NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
As Outlined By Jean-Jacques Rousseau? You produce a deadly paradox, ? Jessica had written. ? Government cannot be religious and self assertive at the same time. Religious experience needs a spontaneity, which laws inevitably suppress. And you cannot govern without laws.
Your laws eventually must replace morality, replace conscience, and replace even the religion by which you think to govern. Sacred ritual must spring from praise and holy yearnings, which hammer out a significant morality. Government on the other hand, is a cultural organism particularly attractive to doubts, questions and contentions. I see the day coming when ceremony must take the place of faith and symbolism replaces morality. ?
Letter from the Lady Jessica Atredies Dune Messiah. P. 252. Religion occurs as a component in virtually every society. With this in mind, one should then also look at what function the religious component serves in societies. Jean-Jacques Rousseau examines religion and its place in society in the social contract and comes up with some very interesting things to say. He also leaves the door open for the reader to come up with some interpretations of religion?
s function in their own rite. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? According to Rousseau, religion, specifically civic religion is an instrument of politics established by the sovereign, or the legislator, and it serves a motivating function. When a society is in its infancy, citizens are often unable to understand the purpose of the law and the purpose behind the law. Therefore, civic religion motivates the citizen to obey the law because the law is backed by the divine and thus, they fear divine retribution if they do not follow the law. When it comes to a developed society, civic religion encourages and motivates people to maintain the habits of obedience in part because they have grown to understand and love the law.
Plus citizens used to obeying the divine, will have less trouble obeying the law, as they are already accustomed to the act of obedience. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? It is necessary to first, to clarify Rousseau? s ideas on religion. This is of course not a simple task and leaves a fair bit up to the reader, as Rousseau? s views were complex and subtle.
There is however, merit to the fact that Rousseau? s subtlety leaves room to interpretations that are not necessarily his own, but no less valuable. In chapter eight of the Social Contract, Rousseau seems to come up with four different types of religion. The first of these types is what Rousseau terms as the? religion of man. ?
According to Rousseau, this is a religion that is? without temples, altars, or rites. ? It is, ? limited to the purely internal cult of the supreme God and to the eternal duties of morality? is the pure and simple religion of the Gospel, the true theism, and what can be called natural divine law. ? [ 1 ] Rousseau sums up the?
religion of man? as Christianity. He does however make a distinction between the current forms of Christianity that are being practiced, and the one that he is speaking of. It is different in the fact that it is focused on the Gospels and? through this holy, sublime, true religion, men, in being the children of the same God, all acknowledge one another as brothers, and the society that united them is not dissolved even in death? [ 2 ] While this sounds like an exhortation of Christianity as the best religious choice, Rousseau goes on to find fault with this religious system in a state.
As true Christianity of this type requires that every citizen ascribe to the same type of Christianity equally, with a continuity and similarity of beliefs so that the citizens are all equally Christian, in order for peace and harmony to be maintained in the society. For if the beliefs are not even and continuous amongst citizens it will not be long before the citizens stop seeing each other as brothers that are children of the same God, for different beliefs leads to discontentment between the sects, with each sect believing itself to be the true Christianity. Along with this Rousseau suggests also that it would be next to impossible, and indeed very unlikely that every man would be equally concerned only with things of heavenly nature. He goes on further to suggest that Christianity is bad for the state for a number of reasons. He explains, that Christianity is otherworldly, and therefore takes away from a citizen? s love for life on earth as it is exemplified by the state. ?
Christianity is a wholly spiritual religion, concerned solely with the things of heaven; the Christian? s homeland is not of this world. ? [ 3 ] As a consequence of this Christians are too detached from the real world as they are constantly preparing and considering things in light of the eternal life to come after this life is over. Moreover, Christians make bad soldiers, once again because they are otherworldly. They won? t fight with the passion and patriotism that a deadly army requires, as often times the requirements to be an effective and deadly soldier run contrary to the beliefs that Christianity calls for. Rousseau also anticipates that?
a single ambitious man, a single hypocrite, a Caroline, for example, or a Cromwell, he would undoubtedly gain an upper hand on his pious compatriots. ? [ 4 ] It is for these reasons that Rousseau while espousing Christianity as the? true theism? suggests that it would be less then beneficial for the ideal state that he is designing. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Rousseau defines the second form of religion as the? religion of the citizen. ? This is the religion of a single country, a national religion.
