Protestant Modernity Weber, Secularisation, and Protestantism Anthony J. Carroll S.J University of Seranton PressContents Dedication, Acknowledgments Introduction Abbreviations Chapter 1 Historical and Systematic Aspects of Modern Secularisation Chapter 2 Setting the Scene Chapter Secularisation in Weber's Soclology. of Religion, Chapter 4 Secularisation in Weber's Wirtschaft tund Gesellschaft (WuG) and Munich Speeches Chapter § The Protestant Heritage of Weber's ‘Theory of Secularisation Conelusion Bibliography Index 83 167 228 255 267 293* powowzmesTs and stimulation. 1 thank Dr. Hanvey for his comments on part ofthe manuscript and for his enoouragement to bring if ‘completion. I thank also Myra Tourlamain, who read through, the entire manuscript and corrected many of ty convoluted turns of phrase and put them into better English, anv Rebekah (O'Keeffe who did some final proofreading. would like to thank Dr. James Sweeney. C.P., Head of Pastoral and Social Studies at Heythrop College, for reading and commenting upon the manuscript an for pointing out ‘umber of errrs. Those that remain aro enlirely my respon. ‘Silty. My thanks also go to the two anonymous readers at ‘Scranton University Press who made very portant sugies- tons for how the discertation could be turned into a book. f ale hank Profan Dav Calera for His haa ie, sphical comments, and Arpad Horvath for the beautiful hotogrph of Frankfurt am Main which adores the cover. Towe a special word of thanks tothe Sisters of the Asstmp- tion who, ata crucial stage, provided me with a quiet refige ‘moder to bring this book to completion, also thank my Jesuit communities in Frankfurt and ‘London for their support and stimulaton over the time of| writing, and especialy both Fr. David Smolira, S.J. and Fr. Michael Holman, 5.J., Jesuit Provineials during the time of writing. Tdedicate this book to my deceased parents, Joseph and Carrol, who would certainly have seca the funny side and who gave me more than Team say Introduction ‘When Ihave some fe time, keto go walling in the eountry~ side. Invariably, on such occasions, the walk ts punctuated bby coming across some old buildings. Two types fend to pre- ‘dominate. The first is a pub: a welcome place to stop and ‘eltesh oneself after the exertions of walking, The second is 2 Church. Although far fom being an expert in ecclesiastical architecture, almost instinctively I. or one of my walking ‘companions, will say! “this is a Protestant Charch,” “Unis 8 Catholle Church,” or “this is an Orthodox Church.” Would {hat it were so easy to detect the confessional influences that bnave shaped the architecture of social theory! This work aims {o highlight Just such @ confessional influence, on Weber's thought. hence the tide: “Protestant Modernity"? “The subject ofthis work is the social theory of Max Weber, 2 glant of early sociology and righlly classified as one of the Founding fathers” of the discipline, who has signiicanty {nflienced a multitude of later social thinkers. In treating Max ‘Weber as the subject, I focus on his Work according to to closely related dimensions. The first i 8 reconstruction of the theory of secularistion present in his works. The second {sa positioning of this theory within the architecture of Protestant heriage* “The objective of reconstructing Weber's account of secuari~ sation is quite simple. For many years [heard it described, together with that of Smale Durkhelm, 2s a central source of “dlassical seculansation” theory.® Moreover, in attending ‘academic conferences, I would fear #¢ sald that “Weber's theory of secularisation 1S clearly outdated,” or “Bmpiricala moovenn evidence now shows conclusively that Webers theory of sacu- larisaion is wrong." problem and, infact, embarrassment after many years spent reading Weber, was that 1 did nat really understand exactly what Weber's theory of secularisation ‘was. Was it simply his thesis on Protestantisto and capitals? Perhaps it was the big idea behind his collected works on the ‘sociology of religion. Or was it rather todo with his method- ‘logical writings? Thien again, was iin his political writings? Moreover, when I came to study later social theorists such as Jargen Habermas, Anthony Giddens, Alain Touraine, and Niklas Luhmann, [noticed that each of them used Weber in ‘her own theories of modernity and society and would consider bs theory of secularisation tobe an a prior of modern social ‘theory. So what exacty isi The more that lread Weber, te ‘more it became clear to me that only through an exegests of Weber's writings would I find an answer To my question Chapters $ and 4 are this exegesis, Im reading Unrough Weber's major writings withthe system- atic intention of reconstructing his theory of secularsation, Twas not tnaware of the difficulties facing someone offering fan interprelation of Weber's corpus. In Chapter 2, I review the history of attempts to find the interpretative key 0 Weber's work and also provide the background necessary to ‘understand Weber in his social, politica, religious, and intel- Teetsal context. ‘Sometimes the most basic questions are the hardest to ansiver. Chapter 1 looks at just such a question: What is ‘meant by secularisation? In looking at Weber's theory of ‘Seculartsaion, Lquickly became aware that not only dia not now what Weber's theory wast I did not now what socularisa- ‘ion was, This frst chapter answers this question at a number of cilerent levels. First, i situates the question of secularisa- tion within sts historia context. I thus begin this chapter by looking at the modem experience of secularisation ushered {ny the French Revolution. This leads on toa consideration ‘both of the ideas important in shaping and expressing the secular worldview of modern times and of secularisation at {he level of European society. This chapter considers seculari- sition and secularisation theory at historical. intellectual. ‘and social levels and introduces the reader to debates that are currently raging on both sides ofthe Atlantic concerning the meaning and even the very existence of the process of ‘ecularisation, This fret chapter has no pretension to being ‘Schaustive but, rather, sketches a panorama against which ‘Weber's own work can be seen to make an important contr- ‘Butlon to thinking about religion and society. “The eccond dimension of tis work, situating Weber's theory of secularieation within sts Protestant heritage. runs through fut Chapters 2 to 5. in drawing out hermeneutical judge- ‘nents conditioning Weber's socelogical typology. theological Sourees shaping Weber's arguments, biographical material Influencing Weber's own intellectual and eroational character fand the historied situation of the newly formed German ‘pation state, the importance of the Protestant heritage of Weber's theory of secuarisation is demonstrated, Whilst this ‘dimenson is present throughout Chapters 2 co 5. Chapter 5 fs entirely devoted to it and brings out some of the definitive fspects of Protestantism that helped shape Weber's views, In the carer chapters, I make it clear in my exegesis how particular works of Weber trade on their Protestant heritage. ‘The effect ofthis exegetteal work is cumulative and builds up to. crescendo in Chapter 5. “Taken together, these 680 dimensions form the baste idea ofthis boole that Weber's theory of secularisation narrates a Protestant account of modernity. Because eecularisation has ‘been, until Tecendy, an uncontested motif of accounts of fnodernty, and Weber's own account has influenced many of| the leading theorists of modernity, demonstrating the Proves: tan( heritage of Weber's account bas sigaileapt implications. Highlighting the Protestant metanarrative™ that informs itinestably puts a question mark over the confessional neutrality of other theories that depend on Weber's account, "Yee, a word of caution fs in order. Tam not arguing that everyting in Weberlan sociology can be explained by reference Io its Protestant heritage, To do so would be simplistic and ted. Rather, my purpose here is to systematically Ihghlight how this Protestant heritage has shaped Weber's town theory ofesctlarisation, and soto make expe the impor ‘ance of confessional influences on his work. Contemporary Social theory is in danger of projecting current confessionalae smnaoveros ‘ecumenism of even irrelevance onto previous generations. ‘Byen a cursory knowledge of nineteentt-and early twentieth ‘century German history reveals the shortsightedness of such § position when #t comes to understanding Weber's work. in making explicit the Protestant metanarrative inscribed on Weber's theary of seeularisation, the impertance of regions Confession in shaping the very architecture of early social theory is made apparent. It also raises the question af how a Social theory influenced by Protestantism might difer from, Say, one influenced by Catholicism or Islam. This book i= hot the place to answer that question. Here, [limit myself to ‘Weber and the Protestant influences that shaped his theory Df secularisation. But what does mean to say that Weber's Gueory of secularisation i structured by its Protestant architecture? In my almost intuttive recognition of the confession of a Cristian church from its architectare, reconstruction of tact Jnowiedge reveals whole series of fascinating things about {he sigifieance of confession for ecclesiastical architecture.” Protestant churches tend to be more spartan, less colourful ‘and fll of images, and to have fewer side chapels and altars. ‘Cleat, the siteenth-oentury shift rem Catholie to Protestant forms of worship and the centralty of the principle of sola Scripnura resulted in the removal of Ue images of saints, the Blessed Virgin Mary, and devotional statues of Jesus from ‘churehes, as, the Protestant emphasis on the Word and preaching gradually replaced the focus on ve eucharistic ace Fee ofthe Mass, Protestant churches were designed to enable the congregation to see and hear the preacher of the Word, ‘phulet for the Catholic atthe time it might have been enough {o see the priest's elevation ofthe Host during the consecration. [Aba result, Protestant churches took the form of open halls, sometimes with extra seating in the galleries in order to listen fo the preacher as he boke the Word open for the congregation. 2s Protestantlem developed, British Nonconformist chapels iwere built aa a bare and highly eliient preaching space. ‘pith the traditional east end altar being replaced by the pulpit land clerks desks. Although medieval monastic architecture, Such as that of tie Clsterelans or Carthusians, reflected the ustenty of the Iife of these orders, the advent of parish churches and chapels in such austere Protestant style makes ven an tnfuitve grasp of ecclesiastical architecture and its Lnderiving theology stfictent to detect diferences between the confessions. tn leading the reader into the architecture of Weber's wor. hope to make the confessional influences on his theory of secularisation equally apparent to the reader. Clearly, the Structures and the symbole manifesting these confessional Aiferences differ in ehureh architecture and social theory. ‘Nevertheless, the underiying ideas are unsurprisingly similar fhe non-sacremental conception of realty resulting from the Separation of grace from nature: he separation of asceticism ‘Suiryeicioms the opposition of faith nnd reason: the empha ‘Sis on the universal vocation of all believers as against the Special vocation of the priesthood and religious life; the exea- hve emphasis on biblical authority over against the herarchi al authority of the tradition of the Church: the emphasis fon charisma over against institutional authority; the Two- ‘imgdoms doctrine of Luther over against the interpenetration ofthe eardly and the heavenly realms: the separation of con= ‘emplation and action; the opposition of law and spit: the ‘opposition of polities and region: the opposition to a realised ceebatology ih the eccletologieal and sacramental form in {avout ofan eschatological withdrawal from the world: andthe ‘opposition of secular positive law to substantive natural 'RiT these componente of the Protestant architecture of ‘weber’ theory of suclarisation will be elucidated during the feegess of his major texts. Lite by lle, the structure of Weber's architecture wil become apparent as the reader walls through the cathedral ike ediice of Weber's works Notes 1A mnber of scolar ave notin the fluence of Protestants con Weber's thought, Sen for example Midge (1809.1 gotta to Fee tet cher for wanging Oe wore my ienton, Neon (1000) and Cae (2003108 m7 ST mperance of Puan rection preety, ae ‘Spur study sce Armtrang (2008), and on a more echolry vemt rmoouenos sce Marty ad Appleby (os) (1991. 1-65, 149-106, and Marty and Apply less) 3 155°178, "Sn recent example of thin can be found un Norris nd Inglehart ot by metanarrative { mean dhe basi framework or general nar tnclnahich Web's snout of secunreation and moder Is ld ‘Foran teresting sty te ines of Prlestantsm on mode chit see Bett 2008, List of Abbreviations Weber's Works A asw caw ops we Pe WEWR ‘Das antike Judlentum. I GARS I Gesammelte Aufeitas sur Religionssozitogi. (1988) [1920, 1921), Edited by Marianne Weber. Tubingen: ‘J.C-B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck}. UTB Baitions in Three Volumes. Gesammelte Aufestete zur Sozial und Wirtschayis: geschichte. (1088) [1924]. Edited by Marianne Weber. Tubingen: J.C.B, Mohr (Paul Siebeck). UTE. Baio. Gesammelie Aufsatee nur Wissenschafisiore. (19s) 11922], ited by Johannes Winckelmann. ‘Rtn ed, Tabingen: J.C-B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), UTE. Ealton, Gesarnmete Police Serifer. (1988) (1921), Bate by Johannes Winekelmann, Sth ed. Tbingen: SlexB. Mohr (Paul Sicbecl), UT Edition Max Weber Gesamieusgabe. (1984-contimulng), ‘Mabingen: J/C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebecl. Die prowstaniische Bihie und der “Getst" des epitaliamais. (2000) [1904-1905, 1920]. Edited and {ntroduioed by Klaus Lichtblaw and Johannes WeiB, ‘Weinheim: Bete Athenaum. Die protestantischen Sekten und der Gelst des ‘Rapitaermss. Ip GARSI Die Wirtschajtseduk der Weltetigionen. In GARSmt Lust OF AstATIONS Wud Wotschaft und Gesetschaft (1972) (1921, 1823}. St revised ed, Student edition. Directed by Johannes ‘Winkelmann, Tabingen:J.C.B. Mohr Paul Siebeck) Binletung: In Die Wirtschafesetike der Welireli- ‘ionen, GARS I: 297-275, bjertiouat: Bie “Objekriatae soaiavissenschafi ther und soviaipoitischer Evkerinis, in GAW? 145-214, Polite Polit als Beruf. tn GPS: 505-500, Vorbemerkung In GARSE 1-16, Wissenschaft Wissenschaft als Beruf, in GAW: 582-613. Aulschenbetvachtung: Zwisehenbbetrachtung: Theorie der Stufen und Richtungen religiser Weltabiehnung, so GARST: 896-573, “The original date of publication is shown in square brackets. CHAPTER 1 Historical and Systematic Aspects of Modern Secularisation For some time now the Wester theory of secularisation has been closely ied to the narrative of the emergence of modern society." One might summarise this narrative in the follow: ing way: due to a constelladom of factors stich as the rise af new selentific methods, the political and legal settlements fof the seventeenth-eentury wars of religion. the tncention of ‘ew forms of politcal and economie theory, and the religious land cultural ehanges associated with the Reformation, the Renaissance, and the French Revohuton,seciely went through a process of modemisation.? Ths process involved a transi- tion from the feudal society of medieval Christendom to a modern capitalist secular society.® Societal modernisation ‘vas brought about through the functional differentiation of Sectors of socely which had previously been fused together in an undiferentiated whole.