Li Shen: The Historical Status and Academic Principles of Marxist Religious Studies
I. Marxist Religious Studies is the Science of Studying Religion Under the Guidance of Marxism
Religious studies is the science that investigates religion. Marxist religious studies is the science of investigating religion under the guidance of Marxism. The founders of Marxism laid the foundation for Marxist religious studies through their research into religious issues. Following the passing of Marx and Engels, outstanding Marxists in new historical periods inherited and developed Marxist religious studies. These included Marxist political parties and their wise leaders, as well as renowned Marxist scholars.
Chinese Marxist religious studies began in the 1950s. Mr. Ren Jiyu [1] applied Marxism as a guide to the study of Buddhism, an approach that received the affirmation of Mao Zedong. In October 1963, Mr. Ren Jiyu published a collection of his research papers on Buddhism titled Collected Essays on Chinese Buddhist Thought from the Han and Tang Dynasties. On December 30, 1963, Mao Zedong wrote the following instruction in an internal Party document:
This document is very good. However, it makes no mention of religious research. Regarding the world’s three great religions (Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism), which to this day influence a vast population, we possess no knowledge. We do not have a single research institution led by Marxists in this country, nor do we have a readable journal in this field. Modern Buddhist Studies [2] is not led by Marxists, and the level of its articles is quite low. In other journals, there are very few articles written from the perspective of historical materialism; for instance, the few articles on Buddhist studies published by Ren Jiyu are already as rare as "phoenix feathers and unicorn horns" [3], and I have seen nothing discussing Christianity or Islam. One cannot write a good history of philosophy, nor a good history of literature or world history, without critiquing theology. I ask the comrades in the Propaganda Department to consider this.
This instruction was later published under the title "Strengthen the Research of Religious Issues." Mao Zedong’s instruction and the publication of Mr. Ren Jiyu’s Collected Essays on Chinese Buddhist Thought from the Han and Tang Dynasties were the landmark events signaling the birth of Chinese Marxist religious studies.
II. The Relationship between Marxist Religious Studies and Marxist Philosophy is One of Common Roots and Symbiosis
The direct precursors to Marxist religious studies were German Classical Philosophy, particularly Feuerbach's The Essence of Christianity and The Essence of Religion.
German Classical Philosophy was born through the critique of religious concepts and concluded with the critique of religious concepts. The critique of religious concepts permeated the entire process of German Classical Philosophy. Therefore, German Classical Philosophy was simultaneously the religious studies of Germany at that time. In the process of critiquing German Classical Philosophy, the founders of Marxism, Marx and Engels, brought that tradition to a close and established Marxist philosophy. Simultaneously, they ended the religious studies of that era in Germany and established Marxist religious studies. The relationship between Marxist philosophy and Marxist religious studies is one of common roots and symbiosis; their theoretical foundations are entirely identical. It is only because their respective tasks differ that they diverged into two systems of thought when further developing and addressing their specific concrete problems.
The first sentence of the first essay, "Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right," in the first volume of the latest 2012 edition of the Selected Works of Marx and Engels, states: "For Germany, the critique of religion has been essentially completed, and the critique of religion is the prerequisite of all critique." It is in this classic work that Marx pointed out:
Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.
Therefore, the "Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right" is a classic work of Marxist philosophy and also a classic work of Marxist religious studies. Works similar to this include The German Ideology, Theses on Feuerbach, and Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy. These classic philosophical works of Marx and Engels are simultaneously their classic works of religious studies. Those classic Marxist and Engelsian formulations regarding philosophical problems are often precisely their classic formulations regarding religious issues:
Feuerbach resolves the essence of religion into the essence of man. But the essence of man is no abstraction inherent in each single individual. In its reality it is the ensemble of the social relations.
The great basic question of all philosophy, especially of more recent philosophy, is that concerning the relation of thinking and being.
Which is primary, spirit or nature—that question, in relation to the church, was sharpened into this: Did God create the world or has the world been in existence eternally?
The answers which the philosophers gave to this question split them into two great camps.
Consequently, to deeply understand Marxist philosophy, one must deeply understand Marxist religious studies. To deeply understand Marxist religious studies, one must conduct in-depth research into religious issues and, first and foremost, conduct in-depth research into the findings of the precursors of Marxist religious studies regarding religious issues.