This type of religion is highly organized and hierarchical, it has formal dogmas, teaches love of country, obedience to the state, and martial values. The association Rousseau makes is to the religion of the ancient Romans. The Islamic religions of the Middle East would also fit into this framework. Outside the nation that practices this kind of religion, everything is infidel, alien and barbaric. It extends the duties and rights given to man only as far as its own altars. [ 5 ] This type of religion, in Rousseau? s estimation can be good for some states, as it unites the state, and love of its laws, with the?
divine cult. ? ? The counter point to this is that this type of religion has the potential to make men superstitious and intolerant. Further, when the boundary between church and state become clouded, citizens may begin to? believe that they are performing a bold action in killing anyone who does not accept its gods. ? They would see this action as having the backing of the state, as in this case the state and the deity, or the religion of the deity are fully intertwined, and having the blessing of God, as they are doing his will. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
Rousseau points out a third kind of religion that he considers in his own terms to be? more bizarre. ? ? He terms this religion as the? religion of the priest. ? His example of this kind of bizarre religion is the Roman Catholic faith. He calls it bizarre?
in giving men two sets of legislation, two leaders, and two homelands, it subjects them to contradictory duties and prevents them from being simultaneously devout men and citizens. ? Roman Catholic faith subjects citizens to both, the laws of the state and the laws of the church. Not only are they subject to the authority that the head of state has over them, but they are also subject to the authority of the pope, via the church. In addition to this they are subject to the rule of the Vatican as well as the rule of their homeland. For Rousseau the? religion of the priest?
is? so bad that it is a waste of time to amuse oneself by proving it. Whatever breaks up social unity is worthless. All institutions that place man in contradiction to himself are of no value. ? [ 6 ] There is also the possibility that Rousseau did not want to get into a full critique of the Roman Catholic Church, as it was a fairly powerful entity in that time, and not necessarily the best organization to be upsetting. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Since Rousseau finds such serious faults with the first three types of religion that he goes over, he puts forth a fourth type of religion as the most admirable and for the proper citizen to adhere to in his society. He defines this as a?
civil religion. ? It is asserted that it is the duty of the Sovereign to require a? purely civil profession of faith? and to establish the dogmas of a civil religion. What he is pretty much saying without specifically saying it is that the Sovereign needs to make up their own religion for their new state.
The Sovereign is to establish the dogmas of civil religion. Rousseau further elaborates on this idea by stating that the dogmas of civil religion ought to be simple, few in number, precisely worded, and without explanations or commentaries. The dogmas should provide for a the existence of a omnipotent, intelligent, omniscient, and benevolent divinity that foresees and provides; the life to come; the happiness of the just; the punishment of the wicked; the sanctity of the social contract, and of the laws of the state. These dogmas are the positive dogmas that Rousseau instructs the Sovereign or the legislator to incorporate into the new state. As for the negative dogmas I am limiting them to just one, particularly intolerance. [ 7 ] The power is then invested into the Sovereign to have the ability to banish from the nation any citizen that does not follow these tenants. However, the Sovereign does not banish one for being impious, rather, the Sovereign banishes one for being unsocial.
With this in mind we can then take a look at the reasons why Rousseau feels that a civil religion is necessary, and it is through looking at these reason that we come to understand how religion is a tool of the state. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? For Rousseau a civil religion motivates the people of the state in two different ways. In an emerging society religion is particularly useful as a tool of states craft, because it creates an awe and fear of a power even larger then the state, namely the divine. Rousseau characterizes people in these new societies, as people who would be unable to understand the real purpose and principals of the laws that the sovereign is laying out. [ 8 ] By using this awe and fear of the divine as the backing for the state the citizens will then also follow the laws of the state, for they have the backing of the divine, and to disobey the divine is to risk great unpleasantness in the afterlife.
In turn he fears this lack of understanding, or ignorance of the masses will interfere with their obedience to civil law. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Rousseau understands the inherent difficulties that come with trying to institute a new system of laws and the dilemmas that come with trying to impose them on a new society. Rousseau places most of the responsibility for the implementation of these laws on the Legislator. [ 9 ] It is the Legislator? s duty to direct the people towards the common good, both for the people and for the society.
The people will not however simply follow the Legislator simply because of the high intellect, or the sound reasoning ability that the Legislator should possess, the people will follow the Legislator because he has the backing of the divine, as the people are accustomed to following, and will trust the will of the divine. Rousseau goes on to assert that? Since the Legislator is incapable of a using either force or reasoning, he must of necessity have recourse to an authority of a different order, which can compel without violence and persuade without convincing? [ 10 ] It is in this passage in particular that Rousseau makes the closest allusion to the specific use of religion as an instrument of politics. Religion then becomes the means to convince the people to subject themselves to the laws of the sate by borrowing the people? s inherent fear of God and using it, so that they will follow the laws of the state because it is God? s will.
Through this instrument of states craft, the people will willingly submit themselves and sign themselves over to the state. It appeals to man? s primitive instincts of survival. Motivation arises out of fear and awe, and a desire not to anger the divine. It is through this combination of the divine and the state that the people will truly submit themselves, for not only will they fear retribution on earth from the state if they disobey the law, but they also fear retribution from heaven. Likewise, they see compliance with the law as a means for gaining favor with the divine, and the way to blessings from God, in the same manner that following the law of God brings blessing from heaven.
One author, Zev Trachtenberg, makes the following comment; ? religion remedies the effect of the cognitive deficit the Legislator encounters with new people? [ 11 ]? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? The society doesn? t stay static however, and neither does the use of religion within the society.