* The separation of the domains fof polities into the apparatus ofthe state and its legtimation ‘through various forme of democratic sovereignty. and of the Conon into a network: of interacting markets based on the ficedomn of the individual fo buy and sell, produced the capita list societies ofthe modem period. This development is furcher lundersiood asthe separation ofa publie sphere ofthe politicalengagement of citizens in the formation of public opinion {fom a private sphore of personal interests. In this model religion is considered to be a private interest, and adherence toa particular “brand,” or none, Is considered to be similar to the decision to buy one product over another, The decline tnd eventual elimination of religion from society, whlch 5 Sometimes understond to be the logical consequence of this hodermisation is thus seen to be a result of loss of interest In this product or the discovery of a better one to perform its functions ® Seen thus, religion does not play. and indeed is bften forbidden to play, 9 zoe inthe formation of public opi- ‘non ia the public sphere.® ‘The history ofthe retreat of religion from public ie 18 a Jong and complicated story that can only be sketched in ths Chapter, Nevertheless, any adequate investigation into the Complexity of theories of secularisation should be informed By this history so as to shape tt systematic endeavours by Coherenge to and comespondence with the actual events of history.” f dhus begin this consideration of the historical and Sjatemiatic aspects of modem secularisation by turning to the events that would send shock waves around the world in he modern era and would significantly shape the ways in ‘which religion and public life have been thought about until reeenty ‘The French Revolution and Modern Secularisation “The most significant event for the moder history of secular fsation is without doubt the French Revolution, The major Geeisions taken at that time, the Declaration of the Rights of Ian and the Cltzen. and the Civil Consttution, ave shaped the modem period and the relationship between religion and Seesety ight up to the present day. The old order, referred to in'Preneh as ihe ancien regime, was characterised by the Confesstonal nature of the State. That is to say, just as an {huividual confessed allegiance to a religion, so also did the State have an official religion, which Its eltizens shared. The ‘pplication ofthe priniple of Cutis regio, ets religio (whose istrict s i, his religion It i8), an ancient principle dating back to the time of Emperor Constantine, had put an end to the confessional disputes between the forces of the Holy Roman Baperor, Charles V, and the fore of the Schalk fie League with the signing of the Peace of Augsburg in 1595 and, inter, selled the religious wars in seventeenth-century ‘Burope: Briain, however, wasn extepdin to this rule There the 1707 Act of Union, whieh forged the British nation, meant that Gueen Anne was the Supreme Governor of the Church of England but simply a member of the Church when In Scotland Yet the principle was universally accepted that the unify of faith in land structured the relations between religion and society, “The beginnings of religious toleration had somewhat mod fed this principle in countries such as Britain and Hungary, but the revocation ofthe Edict of Nantes in 1685, which had [ranted toleration to Protestants in France, dhustrated the SCnuning fregiity of the klea of religious toleration before the French Revolution, It would be the lasting legacy of the French Revolution to initiate the process ofthe separation of {Creed and eitienship that characterises the modem history ‘Sf sccularisation. © Nineteenth-century Europe would continue this process of separating religion fom society and would SSevcop its ov theories of istory to justly this process. “Thus, in Article X of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen, which was adopted by the Constituent ‘Assembly on August 26, 1789, the way was set forthe diso- lation of ereed and cltzenship that would be later adopted by other European nations. The French Revolution ened both a tacition of identifring the State with a particular rel {don ani the historic link between Cathobcism and political in France. Article X stressed hat no citizen should be iparassed for the opinions that they held, even for their Fellgious opinions, Thus, religious opinsens were placed an a ‘Par with al personal choloes and would no Tonger be a sine ua ron for the civil and politcal rights associated with Gttzenchip. Ae a logical consequence, the Assembly granted ‘Sews and Protestants complete eitzenship in 1701 “The separation of society from regia. an important part of the modem concept of secularisation, should not, howeverbe traced back simply to this one act of the Constituent ‘Bssembly. The members of the Assembly were themseives ‘Sul deeply rooted in the conviction of “one nation, ane faith” find would have considered fe unthinkable not to have begun thei anniversary celebrations of the taking of the Bastile tnd the remodelling ofthe Instittions of France with a Mass ‘clebrated by the bishop delegate of the Assembly. accompa- hed by 800 priests, As Rene Remond argues, this clearly ‘hows that the idea of the separation of religion and pelitics ‘wae sll very foreign at the me of the Revolution, even to {he elected members of the French National Assembly.” ‘French society also emerged out of the royalist tradition and presumed that the rights and privileges of the monarchy Should now pass tothe people. Just as the kings had chosen their own bishops and priests, the people should now have the same right, Pe Civil Constitation of the Clergy passed in 1790, thus reformed the structures ofthe Church in France, Including the boundaries of dioceses, which were henceforth to be based on the Departments, and gave the people the Sent to elect bishops and priests Uhroughh their Assembly. ‘This finally galvanised the pope of the time, Plus VI. to issue his letter of March 10, 1791, Quod aliquantum. which eon omed these legal changes and thus irreversibly changed the relations in France between political power and religion, ‘The dispute Ghat resulked caused a split in the loyalty ofall French Catholies.On the one hand, the Assembly demanded fat ils eitizens follow the laws that ft aid down, and on the bther hand, the pope insisted that Catholics follow the voice GfiRome. The sitnation became even more acute when, alter the dovrafll ofthe monarchy in August 1792, the Legisative ‘Assembly proceeded to tnpik the religious fabric of French Zectety and began & process of separating religion from the ‘Sormal fanetoning of society that fs to say. began what We today call the modern process of secularisation. “The Birt move inthis direction was the institution ofa civil registry. This replaced the cataloguing of soctal ie that had Dreviously been eastied out by dhe clergy. Birth, marriage, and Jicath were no longer tobe reeotded in an ecclestastcalframe- ‘work but. eather, ina purely ell one. Thus, birth would no qonger be tecorded by the certificate of baptism but, rather. by entering one's name and birthplace om the civil registry, ‘which was kept at the town hall. This changed a tradition ‘hat had been in place for centuries and removed the ecclesias: tical control of the recognition of individual and social iden- tity. Marriage would now also become a civil affair, recorded in’ civil registy that paid no attention to the religious ‘denomination of the couple.! "A further form of sectlarisation occurred through the measures taken by the Assembly against the religous orders. ‘The whole conception of what itmeant tobe part ofa religous, Order—the collective sharing of goods and the lifelong cor Initment tova life of poverty, chastity. and obedience—was Snathera to the apni of the Revolution, which had stressed {vidual Uberty. In February 1790, the Constituent Asser Scclared that the vows of religion were invalid and banned tiem from being taken sn te future, Monastic orders were bere to disperse, and priestly cellbacy was abolished. in ‘his direct interference in the hie of the religious orders, the ‘State showed that it had power to determine the forms that llgjon could take in its feeitory, This as an assertion ofthe Supremacy of secular jurisdiction over ecclesiastical jurisdic tion and thus further nderined the elimination of the ell- {gous dimension from the fabric of social fe. The thinking Sinich gave rise to such sttitndes had to some extent been Tormed by the enticsms of religous fe by elgiteenth-century thinkers such a8 Voltaire, Hume, and Rousseau. One necds ‘only to thing ofthe satirical portrayal of Pangioss in Voltaire's Candide to gain some idea of the literary and philosophical ‘background that shaped sich a reecton ofthe baste Christian values of religious ie. ‘However, this new spirit of secular liberty undermined not only religious life but also the Christian conception of marriage, which had played a central role in the structuring of soctal if. The Legilative Assembly decreed that divorce Se allowed and argued that the liberty of the individuals Involved required that the consent which constituted the mariage contract could be withdrawn. Again, this was an [Ergument based on the new secular notion of lberty and the ght of individuals to choose and decide their own destiny. ‘The instituting of divoree alter the Revatution was especiallysignificant, since St was the frst tume that a teaching eon URiy to that of the Catholic Church had been legalised by the French State, Whilst this may be commonplace today im fll member couritries of the European Union, at the time of revolutionary France it was epochal. Tl instigated = {major secularisation of saciety by separating religion and Teligious ideas from the institutional fabric of society. The Catholic doctrine of the indissolubility of marriage. which fad guided French society {rom time immemorial, was tUnus feplaced by the secular doctrine ofthe freedom ofthe ndiwidual to withdraw consent. Indeed, the question of ‘divorce in French society would act as a barometer for the fFelstons between religion and society. moderate govern Tenis lending to repeal ft and radical governments tending toreinatitate s.!® “The change in relations between religion and society in France during and after the Revolution was exported ther European countries through miliary conflict under ‘Napoleon in conquered terntories, such as Belgium and the let bank of te Rhine, the State seized church property ind forced the religious ordere to leave. Furthermore. the ‘States in these areas instituted ei registry and separated Sluzenship from creed, as it had done in France, French Siiluence in the Germanie areas was no less significant. In 11809 Napoleon imposed the "Secularsaton,” which dissolved all ecclesiastical states and conviseated all church property ‘Morsover, be also declared the dissolution of the Germanic Holy Roman Empire. the empire that had united political land religious interests in continental Purope for more than Thousand years. Iwas, a8 Remood suggests, the end of the IMiddte Ages in Europe ang a turning point in the history of ‘ecularisation io the modern era. ‘The Secularisation of German Thought in the Nineteenth Century “The Middle Ages in Europe ended not only at a social level Dut also at an intellectual level. The Augustinian under- ‘Standing of the “two cities” and the separation ofthe heavenly from the caithly realm were conceptually sliminated in nineteenth century theorls of World history.!® The concep- ton of the world or universal history that became prominent Instead can be understood as a seculansation of time. since itsouiht to conelder ime purely fom within—that isto say; ‘without recourse tothe eschatological perspective that theo- Fes of history, as developed by St. Augustine, bad consi- Gered would fulfil and make ultimate sense of secular me. “This removal of the transcendental nature of time and the ‘ubstitution of an understanding of tas a purely immanent historical reality’ #s a characteristic of nineteenth-century ‘theones of secularisation, It bocame the framework in which the events of the French Revolution and its aftermath would ‘be interpreted and understood.” ‘German thinkers ofthis tme used the word Verweliicung (the “making worldly” of someone or something), to express the concept of secularssation, Thats the tivo meanings of secu Jarisation, the juridical sence of making someone or something the property of the State and not of the Church, and the Sense of the transformation ofthe canception of history are ‘Both present. This ean be seen in the work of Hegel and in his understanding of history. Infact. in Hegel the concept of Verwetichung is used in both a positive and in a negative Tn his Vorlesungen fiber die Geschichte der Philosophie (wectures on the History of Philosophy). Hegel considers the negative aspect in the sene of the decadence ofthe Church i the Middle Ages and its compromise with the world to the txtent of becoming worldly. This Js 4 loss of te meaning of ‘Christanity for Hegel and, thus, a Verweldizhung in a nega~ tive sence Its a consequence, for Hegel, of the inability of Scholastic theology to find a true reconciliation between ‘anseendence and immanence, which resulted in a form of ‘Worldliness that eatsed the ersis ofthe medieval Church. In his Vorlesungen iber die Philosophie der Geschichte (Lectures fon the Philosophy of Histon), by contrast, Hegel considers the positive aspect af Verweldichung. In this context, he con Siders the opening out of the Christan principle to the work land, as such, @ movement of the absolute spirit into the ‘World and, thus, a transformation of the prwate interiority ofspirit into the public exterionty of history. Here, secularisation iPiinderstood as the way in which the interior message of (Christianity, orginally outside of history. the Christian prin ‘Sipe, becomes the immanent principle of world history. The fearmation of Christ fs, for Hegel, the decisive moment in hich the absolute spirit enters history and turns from Uiistoreal interionfy into an immanent exteriority of volute spint in history. The incapacity of the Chore’ to ‘odlate thts spit t history causes the spirit to tum to the State asthe place in which the realisation of spirit can occur, Tis realisation of the spit in the State is the basis for Hege's understanding of secularisation and makes him. tn the words of Lowith, the last ofthe Christin philasophers."° Hegel so marked the nineteonth century that the relation. ship between religion, philosophy, and world history would Secume the standard point of departure for the generations that followed bim.'® Indeed, the debate about the under. ‘Standing of seculasisation is considered by one contemporary Sher tobe the heart ofthe conic between the socalled Fen and right Hegeliana,°> However, as Owen Chadwick as fagued, iis ia the work of Kar Marx thatthe most sigmifieant evelopment of the Hegelian notion of secularisation occurs {in the nineteenth century?" Marr is the one who took the controversies of David riedvich Strauss and Lodwig Andreas Feuerbach against Hegel's Christian philosophy and the debate on the crisis of christianity of Bruno Baer and Soren Kierkegaard and ‘Seveloped the most radical consequences of the critique of ogee Grundlbuen der Philosophie des Rechts (Elements of the Philosophy of Righd, which bad been begun by Arnold Rage, The debate about the end of philosophy and its trans- formation into practical reality taal ensued In the debates [Mfr the death of Hegel, s realy Just another way of speaking Shout his secularisation theory. Thus in Zur Judenfrage {On the Jewish Question). Mare speaks about the need for the Christian State to become the secular or workly State fn order for the realisation of the human spirit to take place.