Rousseau and Tocqueville fundamentally agree that the civil function of religion is to strengthen the bond that exists between the people and the law. However, the two men differ in their views on how this bond should be strengthened. Rousseau argues in favor of a new, civil religion being imposed by the sovereign, while Tocqueville argues that the people must accept a set of ready-made beliefs, but keep the church and state separated. Although their respective theories on how religion should be used differ, they both assert that religion must serve to check the morals of the citizens and augment their love of the laws. Religion does this by offering the people a set of pre-founded beliefs that are in accord with social morality, justice and growth. For both political thinkers, the civil purpose of religion is to instill in the majority a common opinion which is conducive to the health and progress of the state.
[...] 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 It can be called the religion of the priest. third 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 with himself are of no value.” second is good in that it unites the divine cult with love of the laws, and that in making the homeland the object of its citizens' admiration, it teaches them that all service to the state is service to its tutelary god.” Pg 223 the other hand, it is bad in that, being based on error and lies, it deceives men, makes them credulous and superstitious, and drowns the rue cult of the divinity in an empty ceremony. [...]
[...] dogmas of the civil religion ought to be simple, few in number, precisely worded, without explanations or commentaries. The existence of a powerful, intelligent, beneficent 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. There are the positive dogmas. [...]
[...] One religion has a great influence over the desires, it dominates the imagination, it inspires real and profound beliefs; but it divides the human race into blessed and damned, creates divisions on earth which should exist only in the other life, breeds intolerance and fanaticism. The other preaches toleration, appeals to the reason, makes of reason its symbol; it obtains no power, it is an inert thing, without influence and almost without life. Q. To what do you attribute the religious tolerance which reigns in the United States? A. Principally to the extreme division of sects (which is almost without limits). [...]
[...] He even claims that by separating the Church from the State, religion grows stronger, but “when it comes to be united with a government, it must adopt maxims that are applicable only to certain people” (284). By removing itself from the state, religion is able to “reign over (284) since it has no obligations to appeal to any particular political parties. In this sense, Tocqueville asserts that religion can play a larger civil role by being independent of the state because without this alliance, it need not be associated with feelings of hatred towards those who govern. [...]
[...] In addition to this, Tocqueville claims that religion still serves as a civil function, (despite being separated from the state), by checking the morals of the people and ensuring that they are conducive to loving the laws of the state. He alleges that cannot say that in the United States religion exerts an influence on the laws or on the details of political opinions, but it directs mores, and it is in regulating the family that it works to regulate the state” (278). [...]
Source aux normes APA
Pour votre bibliographieLecture en ligne
avec notre liseuse dédiée !Contenu vérifié
par notre comité de lecture