On Possibility and Purpose
The question of the necessity of religion in civil society lays in the possibility of its purpose. This said, one must define the purpose of religion, in order to assess its possibility. The proceeding will recognize the purpose of religion as means of aligning a body of people to set of beliefs, which will be their guide to living a good, civil life. The works of Montesquieu and Rousseau offer different viewpoints on this essential question of the possibility of the purpose of religion. ... Montesquieu’s move to align the pursuit of religion to the pursuit of goodness coincides with my idea of the purpose of religion, however it offers little help to the question of the possibility of that purpose within a civil society. His need for an inverse relationship between religion and civil laws offers much more insight to this question of possibility, however I find it to be very damaging to his argument that religion is possible, and necessary in civil society. ... From the example of Kahn and his Tartars, it becomes clear that an inverse relationship between religion and civil law will not fulfill the defined purpose of religion, therefore the possibility of this purpose becomes a moot point. Montesquieu further distances from the purpose of religion as he writes, “The various religions of the world do not give to those who profess them equal motives for attachment to them; this depends largely on how they fit into men’s way of thinking and feeling” (Montesquieu, The Spirit of Laws, 25,2. ... Instead of arguing for the necessity of religion in a civil society, he excuses it as a possibility in civil society altogether. ... Rousseau’s argument leaves room for the purpose of religion, if each person were to restrict their existence to their own country, or countries which share their religious beliefs, however this stipulation all but eliminates the possibility of this purpose.