How Are Religion Ideology and Art Integrated Into Culture

ORIGINAL Inquiry

Faith and culture: Revisiting a shut relative

Jaco Beyers^{I , II}

^IDepartment of Science of Religion and Missiology, Kinesthesia of Theology, University of Pretoria, South Africa
^TwoDepartment of Biblical and Religious Studies, Faculty of Theology, University of Pretoria, South Africa

Correspondence

---

Abstruse

Faith and culture ever exist in a close relation. Together with aesthetics and ethics, religion constitutes civilization. As ethnicity becomes function of the related concepts, the relation with religion needs explanation. This article wants to emphasise that when studying faith, a study of civilisation is necessary. This statement is argued from three positions: (1) cultural migrations occurring worldwide, (2) faith as cultural identity marking causing the borders between civilization and religion to blur and (3) the location of organized religion within culture causing religion to act as custodian of culture. This results in a situation where whatsoever signs of antagonism towards culture are interpreted equally opposition towards organized religion. All three arguments necessitate studying ethnicity when studying organized religion.

---

Introduction

When discussing terms and processes in the study of religions, civilization and faith constantly appear every bit important concepts. My argument is that the written report of religions requires studying ethnicity and civilisation. This argument is framed inside the South African post-colonial and mail-Apartheid context. To formulate the issue at hand, a more than appropriate question might be helpful: What are the implications of the relatedness of religion, ethnicity and culture for the process of reconciliation in a post-colonial and post-Apartheid South Africa? If this is our focus, we must recognise the relevance and meaning of related concepts. Culture, religion, anthropology, ethnography and reconciliation get central issues related to the conversation.

My arguments supporting the relevance of ethnicity and culture in studying religion will exist built effectually iii main points: Cultural migrations; faith as cultural identity marker; and the location of organized religion within culture. It volition, however, be important to starting time of all discuss the ways in which religion, ethnicity and culture relate. After this cursory discussion, the three arguments will be set and then the implications for reconciliation between cultures and religions in South Africa will be discussed.

What exactly is the problem?

If religion is a cultural tradition, is information technology possible to carve up religion and culture? Tin can you belong to the Western culture and still practice Muslim religion (cf. Ramadan's [2004] inquiry)? To this question must exist added, can you be a white Christian in Africa without beingness labelled a colonist and oppressor? Can you be African without existence labelled every bit primitive and prone to animism and magic? Has religion get a cultural identity marker in a South African context, demarcating the borders between people? Belonging to a particular religion implies belonging to a detail civilisation. From this position follows a crude generalisation that to belong to a detail civilisation implies belonging to a particular faith. It is articulate that religion and culture cannot be separated. Ramadan (2010:214), however, maintains that Islam, for one, must not be viewed as a culture. The essence of Islam is religious (Ramadan 2010:214). Many adherents of different religions volition agree to this when applied to their own religious convictions. However, it cannot exist denied that organized religion is a cultural expression (Boyer 2001:47). In this regard, culture and organized religion must exist viewed as relatives. This has implications on how to study religion. If faith is seen as a segment of culture, studying faith becomes an anthropological and ethnographic exercise.

The relation between culture and religion is an one-time and still on-going debate. Ever since Aristotle used the term ethnos to identify the groups of people living outside of the Greek polis, indicating them every bit archaic, people belonging to unlike cultures and religions could be labelled as 'outsiders, uncultured and irreligious' (MacKay 2000:98). During the Enlightenment menses, Europeans took over this notion of Aristotle to label all not-Europeans equally 'uncivilised' (MacKay 2000:98). The Enlightenment implication that all reality can exist classified resulted in nations and people existence hierarchically categorised. This classification was based on perceived natural mental, concrete and spiritual abilities. The result was according to MacKay (2000:98) that 'group identity was essentially divers in terms of race'. David Chidester (1996:36, 41) alludes to this when he describes the European attitude towards the natural inhabitants encountered at the Greatcoat Colony during the 16th and 17th century as beingness 'less than man'. This remained the ascendant discourse between cultures and different religions in South Africa, culminating in the Apartheid laws.

In a post-colonial, post-Apartheid South Africa, a reconfiguration of social structures is taking place. The hierarchical structure of Enlightenment arrangements of cultures, races and religions needs to be reconsidered. This reconfiguration includes the consideration of how cultures, races and people with dissimilar religious affiliations relate to one another. This process may be labelled reconciliation, but in fact refers to a process of seeking identity. A survey of the religious landscape of South Africa should include taking cognisance of the immanent racial and cultural relations. But and so, a responsible reconfiguration (or reconciliation) of relations between races, religions and cultures is possible.

Interrelated concepts

In the cauldron from which we serve upwards our conversation are a great multifariousness of concepts, some spicy and unfamiliar, some familiar and non equally interesting, nevertheless all contributing to agreement and explaining the manner in which organized religion can be studied.

Culture and religion

In our discussion on the relatedness of culture to religion, we should state it clearly that the approach in this chat is non emphasising cultural materialism, although it must be recognised that cultural materialism might at some stage in the give-and-take play a role. My focus is much more than concerned with an agreement of culture in terms of sociocultural systems.

