The Theo-Politics of Ritual: Defining and Contesting the Sacred Order of the Church

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Judith Gruber
{"title":"The Theo-Politics of Ritual: Defining and Contesting the Sacred Order of the Church","authors":"Judith Gruber","doi":"10.1093/ojlr/rwae002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Both sociology of religion and statistical bodies within the Catholic Church approach the question of church membership in similar ways: they take participation in religious ritual as a benchmark of affiliation to a religious community. What seems to be a straightforward criterion for measuring membership actually speaks to a complex interplay in the constitution of political and cosmological order: the constitution of social order through practices such as religious rituals is, irreducibly, also a definition of the ‘extraordinary’. Thus, starting from the assumption that the formation of community is a political–theological practice of boundary-drawing that cannot but refer to a beyond, this article offers a theological critique of ritual participation as a criterion of ecclesial affiliation. Taking the performance ‘Verantwort: ich’ (Synodaler Weg, 2023) as a case, it shows that it rests on a theological concept of transcendence that is used as a hegemonic instrument to confirm the established order of belonging in the church. Arguing that the definition of ecclesial boundaries is an irreducibly powerful, even violent theo-political practice, it asks which theological notion of transcendence can best reckon with, and consequently offer tools for managing, rather than concealing, the normative violence that is at the heart of the question of who belongs to the church.","PeriodicalId":44058,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Journal of Law and Religion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojlr/rwae002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Both sociology of religion and statistical bodies within the Catholic Church approach the question of church membership in similar ways: they take participation in religious ritual as a benchmark of affiliation to a religious community. What seems to be a straightforward criterion for measuring membership actually speaks to a complex interplay in the constitution of political and cosmological order: the constitution of social order through practices such as religious rituals is, irreducibly, also a definition of the ‘extraordinary’. Thus, starting from the assumption that the formation of community is a political–theological practice of boundary-drawing that cannot but refer to a beyond, this article offers a theological critique of ritual participation as a criterion of ecclesial affiliation. Taking the performance ‘Verantwort: ich’ (Synodaler Weg, 2023) as a case, it shows that it rests on a theological concept of transcendence that is used as a hegemonic instrument to confirm the established order of belonging in the church. Arguing that the definition of ecclesial boundaries is an irreducibly powerful, even violent theo-political practice, it asks which theological notion of transcendence can best reckon with, and consequently offer tools for managing, rather than concealing, the normative violence that is at the heart of the question of who belongs to the church.
仪式的神学政治学:界定和争论教会的神圣秩序
宗教社会学和天主教会内的统计机构都以类似的方式处理教会成员资格问题:它们将参与宗教仪式作为隶属于宗教团体的基准。看似简单明了的衡量成员资格的标准,实际上反映了政治和宇宙秩序构成中复杂的相互作用:通过宗教仪式等实践构成社会秩序,不可避免地也是对 "非凡 "的定义。因此,本文从社群的形成是一种政治-神学的划界实践这一假设出发,对作为教会归属标准的仪式参与进行了神学批判。文章以 "Verantwort: ich"(Synodaler Weg,2023 年)的表演为例,指出它建立在超越的神学概念之上,而这一概念被用作一种霸权工具,以确认教会中既定的归属秩序。在论证教会界限的定义是一种不可或缺的强大、甚至暴力的神学政治实践时,它提出了哪种超越性的神学概念能够最好地应对,从而为管理而非掩盖规范性暴力提供工具,而规范性暴力正是谁属于教会这一问题的核心所在。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: Recent years have witnessed a resurgence of religion in public life and a concomitant array of legal responses. This has led in turn to the proliferation of research and writing on the interaction of law and religion cutting across many disciplines. The Oxford Journal of Law and Religion (OJLR) will have a range of articles drawn from various sectors of the law and religion field, including: social, legal and political issues involving the relationship between law and religion in society; comparative law perspectives on the relationship between religion and state institutions; developments regarding human and constitutional rights to freedom of religion or belief; considerations of the relationship between religious and secular legal systems; and other salient areas where law and religion interact (e.g., theology, legal and political theory, legal history, philosophy, etc.). The OJLR reflects the widening scope of study concerning law and religion not only by publishing leading pieces of legal scholarship but also by complementing them with the work of historians, theologians and social scientists that is germane to a better understanding of the issues of central concern. We aim to redefine the interdependence of law, humanities, and social sciences within the widening parameters of the study of law and religion, whilst seeking to make the distinctive area of law and religion more comprehensible from both a legal and a religious perspective. We plan to capture systematically and consistently the complex dynamics of law and religion from different legal as well as religious research perspectives worldwide. The OJLR seeks leading contributions from various subdomains in the field and plans to become a world-leading journal that will help shape, build and strengthen the field as a whole.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信