©) Learning Outcomes At the end of this lesson, you should b dle to: 1. explain how globalization affects religious practices and beliefs; 2. _ identify the various religious responses to globalization; and . 3. discuss the future of religion in a globalized world Religion, much more than culture, has the most difficult | relationship with globalism (remember the distinction between “globalization” and “globalism” in Lesson 1). First, the two are i entirely contrasting belief systems. Religion is concerned with the sacred, while globalism places value on material wealth. Religion follows divine commandments, while globalism abides by human-made laws. Religion assumes that there is “the possibility of communication between humans and the transcendent.” This link between the human and the divine confers some social power on the latter. Furthermore, “God,” “Allah,” or “Yahweh” defines and judges human action in moral terms (good vs. bad). Globalism’s yardstick, however, is how much of human action can lead to the highest material satisfaction and subsequent wisdom that this new status produces. Religious people are less concerned with wealth and all that comes along with it (higher social status, a standard of living similar with that of the rest of the community, exposure to “culture,” top-of-the-line education for the children). They are ascetics precisely because they shun anything material for complete simplicity—from their domain to the clothes they wear, to the food they eat, and even to the manner in which they talk (lots of parables and — allegories that are supposedly the language of the divine).The Globalization of Religion | 63 A religious person’s : . ue Slous person's main duty is to live a virtuous, sin-less life such that when he/she dies, he/she is assured of a place in the other world (ie. heaven). On the other hand, globalists are less worried about whether they will end up in heaven or hell. Their skills are more pedestrian us they aim to seal trade deals, raise the profits of private ¢Nterprises, improve government revenue collections, protect the lites from being excessively taxed by the state, and, naturally, enrich themselves. If he/she has a strong social conscience, the plobalist sees his/her work as contributing to the general progress of the community, the nation, and the global economic system. Put another way, the religious aspires to become a saint; the globalist trains to be a shrewd businessperson. The religious detests politics and the quest for power for they are evidence of humanity's weakness; the globalist values them as both means and ends to open up further the economies of the world. Finally, religion and globalism clash over the fact that religious evangelization is in itself a form of globalization. The globalist ideal, on the other hand, is largely focused on the realm of markets. The religious is concerned with spreading holy ideas globally, while the globalist wishes to spread goods and services. The “missions” being sent by American Born-Again Christian churches, Sufi and Shiite Muslim orders, as well as institutions like Buddhist monasteries and Catholic, Protestant, and Mormon churches are efforts at “spreading the word of God” and gaining adherents abroad. Religions regard identities associated with globalism (citizenship, language, and race) as inferior and narrow because they are earthly categories. In contrast, membership lo a religious group, organization, or cult represents a superior affiliation that connects humans directly to the divine and the supernatural. Being a Christian, a Muslim, or a Buddhist places one in a higher plane than just being a Filipino, a Spanish speaker, or an Anglo-Saxon.64 | A World of Ideas: Cultures of Globalization A Mormon missionary These philosophical differences explain why certain groups “flee” their communities and create impenetrable sanctuaries where they can practice their religions without the meddling and control of state authorities. The followers of the Dalai Lama established Tibet for this purpose, and certain Buddhist monasteries are located away from civilization so that hermits can devote themselves to prayer and contemplation. These isolationist justifications are also used by the Rizalistas of Mount Banahaw, the Essenes during Roman-controlled Judea (now Israel), and for a certain period, the Mormons of Utah. These groups believe that living among “non-believers” will distract them from their mission or tempt them to abandon their faith and become sinners like everyone else. Communities justify their opposition to government authority on religious grounds. Priestesses and monks led the first revolts against colonialism in Asia and Africa, warning that these outsiders were out to destroy their people’s gods and ways of life. Similar arguments are being invoked by contemporary versions of these millenarian movements that wish to break away from the hold of the state or vow to overthrow the latter in the name of God. To their “prophets,” the state seeks to either destroy their people’s sacred beliefs or distort religion to serve non-religious goals.Realities In actuality, the relationship between religion and globalism is much more complicated. Peter Berger argues that far from being secularized, the “contemporary world is...furiously religious. In most of the world, there are veritable explosions of religious tervor, occurring in one form of another in all the major religious lraditions—Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and even Confucianism (if one wants to call it a religion)—and in many places in imaginative syntheses of one or more world religions with indigenous faiths.” Religions are the foundations of modern republics. The Malaysian government places religion at the center of the political system. Its constitution explicitly states that “Islam is the religion of the Federation,” and the rulers of each state was also the “Head of the religion of Islam.”