Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The idea of human rights is primarily the product of the Western European and North American cultural, religious and historical background. I would like to assess the implications of human rights’ claim to universality and universal applicability when one addresses these issues from a different background. In other words, I would like to ask in what ways the process of implementing a human rights regime in Eastern Europe is influenced by two factors: on the one hand, by the recent experience of totalitarianism in its communist form; on the other, by the fact that certain Eastern European societies come from a particular interpretation of Judeo-Christianity, i.e., the Eastern Orthodox tradition.
The first thesis I would like to argue is that the closer the Eastern European countries are traditionally, spiritually and culturally to the traditions and the value systems of the countries of Western Europe, the easier it is to learn and implement the new vocabulary of human rights. The argument will be supported by an assessment of the violation of human rights in Eastern Europe and the Balkans. The study will show how the anthropology and the approach to religion and tradition specific to this area of Europe influence the discourse on human rights. Two aspects will be assessed: first, a specific anthropology, generally resulting from the programmatic ideological battle led by the communist regimes against any notion of individual worth, for the sake of creating “The New Man”, a collectivist entity that would exist solely to serve the higher goals of the Party; secondly, the different interpretation of Judeo-Christianity which led to a different approach to religion and traditionalism. Given the massive return to religion since 1989 (941f the population), special attention will be consecrated to Romania and the way in which humanity, religion and tradition are understood.
This will lead into the second thesis of the argument: if religion/religiosity and tradition, particularly in their Eastern Orthodox form, are to play a constructive role in the unavoidable and irreversible process of European integration with its implied human rights regime, religiosity has to undergo a significant process of renewal. This would include a new understanding of tradition, one more informed by Anthony Giddens’ discussion of tradition within the predominantly reflexive character of modernity. In other words, our religiosity should be separated from blind mysticism. It should rediscover its universality and search for a correct understanding of ecumenicity. This should mean separation from blind ritualism, traditionalism and fundamentalism and a reflexive individual appropriation of the teachings that make up the universal fabric of the Christian faith.

Publication Type: Invited Paper

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The anxiety liberal intellectuals harbor toward theologically orthodox Christian believers, whether Protestant or Catholic, is not simply the inevitable reaction to militant fundamentalists. Instead, it is shaped and informed by over a century of conflict with political movements driven by orthodox Christianity. Ever since the Progressive era, in fact, it has been an article of faith among much of the intellectual class to believe that orthodox Protestants and Catholic are a grave danger to American democracy. According to many Progressives, such believers routinely pushed religious dogma over and against science, reason, and social progress. Ignorance and primal bigotries were further assumed to shape the political opinions of orthodox Christians. After World War II this view only became more entrenched. Many intellectuals, in fact, argued that Christians were not merely retrograde bigots; they suffered from psychological pathologies as well, making them irrational and dangerous political animals. New social science lent further credibility to this diagnosis by positing a world in which all citizens who labored for causes other than those that served their own material interest were pathologically irrational. All of these various streams of thought eventually informed contemporary assessments of the Christian Right. And partly because the inherited worldview of liberal intellectuals seemed to fit some radical fundamentalists in particular, it foreclosed another, more textured look at Christian conservatives or a reexamination of their paradigm’s own troubled history. After tracing this intellectual history, this paper offers a better framework for understanding the behavior of orthodox Christians in public life.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Discourses of Reunification: A Cultural Discourse Analysis of the Reunification of the Russian Orthodox Church.
Abstract
This study used qualitative interviews to investigate the impact of the recent Russian Orthodox Church reunification on church member identity. Interviews were conducted with members of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (R.O.C.O.R.) and the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate (R.O.C.M.P.) in order to gauge differences in discursive meaning systems. Key themes were generated associated with the meaning system operating for each church respectively. The framework of cultural discourse analysis was used to examine how Russian Orthodox Church members from both jurisdictions were impacted by the social drama of the reunification.

Publication Type: Proceeding
Abstract: This paper examines the role of religious actors in the democratization process in the former communist republics of Armenia and Georgia against the backdrop of new political institutions and legislation. I examine the shift in power relations that has taken place since independence in both countries, and analyze the political strategies of both traditional majority religious groups and new minority groups in the context of a changing religious and political marketplace. Both Armenia and Georgia are majority Orthodox Christian countries with a strong traditional church that claims to represent and preserve the country’s national identity. In both countries, the traditional churches have been able to monopolize the religious marketplace, but through different means. This paper seeks to explain this outcome by analyzing the structure of religious legislation, the organization of groups in the religious marketplace, and the balance of power among political and societal groups within each country. I rely on data from published sources, quantitative data on religious groups, and information I obtained from interviews conducted in the Republics of Armenia and Georgia in 2005. I analyze the attitudes of religious actors toward the democratization process in each country, and explain the strategies they use to gain or maintain power in these transitional states. My research challenges theories that claim an inherent incompatibility of certain religions with democratic ideals. Instead, I argue that to understand the political relevance and power of religious groups, we need to look beyond denomination and examine religious legislation, practice, competition, and organization.