Studying faith is an ambiguous job. With some dubiousness as to what exactly constitutes faith (cf. Braun 2000:4; Schilderman 2014:176), there may exist uncertainty as to what ought to be studied and how to report it. What is articulate is where to search for forms of religion. Mulder (1985:35) indicates that studying religion implies faith as an expression of man culture. Religion is, thus, expressed and clothed in cultural guise. Comprehending organized religion then implies studying human culture. The reciprocal interaction between culture and religion must be recognised: religion is determined by culture, but religion as well influences culture. The fate of religion and culture is, thus, interwoven.

The definition of what religion is, still, still remains outstanding. The problem with defining religion is according to Braun (2000:4) that there are too many meanings and the meanings are besides indeterminate to exist of value. The purpose of this conversation is withal not to attempt a word on the problem of defining religion. James Cox (2010:3-7) provides direction on this matter by suggesting that studying the groups of definitions has more than value than studying the definitions themselves. For the sake of this study, a sociological understanding as to what constitutes organized religion is followed.

When religion is studied as beingness part of the Cultural Sciences (cf. Figl 2003:36), requiring an anthropological approach,¹ where culture refers to the totality of human existence in the world,^two it can easily happen that the concept of organized religion is captivated in the concept of culture. Rosalind Hackett (2005:144) confirms the difficulty of indicating boundaries between religion and culture because of the fact that religion and anthropology share in many social and cultural theories.

The contrary relation betwixt culture and faith is also possible: religion in opposition to civilisation (religion as anti-culture). Even when religion is role of culture, information technology is possible to differentiate religion from a worldview governing a cultural community. The decision Johann Figl (2003:36) comes to is that whatsoever the relation between civilisation and religion is, either absorbed or in opposition, it even so remains identifiable what constitutes religion. There are many elements considered part of religion which are continued to cultural elements (i.e. politics, science, art and literature). Figl (2003:36) suggests that a Western understanding of religion is especially prone to empathise faith as adamant by culture. In the end, the intertwined relation of religion and culture cannot be denied or ignored (Figl 2003:37).

The contend on what constitutes culture is still a lively debate because of the 'multiplicity of its referents' as well as the 'studied vagueness' (Geertz 1973:89). In that location are, withal, not a shortage of definitions as to what constitutes culture: From Max Weber'due south theorem that humans are animals suspended in webs of significance that they have spun themselves to E.B. Tylor's vague description of culture as 'most circuitous whole' to Kluckhohn's elaborate twenty-vii page long definition or Goodenough's inclusion of 'heart and mind' as the location of culture (Geertz 1973:4, 5, 11). The main elements as to what civilisation is must be understood as the result of a long line of research culminating in a wide multifariousness of perspectives.

Clifford Geertz (1973) defines culture equally follows:

Civilisation denotes a historically transmitted pattern of meanings embodied in symbols, a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and develop their cognition well-nigh and attitudes toward life. (p. 89)

For Geertz (1973:5), culture indeed reflects the webs Weber referred to. Studying culture, all the same, does not simply intend clarification of these webs but besides much rather intends a search for significant.

Anthropology every bit the attempt at studying culture and organized religion requires a definition of what constitutes religion. As to his definition of religion, Geertz (1973) says:

religion is a system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive and long-lasting moods and motivations in men past formulating conceptions of a general gild of beingness and clothing the conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivation seem uniquely realistic. (p. xc)

As to the interrelatedness of culture and faith, Geertz (1973) emphasises:

The importance of religion lies in its capacity to serve for the individual or for a group, as a source of general, however distinctive, conceptions of the world, the self and the relations between them … (p. 123)

Religion, thus, possesses an orientating part, providing club with criteria to notice its identify (identity) inside the world.

Parsons' theory on culture consists of different elements equally Parsons modified and elaborated on his theory on culture over time. 3 phases of evolution of the concept of culture by Parsons are identified past Munch and Smelser (1992):

• Phase 1: Civilisation did not apparently play a role in Parsons' theory of the structure of social action (Munch & Smelser 1992:89).

• Phase 2: Action-theoretical definition: Civilisation is part of a comprehensive 'activity system'. Two subsystems of the full general action system tin can be identified: The Personal and Social systems. Later, a third subsystem was added, namely the 'behavioural arrangement'. Fifty-fifty later a fourth subsystem was added: 'the cultural subsystem', a organisation consisting of abstract and symbolically mediated entities (Munch & Smelser 1992:93).

• Phase 3: Parsons enriched his theory of culture by adding the perspective that the culture-constitutive set of standards is understood as code in correlation with Chomsky'due south theory of generative grammar (Munch & Smelser 1992:94). Parsons (1977) defines culture as:

Civilization is understood as an ordered symbolic system that is, a symbolically mediated pattern of values or standards of appropriateness that permits the construction of a prepare of action-guiding, normative, conventional rules through which meaning cultural objects are generated and used. (p. 168)

Munch evaluates Parsons' theory on culture in an anti-reductionist way. For Munch and Smelser (1992:111), Parsons' utilitarian theory of action is only one theory part of a larger more than comprehensive theoretical model. At that place are, thus, more views to consider than only the utilitarian. When comparing the definitions of culture as provided past Geertz and Parsons, Peacock (1981:123) comments on the similarities. Both Parsons and Geertz hold that society is subordinate to civilization. Both follow Max Weber's suggestion of activity theory.

