Malinowski sees religion as reinforcing social norms and values and promoting social solidarity, but he challenges Durkheim, as he doesn’t see religion as a reflection of society or certain rituals as a worship of society, more that it is concerned with certain areas of social life. He has identified two specific areas, religion and life crisis being the first one. This is based around life crises such as birth, death, puberty, that can disrupt general social life. All of these crises are surrounded with religious ritual, such as death and a funeral. In Malinowski’s eyes it, expresses the belief in immortality and comforts the bereaved. Also with the presence of all the family and friends at the funeral support the mourner and help them to control their stress through the expression of solidarity. The second feature is religious prediction and control, which relates to several other parts of life that cannot be fully controlled or predicted by practical means. This in turn can cause tension and anxiety within some people. Religious rituals surround many of these. Malinowski saw these rituals as magic, whereas most others would see them as a method to reduce anxiety, instil confidence, and give control over a situation. But it basically provides a feeling of control over unpredictable events; such as fishing rituals are events where a group unites to deal with stress of the bad weather. It provides a form of social order to situations, similar to what parsons argued.
Malinowski’s view shares some ideas with Marx in that both view religion as a force that acts to numb pain. However Malinowski believes it eases the stresses of life rather than the exploitation that life brings upon the unsuspecting.
Parsons upholds the view that human action is directed and controlled by the norms provided by the social system of religion. For example the 10 commandments provide guidelines on how we should live our lives and is also the value consensus for social order. Therefore he shows us that the norms of society are integrated by religious beliefs e.g. ‘treat unto others as thy would be treated themselves’ integrates norms of being kind and generous to one another, giving guidance in certain situations. Malinowski suggested that religion addresses certain problems in everyday life that cause stress, which implies that life in everyday, is without stress. However Talcott Parsons argues that stress is present in everyday life and religion can help people alleviate this stress. Unforeseen events placing people in unpleasant circumstances, like pregnancy death, can be explained in religious context and help people deal with the stress. Parsons also argues that one of the main functions of religion is to make sense of all experiences by explaining them. It is meant to give meaning to the least meaningful experiences of life such as suffering, this can be explained as God testing a persons faith, or this is their punishment for their sins. This promotes social order and stability.
Functionalists see that religion creates social solidarity and stability through rites, rituals, and guidelines. On the other hand though, Marxists see religion as a conservative force, like functionalists, but promoting Ruling class ideologies and false class-consciousness. However whilst functionalists argue that the effects of religion are beneficial to every member of society, Marxists being a conflict theory say that it functions to benefit societies more powerful members at the expense of those with less power. Marxists see religion as creating conflict and oppression.
Marxists see religion as an ideological apparatus that reproduces and maintains legitimate class inequality, and Marx describes religion as the opium of the people. It lulls the working class into a sense of false class-consciousness by making their exploitation unbeknown to them. There are 3 key functions as to religion maintaining class inequality. Legitimating social inequality is the religious belief that the existing hierarchy is God-given and unchangeable. This can be seen during the feudal period when it was believed that kings had a divine right to rule, and were chosen by the sun, consequently given the name the sun king. They believed that god created the rich and the poor and god gave their land to them. It has been noted by Marx that the Hymn ‘all things bright and beautiful’ contains subliminal hints, which influence the class inequality. ‘The rich man at his castle, the poor man at his gate, god made them high or low, and gave them their estate’. This is strange as most Christian religious followers would sing this hymn, yet most would not want inequality, yet it is obviously stated in this popular hymn. The second function is distinguishing the true nature of exploitation. Marxists believe Religion explains the economic and social inequalities in supernatural terms, ignoring the exploitation by ruling class and just insisting inequality is a punishment by God. However in Marx terms inequality occurs due to ruling class ideologies being promoted by major social influences. The third function identified by Marx as being a major characteristic of religion is keeping the working class passive and resigned to their fate. In certain religions, poverty and suffering is presented to be a virtue welcomed as normal, as it is suggested that those who do not question their situation will be rewarded with a place in heaven. It keeps people waiting for some kind of divine intervention. So Marxists say that religion produces passive and fatalistic people accepting their suggested fate.
Marx rejects the idea, proposed by parsons, that religion provides answers to life’s questions, instead he sees it as a drug to ease the pain of exploitation. ‘Religion is the opium of the people’. On the other hand, Neo-Marxist Anthony Gramsci was fully aware of the control that the church had wielded against its members, but had located a form of revolution within the controlling reach of upper class rulers. He referred to the control as hegemony, whereby a powerful group alters the consciousness of another group in society. Gramsci found that at different points in history, admired forms of religion had emerged that supported the interests of the working class. From this he accepted that there could be a possibility that religious beliefs and practices could develop and be made admirable by working class intellectuals, made to challenge the dominant ideology of the ruling class.
Neither Marxists nor Functionalists have harmony among their theorists as to the exact role of religion. But as it cannot be decided on a definition for religion as a whole, it may be difficult to define its role in society. Both theories however, view religion as a conservative force and as observing society for better or worse, but overall functionalists are more accepting of religion as they see it as stabilising people, therefore society. Whereas Marxists see religion as a obstacle stopping people from bettering themselves and obstructing a communist uprising. From this Marxists see religion as playing a far more negative role in society than functionalists.