III. German Classical Philosophy is the Direct Forerunner of Marxist Religious Studies
The direct forerunner of Marxist religious studies was the critique of religion by German Classical Philosophy. Tracing back further, one finds the French materialist philosophy of the eighteenth century.
Eighteenth-century French philosophy was a thoroughgoing materialist philosophy and a thoroughgoing atheist ideology. "The French Enlightenment of the 18th century, and in particular French materialism, was not only a struggle against the existing political institutions... it was just as much an open, modernized struggle against the church and theology." Materialist philosophers represented by Diderot and Holbach relentlessly exposed the hypocrisy and greed of Christian priests, revealing that the so-called existence of God and the will of God were merely lies concocted by theologians. They held that belief in these lies resulted from the ignorance of the masses.
These conclusions of the French materialists were the result of their in-depth study of religion, primarily Christianity. They used the unity of matter to negate the existence of God; they used matter in motion to negate God as the "prime mover." They used the natural formation of a diverse world from matter to negate God's creation and his role as the world's master. They used the idea that "mental thinking is a function of the brain, just as taste is a function of the tongue" to negate the religious doctrine of the immortality of the soul. These were their philosophical achievements and simultaneously their achievements in religious studies. These accomplishments became the starting point for the critique of religion for subsequent generations.
French materialist philosophy was the ideological precursor to the political revolution of late eighteenth-century France. Precisely as the French Revolution was in full swing, German Classical Philosophy, beginning with Kant, was born. Although the German philosophers did not engage in open struggle against the Church or even the State as the French philosophers had, German Classical Philosophy similarly served as a precursor to political revolution. Most German philosophers were not materialists but idealists; however, on the issue of critiquing religion, they shared a direct lineage with French materialist philosophy. Building upon the foundation of the French critique of religion, German Classical Philosophy on one hand corrected the deficiencies of the French critique, while on the other hand continuing to carry out a profound critique of religion.
First was Kant, who used his transcendental critical philosophy to prove that there is no possibility for the existence of God within either human a priori reason or a posteriori experience. He refuted all previous proofs for the existence of God, declaring them invalid. This led the famous German poet Heine to remark that Kant "stormed heaven and put the whole garrison to the sword," leaving the supreme master of the world "wallowing unproven in his blood." Hegel, with his dialectical thinking possessed of a "transcendent historical sense," produced a group of thinkers who "politically and religiously... might belong to the most extreme opposition." Furthermore, Hegel provided a philosophical summary of the words and deeds exposing the dark rule of the Christian church since the eighteenth century. He pointed out that the corruption of the church arose because the churches themselves were secular communities; they possessed property, treasures, and coarse passions. He thus explained the causes of ecclesiastical corruption from a theoretical perspective.
After Hegel’s death, his student Strauss wrote The Life of Jesus, discovering that the stories and miracles concerning Jesus in Christian scriptures were merely myths fabricated by people. These myths were able to circulate widely and endure because they expressed desires that already existed but remained unspoken in the hearts of many, rather than being simply the result of "a deceiver meeting a fool." His contemporary, Bruno Bauer, did not believe the stories in the Gospels were unconscious fabrications of the people, but rather the conscious creations of Christian communities. He also proved that "Philo of Alexandria, who was still alive at a great age in 40 AD, was the real father of Christianity, and the Roman Stoic Seneca was, so to speak, its uncle." Engels considered this to be Bauer’s "most brilliant research achievement."
Feuerbach was the final philosopher of German Classical Philosophy. His The Essence of Christianity allowed German Classical Philosophy to break out of Hegel’s idealist system of "pure spirit," "placing materialism back on the throne without circumlocution." Feuerbach believed that man is a unity of soul and thought, matter and spirit. Our consciousness is a product of the human brain. Religious concepts are products of fantasy. The supreme deity who creates and rules the world is the result of human thinking externalizing the infinity of its own consciousness. Thus, the essence of God is merely the essence of man. People's worship of God is merely the worship of the human essence. Such worship is harmful. Mankind should restore the essence of God to the essence of man and restore the celestial life of fantasy to the real life of human beings. People should not believe in God but believe in themselves and struggle for the pursuit of real happiness.
