Out of the four theories we have studied, I agree most with Durkheim. His definition was a unified system of beliefs and practices (ceremonies and rituals) relative to sacred things, things forbidden. This is how I view Christianity. My faith is very important to me and Durkheim’s view is the most parallel. There are two different practices that Durkheim is talking about. Rites and rituals. Rites happen one time and rituals happen multiple times. In my faith, there are many of both. A rite would be baptism and rituals could be holidays or communion. Out of the four theories, Durkheim is the only one who acknowledged sacred things. That is the biggest part to Christianity: acknowledging there is a God and believing in Him.
I don’t agree with Frazer because I think there is too much faith in science. I think he is missing a step and it is truly hard for me to believe that someday, humanity will just abandoned religion for science. Science still cannot explain everything. Therefor, humans are going to need something to believe in.
Freud believed religion was superstition and that it was created to absolve Oedipal guilt. I disagree with Freud the most. I personally think his logic of a woman having penis envy or a man wanting to kill his dad and sleep with his mom is absurdity. (I’m sure if we were engaging in conversation, he we would firmly disagree). I agree that humans may be driven by sex, but I think he might have been slightly off track.
Marx believed religion is a “belief system whose chief purpose is simply to provide reasons for keeping things in society just the way the oppressors like them.” I don’t agree with this one because he says nothing about internal faith. Religion is not solely about rules and societal norms.
I give credit to all of them for expanding in depth on religion and society, but I have to agree with Durkheim and his definition of religion.