Can religion be imposed/forced?

[britisha]

As most of you have stated, religious acceptance is based on beliefs. i have been reading here constantly that religion is imposed on our African ancestors who were slaves.

As the literature states, there were many who did NOT go along with the religion of their slavemasers, eg those in Haiti and the Maroons. Now, could it be that some of those slaves who "accepted" these religions, and pracised them could have been hypocritical and in fact, held on to their own beliefs silently?

What I am asking is, how can a "belief" be imposed on someone? With due respect, it sounds almost ridiculous to state this. Ppl are free, thank God, to think what they want to think, even after brainwashing, the thought process belongs to the individual. A person's mind is IMHO about the only thing that belongs to him/her solely, the only thing that he/she has control over. Noone knows what is in the mind of the other person...so while he/she pretends to accept some beliefs, it may be another thing going on in the mind as could be happening during slavery..

So from this, couldn't it be argued that those who "converted" did so out of their own free will? ...and as for the children of the slaves and their descendants, following the "slavemaster's" religion, aren't we now free to accept or reject what we wish, without the slavemasters coming into the picture?

Why is it that although we are aware of traditional religions of our forefathers {and this include chinese who believe in Budhism, among others] now feel comfortable with adopting other religious beliefs?

What would be interesting is, statistics that showed the total number of enslaved ppl who converted compared to their descendants.

Wouldn't you say? [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Fledgist]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Originally posted by britisha:
[qb]As most of you have stated, religious acceptance is based on beliefs. i have been reading here constantly that religion is imposed on our African ancestors who were slaves.

As the literature states, there were many who did NOT go along with the religion of their slavemasers, eg those in Haiti and the Maroons. Now, could it be that some of those slaves who "accepted" these religions, and pracised them could have been hypocritical and in fact, held on to their own beliefs silently?

What I am asking is, how can a "belief" be imposed on someone? With due respect, it sounds almost ridiculous to state this. Ppl are free, thank God, to think what they want to think, even after brainwashing, the thought process belongs to the individual. A person's mind is IMHO about the only thing that belongs to him/her solely, the only thing that he/she has control over. Noone knows what is in the mind of the other person...so while he/she pretends to accept some beliefs, it may be another thing going on in the mind as could be happening during slavery..

So from this, couldn't it be argued that those who "converted" did so out of their own free will? ...and as for the children of the slaves and their descendants, following the "slavemaster's" religion, aren't we now free to accept or reject what we wish, without the slavemasters coming into the picture?

Why is it that although we are aware of traditional religions of our forefathers {and this include chinese who believe in Budhism, among others] now feel comfortable with adopting other religious beliefs?

What would be interesting is, statistics that showed the total number of enslaved ppl who converted compared to their descendants.

Wouldn't you say? [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [/qb]

You raise an interesting question. The answer to it is a simple, unadorned, yes.

Okay, why?

First of all, let me point out that acceptingthe religion of the master may (usually does) bring advantages (for example, when the Maroons of Trelawny Town revolted in 1795, the Maroons of Accompong were baptised en masse; this was a means of indicating that they remained loyal to the slaveowning scum who ruled the island). This is where 'rice Christians' come from.

Second, a ruling group may seek to extirpate the religious practices of the ruled by replacing them with their own. This is what happened in Jamaica, where myal was suppressed (and obeah made illegal), and missionaries were brought in by planters to provide the slaves with a religion that would focus their hopes on the world to come.

Third, direct force may be used. Most of northern Germany became Christian in the early ninth century CE when Charlemagne forced the Saxons to convert or else. The spread of Islam is not unconnected to the choice offered to 'pagans' conquered by Muslims to convert or die.

Once conversion has occurred, no matter how forced, the new religion becomes the norm over a couple of generations -- although the forced converts and their descendants may make their own adaptations to it.

In addition, the new religion may provide a means for social mobility, and knowledge of the religion may be the only intellectual exercise allowed to the subjugated people.

[britisha]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Thanks Fledge, a very intellectual response. I would also throw in that with the separation of some slaves ie mixing them with slaves from other regions, here might not have been enough of one group to carry on the old religion...and if there were, couldn't it also be that the slaves preferred it compared to the old religion.

Why are there so many convrts in Africa where the indigenous ppl and customs are? Many have converted, even in India. Again, couldn't this be a matter of choice rather than imposition, again the indiv. accepting what he/she chooses to believe?

Look at Haiti, they held on to their religion in spite of all the adversity that they endured...their minds were made up to hang on to the tradition, this is what they as a group preferred. Could their language have provided some bastion of strength here in preservation of old beliefs?

Granted that as it may, many of us,have explored/studied other religions objectively and have come away with our own belief system.

With that being the case, it still goes back to my initial question, in this case would such a belief be imposed?...hope I'm making sense here. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Mutty]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Very accurate response Fleglist.

[RollinCalf]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

"What I am asking is, how can a "belief" be imposed on someone?"

Why do men get married ?