From Kant to Feuerbach, German Classical Philosophy saw distinctions between idealism and materialism, and debates between gnosiological optimism and agnosticism. Yet, in terms of critiquing religion, their direction was consistent. On this issue, they were also consistent with French materialism. This was the attitude toward religion held by the bourgeoisie during its revolutionary period; it was a progressive ideology. It was upon the foundation of this progressive, critical religious study that Marx and Engels created Marxist religious studies and laid its theoretical foundation.
Although German Classical Philosophy exposed the essence of religion more deeply than French materialism and elucidated a series of theoretical problems from the origin to the development of religion—making it a more profound form of religious study, the progressive religious study of the bourgeois revolutionary era—it fell short of French materialism in one respect: almost all of these philosophers retained a "religious tail." Kant abolished God in terms of rational cognition but created a God in the realm of moral practice. Hegel’s dialectics negated a fixed and unchanging world, thereby negating God's creation, yet his "Absolute Idea" itself was nothing more than a compensatory remnant of faith in God—a philosophized deity. As for Feuerbach, he also sought to establish a religion without God, consisting only of "love," to satisfy the human psychological need for dependence.
The critique of religion in German Classical Philosophy should be inherited. The "religious tail" they retained, however, must be excised. This was the work completed by Marx and Engels.
IV. "The Abolition of Religion as the Illusory Happiness of the People" is the Ultimate Goal of Marxist Religious Studies
The founders of Marxism inherited the critical spirit toward religion found in German Classical Philosophy—that is, German classical religious studies—but negated their "religious tails." In the "Introduction to A Contribution to the Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right," Marx immediately affirmed the correctness and historical significance of the German classical philosophical critique of religion, while also clearly stating:
The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions... Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower.
Thus, the new philosophy or religious study must not only overturn Hegel’s dialectics, which stood on its head, and break out of Hegel’s system of "pure spirit," but it also has no need for Kant’s God of practical reason or Feuerbach’s religion of love. It must uphold a thoroughgoing atheist stance and take "the abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people," "giving up illusions about their condition," and "plucking the imaginary flowers on the chain" as its objective and purpose in dealing with religion. This is the essence of Marxist religious studies.
V. Explaining Religion Through History is the Fundamental Theoretical Principle of Marxist Religious Studies
German classical philosophy "found its most systematic, most copious, and most final expression" in the philosophical works of Hegel. In Hegelian philosophy, the history of humanity, as well as the history of nature, is nothing more than the history of the unfolding of the internal contradictions of the Absolute Idea; it is the ideas of men, or even merely religious ideas, that drive the development of history. They did not know that the power driving the development of ideas, including religious ones, is the real material conditions of life:
"This ideational process which takes place in their heads is, in the last resort, determined by their material conditions of life, a fact which of necessity remains unknown to these people, for otherwise there would be an end to all ideology." [4]
This is a new, materialist conception of history. The characteristic features of this conception of history are:
"Starting from the material production of life itself, it sets out the actual process of production, and understands the form of intercourse connected with this and created by this mode of production (i.e., civil society in its various stages), as the basis of all history; and then from the standpoint of civil society it explains the state and all the different theoretical products and forms of consciousness, such as religion, philosophy, ethics, etc., and traces their origins and growth." [5]
In short, this means explaining the changes in ideologies such as religion and philosophy through the changes in the development of people's material conditions of life, rather than the reverse. Conceptions of history prior to Marx always reduced secular problems to religious ones, using religion to explain history; Marxist religious studies, conversely, reduces religious problems to secular ones, using history to explain religion. Using the changes in real living conditions to explain the changes in religion—that is, using history to explain religion—is the fundamental method and theoretical principle of Marxist religious studies.
