Unlike other countries, Norway has only one Humanist organisation, The Norwegian Humanist Association (NHA). The NHA receives state support on equal terms with other Norwegian faith and life-stance communities, and – at the same time – works for a formal separation between state and church. This makes Norway exceptional. Few other atheist or Humanist organisations have managed to receive state budget contributions. Originally, this arrangement was made to accommodate Christian dissident communities who fought for the right for individual refunds of the state church tax. Later, the refund was given as state support to the individual’s faith or life-stance community. The NHA has received state support since the 1980s. The state church, the church of Norway, does, however, receive the greatest support.

Does this corrupt the NHA and make it a loyal supporter of the state? On the contrary, it has given the NHA the opportunity to take on a watchdog role in relation to the actions of the state in matters concerning religious freedom and other related causes.

Support based on membership numbers has also been an incentive to increase numbers, and the organisation can boast an impressive membership increase since the 1980s. Today there are approximately 74 000 members, in a population of 4.8 million.

The NHA was founded in 1956, in a society where the Church of Norway – the Evangelical-Lutheran state church – had a following of above 90 per cent. The Constitution demanded that at least half the Government were to be members of the state church. The King was obliged to promote the Christian faith and was also the head of the Church of Norway. The Government appointed all Church bishops, and Christianity was the only visible religion. Dissenter congregations were marginal and atheist groups non- existent. In state schools ethics was a part of the religious curriculum. The Church was in command of the important life-transition ceremonies, such as birth (christening), youth (confirmation), marriage (wedding)
and death (funeral). The purpose of the founders of the NHA was “to unchain the moral code from the grip of religions”, as stated by the historian Paul Knutsen1. According to Norwegian public opinion in the 1950s, a moral code without a religious basis would result in dangerous nihilism. The NHA also intended to initiate legislation to “erase all discrimination resulting from religious dividing lines”. Important goals were:
• Replacing church registration of births by public civil registration;
• Getting rid of the religious curriculum in primary schools, which was heavily biased towards Lutheran state church teachings;
• Getting rid of the clause imposing Christianity on state schools;
• Full separation between state and church;
• Establishing civil or secular ceremonies for non- Christians.

Humanist ceremonies have been one of NHA’s great successes, with civil confirmation the greatest: approximately 10 per cent of the relevant Norwegian youth group register for the course prior to the ceremony.

During the five decades since its foundation, the NHA has gained influence and authority. Norwegian society has gradually become more secular – opinion polls show that only a minority believe in a personal god. Despite the state church’s loss of political power, it has retained substantial symbolic power: approximately 81 per cent of the population remain members. Priests still serve in hospitals, prisons, and in the military. Government, politicians and other social groups still accept the privileged position of the state church. A political process to loosen the ties between state and church has been started, but complete separation is several decades ahead.

The quantitative success of the NHA in Norwegian society has contributed to the spreading of Humanist ideas. Opinion poll have shown results of as many as 30 per cent identifying with a “Humanist, non-religious” life stance.

A major achievement of the NHA was a secular alternative to the religious curriculum in state schools. The lessons were a great success. However, in 1997, the Norwegian educational authorities removed this alternative and introduced a new compulsory curriculum of Christianity and Religion, common to all Norwegian schools. But Christianity still constituted a majority of the curriculum, and the aim of the subject was both to use religion as a tool of integration and to “introduce pupils to their religious traditions”. Neither the NHA nor other religious minorities were satisfied. In a joint effort with a group of Norwegian parents (members of the NHA), the NHA instituted legal proceedings against the state to show that the subject included Christian preaching and practice of religion, and to demand the right to full exemption from participation. Norwegian courts ruled against the joint NHA/parental case and for the state, and the case went as far as the Norwegian High Court. However, the case was submitted to both the UN Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, and was successful in both, in 2004 and 2007 respectively.

The opposition to the new compulsory subject of religion from the NHA and various religious minority groups led to the establishment of The Council for Religious and Life Stance Communities. The Council represents most major religious and life-stance communities in Norway, including the Church of Norway, and provides a forum for dialogue as well as working for religious and life-stance equality. The Council is a consensus body and releases statements only with the approval of all members. The present leader of the Council is Bente Sandvig, Manager of Life Stance and Political Issues in the NHA. Despite its involvement in dialogues and practical cooperation with religious communities, the NHA is considered by many Norwegians to be hostile towards religion and antagonistic towards Christianity. Admittedly, criticism of religion has been an important part of the organisation’s work. But the NHA encourages pluralistic dialogue and clearly supports religious freedom – meaning the right to choose a religion or to choose not to have a religion. The NHA draws a line between its work for a secular state and its efforts to increase knowledge of a Humanist life-stance. The latter is mainly done implicitly by providing Humanist ceremonies, courses in philosophy, ethics and Humanist thinking, and by book publishing, participation in public debates and hearings, etc.

Based on the principles of human rights, the NHA’s fundamental conviction is not that religion should be banned from the public scene, but that all life-stances, both religious and non-religious, should be treated equally by the state. Recognizing the difference in power, tradition and historical weight, the NHA wants the Church of Norway’s domination of public services to cease. The state must not leave public services to the church and it must compensate for the differences in opportunities of other faith and life-stance communities.

The attitude of the NHA is illustrated by this extract from a statement to a hearing on religious diversity in the Norwegian Armed Forces. In answer to the question “Do we want secularism or do we want pluralism?” the NHA said:

“The answer is both alternatives. State and public activities should be secular, while society retains its pluralism. (…) In our opinion, a secular state is a requirement for true equality of treatment and opportunity, and a pluralistic society. We are talking about a third alternative between the old Norwegian state church tradition and a French model of secularism, where the framework encasing the life of the citizens; legislation, procedures, “rules of play” are without any form of religious or life-stance preference. This does not exclude the religiously unbiased state and public arena from demonstrating a helpful and supportive attitude and contributing to the adjustment of the religious life of citizens in a pluralistic society. However, it is important that the citizens themselves and the faith and life-stance communities are independent players. (…) Furthermore, we would like to emphasise that the State should be very reluctant to allow churches and faith communities to use their position in general institutions to do missionary work, so to speak, by means of public direction.”

This is indicative of NHA’s attitude: In accordance with the principle of religious freedom, the state should prepare the ground for free religious practice on several levels, but – apart from this – the state should not be involved. The state should develop solutions on equal terms, whether with regard to members of the majority religion, or to minorities.

And church or other religious involvement – whether in the armed forces, in prisons or hospitals, in state schools and kindergartens and other public institutions – must be clearly separated from common activities or public services which require active participation.

Therefore, the NHA opposes the holding of public memorial services by the Church of Norway in the event of major accidents or natural disasters, such as the tsunami in 2005, or the deaths of soldiers in service. Common rituals should be secular or pluralistic.

The NHA has a double function in Norwegian society. On the one hand, it is a life-stance community providing Humanist ceremonies and enabling the development of Humanism. On the other, it works to secure the rights of non-religious (and other non-Christian) citizens in Norwegian society, and is thereby an important watchdog in relation to legislation and public practice.

1 Livet før døden – Human-Etisk Forbund 1956-2000 (Life Before Death – the
Norwegian Humanist Association 1956-2006)

Kirsti Bergh is Editor of Fri tanke, the journal of the Norwegian Humanist Association.