|
|
|
Céline
Beraud, The Role of Religion in Students' Lives and their
Surroundings [REDCo III, pp. 397-408]
Also some
remarkable findings (quotes) from other contributions than Beraud's.
p. 401 The
REDCo survey's conclusions on the religiosity of the teenagers surveyed
What is a
"religious student"? Measuring religious identity is undoubtedly a
sociological challenge. The indicators are imprecise and insufficiently
inclusive when considered separately (Campiche, 1997, p. 47-48). When
the questionnaire was conceived, we used different indicators of
religiosity. The first was based upon the assertion of a religious
affiliation or a worldview, or the lack of such an assertion. As with
the Norwegian report, we may wonder about how those surveyed understood
the question: was it seen from an institutional point of view (having
been baptised for example), from a familial and cultural point of view
(having grown up in a Muslim family for example), or from an individual
point of view of personal convictions? This indicator shows whether or
not the people in question think of themselves as within an existing
religious system, and whether or not they feel that they are part of a
tradition. However, this relationship "is not necessarily a fundamental
component of personality" (Campiche, 1997, p. 55). Moreover, it rules
out other non-institutional forms of religiosity. To get a sense of
personal commitment, the indicator associated with the importance given
to religion in each person's life may be more significant. In some of
the reports, it was clearly preferred as a way of measuring the level of
teenagers' religiosity. The data gathered in the question dealing with
belief also made distinctions possible. The frequency of religious
activities appears as a less effective indicator for distinguishing
religious students from nonreligious ones. On the other hand, it was
useful for highlighting the existence of very religious minorities.
Despite the limitations of our survey, involving either the indicators
of religiosity or the samples chosen, we may draw several firmly
established conclusions. We must first point out that some of these
conclusions may seem to contradict each other; this is a result of the
diver- p 402- sity of religious experience among the teenagers surveyed.
This diversity is perceptible between national (or local) contexts, but
even more so within them.
-
The overall tendency toward a
lack of interest
in religious institutions is clearly perceptible everywhere.
A good illustration of this is the relatively low percentages of
the young people surveyed who identify with a religion: in many
cases they make up less than half of the sample. The influence of
religious communities and their leaders appears everywhere as
secondary. The young people surveyed have few opportunities to meet
with religious authorities. It is therefore not surprising that
religious communities are not seen as important sources of
information regarding religion. In the case of St. Petersburg, this
could be explained by historical circumstances, but also because
here, as in all the other locations where the survey took place,
those surveyed tended to consider religiosity as the individual's
business before being something institutions need to deal with.
-
This tendency does not stand in the way of the
existence of active religious minorities with an institutional
presence among young people.
A small proportion of those surveyed consider religion as
something very important in their lives. These same people stand out
by their high level of belief and religious practice. On this
point, young Muslims seem noteworthy. In the Norwegian sample, five
times more Muslim teenagers than Christian teenagers feel that
religion is very important to their lives. The tendency is the
same in the German and English samples, although the difference
between the groups is not as great. There is another remarkable
distinction between young Muslims and young Christians concerning
their level of belief in God. Among young Muslims in the German and
French samples this level is much higher (94% and 97% respectively)
than among young Christians in both samples (59% and 53%
respectively)ll. The difference is not as large in the English
sample: nearly all young Muslims say they believe in God, vs. 75% of
young Christians. The data from this same sample also reveals a
higher level of religious practice (particularly prayer and reading
of sacred texts) among young Muslims. The insufficiently large size
of the samples made it impossible to get an idea of distinctions
internal to Christianity: between denominations, but also between
tendencies within these denominations. The French report has some
comments on young Protestants who belong to charismatic,
evangelical movements. In the national context, they seem to have
many similarities with their Muslim peers. The impact of
national origin on the internal diversity of the various Christian
and non-Christian denominations also deserves a more detailed
analysis, but here again a larger sample, and/or a qualitative
methodology, would be required. The English report seems to go in
this direction when it draws a comparison between Muslim students of
South Asian origin and African Christians, who share strong theistic
points of view.
-
We
should add that this lack of interest in
religious institutions is not associated with a large-scale
acceptance of antireligious positions.
