The
key theories that are applicable to the religious situation in the Fiji context
are the disengagement or differentiation theory and what McGuire terms
competing sources of legitimacy. According to the theory of disengagement or
differentiation, society separates itself from the religious understanding
which has previously informed it in order to constitute itself an autonomous
reality and consequently to limit religion to the sphere of private life. This means that religion influences
these other areas through the personally held and applied values and attitudes
of people who are active in each sphere, rather than directly through
specifically religious institutions such as the church. Particularly important
in this interpretation is the loss of control over the definition of deviance
and the exercise of social control.
For the individual, the process of
differentiation involves conflicting development. On the one hand,
differentiation appears to go hand in hand with the discovery of the self – the
unique individual within society. On the other hand, differentiation results in
segregation of the individual’s various roles in society. Values such as moral
qualms or self-realisation are not necessarily negated; they are simply
relegated to another institutional sphere and considered irrelevant if they do
not contribute to achieving the goals of the organisation. The individual may
experience a conflict between the needs and goals of the self and the demands
of these social roles.
The theory of competing sources of
legitimacy in society holds that the differentiation process has resulted in
competition and conflict among the various sources of legitimacy of authority.
In contemporary society religious institution must actively compete with other
sources of legitimacy. Personal, social, and political authority are more
uncertain. One particular source of this uncertainty of legitimacy is
pluralism, referring to a societal situation in which no single world view hold
a monopoly. Pluralism is sometimes used in a narrower sense to describe the
political or societal tolerance of competing versions of the truth. Pluralism,
in both limited and broader senses, is a key factor in the secularisation
process. Where world views coexist and compete as plausible alternatives to
each other, the credibility of all is undermined. The pluralistic situation
relativises the competing world views and deprives them of their
taken-for-granted status.
As we learned in class, institutional
secularisation can be traced to the rise of the “secular” state and its gradual
assumption of the educational and welfare functions once performed by the
churches. This is certainly the case in Fiji. Christian mission in Fiji which
had focused on education, health and social assistance, have over the years
been taken over by the government. In recent years with the widening economic
gap in society meant that other institutions were needed to take up these
functions of education and welfare. However the churches have had to compete
with non-religious aid agencies and civil-society organisations to reclaim this
role. This is also the case with the issue of social legitimacy. In many cases
the church is relegated being one of many voices on social issues. The other
voices are provided by Non-Governmental Organisations and Civil-Society
Organisations who often specialise on issues and are thus recognised by
mainstream media as the legitimate authority on that particular issue which is
then accepted by society. The church’s loss of definition of deviance on issues
such as homosexuality, de facto relationships, domestic violence and racism has
also added to its increasing disengagement from these aspects of society as
other institutions such as law and human rights become recognised as legitimate
authoritative institutions for such definitions.
The issue of “secular” state has also
had an impact on the disengagement of society from religion. The rise in
religious fundamentalism and ethnocentrism within the dominant religious
institution, the predominantly indigenous Fijian Methodist Church in Fiji, as a
result of loss of social control and legitimacy in the face of pluralism
(brought about by an increase in the population of Indo-Fijians, the majority
of whom are Hindu) led to support for a “secular” state. The recent political
crisis in Fiji which saw the military regime, remove the Methodist Church’s
significant influence on politics has also been part of this disengagement.
At the same time the political and, by
consequence, economic instability has led to an increase religious activity as
a result of the anxiety caused by these situations and as a form of
compensation for the deprivation experienced. However as disengagement has led
to discovery of the self as unique individual within society and as an
individual’s desire for meaning and belonging must be pursued in the private
sphere, the individual is free to “shop around” to find the type of religious
meaning that suits him or her, rather than having to conform to the
institutional religious requirements in society.
The churches have recognised that their
relevance in society is decreasing as a result of this differentiation. In Fiji
and across the Pacific, due to low populations and traditional cultures that
are still entrenched, the church still holds some traditional authority. The
relative smallness of Pacific Island states also mean that the winds of change
are recognisable when they blow. This means that these changes have not gone
unnoticed and direct correlations have been drawn to globalisation and the
shift towards secularisation. The negative impact of the economic aspects of
globalisation, in which most other institutions seem to be contributing
towards, has given the churches an area to reclaim its legitimacy.
As churches find themselves confronted by the
consequences of the process of economic globalization, it has become apparent
to them negative aspects of economic globalization are incompatible with the
values they hold. As a result churches are able to argue that these so call
private values are in fact institutional and important to society. By engaging
with what it perceives as a competing vision competing, speaking out against
the negative effects economic globalization has becomes an expression of
defiance against the emerging global system of domination, of one ideology, one
political system, one international coalition of the wealthy and the powerful. Churches
and many individuals have come to recognize that this is a “kairos” - a time for resistance and a time for alternatives. By
articulating these alternatives in the language of traditional culture and of
religion, the churches have begun to reclaim their place as a legitimate source
of authority in society. This and engagement on issues such as climate change
and sustainable development is a counter process to intellectual secularisation
which has attempted to separate sciences and ethics from the context of a
particular version of the Christian world view.
No comments:
Post a Comment