[britisha]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Originally posted by RollinCalf:
[qb]"What I am asking is, how can a "belief" be imposed on someone?"

Why do men get married ?[/qb]

Because they believe in it; notice that some don't?...and what about the women Rollin? [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[RollinCalf]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

You tell me.

I was coerced into believing many things imediately prior to being married. As you rightly said, "No one knows what is in the mind of the other person...so while he/she pretends to accept some beliefs, it may be another thing going on in the mind as could be happening during slavery.."

I am proof positive of this.

[britisha]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Originally posted by RollinCalf:
[qb]You tell me.

I was coerced into believing many things imediately prior to being married. As you rightly said, "No one knows what is in the mind of the other person...so while he/she pretends to accept some beliefs, it may be another thing going on in the mind as could be happening during slavery.."

I am proof positive of this.[/qb]

Now, this is becoming quite interesting. You fell for it, because it had ribbons and bows and trimmings that appealed to you...a nice package.... so you made up YOUR MIND to have it.... nothing more, nothing less. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[RollinCalf]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

I was manipulated.

See also under "Colonialism" and "Missionaries" for the answer to your question.

[Fledgist]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Originally posted by britisha:
[qb]Thanks Fledge, a very intellectual response. I would also throw in that with the separation of some slaves ie mixing them with slaves from other regions, here might not have been enough of one group to carry on the old religion...and if there were, couldn't it also be that the slaves preferred it compared to the old religion.

Why are there so many convrts in Africa where the indigenous ppl and customs are? Many have converted, even in India. Again, couldn't this be a matter of choice rather than imposition, again the indiv. accepting what he/she chooses to believe?

{Fledgist: In Africa and Asia, it has a lot to do with colonial rule, and the fact that the skills offered by mission schools came with the price tag of religious indoctrination. Colonial rulers heartily approved of and encouraged missionary activity because it made the colonial subject happier in his/her subjection. I find it interesting that some African writers who have sought to emphasise their ethnic/African identity have deliberately excised their Christian names -- thus James Ngugi became Ngugi wa Th'iongo, and Chinua Achebe jokes that, like Queen Victoria, he has 'lost his Albert'.}

Look at Haiti, they held on to their religion in spite of all the adversity that they endured...their minds were made up to hang on to the tradition, this is what they as a group preferred. Could their language have provided some bastion of strength here in preservation of old beliefs?

Granted that as it may, many of us,have explored/studied other religions objectively and have come away with our own belief system.

With that being the case, it still goes back to my initial question, in this case would such a belief be imposed?...hope I'm making sense here. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [/qb]

Again, yes.

[rebelgirl]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

To the original Question : Yes.

[britisha]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Thanks for the responses thus far. I however, must disagree with those who think that religion, a system of beliefs and practices can be imposed/forced on anyone, again based on the fact that freewill of the individual is involved.

Since the term "imposed/forced religion" is used here particularly in reference to slaves and/or their descendants, the latter which seems somewhat far-fetched, can one safely argue that those who warded off these imposed religions wre more intellectually endowed than those who didn't?

If this is/was the csse, must one or can one then conclude that those who accepted/internalised these "imposed religions" were intellectually inferior? I think NOT. While the literature states that Haitians were beaten into submission to accept the christian religion, why is it that the majority of Haitians even those who practice R Catholicism still practice or believe in voodoo? Why? Because they went along with the program to an extent. They were "hellbent" [pawddn the pun} in holding on to their indigenous beliefs.

We all know the history of the slaves across the diaspora; from the Caribbean to the Americas, we know that a fair amount of interbreeding occurred between the races. After slavery ws abolished this interbreeding was voluntary, and as stated in a previous thread here, many have chosen not to ignore any part of their heritage, including the non african side.

Many of these ppl even knew their non-black foreparents. My mother's grandfather was white and he was a Wesleyan minister, her father was also a minister [Wesleyan...now Methodist]. Obviously here, the grandfather taught the religion to his child who taught it to his daugher, in a loving, UNFORCED, non-threatening manner.

If one notices in contrast, those slaves and their descendants who did not interbreed are the ones who held on to their religion(s), again for example the Maroons in Jamaica and other parts of the Caribbean and the Haitians [yes, some Haitians did not interbreed, however few].

The point I am driving at is this, it is obvious that most of the ppl who now uphold christianity as their religion are all of mixed races. Now, I am not making excuses for white slaveowners who could have used whatever tactic including force, to forbid slaves to worship as they choose, but I am again saying that whatever tactic they used, the slave could have gone along with the program, holding on to some beliefs in his mind...as evidenced by the fact that we still have Pocomania in Jamaica, which some follow and some don't...based on their freewill.

Now many of us who decided to accept christianity are being mocked and jeered as being daft and unable to analyse the real deal, and just follow the whiteman's religion as opposed to the indigenous religions....not to mention those who have ardently objectively studied other religions. I find this ridiculous!!

