Charity

“The purpose of TNCOD is to preach “the happy message”, in hundreds of ways, so that the human of today is able to understand the life it is put in […] with charity as a center.” (Thomas Nedergaard, 29:47)

20 Danish translation: ”Næstekærlighed”

This quote is a good illustration of how the rest of the respondents interpreted the formulated purpose of TNCOD: Charity is the key component, in order to understand this overall purpose. This means that an understanding of charity will provide the basis for locating the internal identity of TNCOD. Charity is however a concept that is constructed by multiple aspects. In order to understand the internal identity of TNCOD, it is first of all necessary to understand the different aspects that constitute charity.

4.1.2.1 The concept of charity

When defining the concept, Stine Ravnborg Dehn started by talking about love: “Basically, we as humans are put on this planet to love. Both each other and ourselves. […] The human is love, and that is sort of our purpose in life, to love and to be loveable.” (26:14). Poul Bo Sørensen shared the same basis: “We cannot live without love, because love is what gives us a feeling that we matter as humans. Love is the first need we have. To be loved. This should then give rise to the love we give to others.” (31:41).

Thomas Nedergaard also talked about love as the basis for charity, and exemplified how he incorporates it into his every day. To him, it is the way he meets other people, with the thing in mind that we are all created as equals. It is a sort of interrelation between people built on compassion and humanity and it is about accepting people for who they are, being joyful on their behalf and being able to forgive without conditions. Basically it is a view on humanity, where you should embrace every one of your fellow human beings. Stine Ravnborg Dehn, gathered this into the concept of charity: “No matter who they are, we need to be there for them. Talk with them, and never neglect anyone. Always be there for them. This is how I think we as pastors and we as a church can show this love, which is charity.” (29:33). Poul Bo Sørensen concluded on this, when he stated that TNCOD should play a role in the Danish society as a whole, and to include and embrace as many people as possible: “I would like TNCOD to be the place that can gather our society [as a nation], because I think it is very fragmented.” (01:14:04).

Love is therefore a main component of charity, and it could serve as a building block for TNCOD.

However, every respondent agrees that the concept of love is meant to be shared, humans

in-between. Otherwise it is not valuable. Poul Bo Sørensen put it like this: “The Christian definition of

love, is to give what others need. It is as simple as that.” (34:34). Thus, only when love is shared,

does it become valuable, and it is then referred to as charity.

4.1.2.2 A fellowship²¹

According to the above, charity is deeply reliant on the relations humans have with each other.

Peter Skov-Jakobsen, defined this aspect to be key: “This is what I think is most important about the principle of charity: I am not just myself. I am not just an island by myself. I am living in relations to other people, constantly. ” (10:39). Finn Vejlgaard supported this by saying that: “No human is self-reliant.” (10:44).

Like these two respondents the remaining five also acknowledged this relational aspect as a key aspect of charity. They referred to it as a fellowship. When you are embracing people and giving charity, you are also inviting them into a relation with you. Whether this is a one-on-one relation or part of a greater fellowship, the behavior is based on inclusion.

According to Stine Ravnborg Dehn, the concepts of fellowship and charity are so connected that it becomes irrelevant to differentiate between the two. This is why she defined charity as “[…] the fellowship. It is inclusion, it is when we feel and touch each other. Not physically but in between humans.” (50:08).

Charity and fellowship were also regarded as interdependent by the rest of the respondents, to a degree where their definition of fellowship would overlap their definition of charity. The overall perception was that when you are embracing every kind of people, you are creating a fellowship, which is built on charity.

Peter Skov-Jakobsen further explained that because TNCOD is built on this value of fellowship created by charity, it has resulted in a creation of a place where you do not have to live up to anything and where nothing is expected from you. Poul Bo Sørensen shared a similar opinion.

TNCOD is by his opinion the only fellowship where you can come as you are and where you can lay down your façade: “TNCOD is the common room where we can come, without having to legitimize ourselves by having a special interest.” (09:57) This common room is for him a place where trust is a large factor and where the people involved feel greater confidence in letting out their emotions, than they would in other surroundings. He compared it with being with a psychologist, but that you have an entire fellowship you can share you inner thoughts with. Thus, the fellowship of TNCOD is a place that is built on charity and a thought of inclusion, which results in the creation of a place where you can be yourself and trust the people inside this fellowship.

21 Danish translation: ”Fællesskab”

4.1.2.3 To care about other people

Parochial church council chairman, Mikkel Gabriel Christoffersen, defined charity as a call you have been given: “You should go out and make a difference. Out and use the powers you have been given, to create a more righteous world, or to do good for people.” (10:33). The love he is referring to is thus “to do good for people”. The way he defined this, was by looking at the relationship you have with the people around you, as if you had a piece of their life in your hand. You then have the power to either lift this life or break it down. He then stated that you are obliged to lift this life, as well as you can, in order for that other person to flourish: “That you should handle a piece of another person’s life, which you have been given in your hand, is of course a way of formulating how to show charity.” (14:07). This also works the other way around, and other people are obliged to lift your life as well. It constitutes interconnectedness where you are dependent on one another.

This is a conviction that is shared by the other respondents as well: You need to look out for and care about the person next to you. This person next to you does however not need to be someone you know, or are closely related to. Poul Bo Sørensen defined it like this: “Charity is when you give to those you surround yourself with. Charity is then the love you give to your neighbor and your children, but it is not a kind of love that we are able to delimit. It bursts the boundaries of our normal relations.” (34:49). This statement was further elaborated, when bishop, Peter Skov-Jakobsen, explained his definition. To him charity not only entails you to care for people you like, but also to care for those you hate. This is a reference to the notion of treating other people equally.

