. "The Evolution of Religious Liberty as a Universal Human Right" (PDF). Retrieved 3 March 2009.
52.Jump up ^ "The Constitution Guarantees Freedom From Religion". Freedom From Religion Foundation. August 28, 2000. Retrieved December 27, 2012.
53.Jump up ^ Elena Garcia, Atheist Billboard Hits Idaho, 10 March 2009, The Christian Post.
54.Jump up ^ Smith, Adam (1776), Wealth of Nations, Penn State Electronic Classics edition, republished 2005, p.643-649
55.Jump up ^ Smith, Adam (1776), Wealth of Nations, Penn State Electronic Classics edition, republished 2005, p.647
56.^ Jump up to: a b "Hindu Beliefs". religionfacts.com.
57.Jump up ^ "Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life: Global restrictions on Religion (2009" http://www.pewforum.org/files/2009/12/restrictions-fullreport1.pdf
58.Jump up ^ "Police arrest 5 women at Western Wall for wearing tallitot" Jerusalem Post (Apr 11, 2013)
59.Jump up ^ "Maltz, Judy 'Non-Orthodox Jews prohibited from praying in Knesset synagogue' (Nov 26, 2014) Haaretz" http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/.premium-1.628571
60.^ Jump up to: a b c "Declaration on religious freedom – Dignitatis humanae". Vatican.va. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
61.Jump up ^ Pope Pius IX. "THE SYLLABUS". Global Catholic Neetwork.
62.Jump up ^ "We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may", the eleventh Article of Faith.
63.Jump up ^ Mutua, Makau. 2004. Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief.
64.Jump up ^ J. D. Van der Vyver; John Witte (1996). Religious human rights in global perspective: legal perspectives 2. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. p. [1]. ISBN 90-411-0177-2.
65.Jump up ^ Introduction | Breaking India
66.Jump up ^ Joel H. Spring (2001). Globalization and educational rights: an intercivilizational analysis. Routledge. p. 92. ISBN 978-0-8058-3882-4.
67.Jump up ^ United States of America, Department of State. "2010 International Religious Freedom Report". International Religious Freedom Report. US Department of State. Retrieved 15 February 2012.
68.Jump up ^ Iran Human Rights Documentation Center (2007). "A Faith Denied: The Persecution of the Baha'is of Iran" (PDF). Iran Human Rights Documentation Center. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-11-27. Retrieved 3 March 2007.
69.Jump up ^ Mayton, Joseph (19 December 2006). "Egypt's Bahais denied citizenship rights". Middle East Times. Archived from the original on 2009-04-06. Retrieved 23 January 2007.
70.Jump up ^ Otterman, Sharon (17 December 2006). "Court denies Bahai couple document IDs". The Washington Times. Retrieved 23 January 2007.
71.^ Jump up to: a b c Nkrumah, Gamal (21 December 2006). "Rendered faithless and stateless". Al-Ahram weekly. Retrieved 23 January 2007.
72.Jump up ^ "US State Department report on Greece". State.gov. 8 November 2005. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
73.Jump up ^ Mutua, Makau (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief. p. 652. ISBN 978-90-04-13783-7.
74.Jump up ^ Sanu, Sankrant (2006). "Re-examining Religious Freedom" (PDF). Manushi. Retrieved 26 July 2008.
75.Jump up ^ "No place to call home" (PDF). Christian Solidarity Worldwide. 29 April 2008.
76.Jump up ^ [2] from "Leaving Islam: Apostates speak out" by Ibn Warraq
77.^ Jump up to: a b Heffening, W. "Murtadd". In P.J. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel and W.P. Heinrichs. Encyclopaedia of Islam Online Edition. Brill Academic Publishers. ISSN 1573-3912.
78.Jump up ^ Adbul Qadir Oudah (1999). Kitab Bhavan. New Delhi: Kitab Bhavan. ISBN 81-7151-273-9., Volume II. pp. 258–262; Volume IV. pp. 19–21
79.Jump up ^ S. A. Rahman (2007). "Summary and Conclusions". Punishment of Apostasy in Islam. The Other Press. pp. 132–142. ISBN 978-983-9541-49-6.
80.Jump up ^ Pencovic v. Pencovic, 45 Cal. 2d 67 (1955).
81.Jump up ^ Criminal Law and Procedure, Daniel E. Hall. Cengage Learning, July 2008. p. 266. [3]
82.Jump up ^ "Gesetz über die religiöse Kindererziehung". Bundesrecht.juris.de. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
83.Jump up ^ Bundesgesetz 1985 über die religiöse Kindererziehung (pdf)
84.Jump up ^ "Schweizerisches Zivilgesetzbuch Art 303: Religiöse Erziehung". Gesetze.ch. Retrieved 3 September 2011.
85.Jump up ^ Margery Post Abbott (2011). Historical Dictionary of the Friends (Quakers). Scarecrow Press. pp. 102. ISBN 978-0-8108-7088-8.
86.Jump up ^ Religious Freedom Day, 2006 – A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America, Religious Freedom Day, 2001 – Proclamation by the President of the United States of America 15 January 2001
87.Jump up ^ "US commission names 14 worst violators of religious freedom". Christianity Today. 29 April 2011. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
 ^ "USCIRF Identifies World's Worst Religious Freedom Violators: Egypt Cited for First Time" (Press release). United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. 28 April 2011. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
 ^ Annual Report 2011 (PDF) (Report). United States Commission on International Religious Freedom. May 2011. Retrieved 11 July 2011.
88.Jump up ^ "France Passes Religious Symbol Ban". Christianity Today. 9 February 2004. Retrieved 29 April 2011.
89.Jump up ^ "The Islamic veil across Europe". BBC News. 17 November 2006. Retrieved 2 December 2006.
90.Jump up ^ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved 4 July 2009.
91.^ Jump up to: a b "Global Restrictions on Religion (Executive summary)". The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. December 2009. Retrieved 29 December 2009.
92.^ Jump up to: a b "Global Restrictions on Religion (Full report)" (PDF). The Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. December 2009. Retrieved 12 September 2013.
93.^ Jump up to: a b "Latest Trends in Religious Restrictions and Hostilities". Pew Forum. 26 Feb 2015.
94.Jump up ^ Rising Tide of Restrictions on Religion (Report). Pew Research Center. September 20, 2012.
95.Jump up ^ "Table: Social Hostilities Index by country" (PDF). Pew Research Center. 2012.
Further reading[edit]
