Multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a Chinese model

It is argued that the concept of Multiple Religious Belonging as normally conceived relies upon a problematic construction of “religion” which can be expressed as the World Religions Paradigm. This relies upon a modern Western Protestant bias as to how “religion” should be understood. It is argued t...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Hedges, Paul
Other Authors: S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: 2019
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/10356/106888
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/48981
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Nanyang Technological University
Language: English
id sg-ntu-dr.10356-106888
record_format dspace
spelling sg-ntu-dr.10356-1068882020-11-01T08:05:43Z Multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a Chinese model Hedges, Paul S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies DRNTU::Humanities::Religions Chinese Religion Multiple Religious Belonging It is argued that the concept of Multiple Religious Belonging as normally conceived relies upon a problematic construction of “religion” which can be expressed as the World Religions Paradigm. This relies upon a modern Western Protestant bias as to how “religion” should be understood. It is argued that religion can be understood otherwise, and looking at the Chinese context an argument is made that participation in different religious traditions relies upon a very different construct from Multiple Religious Belonging via the World Religions Paradigm model. This is termed Strategic Religious Participation in a Shared Religious Landscape. It considers the way that Chinese religiosity does not have fixed borders in the same way as the World Religions Paradigm suggests. Indeed, asking whether there is Multiple Religious Belonging in traditional Chinese thought seems to misconstrue the situation. A final reflection asks whether this new paradigm, of Strategic Religious Participation in a Shared Religious Landscape, may be appropriate to look at the contemporary Western context amongst a number of religious “nones”. Although no definitive answer is given to this question, the issue highlights that the World Religions Paradigm which shapes our sense of Multiple Religious Belonging may need to be rethought within different contexts. Published version 2019-06-27T05:10:49Z 2019-12-06T22:20:22Z 2019-06-27T05:10:49Z 2019-12-06T22:20:22Z 2017 Journal Article Hedges, P. (2017). Multiple Religious Belonging after Religion: Theorising Strategic Religious Participation in a Shared Religious Landscape as a Chinese Model. Open Theology, 3(1), 48-72. doi:10.1515/opth-2017-0005 https://hdl.handle.net/10356/106888 http://hdl.handle.net/10220/48981 10.1515/opth-2017-0005 en Open Theology © 2017 Paul Hedges, published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License. 25 p. application/pdf
institution Nanyang Technological University
building NTU Library
continent Asia
country Singapore
Singapore
content_provider NTU Library
collection DR-NTU
language English
topic DRNTU::Humanities::Religions
Chinese Religion
Multiple Religious Belonging
spellingShingle DRNTU::Humanities::Religions
Chinese Religion
Multiple Religious Belonging
Hedges, Paul
Multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a Chinese model
description It is argued that the concept of Multiple Religious Belonging as normally conceived relies upon a problematic construction of “religion” which can be expressed as the World Religions Paradigm. This relies upon a modern Western Protestant bias as to how “religion” should be understood. It is argued that religion can be understood otherwise, and looking at the Chinese context an argument is made that participation in different religious traditions relies upon a very different construct from Multiple Religious Belonging via the World Religions Paradigm model. This is termed Strategic Religious Participation in a Shared Religious Landscape. It considers the way that Chinese religiosity does not have fixed borders in the same way as the World Religions Paradigm suggests. Indeed, asking whether there is Multiple Religious Belonging in traditional Chinese thought seems to misconstrue the situation. A final reflection asks whether this new paradigm, of Strategic Religious Participation in a Shared Religious Landscape, may be appropriate to look at the contemporary Western context amongst a number of religious “nones”. Although no definitive answer is given to this question, the issue highlights that the World Religions Paradigm which shapes our sense of Multiple Religious Belonging may need to be rethought within different contexts.
author2 S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
author_facet S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies
Hedges, Paul
format Article
author Hedges, Paul
author_sort Hedges, Paul
title Multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a Chinese model
title_short Multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a Chinese model
title_full Multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a Chinese model
title_fullStr Multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a Chinese model
title_full_unstemmed Multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a Chinese model
title_sort multiple religious belonging after religion : theorising strategic religious participation in a shared religious landscape as a chinese model
publishDate 2019
url https://hdl.handle.net/10356/106888
http://hdl.handle.net/10220/48981
_version_ 1683494165010186240