The function of civil religion will evolve along with the development of the society it has been instituted in. Once the society reaches the point where it becomes cognizant of the direction of the common good, the purpose behind the civil religion shifts. The people no longer need the fear of the divine to lead them to follow the law, for they see that the law is good and useful of itself, even without the force of the divine behind it. As the laws have been implemented and followed citizens learn this usefulness of the law through their experiences with it, and see that it is too their advantage to live under the law and the protections that it grants them. [ 12 ] The citizens reach the point where they no longer need to be strong-armed into obedience by the will of the divine.
At this point however, the civil religion does not become unnecessary and devalued. It shifts its purpose as to a manner by which obedience is continually enforced. Citizens need to have a moral background upon which to base their reasons for the morality of following the law. For if there were no morality citizens would soon loose their sense of duty to the state and their desire to follow the law and be moral citizens. Rousseau writes, ? For it is of great importance to the state that each citizen have a religion that causes him to love his duties.
But the dogmas of that religion are of no interest either to the state or its members, except to the extent that these dogmas relate to morality and to the duties which, the one who professes them is bound to fulfil towards others. ? [ 13 ] How exactly Rousseau plans for his society to move from a single state oriented religion to a diversity of religions is unclear, though he may be thinking of the fragmentation process that has occurred through time, causing different denominations to spring out of common roots. The passage describes the kind of society that Rousseau wishes to create. He wishes for civil religion to create a bond between the people and the law. Rousseau notes, correctly however that the law on its own has force, and that the divine, on its own has force; however when the two are linked, the force of both is increased. [ 14 ] It is clear that with or without religion a citizen will have duties in a society whether or not there is the added force of religion to encourage the citizens to follow the rule of law. To put it simply, in order to be associated with a state, following the rule of law is a requirement, otherwise the citizen will be banished or sequestered. It is not however, a requirement of association with the state that citizens love these duties to the law, and to their fellow citizen. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
This is where Rousseau? s evolved civil religion fits into the picture. It is the tool by which the state continues to instil in its citizens a love for their civic duties and their moral responsibilities, for the civil religion continues to preach a love for one? s fellow citizen, and the moral responsibilities inherent to the doctrine. This love of the law that Rousseau is calling for is different then the? religion of the citizen?
outlined earlier in our discussion, which calls for the love of the country and the intolerance of anything alien. ? While each of these types would provide a strong link to kinsman and country, a civil religion in Rousseau? s eyes should not turn the state into the object of adoration. It also does not emphasis intolerance in the manner that the?
religion of the citizen? does. Rather the civil religion should emphasise the opposite, Rousseau states, ? tolerance should be shown to all those that tolerate others, so long as their dogmas contain nothing contrary to the duties of a citizen. ? Once again one wonders how exactly the religious difference has crept into Rousseau? s state, however the stressing of tolerance within the limits of the society is an important point to note.
At this point the Sovereign is not concerned with the question as to whether or not the dogmas of the various civil religions are right or wrong, thus eliminating the need to declare a? church of the state? which would push the society back towards a religion of the citizen. The Sovereign should instead be concerned with the moral, social, and political consequences that the religion brings forth into the society. [ 15 ]? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? In the light of this discussion of Rousseau? s view on religion as a tool of states craft, one is lead to wonder whether or not Rousseau truly saw his own religion, or profession of Calvinism as truly a faith based in a spiritual connection that he had, or if it was simply a profession of convenience.
It is hard to see how he could have had such a clear and in some respects, cynical view of religion, and its uses to mould a society, and also believe in his own religion. If he speaks of it as a tool, one must wonder if he saw his own religion in the same light. It is clear to see that Rousseau takes very seriously the function that the institution of religion plays in a society. He outlines four very different yet similar in some respects, types of religion. He only calls for the adherence to one type of religion, the civil religion. The civil religion is viewed as a motivating function of society, for citizens in countries that are in their infancy religion motivates them to follow the law and obey out of fear.
In developed countries or societies the motivation to obey the law comes both from a love of the law and the order that it brings, and a moral code that is instilled by the civil religion. Bibliography & Reference Dent, N. J. H. ? Rousseau: an introduction to his psychological, social, and political theory. ? B Blackwell.
New York, NY, USA. 1989 Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. ? The Social Contract? Translated by G. D. H. Cole.
web Lemos, Ramon M. ? Rousseau's political philosophy: an exposition and Interpretation? Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1977. Trachtenberg, Zev M. ? Making citizens: Rousseau's political theory of culture. ?
London; New York: Routledge, 1993. ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? [ 1 ] SC, Book IV, Chapter 8. [ 2 ] Ibid. [ 3 ] Ibid. [ 4 ] Ibid. [ 5 ] Ibid. [ 6 ] Ibid. [ 7 ] Ibid. [ 8 ] Ibid. [ 9 ] S. C. Book II Chapter 7. [ 10 ] Ibid. [ 11 ] Trachtenberg. ? 1993. [ 12 ] Ibid. [ 13 ] S. C. Book IV. Chapter 8. [ 14 ] Trachtenberg. 1993. [ 15 ] Ibid.
Free research essays on topics related to: roman catholic, jean jacques rousseau, civil religion, laws of the state, social and political
Research essay sample on Jean Jacques Rousseau Laws Of The State
