To Study or Not to Study Religion and Society: The Institutionalization, Fragmentation and

Marginalization of Sociology of Religion in Finland

Author(s): Titus Hjelm
Source: Acta Sociologica, Vol. 51, No. 2 (Jun., 2008), pp. 91-102
Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20460041 .
Accessed: 28/08/2013 16:23
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Sage Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Acta
Sociologica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

ACTA SOCIOLOGICA 2008

To Study or Not to Study Religion and Society

Fragmentation
The Institutionalization,
andMarginalizationof
SociologyofReligioninFinland
TitusHjelm
School ofSlavonic and East European Studies,UniversityCollege London, UK
abstract: In thework ofmany of the classics of sociology, religion plays a major
role. In post-WorldWar II sociology, however, the study of religion gradually ended
up in a marginal position. This article discusses the status of the sociological study
of religion in Finland from the post-war period to the present. The focus in the
article is on the institutionalevolution of the field and the influence of thatevolution
on the role of the sociology of religionwithin Finnish sociology. Finnish sociology of
religion isdivided into threecategories: studies carried out in sociology departments,
sociological studies carried out within religious studies and church and social
studies. The article examines the development and characteristics of each of these
disciplines as well as the consequences of institutionalscattering for the sociology of
religion. The aversion of religionwithin sociology, the focus on folklore in religious
studies and the public identification of church sociology with theology are identi
fied as the reasons for themarginal position of the sociology of religion in Finland.
The article closes with a review of recent studies in the sociology of religion and
the 'new rise' of the field due to the rise in the societal significance of religion.
keywords: church and social studies * comparative religion * Finland
* history of sociology * religious studies * sociology of religion

Introduction
In celebrationof the launchof thenew NordicJournal
Tidsskrift
ofReligionand Society(formerly
forkirke,religion
og samfunn),theeditorscommissionedarticleson thehistoryof sociologyof
religionin each of theNordic countries.In her article,sociologistKirstiSuolinna outlines the
developmentof thesubdisciplineinFinland, fromthefoundersto thepresent (2005).The bulk
of the article is concerned with

the formative period, especially Edvard Westermarck

and his

school - an understandableemphasis consideringSuolinna's earlierpublications (2000,2003;

Suolinna
studies

et al., 2000). Her discussion of later developments

is concentrated on several key
in sociology and practical theology, namely the subdiscipline known as 'church and

social studies'.

Suolinna's
article is a lucid and usefully critical overview of the
of religion in Finland. Her discussion of major studies is detailed

As a historical exposition,
development

of sociology

and comprehensive.
However, Suolinna's overviewalmostcompletelyneglectsthesociological

in departments of comparative
research conducted
religion. The impression that one gets especially ifhailing from a background in comparative religion - is that sociology of religion is
given only two-thirds of the attention that its history in the Finnish university system deserves.
Acta Sociologica * June2008 * Vol 51(2):91-102 * DOI: 10.1177/0001699308090037
Copyright
C) 2008 NordicSociologicalAssociationand SAGE (LosAngeles,London,New Delhi and Singapore)
www.sagepublications.com

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Acta Sociologica
51(2)
Therefore,Iwould like to reopenand refocusthe issueby concentratingon the institution
and itsmarginaliza
alization of sociologyof religioninFinland, itssubsequent fragmentation
concernsabout thepredicamentof sociology
tion,
which is in tum linkedtowider international
of religion among

the social sciences. My

aim is to offer an analytical

overview

of the insti

tutionalprocesses thathave influencedthe status of sociology of religion in Finland. This

includesexamining theways inwhich thedivision of the sociological study of religion into
different
universitydepartmentshas affectedtheobjects of study and the image of Finnish
sociologyof religion.
To clarify my point, it is appropriate

to describe what

I am not attempting

to do. First, I do

not explicitlydiscuss socio-culturalfactorssuch as the status of theLutheran church as a

statechurchand its impacton thesociological studyof religion.It is of course impossible to
completelybypass the influenceof the social and cultural context,but I engage in this
discussion onlywhen it is relevantforthestudyof the institutional
development of thesub
not
to
an
I
aim
stress
is
exhaustive
that
my
discipline.Second,
provide
bibliographyofFinnish
in
research,nor todescribeparticular importantstudies any depth. Last, I have forthemost
part omitted theearliestdevelopments in Finnish sociology of religion,as thesehave been
comprehensivelycovered elsewhere (Anttonen,1987;Haavio-Mannila, 1992;Suolinna, 2005).
The predicament

of the sociology of religion

In his impressiveoverview of sociology of religionbetween theyears 1945 and 1989, James

Beckford (1990) lamentsthemarginal statusof sociologyof religionamong thewider fieldof
sociology.The same sentimenthas been thestockof articlesand sociologyof religiontextbooks
ever since (e.g.Bruce, 1995:xiii;Hamilton, 1998: 1 and 2001: vii;Ebaugh, 2002;Beckford,2003:
1). Looking back to the timeof classics such as Durkheim andWeber,mainstream sociology
did indeed

seem to lose interest in religion as an object of study during

the latter half of the

twentiethcentury.
Beckford himself

(1990: 54 and 2003) offers some explanations

for the current situation, as

does Allardt (1990) inhis response toBeckford (1990).Both stressmacro-sociological changes

in societyand religionas factorsthatinfluenceand setup prioritiesforsociological research:
the status of religion in society inevitably affects the status of the study of religion in sociology.

Therefore,arguing forthemarginalizationof sociologyof religionismore difficultin thecase

of the United

States, where

religion has played

a much more

prominent

role in public

life

(cf.Beckford,1990: 48-51). However, the relationshipbetween religionand societyhas gone

throughprofound changes in the nearly 20 years since Beckford's (1990) overview. The
worldwide resurgenceof interestin religion in politics, themedia and other spheres of life
does seem tohave liftedsociologyof religionfromthenadir alluded to inBeckford'sarticle.
Situated in this context, Finnish sociology of religion can be described as suffering from a
'double deprivation': not only is itmarginal vis-'a-vis the field of sociology in general, but also

thenumber of sociological studies of religionhas been very low.This is in sharp contrastto

thelively,ifmarginal,discussion in theinternational
context(Bruce,1995:xiii;Hamilton, 2001:
vii). Rather than engage in abstractmacro-sociological speculation on the impactof social
change

on the emphases

of sociological

study, my aim is to examine

the predicament

of the

War
sociologyof religioninFinland in termsof the institutional
developments inpost-World
II Finnishuniversities.It is to theanalysis of thesedevelopments thatI now turn.