* The late Iranian religious leader, Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini, bragged about the superiority of Islamic rule over its secular counterparts and pointed out that “there is no fundamental distinction among constitutional, despotic, dictatorial, democratic, and communistic regimes.”*° To Khomeini, all secular ideologies were the same—they were flawed—and Islamic rule was the superior form of government because it was spiritual. Yet, Iran calls itself a republic, a term that is associated with the secular. Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini led the Iranian revolution that turned the country into a theocracy.66 | AWorld of Ideas: Cultures of Globalization Moreover, religious movements do not hesitate to appropriate secular themes and practices. The moderate Muslim association Nahdlatul Ulama in Indonesia has Islamic schools (pesantren) where students are taught not only about Islam but also about 4 modern science, the social sciences, modern banking, civic 4 education, rights of women, pluralism, and democracy.” In other cases, religion was the result of a shift in state policy. The Church of England, for example, was “shaped by the rationality of modern democratic (and bureaucratic) culture.”** King Henry VIII broke away from Roman Catholicism and established his own Church to bolster his own power. In the United States, religion and law were fused together to help build this “modern secular society.” It was observed in the early 1800s by French historian and diplomat Alexis de Tocqueville who wrote, “not only do the Americans | practice their religion out of self-interest but they often even place in this world the interest which they have in practicing it." Jose . Casanova confirms this statement by noting that “historically, | religion has always been at the very center of all great political : conflicts and movements of social reform. From independence to abolition, from nativism to women’s suffrage, from prohibition to the civil rights movement, religion had always been at the center of these conflicts, but also on both sides of the political barricades.” It remains the case until today with the power the Christian Right has on the Republican Party." Religion for and against Globalization There is hardly a religious movement today that does not use religion to oppose “profane” globalization. Yet, two of the so-called “old world religions’—Christianity and Islam—see globalization less as an obstacle and more as an opportunity to expand their reach all over the world. Globalization has “freed” communities from the “constraints of the nation-state,” but in the process, also threatened to destroy the cultural system that bind them together. Religion seeks to take the place of these broken “traditional ties” to either help communities cope with their new i jbo watonat Rehan | 67 ‘MAHON oF organize therr | them to oppose this major transformation of cir lives It can provide the groups “moral codes” that answer : nging from People's health to social conflict to even on — nes ”** Religion is thus not the “regressive force” Slows down globalization; it is a “pro-active force communities a new and powerful basis of identity. It Wan Instrume problems rar that gives nt with which religious people can put their mark ithe reshaping of this globalizing world, although in its own terms Religious fundamentalism may dislike — globalization’s ‘Materialism, but it continues to use “the full range of modern Means of communication and organization” that is associated with this economic transformation.® It has tapped “fast long- distance transport and communications, the availability of English "8 a global vernacular of unparalleled power, the know-how of ‘modern management and marketing” which enabled the spread of “almost promiscuous propagation of religious forms across the globe in all sorts of directions.” It is, therefore, not entirely correct lo assume that the proliferation of “Born-Again” groups, or in the (ase of Islam, the rise of movements like Daesh (more popularly known as ISIS, or Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) signals religion’s defense against the materialism of globalization.” It is, in fact, the opposite. These fundamentalist organizations are the result of the spread of globalization and both find ways to benefit or take advantage of each other. While religions may benefit from the processes of plobalization, this does not mean that its tensions with globalist ideology will subside. Some Muslims view “globalization” as a ‘Trojan horse hiding supporters of Western values like secularism, liberalism, or even communism ready to spread these ideas in their areas to eventually displace Islam. The World Council of Churches—an association of different Protestant congregations— has criticized economic globalization’s negative effects. It vowed that “we as churches make ourselves accountable to the victims ot the project of economic globalization,” by becoming the latter's advocates inside and outside “the centers of power.”68 | AWorld of Ideas: Cultures of Globalization The Catholic Church and its dynamic leader, Pope Francis, likewise condemned globalization’s “throw-away