Suchergebnisse

Es wird der Zugang und der Umgang der Soziologie mit Religion und Weltkultur thematisiert. Argumentiert wird, daß die Soziologie Religion begrifflich als "Phänomen Religion" verformt hat. Als vorbegrifflichtes "Phänomen Religion" ist es selber unmittelbarer Ausdruck einer Verformung soziologischen Denkens. Es sagt so selber mehr über das soziologische Denken aus als über die "Sachen", auf die es sich bezieht; wohl aber wird deren Wahrnehmung nun über die Optik dieses Konstrukts gebrochen. Die Ursache für dieses Vorgehen wird in der fehlenden kulturgeschichtlichen Aufklärung gesehen. Am Beispiel der Debatte um die "Säkularisierungsthese" wird der Umgang der westlichen Religionssoziologie mit Religion verdeutlicht. (GF)

Der vorliegende Beitrag setzt sich kritisch mit dem Buch "Die Unsichtbare Religion" von Thomas Luckmanns aus dem Jahr 1963 auseinander. Zunächst werden die zentralen Aussagen vorgestellt und auf ihre wichtigsten Kritiken eingegangen. Im nächsten Schritt werden einige empirische Arbeiten und theoretische Fortentwicklungen genannt. Abschießend werden die Konturen dieser neuen Sozialform der Religion umrissen. Die "Unsichtbare Religion" ist weder bloß eine theoretische Abhandlung noch ist sie eine empirische Arbeit; Luckmann nennt sie einen Essay. Er stellt darin an die Stelle der kirchlichen oder organisierten Religiosität einen Begriff der Religion, der sich aus der Kirchensoziologie heraus begibt, um andere Formen des Religiösen in den Blick zu bekommen, wodurch der Blick frei wird auf das Verhältnis von Individuum und Gesellschaft. Der Autor kritisiert, dass der essayistische Stil der Rezeption viele Schwierigkeiten bereitet. Einzelne Begriffe bleiben unscharf. So wird etwa der Begriff der "unsichtbaren Religion" lediglich im Titel genannt. Der Essay biete zwar einen theoretischen Entwurf, der sich durch die Bezugnahme auf die zeitgenössische empirische Forschung abstütze. Doch wird die Unsichtbare Religion, bar systematischer Daten, lediglich provisorisch in groben Umrissen skizziert. Der Beitrag geht dann auf die funktionalistische, anthropologische Definition der Religion bei Luckmann ein und benennt die kritischen Punkte. Im weiteren Verlauf des Beitrags setzt sich der Autor mit den Thesen Luckmanns zur Säkularisierung und der Sozialform der Religion sowie der neuen Sozialform der Religion kritisch auseinander. Der Autor kommt zu dem Schluss, dass der besondere Reiz des Buches darin liegt, dass es Konturen religiöser Formen vorzeichnet, die erst später erkennbare Formen annahmen. Religiöse Funktionen werden zunehmend von nicht-religiösen Strukturen getragen. Hierzu zählen zum "cultic religion", politische Einstellungen und Protesthandlungen sowie neue Gemeinschaftsformen und Therapien. Diese neuen Sozialformen der Religion zeichnen sich vor allem durch einen Verlust der Sichtbarkeit auf verschiedenen Ebenen aus. (ICD2)

Bibliography: leaves 124-129. ; The concept of religion in South Africa has been distorted by religious and racial prejuidices. This problem is particularly evident in public schools South African schools have taught Christianity as the only authentic religion, in fact as the only truth. Black parents have not been given a choice of religion for their children. The white government has decided for them Based on the assumption that Christianity is the only legitimate religion, the state has suppressed African indigenous religion at every level of society, but especially in the schools. The thesis examines the indigenous beliefs and practices of the black people in South Africa which were suppressed by Western culture and Christianity. It reveals all the distortions about African Religion by the outside researchers in order to uproot the black people from their way of life so as to colonise them. As a result all the black children are taught to regard Christianity as a "Religion" and their own religion as "culture", the implication being that blacks had no religion until the white man came with Christianity. The thesis also investigates the feelings of the black people about recovering their indigenous religion by having it as a subject in schools. The results reveal that the majority of blacks never dissociated themselves with their religion. Although most are Christians in principle, deep down they practise their own religion. It has also been discovered that there are great lamentations amongst most blacks over the "loss" of some of the indigenous practices. Most have felt alienated from their heritage and identity. It is therefore the interest of the blacks in South Africa that African Religion be taught in schools.