Religion

and post-World War

II sociology

in Finland

EdvardWestermarck(1862-1932)can rightfully
be called thefatherofFinnishsociology(Haavio
Mannila, 1992:28).AlthoughWestermarck'srelationship
with religionisoftenforsome reason
92

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Hjelm: ToStudyorNot toStudyReligionand Society

reduced tohis criticismof institutionalized
Christianity(e.g.Koistinen and Raikka, 1997:25-6),
hiswork was very importantforthestudyof religioninFinnish social science and inspired
many significantstudies (see Suolinna, 2005).
However, the influenceofWestermarckand his school of evolutionarysocial anthropology
WorldWar II (Suolinna,2005: 109) andwith it the interestin religionas an
waned soon after
object of study.Of the sociological studies published between 1945 and 1960, only Rafael
Karsten's book on currentissues in sociology and religiousstudies (1947) and Toivo Palo's
(1952)ground-breaking
Gallup surveyon theattitudestowards theChurch of Finland stand
out as significant
contributionsto thestudyof religion.
The structuralchanges that tookplace in Finnish Society fromthe early 1960s onwards
changed thepictureconsiderably.
Compared topreviousdecades, sociologyof religionreached
new heightswith multiple studies of issues such as theeffectsof urbanizationon religious
beliefs (Koskelainen,1966a, b), secularizationand the role of the church in a modernizing
society (Seppanen, 1962, 1968; Siipi, 1965;Niemi, 1966) and religiousmovements (Haavio,
1963,1965).The reason forthisproliferation
of researchon religion
may be attributed,first,to
theChurch of Finland's growing interestin the rapid social changes of theera,with subse
quent supportforresearch(Husu andAllardt, 1981:24). Second, at thattimeFinnishsociology
was influencedby the 'Americantypeof sociology,which was characterizedby a focuson
contemporarynational issues' (Eskola, 1973: 269.All translations
by theauthor).
Moving our focusto thenextdecade, however,changes thepictureagain.For example,none
of thescholarsreferredtoabove continued thestudyof religionaftertheirinitialpublications
in the1960s (cf.Haavio, 1983: 76; Lempiainen, 1982: 113).Kirsti Suolinna (1975,1977) stands
out as a notable exception tomainstream sociology,which otherwiseshunned religionas an
objectof study.Suolinna's researchon religionbegan alreadyduring themore 'active' (from
a sociologyof religionperspective) 1960s (1964,1966, 1969). She also consistentlycontinued
the sociological studyof religionin the1980s (seeHolm et al., 1981; Suolinna and Sinikara,
1986; cf.Lampinen, 1995). In addition toSuolinna,Susan Sundback (1983,1984,1986) and Eila
Helander (1986)were theonly Finnish scholarsof religioneducated in thesocial sciences in
the1980s.Sundback, especially,has also been very active in a wider Nordic networkof soci
ologistsof religion.
A glance at thecurriculumdevelopmentof theDepartmentofSociology at theUniversityof
Turkuprovides a further
example of thechange in thestatusof sociologyof religionthattook
place inFinland in theearly 1970s:During theAcademic year 1966-67, sociologyof religion
(taughtbyAri Haavio) was theonly substantivecourse offeredin theotherwisemethodolog
ically focused department (Toivonen,1996: 42). In 1972, a committeeresponsible for the
planning of teachingand researchrecommendedthatthedepartment'semphasis should be
in 'thestudyof social change,especially thechanges ineconomicproductionand itsimmediate
effects'(Haavio, 1996: 55). This, naturally,did not exclude the study of religionfromthe
programme

- the study of religious change has been and

is an integral part of the study of

social change.However, despite thedepartmenthaving offeredsociologyof religioncourses

in thepast, thecommittee'slistofpracticalareas of researchdid not include religion.Instead,
theproposed emphases were '1) the regionaldistributionof industrialproduction; 2) the
problems of small-scaleagriculture;thecentralizationof productionand the statusof small
businesses; 3) thesocial and individualeffectsof thenature of labour' (Haavio, 1996: 55).
One seeminglyobvious explanationforthedecline of sociologyof religion- also discernible
from the above

list of research topics - is themassive

success ofMarxism

in Finnish academic

sociology(Eskola,1973:311-13;Haavio, 1996:55). Inspiredby similardevelopmentselsewhere

inEurope, and especially the1968 studentuprising inFrance,Finnish sociologyembraced a
class-consciousand oftencriticalview of religion.EmeritusprofessorAnttiEskola, himselfone
of the foremostproponentsof the 'new sociology', reminiscesthatduring thattimereligion
93

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Acta Sociologica
51(2)
was more or lessa tabooamong sociologists:a scholarspeaking 'approvingly'of religionrisked
was that,in thespiritofprogress,religion
a lossof credibility,
and thegeneral sentiment
would
be obsolete sooneror later(Eskola,2003: 25, 41).
On theotherhand, thenew sociology influencedbyMarxism did not inspirecriticalstudies
of religionin society.IfMarxism had an effecton thesociological studyof religioninFinland,
itwas more in the formof a shiftin researchemphases thanan active critiqueof religion.In
an earlierarticle(1973:310),Eskolamentions a studywhich showed thatfromthe1960s to the
1970s sociological researchinFinland shiftedfrom'humanistic'studies tomore 'technocratic'
approaches. Religion simply did not fitinto the researchprogramme of a class-conscious
sociology.Although theMarxist hegemonywas latersupplantedbymore diverse approaches,
lingeringsuspicion towardsreligionas a valid objectof study inFinnish sociology is arguably
a directconsequence of thechanges thattookplace in the1970s.
One additional reason forthemarginalization of religionas an object of study in Finnish
(andmore broadly,Nordic) sociologyhas todo with the relativetheoreticalimpoverishment
2006: 5).As noted
of thesociologicalstudiesof religionthatproliferatedin the1960s (Beckford,
above, Finnish class-conscious sociology had littleinterestin empirical studies of religion
alone.When thisisdoubled with the inabilitytoengage indeeper theoreticaldiscussionwith
theMarxist mainstream, themarginalization of sociology of religionbecomes much more
understandable.
That said, itshould be noted thatreligionwas never completelyforgotten
by Finnish soci
ologists.However, thefewwritings thataddressed religionwere not primarilyabout religion,
but about elementsof largerprojects.For example,ErikAllardt's influential
paper 'Uskonto
sosiologia' ('Sociologyof religion';1986 [1974];see alsoAllardt, 1970)was a theoreticalassess
ment of one of society's sectors,not a contributioninspiredby thestudyof religionas such.
Similarly,RistoAlapuro's (1977) articleon theeffectsof religionon politicalmobilization in
ruralFinlandwas part of a largerprojectnot focusedespeciallyon religion.
Sociological