On the contrary, we find that only a very small minority of
teenagers declare themselves to be staunch atheists, including those
in Estonia and S1. Petersburg where state atheism was promoted
during the Soviet era, as wen as teenagers in France and Spain where
anticlerical movements have historically had large followings. In
all of the regions involved, even the most secularised countries,
those surveyed strongly reject the most hostile statements regarding
religions and religious people, such as "Religion is nonsense."
There are sometimes marked differences between sexes on this issue.
p. 403 For example, in the samples from Estonia and St. Petersburg,
girls are much less likely to give the most negative responses than
boys are. This is another example of something already observed in
the EVS surveys: "Vague beliefs and religious indifference are
becoming much more prevalent among young Europeans than the
well-reasoned rejection of religious systems" (Campiche, 1997, p.
53). In many national contexts, we may be able to establish a
hypothesis of a break with previous generations on this matter:
older generations seem to have a more negative image of religions
and their most ardent followers. The French context seems to be a
perfect example ofthis12
-
We find
various signs of a
tendency toward
"religion off the beaten track"
(Lambert, 2005: "religion hors-piste") among the young people surveyed, a phenomenon
also described as a mobile and flexible religiosity
modelled
on the two ideal-typical figures of the "pilgrim" and the '"convert"
(Hervieu-Leger, 1999: The pilgrim travels alone and of his or
her own free will. His or her practice revolves around "sacred
places" and "profound experiences", not around day-to-day living.
The convert chooses to commit himself or herself). This
phenomenon is part of a religious environment that is more complex
than what was foreseen some years ago by the theory of a decreasing
interest in religion (Berger, 1967).
The
analysis of the answers given to the question dealing with belief in
"God, a life force or a kind of spirit" reveals that
people without a
religious affiliation are not necessarily nonbelievers or non-observant
(at least when it comes to prayer). Here we find another example of
the phenomenon of "believing without belonging" that the British
sociologist Grace Davie has observed (1994). The decline of religious
institutions has not been accompanied by a decline in belief. Quite the
reverse: some beliefs remain strong and are even growing, though with
some wavering. The grand narratives of belief "function as stocks of
symbolic resources that individuals appropriate freely" (Hervieu-Leger,
2005, p. 296). In addition, some teenagers who do not identify with any
religion say they pray at least occasionally. This is true for more than
a third of the young Spaniards surveyed who said they did not have a
religion. A small minority of German teenagers who said they had no
religion (between 4% and 8% depending on the federal state studied) even
said they pray every day. In all cases, many of those surveyed agree
with the following statement: "One may be a religious person without
belonging to a particular community of faith." (The level of agreement
is especially high in the Estonian, English, Spanish, Norwegian and S1.
Petersburg samples.) The young people surveyed thus seem to have taken
note of the phenomenon of "the institutional deregulation of belief'
(Hervieu-Leger, 1999).
There is
only one question in the REDCo questionnaire - the one regarding "some
sort of spirit or life force" - that allows us to evaluate
how much
borrowing takes place from non Christian belief systems, which is
another example of this mobile and flexible religiosity
(Sociologists use the metaphor of the "bricolage" to describe that kind
of phenomenon. See Hervieu Leger (2005)). For example,
27% of the teenagers surveyed in the Norwegian sample feel that "some
sort of spirit or life force" exists. In other words, these teenagers in
a traditionally Lutheran country agree with an expression that has its
roots in Oriental or New Age religions. A comparable proportion of
teenagers in the French sample agree, in a country that has
traditionally had a Catholic majority. The proportion is even higher in
S1. Petersburg (40%), in a context marked - p. 404 -
by Orthodox
Christianity followed by several decades of state atheism. Theses
results are interesting but we lack other indicators often used in
quantitative surveys on religiosity, such as belief in reincarnation or
the practice of meditation, to go further on the question of
"bricolage" mixing Christian and non-Christian beliefs and
practices.
Some
doubts are often expressed. For example, more than 40% of French
teenagers surveyed say they have doubts16 about the existence or
non-existence of God (the proportion is roughly the same in the
Norwegian and German samples). In addition, some of those
surveyed say they are
open to change. This position ("What I think about religion is open
to change") is clearly mentioned among the Spanish and Estonian
teenagers surveyed, whether or not they identify with a particular
religion. But some religious minorities resist this relativism, as shown
by the young English Muslims surveyed who distinguish themselves from
their classmates by disapproving strongly of doubts about the existence
ofGod and by rejecting the possibility of future changes in their
beliefs.
