religion research papers

• Search Menu
• Advance articles
• Author Guidelines
• Book Reviewer Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access Options
• Why Submit?
• About Journal of the American Academy of Religion
• About the American Academy of Religion
• Books for Review
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Terms and Conditions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Andrea R. Jain

Book Review Editor

View full editorial board

About the journal

The Journal of the American Academy of Religion is generally considered to be the top academic journal in the field of religious studies. This international quarterly journal publishes top scholarly articles that cover …

Aims & Scope

Read more about the Journal of the American Academy of Religion 's background.

Religion and Literature Collection

Browse the Religion and Literature Collection from OUP Religion and Literature Journals.

Presidential address

Read the AAR Presidential Address by David P Gushee

Latest articles

Latest posts on x.

Learn more about the American Academy of Religion , the society behind JAAR .

Email alerts

Register to receive table of contents email alerts as soon as new issues of Journal of the American Academy of Religion are published online.

Recommend to your library

Fill out our simple online form to recommend Journal of the American Academy of Religion to your library.

Recommend now

Related Titles

• Recommend to your Librarian

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1477-4585
• Print ISSN 0002-7189
• Copyright © 2024 American Academy of Religion
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Technical Support
• Find My Rep

You are here

Review of Religious Research

Preview this book.

• Description
• Aims and Scope
• Editorial Board
• Abstracting / Indexing
• Submission Guidelines

Aims & Scope:

The Review of Religious Research (RRR) journal aims to publish manuscripts meeting these six scope criteria: (1) reports empirical research; (2) attends to religiosity and spirituality topics; (3) identifies religious groups and their adherents; (4) engages in interdisciplinary social science research practices; (5) describes methods and analytical techniques; and (6) applies research with relevance for practitioners. Criteria are described below.

Empirical Research

Manuscripts meet the empirical social science research scope criteria by reporting on observable behaviors, actions, orientations, and more of social groups. The goal is to understand and analyze rather than seeking to propagate a religion, proselytize, evangelize, or in other ways directly represent a religious view. Valuing the goal of replicability and peer review, empirical research typically includes a methods section that explains how data were collected, why, using what procedures, under which conditions, and toward what types of analysis.

Relevant Topics – Scroll below for an expanded list of specific topics.For a full list of topics please click here .

• Religious leaders, services, programs, participation, practices, beliefs, organizations, changes, movements
• Religion & civics, family, gender, sex, race, youth, education, science, poverty, crime, attitudes, wellbeing
• Spirituality, spiritual practices, spiritual communities

Applied Practitioners

The journal is particularly interested in publishing applied research with implications for:

• Clergy, pastoral leaders, lay leaders, other religious leaders
• Professionals, staff, volunteers in faith-based organizations, NGOs, INGOS, international networks
• Grantmakers, funders, grant program officers
• Fundraisers, major gifts officers, donor prospect researchers
• Volunteer coordinators, social movement community engagers
• Service providers, program delivery coordinators

Religious Groups

1. Islam, Muslims

2. Buddhism, Buddhists

3. Hinduism, Hindus

4. Judaism, Jewish

5. Confucianism, Confucians

6. Sikhism, Sikhists

7. Daoism, Taoism, Daoist, Taoists

8. Catholicism, Catholics

9. Christianity, Christians

10. Protestantism, Protestants

11. Evangelicalism, Evangelicals

12. Mainline Protestantism, Protestants

13. Pentecostalism, Pentecostals

14. Orthodoxy: Eastern, Catholic, Judaism, Christianity

15. Folk religions: Chinese, African; Ethnoreligious

16. Spiritism, Spiritists

17. Bahá'í, Bahaism, Bahá'ís

18. Jainism, Jainists

19. Shintoism, Shintoists

20. Zoroastrianism, Zoroastrians

21. New religions, new religious movements

22. Atheism, Agnosticism, Atheists, Agnostics

23. Religious unaffiliated, disaffiliated, non-affiliated, or religious “nones”

Interdisciplinar

Valuing multiple approaches in the empirical study of religion, the journal typically publishes research from disciplines such as: sociology, psychology, social psychology, political science, economics.

Methods & Analysis

2. In-depth interviews

3. Ethnographies

4. Case studies

5. Quantitative analysis

6. Qualitative analysis

7. Content analysis

8. Mixed methods analysis

• Clarivate Analytics: Social Science Citation Index (SSCI)

Manuscript Submission Guidelines: Review of Religious Research

This Journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics .

This Journal recommends that authors follow the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals formulated by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Please read the guidelines below then visit the Journal’s submission site https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/rrr to upload your manuscript. Please note that manuscripts not conforming to these guidelines may be returned.

Sage Publishing disseminates high-quality research and engaged scholarship globally, and we are committed to diversity and inclusion in publishing. We encourage submissions from a diverse range of authors from across all countries and backgrounds.

Only manuscripts of sufficient quality that meet the aims and scope of Review of Religious Research will be reviewed.

Publication fees

The submitted manuscript will be initially screened to see if it suitable for publication in the Review of Religious Research . The corresponding author will be contacted about the manuscript’s suitability.

If the manuscript is found to be suitable, a modest processing fee must be paid before the manuscript can be processed further, unless one of the authors is a member of the Religious Research Association (RRA). The processing fee includes a 1-year annual membership in the RRA.

By submitting the manuscript, the authors agree to pay the processing fee.

To pay the submission fee and become a member, visit the RRA website .

Also see section 5.2 below, Information Required for Submitting your Manuscript.

Originality

As part of the submission process you will be required to warrant that you are submitting your original work, that you have the rights in the work, and that you have obtained and can supply all necessary permissions for the reproduction of any copyright works not owned by you, that you are submitting the work for first publication in the Journal and that it is not being considered for publication elsewhere and has not already been published elsewhere. Please see our guidelines on prior publication and note that Review of Religious Research will consider submissions of papers that have been posted on preprint servers; please alert the Editorial Office when submitting (contact details are at the end of these guidelines) and include the DOI for the preprint in the designated field in the manuscript submission system. Authors should not post an updated version of their paper on the preprint server while it is being peer reviewed for possible publication in the Journal. If the article is accepted for publication, the author may re-use their work according to the Journal's author archiving policy.

If your paper is accepted, you must include a link on your preprint to the final version of your paper.

If you have any questions about publishing with Sage, please visit the Sage Journal Solutions Portal .

• What do we publish? 1.1 Aims & Scope 1.2 Article types 1.3 Writing your paper
• Editorial policies 2.1 Peer review policy 2.2 Authorship 2.3 Acknowledgements 2.4 Funding 2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests 2.6 Research ethics and patient consent 2.7 Reporting guidelines 2.8 Research data
• Publishing policies 3.1 Publication ethics 3.2 Contributor’s publishing agreement 3.3 Open access and author archiving
• Preparing your manuscript 4.1 Formatting 4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics 4.3 Identifiable information 4.4 Supplemental material 4.5 Reference style 4.6 English language editing services
• Submitting your manuscript 5.1 ORCID 5.2 Information required for completing your submission 5.3 Permissions
• On acceptance and publication 6.1 Sage Production 6.2 Online First publication 6.3 Access to your published article 6.4 Promoting your article
• Further information 7.1 Appealing the publication decision

1. What do we publish?

1.1 Aims & Scope

Before submitting your manuscript to Review of Religious Research , please ensure you have read the Aims & Scope [ https://rraweb.org/journal-review-of-religious-research/aims-and-scope/] .

1.2 Article types

Original Research Articles

Original research articles present scholarly and methodologically rigorous empirical analysis. Sections: Introduction, Literature Review (typically labeled by topical headings), Data and Methods, Results, Discussion (including limitations, implications, conclusions). Before submitting a manuscript, authors should read the journal’s Aims & Scope for more information. Maximum 10,000 words, 40 double-spaced manuscript pages, including references.

Research Notes

Research notes are similar to original research articles in presenting scholarly and methodologically rigorous empirical analysis. Notes are briefer than articles and typically provide less theoretical framing and literature reviewing than articles. The focus is on the study design and results. Sections: Introduction, Data and Methods, Results, Discussion (including limitations). Maximum 7,500 words, 30 double-spaced pages, including references.

Review Articles

Review articles provide a comprehensive summary of relevant existing studies, including a synthesis of their relevant theory, methods, and findings on topic(s) of interest to the journal (see Aims & Scope). Sections: Introduction, Background, Data and Methods (describe sources, inclusion and exclusion criteria), Results, Discussion (limitations, implications, conclusions). Maximum 10,000 words, 40 double-spaced pages, including references.

Applied Research Abstracts

Applied research abstracts briefly present the results of an applied study. Sections: Background, Purpose, Methods, Results, Conclusions, and Implications. Applied abstracts are 350-550 words and should include a footnote explaining to readers how to access the report, data, or additional information on the study.

Contexts of Religious Research

Contexts include award announcements, memoriams, commentaries about the process of conducting research (e.g., applications of research methods to topics relevant to the journal), profiles of denominational research organizations, or invited addresses from the Religious Research Association. It is rare that a manuscript of this type would be unsolicited; authors should consult the editor before submitting this type of manuscript. Max 1,000 words.

Book Reviews

Book reviews provide a summary of a scholarly book that identifies the purpose and central themes, highlights important claims or contributions, and offers critical evaluation of thetheories, methods, approach, or limitations (about 800 words). If you would like to review a book for the journal, contact the Book Review Editor, David Eagle, PhD [email protected]

1.3 Writing your paper

The Sage Author Gateway has some general advice and on  how to get published , plus links to further resources. Sage Author Services also offers authors a variety of ways to improve and enhance their article including English language editing, plagiarism detection, and video abstract and infographic preparation.

1.3.1 Make your article discoverable

For information and guidance on how to make your article more discoverable, visit our Gateway page on How to Help Readers Find Your Article Online .

Back to top

2. Editorial policies

2.1 Peer review policy

Review of Religious Research is a refereed journal with an anonymized peer review policy.

Review of Religious Research adheres to an anonymized peer review process in which the reviewer’s name is routinely withheld from the author unless the reviewer requests a preference for their identity to be revealed.

Sage does not permit the use of author-suggested (recommended) reviewers at any stage of the submission process, be that through the web-based submission system or other communication. Reviewers should be experts in their fields and should be able to provide an objective assessment of the manuscript. Our policy is that reviewers should not be assigned to a paper if:

• The reviewer is based at the same institution as any of the co-authors.
• The reviewer is based at the funding body of the paper.
• The author has recommended the reviewer.
• The reviewer has provided a personal (e.g. Gmail/Yahoo/Hotmail) email account and an institutional email account cannot be found after performing a basic Google search (name, department and institution).

The Editor or members of the Editorial Board may occasionally submit their own manuscripts for possible publication in the Journal. In these cases, the peer review process will be managed by alternative members of the Board and the submitting Editor/Board member will have no involvement in the decision-making process.

2.2 Authorship

All parties who have made a substantive contribution to the article should be listed as authors. Principal authorship, authorship order, and other publication credits should be based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status. A student is usually listed as principal author on any multiple-authored publication that substantially derives from the student’s dissertation or thesis.

          Please note that AI chatbots, for example ChatGPT, should not be listed as authors. For more information see the policy on Use of ChatGPT and generative AI tools .

2.3 Acknowledgements

All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an Acknowledgements section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, or a department chair who provided only general support.

Please supply any personal acknowledgements separately to the main text to facilitate anonymous peer review.

Per ICMJE recommendations , it is best practice to obtain consent from non-author contributors who you are acknowledging in your paper.

2.3.1 Third party submissions Where an individual who is not listed as an author submits a manuscript on behalf of the author(s), a statement must be included in the Acknowledgements section of the manuscript and in the accompanying cover letter. The statements must:

• Disclose this type of editorial assistance – including the individual’s name, company and level of input
• Identify any entities that paid for this assistance
• Confirm that the listed authors have authorized the submission of their manuscript via third party and approved any statements or declarations, e.g. conflicting interests, funding, etc.

Where appropriate, Sage reserves the right to deny consideration to manuscripts submitted by a third party rather than by the authors themselves.

2.3.2 Writing assistance

Individuals who provided writing assistance, e.g. from a specialist communications company, do not qualify as authors and so should be included in the Acknowledgements section. Authors must disclose any writing assistance – including the individual’s name, company and level of input – and identify the entity that paid for this assistance. It is not necessary to disclose use of language polishing services.

2.4 Funding

Review of Religious Research requires all authors to acknowledge their funding in a consistent fashion under a separate heading.  Please visit the Funding Acknowledgements page on the Sage Journal Author Gateway to confirm the format of the acknowledgment text in the event of funding, or state that: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. 