When one considers the results of social scientific surveys, secularisation in Germany seems to be a more or less linear process of erosion of what is traditionally named religiosity. The percentage of citizens who affirm that they are "religious", believe in God or otherworldly beings, hope for life after death or participate regularly in the praxis of a religious community has been – by and large – steadily declining for decades. This decline has occurred over the succeeding generations: The younger the generation, the fewer "religious" people in it. But the process of secularisation is apparent not only in this persistent quantitative shrinkage from generation to generation. Above all it also manifests itself – this is the thesis of the article – in the transformation of the habitus formations and contents of faith of the generations.
The essence of ongoing secularisation naturally is reflected most clearly in its contemporary state of development which is represented in the youngest adult generation. Therefore the analysis of this generation is particularly interesting for the sociology of religion. But the article does not confine to analyze this generation. After indicating some basic premises of the sociology of generations and the notion of secularisation presupposed in this paper, the succession of generations in Germany is outlined hypothetically, from the so-called generation of '68 to the youngest adult generation, concluding with some remarks about the progress of secularisation.

Religion has had a profound influence on the geography, culture, politics, and artistic life of Sydney. While religion has mostly been a conservative force, preserving traditions transported from home societies, it has also reflected the setting and people of Sydney, its harbour, bushland and suburbs. This article reviews the history of religion in Sydney and the role it has played in the lives of those who have made their home here.

Religion in the modern (post)-industrial societies is still a significant social fact that in many ways connects everyday social, political and economic activities. Area of South-east Europe (SEE), or more precisely countries like Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Kosovo, Serbia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Romania, from the perspective of sciences that are exploring religion/religiosity are heuristically abundant. Source of misconceptions and misunderstandings of the "religious factor" in SEE largely stems from a lack of understanding of the fact that by no means is South-east Europe a homogeneous space. Exploration of these countries constantly refers to a fact that no convergence concerning religion can be observed for all of the mentioned countries, particularly if taken into account the fact that among those countries are those with high level of secularisation, for instance Slovenia, or those with high level of religiosity, for instance Croatia or Romania. Two research goals are set in this paper. The first one refers to the overall religious landscape in SEE countries. In this section the distribution of various elements of personal religiosity, on aggregate level, is presented for the purpose of understanding religious profile of SEE countries. Since religiosity is a multidimensional construct, several measurements of religiosity are chosen: indicator of religious self-assessment , indicator of belonging to a religious community, frequency of attendance at religious services as an indicator of religious practice, indicators of religious beliefs (traditional and alternative), indicator of importance of God in one´s own life, and indicator of religion as a source of comfort and strength. Beside insight into religiosity, religion` s role is explored from the perspective of social expectations. Since religion can be enrolled in various fields in public sphere, for the purpose of the analysis of religion` role in SEE, three main dimensions of public sphere have been operationalized: general social role of religion, socio-cultural role of religion and socio-political role.

This article discusses the position of religion in politics that has relation to leadership. The main argumentation of this research is religion will constantly become a political power and social movement. In one side the research has a different opinion from the integration politic paradigm and secular that proposed by Hasan al-Bannā and 'Alī Abd. al-Rāziq, but in other side, it has reinforced the two paradigms. By using literature study and descriptive method and philosophical historical approach, it indicates Islam will constantly exist and has influence in the political process. Although Islam is not depending on politics and on the contrary. Islam and politic are both integrated dimensions of life, so both are not able to be separated from social political dynamics.

This item is part of the Political & Rights Issues & Social Movements (PRISM) digital collection, a collaborative initiative between Florida Atlantic University and University of Central Florida in the Publication of Archival, Library & Museum Materials (PALMM).

