New religions and the internet: Recruiting in a new public space

The mass suicide of 39 members of Heaven's Gate in March of 1997 led to public fears about the presence of ‘spiritual predators’ on the world wide web. This paper describes and examines the nature of these fears, as reported in the media. It then sets these fears against what we know about the use of the Internet by new religions, about who joins new religious movements and why, and the social profile of Internet users. It is argued that the emergence of the Internet has yet to significantly change the nature of religious recruitment in contemporary society. The Internet as a medium of communication, however, may be having other largely unanticipated effects on the form and functioning of religion, both old and new, in the future. Some of the potential perils of the Internet are discussed with reference to the impact of this new medium on questions of religious freedom, community, social pluralism, and social control.     

RE: religions,equality and curriculum time

Theory can mislead by ignoring detail and the practicalities of teaching situations. Understanding others requires just this attention to detail and practicalities. These observations identify the failings in the ambitions of the National Framework for RE to teach as many ‘religious’ traditions as possible. Part of the motivation of the authors of the Framework appears to reside in the commitment found in liberal education to equality. The author is not convinced that, unless this is religiously conceived, equality can be achieved amongst religions without creating serious inequalities. Attention to practical constraints given by existing language and culture suggests another way forward but in a dialogical spirit that recognizes an equality before God.     

Managing religions: state responses to religious diversity

After 9/11 there is a general sense of the crisis of liberalism and secularism, and the need for greater security and surveillance. Diasporic Muslim communities have been increasingly the target of government interventions and investigations, resulting in various forms of governmentality that in fact constitute a ‘management of Muslims.’ The traditional strategies of benign neglect have been replaced by periods of intense governmental activity. The idea of ‘managing Muslims’ is often disguised by a more neutral terminology such as pluralism or multiculturalism. This article examines two versions of the management of religions from policies of ‘upgrading’ or retraining of Muslims for modernity to more robust policies of containment, rendition and seclusion. The result of securitisation and globalisation is the rise of a new type of society that I call ‘the enclave society.’ In such societies governments are creating new policies of ‘enclavement’ to quarantine communities that are undesirable or unwanted or dangerous. The mobility of a global society is now being constrained by encirclement and enclavement through building walls, ghettoes, catchments and no-go areas. Such policies are likely to be counter productive, requiring an escalation of draconian interventions.     

世界宗教市场--苏为德教授访问四川大学宗教所演讲摘要

苏为德(Hubert Seiwert)教授于2002年9月25-28来四川大学宗教所访问,为宗教所师生发表了题为“世界宗教市场:当今世界的宗教经济”的演讲。苏为德教授是德国宗教历史学会主席、莱比锡大学宗教科学研究所所长。早年毕业于波恩大学,学习比较宗教学。他的研究专长是中国宗教历史,尤其是中国民间宗教、当代西方宗教和宗教学理论。其博士论文为《中国古代的占卜》,教授论文是《台湾的民间宗教与民族传统》。他的新作《中国历史上的民间宗教运动》将于今年出版。     

关于宗教世俗化的几点诠释

曾经有种观点认为宗教世俗化是宗教衰落的表现,其实不然。宗教的世俗化有多重含义,本文试图通过对宗教世俗化的几点全新的阐释,说明宗教的世俗化不仅是宗教发展的新契机,而且还在社会生活的许多方面充当了并继续充当着重要的角色。本文主要拟从以下三个方面来说明,即:宗教对道德控制功能的作用;宗教——尤其在特定宗教的内部,对于集体精神、团结精神的重新发现;宗教对于社会革命的作用力。通过论证,可以看出宗教世俗化对于社会的作用客观存在,并将随着人类历史的发展而被赋予许多全新的含义。     

Different religions,diverse gods

International Journal for Philosophy of Religion -     

Ecumenism between the world religions

Conclusion We seem then to be left with the fourth position outlined above as the best solution we have to the problem of religious diversity. No doubt this will be far too radical for some religious believers in that, while it allows a believer to hold that his or her religion has some kind of paradigmatic status it also admits that genuine religious developments may take place in other religions. On the other hand it will not be radical enough for other people who will see it as denying the integrity and autonomy of other religious ways and sanctioning some degree of religious exclusivity and intolerance in that, by seeing Christianity as having some essential core of truth that Buddhism lacks, I am claiming superiority for Christianity. And vice versa, if I claim that Buddhism is the privileged way of enlightenment, I am claiming superiority for Buddhismvisà-vis Christianity. Nevertheless, even if this position does notsolve the problem of religious diversity it does at least show which of the alternative solutions are finally untenable, both on religious and philosophical grounds. And it does provide a basis for genuine ecumenical dialogue between the world religions. Indeed, by recognising that a religious believer can hold that genuine developments of religious values may take place in other religions, it makes such dialogue absolutely necessary in much the same way as the Christian Churches have been led to see ecumenical dialogue as not merely an option but a necessity.