One of the world’s most distinguished scholars of religion suggests that recent research in the neurosciences is throwing new light on religions and the dynamics of religious conflict
Sixty-five years ago, as a young National Serviceman, I was sent to deal with a bloody riot that was threatening to get out of hand. The people on the opposing sides belonged to two different religions. As I looked at their faces, filled with anger and fear, I couldn’t help asking myself: Why do religious people hate each other so much?
People of different religions are capable of immense generosity and love. But they are frequently involved in many of the most intransigent and savage conflicts in the world today. And there are bitter arguments and divisions, not just between religions but also within them. Christians, of course, can behave at times like ferrets in a sack. “The Apostle of Christianity,” Trollope once wrote, “and the infidel can meet without the chance of a quarrel; but it is never safe to bring together two men who differ about a saint or a surplice.” Different ferrets, different sacks, but something like that is true of all religions.
It is tempting to say that religions are not themselves the root cause of conflict and war. It is only the abuse and corruption of religion that leads to acts of violence and harm. Tempting, but wrong. The truth is, all religions allow or even command action to be taken against others in some circumstances. They differ greatly in what they say these circumstances are, and what they say about when these actions should or may be taken. But all religions, in different ways, authorise some (not all) actions against others in some circumstances.