® Indeed, for Marx. in his Zur Krtk der Hegelschen Rechisphilosophie (On. the Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Fight) the erftique of religion is the precondition for any critique whatsoever in Germany Secularisation does not neat the disappearance of religion for Marx, but rather that Teligous conselousness vill be determined by the plurality of Feligns and tetr mutual conflicts." ‘Mac considers the question of the realisation of philosophy sm his introduction to Zar Krte der Hegelschen Rechtspalas- ‘phic. Here he follows and further develops Feuerbach’s Cique of Hegel and argues that the disappearance of the ‘anscenvdental conception of trath as let the task of ron Scptustaing truth purely from the immanent perspective of rms in bintory.2° This is Manes understanding ofthe sect Tarization (Verweltichung) of philosophy. and he sees it as the entty of philosophy into the conflicts with the present Fling powers in onder to bus and manage a future, Marc ‘xpressed this tnderstanding in a letter he wrote to Amold Fuge n 184 loopy has eculrised tel aed the clearest proto he Sat poco concioumen has tse been pul lo Oe Spon of te stage not oly exeroly but also ermal 1 tie GC fottne ture na te managing or ll ues cones s then even moreso does Ge comple ofthe present that i fr feces em ‘The critique of the heavenly real has thus now transformed {act into dhe entgue ofthe carhly realm? Marc argues that just as we have been alienated by believing in the heavenly ‘esi and using our energies to attain a false goal, so {00 Ihave we been allenated by the fase vision of te capitalist receay in onder to tly realie this, philosophy needs to turn ‘fom being a enique of theology. as it had begn for Feuerbach, land become an engaged ertique of politics. Tn his critique of Hegel's Grundinien der Piilosophie des ochis, Man also uses the notion of secularisation in ts jnidieal sense tg mean the expropriation of church property isd personnel ‘Thus Lather’s reforms, which led to this eRpropration. are the hist steps toward secularisation. The ‘PEishmation of religion from a pricey to a lay organisation. {ind thinkers fom monks to philosophers, are both aspectsof the revolutionary background of Germany. However, Marx field het if ths process, which had begun in Germany. 3 € ‘Sch up with that of England and France, philosophy must free steel of this theoretical obsession and become practical For Marx, social revolution is necessary If tis secularsation {a not simpy to remain the confseation of church property Tewvas not only the philosophers of the nineteenth century who considered the question of secularisation; theologians lise reflected on the changing nature of the reladonship Beteen religion and society. Richard Rothe, for example, the first volume of hia Theological Eves (1845), angucd that Christianity had first embodied itself in the form of the Church, and now this inner Christan principle had been fncarnaied in the State. Moreover, like Marx, he saw the Reformation a the ervcial turning point in this seeularisa- ton. He argued that as the Church had begun to seeularise ec dusing the Reformation, the State had begun to desec tifarise teelf and become the institution through which the Siensuge of the gospel could finaly be mediated tothe whole of soctety Perhaps the most interesting theologian of secularisation, during the nincteeth century was Johann Friedrich Overbeck, Greatly influenced by his iclong fiend Friedrich Nietzsche, Overbeck asgerted. that theology Itself was the death of Cheistanity.® initally, in primitive Christiansiy. he argued, the separation of Christianity from pagan philosophy was Ebsolute, Christianity was not meant to be yet another philo- soph to compete with the multitude already on offer in the Sncient world, Christianity was thus t0 be separated from ‘workly thinking, This view lustrates Overbeck’ fundamental heals that the whole of Christanity is a process of decay, fom an tnitial postion ofthe rejection of the world and its philezophy to one of steady compromises with the world and {fs phulovophies ntl the Anal death of Christianity tm the historical theology of the nineteendh-century Protestant theologians. For Overbeck, the key to real Christianity is to tunderstand that the original intention at che tne of Jesus [nw the wating ofthe Gospels was t accept its powerlessness in this world, making Christianity a real alternative to the sways of the world." “The nineteenth century was not only a time tn which ideo. togles between let ans right were fought out theoretically: t twas aloo a time of great social conflict in Europe. New dees influenced these events and felled social conihict ‘The three phases of historical development outlined by the French sociologist Auguste Comte in his Cours de philo- Sophie (1890-1842)—the theological, the metaphysical. and ihe setentifefitted wel an, age of rapid industrialisation land. growing wrbanisation.©* Such social changes could ‘hardy fail to alter the relations between Chureh and State ‘The Secularisation of European Society in the Nineteenth Century tn the period between the defeat of Napoleon in 1815 and the revotutions of 1848, most parts of Europe saw a return {0 fore conservative forms of Christianiy. This was because overnments fel that Hberal religion and scepticism had Sten major factors in easing the instabilities of the previous years. Thus in France, Charles X (1824-1890) vigorously Promoted the alliance of the throne, altar, and chateau and I Germany, especially in Prussia, Friedrich Wilhelm 1 (1840-1861) sought to bring about a "Christan State. Tm Englend too, asin most other Protestant countries, the carly nineteenth century was period of religious awakening {volving large-scale conversions to Chutstianiky and the rapid irom of evangelical religion. However, resistance to Chiista- Eigy was strong amongst the working class and lower middle taco, Soelalists such as Robert Owen had a large infiuence tn the working class, and works by Thomas Paine, such as ‘The Rights of Man (1701) and The Age of Reason (1798), were ‘Widely read at the beginning of he nineteenth century, These Choouraged a erica attnude towards Chrstinity.™ “The revolutions of 1248-1849 marked a dramatle change tn the relations between the Church and the State and had 2 significant effect on the process of the secularisation of uropean society for generations. At first, they were welcomed ty the Churches as they saw opportunities for relaxing controls Implemented during the eighteenth and early nineteenthcentres, Religious minorities, stich asthe French Protestants End the German Jews, especially hoped for increased freo- ‘dom and frequentiy were the most enthusiastic supporters of the revolutions. ‘Roman Catholie reaction to the revolutions varied. On the fone hand, many priests believed that the changes would Dring about new freedom for the Church, and indeed Catholic Doicste stood ao candidates for the Frankfurt parliament and Prany state paraments in the hope that they eould influence {he politcal situation for the beterment of the Chureh How. tree in Prussia, priests tended to concentrate more on internal Church matters, not hoping for much from the gevolutions {and tending to favour a constitutional monarchy °° in 1848, both the Protestant clergy in Germany and the Catholic ecray in France moved to the right. In Germany. Friedrich Wihelm IV sought to improve relations with the Cathie hierarchy, and the Constitution of 1850 achieved hajor breakthroughs for the Catholic Church in Prussia. ‘The increased freedom granted to Catholics allowed for the se catablishment of religious orders that had been repressed. ‘ibd onders began to hold large missions, which were a signi ‘Scant feature of regis fein the 1850s, The “Christian State” CGkmploned by Friedrich Wilhelm 1V aimed to combine a Shrct form of goverment with a religious curriculum tn the Schools in order to give a strong religious basis for society. tn France, where the revolution in Rome of November 1848 hal honed the clergy. Louls Napoleon rewarded Catholics {or thot support. Under his patronage, laws were passed that ffuve them much greater freedom. The Falloux Law of 1850, {Ger example ited restrictions on religious schools. leading ‘vey raplelly to the founding of both primary and econéary {Routt un by religious orders im many parts of France. The wR eMaking Sunday as a day of rest assumed political Importance. dividing the liberals, who saw this as a matter of personal choice, from the conservatives who thought that SC Ehoutd be legally enforced in order to ensure sense of Solidarity and collective submission to the law of God as & basi for ancy °° “A siguificant development in the md-nineteenth century svat the tendency for the left in both Germany and France to become secular. This went hand in hand with an anticleical tendency in let secular parties in continental Burope. Under the Third Republic in France (1870-1940), religion became the key to dividing the left from the right. This was due not only to the diference of religious policies between the parties, But also to the politcal language that they employed. The Secular left tended to use antireigious language and drew fn the ant-Christan ideologies of the time to discredit the potieies ofthe right. The right, in contrast, tended to use el- Blows rhetori to justify thelr policies and often backed wp {hits statements th references to teachings of the Catholic (Church, In Germany, whilst strong secularising tendencies {fluenced German socialism, religious language and argu- ‘ments continued to play a sigaiieant part in the political debate. This was mainly de to the fact that German Cathol fiom was a significant political force atthe time, and conser: vation was heavily intenced by Protestantism, ths fe often the ease, the situation in Britain was diferent. pitain had already gone through huge social upheavals in the 1880s and 1840s, stich as the reform of Pariament. the reform ofthe Church of Engjand, the reform of town govern Iment, and also the enactment ofthe Poor Law. whi ad met {wrth great resistance from the aristocracy. Consequently, Tete rus ile energy left for revohution. Moreover. the 18403 ‘Sowa Hee in the prosperity of Britain, and this also dampened Shy revolutionary tendencies in the county. n terms of the ‘ellgious influence in polities during the nineteenth century, England clearly difered from France and Germany. Whilst fn the continent the secular parties tended to be on the lft Sind the religious parties on the right. religion in England Crossed the political divide and inlueniced both sides of the eological debate. Thus in England, moderate Iberalsm, ‘Ralcaiem, and even socialism continued tbe inuenced by Feligious convictions and language. ‘The 1860s and the 1870s saw many Nonconformists center into the British pariampent, and the very fervent high ‘Rngfican Wiliam Gladstone,°" who had been deeply flu need by Anglican clergymen such as Jobo Henry Newman, Sdn Keble, and Eaward Bouvere Pusey (te leaders of the ‘Oudord Movement). assumed the leadership ofthe Whigs onthe death of Lord Palmerston in 1865. Gladstone often used bitleal shetore in his paliteal speeches, and many socal and politest movements, such as the rural labourers’ movement Began thett meetings with Iymms and readings from the Bible, Thus, whilst in France and Germany the conservatives {ended to monopolise te political we of Ue Bible, im Britain fl sides claimed bfoliallegtimation for their points of view. ‘This oplt in Germany would lead to a major conffontation Detween, the State and the increasingly strong Catholic Church 3 The resulting clash, known as the Kulcamps. ‘ould farther polarie tet politial and religious factions, ‘In other European countries. such as Italy, Spain, France elguum, Switzerland, and Austra, anticercalism had already ‘Become politely sigaficant atts time The Catholic Church posed a threat to the major force of nineteenth-century pol- es namely. nationalism. In 1664, Pope Pius [X publshed the Sullabus of Bors, which condemned Uberalismn, secwla~ Hom and rationalism and made it clear that the Catholle Church would not be an eazy partner in the forging of the ‘ew national entities in Europe. The distance between sec Ir society and the Church was widened when in 1670 the ‘octrine of papal infalibity was declared. Infact, this doe: {hime sought te lilt Use power of Une pope to the traditional {rene of aith and morals, but tberals percetved the doctrine fs one more sign of papal political interests in the same year, Hallan troops entered Rome and stripped. ‘he papacy of the last vestiges of its temporal power, The pope argued that without temporal power his spiritual inde- Bendenes would be threatened, and he sought support From other European countries to regain his temporal base. Bismnarek. seeing peliteal advantage for the formation of the bnew German nation state, offered the pope asylum. believing ‘hat this could hip the stabsty of the empire. At this potnt Bismarck, himsell an orthodox Lutheran, was relatively COpconcenned about the tnfluence of the Chueh sn politcal utters, However, events would quickly cause him to change {his neutral position. After the declaration of the dogma of ‘apal infalitit. internal divisions developed in the German Eatholte Church, Two lay theologians —lgnaz Dollinger, who hha been a ood intend of Gladstone in England, and Johann Friedrich ted the group known as the “Alt Katholiken the Old Catholics,” who refused to accept the dogima and broke wetth the Roman Cathole Church. in 1871, the Bishops of ‘Breslau and Ermlaad, together with the Archbishop of Cologne, pressed the Prussian authertes to expel the “Old Catholics” Fom teaching posts in aehools and universities. The govern iment refused to do so on the grounds of Feigious toleration nid. when the bishope presced further, retaliated by sus- Donding state subsidies to them, This dispute in itself would Ft have led to the so-called Kulturkarmpf, as Bismarck was fore concerned with poliical issues than matters of theology. Dati ted to confrontation between Bismarck and the newly founided Catholic Centre Party, the Zentrum. of 1870." “The Zentrum had been formed in the face of mounting tiberal hostty (othe Catholic Church and as a reaction to the growth of Protestant Prussia. By 1871 it had become the Second largest pay in the Reichstag and lad a very capable leader in Ladwa Windthost. The party was pledged to defend the Church against the liberals and Protestant Prussian Sate hostility, to support the cause of confessional schools. and to campaign against the introduction of eiil marriage, ‘The Zentrum also made a significant positive contribution 0 Social reform: Catholic social thinkers Such as Bishop Wilhelm Non Ketteler and Father Kolping. Christian trade unions were Tprmed, workers cooperatives were encouraged, and voctal help for the unemployed was initiated. These measures ensured that socal Catholicism in the nineteenth century would ake a significant impact on the new German socio-political ‘S number of measures led to the events that came to be Aeserbed as the Kulturkemp between the new Bismarciian ‘Empire and the Catholle Church. The annexation of Italy land the confiscation ofthe papal lands in 1870 provoked the Zentrum to pat pressure on Bismarek to intervene military th Italy. Bismarck resisted, as be wanted to maintain stable Felations with Italy and sas not prepared to risk a maiitary ‘operation at the start ofthe formation of the German nation Slate. The Zerdrum further pressured him to incorporate the elgous guarantees of the 1850 Prussian Constitution inthe ‘Bow Imperial Constttion, Bismarck tied repeatedly (0 loosenthe support of the Vatican and the German bishops for the Zenerure but to no avai. Catboie Church support for the Poish ‘Requage in the east ofthe Prussian empire further anguished Diginarck, as this fuelled Polish nationalist sentiment and Ureatened to destabilise the empire. Consequently, tn 1872 Ihe appointed Adatbert Falls to be Prussian Mintstr of Religous [Nia Falk was fervent aniclerialist and was determined teput the Church under the legislative eontral ofthe State id tse step was to remove Prussian schools from all church Control, both Cathole and Protestant, and introduce Iesslatign ‘SBloiiding the Jesuit order to set up works in Germany. ‘The so-called “hay Lavi” of May 1873, passed by the Prussian andtag gave the State power over the education of priests Ei forcing each candidate to spend three years at university BYfore entering the seminary, and removed many of the Stseiplinary powers of the bishops. Furthermore, all church sBhomamente of bishops and priests had to be subjected to the veto of the state authorities tn the following year, 1874, the freedom of movement