My point is, IMHO a religion, a system of beliefs, canNOT be imposed it has to be shown/taught subject to acceptance or rejection...for the simple reason that it incorporates the use of free will[how many times am I going to say this?...as many times as needs be, for this is the crux, the main thrust of my argument.]

[britisha]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Now on to Rollins point, where he subtly referred to manipulation.

One definition of manipulation is:

2. Shrewd or devious management, especially for one's own advantage.

Did I detect some manipulation in my other thread?
[img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Now Africans in Africa who were colonised and interacted with missionaries were NOT slaves, as far as I know, and some were converted to RCatholicism, and other christian denominations..India also. As Fledgist pointed out, some even had missionary schools where some form of "indoctrination" went on. He also pointed out some of the benefits one could attain in these schools, like an education.

The examples were given to show those who dropped their English names and reverted to their African ones...couldn't this be a case of dual manipulation here? Going along with the program to achieve certain aims, then shedding the colonial vestiges including the religion...[well many of them still wear jacket and tie and mini skirts] after they achieved their goals?

Some of these who "converted" today still hold on to some of their indigenous beliefs, a sort of straddling the fence on both sides; while there are those who decide which religion they truly wish to adhere to....nothing but an individual preference...so those who believe that a religion can be imposed, should re-think their position...for this in addition to the Haitians who outrightly rejected christianity, negates the argument that one can be forced to believe anything other than what he/she chooses; {based on having a mind of his/her own].

[Fledgist]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

Originally posted by britisha:
[qb]Thanks for the responses thus far. I however, must disagree with those who think that religion, a system of beliefs and practices can be imposed/forced on anyone, again based on the fact that freewill of the individual is involved.

{Fledgist: So you're saying that Charlemagne did not baptise the Saxons en masse in the Elbe? A lot of historians of mediæval Europe are going to want to get in touch with you.}

Since the term "imposed/forced religion" is used here particularly in reference to slaves and/or their descendants, the latter which seems somewhat far-fetched, can one safely argue that those who warded off these imposed religions wre more intellectually endowed than those who didn't?

{Fledgist: What can be argued is that they had a stronger sense of who and what they were than did others, and were willing to resist their oppressors.}

If this is/was the csse, must one or can one then conclude that those who accepted/internalised these "imposed religions" were intellectually inferior? I think NOT. While the literature states that Haitians were beaten into submission to accept the christian religion, why is it that the majority of Haitians even those who practice R Catholicism still practice or believe in voodoo? Why? Because they went along with the program to an extent. They were "hellbent" [pawddn the pun} in holding on to their indigenous beliefs.

We all know the history of the slaves across the diaspora; from the Caribbean to the Americas, we know that a fair amount of interbreeding occurred between the races. After slavery ws abolished this interbreeding was voluntary, and as stated in a previous thread here, many have chosen not to ignore any part of their heritage, including the non african side.

{Fledgist: While miscegenation post-slavery was frequently voluntary, that was not always the case. There are plenty of examples of busha and massa charging, shall we say, a horizontal tax in exchange for employment.}

Many of these ppl even knew their non-black foreparents. My mother's grandfather was white and he was a Wesleyan minister, her father was also a minister [Wesleyan...now Methodist]. Obviously here, the grandfather taught the religion to his child who taught it to his daugher, in a loving, UNFORCED, non-threatening manner.

{Fledgist: Er, how do you know this?}

If one notices in contrast, those slaves and their descendants who did not interbreed are the ones who held on to their religion(s), again for example the Maroons in Jamaica and other parts of the Caribbean and the Haitians [yes, some Haitians did not interbreed, however few].

{Fledgist: Not always by any means.}

The point I am driving at is this, it is obvious that most of the ppl who now uphold christianity as their religion are all of mixed races. Now, I am not making excuses for white slaveowners who could have used whatever tactic including force, to forbid slaves to worship as they choose, but I am again saying that whatever tactic they used, the slave could have gone along with the program, holding on to some beliefs in his mind...as evidenced by the fact that we still have Pocomania in Jamaica, which some follow and some don't...based on their freewill.

{Fledgist: Slaves possess free will? Do tell.}

Now many of us who decided to accept christianity are being mocked and jeered as being daft and unable to analyse the real deal, and just follow the whiteman's religion as opposed to the indigenous religions....not to mention those who have ardently objectively studied other religions. I find this ridiculous!!

{Fledgist: You're being defensive, and for good reason.}

My point is, IMHO a religion, a system of beliefs, canNOT be imposed it has to be shown/taught subject to acceptance or rejection...for the simple reason that it incorporates the use of free will[how many times am I going to say this?...as many times as needs be, for this is the crux, the main thrust of my argument.][/qb]

You're flying in the face of an awful lot of Christian and Muslim history. Perhaps you could explain why the historians are, from your perspective, all wrong?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Can religion be imposed/forced?

99% of Haitian voodoo practice is Roman Catholic.
Africans in Africa was just as much slaves as Africans in the diaspora.
they went through the lynching and forced labour and similar treatment as the slaves in the US and other countries including Jamaica.