This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Lauwers, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Les théories sociologiques concernant la sécularisation - Typologie et critique

In addition to their manifest function of explaining the assumed or real deterioration of organized religion in our society, secularization theories have the latent function of tra cing new forms of religion. For sociologists of religion this seemed to be the way to overcome their identity crisis resulting from this assumed deterioration. Many sociologists of religion have made the secularization theories their new frame of refe rence. This has incited us to critically examine the validity of these theories.

In the first part of this article, three types of secularization theories are discussed, viz. those emphazing pluralization (W. Herberg and M. Yinger), individualization (Th. Luckmann and P. Berger), and rationalization (M. Weber and B. Wil son).

In the second part it is shown that all these theories-are based on two historically developed social theses. First, it is assumed that a distinction can be made between the« essence » of religion and its « accidental » historical form ; secondly, it is assumed that the religious can be separated from the non- religious. Both these assumptions have originated among cer tain positions in a certain historical context, and are still held and defended by certain positions. These secularization theories thus have an ideological basis.

In the third part, the dialectical relationship between ideolo gy and social reality is discussed : secularization not only is an ideology without engagement, it is also a program of social action and as such may become social reality. This dialectic between ideology about. religion and reality of religion holds enough opportunities for research by sociologists of religion so that it is not necessary to promote these ideologies to frames of reference.

Social Compass, Vol. 20, No. 4, 523-533 (1973)
DOI: 10.1177/003776867302000402


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?