It is, however, clear to me that both Parsons and Geertz approach religion from a functionalist position. Religion has a function within society (along the line of argumentation of Durkheim) to provide lodge with guidelines every bit to find identity. The emphasis in studying religion is to focus on the deportment that what is done. Parsons and Geertz follow in a long line of scholars considering what constitutes culture. Both Parsons and Geertz follow Weber in discerning the relation of activity and meaning. Man behaviour and activeness (action) - including religion equally human action - must exist interpreted to gain meaning from such activeness. It is important to note that behaviour with meaning constitutes civilization. Significant is contextually assigned, and therefore, similar behaviour among unlike communities only differs in terms of the meaning assigned to such behaviour. Different ethnic groups volition have dissimilar criteria by which significant is determined.

Lourens Minnema (2014:iii) identifies three stages of evolution in the understanding of culture:

• Stage i: Culture is a pre-given constant. Civilization is seen as an extensive reality, equally a fashion of life of a people. Cultural patterns are pre-given. People belonging to a culture are only bearers of that culture. Culture is characterised by custom and habitual behaviour. This blazon of culture is typical of traditional cultures of small and non-complex societies.

• Phase two: Civilization is a dominating power and a source of conflict and innovation. During the 1960s, culture became a source of disharmonize and a space for innovative initiatives. Cultural patterns are challenged equally they get subversive. Alternative cultures are perceived every bit being innovative. People belonging to this type of civilisation are producers of civilisation likewise as sub-cultures. An example of this type of culture is the modern Western society since the Renaissance.

• Stage 3: Culture is a domain of potentiality and choice. The manner in which culture is interpreted today is that culture is perceived equally providing room for liberty of selection and combinations of elements. Cultural patterns are marketable and transferable, and their power is negotiable. People belonging to this type of culture are mainly seen as consumers of culture although also as producers. They produce something new by fashion of combination and present information technology every bit commodity ready for consumption. Exponents of this type of culture are multi-cultural societies or mixed cultures or postmodern cultures subject to globalisation.

From this assay, the constant product and consumption of culture are emphasised. When religion forms a segment of culture under the 3rd phase described by Minnema, organized religion becomes a article prepared for utility and consumption. A problem, still, arises when people with a Stage 1 or 2 agreement of civilisation encounter a community where a Phase 3 understanding of culture is prevalent. If culture is perceived as a given, there can be no negotiation as to integration or adaptation. The different stages of cultural development must be taken into account when studying inter-cultural contact.

Ethnicity and religion

The relation betwixt ethnicity and religion has been viewed differently over centuries. MacKay (2000) suggests two existing models of viewing the relationship. During the 19th century, the Primordialist view governed relations between religion and ethnicity. This changed to a Circumstantialist position during the late 20th century. MacKay (2000:104) suggests a 3rd possible position for electric current times, that of Constructivism, combining the 2 preceding models.

The Primordialist theory (MacKay 2000:100) was the reigning theory during the 19th century, maintaining that ethnicity is a priori given and not determined by circumstances. This also applies to religion. Faith is regarded every bit a priori given every bit role of identity of an ethnic group. This reflects Minnema's identification of Stage 1 of cultural development. There exists congruence between religion and ethnic identity. The core element determining identity in this case is religion.

The Circumstantialist theory (MacKay 2000:102) holds that the indigenous identity is determined by circumstances. As circumstances change and so does identity. Social interactions determine grouping identity. The result is that identity is non perceived as fixed. The borders between ethnic groups are role of a dynamic procedure and not fixed. Faith is seen every bit function of a social system. The borders of religious and ethnic identity exercise not necessarily overlap. In communities where the relation between ethnicity and organized religion is viewed in this manner, integration is much more probable to succeed.

MacKay (2000:104), nonetheless, suggests a 3rd possibility with Constructivism. This model combines the Primordialist and Circumstantialist position. Constructivism recognises that ethnic identity is formed in part by birth and non by choice. This identity might be re-enforced by mythic traditions emphasising the uniqueness of a item customs. The Constructivistic position, however, also recognises that these (given) elements determining identity are also constantly but gradually reconstructed based on an interpretation of the context, emphasising the circumstantial influence on identity formation. Identity is then constantly nether revision based on interaction and exposure to other group identities. Ethnic identity then becomes flexible.

To sympathize group identity, the circumstances of ethnic groups may and so be studied to make up one's mind which circumstantial elements can contribute to germination of identity. According to Frederik Barth (1969:15-16), studying the boundaries betwixt ethnic groups may, however, prove to be more revealing. It is the indigenous boundary that defines a group and not the cultural content it encloses (Barth 1969:fifteen). It is particularly at the boundaries that the identity stands out sharper. Studying ethnic communities at the boundaries of identity will highlight the decisions made in reaction to circumstantial elements determining identity. For example, how ethnic groups make a decision on what clothes to wear or music to listen to volition be based on ethical convictions that differ from another ethnic customs. These ethical convictions function at the edge between ethnic groups. In that location may exist ideals that two groups may hold on. These convictions would rather stand at the centre of each group than at the periphery of identity. Studying the boundaries may prove important in understanding ethnic differences, and it may contribute to reconciling differences.

