Lutherans and Mennonites - Reconciliation and healing of memories

Not many may remember all that actually happened almost 500 years ago during and after the reformation. We Lutherans mainly remember Martin Luther's struggle to reform the Catholic Church and how he was finally kicked out of Catholic Church and had to establish a protestant church. We Lutherans tend not to remember how the Lutheran princes persecuted the Anabaptists, and did so with theological support from leaders of the protestant reformation. The Anabaptists, or Mennonites, as they themselves prefer to be called, however, have never forgotten how they were treated by their Lutheran brethren in the Christian faith.

What has just happened at the Council meeting of the Lutheran World Federation in Geneva today is therefore very significant. The council unanimously approved the report, ”Healing of Memories; Reconciliation in Christ”, from the Lutheran-Mennonite International Study Commission, 2005-2009 and the below statement and recommended it for adoptaion at the LWF Assembly in Stuttgart, Germany in 2010.

”When Lutherans today realize the history of Lutheran –anabaptist relationships in the 16th century and beyond as it is presented in the report of the Lutheran – Mennonite International Study Commission, the are filled with a deep sense regret and pain over the persecution of Anabaptists by Lutheran authorities and especially over the fact that Lutheran reformers theologically supported this persecution. Thus, LWF, A Communion of Churches wishes to express publicly its deep regret and sorrow.

Trusting in God who in Jesus Christ was reconciling the world to hiself, we ask for forgiveness – from God and fromour Mennonite sisters an brothers – for the harm that our forbears in the 16th century committed to Anabaptists, for forgetting or ignoring this persecution in the intervening centuries, and for all inappropriate, misleading and hurtful portraits of Anabaptists and Mennonites made by Lutheran authors, in both popular and scholarly forms, to the present day.

We pray that God may grant to our communities a healing of our memories and reconciliation.”

As the president of LWF, bishop Mark Hansson, ELCA, said at this very emotionale moment: "We talk a lot about repentence, but more important than words about repentence is repentence. And this is what we are involved in today."


Geneva, Monday October 26, 2009

Mogens S. Mogensen

Religion and Politics According to Moltmann

The encounter with Islam has once again raised the issue of religion and politics. Since Islam is seen by some as a politicised religion or a religious politics, some politicians, media people and also some church people have tried to explain Christianity in a way so that it separates religion from politics.

Today I happened to read an interview with and articles by the German Lutheran theologian Jürgen Moltmann which put this debate about religion and politics into a relevant context. When explaining his "theology of hope", Moltmann points out that "eschatology is the expectation of God's coming in this wolrd to establsih his reign and perfect all the longings and desires of humanity". The coming kingdom therefore gives the church a much broader focus for its mission than a only a private "only" the salvation of individual souls. For Moltmann this means that an eschatological theolology (a theology of hope) will also be a political theology.

Referring to Ernst Blochs's "Principle of Hope" he noted that the eschatoogical conscience and messianic hopes came into the world through the Bible. But, and I quote:

"In the past two centuries, a Christina fiath in God without hope for the future of the world has called forth a secular hope for the furture of the world without faith in God. Since the Christians, the churches, and theology believed in God without future, the will for a furture of the earth has joined itself to an atheism which sought a future without God. The messianic hopes emigrated from the church and became invested in progress, evolution, and revolutions."

If Christianity does not hold forth its hope for the future - based on its escahtological theology, founded in the vision of the coming Kingdom of God - and also has the courage to relate it to the political reality, the consequences may be serious.

"'Political theology", Moltmann argues, "was our answer to the fuailure of the churches and Christendom in Auschwitz. Why did the church fail? There were many heroes in the church. Why were the churches silent? Many reasons could be named. Probably the most important reasin is religon was said to be a private matter that has nothing to do with politics."

A church that choses to be silent regarding politics based on a theology that keeps religion apart from politics, I think, does not take its calling seriously.


Christiansfeld, Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Mogens S. Mogensen

If you want to read more about similar and other topics, visit my website www.intercultural.dk/english

Holocausts and genocides

Reading ”The Lost History of Christianity” (2008) by Philip Jenkins is really an enlightening and challenging experience which I can recommend to others interested in the history of the Christianity in its interactions with other religions.

