Nonfirmands: Danish youth who choose not to have a Lutheran confirmation

Most Danish youth participate in the traditional Lutheran ritual of confirmation. However, a growing minority does not. Based on survey data collected in 2011 from over 600 Danish pupils, this study examines the ways in which Danish ‘nonfirmands’ are different from their peers who participate in confirmation in relation to religious background, personal religious beliefs, intellectual engagement, and demographic factors. We further explore key motivations for ‘nonfirmation’ expressed by the nonfirmands in the sample. Broadly speaking, our findings highlight secular socialization and individual beliefs about God as key elements in understanding the nonfirmand and his or her reasons for opting out of confirmation. We expect confirmations to continue to decline in popularity as nonfirmation gains social acceptance, as nonfirmands raise their own children, and as Denmark becomes increasingly secular.     

Editorial

In this issue of Religion State &;Society Alexander Agadjanian writes about the first attempt by an Orthodox Church to outline a ‘social doctrine’, in the form of the Foundations for a Social Concept for the Russian Orthodox Church (FSC), produced by a Bishops' Council of the church in 2000. Agadjanian describes the Russian Orthodox Church as ‘facing a classical problem of religious ecology: how to respond to constant changes in the Lebenswelt, the surrounding social world, while still retaining a cognitive identity and institutional vitality’, and he finds the FSC to be a ‘torn and polyphonic document’, in which a ‘pro-world stance, affirmed in the beginning, is constantly questioned through the rest of the text’, and in which affirmation of the dignity of the individual turns out to be in the context of the church protecting the individual in his or her need to resist ‘an expanding godless civilisation’. One Russian commentator on the document soon after it appeared went so far as to say that it showed that ‘all possible forms of social existence of the church in a modern secularised society are in fact in contradiction with the sacral concept of social life which is deeply rooted in Orthodoxy’. This is the first time the Russian Orthodox Church has attempted the official formulation of a social doctrine; however, from the mid-nineteenth century until the 1920s, and thereafter in exile, successive Russian Orthodox thinkers and social activists grappled with the very question of how Orthodoxy was to respond to the changing social, economic and political environment. One fertile concept, first formulated by Aleksei Khomyakov in the 1840s, was that of ‘sobornost’', often translated as ‘individual diversity in free unity’, and based on the insight that human social relationships are a manifestation of love and analogous to the relationship amongst the three Persons of the Trinity. Agadjanian draws attention to one fact that appears particularly puzzling. In the FSC no reference is made to sobornost'; much less is there any attempt to deploy it as a conceptual tool in the shaping of a social doctrine for the Orthodox Church. Why should this be?     

Religion,Culture and the Shaping of Religious Attitudes: The Case of Islam

That we live in a world of racial, cultural, ideological and religious differences is a fact of existence. Our awareness of this is not new. What is new, however, is the growing appreciation of these differences and the realization that in a significant sense difference is creative and so must be celebrated. Nevertheless, difference is also challenging. At the present time, no student of religion can avoid asking the pressing question of what attitude to take towards people of ‘other’ religious traditions. This article will investigate how this question has been approached within the culture(s) of Islam. It will argue that the attitude of Muslims towards the people of other religious traditions is not fixed, even within the same time and place. The current context of society and the state of affairs (social, political, demographic, etc.) affects this doctrine.     

Keeping People In or Out?

Abstract : In this article I argue that the Lutheran doctrine of two kingdoms provides a good basis for the legitimate participation of all citizens in political discourse and decisions, no matter what faith they hold. The argument is backed by selected insights from philosopher Jürgen Habermas and sociologists Linda Woodhead and Paul Heelas. Against this backdrop, I suggest some challenges for a theology that addresses issues related to religion and society.     

Religious Perspectives on Abortion and a Secular Response

This paper concerns the medical, religious, and social discourse around abortion. The primary goal of this paper is to better understand how seven of the world’s major religious traditions (Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist, Confucian, and Hindu) address abortion ‘in the clinic’. We do not aim to critique these commentaries but to draw out some of the themes that resonate through the commentaries and place these within complex social contexts. We consider the intersection of ontology and morality; the construction of women’s selfhood; the integration of religious beliefs and practices in a secular world. We suggest that for many women, religious doctrine may be balanced with secular logic as both are important and inextricably linked determinants of decision making about the termination of pregnancy.     