VI. Religion will only disappear when the real-life conditions it reflects disappear
Because the emergence and development of ideology is determined by people's material conditions of life, the fate of ideologies is directly related to the material conditions they reflect. The fate of religious ideas is determined by the social reality they reflect:
"The religious reflex of the real world can, in any case, only then finally vanish, when the practical relations of every-day life offer to man none but perfectly intelligible and reasonable relations with regard to his fellowmen and to Nature. ... The life-process of society, which is based on the process of material production, does not strip off its mystical veil until it is treated as production by freely associated men, and is under their conscious and planned control. This, however, demands for society a certain material ground-work or set of conditions of existence which in their turn are the spontaneous product of a long and painful process of development." [6]
To achieve this goal, there must first be social action to allow society to possess and utilize all means of production under a planned control:
"...For this, social action is first of all required. When this action is accomplished, when society, by taking possession of all means of production and using them on a planned basis, has freed itself and all its members from the bondage in which they are now held by these very means of production which they have produced, but which confront them as an irresistible alien force, when therefore man no longer merely proposes, but also disposes [7] — only then will the last alien force which is still reflected in religion vanish; and with it will also vanish the religious reflection itself, for the simple reason that then there will be nothing left to reflect." [8]
Naturally, enabling society to possess all means of production, and further to use them according to a plan so that "man proposes and man disposes," is a long process that will undergo many painful historical developments. However, this is the only path toward the eventual extinction of religion. In this sense, religion is not "exterminated," nor can it be eliminated by artificial means; rather, it withers away naturally along with the development of social history. In the process of the withering away of religion, society does not engage in direct combat with religion, but rather with the material foundation and the series of material conditions of existence that produce religion and its reflections. It does not use coercive means to abolish or discard religion; on the contrary, it implements a policy of freedom of religious belief. The reason for implementing such a policy is that religion, as an ideology, possesses a material basis for its survival.
VII. Uphold the principle of freedom of religious belief, but do not forget the ultimate goal of "liberating belief from the enchantment of religion"
During the European Middle Ages, under the rule of the Christian Church headed by the Roman Church, Europeans lacked freedom of belief. Any doubt cast upon the religious faith of the time was regarded as heresy or even atheism. Offenders suffered criminal penalties ranging from flogging and imprisonment to, in severe cases, being burned at the stake. In the 16th century, the German Luther opposed the Roman Church, reformed doctrine, and founded Protestantism. He was followed by the Frenchman Calvin and others who further reformed doctrine and established different Protestant sects. Protestantism suffered suppression by the Old Church (Catholicism) headed by Rome, and Europe experienced decades of religious wars and a series of revolutionary movements. Through these movements, Europeans won for themselves the freedom to believe in the Old Church or in a particular Protestant sect. A succession of revolutionary movements in Britain, France, and elsewhere made the principle of freedom of religious belief one of the important achievements of the bourgeois revolution. The American slogan "Give me liberty, or give me death" included the freedom to believe in different religions.
Marx spoke highly of the policy of freedom of belief, regarding it as a fundamental human right:
"This human right is in part a political right, a right which is exercised only in community with others. What constitutes its content is participation in the community, and specifically in the political community, for the state. These rights come under the category of political liberty, of civil rights, which, as we have seen, do not at all presuppose the consistent and positive abolition of religion, and therefore of Judaism. ...
"Freedom of belief is among these rights, namely, the right to practice any form of worship.
"The concept of human rights does not contain the implication that religion and human rights are incompatible. On the contrary, the right to be religious, to be religious in one’s own way, and to practice the ritual of one’s own particular religion, is expressly included among the rights of man. The privilege of faith is a universal human right." [9]
The reason Marxist religious studies advocates for freedom of religious belief is that within bourgeois society, people are still dominated by alien economic and political forces; the factual basis for religious reflection and the religious reflection itself continue to coexist. Under these circumstances, coercing people into not believing in religion would instead expand the influence of religion and "act in God's favor":
"There is no doubt: the only service that can still be rendered to God today is to declare atheism a compulsory article of faith and to outdo Bismarck’s anti-clerical laws in his Kulturkampf [10] by prohibiting religion altogether." [11]
Therefore, under the capitalist system, a policy of freedom of religious belief must be implemented. Even for a period after the proletariat seizes political power, alien social and natural forces will continue to exist. Thus, the proletarian party in power must continue to implement the policy of freedom of belief for a considerably long period.