Why is information technology necessary to study ethnicity and culture when studying organized religion?

Can one study faith without studying ethnicity and culture? 1 tin only sympathize the nature of religion when one understands its connectedness to ethnicity and culture. The interrelatedness and interaction of people from different cultures and races belonging to different religions are our focus here. This effort becomes fifty-fifty more urgent when considering current globe events. Globalisation, postal service-colonialism and growing multi-cultural societies (because of migration nationally or internationally because of economic, social, political and health reasons) necessitate an understanding of the relatedness of culture, ethnicity and religion.

My statement here is that studying faith requires more than emphasis on a report of culture and ethnicity. The goal is to suggest and argue the importance of studying culture and ethnicity to sympathise religious diversity peculiarly in South Africa. Understanding ethnicity can contribute to enhanced inter-religious dialogue and provide possible guidelines as to inter-cultural reconciliation in Southward Africa.

Now that the interrelatedness of the concepts has been discussed, I at present want to nowadays 3 arguments why studying ethnicity and civilization has become important in understanding religion. The three arguments are: Cultural migrations necessitate the studying of cultures; religion as cultural identity marker must be considered and the relocating of organized religion to culture needs to exist taken into account.

Cultural migrations necessitate study of cultures when studying religions

There is currently a need for attention to anthropology of religion. This need is identified by Hackett (2005:144) as the result of iii reasons: (one) The changing nature and location of people as manifested in mass migrations and mass conversion to different religions. In a post-Apartheid S African context a 'migration' took place. People encounter 1 another now in a different context, no longer oppressed and oppressor, but in new circumstances as equals. The reconfiguration of relations betwixt races, cultures and religions requires a demand for anthropology of organized religion. (ii) Scholars studying religion work more inter-disciplinary and (3) new insights have come to the fore because of perspectives from post-colonialism, post-structuralism and postmodernism. To this list, I desire to add globalisation and the growing multi-cultural communities. Changing paradigms cause reconfigurations in society, requiring new methods of studying lodge. Each case of religion must be studied within its ain context in relation to other religions practiced among other racial groups. No universal theory of inter-cultural and inter-religious relations can be applied to every context. Each context must be studied on its own. This is confirmed by Scott and Hirschkind (2006):

The various traditions that anthropologists call religions cannot be understood equally cultural elaborations of a universal class of experience, a sui generis category of human noesis, but must be analysed in their particularity, every bit the products of specific practices of disciplines, potency and ability. (pp. half-dozen-vii)

Tariq Ramadan (2004:200) in discussing the possibility of inter-religious dialogue likewise refers to the importance of civilisation. In the interactions between religions, Ramadan (2010:5) suggests that the principle of integration plays a dominant part. When cultures collaborate, there is no place for isolation, withdrawal and 'obsession with identity'. Rather entering into authentic dialogue as equals is necessary which will eventually atomic number 82 to mutual enrichment and 'partners in activeness'. In the end, the interaction betwixt religions is not about relativising ane'south own convictions and seeking universal neutral principles, it is rather about acceptance and respect of pluralism, diversity and the belief of the Other (Ramadan 2010:6).

How and then to written report faith when the borders of religion and other identifying elements overlap? For example, if religion, civilization and ethnicity cannot exist separated, does it influence the fashion in which organized religion is studied? There seem to exist three scenarios to this problem (cf. MacKay 2000:96-97):

i. The ethnicity of a group is explained in terms of their religious beliefs. An example would be Jewish ethnicity equally it is the issue of practicing Judaism. Religion is the principal element in Jewish identity.

two. Organized religion is explained equally the result of ethnicity. Muslim belief is the result of Arab ethnicity. The group's indigenous identity is the primary chemical element in determining identity.

3. More elements than religion and ethnicity are at play determining group identity. Elements such every bit language, geography, values, worldview and a shared history come to mind.

In this construct of relatedness between religion and ethnicity, religion must exist studied from an anthropological approach. Religion becomes one expression of human identity among many other unlike expressions of identity.

Organized religion either embraces or denies culture (cf. Figl 2003:35). Equally civilization is associated with ethnicity, faith tin can easily be embraced by an indigenous grouping. Ramadan (2010:214) suggests the principle of integration equally way of making religion at home within a cultural context. The result would be to distinguish betwixt (Islamic) 'faith' and (Islamic) 'culture' (Ramadan 2010:214). The core of a religion is clothed in the forms of the diverse cultures in whose midst a religion exists (Ramadan 2010:215). Religion is expressed in cultural terms. So when an individual belonging to a detail organized religion comes from a specific cultural background and ends up in a different cultural environment, the individual integrates the religious convictions into the new cultural context, every bit at that place should be a clear difference between the faith and the culture of origin (Ramadan 2010:215).

