Religion & Conflict

The recent AWARE saga reminded me of the essay I wrote earlier this semester for my religious studies module. The question was "Religion is inherently divisive and leads to conflict. Do you agree? Assess this issue using a specific example and/or case study of religious conflict in the world today."

In my essay, I argued that religions are inherently exclusive and thus exclusive, but they do not necessarily lead to conflict. I used simple logic and Dr Thio Li-Ann's argument of 'intolerance from within' to defend exclusivism. Also, I selected Singapore as an example of a multi-religious state to back up my argument. Here's Dr. J's evaluation of the essay:

My sense of your argument is that you're advocating the primacy and transcendence of state ideology over any form of religious exclusivism. Do you think that withou state intervention & proactiveness, the 'natural' state of exclusivism is towards violence? In any case, you've chosen a good example to demonstrate the efficacy of state ideology over religious exclusivism. This is a very refined and well researched effort. You had some very good sub-headings, why did you not have a main title?

Yesterday, Dr John Chew, Archbishop of the Anglican Church in Singapore issued a statement that churches should not get involved into the matter. It was seconded by DPM Wong Kan Seng and many religious leaders from other faiths. In congruence with the essay I wrote, I got the sense that the Archbishop is also saying that state ideology should be over and above any religious beliefs. Thinking deeper, I found myself asking, "Should that be the case? I mean, which should be the higher commandment? The state's or God's?"

Disclaimer: It is not my intention to contradict the Archbishop or to undermine his authority. I'm just wondering what spurred him to make that statement. Personally, I haven't arrived at a satisfactory answer. I still thinking. What do you think?