of cue dergy was restricted, Also Prussia introduced evil marrage ‘Sha required all births, deaths, and marriages to be recorded ‘Shih the regJotrar, not, as previously, with the chureb author Yon as in France, ils was a sgaiicant social form of secu ancaon that carried with ia deep symbolism. Soci be was (eibe regulated in accordance with a eiil, not ecclesiastical, Pattern which signiteantly changed the framework of relations Betrccn the Church and the State. I further promoted what Recpar vou Greyers has called, for a slightly earlier period, the -privatisation of devotion." The interaction of Ife anc Teligious rfual was marginalised to the private realm of Jevotion and excluded from the public marking of rites of Dessage such as birth, marriage, and death, “Hoses reached a climax in 1875, with laws empowering Prussia to stspend subsidies to all church members who Posleted the new legislation and the suppression of all eis ‘Bous orders except for those engaged in nursing, Papal Sindcennation of this legislation further intensified tensions ‘Stiween the Church and the State. These anti-Catholic Encasues galvanised support for the Zentrum. and ay people Talled to support their bishops and priests in thetr stragele _aguinst the State: Bismarck came to see that force was not fie way to contrl the Catholic Church, and on the death of Pope Pius IX in 1878 he took the opportunity to negotiate finds the Vatican to put an end to the Kulavkamp. The nego- Untions were not easy, however, and it would take until 1687 to reach a final solution, The solution dismantled the May {Lave allowed eed clergy to retorn to Germany. and resumed State payments to the Church. However, Bisinarek ensured hat cet marriage remained compulsory. thatthe Jesuits were Stil banned in Germany, and that church, appointments ‘Would continue tbe monitared by the State." “The seaults ofthe Kutureampf were significant for German, Catholics in effect, Catholis remained a marginalized group (Gell into the twentieth century, and poverty was, signiicantiy Ther among Catholies than among Protestants. Eucatson- aly too, the differences between Catholics and Protestants Tena significant In the 1660s, for example, a Catholic boy ‘Wan half a likely as a Protestant boy to goto university and slate a5 1924, only 12 per cent of the highest-ranking ho servants were Catholics"? ‘The Secularisation Debates of the Twentieth and ‘Twenty-First Centuries For much ofthe twentieth century, the theory of secularisation twas a cultural @ prion that informed all thought about the Imogen world and its emergence fom the medieval past However, cowards the end of the twentieth century this Consensus broke down. José Casanova, in Public Religions inthe Blodern World, explains how this changed in the 1980s and notes that sociologists of religion seem now to be 4s, dlemisive of the theory as they were initially faithful to e35 There are several reasons for thts shift, and here {wall Simply outline eo. “The first can be attributed to what we might cal the “end of modern thesis, The argument runs as follows. The project ‘Sfmodernity aimed, amongst other Wings, to shake off the Gomination of the Church and religious authorities. Kant’s Seilto awe the courage to think for onesel was formulatedspecifically inthis contest. Thus, ane ofthe main aspects of the {beration sought in tis project equates precisely with what the theory of secularsation prociaims: namely, de autonomy of the subject to use his or her reason according to general principles to whieh any reasonable persoo of whatever religious Persuasion or none could adit. Tis, in short, was the baste Ffading of the Enlightenment in Kant’s celebrated essay of 1764, Was ist Aufkidrung? Thus, when the normative basis Of this initial project of modernity is called into question. So too are the claims ofthe theory of secularisation. ‘The second reason for this ehange can be understood by “what has been called the seta of spiritually oF the sacred In contemporary soeeties >The cea here is Uhat there seems {o be a rerum of various forms ef non chureh-based spiritually In modem European societies, interest in Eastern religions, New Age movements, ecological movements, and new forms Of paganism is considered to be an indicator af this. Because {ae been assumed that one consequence of secularisation ‘would be the decline of spiritual beliefs and practices, the Tetum of such belles and pragtices has called the theory ofsecularsation into question. This has led to a second debate on the nature and Himts of the theory of secularisation {tt an interdlsciphinary level ‘The issue of secularisation fs further complicated by the fact that the phenomena of religious belief and practice are Specife to the cultural context in which they occur.>* As ‘Theodore Caplow argues, religious belief and practice bas declined tn many European countries sinee World War 1. ‘ut no signifieant decline im religous belief or practice has ocurred in the United States in the same period.» I that ‘fore not complicated enough, there i also dhe question of just ‘what qualifies as religious belief and practice and how one imeasures this As Grace Davie puts many people in Great Britain, for instance, "believe but they do not belong” to a ‘particular church ®” Moreover, other countries follow thelr ben pattems of secularisation in the context of their own particular histories and forms of religious belief and practice That are more ot less appropriately described by the theory of secularisation.®° There are also societies in which the Separation of religion and polities is not the chosen path. We might think hese of countries like Israel and Iran. Clearly the formulation of an adequate theory of secularisation is very much an ongoing project in the changing circumstances bf the contemporary world Callum Brown has recently proposed an interesting tests for the case of modern Britain.©® He suggests that nly since the mid-1960s has secularisation really begun 5a form of basic change in the language and the deny of ‘People in Bish society. He criticises the view that secular Eation should be equated with the long process of modernity, beginning in the eighteenth century and going on into the twentieth century. Using statistical data, he shows how the Todds and 19503 exhibited the largest growth in church Attendance in Britain since the mid-nineteenth century. The key to the change in the 1960s, for Brown, was the end of (Christianity as a dominant narrative for social and individual life, Ths, he suggests, was brought about through the end of| tnoral censorship alter the tial over Lady Chateriy's Love in 1960, through the legalisation of abortion and homosexuality fn 1967, the easing of the divorce laws in 1968, the Nourishing ofthe youth culture of the 19606, and the student rebellions (01968 and 1970, Calkim Brown is not alone in arguing that the 1960s were the start of secularisation. Peter van Rooden falso suggests that tle was the key time at which society in Holland underwent secularisation. "At he same time, there are also mounting signs that those who defend the theory of seealariation may be concentrating bveriy on Western European trends, Peter Berger. a sociologist, St religion who had significanty contributed to formulating the modern theory of secularization, ss now convinced that the ausumption that we live in a secularlsed world is false. He considers the world to be “furiously religious,” perhaps even “imore than it ever was.” Daniele Hervieu-Leger. one Of the leading French sociologists of religion (oday, is also onvinced What the theory of secularsation f of limited value. ‘She comments: can one tt speak of secutreaion? For dhe notion to preserve Sins senbante of hese eleva’ fr aly reir a ‘unica. sams often et Inne wih ee Seger erof Burope as ts onby vii ld of appeation: then of denis. Sees tha ein tne area fal to each down Int he Fearn vette, One say ag adit that te Ra Shab Wesnnot be taken ey fr ‘What has been treated as the norm, that is, Western Europe Wiiais in dhe end to finish as being the exception when one Toots at the question of secslarsation on a global level, Berger ‘Soggests that there are fo exceptions to his desecularisation {hen Mhe fist is Europe, and even here tis perhaps more SReaurate to hold that the institutional focus of religion bas Shite than fo conclude that people themselves are more seNiinsced ©! The second isan international subculture of a Western-educated elte who act as carriers forthe Enlighten: Jet version of the seculassation thesis. These people are highly ariculate minority and consequentiy have a dspro- Sordonace inftuence on the legal system. on the media. and Patthe educational system, Inthe face ofthese two exceptions, ‘Sccending to Benger, we are experiencing a resurgence of reli iJon and its tilluence on world poitcs.® He mentions a ‘number of examples. “Fe ft ia the influence of Roman Catholicism on politica ssoues across the globe since the Second Vatican Council. ®© ‘Bamps would include the rle of Johin Paul Il sv sftwencing the dowafall of Communi, the saternational inflwence of Roman Catholic communities such as Sant Eid and their {ole im peace mediation, seh as the negotiation of peace in ‘Mocambique and Uganda, and the presence of Vatican repre, MEiretion at international organisations such as the UN, and the European Parliament. The second form of resurgence cated by Berger is that of evangelical Protestantism. the last thzce of four decades has seen a steady increase i conservative Protestant Christians. especially m Latin Kuscries, oub-saharan Africa. and Southeast Asia.°” The {fluence of conservative Prodestantism on American poll fas te also a significant factor that adds weight to the SeSecutarsation thesis © The thied form of resurgence Berger SxSStons is that of fundamentalist Islam. Here perhaps the ‘Gtects on global polities are most dramatic, as whee countries ‘fofine their polldcal systems in terms of the Shariah, the Islamic Taw that defines the compyohensive ethical and legal fyotem of many Islamic nations Indeed, the presence of| fore than 12 million Muslims in France, Germany, and Great Britain has raised the question of how modem Wester Countries relate to Islam withia their own societies, not only {Se an external international phenomenon. ‘Abdullahi As-Nalim sugaests that the major question conffonting Islam is how ies own understanding of religion Sind politics relates tots own conception of secularism"? This Same question is considered by a number of authors in a Study published by the London-based Institute of Islamic Political Thou. Tey look atthe origins ofthe movements that have recently abolished the secularisation of the past ‘century by ereating politcal orders guided by Sbariah law ‘As John Esposito suggests “te post atghtenment eden t define regen asym iste to porsonal pts eae han a5 ay EEvnas ccna tampered oor ery deratand the ale ‘fis and any ober wonders. “This is another way of saying that the theory of secularisation, sit has been used in the Western world, will have consider. ble aiiulty ia coming to terms with Islam, The question of feligion and polities, ofthe forms religion takes in the public Sphere, is becoming more and more of a central question.”* ‘Whilst we are uncertain of exactly how these forms wal turn but. we ean, with Peter Berger, be certain of one thing. “Those (who negleet religion in thelr analyses of contemporary aflairs dose at their per." in the light of the return of religion to public sigifieance Klaus Ber, the German sociologist, has developed an influ- ential theoty of Europe as a “postsecular society." By the hhotion ofa _postsecular society” Baer simply means tha ust asa secular society was one jn which religion was confined to the private sphere, the rum of religion tothe public sphere in recent times inaugurates @ postsecular society. ‘Whatever the final outcome of these debates, they have ‘without doubt enriched our understanding of the main ques ons involved in the use of secalarisation as a category for‘understanding modernity. and also highlighted some of the possible strengths and weaknesses of such a use. The question ‘Ne are faced with today is how to use the concept of secular Teation with suflclentertcal awareness of its imitations 03 2 framework for understanding the engin and progress ofthe Contemporary world, without losing the abit to draw on its heuristic usefulness az a category that continues to stimulate ur hermeneutical imagination.”® Whilst this breakdown in Consensus over the interpretation of the theory of secularisa~ fiom has complicated matters, greater analytical clarity over ‘Suactly what lo meant by Use theory bas also been gained. ‘Karel Dobbelace, for example. makes some helpful distinc; tions by deserbing three key dimensions of secularisation."? ‘The first is the tendeney for individual belief and piety t0 ‘eerease tn both qualitative and quantitative terms. The sec ‘id isthe deereasing role of eurehes and religion in public Tis, The thind fo the intemal change that occurs in religion Hci cauning fe to become more worldly and weakening its ‘aim to possess exclusive truth. all these aspects, according {o Dobbctaere, contribute to making the theory of secularisa- Yon a multidimensional eoncept that functions ata variety of| diferent explanatory levels ‘Hartmat Lehmann considers that tt ls necessary 10 use combination of mutually complementary concepts in order {fo deseribe and analyse the relation of Christianity and modernity, He suggests thatthe concepts of secularisation. ‘Se-christantsation, and re-Christanisation are required in Ghder to be able to grasp the phenomena of religion today.®° Hugh Mcleod suggests that contemporary theories of se ‘arisation can be grouped into four major fypes.°! The frst Yor he describes asthe marca of scence view, This focusses Pine intetlecuel origins of secularisaton.*? It considers {he period fom Copemnicus to Newton to be the start of the process in which modem secular thinking emerged. This was Etxeloped further in the biological discoveries of Charles Darwin and the biblical and theological enitiques of the Pabingen School and Friedrich Strauss and Ernest Renan. Soci sclentie accounts ofthe origin and functions of soci ty developed by people eich as Auguste Comte and Herbert ‘Spencer also fostered the growth of modern secular thinking “The gradual replacement of a theological vision by a scientific “fon of he world isin this model. tne main eause of seculan ‘ation, MeLaod descrfbes the second type as the "modernisa~ dom accouns,-which highlights the idea of social rather than Intellectual change. The main transition here 49 from rural ‘agrarian socetes, whieh, in being hierarchical art traditional {ended to favour religion to societies that are predominandy turban. industrial and democratic, and tend to favour a secular Soetety ©" McLeod's third type is the “postmodernist” which {= based on the idea that secularsation did not really occur tintl around the 1980s, the time of the significant changes in Westem society that have been grouped under the heading bf postinodernism,** And he describes is fourth type as the “saing God" interpretation. This ie propounded by people such as Jefirey Cox and suggests that whilst secularisation hhas ovcurred, iti by ho means an inevitable consequence of odemisation, as the differences between the United States land Burope illustrate, The teste ofthe capacty of religion fe present itself hence the phrase “selling God") an accept able and interesting way to people isthe decisive question as to-whether or not ft survives. 1h addition to these four general types of theories, debates about secilarisation soem themselves have occurred in particular phases and context providing constellations. Thus For example, in the so-called fre secularsation debate. three {najor positions competed for dominance. The fist postion hel by Bryan Wilson and Peter Berger. argued that a decline in religion was an inevitable consequence of the process of edemisation Wilson stiggested that this decline was due fo the shift from agricultural to sndusrial fe styles in modern liimes. Berger angued that. due tothe structural diferentaton fof society, the various spheres of modern life tat emenge Create thelr own logies and their own truth claims. This has | endeney to undermine the manepaly tha religion formerly Feld on truth claims, and the resultung competing pluralism fends to undermine the identity of the various religous ‘erldviews and leads to their decline. The second postion. hneld by Andrew Greeley, saggested that Une theory of secular ‘Stion was 2 myth.