Scholarlink

<p>Is ‘climate religion’ turning the church into a&#xa0;sect? The article examines the escalation of enemy images using the theological discussion at the Forum <i>Zeitzeichen</i> and the case study of the EKD Synod. The presentation of a&#xa0;female speaker from the ‘Last Generation’ proved to be a&#xa0;catalyst for antagonistic escalations in the climate debate. In a&#xa0;discourse characterized by antithetical patterns, not only the fragility of a&#xa0;constructive discussion within the Protestant church on its own contribution to the climate crisis is revealed, but also the ambivalence towards its own heritage between institutional constancy and socially necessary change. Chantal Mouffe’s theory of democratic antagonism repeatedly creates moments of analytical distance in the observation of these dynamics and their media reinforcement. Critical reflection on one’s own interventions serves as a&#xa0;starting point for considering how theological differences can be productively addressed. It becomes clear that, even theologically, it is not a&#xa0;question of agreeing on everything, but that the way in which difference is described and negotiated requires an institutional framework and a&#xa0;culture of debate that enables constructive controversy.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Zwischen Kritik und Diskursschädigung: Antagonistische Muster im evangelisch-theologischen Diskurs um die ‚Letzte Generation‘

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年4月25日

查看全文
  • Constantin Gröhn

摘要

Is ‘climate religion’ turning the church into a sect? The article examines the escalation of enemy images using the theological discussion at the Forum Zeitzeichen and the case study of the EKD Synod. The presentation of a female speaker from the ‘Last Generation’ proved to be a catalyst for antagonistic escalations in the climate debate. In a discourse characterized by antithetical patterns, not only the fragility of a constructive discussion within the Protestant church on its own contribution to the climate crisis is revealed, but also the ambivalence towards its own heritage between institutional constancy and socially necessary change. Chantal Mouffe’s theory of democratic antagonism repeatedly creates moments of analytical distance in the observation of these dynamics and their media reinforcement. Critical reflection on one’s own interventions serves as a starting point for considering how theological differences can be productively addressed. It becomes clear that, even theologically, it is not a question of agreeing on everything, but that the way in which difference is described and negotiated requires an institutional framework and a culture of debate that enables constructive controversy.