However,
this tendency toward "religion off the beaten track" among the teenagers
surveyed may be put into perspective through the importance they give to
the family as a source of religious socialisation, as. well as through
the importance of the traditions inherited from their parents. This
heritage can be seen in the relative correspondence between the religion
or worldview of those surveyed and that of their mother or father, as
well as in the divided opinions gathered on the statement "Religion is
something one inherits from one's family", which did not make it
possible to ascertain a clear tendency toward rejecting inherited
religious affiliations.
-
The
role of religions in cultural heritage asserts itself at the very moment
when religious institutions are becoming less socially relevant and are
losing their hold on the faithful (Boespflug, Dunand & Willaime,
1996). In all the samples, the statement "Religion is important in our
history" obtains a majority of favourable opinions. The Norwegian report
highlights the existence of a group of "cultural Christians", that is
young people who identify with Christianity, but without necessarily
sharing its beliefs or practices. We thus see here a form of "belonging
without believing" in symmetry with the previously observed "believing
without belonging". This category must necessarily exist in other
samples, even though it is not explicitly mentioned.
[next pages
are devoted to checking
the working hypotheses]
The data on
the role of religion in the personal lives of teenagers highlights
situations that contrast to a certain degree from one national (or
local) context to another, but also within each context, as well as some
tendencies that are partially contradictory. Our survey confirms the
tendency toward a lack of interest in religious institutions, excepting
very religious minorities. This tendency does not mean either the end of
forms of religiosity that willingly go "off the beaten track," or the
end of the ability religions have to build identities, as demonstrated
by the "cultural Christians" whose relationship to religious traditions
is based on cultural heritage.
As for the
issues of tolerance and dialogue, we may conclude by distinguishing
diversity as a fact and as a value (pluralism). The first case [= as a
fact] concerns
the presence of several distinct groups within a given society. The
second corresponds to a "deliberate option [...] that intends to
emphasise that diversity, to take it into account and even to promote
it" (Lamine, 2004, p. 226). Whether or not we consider the teenagers
surveyed to be "religious", they are clearly aware of how diverse the
European societies to which they belong have become, even for those
living in national contexts where this diversity remains quantitatively
limited. Moreover, our survey underlines the support that most of the
teenagers surveyed share toward diversity as a value (tolerance and
openness to dialogue). Still, we must be very cautious about our
conclusions in this area. With this quantitative survey, we have
collected opinions. But to be able to assert that there is indeed
tolerance and openness to dialogue, and thus that the values of
diversity are experienced on a daily basis, these opinions must confront
the facts. Stopping at the level of what is said means taking the risk
of being caught in a form of "religious correctness" that teenagers have
no trouble mastering. Moreover, we have to recognise the limits of our
research regarding the forms of tolerance and dialogue that the
questionnaire takes into account, and thus keep ourselves from being
overly optimistic.
G.Bertram
Troost, How do European Pupils see Religion in School
p. 420
The general
impression is that European pupils have the feeling that learning about
religions at school has more impact on their knowledge on different
religions, their respect for people of different religions and on how
they (learn to) live together than on what they learn about themselves,
current events and decisions between right and wrong.
The social
dimension of learning about religion in school (including getting
knowledge about different religions) is, so to say, much more accepted
and appreciated by pupils than the personal dimension.
Pille Valk,
How do European Students see the Impact
of Religion
p. 425-426
General patterns
Looking at the findings regarding the
role of religion in the society
through the European
teenagers' perspective, one can point out the following general
patterns:
-
Most oft he teenagers surveyed see religion as a normal part of the
societal life.
-
The surveyed students mainly did not see religion as a source of
aggressiveness nor an obstacle to tolerance.
-
Students soundly disagreed with the xenophobic statement 'I don't
like people from other religions and do not want to live together
with them' in all our samples.
The surveyed teenagers were quite aware of the conflict potential of
religion. At the same time most of them were convinced that
respecting the religion of others is a way to cope with differences.
[volgt een nationaal uitgesplitst stuk]
Thus,
summing up - in all the national samples in REDCo survey an interesting
and important similar pattern occurred:
-
Students
with religious affiliation share much more positive positions regarding
the impact of religion in society.
