Welcome to Religião Dita e Feita (Religion, Said and Done)

 Hello. 

Welcome to the blog Religion, Said and Done. The idea behind the title is that the theme of religion here will prioritize behaviour, not the ideals and normative definitions of religious authorities and institutions. The blog's focus is social-scientific. But there is lots of room, here. For the social sciences (sociology, anthropology, political science), for the human sciences (philosophy, history, geography) and for academic theology (sorry, but ecclesiastical theology or the perspective of religious leaders - in the case of religions without "a church", cannot be incorporated here, because we cannot go into the merit of their claims to truth, adhesion, assent, obedience).

Much of what will be posted here will have to do with the relationship between religion and politics. What is said and what is done. Especially, we will see the inseparability of saying and doing: even when nothing is said, it is always about doing something that makes sense, communicates, wants to persuade, wants to mobilize. Thus, we take the conjunction "and" in "Religion Said and Done" very seriously. Among other things, it means that saying is doing, that doing is saying. It also means that we intend to portray and discuss religion as a practice. Practice is not just what is done. You can already understand, right? Speaking of "practice" here points in another direction: no matter how much our relationship with religion (any religion, whatever we mean by that word) expresses feelings, emotions and more or less active adherence, we are interested in the analysis of religious and irreligious behaviour. We leave clerics, priests, gurus and other authorities the responsibility to show the way, to evaluate authenticity and to exercise discipline over practitioners of their religions.

Religion Said and Done is radically committed to religious pluralism and a non-secularist secularity of the state, understood in two very important ways: (a) our societies are plural, but they need to learn how to value plurality and not entrust the state with the task of adjudicating their divergences of belief and values; (b) our societies must have a place for any and all religion to express itself and present itself in the public space, build representation, influence policies and legislation, but none has the right to impose itself as a model of what religion or society is or should be, through the legislative, executive or repressive arms of the state. Thus, religion and politics are about public practices. The talk of "private belief" to curb the public expression of religions does not make sense. And that goes for the latter, too. On the other hand, in a plural and democratic society, the state can only be at the service of what does justice to all groups and organizations. We reject the instrumentalisation of the state in the name of self-defined majorities or self-imposed minorities.

We wish to speak in the most jargon-free way, to receive comments from a wide, well-informed, but not necessarily academic, audience. But we will not restrict theoretical, conceptual discussions, however abstract. In that case, no one is obliged to read or comment. But it is not right to censor those who like the more "ethereal" discussions. After all, speaking of religion, these are always around, right?

The blog is also open to contributions in other languages. But there will only be real dialogue in Portuguese, English and Spanish. We believe that this covers as many potential collaborations and interlocutions as possible, anyway.

Enjoy it!