7.4 Theorists Flashcards
The secularisation debate
Bruce
Suggests further evidence for institutuional decline of religion includes the fact that over the past 100 years in the UK the number of full-time, professional clergy has declined by 25%, despite a rising population. Even relatively minor expressions of religious practice, such as baptisms, confirmations and weddings, are in decline: ‘In the 19th century almost all weddings were religious ceremonies’.
Bruce
Argument for practical decline
‘NRMs are often cited as evidence of both religious transformation, as
people express their religiosity in non-traditional ways, and a religious revival (revitalisation).’
Bruce, however, argues that if NRMs were ‘religious compensators’ we should have seen ‘some signs of vigorous
growth’. This, he argues, has not happened.
Bruce
Argument for ideological decline
‘‘believing without belonging’ is often seen as evidence against secularisation’
Bruce argues that there is strong evidence for a general decline in religious beliefs; it simply ‘lags behind’ the decline in religious practice.
Wilson
pro secularisation
Argued that an important individual dimension of secularisation is the extent to which people’s understanding of the natural and social world has changed. As a society, for example, we have moved away
from a magical (spells and charms) or religious (prayer) understanding to one based on secular, scientific, explanations.
Marshall
Argued that to understand secularisation we must take account of possible changes to the nature of religious beliefs,
Measuring peoples core beliefs expressed as:
* The importance of religion in any society
* How seriously people take it
* Number of people who take it seriously
Crockett and Voas
pro secularisation
Argue that as societies modernise the social significance of religion and religious participation declines because:
- Ideas and organisations having strong hold on people’s lives are weakened in large scale complex societies
- People have access to all knowledge including scientific explanations and other cultural beliefs that challenge religious ideas and weaken their power
- As people develop a more individualistic outlook in modernity, their choices of behaviour and belief are reflected in religious pluralism.
Hadden
Argues secularisation can be understood in three ways
- Cognitive - People in postmodernity think very differently about the nature of God with a decline in plausibility of religious explanations.
- Institutional dimension - Idea that many of the functions once performed by religion have been taken over by secular institutions.
- Behavioural dimension - Suggests that religious behaviour retreats from the public to the private sphere; personal faith
Martin
anti secularisation
Claimed that it is impossible to distinguish between the religious and secular in a way that is accessible to academic study because the belief system systems combined under the name religion are so varied and diverse.
Secularisation has become an intellectual tool used to attack religion.
Stark
anti secularisation
Argued that the influence of religious organisations and beliefs in the past has been overstated and the contribution made by religion to contemporary societies understated.
He stated that religious influence in modern societies is still strong.
For example, it provides the moral codes that form the basis for political life. Religion also takes the lead in arguing for ethical practices to inform economic life.
Stark also claimed that there is a strong undercurrent of individual religious belief, even in secular societies.
Berger
anti secularisation
Argued that Western Europe may have seen declining congregations, but that is not the case in USA where church attendance is rising.
Kelley
anti secularisation
Suggested that secularisation where it has occurred is related to particular forms of religious organisation. Religious practice declined only in organisations that were:
- Appealing to many people (image conscious)
- Democratic in internal affairs
- Changed to accommodate particular audiences
- Relativistic in terms of their teaching and morality
in contrast religious growth occured in fundamentalist organisations
Wilson
Religion lost its social significance
Argued that an important feature of modernity is how religion is increasingly marginalised as a social force.
“Religions power decline can be explained from two main processes:
* Modern religions have come under increasing ideological attack from scientific rationalism, that has more plausible explanations for things such as: Theories of evolution and Big bang theory of the creation of the universe.
* Promise of modernity to create a more rational, understandable and equal set of social relationships has not come to pass, and left a lot of people feeling confused and betrayed. “
Argued that NRMs (sects or cults which fill the void) involve the manipulation of psychologically fragile personalities who are promised the respect, status and material rewards denied to them in modern societies.
Wilson argued that newer religions appeal to ‘the naive, the gullible, the oppressed’ in ways that ‘do not serve society. They are indeed almost irrelevant to it, since their sources of inspiration are exotic, esoteric, subjective and subterranean.’ This means that religion has become increasingly marginalised and irrelevant in modern societies.
Berger
Religion has lost its social significance
For many people, religion continues to provide what Berger calls a ‘universe of meaning’. Although Berger is usually seen as an interpretivist, this view is similar to the functionalist view, because it sees religion as helping people make sense of the world and give their lives a sense of purpose, and so contributes to social stability.
Berger describes religion as a ‘sacred canopy’, a sort of protective shield over people, offering explanations for extraordinary events, tragedies and deaths, and providing answers to questions about the meaning of life. Religion shelters people them from the uncertainties of life and the dangers of death and meaninglessness, and
can make it seem as if existence has a purpose.
However, science and logic now provide answers for many people, and have begun to replace religion and superstitions. There is growing secularisation, religious pluralism and fragmentation of beliefs in a globalised and postmodern world. Religion today, according to Berger, is losing its ability to provide a sacred canopy.
Stark and Bainbridge
anti secularisation
"”Religious market theory is based on rational choice.”
Stark and Bainbridge suggested that when people make these choices they weigh up costs and benefits. Costs could be how much commitment, money and time may be involved in joining a religious organisation. Benefits could be reduced stress, the promise of an afterlife and a supportive network of co-religionists.
Where there is religious pluralism (a wide range of beliefs available to consumers), Stark and Bainbridge argued, religious participation will be high, because most people will be able to find a religion that suits them.
Norris and Ingelhart
“Existential security theory suggests that religious participation is instead related to the extent to which people feel safe and confident about their survival. (functionalist)”
Suggested that this explained the low levels of religious participation in most advanced industrial societies. Such societies provide high levels of existential security because the majority of the population are reasonably wealthy (prosperous) and have a sense of wellbeing. These societies help and support people through illness, disability, old age and poverty.
Evidence: The countries that are best at doing this, such as Sweden, Norway and Denmark, are the most secular. In these societies, it is the poorest and most at risk who are most likely to be religious. On the other hand, there are high levels of religious participation in countries where people face threats such as wars and natural disasters, and where health care, education and social security are low.
A problem with this theory is that while it seems to fit many countries, the USA seems to be an exception. The USA is one of the world’s most prosperous nations, yet has high levels of religious participation. Advocates of the theory suggest that the USA is exceptional also in the extent of inequalities, high levels of poverty and weak welfare and health care systems, and that this creates high levels of existential insecurity for some groups, in turn leading to higher religious participation.