Identity should be determined by multiple factors to which one remains open to. This, however, does non mean accepting everything of the civilisation. A disquisitional evaluation of values is necessary. Together with existence critical, Ramadan (2010:219) suggests a good dose of creativity to integrate in a responsible way.

The problem, withal, arises when people with a particular religious amalgamation coming from a item civilization enter a different culture where people have a different religious amalgamation. Based on Lincoln'southward agreement of cultural run into (1989:vi-7), struggle between cultures may ensue. On a continuum, reactions towards the other may vary from 'polite disinterest', demarcation, conflict to outright war. Because of conflict of interest and added to that a stereotyped perception of the other civilisation, permanent antagonism might result from that. The question would be how to have nations, religions and cultures co-exist peacefully, while maintaining their own unique identity.

Because of globalisation, religions all over the earth rarely be in isolation. Religions are constantly exposed to a multi-religious surround. In this plurality, each religion is in need of maintaining its unique identity. Studying religions will demand to take into consideration not only the culture from which a religion originates merely likewise the cultural network a faith ends up in because of globalisation and migration. Creating harmony betwixt religious communities living in close proximity needs to take cultural and ethnic considerations into account.

Religion every bit cultural identity marker

Linda Woodhead (2011:112, 119) differentiates betwixt religion every bit belief and religion as identity marker. Religion as belief refers to a religious interest in dogmas, doctrines and propositions. Religion as identity marker refers to religion every bit a source of identity, either socially or equally personal choice. Based on Woodhead's differentiation, Kilp (2011:212) indicates how religion has currently excelled at being a cultural identity marker, increasingly and so in Europe. As so many different factors are at play in determining identity, cultural identity must, however, exist seen as in flux (Vroom 1996:118). The result is that people become alienated from the traditional religious beliefs and practices and plough to cultural-religious identities, which practise not necessarily include religious beliefs. At play here are the elements already identified: assigned meaning of behaviour; culture as utility; three stages of cultural development. These factors must be kept in mind when a cultural identity is created.

It is also important to note that cultural identity is ideologically motivated. People profess something about their civilisation to motivate the manifestation of a detail group (Vroom 1996:118). This cultural religious identity provides people with a feeling of certainty, order and meaning - a general feeling of belonging. This may serve every bit explanation to the struggle for power in multi-cultural societies, confirming Lincoln'southward (1989:6-7) theory of 'hegemonic struggle'. It is clear from this that struggle as well as attempts at reconciliation between cultures should be seen as efforts at establishing identity. Agreement the effort of creating identity requires an agreement of how people perceive the interplay of religion and ethnicity in creating identity. Religious affiliation does not need to overlap with aspects of ethnic identity. This reflects Minnema's Stages two and iii of cultural development.

The Primordialist theory implies that one belonging to a specific religion can become part of a cultural group and still retain a religious identity. The effect, even so, may exist that 1 volition not exist culturally equal to the cultural grouping into which one enters (Kilp 2011:202). We encounter the same situation with recent immigrants from Syria and Pakistan to Deutschland. Immigrants are welcomed into the German language civilisation although they have a dissimilar religious affiliation. But all the same many Germans do not recognise the immigrants as equal members of society. To be role of the High german people i has to subscribe to all that it means to exist a German: language, clothing, faith and so on. Immigrants tend to become 2d-class citizens. Immigrants are still being identified in terms of their religious affiliation. Religion is still their main identity marker and not the new culture they are trying to adapt to. This sentiment is also witnessed in the discourse on immigration policies in the United States.

Based on religious grounds, differences are viewed from a value perspective. Differences are now viewed either as skilful or bad. The differences in relation to the ain identity are perceived to be based on existence dissimilar, being 'bad' (Kilp 2011:203). The ethical evaluation of the other increases in content and is perceived equally a growing threat requiring protection of the self, which is at present polarised every bit being good as opposed to the other which is now perceived as bad. Kilp (2011:204) illustrates that the other is necessary to maintain the identity of the self. The other as evil is necessary to legitimise the cocky equally expert, pure and right. The absence of the other (the cultural enemy) is dysfunctional.

Cultural identity is, all the same, not stock-still merely dynamic (Vroom 1996:118). Cultural identity tin change over time. Cultural identity is an ideological interpretation as to how people view themselves and desire to exist viewed past others. People present their identity and thus communicate something about their culture. Cultural identity is, thus, constructed (Vroom 1996:118). The question would arise: in what does identity then prevarication? If identity is created, what criteria exercise people select to construct their identity? Cultural groups may make selections of events or elements in history to constitute their identity (Vroom 1996:119).

A trouble arises when multiple cultures co-exist in close proximity and even more then in the aforementioned state. What and who determines cultural identity and then? One can maintain one's cultural identity and still belong to a particular nation sharing another culture. It is then possible to belong to several cultures simultaneously. Interestingly, Vroom (1996:121) sees cultural exchange as more normal than maintaining cultural identity.