approaches

in comparative

religion

IfEdvardWestermarck is thegodfatherof Finnish sociology,Uno Harva occupies the same

position

in comparative

religion. Despite

the fact that he ismostly

remembered

for his ethno

graphical studies of thenorthernpeoples of Siberia,Harva was also theholder of the first

professorshipof sociologyat theUniversityofTurku (Anttonen,1987:101-2;Haavio-Mannila,
1992:37-8). Interestingly
enough,his sociological researchdoes not explicitlyaddress religion,
althoughhe considered thestudy of religionan importantpart of the sociological study of
primitivecultures (Haavio-Mannila, 1992: 39-40).
was formedalong the
Finnishcomparativereligion
Unlike theScandinavian religionshistoria,
linesofGerman Religionswissenschaft,
thus incorporating
multiple approaches to thestudyof
religion,sociologyof religionamong them(Pentikainen,1986).However, despite itsexplicitly
MarttiHaavio had theeffect
interdisciplinary
character,the influenceofHarva and folklorist
that,aftercomparativereligion'sinceptionin 1963 inTurku and in 1970 inHelsinki, itbecame
overwhelminglyfocusedon thestudyof folklore,anthropologyof religionand ethnographi
cal fieldworkinLapland, inKarelia and among the indigenouspeople ofSiberia (seeHonko,
1972;Pentikainen,1986;Markkula, 1997).
That said, therehas also been a 'sociologicallyinformed'
undercurrentincomparativereligion
throughoutitsshorthistoryinFinland. For example, inan articleoriginallypublished in 1961,
Lauri Honko, thefirstprofessorof comparativereligionat theUniversityofTurku,discusses
'functional analysis'

as a tool for the study of folklore motifs

(1972: 20-1). Honko

acknowl

edges thesociologicaloriginof theconceptof 'function',

but clearlydifferentiates
between its
use in sociological researchand in thestudyof folklore.Similarly,otherstudies (e.g.Gothoni,
94

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Hjelm: ToStudyorNot toStudyReligionand Society

but with an anthropologicalfocus.Of the earlier
1982) have been sociologically informed,
researchin comparative religion,Helena Helve's (1987)work on youth and religionstands
out as explicitlysociological,using a longitudinalsurveymethod and employingsociological
theoriesof identity.
ofcomparativereligionas an independentdisci
Arguably,then,ever since theestablishment
pline, thestudyof religionin societyhas been aminor strandof researchin a fieldfocusedon
ethnographyand anthropologicalapproaches. In an articleon thehistoryof sociology in
Finland, Erik Allardt (2003: 14) mentions the establishmentof 'independentsociology of
century.
However, theremarkcan be considered
religion'in thefinaldecades of the twentieth
to theestablishmentofcomparativereligionas an inde
mistaken if,as itseems,he is referring
pendent academic discipline: sociologicalapproaches did not become part of themainstream
of comparativereligionuntil thevery lastyears of themillennium.

'Parishsociology' and theestablishmentof churchand social studies

while
Writing in the1960s,eminentsociologistof religionThomas Luckmann commentedthat
more thanever, ithad turned
the sociologyof religionseemed outwardly tobe flourishing
intoa descriptiveendeavour,without the sociologicallyprofound touchof classics such as
Durkheim andWeber:
The new sociology of religion consists mainly of descriptions of the decline of ecclesiastic institutions
- from a parochial viewpoint, at that.The definition of research problems and programs is, typically,
determined by the institutional formsof traditional church organization. The new sociology of religion
badly neglected its theoreticallymost significant task: to analyze the changing social - not necessarily
institutional - basis of religion inmodem society. (Luckmann, 1967: 17-18)

Luckmann's own work has sincebeen an inspirationfornew directionsin thesociologyof

religion,
with studies of non-institutionalreligion,i.e. 'invisiblereligion', 'implicitreligion',
At thesame
research.
'folkreligion',and so on gradually replacingnarrowlyinstitution-based
namely theLutheran
timeinFinland,however, thesociologicalstudyof religiousinstitutions,
Unlike thecase inotherEuropean countriesand theUnited States,
Church,was strengthened.
church-sponsoredsociological researchof religiontookoffwhere academic sociology (and to
a lesserextent,comparative religion)had leftit.After thedemise of religionas an object of
interestin sociology,and because of themarginalityof sociologicalapproaches incomparative
religion,thestudyof religionand societywas carriedon forsome timemainly at theChurch
established in 1969,
of Finland-affiliated
Church Research Institute(Kirkontutkimuskeskus),
and in thesubdisciplineof 'churchand social studies', incorporatedinto theDepartment of
PracticalTheology at theUniversityofHelsinki in 1985.
The impetusforchurch-sponsoredsociological researchcamewith therapid social changes
of the 1960s and its perceived

effects on the role of the church in society. According

toHuotari

was to 'provide information

on the
(1982:232) theobjectiveof theChurch Research Institute
which is necessaryand useful fordecision-making
church,religious life,and social currents,
and developmentof thechurch'.Similarly,as a part of theuniversitydiscipline of practical
forthefunction
theology,theobjectiveof churchand social studies is to 'provideinformation
ingand developmentof thechurch,and evaluate thechurch'sactivitiescritically'(Lampela
Kivistb, 2001: 151).
The practicalobjectiveofboth church-sponsoredsociologyand thesubdisciplineof church
and social studies is a featurethatdifferentiates'churchsociology' fromgeneral sociologyof
religion.However, perhaps evenmore relevantto thepositioningof churchsociologywithin
The
thewider frameworkof sociology is itssometimesexplicittheologicalself-identification.
ways within the
connectionbetween sociologyand theologyhas been understood indifferent
95

