Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
Cohesive Societies
Sustainable Security
Other Resource Pages
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
External Podcasts
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National SecurityInstitute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      Cohesive SocietiesSustainable SecurityOther Resource PagesNews ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio ChannelExternal Podcasts
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS

      Get in Touch

    Connect
    Search
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • COVID-19’s Testing of Religious Roles
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • RSIS Commentary Series
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • Future Issues
    • IDSS Papers
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers

    CO21150 | COVID-19’s Testing of Religious Roles
    Katherine Marshall

    14 October 2021

    download pdf

    SYNOPSIS

    Societies across the world are tested by the COVID-19 pandemic in countless ways. Deep cracks in social cohesion have become visible in many countries, and many fall along religious lines. Post-COVID-19 policy needs to address robustly what inclusion means both for government policy and for each society.


    Source: Pixabay

    COMMENTARY

    REFLECTIONS ABOUT the course of the COVID-19 pandemic often evoke metaphors of storms and boats. These images highlight two realities that tug in quite different directions: The first conjures up the common, shared threats nations face, buffeted by powerful often unpredictable forces of nature. COVID-19 strikes everywhere, everyone, crossing boundaries of place and class.

    But the storm image also conveys stark differences in the pandemic’s impact and the deep inequalities within and among nations. These shape very different capacities to withstand shocks and different responses to them. A yacht generally fares better than a tiny skiff and while the wealthy seem to do well, the less affluent suffer more. Overall, acute poverty and hunger have increased sharply. The dual, seemingly contradictory commentaries highlight stark and pragmatic choices for governments in the COVID-19 recovery.

    Social Cohesion as a Central Challenge

    The COVID-19 crisis tests contemporary societies and governance in countless ways. Some challenges are new, others seen more clearly in the light of a crisis that highlights differences of leadership and social responses. Inequalities take on new importance as do unresolved conflicts and tensions.

    Interreligious relationships can reinforce cooperation and protection of needy groups, smoothing turbulent waters, or they can stir up squalls of anger and discrimination. The challenges are eminently practical and pragmatic but also deeply values-linked and ethical ─ global leaders speak often of inadequate and unequal global and national responses as a moral catastrophe.

    A much-discussed policy objective ─ inclusion to build social cohesion ─ takes on new significance in pandemic times, as public health policies and measures that demand social acceptance become matters of life and death. Different societies and nations have fared very differently in these extraordinary crises. Societies marked by strong cohesion and those with leaders trusted by their constituents have responded better than those riven by divisions.

    Within societies, different segments of communities have faced different challenges, rendered more acute by the economic fallout of emergency measures. The impact of the COVID-19 crises on, for example, domestic violence and child abuse speaks to often hidden tensions within societies.

    Questions as to how and why societies have responded well or less well are fundamental as we look, hopefully with clear-eyed vision, not only to rebuilding better but to rethinking and reimagining future reforms.

    Social cohesion emerges as a central analytic issue but also challenges strategic policy. Some COVID-19 “success” stories have built policy actions (mandates for vaccination, shutdown regulations) on the strengths of homogenous societies. Countries like Denmark have been blessed with general compliance and support.

    There are other, perhaps fewer cases, where diverse societies have displayed capacities to come together because they buy, in meaningful ways, into a narrative of shared common interests. On the surface, authoritarian systems have forced compliance with positive short-term results but uncertain longer-term prospects.

    Public Health Restrictions and Religious Diversity

    Religious diversity is an important testing ground for societies facing COVID-19 challenges and one that points to significant policy challenges looking ahead. There is first the question of public authority to regulate religious practice of various sorts.

    Some religious gatherings early in the pandemic were tied directly to the spread of the virus, sparking tensions around resulting restrictive measures. With wide-ranging lockdowns and travel restrictions the focus shifted to how religious freedom clashed with public health responsibilities.

    Arrangements for faith-government relationships, often legal but not uncommonly tacit and shifting, came under renewed focus. Where close relationships characterised governance, consultations about measures and cooperation on, for example, addressing misinformation, have shown positive results. Elsewhere politicisation of relationships between religious groups has been a significant stumbling block.

    Inter- and intra-religious relationships have shown new strains in several societies. The history of pandemics and the fears they have always evoked help explain increases in discrimination and scapegoating of different communities. Divisions and inequalities among groups, sometimes divided along religious lines, have shown signs of being accentuated.

    Simmering if barely apparent conflicts, discordant objectives, unhealed past wounds, gaps in civic education, and weak leadership have contributed to anti-public health demonstrations and balky populations. The hardships of economic fallout from the public health crisis (Nigeria, South Africa, for example) and COVID-19 specific measures (cremation orders in Sri Lanka, for example) have heightened social tensions.

