1. to “over-religionise” or “over-Islamise” public sphere: thoughts on ‘The public sphere’ chapter in ‘Religion in Britain: Challenges for Higher Education.’ Stimulus paper (Modood & Calhoun, 2015)
One of the paragraphs (p.11/12) discusses an issue I have always been thinking of and analysing. I wondered how dominant religion became, especially in quite a spiritual environemnts recently, and how monopolised Christianity became. In various parts of the world, e.g.: in UK where I live and in Poland where I come3 from.
Christianity has a deep historical legacy, often dating back centuries or even millennia. As a result, the influence of Christian traditions, values, and institutions can be deeply ingrained in the cultural fabric of society and becomes. secular tradition. This long-standing presence can make it challenging for religious minorities to assert their rights and gain equal recognition, as they are navigating a system that has been historically shaped by Christian norms, and became a neutralised, e.g.: eating fish on Fridays as a habit rather than religious ritual.
The paragraph begins by pointing out that certain religious groups seek inclusion and equality in society. They desire to have their practices, beliefs, and institutions treated with the same level of recognition and respect as those of the dominant religious group (in this case, Christians). For example, if there are state-funded Catholic schools, some religious minorities might argue for the establishment of similar schools representing their own faith, such as Sikhism.
Nonetheless, the paragraph points out that some religious minorities don’t just seek parity with Christian institutions and practices. They request accommodations that go beyond what is traditionally required or practiced in Christian settings. An example given is the inclusion of religious dress codes in schools and workplaces. This creates a challenge in determining how to balance the accommodation of diverse religious practices while also maintaining a secular public sphere.
What comes into picture is deeply rooted tradition (national tradition) where specific secular routines accommodated the religious performance, e.g.: you should wear special clothes for a Sunday mass, but otherwise clothing isn;t of a specific matter in the weekday; eating fish on Fridays (many canteens still have fish and chips on Fridays only).
The paragrap then highlights the obstacles that religious minorities must face by religious minorities in a society where the dominant culture is predominantly growing from Christianity. In such a monopolised culture, religion is often considered a private matter for individuals, and public institutions may lean towards secularism.
Consequently, religious minorities have to negotiate their demands for inclusion within this framework that prioritizes the separation of religion from public life.
On the other hand however, every other religion that Christian would have to compromise on some neutral solutions.
In regards, it is obvious that some religious minorities make claims for public recognition and respect, but this is met with discomfort from some groups of the population. The perception is that such claims may “over-religionise” or “over-Islamise” the public sphere, meaning that certain religious practices or symbols may become overly prominent in public spaces, leading to unease for some individuals who desire a more secular environment.
The paragraph raises the issue of how some religious groups may be perceived in ways that intertwine racial and religious stereotypes, with a particular focus on Islamophobia. Islamophobia is a form of prejudice and discrimination against Muslims based on both religious beliefs and ethnic or cultural backgrounds. This intertwining of stereotypes can exacerbate tensions and challenges faced by religious minorities in their pursuit of recognition and respect. In the light of terrorist attacks then allowing religion such Islam to have more space in the public sphere appears as questionable, because of its possible risk of dangerous outbreak that can
The paragraph concludes by acknowledging that these tensions and complexities surrounding religious inclusion, equality, and perception may persist for a while. Resolving these issues may take time and require ongoing efforts to promote understanding, dialogue, and acceptance among diverse religious and cultural groups.
In summary, the paragraph highlights the complexities religious minorities face when seeking inclusion and equality in a predominantly Christian society. The desire for recognition and respect can raise questions about accommodating diverse religious practices while maintaining a secular public sphere. Moreover, the intertwining of racial and religious stereotypes and the discomfort surrounding claims of public recognition add further challenges to the process. To address these issues, fostering a climate of understanding and mutual respect
2. “Public expressions of personal faith are not prominent in British public life” from The ‘vaguely Christian’ UK chapter in ‘Religion in Britain: Challenges for Higher Education.’ Stimulus paper (Modood & Calhoun, 2015)
The paragraph highlights the complexities of public expressions of personal faith in British public life, particularly in relation to Christianity’s dominance and the prominence of non-Christian religious groups. It also explores the role of multiculturalism and the implications of religious identities beyond strictly religious spheres. This observation is particularly relevant to Christianity’s historical dominance in Britain. While religious voices, especially those of the Anglican and Catholic churches, address ethical issues related to capitalism, inequality, and multiculturalism, religion is generally considered private. The secular nature of public debates is emphasized, except when discussions revolve around religion, particularly Islam and other non-Christians, especially Muslims, are perceived as representative of non-British religion and a higher level of religiosity. This emphasis on non-Christian religious identities, especially those linked to non-Western faiths, is evident in the discourse of multiculturalism.
The text also unveils how religions are becoming a synonym to ethnical minority rather than identify like religion or faithful path, e.g.: religion’s representatives such as Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, and Muslims. Black individuals, on the other hand, are immediately labeled with a racial term, highlighting the way religions are used to describe certain ethnic groups, but they aren’t linked with Christianity (and Christianity is dominant in many African countries). Multiculturalism then turns out to be narrow in its tendencies to focus on recent immigration and non-Western ethnicity, often overlooking the presence and contributions of churches in Black communities.
3. public anxiety in “Religion as a public good” chapter in ‘Religion in Britain: Challenges for Higher Education.’ Stimulus paper (Modood & Calhoun, 2015)
The heading describes the context of British society. It highlights the importance of public engagement with religion, challenges the exclusion of religion from the public sphere, and emphasizes the potential for universities to foster integrative academic (religious, faithful) communities.
The text discussed the public sphere being not limited to government or public ownership only. It is a space where citizens engage in debates, form culture, and participate in decision-making that shapes shared ways of life. Religion, often inspired by religious communities, plays a vital role in such discussions about the public good. Excluding religion from the public sphere is seen as repressive, as tolerating private belief alone is not sufficient to promote open dialogue and inclusivity. The chapter highlights the complexities of British secularity, where the public sphere allows (way) more room for some beliefs, particularly Christianity, than others. The presence of Christian public symbolism, notably through the established Church of England, is significant. However, this one-sided visibility may marginalize individuals of other faiths, illustrating a secularism that does not equally accommodate all religious identities.
The paragraphs also note that some minority religions, like Islam, receive more public attention due to being objects of public anxiety and fearful connections to dangerous and life-threating events. The media and politics often exaggerate in featuring discussions about Islam, despite Muslims comprising less than 5% of the British population. This disparity in attention raises questions about the role of media and public discourse in shaping perceptions of religious groups and in turn daily accommodation.
What is important is to emphasize the importance of universities as spaces for creating integrative academic communities. Encouraging activities that cross religious boundaries fosters learning and enriches the larger society. While some level of self-segregation may be necessary for small minorities to maintain collective identity and solidarity, the burden of integration is often placed disproportionately on minorities. The text urges universities to pursue connections and communication across religious and other groupings while recognizing the need for in-group solidarity.
In conclusion this heading provides a insightful observation into the significance of religion in the public sphere, challenges the exclusion of religion from public discourse, if non-Christian and underscores the potential and powerful input universities have to foster integrative academic communities. It sheds light on the complexities of British secularity and highlights the need for open dialogue, inclusivity, and recognition of religious diversity to promote shared public values and a stronger sense of citizenship in a pluralistic society.