Abstract
This paper discusses how nonreligious individuals in Oslo, Norway, relate to politics of religion. Moreover, it shows how different subcategories of nones differ in such questions. It is reasonable to argue that the current politics of religion in Norway predominantly caters for formal affiliation with religious and nonreligious institutions, which has implications for how (non)religion is represented in politics, law and institutional practices such as education. Engaging nonreligious individuals in conversations about such politics is interesting on several levels. One of the key findings in this article is that both humanists and indifferent ones are political when talking about religion in Oslo, Norway. But they are so in different ways. While the humanists are concerned about the political management of (non)religion, the indifferent are more so regarding the internal affairs of faith and worldview communities. The ‘members only’ approach to (non)religion by the state apparatus dominates, which means that, e.g., the religiously indifferent (e.g., possibly formally affiliated with the Church of Norway) are completely overlooked. Such negligence is visible in the common assumption that ‘Norwegians are Christian’ as 70% are members of the church, which is legitimising the privileged position of the Church of Norway and identity politics striving to pair national identity with a Christian heritage. Studying contemporary nones in Oslo nuances such hegemonic discourses, which at the end of the day challenges how (non)religion is dealt with in politics, law and institutional practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The interviews are conducted for my PhD project (forthcoming). All interviews are conducted, transcribed and analysed by me. All informants are subscribed pseudonyms. The project is approved by the Norwegian Centre for Research data (NSD Project No. 52604) and in compliance with their ethical requirements for empirical research.
- 2.
For instance, Sivert Urstad (2018) applies a substantial definition of nonreligion in a Norwegian context, which is defined by lack of belief ‘in anything transcendent, whether it be God(s), energies or a higher power of any sort’ (Urstad 2018: 135). In my own research, I apply a more inductive approach, which allows my informants to define their non-religiosity as long as they profess no affiliation with religion and religiosity themselves. However, there are few (2 out of 20) in the ‘spiritual, not religious’ category in my sample. I find it adequate to keep these in my study as I have learned that individuals might, for instance, respond positively to questions like ‘do you believe in souls’ while in general terms being rather indifferent to faith and worldviews and (quite often) quite critical to religion. In my opinion, they represent an intriguing facet of the people inclined to tick the box ‘none’ when prompted with recognised faith and worldview categories.
- 3.
For official English translation of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway as amended in 2018, English translation, see https://www.stortinget.no/globalassets/pdf/english/constitutionenglish.pdf (accessed 23.04.2019).
- 4.
For official English translation of the Education Act, see https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/b3b9e92cce6742c39581b661a019e504/education-act-norway-with-amendments-entered-2014-2.pdf (accessed 14.05.19).
- 5.
This is also emphasised by the humanists who states that a ‘humanistic worldview is inherently non-dogmatic’, meaning that there are no such things as ‘right answers’ to any ethical or political questions (www.human.no, my translation, accessed August 31, 2020).
- 6.
‘Our Christian cultural heritage’ (vår kristne kulturarv) is a recurring phrase in Norwegian political discourses, naturally heavily invoked by the Christian Democrats but also across the political spectrum but in different fashions, and it is increasingly called upon for the purpose of identity politics and arguably a token of protectionism (e.g., in debates on immigration).
- 7.
‘Established church’ is the wording in the official English translation of the Norwegian Constitution, while in the Norwegian version, it is labeled folkekirke – ‘folk church’, which gives slightly different associations. I am nonetheless comfortable using ‘established church’ as its current status corresponds with how that term is used in academic literature (e.g., Day 2011; Eberle 2011; Plesner 2016)
- 8.
- 9.
In 2007, the Norwegian state was found guilty in violation of the Covenant of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg. For analysis, see Slotte (2011) and ECHR case: https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-72,492%22].
- 10.
For further discussion, see From (2018).
References
Beaman, Lori G., and Steven Tomlins, eds. 2015. Atheist identities – Spaces and social contexts. New York: Springer International Publishing.
Botvar, Pål Ketil. 2017. May children attend church services during school hours? In Religion, education and human rights. Religion and human rights – Volume 1, ed. Anders Sjöborg and Hans-Georg Ziebertz. Cham: Springer.
Bruce, Steve. 2002. God is dead: Secularization in the west. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Constitution of the Kingdom of Norway as amended in 2018, English translation: https://lovdata.no/dokument/NLE/lov/1814-05-17?q=grunnloven. Accessed 27 Aug 2020.
Davie, Grace. 2007. The sociology of religion. London: Sage Publications.
Day, Abby. 2011. Believing in belonging. Belief and belonging in the modern world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Eberle, Edward J. 2011. Church and state in Western society. Established church, Cooperation and separation. London: Routledge.
Folgerø and others v. Norway. 2007. ECHR. No. 15472/02.
