This is an paper that I wrote this past year while studying at Bethany College. I wrote it as a part of a course called, Society, Religion, and God (for those Bethany Vets older than me – Contemp Thought). Anyway, I have encountered these ideas a lot in the last few weeks of work, in conversations, and in books. So I felt them worthy of a post. This one is about twice as long as my regular posts. That is just a heads up, not an apology. Read on, or don’t read on. I hope for the first. Enjoy, and please interact.
Introduction
Religion has been a part of humanities existence since the beginning of time. There is no culture that has ever existed without some sort of belief system. This phenomenon of religion has permeated the structure of human society in a very prominent manner throughout history. However, society is a dialectic phenomenon in itself; it was a human product, and nothing but a human product, and it continuously acts back upon its producer (Berger 3). Therefore are aspects of society not at danger of being considered a human made product? For instance, religion is a major portion of human society that could very likely be a human creation. If this is true it did not stop religion from rising to positions of great prominence in the past. There was a period of time in which the church, and subsequently religion, ruled society. Ones nationality identified their religion and visa versa. The church made the laws; they arrested the criminals, and even carried out their punishment too. The church and its particular system of belief ruled society. But this did not last. Their came a time when people rebelled against the establishment of religion based society. This period has been called the Enlightenment. It was a time where people began to think for themselves and formulate their own beliefs. This began a movement that seemed to be the end of religion. Society seemed to grow and thrive apart from the religious beliefs that had ruled for so long. People began to think that religion was part of humanities ‘childhood’ and as we mature and grow as a race; religion will fade away as something that we don’t need anymore. However this has not been the case. There are many unanswered questions in the secularization vs. desecularization debate. In a world that is allegedly becoming more secularized how do we account for religious resurgence? What is secularization, and is society becoming more secular? This paper will take a closer look at the Secularization Thesis, and the desecularization of society in order to answer these questions.
Defining the Terms
For the purpose of developing coherent thought that contains the ideas of this paper the use of specific relevant terms is required. Therefore it is important before digging into body of content to define such terms as secular, The Secularization Thesis, and desecularization.
The term secular contains much ambiguity based upon the variety in its use. This word is often used in reference to many modern societies. It can sometimes be used to categorize music, movies and other elements of pop-culture. But what does it mean to be ‘secular’? The term originated in Latin as saeculum and is translated to mean “of the age” or “of the world (Dueck lecture).” From its original Latin roots it has evolved over time and come to mean a few different, but related, things. The first of these was its use by medieval Christians. They saw God as existing outside of time, and contrasted that concept with things ‘of this world’ or ‘secular things’ (Dueck lecture). The understanding of secularity has been redefined as the medieval age ended. It is still related but more refined. A common contemporary interpretation is that it should be thought of in terms of public spaces. These spaces have been emptied of God, or any reference to ultimate reality (Taylor 2). Another good contemporary meaning of secular is that it is more an ideological term that expresses a positive evaluation of the church’s loss of power and the need to maintain a ‘public square’ devoid of religious interference (Dueck lecture).
The Secularization Thesis owes much of its development and propagation to Peter Berger one of the key spokesmen for the thesis in the 1960s and 70s (Dueck lecture). The term ‘secularization’ has had a somewhat adventurous history (Berger 106). This thesis states that as societies modernize they inevitably become more secular (Pearcey 71). This meaning that as society has progressed through the centuries it should be less and less visibly religious. The Secularization Thesis entertains the idea that religion is almost a need that was experienced by humanity in its ‘infant’ stages. Now that it industrializes and modernizes and becomes more ‘mature’ there is an increasing rejection of Christian faith by society as a whole (Koyzis 25). The cause for this phenomenon within culture can be attributed to the increased specialization of things such as education and health care, which has lead to a decrease in the influence of the church. Religion’s role has also become increasingly specialized it deals with questions of meaning, rites of passage and private morality. The result is religion’s influence declining in both society and the lives of individuals (Dueck lecture).
Desecularization refers to the exact opposite of secularization. As The Secularization Thesis notes an increasingly more secular society, desecularization is the reversal of this process (Dueck lecture). It is characterized by the increase of religious practices and beliefs within society. While some parts of the world like Europe and North America are largely secular, many other cultures have embraced modernization while resisting secularization. This is the characterization of desecularization (Dueck lecture). Peter Berger ironically propagated desecularization in his 1999 publication, The Desecularization of the World.
These terms will be used throughout this essay and are essential to understanding the topics at hand. It should also be noted that the term Western refers to the society and cultural developments within North America and Europe.
A More Secular Society – The Secularization Thesis at Work
For more than a thousand years the church governed society. It made all the laws and it governed the people. The Pope was the most powerful person in the word. With his divine appointment as head of the church he was also head of society, with power over the king. But this did not last. Obviously by the current state of the world in which the church and government are separate a shift must have taken place. The Enlightenment was a period in history when people started to come out of this church rule. People were disillusioned with the churches lack of ability to run a peaceful society (Dueck lecture). From about 1650 to 1800 people developed a worldview that had hope for society. It focused on science, and knowledge, learning and exploration. These ideas were directly a contradiction from what the church wanted to see in society. The focus shifting onto science and knowledge meant a shift away from the bible and the churches teaching. This was the fall of religion. The church no longer ruled society. People no longer looked to the Bible for answers. Certain ideas started to develop about society and the direction of humanity. With the rejection of traditional authority came a focus on human reason, on what people can know (Dueck lecture). Natural law replaced religious law. God no longer became responsible for the rising of the sun, but rather the rotation of the earth was deemed responsible. This is what science had discovered. About this time ideas of human progress began to surface with an ultimate goal of harmony. Darwin’s theory of evolution became the foundation for a theory that stated there is constant progress in the world toward betterment (Dueck lecture). This evolution would eventually involve the application of scientific method to all aspects of life and thus eliminating the need for religion and belief.
This shift was the birth of secularism. The fall of the church was the beginning of a secular society that began to leave its need for faith behind as it developed more and more scientifically. The institutions that were created through the enlightenment and the birth of modern society were inherently secular (Gay 14). The enlightenment brought us a new focus on science, and this focus birthed the idea of secularism. So much so that the modern mind set has redefined what the purpose for life is. It is science and science assures us that life’s real purposes do not transcend nature, but are embedded within nature in such a way as to be scientifically discoverable (Gay 80). This view has no room for God. So what is His purpose? From a scientific and technological point of view, God’s existence is largely irrelevant. He has been left to inhabit only that space defined by our ever-diminishing scientific ignorance, and so has become the doubtful “god-of-the-gaps.” And what little need we may still have for this god-of-the-gaps should, at some point in our technological future, diminish practically to the vanishing point (Gay 81). All of this became a picture not of what was happening entirely, but what should happen. Secularism became an ideology; the way society ought to be globally. It became common sense that religion cannot and should not be a motivating force in public life (Pearse 41). What was developing was the Secularization Thesis, which took this ideology of secularism on step further and theorized that it was actually rapidly taking place. In the early 1960s, experts were trying to make sense of religious developments said that religion in the Western world was in decline, an inevitable result of societies becoming more highly industrialized and scientific. The rest of the world would, with increasing industrial development, suffer a similar fate (Bibby 1). Each generation has been confident that within another few decades, or possibly a bit longer, humans will “outgrow” belief in the supernatural. Experts stated that the need for religion could be completely eradicated by at least 1900 (Stark 249).
There was a period of time in which it seemed the Secularization Thesis was coming to reality. Countries of the Western world were losing religious standing. As Western Europe became more secularized North America closely followed. It came to the point where even consciously committed religious believers in Western countries lived highly secularized lives; they did not, in actual fact, spend nearly as much time in religious devotions, or in hedging their actions and decisions with religious criteria and considerations (Pearse 42). This shift seemed to also take place as countries like the United States moved into positions of power internationally. However this shift of secularization was not a global occurrence. It seemed rather localized to Westernized societies. Countries in the Middle East have not shown a decrease in religious growth with such groups as Islam. Other countries like India have only seen an increase in religious following. But when looking at Western society, evidence became strong that they were falling away. Scientific discovery made it harder to live moral lives. This was due to the fact that people were just not asking religious questions. Answers are not found in scripture they are found under the microscope. The questions however, still remain, why was this secularization that was supposed to be global, limited to Western culture? Why didn’t the Secularization Thesis grow without hindrance? What happened that stopped this way of thinking?
Desecularization
Many people thought that since modernization is so advanced in many nations that “postmodernism” is the latest buzzword; it must be assumed that secularization is at least moving to the extent that a significant downward trend in religiousness can be seen (Stark 251). However, it has become obvious in recent years that the Secularization Thesis was not an idea that transcended time. With it being limited largely to Western society there was a lot of room for other regions of the world to develop religiously. In the last decade a major religious resurgence has been seen in most parts of the world. This has seeped into North America causing a religious boom among its people too. Sociological studies have shown evidence that the conflict between religion and science is largely fictional and that scientists are not notably irreligious, being as likely to attend church as is the general public (Stark 264). This has caused a certain level of disillusionment with the Secularization Thesis. Sociologist are now saying that both the extent and the inexorability of secularization have been exaggerated, even in Europe and North America, and much more so in other parts of the world (Berger 41). Cynics state that from the beginning, social scientists have celebrated the Secularization Thesis despite the fact that it apparently never was consistent with reality (Stark 249). Flaws that can be found in secularization ideas have caused fractures in its foundations. People have realized that enlightened or secular concepts of equality and fairness are secular distillations of time-honored Judeo-Christian precepts (Novak 36). The fact of the matter is that secularization did not hold up. Religion bounced back. Rodney Stark lists dozens of statistics in his publication Secularization R.I.P. of religious groups that have grown significantly in numbers over a short period of time. There has been growth in faiths such as Islam, and evangelical Christianity. He also mentions the global occurrence of religious growth everywhere from China and Japan to European nations and the United States (Stark 266-268). Post 9/11, people have seen an increase in global religion in and out of the United States. Sociologists even argue that in the world after September 11, 2001, secular and religious people in the West need one another if they are to put together all the elements of a sustainable humanistic culture (Novak 39). With this major resurgence of religion one question needs to be asked: What are the long-term prospects of the secularism that was so prominent in Europe and the United States? Major difficulties stand out. Such as this: Faced with an extreme ideology such as political Jihadism, as seen on 9/11, conceived in the white-hot passions of resentment and bloodlust, with what can secularism defend itself (Novak 38)? There is no denying it, religion is not dying, and it is growing in numbers and in passion. Father Andrew Greeley is a prominent sociologist and in his publication, The Persistence of Religion he summarizes the desecularization of society with one causal happening.
The ultimate issue is whether humankind is a “secular” species, one that needs no explanation for its own existence and no examination of its propensity to hope. Born with two incurable diseases — life, of which it knows it will die, and hope, which says that perhaps there is something more than death — can the human bracket all questions of ultimate meaning, all stories which seek to point in the direction of transcendence? Surely, some individuals do not need such stories; others seem to need them very much. Most humans at least want to have the stories available at times of crisis in their lives. Unless and until the species can be weaned away from hope — as well as wonder and surprise — and unless and until it can be taught not to raise ultimate questions, it will have religion (in the sense described in the last three sentences) and that religion will have an impact on the rest of human life (Greeley 39).