Jenkins reminds us that around 1900 Christians made up about 11 % of the population of the Middle East, and points out – if we should have forgotten it – that since then ”Christians have ceased to exist altogether – are ceasing to exist – as organized communities.” And he goes on to conclude that whether the causes of that change are religious or polititical ”the result was to create a Muslim world that was just as Christian-free as large sections of Europe would be Jew-free after the Second World War. And in both instances, the major mechanism of change was the same. For alle the reasons we can suggest for long-term decline, for all the temptations to assimilate, the largest single factor for Christian decline was organize violence, whether in the form of massacre, expulsion, or forced migration” (p. 141).

All religious communities, Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu etc., have in their history events and periods which contradict the noblest ideals of these religions. It is not healthy, however, for any religious community to pretend that this was not part of their history. In Europe we have to face the reality of persecutions of Jews and the holocaust. In the same way as people in the Middle East have to face the reality of the persecution of Christians and cases of genocide, and people in Turkye will have to face the history of the Armenian genocide. Some of these tragic events took place long ago, others is part of our modern history. If we refuse to face the harsh reality and learn from our history, we may be more likely to bring ourselves – and others – in a positition where we – and others – repeat the holocausts and genocides of history.

Christiansfeld, Saturday, May 23, 2009
Mogens S. Mogensen

The Rise and Fall and Rise of Global Christianity

Next year we will celebrate the 100 anniversary of the Edinburgh World Mission Conference in 1910. At the beginning of the 20th century about more than 80 % of the Christians in the world lived in the West, i.e., in Europa and North America. And if we go a few centuries further back in time more than 90 % of alle Christians were either Europeans or North Americans. And today only about a third of all Christians live in the West.

The modern missionary movement, whose climax was the 1910 conference in Edinburgh, did not result in the conversion of all the world to Christianity – the perecentage of Christians is about the same today as it was in when mission leaders gathered in Edinburgh a hundred years ago under the slogan ”The Christianization of the World in Our Generation – but it led to an impressive globalisation. Christianity can no longer be presented as ”the white man’s religion”.

Reading Philip Jenkins’ excellent book, ”The Lost History of Christianity” (2008), I was once again reminded that the development of Christianity has not in any sens been linear and progressive in terms of extension and size. Globalisation of Christianity is not a new thing in Christian history. For many centuries in the middle ages Christianity just as globalised as it is now. Jenkins rightly observes that

”For most of its history, Christianity was a tricontinental religion, with powerful representation in Europe, Africa and Asia, and this was true into the fourtheenth century. Christianity became predominantly European not because this continent had any obvious affinity for that faith, but by defaltu. Europe was the continent where it was not destroeyed. Matters could easily have developed very differently” (p. 3).

We should keep this in mind as we celebrate the100 anniversary of Edinburgh 1910. And we should ponder this historical fact as we today celebrate the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, who on this day before ascending – so that He could and can be globally present with his church - gave his disciples then (and also his disciples today) the great commission that whereever we are or go to share the good news and call people to become His disciples.

Christiansfeld, Ascension Day, May 21, 2009
Mogens S. Mogensen

To read more about similar and other topics, visit my website: www.intercultural.dk/english

Christmas and New Year Greeting 2008

When I this autumn visited Assisi, it struck me that the themes in the public debate in Denmark in 2008, also were burning issues at the time of Francis of Assisi in th 13th century. We are discussing the climate crisis and ecology, while Frans was very concerned about our harmonious interaction with the creation of God. We still discuss how we as church and society should relate to Muslims, while Frans distanced himself from the prevailing crusading mentality of his time and dared to go to dialogue with the Muslim leader in Egypt. This year we are experiencing the beginning of a deep economic recession that exposes our material greed, while Frans also had to struggle with the materialism of his time and felt that he had to live in poverty to attain to freedom.

These three themes have also affected my work in Intercultural.dk during 2008.

• In May I was involved in a study and dialogue tour for Christians and Muslims to Istanbul, and in October we organised the third national conference for Christian and Muslim leaders; this year the theme was ”Religion in Freedom – Freedom in Religion”. Earlier this year I published the book ”From Cartoon Crisis to Headscarf Row. Two Conflicts Changing Multireligious Denmark”.

• At the council meeting of The Lutheran World Federation in Arusha, Tanzania,close to the highest mountain in Africa, Mt. Kilimanjaro, whose snow is now melting, the focus was on the climate crisis. In the Danish Mission Council we decided that the next issue of our book series, “New Mission”, which we are working on right now, should be ”Church, Mission and Climate Crisis”. Now we are preparing ourselves for the very crucial climate summit in Denmark in 2010.