However, the freedom of belief advocated by the proletarian party differs from bourgeois freedom of belief:
"Bourgeois 'freedom of conscience' is nothing but the toleration of all possible kinds of religious freedom of conscience, and that for its part [the Workers' Party] endeavors rather to liberate the conscience from the witchery of religion." [12]
In other words, the proletarian party inherits the policy of freedom of belief won by the bourgeois revolution, but it does not forget its ultimate mission regarding the religious question: to discard belief in deities and "abolish" religion. The historical mission of the proletarian party is also the historical mission of Marxist religious studies. That is to say, Marxist religious studies upholds the principle of freedom of religious belief, but it cannot forget the ultimate goal of "liberating belief from the enchantment of religion."
VIII. To liberate belief "from the enchantment of religion," one must criticize theology and propagate atheism
The fundamental way to realize the "liberation of belief from the enchantment of religion" is through practical social action—creating a "certain material basis or a series of material conditions of existence" to reach the goal of "man proposes and man disposes." On this issue, "the weapon of criticism cannot, of course, replace criticism by weapons, material force must be overthrown by material force." However, "theory also becomes a material force as soon as it has gripped the masses." The criticism of religion and the propagation of atheist thought can help people recognize the illusory and absurd nature of religion, thereby inspiring their fighting spirit to actively participate in social action and create their own happy lives, which is conducive to creating the material conditions of existence that break free from religious reflection. This is a spiritual weapon that can also become a material force.
Therefore, the proletarian party not only requires its own members to firmly establish a scientific atheist worldview and forbids them from believing in religion, but it also uses the scientific atheist worldview to educate the masses, helping them liberate their minds and cast off spiritual shackles. Engels stated in "Program of the Blanquist Fugitives of the Commune": "In our day, it is fortunately not difficult to be an atheist. Atheism has become a matter of course for the workers' parties of Europe." He continued, "As for the vast majority of German Social-Democratic workers, it can even be said that atheism has become a thing of the past for them; this purely negative term no longer applies to them, for they no longer believe in God theoretically, but practically; they have simply done away with God, they live and think in the real world, and therefore they are materialists." This was true not only in Germany but also in France. If this were not the case—that is, if some members of a workers' party still believed in religion—they would have to be educated. In Engels' view, the best teaching material for atheist education was the literature of the 18th-century French materialists:
"If not, then nothing is simpler than to see to the widespread distribution among the workers of the brilliant French materialist literature of the last century. Up to now it is the highest achievement of the French spirit, both in form and in content; considering the level of science at the time, its content is still of extremely high value today, and its form remains an unattainable model." [13]
Decades later, Lenin reiterated Engels' opinion, hoping that Soviet Communists of the time would follow Engels' instructions by re-translating the works of the 18th-century French materialists and disseminating them widely among the masses. He said that since the broad masses of people were kept in a state of ignorance and prejudice by the old social system, various atheist materials should be provided to them. Facts from all aspects of real life should be told to the masses, using various methods to influence them, so they could rid themselves of the concept of ghosts and gods, rouse their spirits, and strive for a better life.
In the early period following the founding of the Communist Party of China, it attached great importance to atheist propaganda among the masses. At the end of 1963, in his directive "Strengthen the Study of the Problem of Religion," Mao Zedong pointed out the necessity for Communists to study religion and more accurately positioned the Marxist criticism of religion as the "criticism of theology." This pointed the way forward for Marxist religious studies in China.
IX. The shift in the bourgeoisie's attitude toward religion and the tendency toward the vulgarization of religious studies
From the 17th and 18th to the 19th centuries, bourgeois revolutionary movements occurred in different forms in Britain, France, and Germany. The 18th-century French Revolution, in particular, not only established a thorough democratic republican system; during the revolution, all church property was confiscated and auctioned off. Clergymen were required to obey government laws and swear allegiance to the new regime, failing which they were exiled, imprisoned, or even executed. For a time, in order to purge religious fanaticism, all churches were closed and religious relics destroyed. Before the revolution, the clergy was the First Estate of French society. After the revolution, this estate ceased to exist. The state abolished the status of Catholicism (under the Roman See) as the state religion, declared all religions equal, and granted the people freedom of belief. French politics was fundamentally liberated from the interference and shackles of religion. From the late 18th century to the early 19th century, German classical philosophy, following French materialist philosophy, offered a deeper and more comprehensive criticism of religion, reflecting the fundamental attitude of the German bourgeoisie toward religion during its revolutionary period.