In the struggle to accommodate and have refuge in a unlike culture, disharmonize might arise. Goodenough (1957:167) defines civilisation every bit a process: 'A lodge's culture consists of whatever it is i has to know or believe in order to operate in a manner acceptable to its members'. Based on this definition, a strict exclusion is imprinted. One is only accepted when one knows, believes and acts in a familiar manner to community. Part of the knowledge, convictions and deportment is acceptance of a structure of meaning reached on consensus by a community (Geertz 1973:12). Meaning is negotiated through aesthetics.

It seems harmony between religious groups living in shut proximity can only be reached when conformity from both sides is employed. Coming together one some other at the borders of cultural identity and negotiating boundary markers can lead to a positive conformity. Conformity does non include taking on the characteristics of another culture, but merely recognising differences at the borders and respecting them.

Religion relocated to culture

Matt Waggoner (2011:219) argues that organized religion has indeed relocated. The shift has taken place that faith no longer resides in the consciousness merely inside culture. Waggoner'southward argument in short is that a shift has taken place. Religion is no longer perceived to be subjectively imagined, locating religion in the bodies and brains of people participating in religion, simply rather religion is located in civilization or a social arrangement. The implication is that studying faith requires a change in focus, away from the private and grouping consciousness and finding the location of religion in the outside to the subjective.

This argument by Waggoner goes dorsum to Bruce Lincoln's (1989) contribution to the argue on faith and civilisation. Lincoln managed to combine Durkheim and Marx's orientation to the study of religion. The outset pace is to acknowledge that societies construct faith. Secondly, religion, every bit culture, is e'er associated with a struggle for power. Culture, especially religion, becomes a site where power and privileges in gild are negotiated. Lincoln (1989:6, 174) refers to this equally the 'hegemonic struggle'. Culture has an ideological role in this hegemonic struggle. Culture ignores its historical origin and makes transcendental claims to authorise its own position of ability and ignominy other claims. Further, the origin of religion is from the point of faith ever an authoritative transcendent or supra-historical source, thereby concealing the cultural and historical origins.

Lincoln (2000:416), all the same, refrains from naming religion every bit a 'core component' of civilization. Aesthetics and ideals are cadre components of culture as they are concerns for all homo cultures. Kierkegaard (in Pattison 2004:4) seems to take added the element of religion to the 2 components constituting culture: aesthetics and ethics. The role of religion in culture, even so, changes from one context to the other. Religion, all the same, does play a 'role of prime importance' in culture (Lincoln 2000:416) although this function is inconsistent. The argument by Lincoln makes provision for a situation, every bit Lincoln points out, how religion as i of the essential elements in civilization can from time to time dominate that which is considered as culture (Lincoln 2000:420).

The implication Waggoner (2011:219) draws from Lincoln'due south analysis is to point out that religion is in fact a subset of culture and not something sui generis. It is articulate that organized religion participates in the hegemonic struggle in civilization. Religion tin then human action as cultural identity marker. There are, however, many potential cultural markers (i.due east. language, shared history, race and geography). People tin view others not in terms of ethnicity but primarily in terms of faith. Ethnicity and religion overlap causing cultural or religious antagonism to spill over to religious or cultural animosity.

This article does not pretend to accept the solution to these cases of animosity. This article wants to argue that information technology is of import in the study of religion to study ethnicity and culture likewise.

What are the implications?

If the argument is that to study faith a clear cognisance of culture and ethnicity is necessary, what are the implications? There are ii implications mentioned here: In the calorie-free of the above arguments, studying faith requires a new methodology and a new attitude towards reconciliation, namely making peace with diversity and adversity.

Methodology

When studying faith, a multi-disciplinary approach will be necessary. This is, nonetheless, not new. What is new is that the emphasis will take to modify. Much more attending should be paid to an anthropological approach where cultural and ethnic studies are considered as part of studying religion. Besides this is non new. What I suggest is that the anthropological approach should be focussed on studying the boundaries betwixt cultures, which is in line with Frederik Barth'due south (1969) proffer. Studying the boundaries between cultures helps to place those elements that constitute cultural identity, whether they are ideals, religion or aesthetics or a combination of some sort.

In some cases, cultures might meet where the Primordialist agreement of ethnicity determines a cultural group's understanding of its identity. Then, it is most unlikely that there will be alter equally to how such a grouping understands its own identity. Where a group with a Circumstantialist understanding of ethnicity is encountered, there does exist a possibility of integration and changed identity. The platonic would exist to convince cultures to adhere to a Constructivist understanding, incorporating a fixed identity with a flexible identity.

It becomes clear that a new focus in studying religion should as well exist to search how cultural groups assign meaning to behaviour. This process is contextually adamant (cf. Parsons and Geertz). Studying religion should include studying activeness and significant and discern the criteria relevant to each indigenous community how to determine meaning. Meaning is adamant by values. Studying organized religion entails studying underlying values in cultures.

The author Jos Vranckx (2016) refers in a contempo blog entry on inter-cultural relations in Europe how the French-Iranian sociologist, Farhad Khosrokha, indicates that this process of seeking meaning overlaps with a search for identity. This search for identity is especially prevalent amid a new generation of jihadis who come from 'built-in again'-converts belonging to good educated families. They are seeking identity in a society they perceive as divided and without values, where people are only concerned with entertainment. The values of the two indigenous societies clash. In this encounter, a struggle to discover identity ensues.