    Going forward, rethinking, and reimagining social cohesion is needed. The passage of time may have also eroded mutual acceptance and co-existence built on personal friendship and understanding among the respective community leaderships.

    Looking Ahead: Need for Strategic Reset

    Bolder approaches to social cohesion could have positive results in the post-COVID-19 era. It is necessary to move into a more active co-engagement phase between communities rather than keep to the passive co-existence model.

    The relationships between government and religious communities deserve a strategic reset in many countries. The pandemic should not lead to tighter restrictions on freedom of religion or belief. Faith groups can be mobilised for their humanitarian instincts to strengthen disaster preparedness (for pandemics and other natural disasters). Issues of family law and human rights should be backed by practical implementation of policy and legislation.

    Questions as to which groups are represented at which tables need new approaches. Are women and youth sufficiently represented in religious establishments and their outreach programmes?

    Educational policy should more deliberately promote and include civic responsibilities, religious literacy, and religiously-run educational systems that promote integration. Student relationships that foster knowledge of other communities and inclusion across social, economic, and religious divides can play major roles in advancing the goals of inclusion.

    Tensions among religious communities that the pandemic has highlighted merit attention by the wider society ─ beyond the traditional inter-faith groups and advocates or activists for social cohesion. Timely intervention by policy makers would be helpful.

    The immediate and urgent challenge of achieving widespread vaccination against COVID-19 can and should engage civil society groups including religious institutions and leaders. Programmes that promote inter-group cooperation must be strongly encouraged as they could advance efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic and point the way to greater engagement in the future.

    About the Author

    Katherine Marshall is Senior Fellow at Georgetown University’s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs and Professor of Practice at the School of Foreign Service. She is Executive Director of the World Faiths Development Dialogue (WFDD). This is part of an RSIS series leading up to the International Conference on Cohesive Societies 2022.

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Country and Region Studies / Non-Traditional Security / Regionalism and Multilateralism / Religion in Contemporary Society / Singapore and Homeland Security / East Asia and Asia Pacific / South Asia / Southeast Asia and ASEAN / Global
    comments powered by Disqus

    SYNOPSIS

    Societies across the world are tested by the COVID-19 pandemic in countless ways. Deep cracks in social cohesion have become visible in many countries, and many fall along religious lines. Post-COVID-19 policy needs to address robustly what inclusion means both for government policy and for each society.


    Source: Pixabay

    COMMENTARY

    REFLECTIONS ABOUT the course of the COVID-19 pandemic often evoke metaphors of storms and boats. These images highlight two realities that tug in quite different directions: The first conjures up the common, shared threats nations face, buffeted by powerful often unpredictable forces of nature. COVID-19 strikes everywhere, everyone, crossing boundaries of place and class.

    But the storm image also conveys stark differences in the pandemic’s impact and the deep inequalities within and among nations. These shape very different capacities to withstand shocks and different responses to them. A yacht generally fares better than a tiny skiff and while the wealthy seem to do well, the less affluent suffer more. Overall, acute poverty and hunger have increased sharply. The dual, seemingly contradictory commentaries highlight stark and pragmatic choices for governments in the COVID-19 recovery.

    Social Cohesion as a Central Challenge

    The COVID-19 crisis tests contemporary societies and governance in countless ways. Some challenges are new, others seen more clearly in the light of a crisis that highlights differences of leadership and social responses. Inequalities take on new importance as do unresolved conflicts and tensions.

    Interreligious relationships can reinforce cooperation and protection of needy groups, smoothing turbulent waters, or they can stir up squalls of anger and discrimination. The challenges are eminently practical and pragmatic but also deeply values-linked and ethical ─ global leaders speak often of inadequate and unequal global and national responses as a moral catastrophe.

    A much-discussed policy objective ─ inclusion to build social cohesion ─ takes on new significance in pandemic times, as public health policies and measures that demand social acceptance become matters of life and death. Different societies and nations have fared very differently in these extraordinary crises. Societies marked by strong cohesion and those with leaders trusted by their constituents have responded better than those riven by divisions.

    Within societies, different segments of communities have faced different challenges, rendered more acute by the economic fallout of emergency measures. The impact of the COVID-19 crises on, for example, domestic violence and child abuse speaks to often hidden tensions within societies.

    Questions as to how and why societies have responded well or less well are fundamental as we look, hopefully with clear-eyed vision, not only to rebuilding better but to rethinking and reimagining future reforms.