When the bourgeoisie carried out their revolutionary movements, it was the lower classes—the broad masses of producers, primarily the peasantry—who provided them with a fighting army. With the success of the bourgeois revolution and the development of large-scale industry, there was created not only a class of big industrial capitalists, but also a class of industrial workers whose numbers far exceeded those of the capitalists. As their numbers grew, so too did the strength of the working class. During the revolutionary movements that swept the European continent in 1848, the working class not only played a vital role but also put forward certain "demands that were quite inadmissible from the point of view of capitalist society."
The British bourgeoisie had long discovered that they shared a common interest with the ruling classes in oppressing the broad laboring masses at home. To extract as much and as high-quality labor as possible from their clerks, workers, and servants, it was necessary to train them in docility and submission. The primary spiritual means for this was the use of religion to manipulate their souls. Following the rise of materialist trends on the European continent in the 18th century and the subsequent fierce revolutionary movements, the ranks of the British working class grew daily and began to awaken politically. The British bourgeoisie felt even more strongly that "the common people must be kept in a religious mood." The continental bourgeoisie initially mocked the superstition and ignorance of their British counterparts. However, when they discovered the burgeoning working class standing behind them asserting its own needs, the French and German bourgeoisie, one after another, transformed from "people who mocked religion" into "devout believers." Their slogan became: "Religion must be preserved for the people" (Die Religion muss dem Volk erhalten werden). Thus, the Religious Studies [14] that emerged after the mid-19th century almost entirely lost the critical edge against religion found in French materialist philosophy and German classical philosophy; it even became a spiritual tool for ingratiating itself with religion.
Friedrich Max Müller (1823–1900), known as the "father of Religious Studies," founded "Comparative Religion" in the 1870s. He attempted to study Christianity and other religions on an equal footing, proposing that "he who knows one, knows none." Compared to the theological tradition where Christianity regarded itself as the only true religion and others as non-religions or mere idolatry, this was indeed a step forward. However, he believed that "Religion is a mental faculty or instinct... it is a longing to know the Unknowable, to speak the Unspeakable, a longing for the love of God." [15] This is clearly an act of fawning over religion, describing religious belief as an innate human instinct.
Following Comparative Religion, a series of individually named disciplines in Religious Studies were born: Anthropology of Religion, Psychology of Religion, Sociology of Religion, Phenomenology of Religion, and so on. Early representatives of these disciplines were still able to contrast scientific religious research with ecclesiastical theology. However, the further they progressed, the more the historical tradition of criticizing religion was lost.
The Psychology of Religion views religion as a product of morbid psychology but considers this psychology to be a common trait of human nature transcending time and space. Therefore, religious concepts are seen as a psychological need of humanity that should exist forever. The Sociology of Religion and the Phenomenology of Religion advocate for value neutrality and oppose the criticism of religion. The Sociology of Religion holds that religion serves an integrative function for social groups and a compensatory function for social life, and should therefore be preserved forever. Its representative figure, Max Weber, even argued that the ethics of Protestant Christianity provided the spiritual impetus for capitalist production, completely ignoring the fact that countries dominated by Catholicism [16] likewise developed capitalism. The Phenomenology of Religion builds its research on the self-accounts of believers; otherwise, it claims, one does not "understand" religion. Its conclusions are also frequently predicated on the assumption that believers are inherently correct.
The numerous schools of Religious Studies represented by and beginning with Max Müller are referred to by Soviet scholars as "modern bourgeois Religious Studies." The characteristics of this Religious Studies are, first, acknowledging the existence of God in various obscure forms, and second, arguing from various perspectives that religious concepts arise from a human nature that transcends time and space. Its conclusion is that religion should endure forever.
Modern bourgeois Religious Studies adapted to the shift in the bourgeoisie’s attitude toward religion. It moved in the opposite developmental direction from the French materialist philosophy and German classical philosophy of the bourgeois revolutionary period. Instead of helping the people discard illusory happiness to "reach out and pluck the living flower," this brand of Religious Studies seeks to replace the mental shackles upon the people, urging them to seek consolation in the illusory flowers promised by theologians.