2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests

Review of Religious Research encourages authors to include a declaration of any conflicting interests and recommends you review the good practice guidelines on the Sage Journal Author Gateway .

2.6 Research ethics and patient consent

Submitted manuscripts should conform to the ICMJE Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals , and all papers reporting animal and/or human studies must state in the methods section that the relevant ethics committee or institutional review board provided (or waived) approval. Please ensure that you have provided the full name and institution of the review committee, in addition to the approval number.

For research articles, authors are also required to state in the methods section whether participants provided informed consent and whether the consent was written or verbal.

Information on informed consent to report individual cases or case series should be included in the manuscript text.

Please also refer to the ICMJE Recommendations for the Protection of Research Participants .

2.7 Reporting guidelines

The relevant EQUATOR Network reporting guidelines should be followed depending on the type of study. For example, all randomized controlled trials submitted for publication should include a completed CONSORT flow chart as a cited figure and the completed CONSORT checklist should be uploaded with your submission as a supplementary file. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses should include the completed PRISMA flow chart as a cited figure and the completed PRISMA checklist should be uploaded with your submission as a supplementary file. The EQUATOR wizard can help you identify the appropriate guideline.

Other resources can be found at NLM’s Research Reporting Guidelines and Initiatives .

2.8 Research data

The Journal is committed to facilitating openness, transparency and reproducibility of research, and has the following research data sharing policy. For more information, including FAQs please visit the Sage Research Data policy pages .

Subject to appropriate ethical and legal considerations, authors are encouraged to:

• Share your research data in a relevant public data repository
• Include a data availability statement. This should:
• Indicate if data is available and shared
• In certain cases, indicate if research data is available but not shared, and why. For example, if the data are drawn from qualitative, in-depth interviews that cannot be de-identified, please provide this explanation in the data availability statement. Or, if the data are available upon request, please describe this in the data availability statement.
• Cite data in your research

3. Publishing policies

3.1 Publication ethics

Sage is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. We encourage authors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics’ International Standards for Authors and view the Publication Ethics page on the Sage Author Gateway .

3.1.1 Plagiarism

Review of Religious Research and Sage take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the Journal against malpractice. Submitted articles may be checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article, for example, is found to have plagiarized other work or included third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article; taking up the matter with the head of department or dean of the author's institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; or taking appropriate legal action.

3.1.2 Prior publication

If material has been previously published it is not generally acceptable for publication in a Sage journal. However, there are certain circumstances where previously published material can be considered for publication. Please refer to the guidance on the Sage Author Gateway or if in doubt, contact the Editor at the address given below.

3.2 Contributor’s publishing agreement

Before publication, Sage requires the author as the rights holder to sign a Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement. Sage’s Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement is an exclusive licence agreement which means that the author retains copyright in the work but grants Sage the sole and exclusive right and licence to publish for the full legal term of copyright. Exceptions may exist where an assignment of copyright is required or preferred by a proprietor other than Sage. In this case copyright in the work will be assigned from the author to the society. For more information, please visit the Sage Author Gateway .

3.3 Open access and author archiving

Review of Religious Research offers optional open access publishing via the Sage Choice programme and Open Access agreements, where authors can publish open access either discounted or free of charge depending on the agreement with Sage. Find out if your institution is participating by visiting Open Access Agreements at Sage . For more information on Open Access publishing options at Sage please visit Sage Open Access . For information on funding body compliance, and depositing your article in repositories, please visit Sage’s Author Archiving and Re-Use Guidelines and Publishing Policies .

4. Preparing your manuscript

4.1 Formatting

The preferred format for your manuscript is Word.

4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics

For guidance on the preparation of illustrations, pictures and graphs in electronic format, please visit Sage’s Manuscript Submission Guidelines .

4.3 Identifiable information

Where a journal uses double-anonymised peer review, authors are required to submit:

• A version of the manuscript which has had any information that compromises the anonymity of the author(s) removed or anonymized. This version will be sent to the peer reviewers.
• A separate title page which includes any removed or anonymised material. This will not be sent to the peer reviewers.

See https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/Manuscript-preparation-for-double-anonymized-journal for detailed guidance on making an anonymous submission.

Figures supplied in colour will appear in colour online regardless of whether or not these illustrations are reproduced in colour in the printed version. For specifically requested colour reproduction in print, you will receive information regarding the costs from Sage after receipt of your accepted article.

4.4 Supplemental material

This Journal is able to host additional materials online (e.g. datasets, podcasts, videos, images etc.) alongside the full-text of the article. For more information please refer to our guidelines on submitting supplemental files .

4.5 Reference style

Review of Religious Research adheres to the ASA Style Guide. View the guide here to ensure your manuscript conforms to this style.

If you use EndNote to manage references, you can download the ASA output file . If you use Zotero to manage references, you can download the ASA Style Repository .

4.6 English language editing services

Authors seeking assistance with English language editing, translation, or figure and manuscript formatting to fit the Journal’s specifications should consider using Sage Language Services. Visit Sage Language Services on our Journal Author Gateway for further information.

5. Submitting your manuscript

Review of Religious Research is hosted on Sage Track, a web based online submission and peer review system powered by ScholarOne™ Manuscripts. Visit https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/rrr to login and submit your article online.

IMPORTANT : Please check whether you already have an account in the system before trying to create a new one. If you have reviewed or authored for the Journal in the past year it is likely that you will have had an account created.  For further guidance on submitting your manuscript online please visit ScholarOne Online Help .

As part of our commitment to ensuring an ethical, transparent and fair peer review process Sage is a supporting member of ORCID, the Open Researcher and Contributor ID . ORCID provides a unique and persistent digital identifier that distinguishes researchers from every other researcher, even those who share the same name, and, through integration in key research workflows such as manuscript and grant submission, supports automated linkages between researchers and their professional activities, ensuring that their work is recognized.

We encourage all authors and co-authors to link their ORCIDs to their accounts in our online peer review platforms. It takes seconds to do: click the link when prompted, sign into your ORCID account and our systems are automatically updated. We collect ORCID IDs during the manuscript submission process and your ORCID ID then becomes part of your accepted publication’s metadata, making your work attributable to you and only you. Your ORCID ID is published with your article so that fellow researchers reading your work can link to your ORCID profile and from there link to your other publications.

If you do not already have an ORCID ID please follow this link to create one or visit our ORCID homepage to learn more.

5.2 Information required for completing your submission

Cover Letter

The Cover Letter must contain the following information (No other information should be included in the letter.):

(1) A statement confirming that all the authors have read the final version of the manuscript and agreed to submit it to Review of Religious Research . (Do not submit your manuscript unless this is true.)

(2) A statement confirming that the manuscript has not been published previously and that it is not currently being reviewed for publication by another journal. (Do not submit your manuscript unless this is true.)

(3) A statement explaining how the manuscript fits into one or more of the topical areas listed in the journal’s Aims & Scope. This statement should also briefly identify at least one of the empirical research methods and analysis listed in the Aims & Scope, or specify an additional empirical method or analysis that is not listed.

(4) The full name, institution, and email address of at least one author of the manuscript who is currently a member of the Religious Research Association, OR; A statement acknowledging the authors agree to pay the fee for the manuscript to be peer-reviewed (if it is initially assessed to be potentially suitable for publication), if no author of the manuscript is a member of the Religious Research Association. See the Fee section below for more details. The waiver of the fee only applies to manuscripts that are authored or co-authored by a member of the Religious Research Association. The fee will not be waived for any other reason.

Sample Letter 1

Dear Editor:

All the authors have read the final version of the manuscript and agreed to submit it to Review of Religious Research . The manuscript has not been published previously, and it is not currently being reviewed for publication by another journal.

The authors think the manuscript fits within the topical areas of Religious Leaders and Religion & Civics because it investigates the ways that people in faith-based organizations draw upon religious language in volunteer recruitment efforts. This is an empirical research study that utilized surveys to collect data for the quantitative analysis and in-depth interviews to inform the qualitative analysis.

[Name of Corresponding Author] of the [Affiliated University or Organization] ( [email protected] ) is the corresponding author of the manuscript and a current member of the Religious Research Association.

[Name of Corresponding Author]

Sample Letter 2

The authors think the manuscript fits within the topic area of Religious Beliefs because it reviews how scholars attend to Muslim, Christian, and Jewish religious texts in published research. Although the manuscript does not appear to fit into any of the methods listed in the Aims & Scope, the authors think the manuscript is consistent with the Aims & Scope because the study employs bibliometric techniques to inform a quantitative and qualitative analysis of existing publications.

As none of the authors currently belong to the Religious Research Association, [Name of Corresponding Author] agrees to pay the fee for the manuscript to be peer-reviewed if it is initially assessed to be potentially suitable for publication via the Religious Research Association website (payment will be confirmed with the RRA before proceeding with peer review).

Affiliations

You will be asked to provide contact details and academic affiliations for all co-authors via the submission system and identify who is to be the corresponding author. These details must match what appears on your manuscript. The affiliation listed in the manuscript should be the institution where the research was conducted. If an author has moved to a new institution since completing the research, the new affiliation can be included in a manuscript note at the end of the paper. At this stage please ensure you have included all the required statements and declarations and uploaded any additional supplementary files (including reporting guidelines where relevant).

The title page should include:

• The name(s) of the author(s)
• A concise and informative title
• The affiliation(s) of the author(s), i.e. institution, (department), city, (state), country
• A clear indication and an active e-mail address of the corresponding author
• If available, the 16-digit ORCID of the author(s)
• If address information is provided with the affiliation(s) it will also be published.
• For authors that are (temporarily) unaffiliated we will only capture their city and country of residence, not their e-mail address unless specifically requested.

Abstract  (150-200 words)

Abstracts should further describe the contents of the manuscript. Begin the abstract by stating the central purpose or aim of the paper. Next, describe the objective and approach of this particular study. The majority of the abstract should summarize the methodological design. Name whether the data were collected through a survey, interview, experiment, ethnography, or other mode. Provide an overview of the sample size and characteristics. It is common to use the notation n=x to indicate the sample (n) equals size (x). Specify that the analysis techniques were quantitative, qualitative, mixed methods, or some other type. Briefly state the primary results. Interpret the contributions for theory, research, and/or practice. The readership of RRR is particularly interested in applications for practice, especially for the practitioner sets in the  Aims & Scope .

Please also clearly identify in the abstract the religious group(s) that was studied, the relevant topic(s) from the journal Aims & Scope, and the country(ies) in which the data were collected. If relevant, please indicate for which set(s) of applied practitioners the study has implications.

Please provide 4 to 6 keywords which can be used for indexing purposes. At least one of the keywords must be selected from the topics list in the Aims & Scope.

5.3 Permissions

Please also ensure that you have obtained any necessary permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. For further information including guidance on fair dealing for criticism and review, please see the Copyright and Permissions page on the Sage Author Gateway .

6. On acceptance and publication

6.1 Sage Production

Your Sage Production Editor will keep you informed as to your article’s progress throughout the production process. Proofs will be made available to the corresponding author via our editing portal Sage Edit or by email, and corrections should be made directly or notified to us promptly. Authors are reminded to check their proofs carefully to confirm that all author information, including names, affiliations, sequence and contact details are correct, and that Funding and Conflict of Interest statements, if any, are accurate.

6.2 Online First publication

Online First allows final articles (completed and approved articles awaiting assignment to a future issue) to be published online prior to their inclusion in a journal issue, which significantly reduces the lead time between submission and publication. Visit the Sage Journals help page for more details, including how to cite Online First articles.

6.3 Access to your published article

Sage provides authors with online access to their final article.

6.4 Promoting your article

Publication is not the end of the process! You can help disseminate your paper and ensure it is as widely read and cited as possible. The Sage Author Gateway has numerous resources to help you promote your work. Visit the Promote Your Article page on the Gateway for tips and advice.

7. Further information

Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the manuscript submission process should be sent to the Review of Religious Research editorial office as follows:

Patricia Snell Herzog, PhD [email protected]

7.1 Appealing the publication decision

Editors have very broad discretion in determining whether an article is an appropriate fit for their journal. Many manuscripts are declined with a very general statement of the rejection decision. These decisions are not eligible for formal appeal unless the author believes the decision to reject the manuscript was based on an error in the review of the article, in which case the author may appeal the decision by providing the Editor with a detailed written description of the error they believe occurred.

If an author believes the decision regarding their manuscript was affected by a publication ethics breach, the author may contact the publisher with a detailed written description of their concern, and information supporting the concern, at [email protected] .