Greeley knows that religion in the world will never die, based upon human nature. His claims seem to have been proven by the global religious resurgence over the last few decades. The fact is no one can prove that one day, religion will not wither away. Just as they cannot prove that will die. However, if it does, it will not have been caused by modernization, and the demise of faith will bear no resemblance to the process claimed by the secularization doctrine. This is already being demonstrated around the world in multiple faiths. Therefore, once and for all, it should be declared the end to social scientific faith in the theory of secularization, recognizing that it was the product of wishful thinking (Stark 269).
Die Hard Fans
In the face of the decaying Secularization Thesis there are still groups that hold on with a belief that what it states is true. There is a following that still hopes to see global secularization, as it “ought to be.” And even though this Secularization Thesis and the apparently rapid secularization of global society has become hard to see as fact there are still some portions of the world that have become secular and still remain that way in the face of growing religion. For instance France has a very official secular stance. They take the definition of secular to its truest meaning. They have stated in France that life should be compartmentalized. There are different spheres of life within French thought. There is the personal sphere, which contains areas of life like ones family, friends, social activities, and of course their religious beliefs and practices. The second sphere is public, this contains things like ones job, schooling, and public activities (for example going to the movie theatre). This division in French society has had two effects on its people. The first of these and most obvious globally is that France has become one of the most secularized nations in the world. The second effect has been controversy among religious groups in France who were opposed to laws that prevented them from wearing religious symbols to school or work. There has been a significant increase over the last few decades of Islamic presence in France. However, the French government has done its duty in making certain compromises and squashing different protests in order to remain a secular nation. This phenomenon is not native to only France however due to the public nature of France in the Western world it has been on of the few nations recognized for their secularized state. Another country that is recognizably secular is The Netherlands. However they have become secular for reasons that are unique from France. They do not have an official government stance on public and personal spheres. But The Netherlands has become obviously secular with the legalization of activities such as abortion and certain cases of euthanasia. There is also a prevalent sex industry in The Netherlands that is characterized by things such as the “Red Light District” in Amsterdam where it is known that almost any type of sexual indulgence can be acquired in some way. These features make The Netherlands visibly secularized because they seem to state that the country has been emptied of God. The values and moral stances of the government are obviously not based on scripture. Thus they are considered secular.
There is another idea presented that contains possible explanation for the unwavering beliefs of the secularists. The fact has been already stated that religion simply won’t die among humanity until we can change our very ultimately curious nature. So how is this satisfied for the secularist? If it is human nature to need to believe in something, what do the secularists believe in? Greeley says that it is simple. Secularists believe in secularism. He argues that what they believe, and fight for, has become a religious system for them (Greeley 39). He says that to them secularization is not a descriptive or a predictive model. It is normal. It is not an account of the way things are or a prediction of the way things are likely to become. Rather, it is a prescription of the way reality should be (Greeley 39). Secularists have developed a faith out of their secular beliefs. It contains something that they believe to be absolutely true and worth preaching about. To the secularists, secularization is so true, that it is worth hoping that the world adheres to it. Greeley argues, and seems to be correct in arguing, that secularization is not scholarship; it is the religious faith of the secularized (Greeley 39). If he is right, and he seems to be, then this is a viable reason for the remaining presence of secularism in the face of religious resurgence. Every person needs something to believe in, whether it is Islam, Christianity, Neo-Atheism or Secularism, it is human nature to ask questions and to believe religious answers.
Conclusion
In a world that is allegedly becoming more secularized how do we account for religious resurgence? What is secularization, and is society becoming more secular? The simple answer is: not anymore. There was a time in which it seemed that secularization was becoming prevalent. History shows a brief direction toward secularism, but it also shows movements to desecularize and a resurgence of religious devotion that outweighs secularizations claims. As outlined in the above sections, the Secularization Thesis was only an idea that produced more discussion than visible realities; it was wishful thinking of the way things ought to be. The fact remains; humanity will always be asking ultimate questions that cannot be answered by anything other than some sort of belief that results in religiosity. Those who propagate it as truth, follow the idea of secularization religiously.