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Acta Sociologica
51(2)
subdisciplineof churchand social studies.At theotherend of thespectrum,the relationship
has been seenmainly as practical.For example,Paavo Kortekangas, the firstdirectorof the
Church Research Instituteand thefirstperson tohold theprofessorshipof churchand social
studies, stated that 'systematictheologycan show us the relevanceof differentquestions'
(1975: 9). EchoingKortekangas,PenttiLempiainen (1982: 113) argues thattheaim of church
sociology is to study the representations
of theologicalprinciples in theeveryday lifeof the
church.
with theologyand livingfaithis
At theotherend of thespectrum,sociology's relationship
oftenexpressedmuch more explicitly,
as in thefollowingexcerptfroma book chapterentitled
'Churchand Social Studies as a Science':
When it is understood thatGod's salvation occurs in a historical-social process, both church history
and church and social studies can be understood to study the reality inwhich God works within the
framework regulated by the laws of history and sociology. (Huotari, 1982: 236-7)

It isobvious thatthisiswhere thepremisesofchurchand social studiesdiffer

most strikingly
both fromthestudy of religionin sociologyand fromsociological studies conductedwithin
ofcomparativereligion(Suolinna,2005: 114-15;seeHaavio, 1983:75;Sundback,
theframework
mainstream sociology
2004: 204-5). Although individualdifferencesof interpretation
remain,
of religionhas anchored itsmethodological premises in 'methodologicalatheism' at leastever
since the termwas

coined by Peter L. Berger

(1973: 106; cf.Hamilton,

2001: 5). That

is to say:

of scientifictheorizingtomake any affirmations,

'It is impossiblewithin theframeof reference
positive ornegative,about theultimateontological statusof thisalleged reality'(Berger,1973:
106.Emphasis in theoriginal).
Inpractice,
within churchand social
methodological approachesnaturallyvaryconsiderably
with a particularstudies.Neither does churchand social studies requireany identification
or any,forthatmatter - theologicalperspective.This is demonstratedby thestudies of civil
religionthatproliferatedin churchand social studies in the1980s (Huotari,1976;Lampinen,
1984, 1989;Sihvo, 1991;vrt.Sundback, 1983, 1984).However, perhaps because inFinland civil
religionwas (forgood reason, see Sundback, 1984) likened to the Evangelical Lutheran
Church, thesestudiesdid not, fromgeneral sociology'spoint of view,manage tobroaden the
subdiscipline's 'parishsociology' image.Harri Heino's ground-breakingsurveysof religious
movements

in Finland

(Heino, 1984,1997)

are also exemplary

of an approach

aiming at objec

but because of theirdescriptivenature theycontributedlittleto sociologicaldiscussions

tivity,
about religioninFinland.
thespectrumbetweenKortekangas'spractical
Returningto thequestionof self-identification,
vision and Huotari's religious-theological
view naturallycoversmuch ground.However, the
methodological discussion about the locationof individual studieswithin thefieldhas rarely
been explicit - not tomention

discussion

about

the position

of church and social studies as a

discipline ingeneral (see Ryokas, 1995;Lampinen, 1995).Sensitivityabout the issue is amply

demonstrated in a recent(Yeung,2006) descriptionof thecurrentstateof the subdiscipline,
where the author glosses over the above questions regarding the close relationbetween
theologyand sociologyby bluntlystatingthattheydo not apply tocontemporarychurchand
social studies.

Latest developments inFinnish sociology of religion

of the past 15 years have brought religion back onto the agenda of
Finnish social scientific research. Even if the acceptance of the role of religion as a social force
to be reckoned with has been slow, Finnish social science has awoken - following other

The social developments

European social scientistsstruggling

with similarquestions - to the importanceof religionin
96

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Hjelm:

To Study orNot

to Study Religion and Society

contemporarysociety.
Two developmentshave had a specificimpacton this.First,theeconomic
depression of theearly 1990s brought theChurch of Finland back into the limelightas an
alternativeand necessaryaddition to inadequate social security(Malkavaara,2000;Terasvirta,
2002). Second, thenew importanceof religionwas perhaps evenmore profoundlybrought to
public attentionby thegrowing immigrationof theearly 1990s.Above all, immigrantsfrom
Somalia had a veryvisible effecton theunderstandingof theroleof religioninpublic life.For
thefirsttimeveiledwomen became a common sightinmany Finnishcitiesand schoolswere
requiredtodraftrulesregardingtheclothing,food regulationsand prayerroutinesofMuslim
pupils (see Sakaranaho and Pesonen, 1999).
Even ifFinnish societyhas slowlybut surelyadjusted to thegrowing importanceof religion
inpublic life,institutional
responseswithin academia have varied.Scholars insociologydepart
ments have widely acknowledged the advent ofmulticulturalism,to thepoint that ithas
become one of themajor researchagendas in contemporaryFinnish sociology (e.g. Lepola,
2000;Hautaniemi, 2004;Rastas et al., 2005).However, the linkbetween religionand multi
culturalismhas been largelyneglected in studies conducted by sociologists,whereas for
scholarsof comparative religionithas been themajor focus (e.g. Sakaranaho and Pesonen,
1999;Martikainen,2004). Sociologistshave stillbeen slow toacknowledge religionas amajor
theme,but the 'newgeneration'of researchersin comparativereligionhas createda growing
corpus of studiespertainingtovarious topics,such as new religiousmovements (Junnonaho,
1996;Ketola, 2002), religionin local society(Martikainen,
2004;Pesonen,2004) and theinterplay
between religionand themedia (Sakaranaho and Pesonen, 2002;Hjelm, 2005).
Research inchurchand social studieshas recentlytriedtobreak out of itsparochial roleby
widening its fieldof study.For example, the reportson the state of theLutheran church,
published everyfouryears (e.g.Kaariainen et al., 2004), also offera view of religioninFinnish
societymore generally.
Many of the recentstudies stillwork on themicro- and meso-levels,
but are not restrictedsolely to thestudyof theChurch ofFinland (e.g.Sorri,2001;Nieminen,
2002;Rikkinen,2002;Helander, 2003;Leskinen,2003;Kokkonen, 2003;Salomaki, 2004;Yeung,
propositionsto thereligioussituation
2004).A welcome attemptto linkmore general theoretical
in Finland has recentlybeen made by theChurch Research Institutein theirpublication
ReligioninFinland (Kaariainenet al., 2005).