• Read Online
• Sample Issues
• Current Issue
• Email Alert
• Permissions
• Foreign rights
• Reprints and sponsorship
• Advertising

Individual Subscription, E-access

Individual Subscription, Print Only

Individual Subscription, Combined (Print & E-access)

Institutional Subscription, E-access

Institutional Subscription, Print Only

Institutional Subscription, Combined (Print & E-access)

Institutional Subscription & Backfile Lease, Combined Plus Backfile (Current Volume Print & All Online Content)

Individual, Single Print Issue

Institutional, Single Print Issue

To order single issues of this journal, please contact SAGE Customer Services at 1-800-818-7243 / 1-805-583-9774 with details of the volume and issue you would like to purchase.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychiatry
• PMC10236196

Bridging science and spirituality: the intersection of religion and public health in the COVID-19 pandemic

Shahana ayub.

1 Department of Psychiatry, Cornerstone Family Healthcare, Newburgh, NY, United States

Gibson O. Anugwom

2 Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States

Tajudeen Basiru

3 Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics, Dell Children's Medical Center, Austin, TX, United States

Vishi Sachdeva

4 Adesh Institute of Medical Sciences and Research, Bathinda, Punjab, India

Nazar Muhammad

5 Baptist Health – UAMS Psychiatry Residency Education Program, North Little Rock, AR, United States

Maxwell Trudeau

6 Department of Psychiatry, University of Connecticut, Farmington, CT, United States

Gazal Gulati

Amanda sullivan.

7 Quinnipaic University, Hamden, CT, United States

Saeed Ahmed

8 Department of Psychiatry, Rutland Regional Medical Center, Rutland, VT, United States

Lakshit Jain

9 Connecticut Valley Hospital, Middletown, CT, United States

Associated Data

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had global impacts on social interactions and religious activities, leading to a complex relationship between religion and public health policies. This article reviews impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on religious activities and beliefs in relation to the spread of the virus, as well as the potential of religious leaders and faith communities in mitigating the impact of the pandemic through public health measures and community engagement.

A literature review was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar, with search terms including “religion,” “COVID-19,” “pandemic,” “coronavirus,” and “spirituality.” We included English articles published between January 2020 and September 2022, focusing on intersection of religion and COVID-19.

We identified two main themes emerging, with the selected 32 studies divided in 15 studies focused on the relationship between religious practices, beliefs, and the spread of COVID-19, while 17 studies explored the role of religious leaders and faith communities in coping with and mitigating the impact of COVID-19. Religious activities were found to correlate with virus spread, particularly in early days of the pandemic. The relationship between religiosity and adherence to government guidelines was mixed, with some studies suggesting increased religiosity contributed to misconceptions about the virus and resistance to restrictions. Religious beliefs were also associated with vaccine hesitancy, particularly conservative religious beliefs. On the other hand, religious leaders and communities played a crucial role in adapting to COVID-19 measures, maintaining a sense of belonging, fostering emotional resilience, and upholding compliance with public health measures. The importance of collaboration between religious leaders, institutions, and public health officials in addressing the pandemic was emphasized.

Conclusions

This review highlights the essential role of religious leaders, faith-based organizations, and faith communities in promoting education, preparedness, and response efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic. Engaging with religious leaders and communities can improve pandemic control and prevention efforts. Collaboration between religious leaders, governments, and healthcare professionals is necessary to combat vaccine hesitancy and ensure successful COVID-19 vaccination campaigns. The insights from this review can guide future research, policy development, and public health interventions to minimize the impact of the pandemic and improve outcomes for individuals and communities affected.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted nearly every aspect of our lives, its implications even reaching our religious activities, which remains an important topic of debate and ongoing research ranging from social distancing at religion functions to vaccination acceptance among congregations. A significant toll has been taken on traditional human connections such as these, and this has forced all stakeholders to adopt innovative approaches to address religious gatherings' emergent issues. Whether holding virtual meetings or deploying contact tracing apps, individuals and organizations alike have adopted creative ways to continue communing with one another while trying to keep the risk of transmission low. Historically, religion has served a crucial role in shaping public health outcomes during times of crisis—consider the Ebola epidemic, pandemic influenza, and ongoing worldwide health concerns such as HIV/AIDS ( 1 ). Indeed, religion's influence has appeared before us in beneficial, and at times, detrimental ways during these emergencies ( 1 , 2 ). Positive and negative impacts have stemmed from religious gatherings and rituals due to the extent which religious leaders have adhered to established guidelines. In the case of COVID-19, while some religious groups have been praised for their adherence to public health precautions, others have received criticism for disregarding limitations and thus contributing to the virus's spread. This latest pandemic highlighted the role of religious institutions and practices in either curbing or accelerating viral spread, as well as their contribution to public health efforts to control previous pandemics, such as the Spanish flu and H1N1.

The COVID-19 pandemic led to changes in religious practices and rituals, with some communities resisting or outright defying restrictions suggested by their national or local governments or scientific communities. In turn, this had the negative effect of contributing to viral spread. Unfortunately, these negative cases pitted religion against evidence-based science, with the former seeing its adherents clinging to their religious faith for protection instead of listening to scientific advice ( 1 ). Meanwhile, in the positive sense, other religious communities successfully followed both religious guidance and scientific recommendations to reduce the risk of viral spread.

To better understand the interplay of religion and public health amid the COVID-19 pandemic, several global studies have explored the ways religion has influenced individuals and communities during this crisis. One study revealed how the pandemic forced religious leaders to redesign mosque worship and how Muslims adapted their practices ( 3 ). Another study in Israel revealed how ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities experienced a significantly higher rate of COVID-19 infections due to factors such as overcrowding, distrust of state authorities, and resistance to social-distancing orders. The rapid spread of the virus in such religious communities increased tensions and raised questions about the balance between religious practice and public health ( 4 ).

Studies from global regions as diverse as Ghana, Poland, and Malaysia have explored the impact of COVID-19 on religious communities, psychospiritual gatherings, and other religious practices; as well as the role of religious expression in coping with pandemic-derived stress. In Ghana, Osei-Tutu et al. ( 5 ) explored religious leaders' views on the impact of COVID-19 as it related to restrictions placed on their congregants' wellbeing. The study found that people suffered a plethora of psychospiritual effects due to the pandemic, such as a decline in spiritual life, a sense of loss of fellowship and community, financial difficulties, anxiety over childcare, and fear of infection ( 5 ). Osei-Tutu's study revealed how religious leaders positively intervened by delivering sermons on hope, faith, and repentance, with some going so far as to sensitize their membership to topics such as health hygiene and COVID-19-related stigma. In Poland, Sulkowski et al. ( 6 ) investigated the impact of the pandemic on that country's religious life, finding that some churches either limited or entirely suspended their traditional community-based religious life in light of the pandemic, seeking to reduce risk of viral spread while maintaining contact with and among believers via modern technology ( 6 ). A Malaysian study by Ting et al. ( 7 ) investigated several pandemic-related variables, such as illness perception, stress levels, and religious expressions of major religious groups ( 7 ). Ting et al. ( 7 ) study notably reported that religious expression carried a negative relationship with stress levels, highlighting the importance of religion's role in shaping responses to public-health emergencies, particularly in communities where religion serve a significant role in people's lives. Taken together, these studies confirm the important, even primary role religion can play in shaping responses to public health emergencies ( 5 – 7 ).

Researchers from other countries such as Colombia, South Africa, and the United States, have examined the roles of hope, religious coping, and community organizations in promoting wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Counted et al. ( 8 ) examined these roles and their wellbeing effects in Colombia and South Africa, revealing that hope was positively associated with wellbeing and that the relationship between hope and wellbeing was itself moderated by religious coping. When hope was low, the researchers found, wellbeing trended higher when positive religious coping was high and negative religious coping was low ( 8 ). This study highlights the importance of considering the role of religious leaders and their support in addressing the psychospiritual impacts of the pandemic, particularly in communities where religion plays a significant role in people's lives, as other studies have concluded. In the United States, Weinberger-Litman's ( 9 ) study examined anxiety and distress among members of the first community in the USA to be quarantined due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a community of Orthodox Jews ( 9 ). The study found that community organizations were trusted more than any other source of COVID-19-related information and played a vital role in promoting the wellbeing of their constituents by organizing support mechanisms such as the provision of tangible needs, social support, virtual religious services, and dissemination of virus-related health information. In their conclusions, these studies supported the findings of the mentioned prior ones ( 8 , 9 ).

Similar studies conducted in Portugal, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and New Zealand have explored the roles of spiritual-religious coping, religious freedom restrictions, and worship adaptations during the COVID-19 pandemic ( 10 – 12 ). Prazeres et al. ( 11 ) examined the impact of spiritual-religious coping on fear and anxiety related to COVID-19 in Portugal's healthcare workers, finding that religiosity was not a significant factor in reducing coronavirus-related anxiety, and that higher levels of hope and optimism along the spirituality scale were associated with less anxiety ( 11 ). Begović ( 10 ) found that religious communities in Bosnia and Herzegovina displayed varying responses to pandemic restrictions on religious freedom imposed by state regulations ( 10 ). Here, some communities willingly agreed to the restrictions placed on their religious guidelines and practices, while others struggled to agree. Despite their differences, the researcher found, all communities were able to find support in their religious laws and theological views, which emphasized the value of human life and the importance of caring for their community's wellbeing ( 10 ). In New Zealand, Oxholm ( 12 ) reported that the COVID-19 pandemic caused religious communities to review their worship practices and prioritize community welfare and pastoral care for the elderly and vulnerable ( 12 ). To that end, congregations shifted to virtual worship. In this case, the challenges of mitigating transmission risk, social distancing, and providing welfare overlapped ( 12 ).

COVID-19 indeed caused significant global upheaval, leading to quarantines and a rising death toll. With healthcare professionals plying science to control the virus, religious organizations and psychospiritual groups provided solace while, with a few exceptions, also contributing to the recommended protective measures, such as social distancing and the cancellation or conversion of large gatherings in some faiths ( 13 ). The exceptions included the Islamic State, which regarded the pandemic as divine retribution; and Feng shui practitioners, who attributed it to an imbalance of elements in the Year of the Rat ( 14 ). It remains notable that major religious gatherings were identified as significant clusters of viral spread in Singapore, Malaysia, and South Korea ( 14 ).

For complying religious groups, the pandemic prompted a transition from in-person religious communities to virtual congregations, challenging conventional notions of belonging and participation ( 15 ), This transformation required embracing digital platforms for live-streaming of services, Zoom baptisms, and Skype confessions, etc. ( 15 , 16 ) while less-compliant religious groups resisted change. Additionally, religious leaders here offered explanations and comfort to their congregations during uncertain times, highlighting the resurgence of religion and spirituality in the face of a global crisis ( 14 ).

A survey study by Seryczynska et al. ( 17 ) explored the role of religious capital in coping during the COVID-19 pandemic in four European countries: Spain, Italy, Poland, and Finland. Their results revealed that religious capital indeed can impact individuals' coping strategies, but its dynamics, the ways it does so, are complex ( 17 ). This survey's results provide a better understanding of the role of religious capital in helping people cope with harsh circumstances.

While the scientific community has largely come together in controlling the spread of the coronavirus, primarily through advising mask wearing, social distancing, and developing vaccines, its pandemic-curtailing efforts have been hampered by various factors, oftentimes religious gatherings. Such gatherings provide an essential role in society, but governments, the scientific community, and healthcare entities worldwide have experienced pushback from certain religious entities regarding their advised pandemic-response measures.

The present paper reviews the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on lives around the world, including the responses by the respective public health authorities, the associated factors that dictated the outcome of those responses, and the implications of the intertwined nature of religion, public-health policy, and social responsibility. The researchers subsequently investigate two main intersections where religion met public health during the COVID-19 pandemic: first, the connections between religious practices, beliefs, and the spread of the virus, including both the positive and negative consequences of religious activities; and second, the role of religious leaders and faith communities in coping with and mitigating the impact of COVID-19. In doing so, we hope to offer a unique multidisciplinary perspective on the complex interplay between religious practices and public-health outcomes, emphasizing the importance of taking a balanced, holistic approach to mitigating—or preventing—public health crises. By synthesizing this intersectional area's existing research, we can not only contribute to the related literature by providing a better understanding of the intersection of religion and public health crises, but also identify any potential gaps warranting future research.

