Religion and politics are closely inter- related as follows:
a) Religion validates power relations between groups. It justifies the social and political inequalities.
For example Malinowski describes religion and politics among Trobriand Islanders. The Trobrianders are divided into four clans namely, tukalabuta (iguana) , Lukala (Dog) , Malasi (Pig) and Lukwasisiga (Crocodile/Snake).
One myth among the Trobriand islanders asserts the superiority of Malasi Clan. The myth is often cited when quarrels over land, fishing rights,’ political equations, power relations between subclans and social inequalities arise. Thus, the myth, which is part of religion, justifies power relations between different groups.
b) Religion provides supernatural explanation and divine sanctions for political dominance
For example, Oberg cites the case of the Kingdom of Ankole in Uganda. In this context, the pastoral bahima are the rulers of the land while various agricultural tribes are serfs. In the complex society of Ankole the myths justify the political dominance of Bahima by providing supernatural explanations and divine sanctions.
c) Religion not only validates political power and authority but also reflects the obligations of rulers.
For example, in the Society Islands , the royal chief must be just but he must temper his justice with merry, show energy and patience in discharge of his duties , exercise wisdom and tact in ;handling public affairs and in selecting counselors , advisers and above all embody the highest ideals of generosity , honour and courage . In spite of all these religious backing, chiefs are unseated by priests if they fall seriously short of these ideals, because these failures will prove that they have lost their divine nature. The priests recite a myth indicating the precedent for the disposal of the chief. Thus, religion reveals the obligations of rulers, failures of the rulers and the justification for appointment of new rulers.
d) Divine nature of rulers:
The kings and rulers who trace descent to Gods or divine ancestors are not themselves necessarily considered divine. But in some situations, the position of a ruler may be validated by the belief that he is an incarnation of God. This is very powerful sanction, found most often in complex political situations.
- Eg: – i) Egypt – King is the son of Re (Son God) .
- ii ) Babylonia – Kings are divine because they suckled the breasts of Goddess Ishtan.
- iii ) Japan – Emperor gave up his divinity only in 1947.
e) Privileged relationships to the super natural. An important concept that upholds political power is the idea that the king or ruler is not divine, but has privileged access to supernatural powers. In these cases the ruler is believed capable of manipulating the Gods to the benefit of his country and his subjects. This simultaneously symbolizes his concern for the welfare of his people and demonstrates his ability as political leader. Rain production and weather control are among the most notable of his supernatural risks.
f) Where kings were held responsible for the material and physical well-being of their subjects , the failure of their own health is interpreted as a first sign that supernatural assistance is failing and that his powers are declining.
- Frazer said that a king’s health and sexual potency were believed to have a direct influence upon the well-being of the country and the fertility of the land, because the king’s body is the temporary dwelling place of the God. Its ailing, aging or impotence would directly affect its divine residents and the country would be beset, by calamities. In order to preven these events the ‘ king was killed as soon as he showed signs of failing strength. His office was then handed over to a vigorous new king and the God’s would be transferred to the younger and healthier body. Eg: Nyakyusa of Southern Tanganyika.
- Evans Pritchard talks of the same about Shilluk Kings in Africa.
- Audrey Richards admits the possibility of such killings of Beruba Chiefs and records that the Beruba felt that the health of their chief directly affected the prosperity of their fields.
As stated by Georges Balandier (1970:38) the sacred is always present in politics, but it is seldom far away. While Myron Aronoff (1985b:1) sees “Religion and politics have been inextricably interrelated since the dawn of human culture and civilization”. The role that religion plays in politics is challenging to correlate with specific types of religion, such as shamanistic or priestly. The shaman was the most powerful of men due to his high accessibility to the spirit world in case of the Eskimos while among the tribal Hopi of the American south-west, political strength is carried through ceremonies, dances, and religious sodalities. Likewise Modern Saudi Arabia is regarded as an internationally powerful nation-state, intimately based on Islam.
The role of religion in aiding a specific political regime is exhibited basically in three ways:
- As in the case of theocracy, the government may be directly based on religion.
- Religion may have its operation in order to legitimize the ruling elite.
- Religion may provide the beliefs, ideals, traditions and other underlying structures that are manipulated by aspirants to power.
Thus religion can be said to not only help in reinforcing the existing political structures but can also be a source of force of opposition