1.Istoriškai susidariusias klasikines religinio pliuralizmo sampratas, kurios jau tapo stereotipinės, keičia naujos ir globalizacijos sąlygomis joms priskiriami nauji būdingi bruožai.
2. Šiuolaikiniame vientisame pasaulyje lygiagrečiai egzistuoja dvi tendencijos: diferenciacija, arba ribų iškėlimas ir paklusimas joms, ir dediferenciacija, arba ribų ignoravimas ir demarkacija.
3. Lietuvos valstybės ir religijos tarpusavio santykius reguliuojantys įstatymai evoliucionavo nuo XX amžiaus paskutiniojo dešimtmečio pirmoje pusėje skelbtos visiškos religijų lygybės, kaip optimalaus „religinės įvairovės valdymo“ būdo, į šio dešimtmečio antrojoje pusėje atsiradusius įstatymus, kurie religijas skirsto į „tradicines“ ir „netradicines“.
4. Europos Sąjungos nuostata, kurią atspindi pagrindiniai dokumentai, religijos atžvilgiu yra postmodernistinė. Jai būdingi šie bruožai: religinių procesų pliuralizmas, ambivalentiškumas, reliatyvizmas ir marginalizmas integraciniame lauke. Vienintelė sritis, kurioje religija ir tikintysis yra svarbiausi, yra fundamentinės žmogaus teisės.
5. „Nišos“ funkcija susijusi su religijos vaidmens ir vietos Europos integracijos procese vertinimu. Kartu su etniškumu ji analizuojama kaip konstrukcija, leidžianti patenkinti vietinės pasaulėjautos dvasinių vertybių, už kurių yra praėjusių amžių istorija ir tradicijos ir kurioms minimalią įtaką daro naujos radikalios tendencijos, poreikį.
Bauman, Zygmunt, “Postmodern Religion?” | Paul Heelas, David Martin, Paul Morris (eds.), Religion, Modernity and Postmodernity, Oxford: Backwell Publishers, 1999, pp. 55–78.
Fox, Jonathan, “Religion as an Overlooked Element of International Relations,” International Studies Review, 2001, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 53–73.
Heelas, Paul, “Introduction: On Differentiation and Dedifferentiation” | Paul Heelas, David Martin, Paul Morris (eds.), Religion, Modernity and Postmodernity, Oxford: Backwell Publishers, 1999, pp. 1–18.
Hervieu-Léger, Danièle, “Religion as Memory: Reference to Tradition and the Constitution of a Heritage of Belief in Modern Societies” | Jan G. Platvoet, Arie L. Molendijk (eds.), The Pragmatics of Defining Religion: Concepts, Contexts and Contests Studies in the History of Religions, Leiden: Brill, 1999, pp. 73–92.
Huntington, Samuel P., The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order, New York: Simon and Shuster, 1996.
Plumpa, Petras, „Valstybės ir religijos santykis Lietuvoje: Lietuvos Respublikos Konstitucijos 43 straipsnio analizė“ | Religija ir teisė pilietinėje visuomenėje, Vilnius: Justicija, 2001.
Religious Pluralism: Between Culturology and Law Discourse
Bibliographic Description: Basia Nikiforova, „Religinis pliuralizmas: kultūrologinio ir teisinio diskurso sandūra“, @eitis (lt), 2020, t. 1 432, ISSN 2424-421X.
Previous Edition: Basia Nikiforova, „Religinis pliuralizmas: kultūrologinio ir teisinio diskurso sandūra“, Jurisprudencija, 2006, t. 9 (87), p. 37–43, ISSN 1392-6195.
Institutional Affiliation: Kultūros, filosofijos ir meno institutas.
Summary. Religious pluralism is an important part of European politic, juridical and cultural life. Religious pluralism means the diversity of religious movements within a particular geographical area, and the theory that there are more than one or more than two kinds of ultimate reality and/or truth; and that therefore more than one religion can be said to have the truth, even if their essential doctrines are mutually exclusive. Religious pluralism analyzed in the context of such tendencies as the multicultural and multi-religious communities as result of mass migration, the creation of the global network of the newest technologies and communications, the ethnic and religious conflicts.
This article is devoted to the problem of religious freedom and Church–State relations in situation of religious pluralism and gave examples of its most famous model. The short case study is only an attempt to describe the development of Church–State legislation in Lithuania. In the article were noted two tendencies in the process of religious pluralism: differentiation and dedifferentiation. Forms and spheres of display of the first tendency are the following: disintegration of totalitarian empires and a reconstruction of the homogeneous states; intensification of ethnic, national and confessional borders, amplification of religious fundamentalism as attempts to strengthen ethnically and religious traditional way of life. The second tendency include the wish “to rethink Europe,” creation of the overstates formations ignoring “old” borders on the economic, political and cultural levels, rapprochement of identities and opportunities of their free choice on the basis of ignoring former borders and criteria, occurrence of the inter-ethnic, transnational religious organizations ignoring the state and national borders and the tendencies of ecumenism.
In the article analyzed the reasons and features of “new” religious pluralism, its local perception in the countries of the European Union. The author described such features of “new” religious pluralism as his national-ethnic character, a new dominating model of mutual relations of national ethnic and religious minority with a society of the majority, the tolerant relation practically to each traditional belief or a religious innovation of ethnic minority. The author will examines such basic functions of religion as “an obstacle or alternative,” “niche,” “camouflage,” which are attributed to religious pluralism in conditions of global processes.
Keywords: globalization, religious pluralism, ethnic identity, tolerance, law discourse.