Can religious arguments persuade?

In his famous essay “The Ethics of Belief,” William K. Clifford claimed “it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence.” (Clifford’s essay was originally published in Contemporary Review in 1877; it is presently in print in Madigan (1999)). One might claim that a corollary to Clifford’s Law is that it is wrong, always, everywhere, and for anyone, to withhold belief when faced with sufficient evidence. Seeming to operate on this principle, many religious philosophers—from St. Anselm to Alvin Plantinga—have claimed that non-believers are psychologically or cognitively deficient if they refuse to believe in the existence of God, when presented with evidence for His existence in the form of relevant experience or religious arguments that are prima facie unassailable. Similarly, many atheists fail to see how believers can confront the problem of evil and still assert their belief in a benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient Creator. In this paper, I propose to explain why religious arguments so often fail to persuade (I take the term ‘religious argument’ to include arguments whose conclusions are either assertions or denials of religious claims). In doing so, I first offer an account of persuasion and then apply it to religious arguments. I go on to argue that at least some religious arguments commit a form of question-begging, which I call “begging the doxastic question.”~An argument begs the doxastic question, on my account, when a subject would find the argument persuasive only if she antecedently believes the argument’s conclusion. This form of question begging is not, strictly speaking, a case of circularity and thus, is not a fallacy; rather, it would explain why one coming to the argument would fail to be persuaded by it unless he already accepted its conclusion. This has the effect, when applied to religious argumentation, that religious arguments are rarely persuasive, which raises the further question: what good are religious arguments? I end by suggesting some non-persuasive functions of religious argument. Finally, I suggest that a full understanding of religious argumentation should give evidentialists pause, for religious beliefs look less like belief states that are sensitive to evidentiary states and more like framework principles or fundamental commitments.     

State,religion and the legal framework in Estonia ∗

Abstract

Estonia has a reputation as one of the most liberal countries as far as religion is concerned. At the same time Estonian society is also highly secularised. In the postcommunist period the principles of freedom of religion were laid down in the constitution adopted by referendum in 1992, and the first law on religious associations as legal entities was passed by parliament in 1993. This law reflected the ‘free market’ atmosphere of the early 1990s: all religious associations registered according to the law were treated equally. There are areas where state and religious institutions have found common interests. The main partners for the state have been the Estonian Evangelical Lutheran Church and the ecumenical association the Estonian Council of Churches. Could this be considered discriminatory when approximately 98 per cent of the adherents of any religion in Estonia claim to be Christians? There are different answers to this question. In 2002 a new law on religious associations replaced the previous law, but followed the principles established in 1993. There are also other laws and regulations on different aspects of religion, from the role of religion in public institutions like the army to religious traditions such as the slaughtering of animals. It could be argued that the successful establishing and maintaining of a liberal legislative framework for religion in Estonia is at least partly the outcome of the high secularisation level of Estonian society.     

What is wrong with incest?

Incest taboos should be seen as involving non‐sexual objections to sexual relations, that is, objections based on who people are in relation to each other, rather than their activities. What is at stake is brought out by considering certain objections to father‐daughter incest and certain features of taboos. The objections that matter do not depend on social ties and distinctions having a biological basis, but there is nonetheless a biological element in incest taboos. To see it, one must look to the nature of the Oedipus complex, and to the conditions for the development of the individual and of society. There may be prohibitions which are necessary (to morality, to society, to humanity) even though they may not be justifiable within a narrower conception (e.g. utilitarian) of morality and justification. And so taboos which are universal (occur, in one form or another, in every society), and absolute (allow no questioning), and impose strict liability (allow no excuse), may not be irrational: they may mark the boundaries that shape a way of life.     

After justification: Toward a Dalit public Lutheran theology

The aim of this article is to construct a “Dalit public Lutheran theology” as an “after‐justification” conversation, which drafts an agenda for the future of Lutheran theology in the twenty‐first century. In moving toward that construction, I first briefly explain Dalit theology, public theology, and Lutheran theology and shall discuss the rationale for a Dalit public Lutheran theology. From there I propose that Lutheran theology needs to take a contextual, post‐colonial and subaltern turn. Then I discuss the contours of Dalit public Lutheran theology by discussing one of the pivotal doctrine of Luther, “justification by grace through faith,” by engaging in a Dalit public discourse and propose “hospitality by love” as what comes after justification. Finally, I bring out the relevance of such a theology for our present‐day context. The method I employ in this article is subaltern methodology, which is to “read from below” or “read against the grain.” “After justification” is understood as “beyond” the understanding of doctrine of justification, as a forward‐looking public theological understanding of justification, where it finds fecundity and validity.     

Schleiermacher's Repudiation of Dordrecht in his Essay ‘On the Doctrine of Election’

Friedrich Schleiermacher intended his essay ‘On the Doctrine of Election’ to defend the Augustinian/Calvinian logic of the Reformed doctrine of unconditional election. Counterintuitively he repudiated the Synod of Dordrecht which similarly defended unconditional election for reasons both political/ecclesiastical and theological. Politically he wanted to protect the newly united Reformed‐Lutheran Church in Prussia and the Synod had ended up dividing the Reformed churches over the doctrine of election. Theologically Schleiermacher sought a revised doctrine of election to eliminate any bifurcation between the blessed and the damned in God's decree and to elide completely the notion of eternal punishment in hell.     

Knowledge and society

The question of the nature of our knowledge of society has recently been raised in an interesting form by Peter Winch in his monograph, The Idea of a Social Science, and debated in recent issues of Inquiry by A. R. Louch and Winch himself. In this paper I attempt to contribute to this discussion by attacking the problem of the nature of the empirical bases of social scientific knowledge, the main point in dispute between Winch and Louch. I try to construct an argument to show that in specifying the ‘data’ of social science, we have to introduce an element of ‘interpretive understanding’ which radically alters the meaning of the term ‘empirical base’ in social scientific contexts, thus supplementing Winch's argument in his reply to Louch. At the same time, my argument shows, I believe, that this view of the nature of social science does not lead to any arbitrary restrictions on the methods of research pursued by social scientists, as is sometimes imagined. What the argument leads to is the conclusion that our knowledge of society involves distinctive epistemological features that differentiate this kind of knowledge from the kind of knowledge we have in the natural sciences.     

Grace, Doubt, and Evil: The Constructive Task Of Reformation Theology

The Lutheran vocation is to be a friend of grace; and since the 16th century Lutheran systematic theology has built upon a foundation of grace. Two apparent barriers to grace need addressing. First, doubt in the form of agnosticism and atheism provides a metaphysical argument against God's existence. Second, evil and suffering provide a moral argument against God's existence. From a Lutheran point of view the question of God's graciousness takes precedence over God's existence.     

On Being Lutheran In A Religiously Plural World

Abstract : For those of us who are self‐consciously Lutheran, the reality of contemporary religious pluralism engenders important theological questions. The thesis of this essay is that “being Lutheran” within the context of contemporary religious pluralism requires the creation of “Lutheran identity” that is pluralistic in structure, while simultaneously avoiding either theological exclusivism or theological inclusivism. The implications of this thesis are that (1) dialogue with the religious traditions of the world is of primary importance for thinking Lutherans, and (2) the church's witness and mission needs to be reconfigured in light of the practice of interreligious dialogue.     

Can Lutheran Theology and Virtue Ethics Be Friends?

Lutheran theology is generally suspicious of virtue ethics. This suspicion arises from (1) the Lutheran commitment to justification by faith in God's unconditional promise; and (2) Luther's corollary understanding of sin as existential self‐absorption. Some Lutheran theologians have sought to incorporate virtue ethics by using it as an orientation for Christian life, while making sure to avoid any contamination of the doctrine of justification by virtue ethics. My project is to consider the possibility of a mutual illumination and interaction between the doctrine of justification and virtue ethics’ focus on formation by habituation. As an aid in exploring this possibility I use the distinction in Dietrich Bonhoeffer's Ethics between the “ultimate” and the “penultimate.”     