From, Erlend Hovdkinn. 2018. Who’s the master of none? Nonreligion and secularity research network. https://nsrn.net/2018/02/21/whos-the-master-of-none/. Accessed 17 Jan 2019.
Heelas, Paul, and Linda Woodhead, eds. 2005. The spiritual revolution: Why religion is giving way to spirituality. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hervieu-Léger, Danièle. 2000. Religion as a chain of memory. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Høeg, Ida Marie, and Ann Kristin Gresaker. 2015. Når det rokkes ved tradisjon og tilhørighet. Nedgang i oppslutning om dåp i Oslo bispedømme. KIFO Rapport 2015:2. http://www.kifo.no/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/KIFO-Rapport-2015_2-Nar-det-rokkes-ved_-til-web.pdf. Accessed 5 Mar 2019.
International Humanist and Ethical Union. 2019. The freedom of thought report 2018. https://fot.humanists.international/. Accessed 23 Apr 2019.
Kasselstrand, Isabella. 2019. Secularity and irreligion in cross-national context: A nonlinear approach. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 58 (3): 626–642.
Lee, Lois. 2012. Research note: Talking about a revolution: Terminology for the new field of nonreligion studies. Journal of Contemporary Religion 27 (1): 129–139.
———. 2015. Recognizing the nonreligious. Reimagining the secular. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Manning, Christel. 2015. Losing our religion. New York and London: New York University Press.
Plesner, Ingvill Thorson. 2016. Religionspolitikk. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Quack, Johannes. 2014. Outline of a relational approach to ‘nonreligion’. Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 6 (4): 439–469.
———. 2017. Bio- and ethnographic approaches to indifference, detachment, and disengagement in the study of religion. In Religious indifference. New perspectives from studies of secularization and nonreligion, ed. Johannes Quack and Cora Schuh. Zurich: Springer.
Quack, Johannes, and Cora Schuh. 2017. Conceptualising religious indifferences in relation to religion and nonreligion. In Religious indifference. New perspectives from studies of secularization and nonreligion, ed. Johannes Quack and Cora Schuh. Zurich: Springer.
Remmel, Atko. 2017. Religion, interrupted? Observations on religious indifference in Estonia. In Religious indifference. New perspectives from studies of secularization and nonreligion, ed. Johannes Quack and Cora Schuh. Zurich: Springer.
Remmel, Atko, and Marko Uibu. 2015. Outside conventional forms: Religion and non-religion in Estonia. Religion and Society in Central and Eastern Europe 8 (1): 5–20.
Roy, Olivier. 2013. Secularism and Islam: The theological predicament. The International Spectator 48 (1): 5–19.
Schmidt, Ulla. 2010. Norge: Et religiøst pluralistisk samfunn? In Religion i dagens Norge – Mellom sekularisering og sakralisering, ed. Pål Ketil Botvar and Ulla Schmidt. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Slotte, Pamela. 2011. Securing freedom whilst enhancing competence: The ‘knowledge about Christianity, religions and life stances’ subject and the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights. Religion and Human Rights 6: 41–73.
Statistics Norway (SSB). 2018. Den norske kirke. https://www.ssb.no/kultur-og-fritid/statistikker/kirke_kostra. Accessed 17 Jan 2019.
Taule, Liv. 2014. Norge – et sekulært samfunn? Samfunnsspeilet 1: 9–16.
The Education Act, Norway. https://lovdata.no/dokument/NLE/lov/1998-07-17-61. Accessed 27 Aug 2020.
The Norwegian Humanist Association. https://human.no/om-oss/english/. Accessed 27 Aug 2020.
Urstad, Sivert. 2018. Ikke-religiøse i Norge. Sosiologiske analyser av individer uten religion. University of Agder. (Doctoral thesis).
Voas, David. 2009. The rise and fall of fuzzy fidelity in Europe. European Sociological Review 25 (2): 155–168.
Wilson, Bryan. 1966. Religion in secular society. A sociological comment. London: C. A. Watts & Co. Ltd.
Woodhead, Linda. 2017. The rise of ‘no religion’: Towards an explanation. Sociology of Religion 78 (3): 247–262.
Zuckerman, Phil. 2008. Society without god: What the least religious nations can tell us about contentment. New York: New York University Press.
Zuckerman, Phil. 2014. The Rise of the Nones: Why More Americans are Becoming Secular, and What that Means for America. In A.B. Pinn (ed) Theism and Public Policy. Humanist Perspectives and Responses. Palgrave Macmillan: New York, pp. 37–52.
———. 2012. Faith no more. Why people reject religion. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
From, E.H. (2022). State and (Non)religion: Perspectives from Nones in Oslo. In: Zwilling, AL., Årsheim, H. (eds) Nonreligion in Late Modern Societies. Boundaries of Religious Freedom: Regulating Religion in Diverse Societies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92395-2_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92395-2_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-92394-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-92395-2
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)