Ethics from Pulpits of the Church of Norway: a Self-Report Survey of Social-Ethical Issues
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Empirical Theology 31 (2018) 167-193 Journal of Empirical Theology brill.com/jet Ethics from Pulpits of the Church of Norway: A Self-Report Survey of Social-Ethical Issues Svein Olaf Thorbjørnsen MF Norwegian School of Theology [email protected] Magne Supphellen Norwegian School of Economics (NHH) [email protected] Abstract To what extent do Norwegian ministers deal with social-ethical issues in their ser- mons? While we examine the frequency of such topics in this article, we primarily explore the potential determinants of their priorities in discussing these issues: their individual backgrounds, their ethical and political orientations, the local parish char- acteristics and the ministers’ sources of inspiration in preparing sermons. The results shows that different ethical orientations appear to be largely unrelated to the frequen- cy of addressing social-ethical issues. Experiences in nature are the most important source of inspiration. The school at which the minister was trained has a significant impact on frequency, while political orientation has a very weak influence. Different parish characteristics—affluence and level of social challenges—and the age and mar- ital status of the clergy do have an impact on which issues are given priority. The min- ister’s gender and geographical location both have no effect. Keywords sermons – social-ethical issues – Norwegian ministers – background determinants © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2018 | doi:10.1163/15709256-12341372Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 08:04:09PM via free access 168 Thorbjørnsen and Supphellen 1 Introduction Admonitions have been part of Christian sermons from the time of the New Testament. Throughout the centuries of the church, admonitions related to social-ethical issues have regularly been present in sermons. Pacifism in the old church and Luther’s views on trade and usury are just some examples. The social gospel movement used sermons to point to the moral crisis caused by the industrial revolution, the classical African American homiletics found its way outside its original churches in the 1950s and the preaching influenced by liberation theology focused on social protest and took the perspective of the underprivileged (Edwards 2004). Individual perspectives, however, have likely been dominant. Our situation today as human beings and as a church in a modern and globally understood world is different. The tremendous tech- nological developments of recent years offer both enormous possibilities and very serious ethical challenges. To be global citizens implies that we relate not only to our families, neighbours and fellow citizens but also to people far away and to people from far away who now live near us. We are part of global struc- tures and systems that influence our lives in myriad ways. Today, such issues are decisive, often indirectly, for our daily lives; some, in the end, are even de- cisive for our survival as both individuals and as a species. The church cannot ignore these new realities. However, are they ignored in practice by pastors in the Norwegian Church or are social-ethical issues addressed in their sermons? To the extent they are, what factors inspire pastors to address such issues? For almost 500 years, the Norwegian Church was a state church. Between 2012 and 2017, these bonds between state and church have been severed, but it remains a church of national scope, and a very high percentage of Norwe- gians are members (73% in 2015). 46,540 church services were held on Sun- days and holidays in 2015, with an average of 98 people attending each service (https://www.ssb.no/kultur-og-fritid/statistikker/kirke_kostra/aar/2016-05-04). This shows that many Norwegians still attend churches and are thus likely in- fluenced to a certain degree by the teaching of clergy in terms of both general values and specific ethical positions.1 The purpose of this survey is to describe and explain clerical emphases on various social-ethical issues, with a focus on the occurrence of these issues in sermons.2 Social ethics refers to an ethical reflection focusing on societal 1 T.M. Nteta and K.J. Wallsten show that sermons in mainline churches addressing policies on immigration influenced parishioners (Nteta and Wallsten, 2012). 2 Some investigations published before 2000 have analyzed written sermons in a Norwegian context. Their general conclusion is that social-ethical topics are rare in sermons and other Journal of Empirical TheologyDownloaded from 31 (2018)Brill.com09/28/2021 167-193 08:04:09PM via free access Ethics from Pulpits of the Church of Norway 169 structures and processes and on how particular contexts shape morality. It ex- plores ethical dimensions of, and problems arising in, the workings of social structures, i.e. government, economics, politics and community life (Grenz and Smith 2003). Social-ethical issues include issues related to the fellowship of which we are part, its organization and structures and our relations with the non-human part of our reality, e.g. ecology and the environment, human dignity, human rights, the distribution of resources and economics. Social-ethical issues, however, cannot be isolated from more individualistic approaches.3 In social-ethical assessments, the one who assess will take into account also premises concerning communities and structures. On the other side: Individual assessments are seldom independent of assessment related to society as a whole. The climate-crisis and refugee-crisis, as well as, now from the individual side, love of one’s neighbour and respect for human dignity, are examples of this double relation. In a very distinct way the command of love of one’s neighbour incorporates this bridge between the individualistic and social obligations. In Christianity, the body-metaphor (1 Cor 12) also expresses this mutuality between the social and the personal, manifested in love. From an individualistic point of view, social ethics should contribute to a good and decent life for the individual and for the society. Socially understood social ethics is concerned with laws and institutions (rights, democratic pro- cedures, regulation of markets and ecology) regulating social interaction, na- tionally and globally. As human beings, we are responsible in both directions. The institutions are tools for the individual to attend to its responsibility for unknown people nearby but also far away. In this way, the frontier between social ethics and individual or personal ethics is fluid. However, some ethical issues pertain primarily to the individual, even if they have social implications, i.e. responsibility for body and health, to work out one’s own life-plan etc. The same applies to ethical issues of a so- cial character. One possibility is to define social ethics as an activity analys- ing and assessing social institutions, behaviour and processes from an ethical Christian speeches (Thorbjørnsen and Supphellen, 2017, 27-28). This is surprising given that, especially after 1968, social-ethical issues were high on the agenda in Norwegian society, in the official church and in teaching and among students at theological institutions. 3 We presuppose that ethics has to do with as well individual as political/social conduct. G. Bexell and C.-H. Grenholm characterize this position as modified monistic: the same prin- ciples of moral are valid individually as socially, but the possibility of realizing the ethical ideals are different on the two levels. This position differs from the amoralic (only private acts are subjects to ethical assessment), the dualistic (different criteria for ethical assessment) and the monistic (the same criteria for individual and social ethics and a great optimism when it comes to the realization of the ideals) (Bexell and Grenholm, 1997, pp. 282-285). Journal of Empirical Theology 31 (2018) 167-193 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 08:04:09PM via free access 170 Thorbjørnsen and Supphellen perspective. Another, and better, option is to choose a definition including so- cial organisation and institutions along with people’s relation to them as per- sons and as communities. This is the background for our understanding and use of the concept ‘social-ethical issues’ in this article. The theological context for the discourse on social-ethical issues in Lutheran churches has traditionally been the doctrine of the two kingdoms. This doc- trine distinguishes between the two ways that God promotes his will in the world: through the state authority by way of the power to uphold order and protect life (‘the sword’) and through the church by way of the gospel and the sacraments to save and redeem all people. There is, however, no separation between the two; God is active in both and the Church has a responsibility to promote God’s will in the world. This promotion, when carried out in the Lutheran pulpit, usually has a creational basis that also reflects a creational understanding of ethics. Lately, this tradition has been challenged by stressing that Christological and eschatological ethical aspects must supplement a crea- tional focus (Grenholm 2014; Kurtén 2013). The actual context for very many social-ethical issues today is global (Widdows 2011). Several ethical problems and dilemmas are raised in a context of globalisation, such as environmental issues and ecology, just distribution and economics. Today it would reflect a kind of irresponsibility not to include them and treat them as global problems. The local and national perspective is not redundant or irrelevant. However, in a world where distance is less im- portant than earlier, both socially and materially, and our lives are influenced by contact across frontiers and increasing international dependency, a global perspective is of the utmost importance. In the survey we didn’t ask explic- itly about this global perspective, but there are reasons to believe that the Norwegian clergy include this perspective in their social-ethical reasoning. This is the background for the two main questions we examine in this article: 1.