Towards a New Approach to Secularization: Religion, Education and the State in Denmark, 1721—1900

Abstract

The author attempts to develop a new approach to the process of secularization. It is argued that the existing theories of secularization have failed to pay sufficient attention to the state. Here, the state is regarded as an actor with interests among which the maintenance of sovereignty vis-à-vis other states is vital. The author has analysed Danish state policies with regard to the teaching of religion in elementary schools from 1700 onwards. The founding of schools in the early 18th century was crucial to the establishment of the “Sacred Canopy”, since schools were almost exclusively devoted to the teaching of religion. These schools had a primarily military purpose. From the 18th century onwards the teaching of religion in Denmark changed according to the external relations of the state and state bodies, i.e. on the primary or vital interests of the state.

Danish State policy on the teaching of religion from 1900 to 2007

“…A turning point in the history of the Danish teaching of religion was the introduction of mandatory confirmation in 1736 and the consequent introduction of compulsory schooling in 1739 for all including peasants in the twin kingdoms of Denmark and Norway. At this point, the Danish State created an official Sacred Canopy and schools were almost exclusively devoted to the confessional teaching of Christianity (Berger, 1969; Reeh, 2009). From the early 18th century until 1975, the teaching of religion in Denmark was confessional and one may say that the dominant theology was transformed and disseminated through the school system (Jensen, 2005; Jensen, 2007; Buchardt, 2011).…”

“…They should be considered as a broad category that encompasses not only military force but also the means for the mobilization of resources including an efficient internal organization (State form). In this perspective, the State form (democracy) is regarded as part of the defensive structure of the State, together with, for instance, economic development, the education of the citizen, and culture and religion (Reeh, 2009). In short, the defence of the State should be seen in very broad terms, namely as all the resources that a State can muster in order to maintain or increase its position in the survival ‘game’ (Højrup, 2003; Kaspersen, 2004).…”