He refers to this as “loving your enemy”. It is not meant literally, but it is meant for you to accept and respect people, even though you disagree with them. This was also expressed by Erling Støhrmann-Brun when stating that: “One of the key principals of charity is that even though I disagree with you I can still accept you.” (22:35)

Peter Skov-Jakobsen explained that: “It sounds odd that you should love thine enemy, because then it is no longer an enemy. Well, yes it is, because you should have esteem for other people. Even the ones you do not understand. […] You should have respect for other people.” (02:23). This means that people should not have to assert themselves in order to receive your love or respect. It should be unconditional, as the statement by Thomas Nedergaard showed earlier.

However, this does not mean that your love and respect should be in the shape of

acknowledgement and praise. Peter Skov-Jakobsen stated that your love also can be in the shape of

the courage you have to debate with people you disagree with, and in that way show them that you

are care about them: “[…] it is really bad when we do not have the courage to debate with each

other anymore, because as long as you are debating with your opponent you are still holding on to that person. Then it is still like we are holding each other’s hands.”(31:16). Thus, it is when you are being indifferent with another person that you stop giving your charity.

It is now clear that charity comes in various shapes. Finn Vejlgaard stated: “It is always something that should be carried out specifically to the certain situation you find yourself in. You cannot say that charity is like this, this and this.” (37:43).

A statement by Mikkel Gabriel Christoffersen therefore brings a nice closure to the definition of the concept. For him, the important point to draw from charity is that: “[…] charity as a concept contradicts the center position of being indifferent, or where we are selfish and thinks that relations are made to please yourself.” (18:09).

4.1.2.4 The condition of using charity

However, since the above suggests that a value of TNCOD is to embrace diversity, it then also leaves an impression, that it is capable of accommodating the different needs that doubtlessly must lie in the wake of diversity. Yet some of the respondents had a condition that they needed to have fulfilled, when using charity. This condition was revealed when the concept of the religious aspect was brought into the discussion.

Overall, the religious aspect is derived from the relationship humans have with God. It is not the aim for this thesis to make an extensive review of what a relationship with God entails. Therefore only one main insight about the relationship is included from the in-depths: All of the respondents agreed that the intensity of this relationship is something that each individual decides for themselves. In other words, it is not for TNCOD to decide how intense a relationship people should have with God.

Yet, there were different opinions of how explicit TNCOD should be about another facet of the religious aspect. This was the words and tales of the Bible. These words and tales are the original examples of the values that TNCOD is built on. They bring a historical perspective to the values, which some respondents thought were important to include in church-related activities. They would therefore disagree with each other on how large a role these original words and tales should play at church-related activities in general.

Thomas Nedergaard did not ascribe this religious aspect with much importance. He stated that it

is disadvantageous to have too much explicit focus on the actual words of the Bible at

church-related activities. To him, a too explicit focus is exemplified by the weekly ritual of the classical Sunday morning worship service. Here, the focus is on referring to certain sections of the Bible and not putting these into a modern day context. Such an approach serves as a barrier, which might keep light users from entering the room of the church. He believes that the traditional worship service is built on: “[…] a frozen perception of Christianity that is both rigid and dogmatic” (35:32), and that it therefore has created a fellowship for those members, who enjoy listening to the original words of the Bible.

He stated that by using such an approach, you are favoring the theologically savvy individuals.

Therefore, it has an excluding factor on people, who might benefit from learning about the values of TNCOD, but who does not understand the words that exemplify them. In that way, TNCOD is contradicting its own value of demonstrating inclusive behavior. To him, the most important thing is to exemplify the words and tales from the Bible into a language and activities that reflects the society of today. Stine Ravnborg Dehn supported this opinion. The important thing to her is to draw out the essence of the religious aspect, both when it comes to the biblical tales and God in general, in order to include and encourage as many people as possible to perceive TNCOD as something meaningful and relevant.

With these statements, we are back at the section with the purpose of TNCOD and how it should be interpreted in order to be relevant to a wider crowd. As mentioned earlier, every respondent thought that it is necessary to exemplify the values of TNCOD into something that people of today can relate to. Yet, some of the respondents also thought that it is necessary to be explicit about the religious aspect to some degree.

According to Finn Vejlgaard, it is impossible not to include the actual words of the Bible at

church-related activities. To him, the words of the Bible are what provide the historical aspect to the

values it is built on, and if this historical aspect is detached, an explanation to why these are values

of TNCOD would be missing. In that way the values would be based on a humanistic view only. He

exemplified this, by referring to the value of charity: “I think that Christianity is humanism and that

humanism is Christianity, but Charity seen from a straight humanistic view is lacking something

seen from the view of the church, which is an anchoring in the tale of the Bible about The Good

Samaritan. […] You can talk about God in many ways. That is important to say. But you cannot

separate these two things. Something would be missing.” (01:04:55). Thus, even though he stated

earlier that it is important to translate the words of the Bible into a modern day context, he still

cannot let go of the original phrasing from the Bible.

Mikkel Gabriel Christoffersen shared this opinion. To him, the biblical tales serve as a factor that

enhances the recognisability level of TNCOD, just as the traditional services of baptism,

confirmation, wedding and funeral do. According to him, the identity of TNCOD is very much

reliant on the familiarity that the traditions and the religious aspect bring. Therefore, this includes

the biblical tales as well. To exclude these original words from the Bible would therefore be the

same as excluding the four traditional services, for him. He thinks it is important to renew the

activities of TNCOD in order to appeal to more people, but: “[…] you have to find a balance

between traditions and renewal.” (42:44). This brings a conclusion to the internal identity.

In document Branding The National Church of Denmark (Sider 36-42)