• In January and February my wife and I went on a study tour to India, Thailand and Vietnam in order to study the religions and cultures of the East. This was a great inspiration for our the work, in which I am involved, of interviewing representatives of groups inspired by Eastern religiousities and spiritualities and of pastors and others who have spent years trying to be in dialogue with them. I thas become clear to me that a significant meeting point between New Agers and others and the church is Christian spirituality. I wonder if the present economic crisis will open the eyes also of ordinary Danes for the limitations and dangers of materialism and the need for a spiritual life.

About these and other themes you may read more in the English section of my website www.intercultural.dk, which will be reopened in a new version on the 1st of January.

I want to express my gratitude to all business associates, colleagues and co-workers for time spent together, for conversations and sharing and for cooperation during the year, which is now coming to an end. I hope the see and work together with you also in 2009. I wish all of you a happy Christmas and a Blessed New Year.

Yours sincerely

Mogens S. Mogensen

Cartoon Crisis - perspectives

What was the cartoon crisis all about? At least four interpretations may be offered.

1. Was it a matter of freedom of expression? This was the position taken by Jyllands-Posten and the Danish Government

2. A second possible interpretation is that the cartoon crisis has to do with the recognition or the lack thereof of a religious minority.

3. Domestic politics in Middle Easter, Asian and African Countries. Did oppressive and unpopular governments use the cartoon crisis to divert the attention of the public away from domestic politics towards international religious issues.

4. Or was the cartoon crisis an indication of a clash of civilizations? Was it basically a clash between a democratic West and an undemocratic Muslim world? It was of course tempting to combine the conflicts in the cartoon crisis with the fight against terrorism, which in the minds of most people is a fight against Islamism. Furthermore, for many it does not make sense to distinguish between Islam and Islamism. Some of the statements from among politicians in The Danish People’s Party point clearly in that direction.

Before coming to my own conclusion I want to draw your attention to a follow-up to the cartoon crisis, the socalled headscar row, which I think throws an interesting light on the cartoon crisis.

The Headscarf Row
When, in March 2006, the young Muslim woman, Asmaa Abdol-Hamid, began to appear in a series of television shows, “Adam and Asmaa”, wearing the hijab – an Islamic headscarf – a storm broke out I n the media and among politicians.A storm gaining momentum in April 2007, when she announced her plans to run for Parliament as a candidate for the Danish Red-Green Alliance, a Danish left wing party. If elected, she would become the first Muslim woman in the Danish Parliament. What caused a very heated debate, though, was that this 25-year-old woman was a devout Muslim insisting on wearing a headscarf and who, furthermore, on religious grounds, refused to shake hands with men.

Time does not permit me to go through the headscarf row. Suffice to say that Asmaa was not elected, but before and after the election we had a very heated debate that touched a number of issues surrounding the headscarf
* Ban on headscarves etc.
* Freedom of expression – freedom of religion
* Gender equality
* Value politics – what is danishness
* Islam – Islamism – terrorism
Attempting to analyse the Danish debates on the headscarf, it becomes clear that the headscarf had become an arena for many other battles in the Danish society.

Conclusion
Even though different, the cartoon crisis and the headscarf row were linked and had significant similarities.
* The most obvious link between the two was Asmaa Abdol-Hamid. She had been the spokesperson for the eleven Muslim organisations responding to the Prophet-cartoons by filing a lawsuit against Jyllands-Posten. She had headed the protest against the Danish cartoons, and she became the target of many Danes protesting against her headscarf.


* The cartoons were perceived as a provocation by many Muslims, in Denmark as abroad: Muslims were challenged to accept the cartoons on the basis of the constitutional freedom of expression and freedom of the press in Denmark. Asmaa’s headscarf (and her refusal to shake hands with men) was perceived as a provocation by many non-Muslims in Denmark: on the same basis of freedom of expression and freedom of religion, Danes were challenged to accept new ways of dressing – new ways of behaviour.

And now I come to my conclusion. The cartoon crisis and the headscarf row may – in may opinion - best be understood as seen as side effects of the ongoing globalisation

Globalisation increases and intensifies communication, for better and for worse. The cartoon crisis began as a national controversy, but soon developed into an international crisis. Probably, most, if not all, actors in the cartoon crisis had initially intended their words and actions to be taken note of in the Danish society only. Also, the decisions taken by politicians seem to have been based solely on domestic political premises. Normally, we do not expect what we say in Denmark to be heard and reacted upon in the rest of the world. This was, however, what happened during the cartoon crisis.

