Malinowski noted that in all societies life crises - such as birth, puberty, marriage and death - are surrounded by religious rituals. These are created to deal with problems such as death through rituals such as funerals. These rituals control the stress and anxiety that could disrupt society. This is one function of religion that society uses. Malinowski also argued that rituals were used for specific situations that reduce anxiety by providing confidence and a feeling of control. He argues that religion promotes social solidarity by dealing with situations of emotional stress that threatens the stability of society.
Criticisms of functionalism come from the fact it neglects many instances where religion can be seen as a disruptive force. Functionalist theory fails to consider conflict between different religious groups within one society, such as Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland.
Marxists argue that religion reinforces oppression, and it acts as a form of social control to maintain the current system of exploitation. Basically it is a system of keeping people in their place. Marx argued that “Religious suffering is at the same time an expression of real suffering and protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the feeling of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless circumstances. It is the opium of the masses”. This means that by providing explanations and justifications for social situations, Marx believed that religion could divert peoples’ attention away from the source of their oppression, therefore helping maintain the power of ruling classes. However, conflicting evidence suggests that religion can sometimes provide a force for change. Maduro, a neo-Marxist argued that religion is not always a conservative force, and that it can be a force for social change. He believed that religion may play a progressive role in the political struggles of oppressed classes. Maduro argued that social change could occur if the oppressed took their discontent to the churches. Marx however, believed religion stays a conservative force due to the interests of the ruling class.
An increase in fundamentalism has occurred in recent years. Fundamentalism involves interpreting a religion literally from sacred religious texts. A dramatic example of fundamentalism causing social change through the return to traditional values has been in Iran. Under the last Shah, Iranian society underwent a process of change, the Shar believed that westernisation would help to modernise his country. The culture was rejected and the ayatollahs saw the solution as a return back to true Islamic society based on the Qu’ran and a rejection of western capitalism and western ways. This resulted in a rise in Islamic Fundamentalism. Most sociologists agree that changes in society lead to changes in religion, not vice versa. Talcott Parsons believed that as society developed, religion lost some of its functions. He argues that religion provides meanings to make sense of all experiences. With social change and change of experiences, religion will alter to give new meanings justifying situations.
Max Weber argued that in some circumstances religion leads to social change: his idea is that whilst religious beliefs may integrate a social group, the same beliefs may have repercussions which in the long term can produce changes in society.
In “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism“, Weber examined the relationship between the rise of certain forms of Protestantism and the development of Western industrial capitalism. He demonstrates how a particular form of Protestantism, Calvinist Protestantism, played an important part in the development of capitalism. He argues that Calvinism originated in the beliefs of John Calvin (17th century), who thought that there was a distinct group chosen by God to go to heaven, before they were born. However well behaved non-chosen people were, they would still not be able to gain a place in heaven.
In conclusion, religion can be a catalyst for social change if you look at the perspectives put forward by Max Weber’s “The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism“, yet through the functionalist and Marxist perspectives it can also prohibit social change if there are not enough potential revolutionaries, or the ideology of the ruling-class is a strong enough force to keep a passive, obedient, oppressed class.
