Kuulutko tai oletko aikaisemmin kuulunut vanhoillislestadiolaiseen herätysliikkeeseen? Tai onko Sinulla muutoin kokemuksia vanhoillislestadiolaisuudesta?
Olen tekemässä tutkimusta ns. hoitokokouksista, joita järjestettiin liikkeen piirissä erityisesti 1970-luvun loppupuolella.
Kiinnostuksen kohteena ovat erityisesti ihmisten kokemukset hoitokokouksista; minkälaisia tunteita ne herättivät silloin ja millaisia tunteita ne ovat aiheuttaneet jälkeenpäin?
Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena ei ole selvittää niinkään tapahtumien täsmällistä kulkua, vaan ihmisten kokemusperäistä näkökulmaa asiaan. Kirjoituksissa toivotaan, että niissä kerrottaisiin tapahtumista, niihin liittyvistä muistokuvista ja tuntemuksista. Menneisyyden kokemusten ja tuntemusten lisäksi on kiinnostavaa, millaisia tunteita ne herättävät nykyään.
Kirjoituksia toivotaan niiltä, jotka ovat olleen tekemisissä jollakin tavalla asian kanssa, sekä niiltä, joihin hoitokokoukset ovat vaikuttaneet joko suoraan tai epäsuoraan. Jos olet liikkeen ulkopuolinen henkilö, millaisia kokemuksia Sinulla on ollut hoitokokouksista ulkopuolisin silmin?
Tutkimus kuuluu Suomen Akatemian rahoittamaan "Lestadionismi: Poliittinen teologia ja kansalaisuskonto maallistuvassa Suomessa" -tutkimushankkeeseen (hankenumero: 132693). Lapin yliopistoon sijoittuva tutkimushanke jatkuu vuoden 2012 loppuun asti.
Tutkimuksen toteuttaa dosentti Aini Linjakumpu Lapin yliopistosta. Kirjoitukset voi lähettää osoitteella: Aini Linjakumpu, Lapin yliopisto, PL 122, 96101 Rovaniemi. Kirjoituksia voi lähettää myös sähköpostilla osoitteeseen: hoitokokoukset ät ulapland piste fi. Asiaan liittyvät tiedustelut joko kirjeitse tai edellä mainitulla sähköpostilla.
Kirjoituksia toivotaan 30.6. mennessä. Kirjoitukset käsitellään ehdottoman luottamuksellisesti. Kirjoitukset voidaan toimittaa myös nimettöminä, mutta toivotaan, että niissä ilmenee kirjoittajan ikä, sukupuoli ja mahdollisesti myös asuinpaikka.
Aini
Civil Religion
In one of my earlier postings I gave a short theoretical introduction to political theology. In this posting I will unfold the concept of civil religion.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s book The Social Contract formulates the idea of how people should get together and form a society. The book -- first published in 1762 -- also discusses the role of civil religion in society.
For Rousseau man is born free but in order to preserve himself he has to join with others. This union happens in a social contract and the society thereby constituted becomes the foundation of the general will. The general will ensures that all the people remain free and no one will subjugate the others. According to Rousseau people form the sovereign entity and enact the laws. However, Rousseau separates the government from the people: the job of the government is to implement the general will.
However Rousseau sees it as problematic how a man could accept that the sovereign entity is not led by a ruler who would have received his mandate straight from God. To solve this problem he formulates the concept of civil religion. Civil religion is not about religion as such -- actually it is a way to diminish the role of religion in society. Rousseau makes clear distinction between the civil religion and the private religion. The latter should be out of reach of the government and everybody's private matter as long as it does not conflict with civil religion.
Rousseau makes clear that Christianity will not work as a civil religion or as a bonding element. According to him Christians are too submissive and it would be too easy for one to dominate over others. Christians perform their duties for the sovereign entity, but it is not really this world they are interested in -- it is the next one they are preparing themselves for.
For Rousseau civil religion is the "cement" of society, a factor that keeps people together. Civil religion is a way of thinking that promotes a feeling of unity among the people. Values and 'grand narratives' are carried forward over generations forming the feeling of oneness and belonging.
-Mari
Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s book The Social Contract formulates the idea of how people should get together and form a society. The book -- first published in 1762 -- also discusses the role of civil religion in society.
For Rousseau man is born free but in order to preserve himself he has to join with others. This union happens in a social contract and the society thereby constituted becomes the foundation of the general will. The general will ensures that all the people remain free and no one will subjugate the others. According to Rousseau people form the sovereign entity and enact the laws. However, Rousseau separates the government from the people: the job of the government is to implement the general will.
However Rousseau sees it as problematic how a man could accept that the sovereign entity is not led by a ruler who would have received his mandate straight from God. To solve this problem he formulates the concept of civil religion. Civil religion is not about religion as such -- actually it is a way to diminish the role of religion in society. Rousseau makes clear distinction between the civil religion and the private religion. The latter should be out of reach of the government and everybody's private matter as long as it does not conflict with civil religion.
Rousseau makes clear that Christianity will not work as a civil religion or as a bonding element. According to him Christians are too submissive and it would be too easy for one to dominate over others. Christians perform their duties for the sovereign entity, but it is not really this world they are interested in -- it is the next one they are preparing themselves for.
For Rousseau civil religion is the "cement" of society, a factor that keeps people together. Civil religion is a way of thinking that promotes a feeling of unity among the people. Values and 'grand narratives' are carried forward over generations forming the feeling of oneness and belonging.
-Mari
Postings about women and the abuse scandal
Like in several other religious movements women's role in Laestadianism is often considered marginal. Some of the most popular points of discussion outside the movement highlight this fact and ask questions such as whether or not Laestadian women have control over their bodies.
A new topic hotly debated in the Finnish press and the blogosphere is child abuse. The Pod.fi (orig in eng) web page published last week a post according to which women's stronger role in the church would not only have prevented child abuse, but also made the handling of the problem more 'efficient'.
Pekka Asikainen's blog post on the other hand brought up Conservative Laestadianism and asked whether the wisdom of women has been forgot in the movement and whether women's stronger role would have prevented abuse. Asikainen's has aroused more general discussion about women's role in the Suomi24-forum.
According to article in Omat polut the Conservative Laestadians have been in center of attention in this abuse scandal. The article states that patriarchal and closed structure of the movement has made the problem worse and is degrading the status of Laestadian women and children.
-Mari
A new topic hotly debated in the Finnish press and the blogosphere is child abuse. The Pod.fi (orig in eng) web page published last week a post according to which women's stronger role in the church would not only have prevented child abuse, but also made the handling of the problem more 'efficient'.
Pekka Asikainen's blog post on the other hand brought up Conservative Laestadianism and asked whether the wisdom of women has been forgot in the movement and whether women's stronger role would have prevented abuse. Asikainen's has aroused more general discussion about women's role in the Suomi24-forum.
According to article in Omat polut the Conservative Laestadians have been in center of attention in this abuse scandal. The article states that patriarchal and closed structure of the movement has made the problem worse and is degrading the status of Laestadian women and children.
-Mari
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
