Entry by Danielle 4/27/13
Blog Topic: The Impact of Religion on Society
Subject/Title: Religion and Secularization In American Society:
In Sociology Now, authors Kimmel and Aronson write: “Early sociologists believed that as societies became more modern, religion would decline. Individuals, and society as a whole, would no longer need it, and so society would become increasingly secular. Secularization—the process of moving away from religious spirituality and toward the worldly—was assumed to be the future of religion around the world” (p. 498). However, as Kimmel and Aronson say, this is not the case. In fact, studies are showing an overall global trend of resurging religious activity, including within the United States: “The United States stands alone among wealthy, industrialized countries in its embrace of religion. Nearly six in ten Americans say religion plays a very important role in their lives (Pew Global Attitudes Project, 2002) [Kimmel, p. 500].
In general we define the term religion as a set of belief systems, world views, and usually a language of symbols and customs, that relate humanity with spirituality, or with meanings that encompass and integrate both material and nonmaterial “worlds.” We recognize that these are human concerns (we do not know that animals have these). Kimmel and Aronson point out that “no human society has yet been discovered that lacks an organized, coherent system of beliefs about a spiritual world” (489). On the other hand, secularization is defined as the transformation of a society from close identification with religious values and institutions toward nonreligious values and secular institutions. We know that the U.S. has transformed in this way, valuing and relying on science and technology.
In what manner do these seemingly opposite forces, religion and secularism, coexist in American society? Over the next few weeks, I plan to explore this topic from a sociological perspective and post some of my findings here on this blog. I am looking for some relevant academic sources, including statistics, sociological theories, and discussion from (primarily) the beginning of the 21st century. Sociologists consider religion to be one of the primary “agents of socialization” within societies. What current study and research is being done in this area?
Is the so-called “resurgence” of religion a reaction to the fragmenting, compartmentalizing influence of the modern industrial times? The Encyclopedia of Religion and Society (1998) contains information about the background of the study of religion and society. In fact, the editor,W. H. Swato writes,
“The sociology of religion has, very largely, become trapped in the discussions that concern the shift from preindustrial to industrial societies. The debate needs to move on. Building on to the best of the contributions concerning the nature and forms of modernity (Giddens, Beck, Baumann, and so on), those with appropriate skills need to offer alternative analyses that integrate rather than marginalize the role of religion in the modern world (Beckford 1996). Hervieu-Léger (1986, 1993) has made a significant start in this direction, recognizing that the nature and forms of religion at the turn of a new century depend significantly on the nature of modernity itself. Contemporary religion is a product of, not a reaction to, modernity” (“Content” page).
In the coming weeks, I hope to bring more of the discussion of the relationship between religion and secularization, and its effects on American society, to the blog.
Sources cited:
- Kimmel, M. and A. Aronson. Sociology Now: Census Update. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2012. Print.
- Swatos, W.H. “Content Pages.” Encyclopedia of Religion and Society. Hartford Institute for Religion Research. Alta Mira Press, 1998. Hartsem.edu. Web. 28 Apr 2013.
I have found a piece of recent writing concerning religion and secularism, which I think is good, and applies to the situation in American society. It is by Martin Marty, a longtime recognized academic, theologian, and professor of religious history, now at Univ. of Chicago. Marty’s words are clear—it would be best to just quote him. Here is an excerpt from the preview of the article (I can’t seem to access Jstor for the rest even though it is said to be free):
“In recent decades, many experts have marshaled empirical data demonstrating a secular trend in modern societies. Still other experts, marshaling different data, have documented a resurgent religiosity in these same societies. As a result of these paradoxical findings, my book shelf is crowded with contradictory titles: next to The Secular City is The Unsecular City; a volume that refers to Secular Man adjoins one exploring Unsecular Man.
. . . From my perspective—that of a theologian who has spent a lifetime pondering the impact of secularism on religion—we need a new model for describing the world that we actually inhabit. It is neither exclusively secular nor exclusively religious, but rather a complex combination of both the religious and the secular, with religious and secular phenomena occurring at the same time in individuals, in groups, and in societies around the world.
The old debates revolved around binary categories: societies were either secular or religious; worldly or otherworldly; materialist or spiritual; favoring immanence or transcendence, etc. The use of such polarizing concepts is valid in some contexts, but it does not adequately express the ways that individuals, groups, and societies actually behave; most people blur, mesh, meld, and muddle together elements of both the secular and the religious, the worldly and the otherworldly, etc. In adjusting to the complex world around them, people confound the categories of the social scientists, theologians, and philosophers: they simply ‘make do’ with a syncretic and characteristically modern blend of attitudes—call it religio-secular.”
I think Marty’s summation is good, but also idealistic. It sounds very broad, but how else can we explain both the spiritual urge and the material concerns in human experience? If a person can only see one side, then they are in a sense handicapped. The “both/and” view that sociology uses works well here—America being both secular and religious. I think the scope of American society is so huge—in size, pluralism, and modernity, that religious and secular attitudes mingle, and, as Marty describes, things get muddled and blurred. There are many angles to explore in relating this topic to American society.
For instance, a really big ongoing issue in the U. S. is keeping religion out of school curriculum. The combination of freedom of religious expression with the large diversity of religions, seems to cause a lot of friction and controversy in our society, among differing points of view. When does one person’s freedom of expression start to infringe on another person’s rights? In order to protect everyone’s rights, the U. S. government tries to keep the educational system neutral and secular.
I call Marty’s view idealistic, because he is referring to attitudes, and the realities of pluralistic society are that some religious views try for more—they want action, and want to change other people.
What would happen if, in America, all religious groups could agree to get along, and allow others to be different? Seems it would relieve our society of a lot of difficulties.
*Final note re. the religion vs. secularism debate: fivebooks.com has a transcribed interview with Martin Marty (Apr 19, 2011) in which he talks about five books on religion vs. secularism that he thinks “fuel the debate.” The interview contains interesting ideas on this subject.
Cited:
Marty, Martin. “Our religio-secular world.” Daedalus Vol. 132, No. 3, On Secularism & Religion (2003) pp. 42-48. MIT Press. 5/11/2013.
http://fivebooks.com/interviews/martin-marty-on-religion-versus-secularism-history?page=3
No comments:
Post a Comment