State and Religion

In recent times many countries are taking a right turn. Right-wing politics has been rising globally since some time, and this has increased discussions and debates on the role of religion in a state. 

Traditionalists claim a country has a religious identity irrespective it is secular or not. They feel this religious identity has to be sealed with a proclamation of a state religion. Supporters of state religion claim that nothing would change and minorities will continue to live normally as they have been living till now. But its critiques misinterpret it as a theocracy. Hence during a debate, each side is not able to convince the other why they oppose the idea, as their imagination of a state religion is different from the person differing. So to clarify, let me explain the types of state concerning religion.

Broadly, let's bifurcate states into two types: Religious State, and Non-Religious State. Each type has three sub-types, which can cause confusion.

Religious State:

Cultural state: 

This state tries to maintain a tolerant and secular identity, but it emphasises on one religion which according to them defines their culture and that it should be protected and promoted in the state. Usually, this is a result of fear from a rising percentage of minorities that may endanger its majority. The UK, Bhutan, Thailand, and Norway are some of such examples.

State on Religious basis: 

This is not a theocracy, but a homeland for a particular religion which was either persecuted or feared persecution before getting their nation. A nation created for the people following a religion. Israel and Pakistan are examples of such state. Usually, when a nation is created for people of a specific religion, it becomes difficult to maintain secularism as religion and politics end up blending.

Theocratic State: 

This is what most of people think what a religious state is. Basically, religion and politics are the same. The nation is ruled by religious figureheads and constitution is governed by religious laws. Iran, Vatican City, and Saudi Arabia are some examples of theocracy.

Non-religious State:

Secular State: 

Secularism by definition means separation of religion and state. This means that religion has no space in politics, but citizens are free to follow or not to follow any faith of their choice in their personal life. We all know the secular nations. Most of the democratic nations call themselves secular.

Pluralistic State: 

This is somewhat like a secular state, but it can differ from country to country. This state acknowledges the existence of multiple religions in the state and maintains neutrality. But this may not mean that politics and religion cannot be intertwined. For example, Indonesia is a Muslim majority country, but it acknowledges six religions, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Roman Catholic and Protestant. As per its foundational political philosophy, it is necessary in Indonesia for religion to acknowledge monotheism - One God. So where does it leave an atheist or a Jain in this system?

Atheist State: 

This state is the mirror opposite of a theocracy. Here, the state not only rejects all religions but also expects its citizens to reject them. Just like religious missionaries, the state propagates atheism and in this process sometimes persecute them those who follow a religion. Communist states follow state atheism.

In short, human polities are as complex as their cultures, psychologies, and histories. Therefore, the role of religion in a state differs from nation to nations.