Society is presently living an interesting event: laicity and democracy are permeating its deepest roots. Each continent is facing it in different ways but all of them present the same common denominator. For many people, religion has been outdated within the context of laicity and democracy, No place for a word in its favour should come from families or new generations. For some scholars, the undersigned included, the described situation could be a good stage to establish a constructive dialogue between families, education, State, politics, laicity and democracy… Such an environment has shades and lights but we can´t deny that it is a challenge to generate formative, dynamic and creative processus. ; La sociedad enfrenta actualmente un evento interesante: la democracia y la laicidad van permeando sus raíces más profundas. En cada continente existen matices más o menos diversos, pero en el fondo el asunto tiene ese denominador común. En un contexto de democracia y laicidad, la religión para muchos ha pasado de moda, ni las familias, ni los padres de las nuevas generaciones deben pronunciarse. Para otros estudiosos, como el autor del presente artículo, la situación enunciada representa un escenario propicio para entablar un diálogo constructivo entre familia, educación, estado, política, laicidad, democracia. Un entorno así posee muchas luces y sombras, pero a su vez se erige como un reto capaz de generar procesos formativos dinámicos y creativos.

The relationship between translation and religion, as well as between the translator and the development of religious attitude and behaviour, is of interest to many sciences such as psychology, anthropology, or the sociology of religion, but also to translating. The concept of "monastic translation" (Bueno 2007), or more broadly "religious translation", supports this approach. The relationship of the sacred scriptures with their author undoubtedly marks some differences in translation, which also influence their reception. The identity of the translator is also an important factor in understanding the commitment to the work and function of the target text. The time and space in which this translation work takes place undoubtedly condition the result and allow for the consideration of multiple variants and consequences of their task. The consequences and impact of religious translation on different societies or political systems are measured from the Ancient Age to the Middle Ages and from the Middle Ages to Humanism, the Modern Age or the Contemporary Age. In the age of geographical discovery, the expansion of religions and their translations had very different consequences, depending on the identity of the populations or the character of the recipients of the religious message. Starting from the most well-known religions and the translation activity carried out within them, we analyse here the characteristics of the text, the behaviour of the translator (believer or non-believer, apologetic or critical of the religious system in question) and the value of the translation from multiple perspectives: linguistic, religious, anthropological, sociological, political, etc. From a more general point of view, the value of contemporary or past texts is also examined, as well as the reactions of the recipient to the translated texts, whether they are from the same or a different period.

The great monotheistic religions –Judaism, Christianity, and Islam– agree in announcing God's love for men, while demanding men's love for God and for their neighbors. However, a brief look at these religions' praxis leads to doubt whether this love is not a mere statement, while in history and at present were and are still imposed exclusive truth claims exercising violence against the adepts of the own religion ("internally") and, in especial, against the followers of other religions ("externally") in order to attain political power. Now, a distinction between the just sovereign power of God and detrimental violence should be made, asides from the fact that God's sovereign power and God's concept is not the same in the three great monotheistic religions. In Judaism God governs with love and as king, in Christianity with love and as servant, in Islam with love and majesty. Nevertheless, sovereign power is exclusive of God and detrimental violence is never desired among men. Only thus is power constitutive of religion's inner nature, but not of the relation between religions or of religions with the world: "There is no coercion in religion". ; Las grandes religiones monoteístas –Judaísmo, Cristianismo e Islam– coinciden en anunciar el amor de Dios a los hombres, y reclaman el amor de los hombres a Dios y al prójimo. Sin embargo, una breve mirada a la praxis de estas religiones hace dudar de si este amor no es una mera afirmación, mientras que en la historia y en el presente se impusieron y se imponen las pretensiones exclusivas de verdad mediante el ejercicio de la violencia en contra de los adeptos de la propia religión ("internamente") y, en especial, en contra de los seguidores de otras religiones ("externamente") para así alcanzar el poder político. Ahora bien, hay que distinguir entre el justo poder soberano de Dios y la violencia lesiva, además de que el poder soberano de Dios, al igual que el concepto de Dios, no es el mismo en las tres grandes religiones monoteístas. En el Judaísmo domina Dios con amor y como rey; en el Cristianismo, con amor y como servidor; en el Islam, con amor y majestad. Aunque siempre el poder soberano es exclusivo de Dios y nunca se desea la violencia lesiva entre los hombres. Solo así el poder es constitutivo de la naturaleza interna de la religión, mas no de la relación entre las religiones o de las religiones con el mundo: "No hay coacción en la religión".