Conclusion: fragmentation,
marginalization, resurgence?
The above remarksshow thatBeckford's (1990, 2003) lamentover themarginality of the
sociology

of religion

is relevant also

in the case of Finland.

It is not as if there was

some

momentwhen the significanceor usefulness of sociologyof religionper sewas questioned.

of the past 40 or so years have
the study shows that the institutional developments
However,
led to a fragmentation which in turn has relegated the study of religion to the margins of

Finnish sociology.In sociology,the interestin religiondropped dramaticallyafterthe intro

duction ofMarxist sociology in the late 1960s and early 1970s.Finnish comparativereligion,
in turn,concentratedfromtheoutset in folkloristic
and anthropologicalresearch.Finally,the
sociological study of religion in the subdiscipline of church and social studies remained

marginal

because

of a provincial

focus on the Lutheran

church and because

of the dominant

imageof churchand social studies as a theologicaldiscipline.

The recentglobal developmentsand local social changes inFinland have brought religion

back onto the research agenda

of sociological

research. That said, general

social interest is not

in itselftoalterthemarginalized positionofFinnishsociologyof religion.

likelytobe sufficient

However,

some steps have already been

taken towards gaining

a more

recognized

status.

First,thegradual loweringofdisciplinaryboundaries has enabled awider disseminationof

ideas. Finnish researchersfromdifferent
disciplineshave had very little
mutual dialogue in
97

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Acta Sociologica
51(2)
thepast. In a positive development,thishas changed in recentyears.For example, theestab
lishmentof a working group forsociology of religionat theannualmeeting of theFinnish
sociologicalassociation (TheWestermarckSociety)has broughttogetherscholarsand students
fromvaryingdisciplines,breaking (or at least lowering)some of theparochial boundaries of
disciplines.
have broadened theirresearchagenda to includeothercountries
Second,Finnish researchers
and culturalcontexts(e.g.Sakaranaho, 1998,2006;Ketola, 2002;Granholm, 2005). Thismeans
thatsociologicalresearchisnot completelydependenton how interesting
researchintoreligion
is deemed in a particularsituationin theFinnish context.
Third, and most importantly,
theadvent of a 'new generation' of sociologistsof religion
(regardlessof disciplinarybackground)promises thatteachingand researchin thesociological
Whether recentdevelopmentswill eventually
studyof religionwill be active forsome time.
culminate

in a 'tradition' or a 'school' of sociological

research remains

to be seen, but if the

will most probably

currentrapprochement
betweendisciplinescontinues,sociologyof religion
be (re)recognizedas a legitimateand importantfieldofFinnish sociology.
Yet,much remains to be done. The increasingprominence of sociologists of religion in
comparative

religion and church and social studies has not yet had an equivalent

in Finnish

sociology.This is of coursepartlyexplained by the lackof expertiseresultingfromthealmost

40-yearlacuna in researchon religionindepartmentsof sociology.In lightof this,thedisciplin
ary rapprochementdescribed above is also importantforactivatingsociologistsand creating
of sociology intoa myriad of subfieldsmay
inclusiveresearchnetworks.The fragmentation
be an irreversibleprocess, but at the same time themuch-discussed interdisciplinarity
of
today'sacademiamay be thekey to raisingscholarlyawareness of religionand, consequently,
awareness of theneed forsolid sociological researchon religion.
A more importantquestion iswhetherFinnish sociologistsof religionare able toutilize the
recentresurgenceof public interestin religion in order to formulatethe sort of universally
demanded by, forexample,Allardt (1990). InAllardt's
contributions
sociologicallysignificant
view, good social science always has an impact outside its immediate sphere (Allardt, 1990: 66;
see also Wuthnow, 2001: 22-3). This general sociological impact is obvious in the case of classics
and Weber, and in the case of scholars building on the classic tradition
such as Durkheim

(e.g.Bellah, 1967;Berger,1973). In theNorth American context,contemporarysociology of

religionhas made significantcontributionsto discussions of civil rights,political sociology

and the theory of social capital

(e.g. Bellah

et al., 1996; Wolfe,

1999). In Europe,

discussions

of

multiculturalismand thepluralizationof societyhave benefitedfromresearchoriginatingin

research
sociologyof religion(e.g.Baumann, 1999;Sakaranaho,2006).Although social scientific
has a varied

role in different social contexts, the above may well be the areas where

an inter

disciplinarysociologyof religioncan leave itsmark on thefieldofFinnish social science,thus

shakingoffthemantle of a fragmentedand marginalized discipline.

Notes
Parts of this article have been reworked from an article published in Finnish in Sosiologia (vol. 42 (2),
2006). Iwould like to thankKirsti Suolinna, Minna Rikkinen and Kimmo Ketola for comments on the
earlier

version.

References
Alapuro,
M.

R.
Klinge

'Uskonto
mobilisoituminen
ja poliittinen
muutos
tutkimuskohteena,
(eds) Maailmankuvan

(1977)

maaseudulla',
pp.

121-47.

inM.
Helsinki:

Kuusi,
Otava.

Allardt, E. (1970) 'Approaches in the Sociology of Religion', T?menos 6: 7-19.

98

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

R.

Alapuro

and

Hjelm: ToStudyorNot toStudyReligionandSociety

Allardt, E. (1986) 'Uskontososiologia', in J.Pentik?inen (ed.) Uskonto, kulttuurija yhteiskunta,pp. 32-45.
Helsinki: Gaudeamus. (First edition published in 1974with the titleUskonto ja yhteis?.)
Allardt, E. (1990) 'Commentary on James Beckford's and Emile Poulat's Papers on the Predicament of
the Sociology of Religion', Social Compass 37: 65-9.
Allardt, E. (2003) 'L?pimurtoja suomalaisen sosiologian kehityksess?', inA. Antikainen (ed.) Sosiologia
susirajalla. Sosiologian opetus ja tutkimus30 vuotta Joensuunyliopistossa,pp. 3-20. Joensuu: Joensuu
Press.

University

Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.

Anttonen, V. (1987) Uno Harva ja suomalainen uskontotiede.
Baumann, G. (1999) TheMulticultural Riddle: RethinkingNational, Ethnic and Religious Identities.London:
Routledge.