We conducted a structured and systematic literature search on PubMed and Google Scholar using keywords such as “religion,” “COVID-19,” “pandemic,” “coronavirus,” and “spirituality” to study the intersection of religion and the COVID-19 pandemic. Our search was conducted from January 2020 to March 2023. We included peer-reviewed articles, published in English language, primarily observational studies, cross-sectional studies, surveys, and systematic reviews. We excluded case reports, case series, non-English papers, papers not directly related to the topic, papers with data that was difficult to extract, and unpublished papers. The articles must focus on one or both of the following aims: investigating connections between religious practices, beliefs, and the spread of the COVID-19 virus, including both the positive and negative consequences of religious activities; and exploring the role of religious leaders and faith communities in coping with and mitigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Initially, we identified 2,256 papers through our search strategy, which we then narrowed down to 876 by removing duplicates. After screening the titles of these papers, we included 327 citations for abstract screening. During abstract screening, we excluded 549 citations based on our inclusion criteria, which focused on studies that provided insights into the role of religion and religious activities in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The remaining 122 papers were reviewed for eligibility by SA and LJ, and any disagreements were mediated by a third reviewer (SA). Additionally, we employed a snowballing technique whereby we identified and selected review articles on our topic of interest ( 1 , 13 , 18 – 20 ), and then used their reference lists to further identify relevant studies. This approach helped us to expand our search results and ensure that we did not miss any important studies that were relevant to our topic. We have included a study selection flow diagram ( Figure 1 ) to illustrate the process of identifying, screening, and selecting articles for our review. This diagram provides a transparent representation of our literature search and selection process.

Search strategy.

3.1. Description of studies included

32 full-text articles were identified that met our inclusion criteria for this literature review. We categorized these articles into two tables based on their focus: Table 1 , which captures studies investigating the relationship between religious practices, beliefs, and the spread of COVID-19, and Table 2 , which explores the role of religious leaders and faith communities in coping with and mitigating the impact of the pandemic. We acknowledge that the studies included in our review come from various research designs, and our aim was to provide a comprehensive overview of the existing literature on the topic rather than a strict synthesis of the findings.

Studies focusing on the role of religious practices and beliefs in the spread of COVID-19.

Exploring the role of religious leaders and faith communities in coping with and mitigating the impact of COVID-19.

4. Narrative synthesis

4.1. the relationship between religious practices, beliefs, and the spread of covid-19.

The role of religious gatherings, ceremonies, and practices in contributing to the spread of COVID-19 has been noted in published literature. Researchers reported that these types of events played a significant role particularly in the pandemic's early days ( 1 , 22 – 24 ). Though a strong correlation existed between religious activities and viral spread, it is worth noting that the study by Lee et al. ( 1 ) emphasized that religious activity could both accelerate and mitigate COVID-19. This illustrates religion's dual potential effects on public health crises. The relationship between religiosity that adhered with guidelines recommended or mandated by various government remains unclear. Some studies have found people in more religious areas or with higher levels of religiosity were less likely to comply with social distancing and stay-at-home orders ( 27 , 32 ). Other studies have found some correlation between increased religiosity and misconceptions about the virus, as well as resistance to government mandated restrictions ( 28 ).

Regarding vaccination acceptance, religious beliefs had association with vaccine hesitancy, particularly when conservative religious beliefs linked with skepticism toward vaccines and overall public-health initiatives ( 1 , 29 ).

The pandemic saw various religious leaders from various countries facing unique challenges in caring for their communities. Studies showed that effective communication and collaboration with public-health authorities or local governments remained vital in promoting adherence to guidelines and dismantling misinformation ( 3 , 26 , 43 ). The pandemic has also caused changes in religious practices. While some individuals have turned to religion for comfort and support during these uncertain times, others have experienced a crisis of faith or questioned their beliefs ( 14 , 28 ).

Given the mixed findings on the relationship between religiosity and compliance with COVID-19 guidelines, it is important for researchers to continue examining it.

4.2. The role of religious leaders and faith communities in coping with and mitigating the impact of COVID-19

The published literature shows the impact of the pandemic on various religious communities and the challenges they faced, whether financial, childcare disruption, fear of infection, or loss of fellowship ( 5 , 41 ).

Several studies revealed the importance of religious leaders and communities adapting to COVID-19 measures to maintain a sense of belonging and foster emotional resilience among their congregations ( 33 , 35 , 37 ). Some studies highlight how religious communities adjusted their traditional religious ritual and practices, ultimately complying with social distancing guidelines and safety measures to prevent viral spread ( 6 , 12 , 36 ). Other studies revealed the importance of collaboration between religious leaders, institutions, and public health officials in addressing the pandemic ( 37 , 42 ). Still others revealed the important role religious leaders and institutions have played in upholding compliance with public-health measures and providing various support services ( 9 , 10 ). Overall, most published studies underscore the need for religious leaders to accept scientific findings and resist disseminating COVID-19 and vaccine-related misinformation ( 42 ).

5. Discussion

The evaluated studies highlight the complex relationship between religion, religiosity, and the COVID-19 pandemic. Religious gatherings and activities played significant roles in the spread of COVID-19 across the world, as evidenced by the reviewed published studies ( 1 , 3 , 22 – 25 , 27 , 29 – 32 ). The literature shows the role of religious activity in amplifying the spread of COVID-19, through non-wearing of masks, non-adherence to social distancing, and at times through the promotion of misinformation. While some studies have suggested religion as a risk factor for contracting COVID-19; other studies identify religion as a positive source of coping and resilience ( 1 , 26 , 32 ).

The ravages of the COVID-19 pandemic led to existential crises in many, with some religious believers finding meaning by leaning into apocalyptic narratives, which some of the secular also did ( 20 ). Viewing the pandemic as an act of a superior being, certain religious leaders and organizations refused to change their group rituals and ceremonies. Several pastors expressed the belief that only God would decide when someone died and not the government, and thus refused to stop holding packed church services ( 44 ). Such religious defiance and harmful-belief promotion ultimately led to a rejection of government recommended or mandated COVID-19 guidelines, increasing the virus's transmission among the masses ( 1 , 3 , 27 , 28 ).

In certain instances, both governments and religious leaders have been criticized for their handling of the pandemic. For example, during the second wave of COVID-19 infections in April 2021 in India, the decision to continue with the annual Kumbh Mela, a pilgrimage that attracts over nine million people, was deemed irresponsible by some public health experts. Despite concerns raised regarding the potential spread of the virus, minimal precautions were taken, and pandemic guidelines were not strictly enforced. These included a lack of social distancing and wearing masks. Such actions have been viewed by some as further contributing to the crisis ( 21 ). This led to what some have called as a “massive superspreader event” ( 45 ). Unfortunately, no quarantine was enforced nor was contact tracing imposed on the returning pilgrims. This incident highlights how faith and distrust of science can lead to crisis ( 46 ). In the Middle East, similar incidents were reported, with increased spread associated in “Qom with Jewish and Shi'ite communities” with religious practices and travel to holy places of their respective countries ( 23 ).

In West Africa, the COVID-19 crisis was simply seen by the population as an extension of the Ebola crisis ( 34 ). What the Ebola crisis taught may have helped in managing the COVID-19 response, but persisting apocalyptic narratives here also played a role in viral spread ( 34 ). When COVID-19 reached Tanzania, that country's president stated that only faith in God and quack treatments like steam inhalation would defend them from COVID-19. He refused to enforce a lock down, and instead rubbished test kits, vaccines, and masking ( 47 ).

The pandemic placed many religious and psychospiritual communities in difficult positions, forcing them to make a difficult choice over whether to follow health regulations substantially, partly and not at all, and to keep pursuing their cultural norms, regarding funerals and other sanctified gatherings. In Brooklyn, New York's Hasidic Jewish community, doctors estimated that hundreds of Orthodox Jews died due to participating in super-spreading events such as funerals ( 48 ). Funeral restrictions also impacted other religions. Hindus, for example, who commonly cremate the bodies of loved ones in holy sites such as Varanasi, India, have had their travel restricted due to the pandemic. Culturally, these restrictions disrupted an important ritual, one that draws large families together in the throes of cathartic mourning ( 48 ). Here, tightly wrapping the bodies of victims of COVID-19 did prevent transmission, but also prevented the victim's families from saying their last goodbyes according to their religious beliefs ( 48 ).

Islamic cultures also experienced COVID-19 limitations to their tradition of burying their dead in a timely manner. In Iraq, burials were delayed for days, causing distress among the deceased's loved ones for their inability to provide a traditional funeral ( 48 ). The large number of coronavirus deaths also impeded funeral practices, since family members who were recently running from pillar to post to obtain scarce oxygen and a hospital bed, now had to struggle to secure burial plots or space in a funeral home to perform the final rites ( 49 ).

Some religious leaders, however, found creative solutions. For example, in the Jewish community, Rabbi Avraham Berkowitz decided to attend a family funeral (and set an example, perhaps) safely distanced in his car ( 50 ). Some priests started giving blessings from the hallway or over the telephone, while some funeral homes started drive-in funerals, with others reviving old traditions of bowing to a hearse when it passed by their home. Shivas were organized via video conference by the Jewish community, while Han Chinese live-streamed their tomb-sweeping ceremonies rather than visiting the tomb of their loved ones in person ( 51 ). A mixed method review by Burrell et al. ( 52 ) revealed that restrictions on funeral practices did not necessarily entail poor outcomes or experiences for the bereaved. Rather, they seemed to add meaning to the occasion and strengthened the connections mourners felt, as they played a much more critical role ( 52 ).

Despite these challenges, religious leaders have recognized their unique role in promoting healthy practices, communicating scientific information to their communities, and helping dispel myths and inaccuracies that contributed to the spread of COVID-19. Religious communities have had to encourage people to take precautions, accept vaccinations, adapt, and find innovative ways to continue their practices while minimizing the risk of infection ( 33 , 35 , 36 , 39 – 42 , 53 ).

Religion's skepticism over the COVID-19 vaccine coupled with the new technologies being used to practice religion gradually seemed to fade. More in-depth studies found the association between resistance and negative attitude toward vaccination most pronounced in religiously conservative communities ( 29 , 35 , 54 ).

Despite the myriad challenges, several examples appear where religious and community leaders issued guidance based on scientific recommendations and thus adapted their practices in response to the pandemic, changing the implications of these adaptations for public health outcomes. For example: The Catholic Church's Pope Francis loudly and globally professed support for the vaccine ( 42 , 53 ). While countries with Roman Catholics as the majority religious group displayed a positive association between religiosity and vaccine rates ( 36 ). In some regions, religious leaders postponed religious events or utilized alternative modalities to maintain traditions and rituals in a COVID-friendly manner. In Saudi Arabia, the Muslim pilgrimage to the holy sites in the Kingdom were restricted, and a new e-Visa program was devised to ban inbound travel of persons from coronavirus-affected countries ( 37 , 38 , 55 ). In similar fashion, Jewish religious leaders adapted their manner of religious prayer by praying through a “balcony” minyan while conducting online havrutas using video conferencing, and virtually broadcasting Passover ceremonies ( 33 ). Programs such as Project Trust have helped religious leaders promote health in ways sensitive to their cultures and provided accurate information about public and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic ( 41 ).

The complex relationship between religiosity, cultural values, and public-health decisions has spurred healthcare professionals and other stakeholders, including religious leadership and policymakers, to examine these factors and formulate effective strategies while promoting cooperation among religious communities to ensure adoption of proper procedures or at least the necessary Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) to mitigate viral spread ( 36 ).

Certainly, religious leaders bear significant influence on the perceptions and behaviors of their followers and congregations, as evidenced by higher country-level religiosity leading to lower vaccination rates. In contrast, Roman Catholics showed the opposite trend, mostly due to the Pope's open advocacy for vaccines. This clearly shows the leveraging role religious leaders can assume in influencing the perceptions and behaviors of their followers in periods of public-health crisis. There is a need for a more-comprehensive approach to science communication, one that considers the needs and perspectives of religious communities in the context of public-health crises ( 1 , 26 ). As we continue to navigate the challenges of COVID-19 and health crises certain to come, what is essential is considering the role of religious practices and beliefs in either spreading or mitigating the impact of infectious diseases ( 1 , 22 – 27 , 32 ). Future research should more deeply explore the religion's potential to promote wellbeing and resilience during public-health crises and derive the implications of this for public-health policy and practice ( 8 , 11 , 32 ).

Our discussion considered religion's positive as well as negative impacts during the COVID-19 epidemic. Understanding the complicated relationship between religious practice, belief, and public health is necessary for effective policymaking. It is important to include religious leaders and communities in encouraging compliance to health guidelines, and further, to better understand and promote the role of religion in maintaining wellbeing and resilience during health crises.

