Compared Functionalist and Marxist theories of the role of religion.

Both functionalist and Marxist believe that religion is primarily concerned with situations where emotional stress and uncertainty can arise. And this is seen as a threat to the social solidarity. Malinoswki states that life crises such as life, puberty, marriage and particularly death are all dealt with by religion. Death is seen as the most disruptive event and so there is much emphasises on how to deal with death in religion. In religion, funeral ceremony reinforces the belief in life after death (immortality) and so by denying the fact of death individuals are comforted. The presence of other mourners also provides support for the bereave. This way religion ensures society is not disrupted. Death is seen as the most 'socially destructive event' because it removes a member from society. The event of funeral therefore unifies the social group and therefore promotes social solidarity by dealing with the emotion of this event and removes the uncertainty that may have threatened the stability of society.

Like Functionalist Marxist also believe that religion can dull the pain produced by oppression. Marx referred to this as 'the opium of the people' - this way religion does not solve the problem because it only makes life more bearable and as a result discourages the demand for change. Religion dulls the pain of oppressor by promising a paradise of eternal happiness in the life after death. And therefore gives the oppressed something to look forward to. Religion also offers the hope of a supernatural that solves the problems on earth and this way the 'anticipation of the future can make the present more acceptable'. Religion works in all these ways to help people, in particular those at the bottom of stratification system to accept and come to terms of their situation.

In addition, functionalists believe that life is 'full of contradictions that threaten the meaning people place on life'. So religion is there to 'make-sense' of all these contradictions. For example, the suffering of humans is explained by religion as a test from God, a punishment for sins, suffering will bring joy and reward in heaven and so suffering becomes meaningful.

Functionalists theory is criticised for emphasising on the positive contribution of religion to society and for ignore the negative aspects. However Marxist overcome this criticism as they perspective is entirely based on the conflict aspect of religion. Most of Marxist criticisms have also been overcome by Neo-Marxist. Neo-Marxist deny the fact that religion is always used as a conservative force. They believe that religion can cause social revolution, for example the liberation of the Latin American was primarily helped by religion. Tuner Neo-Marxist believes that religion does relate to the physical and economic aspects of social life. However unlike, Marxist he does not believe that religion has a universal role in society and that religion is not always an important part of the ruling class ideology. For example in the feudal period, Marxist assumed that religion was adopted to integrate society. But according to Turner the feudal system was concerned with survival based upon wealth and power. Religion then did help to change the system in terms of emphasising on values of family. However in capitalist society, Turner argues that religion has lost one of its vital functions for the ruling class. And so Neo-Marxist believe that the ruling class do not need to use religion to reinforce their ideas to maintain social solidarity because this can now be done by coercion and economic power.