®” He based his argument on the persis~ tance of religious practice in America since the Second WorldWar. He accounted for this phenomenon by suggesting that the clear ceparation of religion from political institutions SMows religion to thrive in sts own, sphere.®® The third position, held by Thomas Luckmann®? and Robert Bella.” Reveloped Durkheim's functional understanding of relision {iss form of social solidarity. Luckmann suggested that re iJon docs not disappear: rather, Its transformed into the Grats codes of ssel-expression” and “self-realisation” in Pi mnvisbie or private form of religion that maintains the, ‘Smbolte production and Feproduction of modern societies. ‘Botan arued that religion transforms into both a private fystem of meanings that help individuals find meaning in ifs and also a public form of eli religion that supports the Dreduetion and reproduction ofthe mts of octal solidarity Silo eae theories and debates indicate that it would be jwromg to consider the theory of secularisation as a uniform theory of social change. Rather, in order (o fully grasp tts Sionifcanee, i ts necessary to piace ten the context of the Sihous interpretations given to i by those who associate Themselves, either positively or negatively. with ths Uheors Im theologieal debates about secularisation, the work of redrich Gogarten has most sigaiicanly shaped subsequent Interprelalons. Gogarten wae a diseiple of Hammack in Berlin Ghd of Twoeltsch in Heidelberg, and together with Barth, Thurneysen, Mer, Bultmann, and Brunner, launched the lalektcehe Theologie aleetical theology) that played such gnifieant roe in theological thinking during the twentieth Th 1852 Gogarten published his Der Mensch zwischen Gott und Wele tan benwsen God and World) followed in 1953 by his Verhdngnts und Hoffnung der Newzot. Die Stkulorsierung als tnoologiaches Problem (Fate and Hope of the Moclern World. Seculgrisation as a Theological Problery. in both books, be Sct out hls baste understanding of the relationship between {he modem world and Christianity. His intention io. these ‘Sorts was to rethink the biblical and Protestant theological Thith in the light of the modem phenomenon of secularisation. He understood secularisation to be the transformation of fdeas, knowledge, and experience that had formally been ‘Christian into the real of autonomous human reason, which no longer depends on the Christian ffamework of action and understanding for ils expression." He also described secu: Jarlsation as the capacity to complete processes thought previously to be spiritual by purely human means Gogarten Ehaeests that there are three possible responses to this Situston. The fret, which he suggests Is characterised by Kierkegaard, is to refuse the process of secularisation. sings ft ultimately leads to a destruction of the Christian fath,®® In the second responce, which he associates with Nietzsche, Ecevlarisation is embraced precisely, because it rids the ‘world of Christianity by destroying it The third response. Gogarten's own, is t0 propose another way of considering fie interaction of the Chiistan faith and secularisation.* Hie Suagests that secularisation 1s a legitimate consequence of ‘Christianity. This he does by outlining three areas in which ‘Scaularisatton ean be considered t0 arise out of Christianity set athe uses the Pauline formula of justification (Rom 9:2) frequently employed by Luther, © divide the sphere of fat from the sphere of worldly action. Worldly action, he holds ‘Should be considered as an autonomous buman activity that Sught tobe valued in its ov right and not tobe Hinked tothe fuligious question of salvation. He believes that activity ean ow naturally out of one's faith but not that this should be Cnderstood as soterologicallysgniieant sphere. he second ‘hea of secularisation ares Out ofthe Christian belie inthe Sforld as the creation of God. Since God has made the world This effectively demythologises the world ffom the ancient conception of gods and spirits who inhabit and contr! the Senta of te cosmos, Humans have thus been given auton my {© act nthe world. This makes the world simply the World and removes from it an ancient sense of sacredness “The third area of secularisation arising out of Christianity is Tate! to he filal relation between Ged and humans. Since Inumane are Considered sons and daughters of God. this Confers sovereignty on individuals that makes us responsible ariners of God and autonomous agents in the world. “Gogarten makes a key dlstinetion. one that has been rove zed by ter theologians, betwen seclarisaton and ec fartom. He understands secularisation 1 be the legitimateland indeed inevitable consequence of the Christian faith {ending to the liberation of the world from mythical under ‘Sandings. However, he understands secularism to be the egeneration of the secularsation process Into an attack on fte'very own source. This distinction allows him to develop a hormative conception of sectlarisation that is compatible ‘tha form of Christianity lived out in the modern work, ‘Gotarten's work on the concept of secularisation has been enormously infuential in theology concerned with the rela onahip between Christianity and the modern world. Harvey Cox's The Secular City (1968). for example, uses Gogarten's framework to develop the, conception of secularisation a5 ‘urbanisation. Kart Raker ®" who does not explicitly mention Gogarten. nonethelese uses many themes that Gogarten alsed. And J. B. Metz develops his own conception of 2 ‘Hheology of the world” as a enique of Gogarten's under standing of secularisation.*° the Bhunenberg Lawith Debate “The relationship of Christianity to the modem world was also the question that the so-called Blumenberg-Lowith debate Suditaced, although this time the question focused mare on ‘he orgins ofthe modem world than on the future prospects of Christianity in it In 1049 Lowith published his Meaning {iHfotory. in which he set out fo show that the modern idea tf progress is a secular transformation of the Christian Conception of cechatology. Crucial to Lowith's argument lege understanding ofthe relationship between Christianity nd history. For Hegel, the modern, spiritual and politcal World arses out of the Aufhebung!™ of word history that ‘ccured during the Christian Reformation. The concept of ‘rashebung. or its English equivalent “sublation,” caries with ia number of meanings Iti simultaneously a raising, Sentroying, and a preserving of @ concept or thing. A simple ‘way lo understand this notion ie to think of what happens in The seasoning of food, For example, when salt is added to a tomato, the taste is drawn out in the sense of being raised toa new level it is changed or destroyed in this alteration, land itis also preserved ia some sense! tn an analogous ‘way to Hegel, with considers the process of secularisation Tobe an AuMtebung of Christian categories such as eschatology Into the notion of progress in the modern philosophy of hnistory, For Lowith, the origins ofthis notion are to be found in the Jewish and Christan faith in an ultimate falsiment of history In the coming of the Messiah. This inheritance, Suggests Lowith, reaches a conclusion in the moder philo- Sophy of history. Tin order to ace this genealogy of modern seculartsation Lowth begins by looking at the major authors who have ‘Contributed tothe modern philosophy of history, and attempts {to show how the baste iden gulding their philosophies isthe Understanding of history ae moving towards a final point of Unification and flilment ofthe human condition 10? ‘For Lowith. a Jew who was forced to lee Germany during ‘he Hitler era this notion of progress in history isnot convine- Ing, The cove of iis thesis io that the modern era has 3 Dabically false self-lenowiedge. It considers itself to be based fon autonomous human rationality, but is actually based ‘onan inherited thealogieal conception of progress." He lrgues that the unique contribution of Christianity was the ‘unsformation of the ancient world’s cyeleal conception of {ime into a linear conception of ume as progress." He uses {his guiding metathesis to organise the various modern Philosophies of history around the idea of dhe secularization Ereschatology in the notion of progress. Modern thought. in his view, is stuck in indecision about whether to be pagan or ‘Christian, and, unlie the ancient and biblical word, it does hot know what wants tobe." ‘Blumenbergs Die Legtmat der Newzot (The Legtimacy of the Modern Age) is sgnifleanty snluenced by Lawit's thesis, although he also enters into debate with other defenders of fhe secularisation thesis, most notably Cart Schmitt °° ‘Biumenberg begins his responce by asking what it means for Concepts and structures t be secularisatlons. He suggests ‘hat Lowith’s thesis depends on a number of premises, FUSt. that the secularisation thesis proposes the view of & common Substance that undergoes change of form but not of content uring the process, Second, that the contents of this substanceare essentially Christian, Third, that the transformation of {his substance ts one-sided (fom a Christan to a secularsed form, and does not consider how the Christan form came About as itself the result ofan ancient form).'°7 Blumenberg points out that there is a formal difference between the notion Ef cechatology and. that of secularisation: namely, tat ‘Eehatology ts based on transcendent factor entering history from outside, such ae God or the Messiah, whilst secuarisation fs based on a prineiple immanent in the loge of history! Stumenberg also pursues another line of erticism by ques- ‘oning the genealogical process that i meant to have brought {hls eecularsation about. He proposes an alternative genealogy to the notion of progress, which be suggests has been brought fabout by two major factors frst the scientific advances made in the sixteenth and seventeentlt centuries produced a new method, the scientific Iethod, based on the work of many generations of thinkers fand resulting in.a better explanation of the motions of the planets, Second, the quarrel between the “ancients and the Inoderns" resulted in overcoming the Renaissance idea of the perfection of classical art, which all later generations Ihad to try and recover, and the belief that each generation ‘Capresses its creative spirit in ways appropriate to its time. in'irceing the modern era from the belief Uuat the summit of bgh art had been already reached fm the Classical era, the Way was cleared for modem art to consider itself better than {he art of previous eras. “this genealogy of scientific method and aesthetic under~ standing, Blumenberg suggests. united in the eighteenth entary to produce the notion of progress. which portrays fhumans making their own history and Fepresents the emer fence of the notion of progiess as a general historical eat Gory for underotanding social change. This modern notion Ef progress differs from eschatology in two basic ways: ‘Substantially, in that i an immanent and not a transcen- dent consummation of history: and genealogical, in that frises out of seltascertion Tm his reply to Blumenberg in the review article in the Philosophische Rundechau of 1968, Lowith points out he Giffeences between the ancient and the modem notions of progress and the face that Chitstanity ocurred between these Periods, He then suaigests that st would be highly improbable [ar the moder age tobe orginal and autonomous. This would ‘Sccount for the overambitious calms of the philosophy of story in wanting to fl the epace previously occupied by Christian eschatology ‘Blumenberg irames his response to Lovaith in the context of another explanation as to why the philosophies of story in the eightecnth and fineteenth centuries tended to be over Uiibitious, He suggests that they overextended the more ‘modest notions of progress presented in the sixteenth and Tigenteenth centuries because they tried to answer questions isi over from the Christan Middle Ages. As a result, they Etterpted to use te modest idea of regional progress to $Sccnunt for the universal drive of history in terms ofa general movement of progress. in fact, he argued, the origin of the iden of progress and its application to the question of the Shniversal meaning of history as inherited from ehe Christian Unditon are two distinct events. Bhumenberg suggests that ‘Shilst modem thought was able to discredit Christian answers (odie meaning and patter of history. It was unable to ent aly eliminate the questions of Chnstanity, which continued fe drive them to provide answers. In a similar fasbion to hinkers like Ludwig Wittgenstein and later Richard Rory, Blumenberg proposes that we need to realise that certain {questions are no longer relevant for an age and s0 no longer Acca to be answered. Thus for Blumenberg. progress the Emplementation of seif-aseerton, and itis this which eonsti- tutes the legitimate core of the modern age. Tis he derives ftom his consideration of the problems that had been left Goer by the late medieval Nominalism of thinkers such as Settharn, 1 ‘Nominalism, suggests Blumenberg, solved the problems of wworld-denial, sin, and evi by fecussing on the avane wil 5 ‘Omnipotent and the human ssllas free and responsible, This STlowed fora postive valuation of the world as the creation of Gad and, at the same time, for an account ofthe presence of Sor and! cv in the world as the consequence of human free SHILUIS-Tme consequence ofthis dependence on wil i that Sivauon and creation are taken out ofthe sphere of humanmeaning and reliability and are considered simply as part of God's wil, This contingency ean either focus on the next ‘World, as was te oficial medieval solution, though this was nade more difiealt by the notion of grace and predestination, brit can consider this world etst deus non daretur (as though {here were no God), which was de official modern solution £9 ‘this problem. “Thus, human self-assertion was the only avallable concep= tual space let over for humans ip a world of pure causal Conteney ruled by the abelute wil of Cod, In this way, the modern idea of progress i= codetermined by the Christian Iegney without it being the transformation of a Christian Substance. Another way of saying this is that the notion of progress is truly modem in its content, but affected by the FRentage it has receive from Christianity i the function that ths eoncept has played in the philosophy of history. Thus, the concept’ legitimacy is understood by Blumenbeng in a {iro fold way, as ot being & borrowed category from = prev: (us efa and also as drawing a justiied conclusion given the Togleal possibiltes available. ‘iawith's reply im the Phdosophische Rundschau seems to tndieate that he didnot really engage with the seriousness of [lumenbergs eatique, as he does not consider the possibilty that histoneal change ean occur as a result of ideas cominit Jn ifom outside the dominant tradition. The result ofthe debate Between Blumenberg and Lovith over the understanding of Eseulatsation and the tse of the concept of progress reveals fn imcresting basic difference between the two thinkers {with has a conception of history essentially similar to that ‘of Bolybius an the Roman conception of repetitive eles of fate which leave humane relatively helpless to cause any real Change in their history. Blamenberg, by contrast, considers history to be open, dependent on the capacity of humans © realise their projects and goals through self-assertion and ‘Ghuse real change i the patterns and dynamics of human bistoy. “The debate between Blumenberg and LOwith leaves many questions stil to be answered in understanding the meaning Sfsecularsation and its use as an interpretative category to Better understand the origin of te modem world. In his review of Blumenberg's work, Hans Georg Gadamer consid ts the category of secularisation to be a legitimate herme ‘outlet concept for understanding the relation between the ‘rodern and medieval worlds,!!? Uirich Rub concludes that BBumenberg gave a one sided and rather selective reading of the origin snd essence of the Christan faith. He suggests tar tn eliminating the category of secularisation as a legit tale hermeneutical concept, Blumenberg also eliminates the Possibly for serious confrontation and exchange between Tie modern world and Christianity." Religion and Society in the Twentieth and ‘Twenty-First Centuries René Remond suggests that a consideration of the relations Detcen religion and society over past centuries leads to the conclusion that religion can only be understood in the Content of politcal events and intellectoal trends." This is Serbape eapecially tre forthe twentieth century. where the For of Keologes in Europe and the ewo World Wars signi ‘aly coloured relations between religion and society Tin 1914, at the start of the First World War, religious aierences In Europe were enormous. At one extreme was Holy ‘Russia, a nation united by its Ortodax faith, and atthe other ‘atreme was the thoroughly secnlar republican France. These fiiferences would gradually narrow, in Western Europe at feast, Csrough the experience of the mtsing and movement Si peopies that occurred during the wars. Moreover, as the Catholic Church became increasingly aware of the dangers of ‘both communistn and fasesm, 1 aligned Itself with democ: acy ao the best political system for preserving freedom and sastee tn 1944, for example, Pope Pius X1 gave a number of radio broadcasts at Christmas in which he praised democracy as {he way to preserve freedom, Inside the Catholic Church as (well the resogntion ofthe doctrine of religious freedom after Yor was a algufieant step towards the recognition of re _Bous pluralism and the freedom to choose one’s ovm religion. ‘The documents produced in the Second Vatican Counell of1962-1965 reinforced this tendency in the Catholic Church and placed ft ina much less confrontational position with Jnodem Western democracies, This can be seen In dhe coneoe- ‘dats that were drawn tp between the Vatican and the various rations, im lal, for example, the Concordat of 1984, which was, the reall of more than twenty years of negotiation between the Yaucan and the Hallan State, id a great deal to harmonise the principles of allan democracy with the demands ofthe ‘Vauean, State subsidy of the Church would from then an be 1S Gholes for the individual ltizen, who could choose if she or The wanted to pay up to 0.8 percent of their sneome tax to the Charen, ‘Secularisation also brought increased freedom for the ‘church. The separation of religion and poltes meant that the politcal authorities had less and less justiestion for tntcsring in the intemal workings ofthe Church. Furthermore. the increasing regional autonomy’ in the Catholle Church tncant that loeal churches were increasingly free €o decide on particular seues concerning thelr dioceses, Tis al made possible the increased emphasis on colegialty tat was evident in the Second Vatican Council. National Protesant churches were also underway to eparate Church End State. Thus. since 1097 n Sweden, newborns are no onger automatically enrolled m Use Church, and legal sepa- ration between the Protestant Church and the State was Feached in 2000, Also In Finland, since 1997 the government hhas not intervened in the administration of the eight chap- ter of he navonal Lutheran Church, Bren in England there has been sertous debate about disestablishing the Anglican Church, Paradoxically, in conjunction with this movement 9 Separate Chureh and State, there also has been a renewed eda recognition of religious groupe in France since 1970. ARES is parculanly signifeant in Uhe French context a8 i ‘means that the state ackmowledges that citizens may belong oimtermediate communities, something that does not come ‘Naturally 0 the national republican model of soliarigy in ‘Brance. Moreover, since 1987 French taxpayers have been able fo obtain tax reductions for their chureh contributions, The ‘ccogntion of intermediate communities, of which religious ‘MODINE SECULASCSATION 33 communities form a significant part, has also been a major ‘Scretopment in Holland's “pillarisation” system. Holland was Griginally organised on confessional lines, and the pillarisa~ on system! develops a tradition that crystallised Dutch wetlondd conseioueness, Sehools and even radio stations are ‘Srganiaed on denominational Imes and, due to the dramatic tnerease of people claiming no religous aiiiation in Holand, Humanists are considered one of these intermediate comms ‘ites A stil situation exet in Belgium, where universities ‘ie ased on confession: the Free University of Brussels (ULB) as set Up precisely to educate those who profess neither Protestant nor Cathoti allegiance “Rs has already been noted, in speaking of the Wester world ‘as a secular world one needs to be careful to distinguish eeween Burope and the United States. n the United States. ‘Church state relations have been central o public debates tn ecent years, Whether they are over constitutional amendment BNiah oy reciting “under God” im the Pledge of Allegiance, or ‘Saijer in puble schools, or the political stmieance of religous Robying, the United States has been avash with debates “bout religion and the public sphere" In theory. the United ‘States accepts a strict chureh/state separation 33 enshrined fa the Pirst Amendment to the US. Constitution (which Supullates that there shall be no establishment, and free ‘ScErloe of religion), This #¢ meant to guard the neutrality of the State in matters religious, and to prevent one religious (Boup from having unfair state advantages or. indeed, unfair State touence iin his study of American national identity, Same! P. Huntington asks the question, “Is America also « Christian Dallon?=! The answer he gives is a resounding “yes.” based ‘he fact that between 80-85 percent of Americans regu {arly fentfy themselves as Christans..!° Thus, the many jfodiclal eases conceried with maintaining the strict separa {iGnof Church and State should not be interpreted as a sign Sfigowring iveliglousness. The case of the United States cee to sugsest that secularization, understood as the Scparation of the church and state, isthe bass for a strong Felgjonity in soctety.?"” Americans rank as some ofthe most ‘igious people in the world according to Werld Values Surveyfgures.8 in fact, Huntington suggests that at the start ofthe (oeenty-firt century. Christan identify inthe United States fs stronger than ever. Notes 1. CE Marin (2008: 3, 2. Te queion of essay ie obviously central fo this account. The “tsps aver mi actos afe more faneamertl i soca eng at tbe telaonanp Between este and ee noon of social change favs long history nf one motwatin for Weber Protestant ete ‘hea wan prone lave seco oUt of Kal Mars thoy ‘eect change his thewy of Mitoneal mazes Sx ocho Die (roteastache Bink und ex Got dos Kaptan Winckelnann {a tisray especialy 859, 95. Tis not surpraing supe Weber Ie ‘Extra to have perocied that hikers his mea wee characterised {pre eatoahipto te toh Mar and Ntsc Se Hens Uigar167 te queatonofeauslty has been ave of he ost spate {spect im the oar af the reception of Weber's work and wil De ‘Soheideed in looking at he Prsetart Pine dese Sh Foran exelent survey ofthe various aspects of this transforma: tio, sce Buehler: Hal snd Mann as) 1088 “Ste for esaple Lahmann (1098) 250-957. Dobler (1998) foi smtae approach to Luka. avn notes now some model of secwarcation have adopted he Sel trate apecono agn 8 6, Te reasons here ae generally of tw lands. The st type tends to condor that rig comicdans wal colonise Ue pubis ota Salthus, ts some form or another, ac he newly f debate. The cond tye tend to fea at with substantive egos ewe i the itroground, consensus wil ot be posible Foran exelent erie of te story of modem secularsation from the tne of te Freneh Revlon Co he Fast World War set Burkes e000) 1m the clash of early madenaty with monarchy and the estab ished Chueh in England ee Martin 20030 66. 1. For the dnputance of frotertantem in forging the Bria ton ident ace Coles (1800) 10-58. 1 See uregh 05" 311-364 11 See Rem 1900) 41. 1, This separaon of scl fom is religous framework wou continue fo suet a extent the centry ahead that in 1872 Do ‘mention of gon occurred on dhe census forms. See Remand tos. Tavis for example be second Restrason, which had wanted to recombi someting of the are foderate ews, aie Tle, and she repuieana. who flowed the tore radeal views of ce Revlon. r-stashes tin 1884 Ta: Me ingece of soesarentian in France shouid not be overest- mote, sine there wena sigcnnt religous revive athe te 1780s ‘The rest of hs revival was that Napoleon Was pereaaded o come to Tnasecment wie church er the -relgaar ue A Concerdat ‘ih Pope Pas Vil wet isud in 1802 and Napoleon mie the Seated “orgie Arles” ntrally. shang Cato thereon Stay ie Fee eae, any het etn rent Uemates ofthe Gus tt oo mow sahes oud be ecb ‘Mul Sate authoreaton, and bshops would be neminted By the ‘iste snd ate byte pope The fc hate majority of French ‘ene remained Cathae Tent thatthe lgicance of Ge ecgsaion ‘tether denomatins sd even fans wae watered dows ata prac: ‘sshd to-day evel 15, mad consders the socularstaton of Europe under two major sspecin, Te fst whieh he oat "aberl era of secwarsaton. ‘Br'gredual separation of the Stace from the inven of the Church “The State itr cnfectonal he st pase but gradual shed [eros allaton aed started fo eeparse the pai a the et oui rat eens srr pon een of ‘ng oduct, and roral vals, scont ote secular of ors le however somewhat over dependent the ent exe face and frome influence in oder European countries. For his ‘Stcount of thee two phases of seculariston, see Rett (190%) ieraie {er Sec Brunner tl a (1984 609-829, an Marra (1999-28. 17, One cramp of such m conceton So Hegel’ understanding of Sapccon es a "wold hlstorcl saa” yr tus Hegel mean Dotson who a partial incisive way understate the spit ofthe Rem corso tnt sag ef depot ee "Ye Se Lith (1940 82-59, and (1095 89-64 19, Fora ul actount fe controvere bese Hepes cesar sec Lint (1965) “go Sex Warramao (1900): 37, 2 See Chews 1079) 48-87 12. Sex Marna Ege (1927) 500. 28 fd 6072. mat 501 25. a: 603 38. "Die Plosophie hat ich verwelliche, und der, schlagende ‘owes df da dis Qual des Kansples htm Suerach, sender och inerch hingecogn it nt ce onstrukon dee Zulunk snd {Es rerdgwenen ar se Baten ebt nore Sache, sot dst gerne, ‘Tes wr gegonmarig mu vollagen haben. tn mine die rctsehecs Wibr edit Sesenchenrackaendor sowohl ta dem Sane, dae ‘ese eit vor tees Rewaten force nd ebensowens Yor fiom Konise mit den verhandenen Machten "11: 579. 17 On this pin, ace Van Leeuwen (1972, 2 Mane ana Engst 1027) 608. ‘ato 615. 50 tis interesting to note that fr Soetsehe, German piloaooty 1s simply» cntation of te pllosopheal athelsm of Protestant So. Thus. for Netasche. Geran pilwophy eat Beat the devlop- ‘Sent te Chslogy of the “Tobuagen.Scpoc”“Defntlon. des ‘iostantiomus dis halbucige Labmung des, Christentome—nd Ser Vern, ian bat nur das Wort Tabinger Saft suszuspreshen. im zu beprefen, waa de deutache Phlecope im Grunde icine HMvernoge Telos anichristn 10 que roma Nite (1958) (Deftaton of Protestaniam: he one-sided paras of Chstsity {ind reason, One has only fo pronounce the word “Tbingee Founia- ‘ide andr to rene that aslealy German peop tan sd [Set enctog For a dlcussion of te aon betwen theology and Seeman osopny in the mineteente century. see LOwiD (1995: Sots. Sit Overbeck was ako so inne an te decoy of Kast Bact ani ius rdoston of philwopiy ne = medator for the message of ‘Siete See Baru (1047) 457. Sf eteesing study of Comte’ oclegy andthe posttheistic proganso rec stl istry. te Were 200), "Bsr Seman (895): 278-201. 24. Se Melond 2000) 25-28, 35, See Speer 1084) 09100, 46, See MeLeed (20008 81. 37, Clndsone humeelf actually wroteon biblical and Sesion szses publishing in 1638 ie Chard and the Relations wi he Sie ‘Sick Sutined Ms segs coreons Dat motivated his pols! and line hw Church and Sate were bh ees rahe el tnt nce " oe moet tte arabe one. Sikador, For alecusoton of til point see Avert (1987) and ‘Scheer 1997 99, Foran interesting discussion of the role and importance of confestonal pares In tinetoentn ad entieth censry European ‘ion ee pperdey 1980, 120-100 “fo See Sunn 088) «21-426, ‘2, or an eacllent overview ofthe formation and history of the _beutsshe Roe German Empste),se Halse 0989, “2 See Pane (1007 25-32. 115. Sex Crepes (2007 285-04, {3 ted te Zentrum would continue to pay signiteant role in ‘cera pice for the next at Sear unt te disbanding July 1555, shorty before the Concordat ined between the Hier gover ‘nent and the Vateane which ve back to the Church sigaeant ‘Paci an educational independence ‘BS See Care 1091) 1194188. $6: Te sly of Catholic tact as a mote oe oe captalizm ‘wan ptape ton erly anor by Ma Webern hs reer Bi dhe. Thos theee stuctual disavantages against Catelcs sree aot otn a pose caes of he ml of Caton 0 ak iSite motnaing force for captain. See GARST 17-00, ‘7 Pulser, Peter 1007127, {28 Casanova {1900 11-90. See aso Casanova (2003: 18 n this incr artic Canova notes that American eoogits of region it porte fave dear the eculrsation paraain, "o. Alhough, ax Casanova segues, the tracional tory of secular talon no come under attack some (oes Europeans) tl end or on he freon obey See Braz, Sex Bruce 00, ‘oat Other Danie, sch se Radney Stark have presented alteralve ‘Fowsos fo hing the setulae Gens ade Teer th ‘hen sine atmbiage, Stark argued that de preicon ot ot ‘eli in some versions ofthe sceularisaon eles wrong becuse Feligon cas pronde wnat secular read canbe nora, oor ‘fsttesoutsnp what sexuar rewards can prone). See Statk sod ‘Somndge 1907, Stak haw alo argued tha theorits had everest ‘sted te religoniy ef the pst snc wo stated Bom co high a bseine {Bin presse of lias bel and rene. Mores IB Ie viet moet” of reljeueness, the tnereased “competion” ‘Goce the Reorinationsncnced “supply” sed tes to generate 2 ‘Regence “mand See Stark (1086, 1998 50. A pple! and welanowm example here i6 the essay by Jean- ranias Lyoasd 1970) The norma esque of moder en ‘ore forcefully pt in otra (1088, 5) The quay of eratre hee vast amples incu Hamnoed (0966) an Berar (1099), ‘32 Employing & Duskdeminn penton, Paul Hedas and Lind Woodend astempt to account fr bts be fal in tonal forts ofselgon ae the emergence of espace ty thet thar ofthe ‘iBicedne tam. Tney nugget that the tm fo te saben moder ‘itp has fd toa ht om ranscendent sarees of meaning to net ‘fey suren tt ze oe und in the ely Based on tear cme (ovarth canoed ut it Renda they use the categories of eas” ie Teed secnding to external expectations) to stand for religion and Siete Ue fe led in doop catnecton wth the ungue exer heed ot wy elnseaton fo vepesent spay. See Hels and ‘Woeabend (2009, [ene fet seulansstion debate mcd such voices as Dovid arta an Anew Grvity and began to gest thal empirical {igo contradicted the datas of te dene of eetgon Inthe theory of ‘EG A good sunmaay of te Hes debate on dhe theory of SEEMS cane found in Casanova (1964). The second secular: Sen ‘dehate to ongoing and has Socome uly Interdecpinacy ‘tes include fn palesophy Vato (a) [Vato (1090; anyon Wernick (eda) 902) Jaaieaud (1901) and Chreben Bens. Saran, and foteur eds) (1992) Tn soctogy Kuta 965; “Vatman oor Herweo-Laes and. Wihue "(2001 Cesaniva (1900) in thal beak (980) Bind el (1828) Pek 0 ay ie 200; aba 8 7A ingots (1902) Tec of the caret berate on the fave of searisstion mates te distinction between sstutanaled forms of reign aid (prs of noninattuttonaly bowed spirituality. Whilst this einen BE She ecttogen use, is thelngealy Inadequate because i Tehri fct seat slg ele and pracie are components of ‘Sirsa, Gee Mecratn 1990 1-5. 