More importantly globalisation leads to the development of multicultural and multireligious societies. These Danish controversies may be seen as the birth pangs of the multicultural and multireligious society: the Danish society is struggling to come to terms with the fact that it now contains a much larger diversity than it has ever done before. At the same time the controversies may reflect how Muslims in Denmark are struggling to adapt to a non-Muslim society, and perhaps also struggling to develop a European version of Islam.

The multireligious nature of globalised societies has been perceived as a serious threat to the cohesion of the Danish society. The solution offered by our prime minister is – on the basis of the experiences during the cartoon crisis – to “Keep Religion Indoors” (as was the title of a feature article with him in a Danish Newspaper in May 2006. “To secure a strong coherence in the future, I am of the opinion that it would be good if religion would take up less space in the public sphere.” He would not in any way interfere with people’s freedom of religion; he insisted that “we must distinguish between religion and politics” and that “religion is first of all a private issue. If we are to maintain this strong coherence, which is so crucial for Denmark’s progress and stability, it is necessary that we also in the future encounter each other in the public sphere as human beings and citizens in Denmark – and not as representatives of different religions”.

This leads me to the last element in my analysis of the effects of globalisation. A number of researchers have noted that there is a significant connection between globalisation and the increasing visibility of religion as a political factor in various parts of the world. There is no indication, however, that religion will disappear from the public space. On the contrary all members of the Danish society will have to learn to live with the presence of religion and religions in the public space. The challenge for representatives of all religions, then, will be to show how they as religious communities can contribute to the common good of society – thereby becoming a part of the solutions to societal problems instead of being part of the problems.

Defamation of religion and freedom of expression

In 2001 a UN Conference against Racism was held in Durban, which generated a lot of heated discussions and conflicts, in particular about colonialism and zionism. Now a follow-up conference – a Durban 2 conference – is being prepared for April 2009. This time it seems as if an even more serious conflict is building up. A number of Muslim countries under the umbrella of the Organization of Islamic Countries have proposed that islamophobia should be recognized as a racism, and that defamation of religion of religions therefore should be seen as a form of racism against which religious people should be protected.

Being a Dane I cannot help thinking that it is now pay back time for the Danish cartoons. In a way I appreciate that the reaction is diplomatic rather than violent, but still this move by Muslim countries has to be opposed as strongly as possible. In most countries we have laws against defamation of people – unwarranted attacks on somebody’s reputation - but now this concept of defamation is transferred to the realm of ideas, ideologies and religions, and therenby infringes on the freedom of expression of individual people.

I do not adhere to the position that we can have an absolute and unlimited freedom of expression. All ”freedoms”, irrespective of how fundamental and important they are, must by necessity be limited by other ”freedoms”. This also became very clear in the heated Danish debate in connection with the cartoon crisis. Freedom of expression is limited by laws protection the reputation of people, confidentiality and security, incitement to violence etc.

Another very basic human right is the freedom of religion. Some would say that defamation of religions infringes on people’s freedom of religion, but I hold the opposite view that any law forbidding defamation of religion is effectively undermining the individual’s freedom of religion. Practicing another religion than that of the dominant majority and advocating the beliefs of such a religion, which might contradict the dominant religion would very easily be understood as a defamation of that dominant religion.

Without the freedom to criticize religions – and to carry out critical research on religions – the freedom of expression becomes more or less empty and meaningless. For some Muslims Islam is not only a religion in a narrow sense of the word but a way of life encompassing all dimensions of human life, including politics. A prohibition against defamation of religions might easily be used as a legitmation to proscribe un-Islamic behaviours and statements. Furthermore, religions with their very strong both cognitive, emotional and social appeals to the loyalty of their adherents, are constantly in need of criticism in order to stay healthy and avoid becoming totalitarian.

Within a legal framework of freedom of expression and freedom of religion, in which defamation of religions is not criminalized, we must of course consider not only what is legal or unlegal to say or to do about other religions and their adherents, but also what is ethical and what is wise to do and to say if we want to live peacefully together and work together to develop our society in a healthy way and deal with the local and global challenges that face all of us irrespective of our religious or non-religious affiliations and views.

Saturday, September 27, 2008
Mogens S. Mogensen

Visit my website www.intercultural.dk - click on "In English"