culture” that is “fatally destined to suffocate hope and increase risks and threats.” The Lutheran World Federation 10th Assembly's 292-page declaration message included economic and feminist critiques of globalization, sharing the voices of members of the 4 Church who were affected by globalization, and contemplations on the different “pastoral and ethical reflections” that members “| Jt warns that as a result asunder by forces we often ark contrasts between could use to guide their opposition. of globalization: “Our world is split do not understand, but that result in st those who benefit and those who are harmed, especially under forces of globalization. Today, there is also a desperate need for healing from ‘terrorism,’ its causes, and fearful reactions to it. Relationships in this world continue to be ruptured due to greed, injustices, and various forms of violence.” These advocacies to reverse or mitigate economic globalization eventually gained the attention of globalist institutions. In 1998, the World Bank brought in religious leaders in its discussions about global poverty, leading eventually to a “cautious, muted, and qualified” collaboration in 2000.” Although it only yielded insignificant results (the World Bank agreed to support some faith-based anti-poverty projects in Kenya and Ethiopia), it was evident enough that institutional advocates of globalization could be responsive to the “liberationist, moral critiques of economic globalization” (including many writings on “social justice”) coming from the religious.” With the exception of militant Islam, religious forces are well aware that they are in no position to fight for a comprehensive alternative to the globalizing status quo. What Catholics call “the preferential option for the poor” is a powerful message of mobilization but lacks substance when it comes to working out a replacement system that can change the poor's condition in concrete ways.” And, of course, the traditionalism of fundamentalist political Islam is no alternative either, The terrorism of ISIS is unlikely to create a “Caliphate” governed byWy ; the and stability telwious In Iran, the unchallenged superiority of a acy 5 . Cy has stifled all freedom of expressions, distorted als like elections, and tainted the opposition.” autocr an Mocratic rity Conclusion Vor a phenomenon that “is about everything,” itis odd that plob eee seen to have very little to do with religion. As ayer and Lori Beaman observed, “Religion, it scems, 'S somehow ‘outside’ looking at globalization as problem or Potential.” One reason for this perspective is the association of ulobalization with modernization, which is a concept of progress that is based on science, technology, reason, and the law. With reason, one will have “to look elsewhere than to moral discourse lor fruitful thinking about economic globalization and religion.”* Religion, being a belief system that cannot be empirically proven is, therefore, anathema to modernization.” The thesis that modernization will erode religious practice is often called secularization theory. Historians, political scientists, and philosophers have now debunked much of secularization theory. Samuel Huntington, one of the strongest defenders of globalization, admits in his book, The Clash of Civilizations, that civilizations can be held together by religious worldviews.” This belief is hardly new. As far back as the 15th century, Jesuits and Dominicans used religion as an “ideological armature” to legitimize the Spanish empire.” Finally, one of the greatest sociologists of all time, Max Weber, also observed the correlation between religion and capitalism as an economic system. Calvinism, a branch of Protestantism, believed that God had already decided who would and would not be saved. Calvinists, therefore, made it their mission to search for clues as to their fate, and in their pursuit, they redefined the meaning of profit and its acquisition. This “inner-worldly asceticism” —as Weber referred to this Protestant ethic—contributed to the rise of modern capitalism.”70 | AWorld of Ideas: Cultures of Globalization It was because of “moral” arguments that religious people were able to justify their political involvement. When the Spaniards occupied lands in the Americas and the Philippines, it was done in the name of the Spanish King and of God, “for empire comes from God alone.” Then over 300 years later, American President William McKinley claimed “that after a night of prayer and soul-searching, he had concluded that it was the duty of the United States ‘to educate the Filipinos, and uplift and civilize and Christianize them, and by God’s grace do the very best we could by them.’””** Finally, as explained earlier, religious leaders have used religion to wield influence in the political arena, either as outsiders criticizing the pitfalls of pro-globalization regimes, or as integral members of coalitions who play key roles in policy decision- makings and the implementation of government projects. In short, despite their inflexible features—the warnings of perdition (“Hell is a real place prepared by Allah for those who do not believe in Him, rebel against His laws, and reject His messengers”), the promises of salvation (“But our citizenship is in Heaven”), and their obligatory pilgrimages (the visits to Bethlehem or Mecca)—religions are actually quite malleable. Their resilience has been extraordinary that they have outlasted secular ideologies (e.g., communism). Globalists, therefore, have no choice but to accept this reality that religion is here to stay.