Beckford, J.A. (1990) 'The Sociology of Religion 1945-1989', Social Compass 37: 45-64.
Beckford, J.A. (2003) Social Theory and Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beckford, J.A. (2006) 'The Sociology of Religion in theNordic Region as Seen from theOther Side of the
North Sea', Nordic JournalofReligion and Society 19: 1-11.
Bellah, R. N. (1967) 'Civil Religion inAmerica', Daedalus 21: 1-21.
Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A. and Tipton, S. M. (1996) Habits of theHeart: Indi
vidualism and Commitment inAmerican Life.Updated edition. Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press.

Berger, P. L. (1973) The Social Reality ofReligion.Harmondsworth: Penguin. (Originally published in 1967
as The Sacred Canopy.)
Bruce, S. (1995) 'Introduction', in S. Bruce (ed.) The Sociology ofReligion, vol. II, pp. xiii-xvii. Aldershot:
Edward Elgar.
Ebaugh, Helen Rose (2002) 'Return of the Sacred: Reintegrating Religion in the Social Sciences', Journal
for theScientificStudy ofReligion 41: 385-95.
Eskola,

A.

'Suomalaisen

(1973)

sosiologian

uudistuminen',

in R.

Alapuro,

M.

Alestalo

and

Elina

Haavio

Mannila (eds) Suomalaisen sosiologian juuret,pp. 269-317. Porvoo-Helsinki: WSOY.

Eskola, A. (2003) Tied?n ja uskon.Helsinki: Otava.
Goth?ni, R. (1982)Modes ofLife ofTheravadaMonks: A Case Study ofBuddhistMonasticism in Sri Lanka.
Helsinki: Societas Orientalis Fennica.
Granholm, K. (2005) Embracing theDark. TheMagic Order ofDragon Rouge Its Practice inDark Magic and
Meaning Making. ?bo: ?bo Akademis f?rlag.
Haavio, A. (1963) Evankelinen Hike her?ysliikkeen?:sosiologinen tutkimus.Helsinki: Suomen luterilainen
evankelioimisyhdistys.
Porvoo: WSOY.
Haavio, A. (1965) Suomen uskonnolliset liikkeet.
Haavio,

A.

(1983)

Haavio,

A.

(1996)

tieteenalana',

'Kirkkososiologia
'Suunnittelun

ja ohjelmien

Sosiologia

vuosikymmen,

20: 75-6.
1970-luku',

in T. Kynt?j?,

A. Konttinen

and

P. Vanttinen (eds) Sosiologiaa ajassa ja tilassa. Turkulaista sosiologiaa 70 vuotta. Sosiologisia tutkimuksia
B30,

pp.

52-8.

Haavio-Mannila,

Turku:

E.

Turun

(1992)

yliopisto.

'Etnologia

ja sosiaaliantropologia',

in R.

Alapuro,

M.

Alestalo

and

E. Haavio

(eds) Suomalaisen sosiologian historia,pp. 27-75. Helsinki: WSOY.

Hamilton, M. B. (1998) Sociology and theWorld's Religions. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Hamilton, M. B. (2001) The Sociology ofReligion: Theoreticaland ComparativePerspectives,2nd edn. London:
Mannila

Routledge.

Hautaniemi, P. (2004) Pojatl Somalipoikienkiistanalainennuoruus Suomessa.Nuorisotutkimusseuranjulkaisuja

41. Helsinki:

Nuorisotutkimusseura.

Heino, H. (1984)Mihin Suomi uskoo?Helsinki: WSOY.

Heino, H. (1997)Mihin Suomi t?n??nuskoo?Helsinki: WSOY.
Heiander, E. (1986) To Change and toPreserve:A Study of theReligiosity ofEvangelical Students and Graduates
inTrinidad.Missiologian ja ekumeniikanseuran julkaisuja 50.Helsinki: Missiologian ja ekumeniikan seura.
Helander, E. (2003) 'Uskonto ja globalisaatio', in E. Helander (ed.)Muutoksen tulkkina.Kirkot ja uskonnol
linenel?m? osana yhteiskuntaa.Helsingin Yliopiston K?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitoksen julkaisuja 106.
Helsinki: Kirjapaja.
Helve, H. (1987) Nuorten maailmankuva. Seurantatutkimus p??kaupunkiseudun er??n V?hion nuorista.
Kansalaiskasvatuksen keskuksentutkimuksiaja selvityksi?1/87.Helsinki: Kansalaiskasvatuksen keskus.
99

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Acta Sociologica
51(2)
T.

Hjelm,

(2005)

media

Saatananpalvonta,

ja

suomalainen

Nuorisotutkimusseuran

yhteiskunta.

55.

julkaisuja

Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.

Holm, N. G., Suolinna, K. and Ahlb?ck, T. (eds) (1981) Aktuella religiosa r?relser i Finland. Abo: ?bo
Akademi.

Honko, L. (1972) Uskontotieteenn?k?kulmia.Porvoo: WSOY

Huotari, V (1976) 'Kansankirkon sosiologinen luonne', Teologinen aikakauskirja81: 185-93.
Huotari, V (1982) 'Kirkkososiologia tieteen?', in I.Askola, T. Lampinen and P. Lempi?inen (eds) Kirkkoso
siologia,pp. 228-39. Helsinki: Kirjapaja.
Husu, L. and Allardt, E. (1981) Sociology inFinland.Working papers of theDepartment of Sociology 21.
Helsinki: University ofHelsinki.
Junnonaho,M. (1996) Uudet uskonnot vastakulttuuriaja vaihtoehtoja.Helsinki: Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden
seura.

Karsten, R. (1947) Stridsfr?gorinomdenmoderna sociologienoch religionsvetenskapen.

Helsingfors: S?derstr?m.
K.
An
Indian
and
His
Western
and
Guru
Communication
Ketola,
(2002)
Disciples. Representation
ofCharisma
in theHare KrishnaMovement. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.
Helsinki: Edita.
Koistinen, O. and R?ikk?, J. (1997) Taivaassa ja maan p??ll?. Johdatususkonnonfilosofiaan.
Kokkonen, S. (2003) Ty?tt?m?n? is?n?perheess?ja yhteiskunnassa.Helsinki: Suomalainen teologinen kirjal
lisuusseura.

Kortekangas, P. (1975) 'Kirkkososiologian asema ja teht?v?t', in E. Koskenvesa

Toinen

oppiaineisiin.

93-100.

pp.

painos,

Helsinki:

(ed.) Johdatus teologisiin

Gaudeamus.