As we look ahead to the future, examining our current public health situation raises some pertinent questions. How can religious-based approaches help strengthen adherence to measures such as vaccinations and mask usage? To what degree will technology and virtual platforms impact how people practice religion going forward — is there potential for lasting effects on faith communities and individual believers alike? Also, it's crucial to consider how religion can play a role in shaping public health policies and regulations. This might involve studying how religious organizations and leaders contribute to creating, implementing, and evaluating these policies, and also discovering the most suitable methods to take religious perspectives into account when planning public health initiatives. These are some pressing research topics worth exploring in future to gain deeper insights into ways that religious institutions play critical roles during this pandemic period.

6. Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on people globally for the past 3 years, with vaccine hesitancy greatly hindering efforts to curb its effects. To combat this, collaborative efforts among religious leaders, governments, and scientists remain crucial to building trust and promoting vaccine uptake. It is essential to recognize that effective communication strategies and direct channels are necessary to reach and ease the fears of vaccine-hesitant populations, especially within those communities with strong or strict religious and psychospiritual beliefs. Tailored messaging that is culturally and religiously sensitive has been shown to be more effective in reaching these populations. Religious leaders and institutions can play critical roles in disseminating accurate and evidence-based vaccine information. For instance, faith-based advocacy can help reach certain vaccine-hesitant populations in religious communities. What is important to acknowledge and transcend, however, are the challenges and limitations of such efforts, for political or ideological barriers may exist between certain religious groups and governments that could hinder collaboration.

More generally, governments should concurrently take proactive measures to ensure health safety, equal access to healthcare, and non-discrimination across all communities. Collaborative efforts among all stakeholding groups—religious, scientific, healthcare, and governmental—are necessary to ensure successful vaccination campaigns to curb the spread of pandemics, COVID-19 or those of the future. To this end, it is crucial to survey and provide specific examples of successful collaborations between religious leaders, governments, and scientists to promote vaccine uptake. These should include case studies and real-world examples of faith-based advocacy efforts that have successfully reached vaccine-hesitant populations. Only through such collaborative efforts, can we ensure that all communities receive accurate information and access to vaccinations.

7. Limitations

One limitation of this review paper is that it focuses mainly on challenges faced by religious communities during the COVID-19 pandemic without exploring other factors that may contribute to vaccine hesitancy or resistance. This paper also focuses primarily on examples from the Western, Arabs and African contexts, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to other regions or cultural contexts. Additionally, while this paper highlights the importance of engaging religious leaders in promoting vaccination acceptance, it does not explore potential challenges or barriers to such engagement. Our methodology follows a systematic approach, sharing similarities with established guidelines such as PRISMA or Cochrane, but does not strictly adhere to these guidelines. However, our review maintains rigor and transparency, which are key elements of a reliable review process.

Data availability statement

Author contributions.

SAh, TB, and GA designed the study and developed the original protocol. SAh and LJ assisted with the initial screening of papers, data extraction, and the literature search. VS, LJ, and SAy contributed to writing the manuscript, including the methods section and synthesis of studies, and also participated in the interpretation of results. LJ, AB, SAy, and NM were involved in data analysis, interpretation of results, and writing several sections of the manuscript. MT, GG, and AB contributed to writing the discussion and conclusion sections. LJ and SAy contributed to writing the results, discussion section, and references. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

Acknowledgments

We express our gratitude to our co-workers, collaborators, language editors, and librarians for their invaluable support and assistance during the writing of this article.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Research on religion, spirituality, and mental health: a review

Affiliation.

• 1 Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710, USA. [email protected]
• PMID: 19497160
• DOI: 10.1177/070674370905400502

Religious and spiritual factors are increasingly being examined in psychiatric research. Religious beliefs and practices have long been linked to hysteria, neurosis, and psychotic delusions. However, recent studies have identified another side of religion that may serve as a psychological and social resource for coping with stress. After defining the terms religion and spirituality, this paper reviews research on the relation between religion and (or) spirituality, and mental health, focusing on depression, suicide, anxiety, psychosis, and substance abuse. The results of an earlier systematic review are discussed, and more recent studies in the United States, Canada, Europe, and other countries are described. While religious beliefs and practices can represent powerful sources of comfort, hope, and meaning, they are often intricately entangled with neurotic and psychotic disorders, sometimes making it difficult to determine whether they are a resource or a liability.

Publication types

• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
• Systematic Review
• Adaptation, Psychological
• Alcoholism / psychology
• Anxiety Disorders / psychology
• Depressive Disorder / psychology
• Mental Disorders / psychology*
• Mental Health*
• Psychotic Disorders / psychology
• Religion and Psychology*
• Spirituality*
• Substance-Related Disorders / psychology
• Suicide / psychology

Religion Research Paper

This sample religion research paper features: 6700 words (approx. 22 pages), an outline, and a bibliography with 36 sources. Browse other research paper examples for more inspiration. If you need a thorough research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A! Feel free to contact our writing service for professional assistance. We offer high-quality assignments for reasonable rates.

Introduction

Development of religion and belief, early explanations for religion and belief, eastern and western traditions, christianity, religious objects, symbols, and rituals, religion, manuscripts, and teachings, future directions.

• Bibliography

Religion and belief are of great importance for anthropological research on the development of humankind and its history, as they represent the human reaction to an extrahuman, holy, transcendent, or divine object. Almost no other terms of the mental and intellectual human life seem to have such a big and colorful variety as “belief ” or “religion.”

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code, more religion research paper examples:.

• Buddhism Research Paper
• Confucianism Research Paper
• Hinduism Research Paper
• Islam Research Paper
• Judaism Research Paper
• Protestantism Research Paper

At first, a look into the past: The term religion has its etymologic and historical roots in the ancient Roman world. A different context can be found for the terms personal belief or universal faith; they have their semantic origin in the Greek word pístis, which Saint Paul used in his letters, or in the Latin fides. Whereas religion gives the framework, belief fills this framework with individual religious activities. Faith means the universal religious activity of a group of people of the same religion. The Latin noun religio stems from the verb re-legere, which has the meaning “to do something diligently, to do something again, to re-read something,” according to Marcus T. Cicero (106–43 BCE). The prefix re- could even be translated as “to do something diligently again and again.” The careful execution of rituals was prescribed by rules, which were only valid through their exact observance. Therefore in the ancient Roman culture, the Latin noun religio expresses the right observance of cults and, as a consequence, the respect for the gods. The verb re-legere is the opposite of the verb neg-legere (to neglect).

The derivation of the noun religio from religare (to connect, to reconnect) is in general problematic, because this reconnection can be seen in a feeling of an inner attachment to something transcendent, which was not common to classical beliefs. In its character, religio is in Roman antiquity rather a virtue than a kind of feeling. Central in the diligent performance of rituals was a kind of “pious awe,” which was not so intensive that the acting person in religious affairs was moved inside. This is one of the reasons why ancient Roman religio is basically incomprehensible to us. Nowadays, the adjective religiosus means “pious.” In a later development, homo religiosus means “member of an order,” a person who lives according to the three evangelical counsels: poverty, chastity, and obedience. This person wants to be, in his religious life, a good example to others. It was this meaning of the word pious (religiosus) that brought the noun religion into the Christian-shaped, Western culture, and less the Latin noun religio, in the ancient Roman sense.

To exhaust the full meaning of religion or belief, it is not sufficient to speak only of devoutness or “expression of devoutness.” Religion and belief also cover the sentence fides quaerens intellectum (faith or belief that searches for insight). Therefore, it has also to do with rationality and the search for reasonable causes. Saint Augustine (354–430 CE), as an exponent of Christian antiquity, and Saint Thomas Aquinas (ca. 1224/5–1274 CE), as a philosopher of high scholasticism, shaped the concept of religio as identical with Christianity. Other, non-Christian religions or beliefs could only be classified as lex, secta, or fides.

The meaning of the term lex is universal, according to our expression “denomination” or “total structure of life.” There is also a lex Christianorum, which means “doctrine and law of the Christian faith.” By no means is the forming of the concepts “religion” and “belief ” steady or logical. Within the historical development, beginning with classical antiquity up to the advent of Protestantism in the 16th century, it is not possible to find a strictly continuous development to the modern term religion . So, religio cannot be translated by or equated with religion or belief in today’s meaning.

If the Christian context of the word religion is left aside, then religion and also belief can be defined as the relationship of a human to a personal or impersonal transcendent, in whatever shape of “the Real”: a divine persona or impersona. The meaning of the Western terms religion or belief , influenced by Christian thoughts, changes in other European and non-European languages from “something that is owed to the transcendence” to “law/doctrine” and “eternal, never-ending structure.”

As a result, the term religion is more objective than the rather subjective term belief . Also, the concepts of belief— characterized as individual, personal belief, or conviction— and faith—characterized as universal belief—can be differentiated. Religion is in general the system of faith that people of the same conviction have in common. Belief is the personal activity, the “personal” faith, within the framework of religion. Belief system is very near to religion, but it emphasizes the personal religious activity more than universal faith.

After this etymological study, the paradigmatic development of the modern terms religion and belief will now be described in order to give a contemporary view on them. A religion that prescribes a belief in a deity of imaginable terms is marked as rational, according to the Lutheran theologian and historian of comparative religion Rudolf Otto. In his classic work, The Idea of the Holy (1917/1925), Otto also asked for the objectivity of religion or belief, and emphasized the “contrast between Rationalism and profounder religion.” One cannot do justice to religion or belief only by rational terms. The two opposite characterizations of religion are, as Otto pointed out, the tremendum, or the “awefulness,” and simultaneously the fascinans, or the “fascinating.” The tremendum shakes people in awe in sight of the mysterious, completely different being, God. This form of fear is by far different than the “natural,” or ordinary fear of a human, and applies more to the general “world-fear.” The tremendum derives from a “numinous dread” that terrifies and fascinates people at the same time.

The Romanian historian of religion Mircea Eliade, who worked at the University of Chicago, addressed Rudolf Otto’s reflections at the beginning of his book The Sacred and the Profane (1957/1959). Eliade focused on the nature of religion or belief, describing the manifestations of religion and the religious in a world that dissociates itself more and more from religious dimensions. But even in a secular world, there is something sacred that is characterized by humans as the opposite of the profane. The process is always the same: the “completely different” is a reality that is not of our world and manifests itself on things that are components of our natural, profane world.

Eliade repeatedly spoke of homo religious, and he wanted to make clear that religion and belief belong to the human nature. Therefore, people live as long as possible in the sacred universe. By the word sacred, the dimension of the religious is described. This dimension surrounds, carries, and holds the human as a religious being. On the other side, a secular person, who is able to live without any religious feeling, has a completely different, secular experience of the universe. She lives in a desacralized world. The religious feeling has to find its way by another, maybe hidden means. The secular person lives totally differently from the homo religious.

Almost 150 years earlier than Eliade, Friedrich D. E. Schleiermacher, a German Lutheran theologian and philosopher, classified religion and belief as a “feeling,” as the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau did before him. Schleiermacher called religion a “feeling of infinity” in his second speech, “On the Nature of Religion,” of his five speeches appearing in On Religion (1799/1996).

The German philosopher of the Age of Enlightenment, Immanuel Kant, stood in strong contrast to the definition of religion or belief as “feeling.” In his work Religion Within the Boundaries of Mere Reason (1793/1998), Kant proved that there was no way to conclude the certain feature of direct divine influence by a feeling. Hence, according to Kant, religion must be based on reason alone in order to be universal. For Kant, religion had to be a “pure religion of reason.” Although these two characterizations of religion as a “feeling” (Schleiermacher) or as a “pure religion of reason” (Kant) are opposing, these two definitions of religion may be coincident in the fact that religion or belief is something according to human nature. Therefore, around the year 1800, a concept of internal religion developed, which remains effective today.

Statements on religion or belief by the Protestant theologians Ernst Troeltsch (1912/1981) and Paul Tillich (1955, 1961/1988) underlined this fact. In another way, Tillich’s works can be regarded as examples of the effective power of the concept of religion or belief. In a different approach to Immanuel Kant, he distanced himself to consider “feeling” as the basic determination of religion. If religion could be connected to the pure subjectivity of emotion, then it would decline, because religion would loose its seriousness, its truth, and its highest sense. Without a highest content, religion would stay empty. In his essay “Religion as a Function of the Human Mind?” (1955/1988), Tillich defined religion as “something that concerns us immediately,” in the deepest sense of the universe. That which “concerns us immediately” referred to all creative functions of the human mind. However, this did not mean that religion and belief are fictions of the mind, created by human beings.

According to Tillich, the human mind is able to be creative in relation to both itself and to the world. But this creativeness is limited by the relationship to God. Religions and beliefs contain all areas of the human life and of the mind, as they build the substance, the basis, and the depth of the human intellectual life. Therefore religion or belief is not based on a function of the mind at all. Religion is universal; belief is individual. They are consequently the unconditioned components in every situation of human life. Being moved by religion is always related to a religious object. In this context, Tillich emphasized two points: (1) Religion and belief are always related to a content, which cannot be explained in the end; and (2) religion has always a social dimension, too. Nobody is alone in being religiously moved or in feeling any kind of religious emotion. Therefore, the objectivity of religion is founded by its social dimension, according to Tillich. As a consequence, religion and belief are situated in the human being, who is touched by a “revealed unconditioned being,” by a religious object. This can generally be applied to everyone. “Religious reality,” however, goes along with a secret consciousness: tua res agitur, “your situation is concerned.”

Two definitions of the concept of religion can be found in Tillich’s work. Both differ crucially from the traditional one—religion or belief as the human answers to the transcendent. (1) Tillich spoke of an “autonomous religion” that does not know a representational God, nor, consequently, any form of prayer. But in contradiction to that, religion is not impious or lacking a God. It just does not know any kind of ecclesiastical objectification of God. With mysticism, it is different again, because mysticism elevates itself beyond the objectification of God. (2) In his later essay, “Christianity and the Encounter of the World Religions” (1961/1988), Tillich mentioned quasireligions, which are similar to religions and have some features in common with religions. But quasireligions are only related to secular objects and consequently to secular institutions. Tillich differentiates between quasireligions and pseudoreligions. Both pretend intentionally to be similar to religions. The expansion of the concepts of religion or of belief as inward phenomena, which have been developed since the beginning of the 19th century, became clear in Tillich’s considerations.

The two concepts of quasireligions and pseudoreligions must be strictly distinguished from traditional, historical religions. Similar to quasireligions is what Eric Voegelin (1938/1999) and Raymond Aron (1965/1968) spoke of as political religion. An explosive nature is exhibited in the relationship between religion and politics, as it is demonstrated in the concept of political religion, and later on in the concepts of state religion or civil religion. The term political religion has its roots in religio politica, going back to the early 17th century. Since the 1930s, it served to classify the politicaltotalitarian mass movements of this time in a critical attitude toward ideology. This modern “political religion,” however, must be clearly distinguished from the “political religion” of classical antiquity and the later concepts of state religion and civil religion, which tried to institutionalize the relationship between religion and politics, not always in a fruitful way.

Generally speaking, it is possible to identify religion or belief as being situated in a person. Religion or belief must be further defined as a relationship and interchange between a human being and transcendent reality, which is relevant for humans. But the relationship to transcendence is not the only decisive criterion for a religion or a belief. Religions and beliefs are rather connected by a kind of “family resemblance,” as defined by Ludwig Wittgenstein (1953/2001). They are determined by overlapping qualities, including holiness, prayers, and services. Religions and beliefs also show similarities that connect them. These similarities, however, must not necessarily be alike in every religion or belief. Regarding those similarities, the reference to transcendence plays, of course, an important role. John Hick (2005) pointed out that another fundamental “family resemblance” of religions and beliefs, in addition to their reference to the transcendence, is their soteriological content, which describes the ability of a religion or belief to redeem human souls and allow salvation. However different their contents and traditions may be, this soteriological quality is a feature that all religions and beliefs have in common in various manners. Also, the validity of religious traditions was of great importance for Hick.

Religion and belief in the modern ideology can carefully be defined as generic terms, or concepts, which slowly have grown in importance in our modern age. These concepts are very different from the ancient meaning of the word religio, which first described all imaginations, attitudes, and actions of a person concerning the ultimate reality. Humans accept the ultimate reality as powers or a power, spirits or demons, gods or God, the “Sacred” or the “Absolute,” or just “Transcendence.” In ancient times, religio was not used as a collective name for each belief or as a universal term, in which various beliefs were summed up. The term religio, representing the past view on religion or belief, was used in a very narrow sense from antiquity up to the 16th century. At first, religio referred to the exercising of the rituals prescribed by law, but only later with regard to the Christian denomination. In general, it took a long time before religio and later “religion” had achieved their meaning, which led to the modern understanding of “religion.” Religion is more than the mere name of a personal belief. It expresses that humans are concerned about something beyond them. Also, death obtains a different meaning within a religious worldview. Romano Guardini (1940/1998), the Catholic priest, theologian, and philosopher of religion, considered death as the gate to the other side of human life, which remains secret to those who still live in this world. For religious people, death is no longer the end of life but, instead, is the turning point to a different reality.

Summing up, the terms religion and belief can be characterized by the following three points:

• There are no universal terms for all religions or beliefsystems of humankind in each epoch.
• There is no term that includes all aspects of what ismeant by religion or belief today. Even all these terms together cannot cover every aspect now meant by religion or belief.
• Earlier terms of religio or religion stand in contrast to themodern meaning of religion. They emphasize the external practice of religion, the observance of ritual instructions and regulations, and the obedience to religious laws.

These three points, however, cannot unambiguously classify religions or beliefs and they do not ultimately define them. But they do outline the broad frame of the modern concept of religion and belief.

Since ancient times, as many sources teach, people have had various religious or pseudoreligious systems. In the past, religions and beliefs were the result of natural phenomena, which led people to fear and to require that these natural phenomena be explained. Also, social facts and mechanisms had to be explained through religious patterns. Ancient Egyptian, Greek, and Roman religions show this function of early religions or belief systems. These religions and beliefs were polytheistic (i.e., there were many different gods, who had different things to take care of). In many cases, one god is honored as supreme among the others (e.g., Zeus in ancient Greek religion or Jupiter/Jove in ancient Roman religion). The holy or the deity was often linked with nature. Humans found in nature the powerful influence of God: Therefore trees or fountains or mountains (esp. the peak, like Mount Fuji in Japan) were adored as holy, or as the place where the deity lives. Also in totems, things of everyday life or symbols or even animals, the spirit of a deity is believed to be effective. Therefore, it is forbidden, it is a taboo, to kill an animal in which a deity is believed to be present. These original religious aspects can be found within African religions and beliefs, or within the religions of the Pacific islands.

In the Egyptian and Roman traditions, the emperor was adored as a god and found his place in the Pantheon after his death. Archaeological proofs of these ancient religions and belief systems can be found in the pyramids in Egypt, as well as in the ancient Roman temples around the Mediterranean Sea. From the onset of European culture, politics, religion, and society were interconnected within the ancient state, the Greek pólis or the Roman civitas. So religions and politics were interlinked in ancient European societies. Later on, these three aspects differentiated more and more. Today, politics, religions, and societies are almost separated, but one should be aware that humans are oriented toward religious belief, as civilians within a political state and a civil society. So it is useful to respect religion and belief even within a political point of view.

At the beginning of ancient Greek culture, the explanations for the reasons why the universe came to exist, and why it exists the way it does, were given in the myths of the writers Homer (ca. 8th century BCE) and Hesiod (ca. 8th century BCE). Next, there was a shift from mythos (myths) to lógos (reason). This shift can be found in the quotations and fragments of the pre-Socratic philosophers, who turned their interests toward nature and the reasons for natural phenomena. Thales of Miletus (ca. 624–546 BCE), for example, a philosopher of nature living on the Ionic coast (today’s Turkey), gave a precise forecast for a total eclipse by calculation, but people took him almost for a prophet, and, what is more, he could forecast a rich bearing of olives, so that he lent all the olive presses in his country for a small amount of money, and consequently he was able to borrow them for a very good price. The next step from myths to reason can be found in the philosophy of Plato (ca. 428/427–348/347 BCE), a disciple of Socrates (ca. 469–399 BCE). Plato underlined his arguments in his dialogues with myths, in order to explain them better to his disciples. Among them, there was another important philosopher, the educator of Alexander the Great, Aristotle (384–322 BCE). Aristotle was also very interested in investigating natural phenomena and in explaining the world by reason, not by myths.

The general aim of this early Greek philosophy was to explain the universe by using human reason rather than mythical explanations. As a result, the soul of a human should not be in a disturbed situation, but in a quiet state, which is characterized as eudaimonía (felicity). The early philosophical schools in ancient Greece always had the intention of caring for the soul by giving reasonable explanations for the universe and its existence. Consequently, these early philosophical schools played the role that religions or beliefs play in our own time.

Major Religions and Belief Systems

There are many religious systems, including ancient systems or natural religions, or smaller derivates from the major religions or belief systems. All religions and belief systems aim to provide answers to human questions on the transcendent and to major questions on life and death. People thus find orientation for their lives within these major religions and belief systems.

In general, Eastern traditions differ from Western traditions. Among Eastern traditions, which have more the character of belief systems than religions, there is Hinduism and Buddhism, but also Confucianism in China, which concentrates on the ethical life, and the animistic and polytheistic Shinto in Japan, which honors and prays to the ancestors. These are known as very old religious traditions in the Eastern part of the world.

The Western traditions are better described as religions than as belief systems. The most important are Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. All three of these religions refer in quite different ways to Abraham (ca. 2000 BCE) as an ideal of a pious and religious person.

Also, Zoroastrianism is counted among the major religious traditions or belief systems. It is considered to be the first monotheistic belief system, with Ahura Mazda as the universal God. But it is also a dualistic system; asha/arta is the principle of “truth” and “order” whereas druj, “lie,” is the opposite. Both principles “fight” against each other in the world. Zoroastrianism was founded by the prophet Zoroaster, or Zarathushtra, in the farmland area of today’s Western Iran. The main teachings of Zoroastrianism can be found in the scripture Zend-Avesta.

In Asia, the Hindu traditions are well known; the religion of the Vedas and the Upanishads is grounded in very old scriptures (e.g., the Bhagavad Gita or “Song of God”). The beginning of these traditions is about 4,000 years BCE in India. The Hindu traditions have a polytheistic basis, with Shiva and Vishnu as the central deities, but only one eternal aim: the unification of the individual soul, atman, with the highest spirit, Brahman . After several lives, the soul can enter the Brahman, leaving the system of reincarnation ( samsara ), if the karma, the balance of all individual actions, is good enough. Five elements are considered to be central for Hindu beliefs: (1) dharma (ethics and duties), (2) samsara (cycle of reincarnation), (3) karma (action and resulting reaction), (4) moksha (liberation from the cycle of rebirth), and (5) yogas (paths and practices). Though it is controversially debated among scholars whether the caste system is an important part of Hindu teaching, this social system remains strong even today. There are four castes, called varnas, beginning with the highest cast: (1) Brahmins (teachers and priests); (2) Kshatriyas (warriors, nobles, and kings); (3) Vaishyas (farmers, merchants, and businessmen); and (4) Shudras (servants and laborers). The caste system is very rigid. Marriage is only possible within one caste. People outside the caste system, Parjanya or Antyaja (or now Dalits), the “untouchables,” have almost no chance to progress in social life. Therefore, this system has often been criticized as discriminatory (e.g., by Mahatma Gandhi [1869–1948], whose ideal was absolute peacefulness).

Also in Asia, the Buddhist tradition is founded on the philosophy of Siddhartha Gautama Buddha (ca. 563–483 BCE), who was a teacher of spiritual wisdom. There are two main traditions in Buddhism: the Mahayana (great vehicle) Buddhism and the Theravada (ancient teaching) Buddhism. A smaller tradition is the Hinayana (low vehicle) Buddhism. Central Buddhist teachings contain the Four Noble Truths: (1) the nature of suffering ( dukkha ), (2) suffering’s origin ( samudaya ), (3) suffering’s cessation ( nirodha ), and (4) the way ( marga ) leading to the cessation of suffering. This “way” (marga) is characterized by the Noble Eightfold Path: (1) right view, (2) right intention (wisdom), (3) right speech, (4) right action, (5) right livelihood (ethical conduct), (6) right effort, (7) right mindfulness, and (8) right concentration (concentration). The Noble Eightfold Path contains the ethical “program” of Buddhism.

One aim of Buddhism is to bring cessation from suffering to the human soul. There are several traditions within Buddhism. Among them, there is Zen Buddhism in Japan and Tibetan Buddhism, whose head is the Dalai Lama. The monastic tradition is also very common in Buddhism, because its discipline helps the adherent to succeed in achieving the aim, the nirvana, as a unity of the individual soul with the universal in the absolute nothingness (nirvana).

The Mosaic tradition, later Judaism, is historically the first major tradition in Western culture. Christianity and Islam followed. In Judaism, humankind has been given the advice to follow God’s law, which was revealed on Mount Sinai, or Horeb to Moses. This revelation took place during the Exodus, the Jews’ escape out of Egyptian slavery. Moses was the leader of the people of Israel during that time. A life in accordance to the law will end up in felicity and prosperity, even after death. The prophets played a major role, because they renewed the concentration on God’s revelation within his law. During the reign of the Babylonian emperor Nebuchadnezzar II (ca. 630–562 BCE), the Jewish people were kidnapped and taken to Babylon. The Babylonian Talmud was written during this time, a commentary on the Torah, with respect to other commentaries and the oral tradition, in order to give a set of rules for everyday life. Literature interpreting the Torah is known as midrash.

When the people of Israel returned to the Holy Land, they built the first temple. In the year 70 CE, the temple was destroyed by the Romans, and the rabbinic phase began in Judaism. Rabbis are teachers of the Holy Scripture and they interpret for believers. They also give advice to pious Jews on how to manage life and how to decide in problematic situations. The halakha means to follow properly the way of the Jewish tradition.

Judaism today is quite various. There are liberal branches, as well as orthodox branches, whose believers observe the traditional religious law very strictly. As predicted in the prophecies of the Hebrew Bible, Jewish people still wait for the Messiah, who will come in the future in order to complete the divine law in his person.

In Christianity, Jesus Christ is believed to be the son of God, who came to redeem people. After the original sin of Adam and Eve, humankind survived for the redemption. The redeemer is Jesus Christ, who was crucified by the Romans after being accused, by the Jews in Jerusalem, of heresy for pretending to be the Messiah, and whose resurrection after 3 days astonished people, especially his own disciples. After another 40 days, Jesus Christ went up into heaven. After another 9 days, the Holy Spirit was sent down to earth in order to lead the faithful and to give consolation to them. God is the Holy Trinity in Christian tradition: God-Father, God-Son, God-Holy-Spirit.

Later, the Christian church developed into a more and more powerful institution, which secures the tradition of belief and teaching. Although crusades have occurred, the Christian doctrine is against force and tends toward peace on earth. In the year 1054 CE, the Eastern Greek Church turned away from the Latin Roman Church with the pope, the bishop of Rome, as Vicar of Christ and head of the church. Formally, there were two reasons for the East-West Schism: First, the Western and the Eastern traditions could not find a proper date for Easter, and second, the Eastern tradition could not agree to the filioque (“and by the Son”) within the credo, the big confession of the faith. The filioque means that the Holy Spirit was sent by the Father and Son together.

In the 16th century, the Protestant Reformation movements began with the Augustinian monk Martin Luther (1483–1546) in Germany, Huldrych Zwingli (1484–1531), and John Calvin (1509–1564) in Switzerland. The theologians Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466 or 1469–1536) and Philipp Melanchthon (1497–1560) both followed the Lutheran teaching and supported the Protestant teaching in the academic sector (e.g., by writing important letters). The Protestant Reformation movements wanted to renew the Western Church (e.g., by providing new translations of the Bible, and a new structure by changing the hierarchy). But in the end, these movements divided the church again as a result of a second big schism. Protestant Christianity then divided again into the many small movements and churches, or denominations, of today.

In 1534, the English Church separated from the Roman Church, and as a result the Church of England or Anglican Church was founded. The king or the queen of England is the head of the Anglican Church, and meanwhile the Archbishop of Canterbury exercises this office worldwide in the Anglican Church (e.g., the Episcopal Church in the USA). Whereas the High Church is near to the Catholic Church, the Low Church is nearer to the Protestant Church. So the Anglican Church regards itself as a “middle way” between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism.

In contrast to Protestantism, the Catholic Church keeps up its 2,000-year-old tradition and discipline, although the Second Ecumenical Council of the Vatican (1962–1965) has changed some elements in this tradition.

Islam was founded by the prophet Muhammad (ca. 570–632 CE), who had a direct revelation from God ( Alla – h ). This revelation is written down in the Koran, the holy book of Islam. In 622 CE, the first year of the Islamic calendar, Muhammad went from Mecca to Medina; this event is called the Hijra, or “walk,” which was the founding act of Islam. Sometime later, Muhammad returned to Mecca with his soldiers and gained a lot of followers and power. Islam regards itself as the final religion, which is based on the ultimate revelation given by God to Muhammad. This revelation gave perfection to the Mosaic and Christian revelation. Muhammad, the prophet of God, is the last and the highest of the prophets.

In the Islamic tradition, on each Friday there is a ritual prayer in the mosque. Ritual prayers are among the most important elements of Islam, the so-called Five Pillars of Islam: (1) fasting in the month of Ramadan, (2) the pilgrimage to Mecca (hajj), (3) ritual prayers (salát) several times a day, (4) charity (e.g., giving money to the poor), and (5) the profession of faith. Also, the observance of religious law (sharia), which contains rules for all areas of human life, is central to Islamic teaching. Islam is a religion or belief system of strict discipline, and it has gained a lot of influence in the states of both the Near East and the Middle East, as well as in Indonesia and Africa.

Each major religion or belief system knows certain objects and symbols, as well as rites. The rite is often connected with specific objects or symbols. In Buddhism, for instance, the wheel is a symbol of the recurrence of life and, more important, the Noble Eightfold Path. In the Mosaic tradition, the Star of David is the central symbol of identification. In Christianity, the cross, on which Christ was sacrificed, is the core symbol. And in the Islamic tradition, the half moon, as well as the sword, is central.

Symbols serve to give meaning to rites. In Jewish service, for example, the scrolls of the Torah must not be touched by humans, because they are absolutely sacred and represent God’s presence. Therefore signs exist, sometimes formed like a human hand, with which the scrolls of the Torah can be touched in order to follow the lines, which have to be cited. Another symbol in Jewish service is the shofar, a horn (e.g., from a ram, which is blown in preparation for and during Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, when humans reconcile with God). Yom Kippur is celebrated 10 days after Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year.

In the Catholic Holy Mass, wine and bread are leavened and then transubstantiated into the blood and body of Christ as an unbloody renewal of the Crucifixion of Christ. The Host is then essentially Christ, and it is carefully venerated and adored. Also, the Virgin Mary is venerated in the Catholic faith as the Mother of Jesus Christ (i.e., the Mother of God). In the Protestant traditions, the transubstantiation is interpreted in a different way. The essential real presence of Christ is limited to the moment of the transubstantiation. Also, the veneration of the Virgin Mary and the saints is not common in the Protestant tradition. In order to venerate the Corpus Christi (body of Christ), the Virgin Mary, or the saints, there are often processions of Christians, especially in the Catholic tradition.

The pilgrimage ( hajj ) to Mecca, one of the holy cities of Islam, has its aim in circling around the Kaaba, or “cube.” The Kaaba is a thousand-year-old small building and the most sacred place in Islam. In the Eastern corner of the Kaaba, there is the Black Stone, the most important feature of the “cube.” All Muslims pray in the direction of Mecca, as it is the center of Islam.

Also, ritual dances or specific music or songs help to bring people into a state of mind that leads them toward a deeper understanding of the transcendent. The location for rites is, in most cases, a sacred place or a temple (in Christianity, a church), which can be seen as the house of God. These “houses of God or gods” attach a specific place to religions or beliefs, thereby providing an identity for them; also, they provide a meeting point for the believers as a kind of “home.”

Religions and belief systems express themselves in teachings, on the one hand manifested by oral traditions and on the other by sacred manuscripts. The basis for most of the teachings is a divine revelation.

The most common religious manuscript in our times is the Holy Bible, the “book of books.” But in the Far East, we have a lively tradition of Holy Scriptures: In the Vedas and Upanishads, Indian religious wisdom is written down, as in the Bhagavad Gita, or Song of God, as mentioned earlier. In the Bhagavad Gita, Sanjaya, who has a supernatural eye, tells the blind-born king Dhritarashtra about the big battle (between the near-related royal families of the Pandavas and Kauravas) that took place in the region where now the city of Delhi is located.

Judaism and Christianity refer in different ways to the Holy Bible. The Mosaic tradition is based on the five books of Moses, the Mosaic law or the Torah, the books of the prophets, and the psalms. Another important writing of Jewish tradition is The Guide of the Perplexed by Moses Maimonides (ca. 1135–1204), which considers religious and philosophical aspects, and helps to interpret the Jewish law properly. Maimonides’s influence on Jewish thinking still remains intense. Christianity is also based on the Old Testament, partly equivalent to the Hebrew Bible ( Tanakh ), but also on the New Testament: the Four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, the Epistles of Saint Paul, and the General or Catholic Epistles, as well as the Apocalypse of Saint John.

In the Koran, or “the recitation,” the holy book of Islam, the revelation to Muhammad resulted in the central teachings of Islam, which are the core of the religious law, the sharia. Furthermore, the sunna, the history of the life of Muhammad, is the model of a good life for a Muslim. In Islam, the religious law, the sharia, has a great meaning, so the most important religious leaders are judges.

Teachings of all religions provide explanations for the beginning of the universe, as in Genesis, the first book of the bible, moral teachings, and orders for a good life, which must match the will of God. These moral teachings belong to the realm of natural rights, which are similar in all religions and belief systems and their teachings. Natural rights follow human nature and therefore human rationality. Religious teachings give answers to crucial human questions concerning the universe, ethical problems, and life and death.

In the field of religions and beliefs, many fruitful future research areas can be found. The humanities, especially the studies of religion, which are linked to anthropological and sociocultural research, create new research areas: using the structuralistic method of the French ethnologist Claude Lévi-Strauss, rituals are analyzed in order to discover the common structures of rituals in different religions or beliefs. Furthermore, the discourse of religions and beliefs are examined as well. Therefore, the dynamics and controversies within this discursive process are analyzed and described in order to obtain more results concerning the relationship between different religions and belief systems.

Also, the aesthetics of religions or beliefs are currently under scrutiny. Religions and beliefs can be described as aesthetical systems or systems of symbols, which influence the human realization of reality. The aesthetics of religion build up a systematic coherence for religions and belief systems. Another field of interest is the influence of religions and beliefs on different human societies and politics, because religions and belief systems provide ethical rules and values. Psychological studies examine the inner processes caused by the personal beliefs of a human being, for example during religious examinations, such as prayers or meditations. Very important for future research on religion is the investigation of human nature. All religions or belief systems provide concepts of human nature. This question of human nature is important for answering many questions and solving many problems in terms of the sciences in the future (e.g., in human-genetics research).

Also, in philosophy and theology, there are new areas of research, especially the examination of the relationship between rationality and religion or belief. For example, the context of metaphysical considerations of late antiquity and the appearance of Christian revelation in the first centuries, beginning with early Fathers of the Church like Origen (185–254 CE) and ending with Saint Augustine (354–430 CE). During that time, theology has its origins in the confrontation of philosophy and religion. A major rational concentration on religious thoughts can be found in the Middle Ages (e.g., in the Summa Theologica, written from 1264–1274, of Saint Thomas Aquinas). The rationalism of the European Enlightenment emphasized critical views grounded in logic and nature. After rationalism, German idealism included religion systematically within philosophy as a philosophical perfection of the spirit. The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) understood his philosophical work as a negative profile of religion in contrast to Christian thinking, which, he posited, is not suitable to human nature. But in the 20th and 21st centuries, religions and beliefs soon came back to the intellectual agenda. Therefore, religions and beliefs are truly fruitful objects for future research, as well as for anthropological research.

Summing up, the following three points are important for an anthropological perspective of religions and beliefs:

• Religions and belief systems want to give humans aspecial place in the universe and within reality itself, which is of course a different orientation from the scientific worldview, but nevertheless one way to consider the universe and humans within it.
• People may not want to refer to religion or beliefs assomething entirely made by humans. For many people, religions and beliefs should include a serious transcendental relationship (e.g., based on a revelation). Otherwise, religion is in danger of becoming an ideology, which may lead people to the use of force and cruelty, as in totalitarian political systems. Such systems are often characterized as political religions, like fascism, national socialism, or communism.
• Moreover, religions and belief systems need not be rigidsystems of moral teachings in order to suppress others. Religions offer guidelines for life respecting the truth, with the aim being a future life (of the soul) in truth and peace. In religions and belief systems, people want to live their lives in accordance with God, as fruitful and successful individuals. And, what is more, people want to gain the hope for eternal life or redemption after death, which thereby gives a meaningful sense to human existence, like a gate to paradise, near to God or the transcendent.

Religions and beliefs belong to many fields in the humanities: theology, philosophy, sociology, history, religious studies, and psychology (among others). It is very important that, in many perspectives on human life, religion and belief play a role as an answer to the question of the sense of human life and death. In religions and belief systems, humans seek answers to many other questions as well, especially in terms of ethical questions and the question of a good life. As a result, religions and belief systems play a major role within anthropological considerations of any kind.

Bibliography:

• Adair, J. R. (2008). Introducing Christianity. New York: Routledge.
• Ankerberg, J., & Weldon, J. (2008). The facts on world religions. Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers.
• Aron, R. (1968). Democracy and totalitarianism (V. Ionescu, Trans.). London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. (Original work published 1965)
• Brague, R. (2003). The wisdom of the world: The human experience of the universe in Western thought (T. L. Fagan, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Brague, R. (2007). The Law of God: The philosophical history of an idea (L. G. Cochrane, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Comfort, R. (2008). World religions in a nutshell. Alachua, FL: Bridge-Logos.
• Cowan, D. E., & Bromley, D. G. (2007). Cults and new religions: A brief history. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
• D’Amato, S. E. (2006). Myths and mythology. In H. J. Birx (Ed.), Encyclopedia of anthropology (Vol. 4, pp. 1657–1661). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Eliade, M. (1959). The sacred and the profane: The nature of religion. New York: Harcourt, Brace. (Original work published 1957)
• Geertz, C. (1975). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. London: Hutchinson.
• Geertz, C. (2008). Religion. In P. A. Moro, J. E. Myers, & A. C. Lehmann (Eds.), Magic, witchcraft, and religion: An anthropological study of the supernatural (7th ed., pp. 6–15). New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Guardini, R. (1998). Eternal life: What you need to know about death, judgment, and life everlasting. Manchester, NH: Sophia Institute Press. (Original work published 1940)
• Hick, J. (2005). An interpretation of religion: Human responses to the transcendent (2nd ed.). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Johnson, P. G. (1997). God and world religions: Basic beliefs and themes. Shippensburg, PA: Ragged Edge Press.
• Jones, R. R. (2006). Religion and anthropology. In H. J. Birx (Ed.), Encyclopedia of anthropology (Vol. 5, pp. 2003–2006). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Kant, I. (1998). Religion within the boundaries of mere reason and other writings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1793)
• Lamb, R. (2006). Religious rituals. In H. J. Birx (Ed.), Encyclopedia of anthropology (Vol. 5, pp. 2011–2014). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Lévi-Strauss, C. (1983). Structural anthropology (M. Layton, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Maier, H. (Ed.). (2004–2007). Totalitarianism and political religions (3 vols; J. Bruhn, Trans.). New York: Routledge.
• McGrath, A. E. (2007). Christian theology: An introduction (4th ed.) . Malden, MA: Blackwell.
• Meister, C., & Copan, P. (Eds.). (2007). The Routledge companion to philosophy of religion. New York: Routledge.
• Mitchell, D. W. (2008). Buddhism: Introducing the Buddhist experience (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Moro, P. A., Myers, J. E., & Lehmann, A. C. (Eds.). (2008). Magic, witchcraft, and religion: An anthropological study of the supernatural (7th ed.) . New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Morris, B. (2006). Religion and anthropology: A critical introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Nigosian, S. A. (2008). World religions: A historical approach (4th ed.). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s.
• Otto, R. (1925). The idea of the holy: An inquiry into the nonrational factor in the idea of the divine and its relation to the rational. New York: Oxford University Press. (Original work published 1917)
• Rodrigues, H., & Harding, J. (Eds.). (2008). Introduction to the study of religion. New York: Routledge.
• Schleiermacher, F. D. E. (1996). On religion: Speeches to its cultured despisers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1967)
• Segal, E. (2008). Introducing Judaism. New York: Routledge.
• Seitschek, H. O. (2006). Religion. In H. J. Birx (Ed.), Encyclopedia of anthropology (Vol. 5, pp. 1998–2003). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Tillich, P. (1988). Main works: Writings on religions (Vol. 5). Berlin: de Gruyter. (Original works published 1955, 1961)
• Troeltsch, E. (1981). The social teaching of the Christian churches. With an introduction by H. Richard Niebuhr (O. Wyon, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1912)
• Voegelin, E. (1999). Modernity without restraint. Edited with an introduction by Manfred Henningsen. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press. (Original work published 1938)
• Williams, J. (2008). Islam: Understanding the history, beliefs, and culture. Berkeley Heights, NJ: Enslow.
• Wittgenstein, L. (2001). Philosophical investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. (Original work published 1953)
• Young, S. (2007). New York: Marshall Cavendish Benchmark.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

Read our research on: Abortion | Podcasts | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

8 in 10 americans say religion is losing influence in public life, few see biden or trump as especially religious.

Pew Research Center conducted this survey to explore Americans’ attitudes about religion’s role in public life, including politics in a presidential election year.

For this report, we surveyed 12,693 respondents from Feb. 13 to 25, 2024. Most of the respondents (10,642) are members of the American Trends Panel, an online survey panel recruited through national random sampling of residential addresses, which gives nearly all U.S. adults a chance of selection.

The remaining respondents (2,051) are members of three other panels, the Ipsos KnowledgePanel, the NORC Amerispeak panel and the SSRS opinion panel. All three are national survey panels recruited through random sampling (not “opt-in” polls). We used these additional panels to ensure that the survey would have enough Jewish and Muslim respondents to be able to report on their views.

The survey is weighted to be representative of the U.S. adult population by gender, race, ethnicity, partisan affiliation, education, religious affiliation and other categories.

For more, refer to the ATP’s Methodology and the Methodology for this report. Read the questions used in this report .

A new Pew Research Center survey finds that 80% of U.S. adults say religion’s role in American life is shrinking – a percentage that’s as high as it’s ever been in our surveys.

Most Americans who say religion’s influence is shrinking are not happy about it. Overall, 49% of U.S. adults say both that religion is losing influence and that this is a bad thing. An additional 8% of U.S. adults think religion’s influence is growing and that this is a good thing.

Together, a combined 57% of U.S adults – a clear majority – express a positive view of religion’s influence on American life.

The survey also finds that about half of U.S. adults say it’s “very” or “somewhat” important to them to have a president who has strong religious beliefs, even if those beliefs are different from their own. But relatively few Americans view either of the leading presidential candidates as very religious: 13% of Americans say they think President Joe Biden is very religious, and just 4% say this about former President Donald Trump.

Overall, there are widespread signs of unease with religion’s trajectory in American life. This dissatisfaction is not just among religious Americans. Rather, many religious and nonreligious Americans say they feel that their religious beliefs put them at odds with mainstream culture, with the people around them and with the other side of the political spectrum. For example:

• 48% of U.S. adults say there’s “a great deal” of or “some” conflict between their religious beliefs and mainstream American culture, up from 42% in 2020.
• 29% say they think of themselves as religious minorities, up from 24% in 2020.
• 41% say it’s best to avoid discussing religion at all if someone disagrees with you, up from 33% in 2019.
• 72% of religiously unaffiliated adults – those who identify, religiously, as atheist, agnostic or “nothing in particular” – say conservative Christians have gone too far in trying to control religion in the government and public schools; 63% of Christians say the same about secular liberals.

These are among the key findings of a new Pew Research Center survey, conducted Feb. 13-25, 2024, among a nationally representative sample of 12,693 U.S. adults.

This report examines:

• Religion’s role in public life
• U.S. presidential candidates and their religious engagement
• Christianity’s place in politics, and “Christian nationalism”

The survey also finds wide partisan gaps on questions about the proper role for religion in society, with Republicans more likely than Democrats to favor religious influence in governance and public life. For instance:

• 42% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say that when the Bible and the will of the people conflict, the Bible should have more influence on U.S. laws than the will of the people. Just 16% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say this.
• 21% of Republicans and GOP leaners say the federal government should declare Christianity the official religion of the United States, compared with 7% of Democrats and Democratic leaners.

Moral and religious qualities in a president

Almost all Americans (94%) say it is “very” or “somewhat” important to have a president who personally lives a moral and ethical life. And a majority (64%) say it’s important to have a president who stands up for people with their religious beliefs.

About half of U.S. adults (48%) say it is important for the president to hold strong religious beliefs. Fewer (37%) say it’s important for the president to have the same religious beliefs as their own.

Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to value religious qualities in a president, and Christians are more likely than the religiously unaffiliated to do so. For example:

• Republicans and GOP leaners are twice as likely as Democrats and Democratic leaners to say it is important to have a president who has the same religious beliefs they do (51% vs. 25%).
• 70% of White evangelical Protestants say it is important to have a president who shares their religious beliefs. Just 11% of religiously unaffiliated Americans say this.

Views of Biden, Trump and their religious engagement

Relatively few Americans think of Biden or Trump as “very” religious. Indeed, even most Republicans don’t think Trump is very religious, and even most Democrats don’t think Biden is very religious.

• 6% of Republicans and GOP leaners say Trump is very religious, while 44% say he is “somewhat” religious. Nearly half (48%) say he is “not too” or “not at all” religious.
• 23% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents say Biden is very religious, while 55% say he is somewhat religious. And 21% say he is not too or not at all religious.

Though they don’t think Trump is very religious himself, most Republicans and people in religious groups that tend to favor the Republican Party do think he stands up at least to some extent for people with their religious beliefs. Two-thirds of Republicans and independents who lean toward the GOP (67%) say Trump stands up for people with their religious beliefs “a great deal,” “quite a bit” or “some.” About the same share of White evangelical Protestants (69%) say this about Trump.

Similarly, 60% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents, as well as 73% of Jewish Americans and 60% of Black Protestants, say Biden stands up for people with their religious beliefs a great deal, quite a bit or some.

Overall, views of both Trump and Biden are generally unfavorable.

• White evangelical Protestants – a largely Republican group – stand out as having particularly favorable views of Trump (67%) and unfavorable views of Biden (86%).
• Black Protestants and Jewish Americans – largely Democratic groups – stand out for having favorable views of Biden and unfavorable views of Trump.

Views on trying to control religious values in the government and schools

Americans are almost equally split on whether conservative Christians have gone too far in trying to push their religious values in the government and public schools, as well as on whether secular liberals have gone too far in trying to keep religious values out of these institutions.

Most religiously unaffiliated Americans (72%) and Democrats (72%) say conservative Christians have gone too far. And most Christians (63%) and Republicans (76%) say secular liberals have gone too far.

Christianity’s place in politics, and Christian nationalism

In recent years, “Christian nationalism” has received a great deal of attention as an ideology that some critics have said could threaten American democracy .

Despite growing news coverage of Christian nationalism – including reports of political leaders who seem to endorse the concept – the new survey shows that there has been no change in the share of Americans who have heard of Christian nationalism over the past year and a half. Similarly, the new survey finds no change in how favorably U.S. adults view Christian nationalism.

Overall, 45% say they have heard or read about Christian nationalism, including 25% who also have an unfavorable view of it and 5% who have a favorable view of it. Meanwhile, 54% of Americans say they haven’t heard of Christian nationalism at all.

One element often associated with Christian nationalism is the idea that church and state should not be separated, despite the Establishment Clause in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The survey finds that about half of Americans (49%) say the Bible should have “a great deal” of or “some” influence on U.S. laws, while another half (51%) say it should have “not much” or “no influence.” And 28% of U.S. adults say the Bible should have more influence than the will of the people if the two conflict. These numbers have remained virtually unchanged over the past four years.

In the new survey, 16% of U.S. adults say the government should stop enforcing the separation of church and state. This is little changed since 2021.

In response to a separate question, 13% of U.S. adults say the federal government should declare Christianity the official religion of the U.S., and 44% say the government should not declare the country a Christian nation but should promote Christian moral values. Meanwhile, 39% say the government should not elevate Christianity in either way. 1

Overall, 3% of U.S. adults say the Bible should have more influence on U.S. laws than the will of the people; and that the government should stop enforcing separation of church and state; and that Christianity should be declared the country’s official religion. And 13% of U.S. adults endorse two of these three statements. Roughly one-fifth of the public (22%) expresses one of these three views that are often associated with Christian nationalism. The majority (62%) expresses none.

Guide to this report

The remainder of this report describes these findings in additional detail.  Chapter 1  focuses on the public’s perceptions of religion’s role in public life. Chapter 2  examines views of presidential candidates and their religious engagement. And  Chapter 3  focuses on Christian nationalism and views of the U.S. as a Christian nation.

• The share saying that the government should declare Christianity the official national religion (13%) is almost identical to the share who said the government should declare the U.S. a Christian nation in a March 2021 survey that asked a similar question (15%). ↩

Sign up for our Religion newsletter

Sent weekly on Wednesday

Report Materials

Table of contents, 5 facts about religion and americans’ views of donald trump, u.s. christians more likely than ‘nones’ to say situation at the border is a crisis, from businesses and banks to colleges and churches: americans’ views of u.s. institutions, most u.s. parents pass along their religion and politics to their children, growing share of americans see the supreme court as ‘friendly’ toward religion, most popular.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .