PAGE 1

Religions as Complex Adaptive System Reacting to the

End of Cold War: A Comparative Study of Romanian
Orthodoxy and Mongolian Shamanism

Andrei-Razvan COLTEA

1) Can religion be understood as a complex adaptive system, and, if so, what

are its composition, sructure and dynamic mechanisms?

2) What is the impact of strong stressors (political pressure, pandemics) on

religious complex adaptive systems?

3) Does secularization theory accurately describes the general evolutionary

pattern of religious systems in the modern world, especially after the end
of the Cold War?

PAGE 2
CONTENT

CHAPTER I – What Complex Adaptive Systems are and how they behave. Religions as
complex adaptive systems, their function, dynamic and predictability of change. A
presentation of the relevant features of complex systems and explaining why the complexity
framework is crucial for understanding social phenomena, followed by a demonstration of
the compatibility of religions with the complexity theory: why they can be considered
complex adaptive systems, what are their components and how are they structured. Finally,
an analysis of why and how religious complex adaptive systems change, their reactions to
different types of stressors and the exploration of the possibility to predict their behavior.

“Mankind is at a turning point, the beginning of a new rationality in which science is no longer
identified with certitude and probability with ignorance” (Prigogine, Ilya, The End of Certainty,
p.7).
“We come from a social past of conflicting certitudes, be they related to science, ethics or social
systems, to a present of considerable questioning, including questioning about the possibility of
certainties. Perhaps we are witnessing the end of a type of rationality that is no longer
appropriate to our time. The accent we call for is one placed on the complex, the temporal, and
the unstable, which corresponds today to a trans-disciplinary movement gaining in vigour.”
(Gulbenkian Commission, 1996, 79)

PAGE 3

Measuring Systemic Variables: RITUAL PARTICIPATION (church attendance, prayer

frequency, pilgrimages etc.), BELIEF IN SUPERNATURAL AGENTS (a measure of
religiosity), KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF IN MYTHS (creation, eschatological etc.),
FOLLOWING OF TABOOS , TRUST IN RELIGIOUS AUTHORITY AND INSTITUTIONAL
ASPECTS OF THE RELIGIOUS SYSTEM, ADHERENCE TO DOCTRINALLY VALIDATED
AFTERLIFE BELIEF

PAGE 4

CHAPTER II – Religious Systems under Socialist Regimes. A comparative historical

analysis of the impact that socialist regimes had on religious systems in the 20 th century,
ending with a focus on the comparison between Romania and Mongolia.
 PAGE 5

CHAPTER III – Case study: Romanian Orthodox Church at the end of the Cold War. A
description of the development of the Romanian Orthodox Christianity after 1989, a stress
test to determine the fragility of the system and, last but not least, an analysis of the data
collected through interviews.
 PAGE 6

CHAPTER IV – Case study: Mongolian shamanism at the end and after the Cold War. A
history of shamanism in post-1990 Mongolia, a stress test to determine the system’s fragility
followed by an assessment of the impact that the end of the Cold War had on the Mongolians’
belief system based on interviews and data analysis.
 PAGE 7

CHAPTER V – Similarities and differences between the way Romanian Orthodoxy and
Mongolian Shamanism adapted to the end of the Cold War. A critique of the
secularization theory from the perspective of Complex Systems Theory. Drawing a
conclusive comparison between the two cases and using it to support the attempt to provide
an answer to the question: Is complexity a better paradigm than secularization theory to
understand the processes of religious (de)privatization and globalization and, if so, how does
it explain the post-Cold War evolution of religious systems better than existing theories?

PAGE 8

HOW TO MEASURE FRAGILITY

A) Doctrinal inflexibility, or specificity

B) Centralization makes systems prone to doctrinal inflexibility, concentration
of responsibility and risk, decreased adaptability.

C) Coupling refers to the linking of systems (such as political and religious).

Systemic malfunctioning can be contagious
D) Entropy refers to the increase in complexity of systems over time. In doing
 so they lose the ability to use information to transform inputs into desired
outputs
E) Monotonicity refers to the inability of learning from past mistakes and
modifying the response to stressors.
F) Stress starvation means withholding stress from systems, thus increasing
their fragility .

PAGE 9

PRIMARY SOURCES
Official Archives: ANCSAS and ANIC Archive Documents, Church Archives
Legislation: Official Journal of Romania’ 1949-2020
Official Church Bulletins: Biserica Ortodoxa Romana 1949-2020– Official Bulletin of the
Romanian Orthodox Church
Newspaper Archives: ‘Romania Libera’ and ‘Evenimentul Zilei’ newspaper archives 1990-
2020
Semi-structured Interviews: Romanian Orthodox Priests, Shamans, Religious Practitioners in
Romania and Mongolia

PAGE 10

Thank you!