Koskelainen, O. (1966a) Uskonnosta ja uskonnollisuudestaHelsingiss?: havainnointiin perustuva tutkimus.

Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksen tutkimuksia 61.
Koskelainen, O. (1966b) UskonnollisuudestaHelsingiss?. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksen
tutkimuksia 74.
K??ri?inen,

K.,

M.,

Hyt?nen,

K.

Niemel?,

and

K.

Salonen,

evankelis-luterilainenkirkkovuosina 2000-2003. Kirkon

Kirkon

(2004)

Kirkko

muutosten

keskell?.

Suomen

tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja 89. Tampere:

tutkimuskeskus.

K??ri?inen, K., Niemel?, K. and Ketola, K. (2005) Religion inFinland: Decline, Change, and Transformation
ofFinnish Religiosity.Kirkon tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja 54. Tampere: Kirkon tutkimuskeskus.
Lampela-Kivist?, L. (2001) 'K?yt?nn?llinen teologia', inPetri Luomanen (ed.) Teolog?a.Johdatustutkimukseen,
pp.

149-71.

Helsinki:

Edita.

Lampinen, T. (1984) The Preaching ofState: Civil Religion in theProclamation ofChurch and State inFinland.
Lutheran

Geneva:

Lampinen,

T.

World

Federation.

ja luterilainen

'Yhteiskuntauskonto

(1989)

ilaisen teologian mahdollisuudet t?n??n. Suomalaisen

pp.

85-102.

Helsinki:

Suomalainen

in S. Peura

teologia',

(ed.) Usko

ja rakkaus.

teologisen kirjallisuusseuran

Luter

165,

julkaisuja

kirjallisuusseura.

teologinen

Lampinen, T. (1995) 'Kuilun yli. Kirkkososiologia Helsingin yliopiston teologisessa tiedekunnassa

1975-1985', inH. Vapaavuori (ed.) Usko El?m?n k?tk?ss?.Kirkkososiologianvaiheitaja n?kymi?vuosituhan
nen lopulla.K?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitoksen julkaisuja 82, pp. 167-77. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston
k?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitos.
Lempi?inen, P. (1982) 'Kirkkososiologia', in P. Korhonen (ed.) Johdatus teologisiinoppiaineisiin.Kolmas
111-19. Helsinki:
painos, pp.
O.
(2000) Ulkomaalaisesta
Lep?la,
luvun maahanmuuttopoliittisessa

Leskinen,

T.

(2003)

Globaalin

Gaudeamus.
suomenmaalaiseksi.
keskustelussa.
auttajan

arvot

Monikulttuurisuus,

Helsinki:

ja asenteet.

kansalaisuus

Tutkimus

suomalaisten

asennoitumisesta

misesta vapaaehtoiseen kehitysyhteisty?h?n.

Helsinki: Kirkkopalvelut.
Luckmann, T. (1967) The InvisibleReligion.New York: Macmillan.
Malkavaara,

M.

(2000)

'K?yhyys,

kirkko

ja ruokapankit',

ja suomalaisuus

1990

SKS.

inM.

Heikkil?,

J.Karjalainen

ja osallistu

and M. Malkavaara

(eds) Kirkonkirjatk?yhyydest?.
Kirkkopalvelujenjulkaisuja 5, pp. 11-17.Helsinki: Kirkkopalvelut.
H.
ottaisi
'Kuka
uskontotieteen? Uskontotieteen asema Helsingin yliopistossa 1969-1996',
Markkula,
(1997)
inH. Pesonen (ed.) Uskontotieteenikuisuuskysymyksi?.
Uskontotiede 1,pp. 17-41.Helsinki: Uskontotieteen
laitos.

Martikainen, T. (2004) ImmigrantReligions in Local Society.Historical and ContemporaryPerspectives in the

City ofTurku.Abo: ?bo Akademis f?rlag.

100

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Hjelm: ToStudyorNot toStudyReligionand Society

Niemi, I. (1966) Uskonnollinen toimintauudenaikaistuvassa yhteiskunnassa.Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston
sosiologian laitoksen tutkimuksia 56, 59.
Nieminen, R. T. (2002) Seurakunta aluety?n j?nnitteess?.Organisaation ja toimintayhteis?n
muutosprosessi
aluety?t? toteuttavassa seurakunnassa. Kirkon tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja A 78. Tampere: Kirkon
tutkimuskeskus.

Palo, T. (1952) Kansan kasityskirkostaGallup-tutkimuksenvalossa.Helsinki: Suomen Kirkon Seurakuntaty?n

Keskusliitto.
Pentik?inen, J. (1986) 'Uskontotieteen tutkimusalat', in J.Pentik?inen (ed.) Uskonto, kulttuurijayhteiskunta,
pp.

11-31. Helsinki:

Gaudeamus.

Pesonen, H. (2004) Vihertyv? kirkko.Suomen evankelisluterilainenkirkkoymp?rist?toimijana.Bidrag till

k?nnedomav Finlands natur ochfolk 106.Helsinki: Suomen tiedeseura.
Rastas, A., Huttunen, L. and L?pytty, O. (eds) (2005) Suomalainen vieraskirja: kuinka k?sitell?monikult
tuurisuutta.

Tampere:

Vastapaino.

uususkontokeskusteluissa.
Uskontotiede 9.
Rikkinen,M. (2002) Yhteis?n nimeen.Kirkon identifikaatioprosessi
Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston Uskontotieteen laitos.
- onko
sit??', inH. Vapaavuori (ed.) Usko El?m?n k?tk?ss?.
Ry?k?s, E. (1995) 'Kirkkososiologian murros
vaiheita
vuosituhannen
lopulla.K?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitoksenjulkaisuja 82,
Kirkkososiologian
ja n?kymi?
178-94.
Helsinki:
pp.
Helsingin yliopiston k?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitos.
Sakaranaho, T. (1998) The Complex Other.A RhetoricalApproach toWomen, Islam, and Ideologies on Turkey.
Uskontotiede 3. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston Uskontotieteen laitos.
Sakaranaho, T. (2006) Religious Freedom,Multiculturalism, Islam: Cross-Reading Finland and Ireland.Leiden:
Brill.
Sakaranaho, T. and Pesonen, H. (eds) (1999)Muslimit Suomessa. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino.
Helsinki: Helsinki
Sakaranaho, T. and Pesonen, H. (eds) (2002) Uskonto, julkisuus ja muuttuva yhteiskunta.
University

Press.

