IF 0.4 0 RELIGION
K. Delport
{"title":"Between Imperium and Sacerdotium","authors":"K. Delport","doi":"10.1163/15743012-bja10045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Christianity from its inception has expressed a tension between imperium and sacerdotium; after the Reformation, this tension has only been aggravated. Avowals of religious freedom thereafter have often rightly insisted on the capacity of spiritual communities to invoke limits for the state. This is readily apparent in South Africa, past and present. However, scholarship has shown that “religious liberty” has an ambiguous function, such as its privatisation of belief, based on a liberalised notion of “negative” freedom that allows the state to grant the “right” to “belief,” while simultaneously rendering belief a purely private or “otherworldly” affair. This is traceable to overly-Protestant conceptions of “religion” and “freedom” that are pervasive – including South Africa. From a theological perspective, I argue that this conception of “religious freedom” might sit in tension with aspects of ecclesiology and that the discursive deployment of “religious freedom” should therefore be engaged critically.","PeriodicalId":41841,"journal":{"name":"Religion and Theology-A Journal of Contemporary Religious Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Religion and Theology-A Journal of Contemporary Religious Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15743012-bja10045","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: 0

摘要

基督教从一开始就表达了统治权和圣权之间的紧张关系;宗教改革之后,这种紧张关系更加恶化了。此后,宗教自由的宣言往往正确地坚持认为,宗教团体有能力为国家施加限制。这在过去和现在的南非都很明显。然而,学术研究表明,“宗教自由”具有模棱两可的功能,例如其信仰私有化,基于一种自由化的“消极”自由概念,允许国家授予“信仰”的“权利”,同时使信仰成为纯粹私人或“超自然”的事情。这可以追溯到包括南非在内的普遍存在的过度新教的“宗教”和“自由”概念。从神学的角度来看,我认为“宗教自由”的概念可能与教会学的各个方面存在紧张关系,因此,对“宗教自由”的话语部署应该加以批判。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Between Imperium and Sacerdotium
Christianity from its inception has expressed a tension between imperium and sacerdotium; after the Reformation, this tension has only been aggravated. Avowals of religious freedom thereafter have often rightly insisted on the capacity of spiritual communities to invoke limits for the state. This is readily apparent in South Africa, past and present. However, scholarship has shown that “religious liberty” has an ambiguous function, such as its privatisation of belief, based on a liberalised notion of “negative” freedom that allows the state to grant the “right” to “belief,” while simultaneously rendering belief a purely private or “otherworldly” affair. This is traceable to overly-Protestant conceptions of “religion” and “freedom” that are pervasive – including South Africa. From a theological perspective, I argue that this conception of “religious freedom” might sit in tension with aspects of ecclesiology and that the discursive deployment of “religious freedom” should therefore be engaged critically.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
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