1: eaplow (1965). Se alo Casanova 2009), ‘a. On tis quetion. se Henk (2001 227, 59, Grace Deve has doroped here on de wees of titi tional sein n Bure ted tootuced the ation af vcs reo to uagee that although peep may ot allen’ churches, ey olen ‘eal cyurches to at or Uns n vast of way Se Dae 1998) ‘sa 2000 Er Davi and Hervew Laer (1906), and Casanova (1998 $58, See row (2001, (0, Se Rosen 1997 (Sox Pots Berger) (10001: 2. 2. HerweeLéger BOON) 125. (5. his pont hae ben well made by the itch stot fr ‘gon rece Damen her pase of baberng but not bering” she ‘epee that he cris n te West for regen is wis attconal Stibisment or ets rater a lock of ele. Shen ater edie ‘She thone by inroduang the noon of erious rel. by whith se mean that people may not attend church themselves but they wi ROSE GR Dapper amy of se woutary ertoes the the ethos ean ou ar er understanding of der religous e=ee ‘cne as “eleving and not banging ee Davie (1904): 96-136, and (ihe understanding of arcu reli." see Davie 2000. (See Peter Berge (1999) 10 8. The Unsts of Samue umtingtonf brows sgn nS ! ‘Weber is clearly committed toa pluralism of motives for action land cols to understand the various forms of social action ‘according to their various motives and orientations. Tt is ‘within this philosophical context, concerned with the new Secular view of human action, that his methodological reflec tons are carried out. Therefore, Its not surprising that one should find an implicit theory of secularisation within his ‘methodological writings ‘The Influence of Marx and Nietzsche [Neo-Kantianism was not the only’ major philosophical infu- tence on Weber. Weber is reported by Bduard Baumgarten so 8 discussion with Oswald Spengler in January 1920, to have ‘said that the influence of Manc and Nietzsche was definitive forall modern scholarship. Commentators on Weber have varied greatly in thelr assessment of this influence.” Bryan “Timer believes that Nietzche influenced Weber in a number of important ways.°* He suggests that Weber's pessimistic ‘View of history resulted from his encounter with the pliloaophy ‘of Nietzsche." He also believes that Nietzsche's philosophy Iniluenced Weber's formulation of sociology of action. Tse. Tamer sees Weber's PE as a way to desenibe the victory of Apollo, the god of form and reason, over Dionysius, the god of ‘emotion and sexuality. As a result, the formation of vocations ‘mn the economic sphere can be seen as a way in which the 4pollonian principle dominated over the Dionysian principle ‘in Westem Societies ® This s displayed, according to Turner, {in Weber's analysis of the ehilsng function of religious Robert Eden has noted the relation between Weber's con: cept of charisma and Nietsche's concept of the superman, Here, charismatic power represents the principal challenge to the traditional pattem of authority and leadership. Lake “roeltech, Weber viewed Protestant sets as an ilstation of Gallerie charm in ther challenge o organised Christa People such aa. P. Mayer and Wolfeng Momamsen have also Seen the infuence of Nietache's views om the "il o power” th Weber's concer with power and poiies." Bul Bryan Tummer sugueats that these Commentators bave missed the Central infence of Netache on Weber: the gromth of group Of rational state specialise who were notated by Calilst ‘eas and sought to dominate the world by @ commitment 0 fn ete of mastery For Nietzsche, these specialists were ‘Stvociated withthe domination of Calvinist theslogy and the txpansion ofthe new Prussian State. Wolsang Sehivehter {s more sceptil about Weber's dependence on Nietsche He suggest that walt Weber found Nicusche's work tobe a ‘Sgoiicant monnent in intelstual Mstory, he id pot comer ‘ictnchs work to bea asia for soil science “Whatever the infienee of Neto on Weber seems that une-'death of Cod” thesia proposed by Netache proved = bhckagpuind to Weber's working out of an immanent science lifes The trugge betrecn he gdsrestlting fom the death Sf God is'a consequence of seularsaton for Weber. AS Wolfgang Seniuchier has ptnted out, Weber spoke not ofa ‘odes tine, Dut rather ofa tube in whe) God ie foregn”* ‘No less portant an inuence on Weber was Mare, Weber nas often been seen a. opponed to Mas ieas: Just ao Marx ‘proposed & materialist conception ef history. so Weber pro- Posed an idan conceptons”* rlowever, as we Know fom Rrcbere Pe" Weter oomaidered Mane views on the iipor {ance of econome factors in the formation of ideas, especially Felgious ideas, to be wal. What he enitilsed, a Anton? Giddens has noted." is Mane notion that idess are simply S pasoiverelecton of ateral realty. This would eliminate {he role of actors creating thetr own socal reality.”” “Weber's eal opposition tothe idea of Marx soa certain form of dognatie nateralism that tends to deduce all socal Phenomena from economic factors This fo unscentie for ober because t presupposes wha set ot to prove: hat te the caues of @ socal phenomenon.”® For Weber. the ‘Suses ofeach single Phenomenon have to be investignted,not presupposed, and history is the product of mullcaussty, ‘not of monocausality.”” Indeed, Weber makes fan of the monocausal position of economic dogmatism by ironically ilustrating how limited such a one-sidedness would be, if ‘only spiritual factors were admitted as causally significant ® Karl Lawith has painted out that Weber®s eitque of the materialist conception of history only really touches on the “vulgar economic Marxiem” of the Inter Matx and Engels.“ In fact, Weber's entique of monocausal explanation in his- tory is eritial of both matertalist and tealist conceptions of history, since both fall to view reality aa an infinite manifold that can only be studied through our concept formation. ‘This means that the search for ultimate prineiples that guide the course of history is futile. For Weber, the assumptions of ‘such theories ofhistory make the scientist blind to what may be the actual causes of social and historeal phenomena. Weber is also critical of the notion of sclentife soctaler,” He charged that It mixes up the status of values and facts, presenting the values of seentie socialism as if they were ‘Objective facts. in realty, for Weber, dhese are subjective values, Which, whilst necessary for concept formation and the mot vation of scigntiie study, cannot be premises in scientific ‘explanation.* And he is ao ertical ofthe Marxist notion of ‘determinism, charging that ite nrealiatie to consider history 1 be guided by sclentilieally discoverable laws and heading towards a utopian fature Instead, Weber holds that we are ‘condemned to the problem of growing bureatcratisation a= & result of increasing eocialisation © ‘Yet. there is also a baste similarity between Marx and Weber Fundamentally. their interest in social theory les in the ‘question of the possibility of human emancipation. ®® Both theorists are concerned ‘with the question of the fate of ‘human in a world Usat poses new dangers and challenges to dhuman freedom. They share the view Uiat capitalism, whist bringing many advantages, is also a chief source of enalave- iment. However, whilst Marx proposed a form of therapy in the formation of a communist society, Weber only proposed a lagnosis ofthe tls of society. In ths Sense, one can consider Weber to be a more pessimistic social theorist than Marx. As ‘we know from his Wissenschaft (Science as a Vocation. he held out tle hope for the emergence of modern people from the ion cage of bureaucrat rationalism that was growing in ‘capitalist societies. ‘The Religious and Theological Context of Weber's Social Theory {is important to remember, as Martin Albrow has note, that Weber wrote win a Gaia raion The not {isay that Weber wns a practising Chisan, which he was no ‘Dut rather to suggest hat without some understanding of the inluene of Protestantism on Weber's work, is imposstle {oly understand his social Usory. Weber’s own relation- Sup 10 the Protestant ftth of his fasuly was complex and aunt wih many tensions, His mother Helene and her sister {ia Baumgarten, both of whom were devo Protestants. ‘Serle considerable infec phi Weber pen 3 Sear with the Beumgartens in Strasbourg as ast ner through much corespondence on religlous matters ‘waa siguicanly in uenced by the values of Protestantism, Teis ot an exaggeration fo suggest that relggon eld a dexp ‘cuolinal significance for him and shaped the direction of Such of isles were®* Some of this compucate reatonship To religon is brougt out his famous lotr to Ferdinand ‘Tonnies of February 19, 1908: ‘ets rue in rapt of lig 1am absobtetyunmosieal an have ‘alte theses nor the sty to erect some pital “ee” of ‘Teague characte im myelr—thats nat on, or get Bato ‘hse inepeton asa nether antigen religous. in ls eopect ec neil tobe t ripple. am smpates, whose inner ate [isto nae to atti honesty ado come to ero wi i 90 ‘enol tolpae ito romantse wand Weber's own understanding of secularsation is shaped by his Protestant tradition. Indeed, the conception of modernity of which his understanding of secularsation forms parti Stronghy influenced by the Protestant Reformation ® This is Dot surprising since, as Feiedsich Wihelm Graf notes. Max Weber was the most theologically Mterate sociologist of his‘century, and without some understanding of the theological Sources that informed his religious sociology, itis dificult tounderstand his intellectual programme.*! Weber himself ‘wrote te his mother on May 16, 1882, during the fret semester fof his law studies at Heidelberg, “Moreover, lam quite engaged in theology: I read Strau8, Schlelermacher and Pleiderer (Pauline studies) and besides that only Pato, Indeed, even a cursory glance at his PE shows how acquainted Weber was ‘with theelogieal and biblical literature. Graf suggests that there are three main dimensions to Ue relation of Weber t0 the theology af his time. First ip Weber's youth and most especially through his cousin Otto Baumgarten, who later Became professor of practical theology in Riel, he became acquainted with the liberal theology of the time and with the concern to relate religion tthe ethical dimension of if; also to concetve religion fs occupying an autonomous sphere of human conecitte hess. Second, he eeoperated with a numberof theologians in Various ways, He wrote articles forthe journal Dis Chrstiche Wott (The Chuistian World), which was edited by the brother- livlaw of Friedrich Naumann, Martin Rade.®® Weber also collaborated with both his cousin Otto Baumgarten, who edited the journal Bvangelisch-soziale Zetfragen (Prowsiant Social Questions of the Times) and also Egnst Troelisch®"™ im developing a theory of religous sects.®© The extent to ‘hich Weber and Treeitsch shared ideas has been the sub- Jest of much discussion amongst scholars.°® At the very Teast, it seems highly llely that Troeltsch helped Weber to Decome awafe of the theological literature tat he required to write PE." Third, Graf suggests that Weber shared with the liberal theologians of the time an interest in the fate of ‘the individual personally ia modern capitalistic socety.10" “his is not surprising since, with the advent of industrial society, te question ofthe freedom of the individual in the face of the large anonymous structures of the capitalistic society was central to most reflections about the future of| >bumaniy.°2 ‘A very important early theologioa influence on Weber was his contact with the History of Religion Schoo! (religensge Schihliche Schule" They used ordinary historical methods to investigate religion as a historical phenomenon, and Weber often quoted members of the school in the footnates to bis ‘own work on the soctlogy of region. This group of theologians was particularly interested in investigating the ways In ‘whic religion and culture interaetin the shaping of maida land social life, Religion was for them a form of a prior in hhuman cognition, and mediated between the Christian faith and reason. °* ‘Another point of contact with theological influences for ‘Weber was’ the Evangelical-Social Congress. He regularly attended its anal conferences, which consisted of Protestant finistere and scholars, and between 1802 and 1897 was ‘titeniber of the Council that directed the movement 109 The Congress aimed to promote an active engagement of the ‘Churen in matters of social policy and to bring the concer of the workers closer to the Church. Weber considered the Congress to bes pace in which ne could promote is own polit ‘eal ideas of developing a social-iberal imperialistic German Reich.10® jt would certainly have been a forum in which the main eral and conservative theological ideas of the tne, tlexeloped by thealoglane such as Adolf Hammack, Abert Fisch, fand Adolf Stoker, would have become accessible to him. In Thomas Ekstrand’s study of Max Weber, he points out three areas of alfinity between Weber's thought and the theological ideas of the time.” The first is a common lunderstanding of the ‘origins of religion, Weber rejects reductionist tendencies to explain religion away as the prod lct of a more fundamental phenomenon. He holds. tat ‘whilst the influence of the social and cultural context in ‘which the religious experience occurs ss important. religion Cannot be reduced to any of these factors. Religious expert fences are autonomous (endogen) for Weber and ean never be Explained by relerence to any monocaeal explanations. °° Fe ts particularly interested in the chariematie origins of felgjon and deals with the Old Testament prophets and their charismatic origins in considerable length in Das Canttke Judentum (AJ), In bis analysis of tae prophets and the origins of O14 Testament religion, Weber is very close to fone of the central Agures of the History of Religion Shoal, ‘amey, Hermann GunkelFor Weber, the origins ofthe Old Testament prophecy are found in the magicians and seers who played significant role in the Israelite community before the establishment of the Davidic kingdom. He sees these preseriptaral prophets fs charismatic figures who deliberately brought on their estate states through dance and rausic.09 after the Davidic kkingdom had been established, these prophets, who had ‘mainly prophesied good fortune, were replace by the prophets Gfdoorn, who eriticised the rulers ofthe kingdom for adopting the ways of the pagans! However, even though Weber ‘epeatedly stresses the importance of the social and political influences on these prophets and thelr prophecies, he spells foul clearly that thesr prophetic origin hes in the Own inner ‘experience as prophets, and is not simply the product of ‘motional mass iniuence 1? “Te effectiveness ofthe post-Davidie prophets i, for Weber. based on their capacity to interpret thelr eestalic experiences ma way that made sense to the Israchtes and thus indicated hat they had received a mission (Sendung) from God to speak." Twa characteristic separate these prophets from ‘ther prophets: they are solitary Ngures. and they do not seek {o generate their own ecstatic experiences, but Father, come to them spontaneously-11© The point here is that Weber Accepts that thete is @ religious experience that cannot be ‘educed to other causal Sactors, Ths ie not to say that such teligious experiences are unmediated by the social and historical circumstances in which they occur. Indeed, Ie ‘considers them tobe mediated by the religious-symboie world in whieh they occur" Nevertheless. st clear that, a5 an ‘cxample of hls account of religious experience and, hence, ‘eliion, Weber's analysis ofthe charismatic prophets reveals that he is nota reductionist and that he olds tothe autono- ‘mous (endagen) nature of religion. ‘Much of Weber's analysis of ancient Judaism is dependent on the History of Region School and, most especially, on te work of the founder of the method of Form Criucom, Hermann Gunkel." Indeed, he quotes from a number of published articles that were later assembled into Gunket's book on the prophets and remarks that they are “glanzend wie immer” {rllant as ever)!" What separates Weber from theologians like Gunkel is that he had no explicitly theological preten: sions in his explanation, but rather, confined himself to the Social role played by such religious experiences.” “A second area of afinity between Weber and the theolo- sans of his time was the ejection of the metaphysical clatms ff religion and the concentration on ethical perspectives. ‘This locates hin within the limiee of the modern scientific ‘world epistemologealy defined by Kant and accepted by iberal Protestant theologians such as Albert Rtschl (1822-1689) ‘Thus, the truth claims of religion about the erigin ofthe work fznd the existence of spirits and angels are rejected in favour Sf the ethical impulse that religion can give to ving life in this word ‘Weber ls clear that, sterically, religions have played two major roles, providing both a basic value orientation and a FaUonal explanation fora realty that seems to present itself Es trationel.