    Social cohesion emerges as a central analytic issue but also challenges strategic policy. Some COVID-19 “success” stories have built policy actions (mandates for vaccination, shutdown regulations) on the strengths of homogenous societies. Countries like Denmark have been blessed with general compliance and support.

    There are other, perhaps fewer cases, where diverse societies have displayed capacities to come together because they buy, in meaningful ways, into a narrative of shared common interests. On the surface, authoritarian systems have forced compliance with positive short-term results but uncertain longer-term prospects.

    Public Health Restrictions and Religious Diversity

    Religious diversity is an important testing ground for societies facing COVID-19 challenges and one that points to significant policy challenges looking ahead. There is first the question of public authority to regulate religious practice of various sorts.

    Some religious gatherings early in the pandemic were tied directly to the spread of the virus, sparking tensions around resulting restrictive measures. With wide-ranging lockdowns and travel restrictions the focus shifted to how religious freedom clashed with public health responsibilities.

    Arrangements for faith-government relationships, often legal but not uncommonly tacit and shifting, came under renewed focus. Where close relationships characterised governance, consultations about measures and cooperation on, for example, addressing misinformation, have shown positive results. Elsewhere politicisation of relationships between religious groups has been a significant stumbling block.

    Inter- and intra-religious relationships have shown new strains in several societies. The history of pandemics and the fears they have always evoked help explain increases in discrimination and scapegoating of different communities. Divisions and inequalities among groups, sometimes divided along religious lines, have shown signs of being accentuated.

    Simmering if barely apparent conflicts, discordant objectives, unhealed past wounds, gaps in civic education, and weak leadership have contributed to anti-public health demonstrations and balky populations. The hardships of economic fallout from the public health crisis (Nigeria, South Africa, for example) and COVID-19 specific measures (cremation orders in Sri Lanka, for example) have heightened social tensions.

    Going forward, rethinking, and reimagining social cohesion is needed. The passage of time may have also eroded mutual acceptance and co-existence built on personal friendship and understanding among the respective community leaderships.

    Looking Ahead: Need for Strategic Reset

    Bolder approaches to social cohesion could have positive results in the post-COVID-19 era. It is necessary to move into a more active co-engagement phase between communities rather than keep to the passive co-existence model.

    The relationships between government and religious communities deserve a strategic reset in many countries. The pandemic should not lead to tighter restrictions on freedom of religion or belief. Faith groups can be mobilised for their humanitarian instincts to strengthen disaster preparedness (for pandemics and other natural disasters). Issues of family law and human rights should be backed by practical implementation of policy and legislation.

    Questions as to which groups are represented at which tables need new approaches. Are women and youth sufficiently represented in religious establishments and their outreach programmes?

    Educational policy should more deliberately promote and include civic responsibilities, religious literacy, and religiously-run educational systems that promote integration. Student relationships that foster knowledge of other communities and inclusion across social, economic, and religious divides can play major roles in advancing the goals of inclusion.

    Tensions among religious communities that the pandemic has highlighted merit attention by the wider society ─ beyond the traditional inter-faith groups and advocates or activists for social cohesion. Timely intervention by policy makers would be helpful.

    The immediate and urgent challenge of achieving widespread vaccination against COVID-19 can and should engage civil society groups including religious institutions and leaders. Programmes that promote inter-group cooperation must be strongly encouraged as they could advance efforts to address the COVID-19 pandemic and point the way to greater engagement in the future.

    About the Author

    Katherine Marshall is Senior Fellow at Georgetown University’s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs and Professor of Practice at the School of Foreign Service. She is Executive Director of the World Faiths Development Dialogue (WFDD). This is part of an RSIS series leading up to the International Conference on Cohesive Societies 2022.

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Country and Region Studies / Non-Traditional Security / Regionalism and Multilateralism / Religion in Contemporary Society / Singapore and Homeland Security

    Popular Links

    About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

    Connect with Us

    rsis.ntu
    rsis_ntu
    rsisntu
    rsisvideocast
    school/rsis-ntu
    rsis.sg
    rsissg
    RSIS
    RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    Getting to RSIS

    Nanyang Technological University
    Block S4, Level B3,
    50 Nanyang Avenue,
    Singapore 639798

    Click here for direction to RSIS

    Get in Touch

      Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
      Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
      Help us improve

        Rate your experience with this website
        123456
        Not satisfiedVery satisfied
        What did you like?
        0/255 characters
        What can be improved?
        0/255 characters
        Your email
        Please enter a valid email.
        Thank you for your feedback.
        This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
        OK
        Latest Book
        more info