X. The General Trend of Religious Development and the Strategy of Imperialist Religious Infiltration
Engels said: "Neither the religious pride of the British bourgeois nor the post-festum [late] conversion of the continental bourgeois will stem the rising proletarian tide." [17] Naturally, they cannot stop the trend of continuous religious decline either.
Around the time Engels wrote these words, those countries where the bourgeois revolution had succeeded saw their bourgeoisie try every means to convert to religion. Yet, by the time they discovered religion was "the only and last means of salvation to keep [their] society from total destruction," they had "already done their best to destroy religion forever."
To restore religion to its former glory is as impossible as recovering water spilled on the ground. In countries where these revolutions succeeded, they first implemented the separation of church and state—that is, religion must not interfere in politics; next came the separation of religion and education—religion could no longer interfere in schooling. These two separations became the founding principles of modern states in general. Thus, religion lost its two most important social functions and retreated into being a general civil organization.
From the perspective of religion—specifically the supreme deities of the three major world religions—they each regard themselves as the master of the world and take the salvation of all humanity as their religious goal. They will not willingly accept living under the constraints of state law and social norms like other civil organizations. Therefore, for over a century, wave after wave of attempts to revive religion have been ongoing. However, as the famous philosopher and mathematician Whitehead [18] observed:
Ideas change, and no one can stop them. The current religious situation of the European nations proves the point I have raised. The phenomenon here is quite chaotic. Sometimes there are religious reactions and revivals, but the general trend over many generations is that the power of religion in European culture has visibly declined. Every revival only reaches a peak lower than the one before it, and every period of slackening sinks into a deeper abyss than the last.
Europe is the stronghold of Christianity. The religious decline Whitehead speaks of refers primarily to the decline of Christianity. As for Buddhism, after a period of prosperity in our country, it began to decline at least from the Song Dynasty onward. By the Qianlong era [19] of the Qing Dynasty, some suggested "purging the monks and Taoists." Emperor Qianlong remarked that purging them is easy—even total abolition would require only an imperial edict—but the monks and Taoists of today are not what they used to be; keeping such a group allows for the resettlement of displaced people. Otherwise, how would so many idle people be accommodated? To this end, Qianlong wrote a poem:
"The receding tide daily ebbs, how can it be turned back? / The two faiths [20] today are truly in a pitiable state. / Why must we anciently insist on 'expelling heresy'? / Simply leave them as materials for painting and poetry."
Islam, also a world religion, has lost its former glory. The Ottoman Empire, which spanned Europe, Asia, and Africa, no longer exists. Many of the states formed by the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire have implemented modern democratic systems. Even in those countries that still declare Islam the state religion, their political systems have undergone significant changes. The general trend of religious decline is unstoppable. Religious ebbs and flows in certain countries and regions at specific times are merely minor zigzags in a vast current; as Whitehead noted, they represent a phenomenon of waves becoming lower and lower.
Given that world religions are in decline in their lands of origin or traditional territories, some religious and theological forces have pinned their hopes for revival on countries and regions where their religion is not yet widespread—primarily Third World countries in Africa and Latin America. According to statistics, the number of Christians in Africa and Latin America now exceeds that in traditional European and American regions. Islam has also seen significant development. Secondly, mainland China has become a new region where Christianity and Islam are dedicated to spreading and expanding. This is the problem of so-called "religious infiltration" that our government constantly warns against. The U.S. government established a "United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF)" specifically to concern itself with the state of religious freedom in other countries. They issue an annual report, doing their utmost to distort and slander the situation of religious freedom in other nations, particularly our own, serving as a tool for the U.S. government to interfere in the internal affairs of others. Since the Reform and Opening-up, the resurgence and revival of religious forces in our country have been closely linked to the infiltration of ill-intentioned foreign religious forces, posing a significant hidden danger to our country’s ideological security.
Criticizing theology, spreading atheism, resisting religious infiltration, defending the nation’s ideological security, and helping the masses shake off the shackles of theism to achieve their own tangible happiness through their own efforts—this is the goal of Marxist Religious Studies and the glorious responsibility of scholars engaged in its research.
Online Editor: Tong Xin Source: Science and Atheism, Issue 5, 2022