The struggle in Ireland for equal rights between religious groups is a story even older than racism. Before mankind was divided based upon melanin content, ethnicities and societies distinguished themselves from others based upon a certain system of beliefs in a higher power, or oftentimes, multiple higher powers. Even before monotheism came to dominate the religious landscape, particularly in the developed world, ancients would often persecute or justify war, enslavement, and pillaging upon divine inspiration. The advent of monotheism was marked by centuries of religious-inspired conflicts, the Jewish conquest of the Canaanites, for example. Two other important examples are the centuries of oppression, execution, and torture endured by Christians at the hands of the Roman Empire. Charlamagne’s conquests in the north of Europe are also well known for their brutality.
What is the common theme between all these infamous examples of religious warfare and persecution? Not necessarily that the parties involved are religious, after all, the Quakers, Amish, Jain, and most Christians today are well known for their pacifism. The true link between violence, oppression and injustice via religious discrimination is a wedding of religion and the power of the state. The human institution of government as usual poisons the well.
The logic I followed in class holds that when a state and religious ideology are successfully melded, any dissent from the religious body is essentially dissent from the government that is in cahoots with the religious body. By wedding the auspices of the state with the divine power of religion, governments not only obtain ultimate authority on earth but also have the ability to dictate the eternal afterlife – creating the ultimate coercive apparatus. In essence, I argue that the root problem is not religion itself, as there are arguably more examples of religions coexisting and living in peace with one another than there are of conflicting ideologies. Rather, I argue that the uniquely toxic combination of religion and the powers of earthly government creates a wholly unacceptable society rife with religious discrimination, persecution, and violence.
The Catholics may have been a majority but they were not the government, and the mechanisms of government explicitly discriminated against Catholics, in addition to the protestant person to person discrimination that was also widespread. The British government and Anglican church perpetrated centuries of religiously targeted genocides against native Irish speakers, catholics and families. It was not just social class
You bring up a good point about how the state can utilize religion to derive divine power to oppress the people. However, in Ireland’s case, the largest denomination population-wise is Catholicism. Yet, it is largely the Catholics who were oppressed by the Protestants. Is the mechanism behind it the state using religion as a justification to control the people? I think not. Interestingly, the situation seems more like a racial issue than a totalitarian government. The difference here is that in a racial-like issue, it is not the government who oppresses, but rather a social class. For example, in the American colonies in the 1700s, the government played little role in the governing of slaves. The slaveowners had almost total control. It is precisely the lack of governmental control (and less importantly a bias against slaves in the judicial system) that enabled the class of slaveowners to oppress the slaves and derive justification from skin color. In Ireland, the situation was similar because it was the largely Protestant unionist class that discriminated against Catholics, and the lack of governmental action enabled them to do so. In a totalitarian government, combined with religion or not, the government did most of the control, not a social class.
I really like that you brought up this issue about the role of religion and its relationship with the state because it is one of the issues I have grappled with a great deal but still cannot come down on a position. I am generally skeptical of anything religious and I certainly oppose the inclusion of pure religion in state affairs. However, this becomes more complicated when religion defines identity more than it defines belief. It is my understanding that in Ireland today a great deal of people are actually secular, but they still identify as Catholic because it is such an integral part to their identity. What becomes the acceptable role of religion in the state when religion really means identity? Does this lead to something similar to an identity majority democracy, or is it something new?