Orthodox churches and politics in Southeastern Europe: nationalism, conservativism, and intolerance

IF 1.3 0 RELIGION Religion State & Society Pub Date : 2021-10-20 DOI:10.1080/09637494.2021.1995177
Vasilios N. Makrides
{"title":"Orthodox churches and politics in Southeastern Europe: nationalism, conservativism, and intolerance","authors":"Vasilios N. Makrides","doi":"10.1080/09637494.2021.1995177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"another, and thus in turn produce and reproduce the particular ways religious diversity circulates in public discourse? The text contends with a number of ‘linguistic dilemmas’ – successfully on some points, less so on others, and on yet others one might say ‘the jury is still out’. The perennial problem of consistency and accuracy in the uses of ‘ity’, ‘ism’, and ‘isation’, which dogs the field of sociology of religion generally, is one point of vulnerability in this text. One example is in the use of the term ‘religious diversity’, endowed by Burchardt with a normativity because of the ways it ‘is turning into an increasingly prominent tool in order to render populations legible for governmental and administrative purposes’ (3); it may or may not be overly pedantic to suggest that good old-fashioned ‘pluralism’ and ‘anti-pluralism’ could serve the purpose equally well without contributing to the prevalent conceptual confusion between diversity and pluralism. Another example may be found in the uses of ‘secular’, ‘secularism’, ‘secularity’, and ‘secularisation’. Perhaps more substantially though, one might question the overall limitation of the book’s focus, as indicated in its subtitle, on the ‘secular West’. Besides not offering a definition of the ‘secular West’, Burchardt also does not entirely do justice to his previous work on ‘multiple secularities’ in thus limiting the scope to the ‘secular West’: many contestations of religion akin to those he describes in his second chapter, and to those he elaborates further through examples of urban administration and debates around head and face coverings (chapters 3 and 4), as well as iterations of heritage religion (chapter 5) may be found in not-so-post-secular contexts, across the globe. The extent to which migration-driven diversity is a necessary catalyst for all the above may also be questioned in a globalised world in which societies may be torn by passionate debates over issues not (yet, or possibly ever) directly relevant to them, in an empirical sense at least. Burchardt’s Regulating Difference is an excellent resource for students and scholars of religious diversity, of the relationship between religion and national identity, and of secularism and secularity. It is path-breaking, insightful, and a delight to read, and the field of religious diversity studies will be enriched if many do indeed read it.","PeriodicalId":45069,"journal":{"name":"Religion State & Society","volume":"39 1","pages":"423 - 426"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion State & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2021.1995177","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

another, and thus in turn produce and reproduce the particular ways religious diversity circulates in public discourse? The text contends with a number of ‘linguistic dilemmas’ – successfully on some points, less so on others, and on yet others one might say ‘the jury is still out’. The perennial problem of consistency and accuracy in the uses of ‘ity’, ‘ism’, and ‘isation’, which dogs the field of sociology of religion generally, is one point of vulnerability in this text. One example is in the use of the term ‘religious diversity’, endowed by Burchardt with a normativity because of the ways it ‘is turning into an increasingly prominent tool in order to render populations legible for governmental and administrative purposes’ (3); it may or may not be overly pedantic to suggest that good old-fashioned ‘pluralism’ and ‘anti-pluralism’ could serve the purpose equally well without contributing to the prevalent conceptual confusion between diversity and pluralism. Another example may be found in the uses of ‘secular’, ‘secularism’, ‘secularity’, and ‘secularisation’. Perhaps more substantially though, one might question the overall limitation of the book’s focus, as indicated in its subtitle, on the ‘secular West’. Besides not offering a definition of the ‘secular West’, Burchardt also does not entirely do justice to his previous work on ‘multiple secularities’ in thus limiting the scope to the ‘secular West’: many contestations of religion akin to those he describes in his second chapter, and to those he elaborates further through examples of urban administration and debates around head and face coverings (chapters 3 and 4), as well as iterations of heritage religion (chapter 5) may be found in not-so-post-secular contexts, across the globe. The extent to which migration-driven diversity is a necessary catalyst for all the above may also be questioned in a globalised world in which societies may be torn by passionate debates over issues not (yet, or possibly ever) directly relevant to them, in an empirical sense at least. Burchardt’s Regulating Difference is an excellent resource for students and scholars of religious diversity, of the relationship between religion and national identity, and of secularism and secularity. It is path-breaking, insightful, and a delight to read, and the field of religious diversity studies will be enriched if many do indeed read it.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
东南欧的东正教和政治:民族主义、保守主义和不宽容
另一个,从而反过来产生和再现宗教多样性在公共话语中传播的特殊方式?这篇文章讨论了许多“语言困境”——在某些方面成功了,在另一些方面就不那么成功了,而在另一些方面,人们可能会说“尚无定论”。在使用“城市”、“主义”和“化”的一致性和准确性方面的长期问题,通常困扰着宗教社会学领域,是本文的一个弱点。一个例子是“宗教多样性”一词的使用,伯查特赋予了它规范性,因为它“正在成为一种日益突出的工具,以便为政府和行政目的提供清晰的人口”(3);老式的“多元主义”和“反多元主义”同样可以达到目的,而不会造成多样性和多元主义之间普遍存在的概念混淆,这种说法可能过于迂腐,也可能不太迂腐。另一个例子是“世俗的”、“世俗主义”、“世俗主义”和“世俗化”的用法。也许更重要的是,正如副标题所示,人们可能会质疑这本书关注的整体局限性,即“世俗西方”。除了没有给出“世俗西方”的定义之外,Burchardt也没有完全公正地对待他之前关于“多重世俗”的工作,从而将范围限制在“世俗西方”上:许多类似于他在第二章中描述的宗教争论,以及他通过城市管理和围绕头巾和面罩的辩论(第3章和第4章)的例子进一步阐述的宗教争论,以及传统宗教的迭代(第5章),可以在全球范围内的非后世俗背景中找到。在一个全球化的世界里,移民驱动的多样性在多大程度上是上述所有问题的必要催化剂,也可能受到质疑。在这个世界里,社会可能会因为与(尚未,或可能永远)与他们没有直接关系的问题(至少在经验意义上)的激烈辩论而四分五裂。伯查特的《调节差异》是研究宗教多样性、宗教与国家认同、世俗主义与世俗主义关系的学生和学者的优秀资源。这本书具有开创性,见解深刻,读起来令人愉悦,如果许多人真的读了它,宗教多样性研究领域将会丰富起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
10.00%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: Religion, State & Society has a long-established reputation as the leading English-language academic publication focusing on communist and formerly communist countries throughout the world, and the legacy of the encounter between religion and communism. To augment this brief Religion, State & Society has now expanded its coverage to include religious developments in countries which have not experienced communist rule, and to treat wider themes in a more systematic way. The journal encourages a comparative approach where appropriate, with the aim of revealing similarities and differences in the historical and current experience of countries, regions and religions, in stability or in transition.
期刊最新文献
Unsettled grounds: religion, gender and sexual nationalism in a Dutch city. Confessional culture, religiosity, and traditionalism: tracing the influence of religion on public attitudes towards European integration Conflict and coexistence among minorities within minority religions: a case study of Tablighi Jama’at in Japan Editors’ introduction Rage and carnage in the name of God: religious violence in Nigeria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1