Book Reviews
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Tapir_NJRS 2-10.fm Page 196 Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:23 PM Nordic Journal of Religion and Society 23:2 BOOK REVIEWS Stifoss-Hanssen, Hans and Inger Furseth (eds.) 2008. Mellom prinsipper og pragma- tisme: analyser av høringen om staten og Den norske kirke [Between principles and pragmatism: analyses of the hearing about the state and the Church of Norway]. Trond- heim: Tapir Akademisk Forlag. 203 pages. The relationship between State and Church has increasingly become an object of discus- sion in Norway. From a political point of view, and from the point of view of the state, there is a growing uneasiness about the current state of affairs. During the last half or quarter of the 20th Century Norway has become culturally and religiously heterogene- ous, not only due to immigration but also because of the spread of agnostic or atheistic world views among Norwegians with long generational roots in the country. As a result of this development towards world view pluralism, some laws regulating the affairs of the Church of Norway and its relationship to the State seem to have become outdated. The mere fact that the Parliament outlines the function and role of the Church may be seen as a sign that the State favors one particular world view. Even the fact that local municipalities support the parishes economically – to a degree decided by bishops – calls the neutrality of the Norwegian State into question. Can a state that supports one particular religious body guarantee its neutrality in terms of world view, it is asked. From within the Church another critique of the status quo is formulated. Due to its support, the State (and municipalities) also to some extent control the actions of the Church. The State institutes bishops, and the organization of the Church is closely linked to the secular organization of the country. The national synod has a say in a number of questions, but almost always in conjunction with the secular authorities such as the Church Ministry of the government. For some theologians this position of sub- jugation is intolerable, and arguments for the independence of the Church are formu- lated. Thus, from two different positions there has been a call for change of relations, positions one can call politically liberal and theologically activist, respectively. In 2003, a committee was instituted with the task of analyzing and proposing models for change in what to some had become an unreasonable, if not intolerable, state of affairs. In the year 2006 its report was published, called «the Gjønnes Report». In the report, three models for the future organization of the Church of Norway were investigated: (a) folk church based on a constitutional law, (b) folk church based on a non-constitutional law, and (c) independent folk church (based on a general law on life view communities). The majority of the committee recommended solution (b), which would mean that the present constitutional regulation about the State Church has to be removed, that the Church of Norway becomes a legal entity (not a part of the State), and that the Church of Norway through its own church law is given a privileged posi- tion in relation to other denominations or life view organizations. Following the publication of the report a large scale national hearing was organized. The results of the hearing were assembled and published, first in a series of publicati- 196 Tapir_NJRS 2-10.fm Page 197 Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:23 PM Martin Lindhardt: Book reviews ons of a mostly descriptive kind. The book under review here may be said to represent a second phase of analysis, in which a number of theoretical perspectives are used for more profound analyses. In part 1, six contributions deal with theoretical perspectives on the result of the hearings, political, democratic, sociological, human rights, and mul- ticultural perspectives. In part 2, three scholars from Denmark, Finland and Sweden depict the situation in their countries, thereby offering three perspectives of difference: which factors lie behind the differences in church organization in these often closely and historically united countries? The book reviewed is published in Norwegian. For this reason the review will tend to give a somewhat broader picture of the articles than what is normally seen. I will summarize the articles before my more qualitative discussion of their content. In the first part, political scientist Jo Saglie discusses how democracy is understood in church elections and church policy making. Who are the people in the Church of Norway? About which issues should the church’ people decide? How is this to be orga- nized? These three questions pinpoint the issues which the article addresses. At the basis of his description of the problems of democracy Saglie places a quote from Cohen (1971): Democracy is that system of community government in which, by and large, the members of a community participate, or may participate, directly or indirectly, in the making of decisions which affect them all (1971: 7). Using a broad definition such as this allows Saglie to discuss a number of the issues that have proven controversial in the hearing: whether in church rule the aim of democ- racy is to control those in power, to develop participation of the population, or to develop deliberation about church matters in general. Membership of the Church of Norway can neither easily be compared to that of an association nor that of a state (citizenship). Saglie characterizes the membership per- centage as inflated, which means that beside the proportion of devoted members there is another proportion who have become members without intent. They have been bap- tized by their parents and have remained in the membership going along with baptism. The inflated membership has consequences when calculating voting percentages in church elections. Historically, these have been very low when compared to other elec- tions. But – as Saglie states – when a percentage is considered low, you may in your analysis look at the numerator, in casu the number of votes, or the denominator, i.e. the number of people allowed to vote. If the number allowed to vote is unrealistically high, a low voting percentage may be unavoidable. The question of what issues the elected representatives decide on posits another problem, since a number of decisions are placed elsewhere. In an Episcopal church a number of decisions are in the hands of the bishop. In order to motivate candidates to run and voters to vote there has to be a clear understanding that such actions matter. If the decision space available is considered too small, nobody will care to candidate or vote. The final question posed by Saglie, who abstains from giving advice, is what kind of organization the Church of Norway wishes to be or become. Charles Anderson 197 Tapir_NJRS 2-10.fm Page 198 Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:23 PM Nordic Journal of Religion and Society 23:2 (1984: 433) is quoted for the following conclusion: «form follows function in the design of political institutions, almost the way it does when it comes to buildings». So the question whether the Church of Norway wishes to be an institution of the State or a voluntary association is placed at the centre of the discussion of various democratic models. Ethicist Ulla Schmidt describes how formal bodies and officers in the Church of Norway see democracy in the church by means of an analysis of their responses in the official hearing, complemented by survey data from the church members. The question of how to build democratic structures is complicated. When respondents in the official hearing are asked to present their view on general principles concerning faith and life view, a democratic structure for the Church is frequently mentioned. There seems to be a difference between on the one hand local and on the other regional and national church bodies about direct or indirect elections. The locals do not support an extension of direct elections. Schmidt notes a difference in views of what constitutes the basic units of the church, the parish or the individual. For the bodies underlining the parish as the basic unit there is also a tendency to underline the necessity of «through-going representa- tion», i.e. that the locally elected are represented at higher levels of organization (dio- cese, nation). Others underline that the individual member must be given possibilities to influence decisions. This view tends to coincide with a preference for direct elec- tions at the higher levels. The low level of participation in church elections obviously presents a problem for the Church, and so Schmidt analyzes the individual motivations for participation or non-participation in these elections. She engages in a discussion (with among others theologian Harald Hegstad (2004) about recruitment of new voters, who may be in their rights to vote, without necessarily being engaged in church matters. To a certain degree this discussion echoes Saglie’s comments on an inflated membership. The Church of Norway may have members who do not consider it in their interest to vote in church elections. This group may be identical with the group loosely depicted as «unjustified voters» by Hegstad and Schmidt. The methods and ways of voting constitute one side of democracy. There are others, however. Democracy may be conceptualized as a culture more than a voting procedure. Theoretically speaking one might discuss the deliberative side of democracy. Schmidt notes that there is a correlation between a reduction of the idea of democracy to voting procedures and the concept of management by objectives, a correlation which contrasts against arguments for a deliberative democratic culture. Arguing against this correla- tion Schmidt claims that democracy is more than a high percentage voting.