A history of the secularization issue

Institut Français d'opinion publique (IFOP) and the most important figure in the development of empirical sociology in France.

120 Although it developed some interest in the study of urbanism, it never developed an all-encompassing sociological approach.

121 A professor of Canon Law.

122 Interview with Roland Campiche; see also Hervieu-Léger and Champion 1986, p. 19.

123 Fondation nationale des Sciences politiques, Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Centre d'Etudes Sociologiques (Poulat 1969, p. 7), and later Centre d'Etudes Sociologiques, Faculté de Droit de Paris, Membre de l'Institut.

124 Although he did not participate in the first conference and was not one of the founding members, contrarily to what the succeeding presidents of the CISR always pretended (Poulat 1990, p. 14).

125 The proceedings of the first two conferences were not published.

126 See for instance Labbens 1960.

127 "Il est vrai que nous n'avons point là une enquête méthodique, [...] mais combien de tels coups de sonde sont excellement révélateurs des problèmes de sociologie religieuse concrets, et aussi du désir, qui se fait jour, de les connaître avec exactitude, afin de pouvoir y porter remède!" (Paul Droulers and Antoine Rimoldi, CISR 1951, p. 83).

128 The textbooks in themselves were not the most influential in bringing about this change. The most important factor in this evolution was the theoretical evolution of the field itself.

129 It should be noted that, even before 1937, several textbooks were organized around a set of institutions (see for example Cooley, Charles H. et al. 1933. Introductory Sociology. New York: Charles Scribener's Sons. Pp. 402-72; Young, Kimball. 1934. An Introductory Sociology. New York: American Book Co. Pp. 215-345; Ballard, Lloyd Vernor. 1936. Social Institutions. New York: D. Appleton-Century Co.

130 Some texts published before 1930 did include a chapter at least partly devoted to religion (see for example Hayes, Edward C. 1918. Introduction to the Study of Sociology. New York: D. Appleton and Co.; Hankins, Frank H. 1928. An Introduction to the Study of Sociology: An Outline of Primary factors and Fundamental Institutions. New York: Macmillan). But these chapters did not form part of a systematic pattern organized around the presentation of institutions.

131 E.g. "Part IV. Major Institutions"; TXT 1948.

132 For instance TXT 1954, 1956a, 1966b.

133 See also TXT 1954, p. 562; 1961b, pp. 274-76; 1967, p. 338.

134 TXT 1950, pp. 420 and 422; 1956a, p. 445.

135 TXT 1950, p. 421; 1956a, pp. 417-18.

136 TXT 1951, p. 487; 1954, p. 573; 1962a, p. 290.

137 TXT 1956a, pp. 424-25; 1967, p. 338.

138 TXT 1951, p. 487.

139 TXT 1951, p. 487; 1956a, pp. 438-42.

140 Starting from TXT 1954 (pp. 569-70).

141 See also TXT 1956a, pp. 434-36; 1962b, p. 380; 1965, pp. 230-31; 1966b, pp. 494-503.

142 See also TXT 1965, pp. 230-31.

143 For a discussion of the most important studies in American sociology of religion before the 60s, see Glock 1959 and Lenski 1962.

144 Like his brother, Reinhold Niebuhr, author of Pious and Secular America (1958).

145 In which reality is perceived through a view that transcends the world.

146 An intermediate type.

147 In which reality is conceived as directly accessible through the senses.

148 See Parsons 1957 (Archives de sociologie des religions, n. 3) and Parsons' commentary on a paper by L. Kolb in the very first issue of the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion.

149 It is very interesting to note that the first two important books in lay American sociology of religion were not written by really professional sociologists.

150 This question has been very skillfully analyzed by Glock and Stark; [1959] 1965, pp. 68-85 (see below).

151 Which had been expressed in 1952 by Reinhold Niebuhr; cf. Herberg 1955, p. 270, n. 39.

152 At this point, Herberg refers to Sklare (1955); this footnote was already present in the 1955 edition.

153 This approach was inspired mainly by Niebuhr's (1929) analysis (Pfautz 1955, p. 121, n. 4).

154 This pamphlet appeared either in 1951 or in 1952.

155 The fourth Weberian dimension, the value-rational, was also taken into account.

156 Yinger's Ph.D dissertation and first major work, Religion in the Struggle for Power, was published in 1946.

157 In 1957, Yinger almost seemed to accept the use of secularization as a self-evident decline; he spoke of "modern society in which the process of secularization has gone so far - that is, in which traditional religious symbols have lost force and appeal" (1957, p. 119). In a later paper, however, he asserted that "it is difficult to say when secularism has increased or decreased. [...] Undoubtedly, there are many aspects of life for contemporary men in which secular rather than religious considerations prevail. [...] On the other hand, I belive that some aspects of life are being de-secularized" (1967, p. 24).

158 They precise that they take secularization here in the same sense as they took in the chapter we discussed previously (1965, p. 116).

159 Interview.

160 The reason why Luckmann's criticisms had more effect than most others does not stem so much from the criticisms themselves - which were not very new - but from the fact that Luckmann (together with Berger) really did propose an alternative to the approach he criticized (see Berger and Luckmann 1966).

161 For instance Jean Rémy, who was marked by the presentation of functionalism at the 1959 CISR conference in Bologna (Interview with Jean Rémy).

162 Interview with Emile Poulat.

163 As is attested by the very extensive reviews of the literature in Archives de sociologie des religions.

164 Thus, Bellah's paper Civil Religion and Berger's Sacred Canopy were both translated into French on the instigation of Jean Séguy and Jean Maître, members of the GSR (Interview with Jean Séguy).

165 Danièle Hervieu-Léger (Interview).

166 A first version of the following analysis has been presented at the 1989 CISR conference in Helsinki (Tschannen 1990).

167 Le Bras was not present at this conference. However, he wrote the introduction to the Actes and contributed one paper (Poulat 1990, p. 14).

168 In another paper included in CISR 1951, Le Bras presented this point of view more in detail: "L'objet inconstesté de la sociologie religieuse est [l'Eglise comme] établissement visible [...]. Elle peut prétendre davantage. Nous lui attribuons sans hésiter l'examen des conditions sociales du développement des croyances et des rites. [...] Les belles perspectives ouvertes par Troeltsch et Max Weber sur la morale et sur l'économie, les préoccupations normatives des chrétiens sociaux, la hantise du complexe religieux-profane dans les communautés civiles, ne mettent en mouvement que de rares théoriciens ou philosophes et surtout au sein du protestantisme anglais et américain. [...] Une sociologie du catholicisme doit être insérée dans une sociologie générale" (CISR 1951, pp. 18-21).

169 Other remarks going in the same direction include the following: "Certaines études entrant formellement dans le cadre de la sociologie religieuse ont dû, parfois, n'accomplir qu'une partie essentielle, mais somme toute préalable, de la besogne, compter, décrire, classer les phénomènes religieux, spécialement celui de la pratique dominicale, sans arriver toujours à une véritable sociologie" (Jean Labbens, CISR 1953, p. 50). "Des centres d'études dûment qualifiés aideraient l'observation à dépasser les faits de première zone pour s'approcher des éléments moins saisissables. Elle franchirait le domaine des effets pour passer à l'ordre des causes" (Giovanni Hoyois, CISR 1951, p. 80).

170 The very brief summary of the debates given on page 244 of CISR 1951 provides a good example of this: "Le P. Delcuve, S.J., demande au conférencier si sa conclusion ne risque pas d'être précipitée. La vie chrétienne est principalement une réalité intérieure et qualitative; n'est-il pas dangereux de l'apprécier en se basant sur la régularité d'actes extérieurs, dont l'importance est d'ailleurs évidente? - M. l'abbé Verscheure répond que telle est bien sa pensée; quelques-unes de ses expressions ne furent pas adéquates. Il se réjouit de voir la J.O.C. attacher plus d'importance à l'élément qualitatif dans ses enquêtes récentes. Mgr Delacroix insiste sur cet élément et sur l'esprit de finesse, qui est nécessaire pour le découvrir. A son avis, la statistique religieuse occupe une place exagérée dans les études sociologiques. M. le chanoine Leclercq estime indispensables ces recherches quantitatives; elles introduisent à la connaissance d'une paroisse, d'un diocèse [...]. Elles ne deviennent dangereuses que si l'enquêteur s'y arrête et ne procède pas ensuite à une étude 'qualitative'".

171 Other example: "Les 'Scientifiques' [...] nous reprochent un manque d'esprit scientifique, ils ne veulent pas se contenter d'une simple description des faits, mais insistent surtout sur la comparaison et l'explication des faits" (N. de Volder, CISR 1953, p. 72).

172 On one occasion, the sociology of knowledge is ironically designated as "ce suppôt de l'Université" (Gabriel Le Bras, CISR 1958, p. 43).

173 Other examples: "Lorsqu'en 1949, nous crûmes le moment venu d'informer le Saint-Siège de notre Conférence Internationale de Sociologie Religieuse, la réponse qui nous vint nous mettait en garde contre 'les recherches sociales en matière religieuse qui pourraient se faire en partant des postulats et en usant des méthodes de la science sociologique, telle qu'on l'entend communément'. Il est vrai que nous l'entendions autrement [...]. Parce que chrétiens, nous sommes prémunis de la tentation dont la sociologie durkheimienne reste un exemple bien établi, à vouloir tirer la règle du fait au lieu d'appliquer le fait à la règle" (Jacques Leclercq, CISR 1958, pp. 25 and 28). "Sans la révélation, impossible de comprendre et d'expliquer les structures sociales de la vie chrétienne. Celles-ci sont, en effet, si intimement liées à la révélation qu'une étude purement empirique méconnaîtrait la nature de l'objet étudié" (N. de Volder, CISR 1951, p. 217).

174 It thus seems that, as in the case of the ACSS (Morris 1989a, p. 3), the scientific publication which was closest to the organization acted as a catalyst in transforming the CISR.

175 The papers by Houtart, Tufari, Carrier, Goddijn, Acquaviva, Birou, Maître and Laloux.

176 A Jesuit.

177 President of the CISR from 1951 to 1965.

178 A Franciscan.

179 I first established a list of all the authors who presented papers at the CISR (N=396, including multiple occurrences). On this basis, I then established a second list (N=31, excluding multiple occurrences), grouping all the authors who had presented at least 3 papers. This second list allowed me to calculate the "longevity" of each author, that is, the period of time between his first and his last paper.

180 It should be noted that my method results in certain biases, because it focuses on the formal papers and ignores the people who acted as chairpersons for the discussion groups and sessions. Thus, some not very important names appear, while Dobbelaere, for instance, does not appear - he was too busy managing the whole affair to present papers! The 3 generations emerging from this analysis are the following: First generation: from 1951 to 1961 (3^d to 7^th conference). Authors entering into this category are not numerous; they are: Le Bras (from the 3^d to the 5^th conference), Labbens (3 to 5), Laloux (5 to 7) and Boulard (5 to 7). Two other authors, whose longevity was somewhat greater, can be added to that list: Houtart (3-11) and Fichter (3-10). Second generation: from 1959 to 1975 (6^th to 13^th conference). Members of the second generation are not very numerous either; they are: Acquaviva (6-13), Goddijn (6-12), Maître (6-11) and Pin (7-10). Burgalassi, whose longevity is greater (5-15) can also be considered as belonging to this generation. Third generation: from 1971 to 1987 (11^th to 19^th conference). Members of this generation are very numerous (and most of them appear for the first time at the 11^th and 12^th conferences); they are: Séguy (11-18), Servais (11-13), Swyecki (11-17), Voyé (11-19), Vrcan (11-19), Beckford (12-19), Guizzardi (12-18), Hervieu-Léger (12-19), Laeyendecker (12-14), Lemieux (12-14), Luckmann (12-19), Raphaël (12-15), Campiche (13-16), Maduro (13-17), Yanagawa (14-17) and Lalive d'Epinay (15-16). Three authors, whose first paper was delivered before the 11^th conference, can be added to this list: Rémy (8-19), Martin (9-18) and Wilson (10-19). Finally, only one author, Isambert (5-19), is impossible to classify, as his longevity covers the three generations.

181 Until 1962, about half of the names were followed by such a title, but from 1965 to 1969, only 10% to 30% of the names were followed by the title, which totally disappeared from 1981 onwards. Which obviously does not mean that the number of persons bearing such titles decreased in similar proportions, but that these titles no longer appeared officially.

182 As far as this can be guessed from the name of the institution given in the Acts.

183 Separate analyses for the first (1-7) and the second (9-19) period show that these relationships are not determined by the heavier presence of authors attached to a Church in the first conferences. In other words, this difference is statistically significant (.05) in the second period as well as in the first one. This result comes as no surprise: In his summary of recent trends in sociology of religion, Pin, writing in 1960, remarked that most of the efforts toward a theoretically more relevant sociology of religion had been made by academic sociologists (Pin 1960, p. 78).

184 As most of the persons involved are still alive, I have renounced quoting some of the harshest expressions of these strifes.

185 There never was a formal link between the CISR and the Church, but in the first years, the CISR always required ecclesiastical approval for its conferences and its publications.

186 The CISR does not as yet have any centralized archives.

187 Interview with Leo Laeyendecker.

188 Interview with Emile Poulat.

189 Interview with Christian Lalive d'Epinay.

190 Interpretations diverge on this point: Jean Rémy thinks that the division was mainly along confessional lines ("Même les allemands, qui venaient avant, c'étaient tous des gens de mouvance catholique. Et alors les américains, qui sont toujours venus, venaient à travers l'association catholique de sociologie des religions. Et Fichter, qui a été là tout un temps, c'était quand même un jésuite"; Jean Rémy, interview), while others (Leo Laeyendecker and James Beckford) tended to think in different terms: "The power struggle was between the French-speaking and the non-French-speaking" (James Beckford, interview).

191 Interviews with Thomas Luckmann and Bryan Wilson.

192 Interview with Bryan Wilson.

193 "Wilson was a man with a high prestige, also to the Americans, in the international world. And the CISR realized that if they wanted to be accepted as a scientific association in the world, then they had to have representatives who were scientists" (Leo Laeyendecker, interview).

194 Interview with Emile Poulat.

195 Bryan Wilson (Interview).

196 "Cessant de recourir à des 'pasteurs' et engageant [...] des sociologues professionnels, ces centres se sont trouvés confrontés à un changement de priorité des objectifs de la recherche: non plus un objectif pastoral, avec ce que ça peut amener parfois de regard peu ou pas critique, mais bien un objectif 'scientifique', avec ce que cela suppose de regard froid et de non-engagement, tout au moins au stade de l'analyse, de l'interprétation et du diagnostic - ceci n'empêchant pas, sinon toujours, du moins parfois, une préoccupation ecclésiale certaine" (Liliane Voyé, personal communication).

197 Dobbelaere's assertiveness on the whole issue of the separation of the scientific and the theological viewpoints must be understood against the background of the Belgian situation, where the Catholic hierarchy retains a considerable power and a marked dislike for lay sociology of religion (Interviews with Jean Rémy and Christian Lalive d'Epinay). Dobbelaere reacted strongly against this: "Fondamentalement, vous avez devant vous un homme qui s'est rebellé contre l'Eglise qui voulait définir ce qu'on pouvait accepter et pas accepter" (Karel Dobbelaere, interview).

198 Incidentally, this is the reason why I rely so heavily on Dobbelaere to document the strifes in the CISR. He is much more outspoken than the other sociologists whom I interviewed, but there is no reason to think that his accounts should be considered as unreliable. On the contrary, I was struck, in my interviews, by the fact that virtually everyone seemed to agree with Dobbelaere's description when directly asked, although most people preferred to remain as reserved as possible.

199 But is it not the case that in 1974, the revolution had already largely been accomplished? Not entirely. Even after 1971, the struggle was not completely over, as can be seen from the following account: "At first there was a wide support for Verscheure; he re-organized the CISR, put some order in the administration, and promoted contacts with Eastern Europe. However, he more and more acted - to use an expression the French use when they speak about De Gaulle - like: 'La CISR, c'est moi'. The council lacked the means to effectively control the Secretary General (the discussion started in Strasbourg), and there were provisions in the statutes that limited the number of years one may function as an officer. Consequently, we had to resort to changing the statutes as a tool to change this situation. Campiche, myself and others wanted more democracy in the CISR: a limited number of years in the council, a limitation of the years a person can serve as president or Secretary general, giving the members the power to nominate people as candidates for vacant positions in the council, etc" (Karel Dobbelaere, personal communication)..

200 In this context, the ISA, in which many of the members of the new generation also participated, provided a welcomed link to general academic sociology (Dobbelaere 1989, p. 385).

201 The term dechristianization as used by members of the CISR is not directly related to the notion of dechristinaization as used by sholars of the French revolution.

202 "La volonté prométhéenne de l'homme a accordé à la technique, instrument de sa puissance incontrôlée, un prestige absolu" (CISR 1960, p. 230).

203 Which he does not define precisely, but which he circumscribes as "le péché du monde"; "[les] déséquilibres, [...] malaises et [...] troubles de la société moderne; [les] fausses intégrations" (CISR 1960, pp. 228-29).

204 I understand that the author restricted his analysis to this level on purpose: "Ce n'est pas le changement social comme tel qui est cause de la transformation religieuse, puisque celle-ci peut s'orienter dans le sens positif ou négatif, mais bien l'adéquation sujet-objet, c'est-à-dire le moyen terme de caractère proprement sociologique qui résulte des positions mutuelles du sujet et de l'objet et de leur interaction réciproque" (CISR 1960, p. 59). However, this explanation is not convincing: The adequation between the subject and the object is nothing but an intervening variable, which determines the form of religious change; but the ultimate cause is social change.

205 A member of the CNRS Groupe de Sociologie des Religions.

206 A Jesuit, Secretary General of the CISR from 1965 to 1969.

207 But the author does not use these terms.

208 Other discussions of the causes of dechristianization include the papers by Nicolas Monzel in CISR 1951, by Jean Labbens in CISR 1953 and by Henri Mendras in CISR 1958.

209 A professor at the Catholic University in Louvain (Belgium).

210 For another overview of this process, see Beckford 1990.

211 The texts including a complete chapter on religion are: TXT 1948, 1950, 1951, 1954, 1956a, 1960, 1961b, 1962a, 1962b, 1965, 1966a, 1966b, 1967.

212 Chapters including a complete chapter on religion include 1969b, 1969c, 1969d, 1971b, 1971c, 1971d, 1973a, 1973b, 1975c, 1976a, 1976b, 1977b, 1979b and 1984. In addition, 1970 and 1976d include chapters partly devoted to religion.

213 According to Schreuder, between 1962 and 1964, at least 40 conferences on the sociology of religion were held worldwide (1966, p. 206).

214 Originally a fellowship of Protestant researchers (Beckford 1990, p. 47).

215 The most important in respect to what we have said being that the stress in Schleiermacher is on