Thank you, @Zest, your article made me think and also feel that you provide here a very unagitated view of religion (magic & supernatural). Sorry for my long comment, but I felt triggered by your words.

I grew up in a community where my people were and are Christians.

Even as a child I noticed that my mother tried to convince me too much of her faith and the methods made me suspicious. I felt that certain rules of conduct were connected with it, which were not always observed by me as continuous and I rejected the belief in a fatherly God who wanted to love as well as punish. For me, the Christian faith was for a long time not much more than a naive concept to compensate for the pain about the transience of life. I became a casual atheist.

On the other hand, I suspect, the Christian faith led me to take a deeper look at the subject, because I had experienced that the community approached me in a way that was not accepted by me, but in the face of practicing faith it became secondary.

Rather, I began to be interested in where the influence in practice showed its positive side. Today I believe that this has had a positive influence on me to a large extent because the practical treatment of the sick, the elderly and the dying takes place in an empathetic and interested way by the members of my congregation. As awkward as the proselytizing attempts were for me verbal, so strong were the actions based on faith and acting accordingly.

I have therefore dropped all scorn and realized that the way my people deal with the important things of life (the way they deal with death) offers a healthy spiritual form that I have not yet seen in anyone who has not found refuge in any way in connection with a spiritual/heartful/mindful form of contemplation. Consolation and confidence are aspects that oppose those of hopelessness and despair.

For me, atheism does not have much more to offer in this respect, because I do not see in it the same practical approach as I have experienced through my Christian heritage.

The need for community. All theorists seem to agree on one thing, regardless of the different beliefs and rituals, religion satisfies certain psychological needs common to all people.

What you describe, I interpret and add from it the following and quote the Buddhist teachings:

1. a role model is needed on which people want to orientate themselves (because the people we know are all labeled with blemishes and are therefore not ideal) - in this case the figure of the "Buddha".

2. there needs to be a teaching - this is called "Dharma" or "Dhamma" by the Buddhists - a coherent, logical and largely self-evident concept which Buddhists impart as "verifiable" - no higher authority and creation theory is behind it.

3. social involvement (community) and friends who talk to you about their practices and insights and reflect in the dialogue on the state of their knowledge (= valuable conversations) - this is called "Sangha" by the Buddhists.

I am therefore more oriented towards the "function" of religion you mentioned, not so much towards theoretical speaking to people who are merely superficially concerned with it. For my part, I always associate function with the practical aspect of "what can I derive from religion or magic" and where do I see the useful and helpful aspects in people's daily lives. As humans are humans, I guess, there are and always were all kinds of manipulations involved, to the bad and to the good.