The meaning and legacy of the Reformation in a global perspective

When reviewing the non‐European perspectives of Lutheran theology presented in the contributions of this issue of Dialog, it is easy to recognize a dominant, unifying theme and a common task in a confrontation with the new Pentecostal churches. It then makes sense to refer to the two central themes and tasks of Lutheran theology mentioned in this volume: the development of a Lutheran pneumatology in contrast to the Pentecostal/charismatic movements; and an interpretation of the Lutheran doctrine of justification that concentrates on how the pure grace and love of God can be witnessed in good works. As a future focal point of Lutheran theology, the contributions from non‐European Lutheran Christianity presented here show that the connection between the theology of the cross as a central element of the grammar of Lutheran Christianity and the dialectics of law and gospel for the interpretation of the salutary efficacy and experienceable nature of the Spirit requires further reflection.     

Theologia Prima—Liturgical Theology as an Ecumenical Challenge to Lutheran Worship Practice

Abstract : The doctrine of justification is of highest importance for Lutheran theology. But regarding their worship practice Lutheran churches seem to be less aware of this priority than Orthodox, Roman‐Catholic and Anglican churches. David Fagerberg, building on Alexander Schmemann, claims the worship service experience is theologia prima, God's action upon God's people. At the same time Andrea Grillo calls the human being an animal ceremoniale stating that liturgy always reminds us that God's action comes first. Can Lutherans building upon this ecumenical liturgical theology find in the worship service the ‘place of justification’?     

Religion and bioethics: toward an expanded understanding

Before asking what U.S. bioethics might learn from a more comprehensive and more nuanced understanding of Islamic religion, history, and culture, a prior question is, how should bioethics think about religion? Two sets of commonly held assumptions impede further progress and insight. The first involves what “religion” means and how one should study it. The second is a prominent philosophical view of the role of religion in a diverse, democratic society. To move beyond these assumptions, it helps to view religion as lived experience as well as a body of doctrine and to see that religious differences and controversies should be welcomed in the public square of a diverse democratic society rather than merely tolerated.     

Advocacy,Political Participation,and Citizenship: Lutheran Contributions to Public Theology1

Abstract : Martin Luther never developed a political theory, but his theology does inform the way Christians live in society, making it both public and political. Luther's “two kingdom theory” often has been misinterpreted to justify passivity and obedience toward civil authorities. Under closer examination, however, his theology applies to the everyday practices of politics, economics, and religious affairs. In the context of nation‐building, a Lutheran theology fosters citizenship not only as individual rights and responsibilities, but as active participation in civil society.     

THE POLITICAL NATURE OF DOCTRINE: A CRITIQUE OF LINDBECK IN LIGHT OF RECENT SCHOLARSHIP

This article argues that the power of religion to shape experience presupposes the mobilization of religious identity through social opposition. This thesis is developed through a critique of George Lindbeck's The Nature of Doctrine. The article first examines Lindbeck's thesis that religion shapes experience in light of Talal Asad's critique of Geertz's concept of religion. It argues that in order to understand how ‘religion’ shapes experience we must look outside the immanent sphere of cultural‐religious meaning that Lindbeck, following Geertz, identifies with ‘religion’. Religious authority ultimately derives from the recognition of a social group. Next, looking at the nature of doctrine in light of Kathryn Tanner's thesis that Christian identity is essentially relational, it argues that church doctrines function to mobilize group identity through social opposition. In this respect they resemble the mobilizing slogans of political discourse more than, as Lindbeck's theory proposes, the grammatical rules governing Wittgensteinian language games.     

Contributors

Abstract

The terrorist attacks on the USA, and the responses to them, brought to light complex social forms and interactions ‐ and varying involvement by churches and religions ‐ amongst the peoples and governments involved. The first responses in the USA were to the attacks as destructive of meaning, with corresponding practical, moral and religious attempts to restore social meaning. Subsequent responses have employed notions of social life performed with the instruments more typical of a modern society, but these usually lack historical and religious awareness: economics, government and military power. The article traces some of the distinctive ideological, rhetorical and religious forms of society in the USA, interacting with those more historically formed, in Europe, the Middle East and amongst Islamists. It argues the need for an international socio‐religious — that is ecclesial ‐ response to present events, as now seen in ‘Scriptural Reasoning’, a movement in which Jews, Christians and Muslims join.