Daniel L. Dreisbach and Mark David Hall. The Sacred Rights of Conscience: Selected Readings on Religious Liberty and Church-State Relations in the American Founding (Indianapolis: Liberty Fund Press, 2009).
Barzilai, Gad (2007). Law and Religion. Ashgate. ISBN 978-0-7546-2494-3.
Beneke, Chris (20 September 2006). Beyond Toleration: The Religious Origins of American Pluralism. Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 0-19-530555-8.
Curry, Thomas J. (19 December 1989). Church and State in America to the Passage of the First Amendment. Oxford University Press; Reprint edition (19 December 1989). ISBN 0-19-505181-5.
Frost, J. William (1990) A Perfect Freedom: Religious Liberty in Pennsylvania (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press).
Gaustad, Edwin S. (2004, 2nd ed.) Faith of the Founders: Religion and the New Nation, 1776–1826 (Waco: Baylor University Press).
Hamilton, Marci A. (17 June 2005). God vs. the Gavel: Religion and the Rule of Law. Edward R. Becker (Foreword). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-85304-4.
Hanson, Charles P. (1998). Necessary Virtue: The Pragmatic Origins of Religious Liberty in New England. University Press of Virginia. ISBN 0-8139-1794-8.
Hasson, Kevin 'Seamus', The Right to be Wrong: Ending the Culture War Over Religion in America, Encounter Books, 2005, ISBN 1-59403-083-9
McLoughlin, William G. (1971). New England Dissent: The Baptists and the Separation of Church and State (2 VOLS.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Murphy, Andrew R. (July 2001). Conscience and Community: Revisiting Toleration and Religious Dissent in Early Modern England and America. Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN 0-271-02105-5.
Mutua, Makau (2004). Facilitating Freedom of Religion or Belief, A Deskbook. Oslo Coalition on Freedom of Religion or Belief.
Stokes, Anson Phelps (1950) Church and State in the United States, Historic Development and Contemporary Problems of Religious Freedom under the Constitution, 3 Volumes (New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers).
Stokes, DaShanne (In Press). Legalized Segregation and the Denial of Religious Freedom at the Wayback Machine (archived October 27, 2009)
Stüssi Marcel, MODELS OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM: Switzerland, the United States, and Syria by Analytical, Methodological, and Eclectic Representation, 375 ff. (Lit 2012)., by Marcel Stüssi, research fellow at the University of Lucerne.
Associated Press (2002). Appeals court upholds man's use of eagle feathers for religious practices
American Indian Religious Freedom Act (1978)
Policy Concerning Distribution of Eagle Feathers for Native American Religious
Ban on Minarets: On the Validity of a Controversial Swiss Popular Initiative (2008), , by Marcel Stuessi, research fellow at the University of Lucerne.
"Religious Liberty: The legal framework in selected OSCE countries." (PDF). Law Library, U.S. Library of Congress. May 2000. Archived from the original (PDF) on 25 June 2008. Retrieved 6 April 2007.
Utt, Walter C. (1964). "Brickbats and Dead Cats" (PDF). Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 59 (4, July–August): 18–21. Retrieved 23 June 2011.
Utt, Walter C. (1960). "A Plea for the Somewhat Disorganized Man" (PDF). Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 55 (4, July–August): 15, 16, 29. Retrieved 24 June 2011.
Utt, Walter C. (1974). "Toleration is a Nasty Word" (PDF). Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association) 69 (2, March–April): 10–13. Retrieved 24 June 2011.
Zippelius, Reinhold (2009). Staat und Kirche, ch.13. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. ISBN 978-3-16-150016-9.
External links[edit]
 Wikiquote has quotations related to: Freedom of religion
Religion and Foreign Policy Initiative, Council on Foreign Relations.
The Complexity of Religion and the Definition of "Religion" in International Law Harvard Human Rights Journal article from the President and Fellows of Harvard College (2003)
Human Rights Brief No. 3, Freedom Of Religion and Belief Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC)
U.S. State Department country reports
Institute for Global Engagement
Institute for Religious Freedom


[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Liberty













Liberty





































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Substantive human rights






























































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Religion



























































































































































































































































































































































































































































[show]
v ·
 t ·
 e
 
Christianity and politics















































  


Categories: Freedom of religion






















Navigation menu



Create account
Log in



Article

Talk









Read

Edit

View history

















Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store

Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page

Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page

Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version

Languages
Alemannisch
العربية
Беларуская
Български
བོད་ཡིག
Català
Čeština
Dansk
Deutsch
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Føroyskt
Français
Galego
한국어
Hrvatski
Bahasa Indonesia
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
Қазақша
Kiswahili
Latina
Magyar
مصرى
Bahasa Melayu
မြန်မာဘာသာ
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk bokmål
Norsk nynorsk
Occitan
ਪੰਜਾਬੀ
پښتو
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
ไทย
Türkçe
Українська
اردو
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 15 April 2015, at 01:44.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view
Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion