Abstract

The 21st century has been witness to the proliferation of religious extremist groups and terrorist attacks committed by these groups. Much ink has therefore been spilled discussing the notion of religious violence, what it consists of, why it exists, and whether or not it should be understood as being particularly dangerous. In response to these inquiries, William T. Cavanaugh, a Catholic priest and theologian, has sought to deconstruct the notion of religious violence. Cavanaugh has argued that the term religious violence portrays acts of violence committed by religious groups as solely being the product of their religious beliefs, when such a thing is far from the truth, as no act of violence can take place in isolation. This thesis will prove Cavanaugh’s central argument correct through an analysis of 3 case studies that are typically understood as being significant acts of religious violence, the Jonestown massacre of 1978, the conflict at Waco between the FBI/BATF and the Branch Davidians in 1993, and the release of Sarin gas onto the Tokyo subway system in 1995 by the group Aum Shinrikyo. By analyzing these 3 case studies through Cavanaugh’s theoretical lens, this thesis will argue that the case studies in question should not be understood as incidents of religious violence, as to do so would be to ignore the fact that the violence undertaken was the product years of latent tension between secular authorities and the religious groups in question for reasons that had little to do with religious beliefs.