Studying religion with accent on cultural and ethnic interrelatedness requires a stardom betwixt religion as belief and religion equally identity marking, or as Ramadan puts, information technology distinguishes between religion and civilization (Ramadan 2010:214). This is indeed a difficult task. In a Western understanding determined by Enlightenment thought, such sectionalisation might exist possible. Inside other cultural orientations, such a differentiation seems unlikely.

Information technology is clear that when faith functions equally identity marker, at that place are several traditions and myths feeding various claims of racial superiority. Studying religion requires an understanding of the ideological determination of cultural identity. It is necessary to study the myths behind the claims as to racial superiority. Traditions from the by determine social behaviour. A study of the myths and traditions that contribute to racial and religious bias is necessary in lodge to understand the Other.

From this, information technology becomes clear that the insights from several disciplines are necessary in order to understand the phenomenon of religion and the interaction between religions.

Making peace with diversity and adversity

A farther implication of the emphasis on studying ethnicity and culture in understanding organized religion lies on a social level. Tin can you lot belong to a culture, not shared in the same race, but have the same history? Yes, white Christians participating in the liberation struggle in South Africa marching, protesting side by side to blackness non-Christian Due south Africans, are a good example. The question, however, remains whether the two cultural groups are viewed as equals? The respond differs from context to context, depending on the meaning assigned to the behaviour (i.e. participating in the liberation struggle). At times, information technology may exist considered as i civilisation, every bit the borders and definition as to what constitutes culture changes.

Is it possible to exist a Muslim and belong to Western civilization, can one be white and non be labelled a Christian coloniser, or be a black African and not exist labelled prone to animism and magic? The respond is, even so, 'No!' Cultural and religious identity overlap based on circumstantial weather. Identity is not just internally constructed. Identity is also externally assigned based on behaviour and the feel of the behaviour by others too every bit the meaning assigned to such behaviour. This may lead to cultural and religious bias and generalisations and the creation of stereotypes. One must, however, recognise the circumstantial process that contributed to the formation of identity and perceptions of the other.

The cease goal of this research is to contribute to the process of reconciliation betwixt cultural groups in South Africa. Ramadan's position on this matter is to admit multifariousness (2010:41). I option is to divide culture and religion, ethnicity and religion, and the other is to comprehend diverseness and complication. A tertiary possibility is to acknowledge that unity lies in diversity. This entails to maintain religious principles which attach a religious community to the broader community of believers worldwide. The local face of the religious community might await different from the same religious community located in a different cultural setting. Thereby, a discontinuation as well as a continuation is maintained. This is in line with MacKay'due south proffer of a Constructivist approach to the relation ethnicity to religion.

The solutions seem to be threefold: dissever culture and faith, bring together culturally but not religiously or join religiously but not culturally. Kilp (2011) indicates how cultural conflict spills over into religious conflict based on the sequence of events. Commencement of all, social, economic and political concerns in a multi-cultural society arise. This leads to feelings of insecurity, chaos and vulnerability which in turn lead to the construction of cultural identities. These constructed identities rely on religious and ideological values, beliefs, myths and narratives framed by morals. This can lead to adversity and conflict.

In this endeavour of trying to reconcile cultures and religions, peace and harmony seem not to prevarication in creating peace between cultures and religions, but peace lies about probably in accepting the fact that peace and harmony between cultures and religions are well-nigh unlikely to happen.

Conclusion

In this commodity, I tried to argue that a shift in studying religion is necessary. It has become necessary to emphasise the contributions the studying of cultures and ethnicity has fabricated to the agreement of organized religion. The arguments used were that cultural migrations necessitate the study of cultures, religion acts as cultural identity marker and religion has relocated to civilization. From the give-and-take, the post-obit elements are articulate:

• Studying organized religion cannot go without studying civilisation.

• Studying culture cannot go without studying faith.

• Studying inter-religious dialogue cannot go without studying underlying traditions and myths contributing to how the Other is viewed.

The relation between religion and culture seems to exist similar to the uneasy relationship between two arguing relatives who cannot deny their connectedness, but wished information technology otherwise.

Acknowledgements

Competing interests

The writer declares that he has no financial or personal relationships which may have inappropriately influenced him in writing this article.

References

Barth, F., 1969, Indigenous groups and boundaries: The social organization of civilization differences, Little & Brown, Boston, MA.         [ Links ]

Boyer, P., 2001, Religion explained, Basic Books, New York.         [ Links ]

Braun, Due west., 2000, 'Faith', in W. Braun & R.T. McCutcheon (eds.), Guide to the study of religion, pp. 3-xviii, Cassell, London.         [ Links ]

Chidester, D., 1996, Savage systems: Colonialism and comparative religion in Southern Africa, University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.         [ Links ]

Cox, J.50., 2010. An introduction to the phenomenology of religion. Continuum Publishing Group, New York.         [ Links ]

Figl, J., 2003, 'Wissenschaftsverständnis: Gliederung, Methoden und Teildisziplin', in J. Figl (ed.), Handbuch Religionswissenschaft: Religionen und ihre zentralen Themen, pp. 35-61, Tyrolia Verlag, Innsbruck.         [ Links ]

Geertz, C., 1973, The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays, Basic Books, New York.         [ Links ]

Goodenough, W.H., 1957, 'Cultural anthropology and linguistics', in P.L. Garvin (ed.), Report of the seventh annual round table meeting on linguistics and linguistic communication study, pp. 167-173, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC. Monograph series on Language and Linguistics No. 9.         [ Links ]

Hackett, R.I.J., 2005, 'Anthropology of organized religion', in J.R. Hinnells (ed.), The Routledge companion to the report of organized religion, pp. 144-163, Routledge, London.         [ Links ]

Kilp, A., 2011, 'Faith in the structure of the cultural "cocky" and "other"', ENDC Proceedings, 14, 197-222, viewed vii March 2016, from http://www.ksk.edu.ee/toimetised        [ Links ]

Lincoln, B., 1989, Soapbox and the structure of society, Oxford University Press, Oxford.         [ Links ]

Lincoln, B., 2000, 'Civilisation', in W. Braun & R.T. McCutcheon (eds.), Guide to the study of religion, pp. 409-421, Cassell, London.         [ Links ]

MacKay, D.B., 2000, 'Ethnicity', in Due west. Braun & R.T. McCutcheon (eds.), Guide to the study of organized religion, pp. 96-109, Cassell, London.         [ Links ]

Minnema, L., 2014, Correlations between types of culture, styles of communication advert forms of interreligious dialogue, HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies 70(ane), Art #2604, ane-7. https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v70i1.2604        [ Links ]

Mulder, D.C., 1985, 'Het vak godsdienstwetenskap', in D.J. Hoens, J.H. Kamstra & D.C. Mulder (eds.), Inleiding tot de studie van godsdiensten, pp. 35-forty, J.H. Kok, Kampen.         [ Links ]

Munch, R., & Smelser, N.J. (ed.), 1992, Theory of culture, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA, viewed 4 March 2016, from http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft8q2nb667/        [ Links ]

Parsons, T., 1977, Social systems and the development of action theory, The Free Press and Collier MacMillan, New York.         [ Links ]

Pattison, G., 2004, Kierkegaard: Religion and the Nineteenth century crisis of culture, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.         [ Links ]

Peacock, J.L., 1981, The third stream, viewed 7 May 2016, from http://www.isca.ox.air conditioning.u.k.        [ Links ]

Ramadan, T., 2004, Western Muslims and the future of Islam, Oxford Academy Printing, Oxford.         [ Links ]

Ramadan, T., 2010, What I believe, Oxford University Printing, Oxford.         [ Links ]

Schilderman, H., 2014, 'Defining religion: A humanities perspective', in H. Schilderman (ed.), The concept of organized religion: Defining and measuring contemporary beliefs and practices, pp. 176-198, Brill, Leiden.         [ Links ]

Scott, D. & Hirschkind, C., 2006, 'Introduction: The Anthropological scepticism of Talal Assad', in D. Scott & C. Hirschkind (eds.), Powers of the secular modern: Talal Assad and his interlocutors, pp. 1-10, Stanford University Press, Stanford.         [ Links ]

Vranckx, J., 2016, Religie niet het probleem maar de oplossing?, viewed five April 2016, from www.dewereldmorgen.be/weblog/josvranckx/2016/04/04/religie-niet-het-probleem-maar-de-oplossing        [ Links ]

Vroom, H., 1996, Religie als ziel van cultuur: Religieus pluralisme als uitdaging, Meinema, Zoetemeer.         [ Links ]

Waggoner, Thousand., 2011, 'Culture and religion', in P.B. Clarke (ed.), The Oxford handbook of sociology of religion, pp. 210-225, Oxford University Press: Oxford.         [ Links ]

Woodhead, L., 2011, 'V concepts of organized religion', International Review of Folklore 1, 121-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2011.544192        [ Links ]

Correspondence:
Jaco Beyers
jaco.beyers@up.air-conditioning.za

Received: 29 Aug. 2016
Accustomed: 23 Nov. 2016
Published: 28 July 2017

Projection Leader: J. Beyers
Project Number: 02440237
Note: This commodity was presented at the coming together of the Association for the Study of Religions in Southern Africa (ASRSA), which formed role of the Third Joint Conference of Academic Societies in the field of Religion and Theology, 11-xv July 2016 at the University of Pretoria.
1 . The deviation between anthropology and ethnography is summarised by Hackett (2005:144): Anthropology refers to the generalised, theoretical reflection, whereas ethnography refers to the empirical fieldwork on a item culture incorporating insights gained from participants from the particular civilisation.
2 . Culture is then understood in the widest ethnographic sense to refer to knowledge, beliefs, art, ethics, customs, practices and skills, which humans as members of a community have acquired (based on the definition of culture by Eastward.B. Tylor quoted in Figl 2003:36).

wienholtwonean83.blogspot.com

Source: http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0259-94222017000100010

Share this post