Salom?ki, H. (2004) Tosi rakkausodottaa. SeksuaalieettinennuortenliikeSuomessa. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino.

Sepp?nen, P. (1962)Muuttuva kulttuuri ja kirkollisuus.Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston sosiaalipolitiikan
laitoksen tutkielmia 21.
Sepp?nen, P. (1968) 'Finland: A Country of Conformist Religion and Secular Protest ofWorking Class',
Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksentutkimuksia,99-103.
Sihvo, J. (1991) 'The Evangelical-Lutheran Church and State in Finland', Social Compass 38: 17-24.
Siipi, J. (1965) Luopumisen aika: kirkostaeroaminensosiaalisena ilmi?n?.Karisto, H?meenlinna.
Sorri, H. (2001) Lama ja ahdinko.Henkinen pahoinvointi Palvelevan puhelimen soittojen valossa. Kirkon
tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja B 81. Tampere: Kirkon tutkimuskeskus.
Meddelanden fr?n Ekonomisk-statsveten
Sundback, S. (1983) 'Civil religion' iFinland efterandra v?rldskriget.
vid
A
192.
Akademi
Akademi.
Abo
?bo:
?bo
skapligafakulteten
Sundback, S. (1984) 'FolkChurch Religion a New Kind ofCivil Religion?', inB. Harmati (ed.) The Church
in
the
and Civil Religion
Nordic Countries ofEurope, pp. 35-40. Geneva: Lutheran World Federation.
S.
Sundback,
(1986) 'Folkkyrkanoch folketspassivering: en Studie av uttr?dandet ur de nordiska lutherska
fakulteten vid ?bo Akademi. Ser. A; 229.
folkkyrkorna',Meddelanden fr?n Ekonomisk-statsvetenskapliga
?bo: ?bo Akademi.
Sundback, S. (2004) 'Sociologin och religionsvetenskaperna', in T. Sj?blom and T. Utriainen (eds) Mika
ihmeenuskonto?Uskontotiede 10.Helsinki: Uskontotieteen laitos.
Master's thesis.Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston Sosiologian
Suolinna, K. (1964) Religionsfaktorni samh?llet.
laitos.

Suolinna, K. (1966) 'V?xelverkan mellan religiosa r?relser och samh?llet', Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian
laitoksentutkimuksia56, 59. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.
suhteista.Licenciate thesis.Helsinki: Helsingin
Suolinna, K. (1969) Yhteiskunnan ja uskonnollistenliikkeitten
laitos.
yliopiston Sosiologian
Suolinna, K. (1975) 'Uskonnollisten liikkeittenasema yhteiskunnallisessa muutoksessa', Helsingin yliopiston
sosiologian laitoksentutkimuksia203. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.
Suolinna,

K.

(1977)

'Lestadiolaisuus

ja agraarin

v?est?n

puolustusmekanismi',

in M.

Kuusi,

and M. Klinge (eds)Maailmankuvan muutos tutkimuskohteena,

pp. 112-20. Helsinki: Otava.

R.

Alapuro

101

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

51(2)
Acta Sociologica
K.

Suolinna,

'Hilma

(2000)

Granqvist:

Scholar

of the Westermarck

School

in its Decline',

Acta

Sociol?gica

43: 317-23.
Suolinna, K. (2003) 'Edward Westermarckin ja ?mile Durkheimin v?linen kiista', inA. Antikainen (ed.)
Sosiologia susirajalla. Sosiologian opetus ja tutkimus30 vuotta Joensuunyliopistossa,pp. 93-102. Joensuu:
Joensuu

Press.

University

Suolinna, K. (2005) 'The Sociology ofReligion in Finland', Nordic JournalofReligion and Society 18:103-20.
Suolinna, K., afH?llstr?m, C. and Lahtinen, T. (2000) PortrayingMorocco: EdwardWestermarck'sFieldwork
and Photographs 1898-1913. Abo: Abo Akademis f?rlag.
Helsinki:
Suolinna, K. and Sinikara, K. (1986) Juhonkyl?:tutkimuspohjoissuomalaisesta lestadiolaiskyl?st?.
Suomalaisen

Kirjallisuuden

kirkko

luterilainen

Seura.

(2002) 'Objektiivisia uutisia vai merkityst? tuottavaa retoriikkaa? Suomen evankelis

Ter?svirta, Laura

toimijana

yhteiskunnallisena

Helsingin

Sanomien

in T. Sakaranaho

uutisissa',

and

(eds) Uskonto, julkisuus ja muuttuva yhteiskunta,pp. 47-74. Helsinki: Helsinki University

H. Pesonen
Press.

Toivonen, T. (1996) 'Kuohuva kuusikymmenluku', in T. Kynt?j?, A. Konttinen and P. V?nttinen (eds)

Sosiologiaa ajassa ja tilassa. Turkulaista sosiologiaa 70 vuotta. Sosiologisia tutkimuksia B30, pp. 34-51.
Turku:

Turun

yliopisto.

Wolfe, A. (1998) One Nation, AfterAll. New York: Penguin.

Wuthnow, R. (2001) 'StudyingReligion, Making itSociological', inM. Dillon (ed.)Handbook of theSociology
ofReligion, pp. 16-30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Yeung, A. B. (2004) IndividuallyTogether.Volunteering in LateModernity: SocialWork in theFinnish Church.
Helsinki: Finnish Federation forSocial Welfare and Health.
Yeung,

A.

B.

(2006)

'Rajojen

ylityksi?

uskonnosta,

kirkosta,

sosiologiasta',

in A.

B.

Yeung

with

H.

Pesonen

and S. Sundback (eds) Rajojen ylityksi?:Uskonto, kirkko, sosiologia, pp. 50-63. Helsinki: Suomalainen
teologinen

kirjallisuusseura.

Biographical Note: Titus Hjelm is a lecturer at the School of Slavonic and East European Studies,
University College London. His main areas of expertise are sociology of religion, religion in Finland,
new and alternative religions, and the study of religion,media and culture. He is currentlyworking
on a book on Social Constructionism (to be published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2008).
Address: Titus Hjelm, School of Slavonic and East European Studies, SSEES, University College London,
Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK. [email: t.hjelm@ssees.ucl.ac.uk]

102

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions