Freedom of Religion and the Accommodation of Religious Diversity: Multiculturalising Secularism

The classical liberal concern for freedom of religion today intersects with concerns of equality and respect for minorities, of what might be loosely termed ‘multiculturalism’. When these minorities were primarily understood in terms of ethno-racial identities, multiculturalism and freedom of religion were seen at that time as quite separate policy and legal fields. As ethno-religious identities have become central to multiculturalism (and to rejections of multiculturalism), specifically in Western Europe in relation to its growing Muslim settlements, not only have the two fields intersected, new approaches to religion and equality have emerged. We consider the relationship between freedom of religion and ethno-religious equality, or alternatively, religion as faith or conscience and religion as group identity. We argue that the normative challenges raised by multicultural equality and integration cannot be met by individualist understandings of religion and freedom, by the idea of state neutrality, nor by laicist understandings of citizenship and equality. Hence, a re-thinking of the place of religion in public life and of religion as a public good and a re-configuring of political secularism in the context of religious diversity is necessary. We explore a number of pro-diversity approaches that suggest what a respectful and inclusive egalitarian governance of religious diversity might look like, and consider what might be usefully learnt from other countries, as Europe struggles with a deeper diversity than it has known for a long time. The moderate secularism that has historically evolved in Western Europe is potentially accommodative of religious diversity, just as it came to be of Christian churches, but it has to be ‘multiculturalised’.

Emil Durkheim on the role of religion in public life. Substantiation of the choice of elementary religion

The sociological theory of the religion of E. Durkheim, despite the past tense, remains an important source for the study. The understanding of the French sociologist of religion as the most important social institution providing social integration, led him to look for a sociological approach to the study of this social institution. In the works of E. Durkheim embodied the development of ideas about the collective consciousness, that is, collective beliefs and related moral relations, acting as a unifying force in society, as the “highest form of mental life”. An important distinction of E. Durkheim’s Elementary Forms of Religious Life from his contemporary totemism literature and primitive religion in general became its methodological approach. He consistently examines, criticizes and rejects competing theories of the origin of totemism, analyzes the development of a religious phenomenon in society, examining precisely its social aspects that are available for scientific analysis. In a religious rite, a person fixes his “confused social feelings” on these clear, concrete objects, from which the physical power and moral powers of society are distinguished. E. Durkheim saw the exceptional social appearance of religious facts. Thus, the sequence of short but intense periods of religious “collective excitement” alternates with much longer periods of diffuse secular individual economic activity, and that it was this division that gave rise to belief in two special worlds — the sacred and the secular — both within man and within nature. E. Durkheim’s famous hypothesis — that a deity is nothing more than a deified society — was confirmed by many arguments of its reasoning, but at the same time it does not have any anticlerical or antireligious ideology that would strongly contradict Durkheim’s understanding of the principle of scientific objectivity.

A Crisis of Faith, Scary Popes, and William Gladstone

William Gladstone presided as Prime Minister of Great Britain on four separate occasions between 1868 to 1894. Gladstone was preoccupied both personally and politically with religion, and his personal faith journey reflected the larger crisis of faith occurring in Britain in the nineteenth century as secularism and urbanization began to erode the place of faith in common life. Many scholars have referred to this period as the “Victorian Crisis of Faith.” This paper examines his personal diaries and extensive writings to understand his zest for religion, primarily regarding the supposed papal aggression of 1850 in Great Britain and his personal faith crises. The significance of this paper is that it highlights how both personally and politically this key leader was working to understand the role of religion in public life in nineteenth-century Great Britain.

Secularism and Religion

The boundary between the religious and the secular spheres of life is contested in many parts of the world. From the latter decades of the 20th century, controversies over issues such as the legalization of same-sex marriage, assisted dying, and freedom of speech, as well as clashes around reproductive rights and equality issues, have all featured highly on national political agendas. Set against a backdrop of the “return of religion” to public life, these debates and tensions have given rise to the notion that secularism might be in a state of crisis or moving toward some form of post-secular condition. The term “secularism” is itself also contested. The precise nature of the “secular” and the “religious” spheres of life is subject to interpretation, and secularism in practice can be manifest in a number of ways. This ranges from exclusivist forms of secularism in countries such as the United States and France to inclusive secularism in the case of India. Supporters of a role for religion in public life maintain that religion provides a range of valuable public goods and gives individuals a sense of meaning and identity. Secularists, on the other hand, claim that the separation of church and state provides the best framework for upholding the rights and freedoms of all citizens regardless of their religion or belief.

The Representation of Religion in Religion Education: Notes from the South African Periphery

Scholars of Religion Education (RE) have promoted a non-confessional approach to the teaching of religions that explores and examines the religious history of humankind, with due attention paid to its complexity and plurality. In this promotion, the public representation of religion and its impact on RE has not received sufficient attention. An often hegemonic representation of religion constitutes an important part of religion in public life. Moreover, this article argues that this representation is a phenomenon shared by secular, secularizing, and deeply religious societies. It shows that a Western understanding of secularization has guided dominant RE visions and practices, informed by a particular mode of representation. As an illustration of how education in and representation of religion merges in RE, the article analyses the South African policy document for religion education. While the policy promotes RE as an educational practice, it also makes room for a representation of religion. This article urges that various forms of the representation of religion should be more carefully examined in other contexts, particularly by those who want to promote a non-confessional and pluralistic approach to RE.

Freedom, Responsibility, and Religion in Public Life: From Luther to Levinas and Arendt

While Luther affirmed the believer’s freedom in relation to the world, he described the human being as unfree in relation to God from whom we receive everything and without whom we can achieve nothing good. This article reconsiders the relation between autonomy and heteronomy in the context of a phenomenology of listening: if faith comes from listening (ex auditu) and auditus is not a human capacity, but rather the effect of God’s Word that operates within the human being, how is our (un)freedom to be understood? Further, if a human being’s self-relation is expressed by the ‘voice’ of conscience, which can be ignored only at the cost of losing the unity with oneself, how is responsibility to be conceptualized when the call comes both from ‘within’ and from ‘without’? Finally, what are the implications of this view of the person for the role of religion in public life and the ways in which religious conflicts can be resolved? In an anachronistic thought experiment, Luther is brought into a posthumous dialogue with those that he excluded from the discussion: the Jews. In particular, his view concerning the justmentioned questions is contrasted with insights by Emmanuel Levinas and Hannah Arendt.

Religious Liberty in American Education

Many educators and school administrators receive little or no civic education about the history and significance of the religious liberty clauses of the First Amendment. As a result, many Americans are misled about the constitutional role of religion in public life, confused about the meaning of church–state separation, and uncertain about the limits of the free exercise of religion. This chapter details the broad consensus that has been made about the principles of rights, responsibility, and respect that flow from the religious liberty clauses of the First Amendment. This chapter argues that by applying this constitutional framework, educators and community stakeholders can forge a shared understanding of the place of religion in public life. They will be able to work together to sustain America’s bold experiment in living with our deepest differences.

Anthropology, theology, critique

This article reflects on one potential relationship the anthropological study of religion might enjoy with a critical orientation to religion. To do so, I highlight a burgeoning (but tenuous) dialog between anthropology and theology. Ultimately, I propose that a focus on religion and human flourishing provides one wavelength on which an anthropology–theology collaboration can thrive. I follow the observation that anthropologists and theologians are united by concern with shared problems. If human and social flourishing is one such problem, then what might a collaborative configuration look like? The example I consider is how ethnographic evidence of religion in public life can be mobilized to advance prophetic theological critiques of injustice.

Litigating Religions

Religions are a problem for human rights, and human rights are a problem for religions. And both are problems for courts. This essay presents an interpretation of how religion and human rights interrelate in the legal context, and how this relationship might be reconceived to make this relationship somewhat less fraught. It examines how the resurgent role of religion in public life gives rise to tensions with key aspects of human rights doctrine, including freedom of religion and anti-discrimination law, and how these tensions cannot be considered as simply transitional. The context for the discussion is the increasingly troubled area of human rights litigation involving religious arguments, such as wearing religious dress at work, conscientious objections by marriage registrars, admission of children to religious schools, prohibitions on same-sex marriage, and access to abortion. This essay examines doctrinal developments in these areas, where standoffs between organized religions and human rights advocates in the courts have been common. The essay argues that, if we wish to establish a better dialogue between the contending views, we must first identify a set of recurring problems identifiable in such litigation. But to address these recurring problems requires more than simply identifying these problems and requires changes both in human rights theory and in religious understandings of human rights. The essay argues that, by paying close attention to developments in human rights litigation, we can make theoretical progress.