-
They are more likely to disagree that
religious people are less tolerant toward others, that the world would
be a better place without religion and that religion is the source of
aggressiveness.
-
They also esteemed the role of respecting the religion
of others in coping with differences significantly more highly.
Religion
as a contribution for dialogue
As is said
in the first chapter of the book, we did not work with an elaborated
specific theoretical concept of dialogue in our quantitative study.
Instead, we decided to use the simple wording 'talking about' as a
flexible synonym for dialogue in our instrument [...]. Three
statements [..] explored the possible positive impact of dialogue on
religious issues
- "Talking about religion helps to
understand others",
- "Talking about religion helps me to live peacefully
together with people from different religions", and
-
"Talking about religion helps me to understand better what is going on
in the world"
When looking at the mean values of the responses to the
first statement, it occurs that in all samples they lay closely and
firmly on the agreement side of the scale, between 2.44 (England) and
2.82 (Estonia). A similar pattern was found also in regarding to the
third statement. Here also all the means are below '3' from 2.49
(France) to 2.95 (Russia). Talking about religion as a prerequisite for
the peaceful co-existence of people from different religions met a
slightly different response. Here the means lay between 2.75 (Dutch
respondents) and 3.18 (French respondents). The means of the responses
fell slightly into the disagreement side of the scale in three samples -
in France, St. Petersburg (3.07) and Norway (3.04). The statement, that
talking about religion only leads to disagreement was not agreed by the
'average respondent' in all countries - all the mean values lay on the
disagreement side of the scale from 3.07 (for Norway and Estonia) to
3.86 (for The Netherlands). The statement reflecting the emotional
reactions regarding religion as something to talk about - "In my view
talking about religion is embarrassing" was rejected by lot of
respondents in all countries. The mildest disagreement was found among
the St. Petersburg students (3.31); the strongest disagreement was
recorded among the Dutch students (4.25). There were three samples where
the mean value of the responses was higher than 4 (thus, in-between
'disagree' and 'strongly disagree') - in addition to The Netherlands
this was the case also in Germany and in Norway. The last detail is of
particular interest because when looking at the answers to "For me
talking about religious topics is boring", Norwegian respondents
together with Estonians were the only ones whose mean response fell
slightly to the agreement side of the scale (2.96): is it the case that
talking about religion is not embarrassing because it is just not an
issue to talk about?
These
general findings regarding 'talking about religion' could be synthesized
in the following way:
-
The
surveyed students evaluate the dialogue on religious issues as an
important mean of understanding others as well as the current events
going on in the world.
-
The
respondents were less optimistic about talking about religion as being a
sufficient prerequisite for peaceful coexistence. Probably something
more is needed.
-
Religion
was not considered as an embarrassing topic to discuss about by our
respondents. If they are not so eager to talk about religion in some
countries it is because their main interests lay somewhere else.
[nationaal
uitgesplitst]
p. 430
Summing up the main findings
[whether religion is
positive or negative with regard to dialogue] one can state that:
-
Positive statements towards dialogue are evaluated more highly, and
negative ones lower, by the students with religious affiliation.
-
Girls in all countries tended to be more open for dialogue and more
optimistic about the possible positive impact of such communication.
-
Muslim students were distinguished by higher readiness for dialogue
and communication in several countries.
It is a challenging complex research question for future deeper
investigation how far their readiness to talk about religion is
influenced by their reaction to the negative image propagated
sometimes by the media, how far it is an apologetic position,
how far there is deeper conscious readiness for dialogue. These
questions can of course also be addressed to the readiness for
dialogue of Christian pupils.
ways to
peaceful coexistence
Looking at
the general tendencies in the surveyed students' views regarding the
prerequisites for peaceful coexistence, one can point out the following
issues:
-
Students
evaluate knowledge about the different religions and worldviews as one
of the most important preconditions for peace in the pluralistic
society.
-
Common
interests and joint action help to develop social cohesion. Personal
contacts help to overcome separation and xenophobia.
-
The
relevance of the impact of legislative measures in attaining peaceful
coexistence is less agreed upon, compared to the above-mentioned aspects
such as knowledge, common interests and joint actions. Nevertheless
legislative measures are also regarded as a useful instrument by a
considerable proportion of pupils. Even less was the number of those who
agreed that keeping religion as a private matter will solve the
problems.
|