Suchergebnisse

Ursprung und Entwicklung der evangelikalen, pentekostalen (aus der Pfingstbewegung stammenden) und fundamentalistischen Strömungen des amerikanischen Protestantismus, eingebettet in den jeweiligen historischen, kulturellen und sozialen Kontext

Comments on Zdenek R. Nespor's article, 'Three European Sociologies of Religion: Beyond the Usual Agenda of the Discipline,' which reviews three new European overviews of the discipline that go beyond its traditional agenda. There is agreement with Nespor that there has been a merging of European & Anglo-American sociologies of religion; however, differences between European & American applications of the sociological study of religion are said to be an artificially created problem. Attention is given to whether or not the sociology of religion needs grand theories, especially the secularization theory which Nespor describes as 'worn out.' The dispute over the importance of the secularization paradigm for the sociology of religion is considered to argue that abandoning it is not completely justified. The inadequate attention Nespor gives to the dispute over the definition of religion is pointed out, along with the inability of the sociology of religion to 'decide which rationality/discourse type it has & is able to defend & which criteria will help assess the relevance of the rationalities adopted.'

Containing over 200 articles from prominent scholars, The Encyclopedia of Politics and Religion examines ways in which politics and religion have combined to affect social attitudes, spark collective action and influence policy over the last two hundred years. With a focus that covers broad themes like millenarian movements and pluralism, and a scope that takes in religious and political systems throughout the world, the Encyclopedia is essential for its contemporary as well as historical coverage. Special Features:* Encompasses religions, individuals, geographical.

AbstractA number of controversial aspects of the relationship between religion and the state are located in public space. Although burqa bans, the Swiss minaret ban, and duties to display crucifixes on public buildings are different in various ways, it is significant that they all take place in this particular type of location. However, when normative political theorists have addressed these issues, they have rarely paid sufficient attention to their spatial location, and, as a result, their analyses are lacking a vital dimension. This article shows what can go wrong when these normative analyses do not refer to an account of public space. It then indicates what part of a suitable account would look like by sketching four of its essential elements, referred to as the definition, distinctiveness, differentiation, and dynamism of public space. It is argued that normative political theorists should draw on aspects of such an account in order to achieve a more sophisticated understanding of issues concerning religion in public spaces, as well as to reach more securely grounded normative conclusions about them.

The scientific worldview of Michio Kaku—a prominent theoretical physicist and popularizer of science—can be viewed as a humanistic religion based on the principles of physics and how they relate to humanity's place in the cosmos. In a sense, he follows in the tradition of Isaac Newton, Galileo Galilei, and Albert Einstein, all of whom searched for the secret rules on which the universe runs. Their pursuit of science was not unlike a religious quest, insofar as they believed that by exposing the patterns underlying nature, they could read the mind of God. Numerous religious motifs feature prominently in Kaku's narrative of science and futurology, including a creation myth, a period of tribulation, an eschatology and salvation through science.

One way of approaching the following essays is to pause here at the beginning and consider the peculiarity of the conversation we will be overhearing. In this volume we will be listening to a group of scholars who are Catholic, Episcopal, mainline Protestant, evangelical, and secularist in their varied backgrounds. They are considering the place of religion in public policymaking. The peculiarity arises if we think about American public life historically. For one thing, we are listening to people who most likely would not have been inclined to interact with each other at the outset of the twentieth century. More than that, they are talking about something that hardly anyone a hundred years ago would have thought even needs discussing.