® That is to say, for Weber, the question of Theodiey is the motive foree behind the development of the Wwonld religions." The various religions, he explains, have Ueveloped different strategies to cope with the problem of fhuman suffering. For instance, Indian religions, uch Hinduism, have developed the concept of karma, and Chris~ tianity hes developed the concept of the deus absconditus land also the Calvinistie notion of predestination. ‘Weber illustrates his understanding of religion 3s provid ing a basic value orientation Unrough his analysis in PE of the aseetie Calvinist way of hfe. This is a clear example for ‘Weber of how human behaviour ean be guided by a religions worldview. Its also a clear point of contact with the anl- Tietapiysical liberal Protestant theology of Fitecht. Fatschl {ellowing Kantian epistemology. rejects the notion that we can Tinow anything about God in himself, or even ofthe nature of ‘Seous, What we ean know is only what God and Jesus mean for us in our concrete lves.'2! This antimetaphysical and thtealy oriented approach to theology was typical of the liberal Protestant theological thinking of Weber's time." ‘The best known example can be seen in Adolf Hamack, a disciple of Ritschl, who taught that since the heart of the Gospel megsage was love, religion Rds its embodiment in smorality.‘A final affinity between Weber and the theologians of ls time, noted by Ekstrand, is terest inthe late ofthe ne luli modern capitalist societies. Nieteeni-centry UD ‘ral Protestant theologians were sgufenndy influenced by he anuin conception of the individual a “perma.” “Their search ‘or an ethical understanding of the indvidal ‘who could be a coherent socal actor took place in the contest Uf the growing importance of the social question. Trosltsch ‘was the most signiieantof Weber's theolageal contemporaries Torwhom the notion of"personalt” played a crucial Fle. He hha argued his Die Soaatloven der Chater Kuchen tune Gripper (Social Teaching ofthe CIvisian Churches and Groups) (1912) thatthe way forward forthe Church was to follow Cahinioms lead tn demonstrating that the notion of ‘thal personality was itsmately bound up with the modem ‘coonomil, political, and legal systems of the West. ‘Bath Weber and Troetech seem, however, to be rather pessimist when if comes tothe fuse of te individual in oder society. For Weber, religion holds out hope forthe Individual but not fer te public sphere. ses no posabty otconstructinga religous worldview that Is able to dominate ‘whole sotety. What remains isthe possibly of retreating {fom Uie modern world ino the prvery ofa religious world: ‘ew. but ts soni a te pie ofthe “Onfer des Intake Geacriice of the intellect). While Trostsch holds out the possibility hat religon can sil actin an integrating capa hy to bridge the confics that occur in modern socesy7 ‘Weber olds tat de only form of eistance to the onsatght On the indidual is rough the outburst of new form of Prophetic charisma. Ts dea sale found inthe work St Hermann Gunkel and is probably a concept that Weber Sorzoted om his encounter with the Uheloglans of his Moder political fe was a further threat to mdvidualty for Weber. He saw the great challenge of modern polities as being {he competion between an ethics of conviction (Gesivange Sed aid an ets of responsi Verannuorangst0) 2 ‘The Grsinungnethter i chilly concemed with holeing to hus or her principles of ples and leaves the consequences ot ie or Her setions to God. The Verantuortungsetker is sero me scone oa concerned with the practical situation as it exists and thus seeks to achieve his or her goals by whatever means seein most appropriate. It is clear for Weber that the ethies of ‘esponsibiiy are mare appropriate for modern politics, sice they do not presume the goodness and perfection of people. Dut take the average nature of most people ae their starting point. This for Weber is a departure from the base pinch ples of Christianity, and he maggests that politics and region vill be in permanent confict on this paint. Whilst religions persons ean content themselves that they did what is right in fhe face of the consequences, the politician has to bear the brunt of the consequences and is thus often forced fight violence with violence. Weber puts it rather lyrieally when he says: ‘The gens, or demen of paitics ines in sate finer tension ‘wth the got of hve and een wt the Chrstan Go as an Tete in he tation ee chur ton Sat ay erie at Exstrand notes that Weber's position fe very similar to that of his cousin. the Uberal theologian Otto Baumgarten," Both hold that modem pot is guided by the means-ends tethies of the Veraniwortungsethuer and that this clashes ‘with the ethiesoflove of Christianity. Ye, it should be noted that Uberal cheologians such as Baumgarten often accepted the necessity ofa split between private and public morality in modern society. Baumgarten understood politics tobe the struggle for power. and thus to lose power would be equtvalent fo sinning in a political sense. This is not quite Machiavel- anism, since for both Baumgarten and Weber the purpose of obtaining and maintaining power Is not an end in itself but they did see politcal power as @ means of mplementing one's own vision of saiety 194 "Both the rationalisation of modem soctety and the plaality ofvalue-systems make the place of religion in modem society problematie for Weber. The eed to compete in the market lace withthe reat of the ode and demons makes Christianty’s faim to universal truth an essentially contested one. That means that the dominance of the public sphere by religion Isno longer an option for Weber. The question is, what if any {le remains for religion? Interpreting the Work of Weber In Hermann Libbe’s study of the history of the concept of Secularisation, he states: “The way in which Weber accasion- lly uses the concept of secularisation would justify placing Tis whole research in the soctology of religion under this tile Whilst Labbe's position is very clear on this matter. the history of the interpretation of Weber's work reveals that fone must proceed with eaution when advancing a possible Rermeneutie of Weber® carpus, In order to consider the {question of interpreting the work of Max Weber as a tory of SEoulartsation, Lwould Hike to review the debates that have tceurred over the last decades concerning how one should Coneetly understand his base intention in bis various works." The question ofthe correct interpretation of Weber's work is chiefly a product of the fact that much of his work has been ‘published posthumously. Until now, a great deal of attention Ras focused on his famous PE, which was frst published Im 1904 and 1906 in the Archi flr Sostalwtssenschaft und ‘Sovialpoiti In some ways, this focus has prevented Weber's other works from being sufficient read, and consequently, hhas Ted to a rather uneven reception of his work. ‘Brederich Tenbrick posed the question of correct interpre tation, in 1975, he published an article entiled “Das Werk ‘Max Weber Max Weber's Work) in which he sought to pro: ‘ove a hermeneutical key to understanding, the Weber corps. ‘hich would supply fe with ant inner unity” Until Tenbruck: proposed his ow erteria of interpretation, a numberof com: peting models had been used to Organise the work of Weber. Ene organising principle had been to concentrate on his PE thesis as his main work. This led to much debate about the ‘question of causality in the economic evolution of modern Societies, A second organising principle had been to propose Wetschajt und Gesellschaft (WuG) as is main work, since was much more systematic and dealt with methodological ser THE scone 6s ‘questions, while it also covered a numberof aiferent areas of Sociology. 1 A third organising principe had been to conaider the work of Weber as an antieipation of the proposals of the Neo Positvists. Weber's repeated criticism of monocausality ‘was thus considered a way-to combat the clams of posits. land his work was primarily viewed as a contribution € roth fodologieal analysis in the social sclenees. Yet other ways of frganising the work of Weber had been accomplished by ‘those theoriste who had wanted to use iti thelr own sys- tematic theories of society. This group includes people Such a8 Taleott Parsons and his development of struetural- fhunetionalism, whieh was heavily dependent on Weber’ (heary of action: Raymond Aron's reception of German sociology {in France and his use of Weber's concept of political domina Hon!" and Critical Theory, which also used the Work of Weber in its reflections on socal action and rationality." [Reinhard Bendix sought to overcome these limited recep tions of Weber's work by trying to locate both his hfe and ‘work in ahistorical context. In is Max Weber: An Intellctual Portrait, he concluded that Gwo major themes were present throughout Weber's works the investigation into the nature of cviation through his religous and ethical sociology: and his political sociology centred on the questions of lesitima~ tion and domination." For Bendis. the central clue to lunderstanding Weber's work was to see that the concept of tthleal rationality wag the key idea that guided his study bf modern rationaiy. © This interpretation dominated Weber Scholarship unt the intervention of Tenbruck. Tenbrock challenged Bendix’s contention, which drew on Marianne ‘Weber's biography of Max Weber, dhat WaG was Weber's prin cipal work, He entekted Bendie’s chranology of composition, ‘which had identified the concept of rationalisation asthe key defining term of Weber's work. Tenbruck argued that this did not respect the real order of composition and reviston iat Weber had followed with respect to WuG and his Die Wartschaitsethik der Wetrelgionen (The Economic Bucs of the Werid Religions) (EWR). Moreover, Tenbruck maintained, Bendixs focus ignored the importance of a considerable fnumber of Weber other works. The key issue for Tenbruck layin the fact that Bendix had not seen thatthe main idea of“Weber was that of disenchantment (Entznuberang, a concept which had already appeared in PE. but had been considered to be a later addition. Waist Bendix had considered disen- ‘chantment to be @ particular moment within the general pro- ‘cess of rationalisation, Tenbrick considered disenchantment to be the key idea that allows us to understand the entire logic of rationalisation in the work of Weber. He based this Interpretation on his investigation of WEWR and also of ‘WuG. in the course of which he concluded that the impor- tance of Wu had been overemphasised to the detriment of ‘Weber's more historical work, WEWR. This had led toa falsi- ‘cation of, or atleast an inattention to, the real chronology of| {eis production and revision. Tenbruck thus concluded that WEWR. not WuG. was Weber's most Important work. Fur- thermore, Tenbruck argued that the guiding idea that gave a hematie unity to Weber's work could be found in WEWR, ‘most especially in the two introductions to his religous soci- ‘logy. the Vorbemerkung (Preliminary Remark) and the Bileitung (intreduction), and in the excursus Zuischenbe trachtung (Intermediate Reflection), which for Tenbruck represent Weber's most elaborate rellections on the nature ‘fdisenchantment and its relation to rationalisation.“ Thus, ‘Tenbruck proposes that in order to propenly understand the systematic intention of Weber, we have to realise that or Weber, on he other hand the decisive discovery tytn the owe that rnonallon, ia eto eg ae ‘rau forward by he campulsion ax Kner loge which as ea © {Se unstoppable impale ofthe ratsonaeatos of repos eas ‘Consequy, the atinalaaton process aint coe eigous ‘itty of ecenciantment fom wich fare ke moments a ‘ations of tnt Not te Sdenticaon of partial processes but father the lane nosey of a succes dots Weber's ‘ition ‘he Key, however, to this interpretation of Weber's work es in sme work wen despite all oe sterpetatve progeese stl resists Incepretton i genta part. at i to sy he Weschafscte der Welrcigonen WEWR is thus, for Tenbruck, the place to find the guiding dea of Weber's complete work. Itis also in many ways & servo Tue sean er ‘counter-example tothe thesis proposed in PE‘and ilustrates that the process of disenchantment is a way to investigate ‘the interaction between ideas and interests, which produces ‘the process of rationalization. ‘The dificulty with interpreting just what Weber means by the concept of rationalisation hie in the ambiguity of the term, which he applies o-2 multitude of processes arid social spheres. In general, he seems to mean by rational orientation formal method of matching means to ends without making 8 value judgement. He outlines the importance of religion in this evolution of value neutraliy in science as the response tothe theadicy question: the need to give meaning to ie history fof suffering and to understand how this is conspatble with 4 loving and just God. Without (his internal evolution in the religious ideas of rationalisation, which has reached its goal in disenchantment, it would have been impossible for rationality to have progressed in Its cognitive-technical ‘modality. For Tenbrick. what Weber decides in his discus- Sion of WEWR Is the priority of ideas as the motive force of history. As Weber puts itin the Etuetung, st bath Meas and tons between Weber's later works and essays and his disen- jhanteent thesis, and he concludes on a rather pessimistic note when considering the practical consequences of the ‘isenchantment thesis for society Despite the provocative intervention of Tenibruck in the debate about the corect interpretation of Weber's work. it was ‘not until 1980 that vo publications addressed his claims {have uncovered the real Weber.‘ in his. 1980 arucle ‘Johannes Winkelmann contradicted the proposed bby Tenbruck, who had found the concept of disenchantment GErizauberurg) to be a late summation of Weber's whole understanding of the process of rationalisation, Winckelmann ound the tenm already employed by Weber in his essay Ueber ‘erige Kategorien der verstehenden Soeiologte, published in 1913." "and indeed in the Introductory note to it Weberos sores MODESSITY explains that he bad already written the part of this essay, in ‘which he tses the concept of disenchantment, a considerable time before Winekelmann also found the concept in the fist edition of WuG in the chapter dedicated to the sociology Of religion, which he deduced had been ready for publication in 1913.) In this context, the term Brizauberung plays the Tole ofan ideal typist eategony'® used to ustrate the process ‘ofthe decline in the magical explanation ofthe worl. Moreover, {Winckelmani found that the very concept on which Tealbruck had ining his thesis did not occur in WEWR, which, accord Ing to Tenbruck, was Weber. principal research work, ‘Winckelmann went on to show that the use of the category of Bnizauberung in Weber's essay Wissenschaft was om {Used in the same sence as employed in WaG. tha sto say ‘away to explain the fll rom grace of maghe as an intellectually ‘espectfal mode of explanation ‘However, Tenbruck’s thesis was undermined not only by \Winekelmana's entique of his chronology but also by incon Sistences in his systematic claims, Winckelmann argues that ‘Weber had never accepted the notion ofa single idea guiding the inner logic of history. In order to Justify his claims, Winckelmann drew on PE and also on Weber's own reply to Karl Fischer regarding the correct interpretation of his own Uheory. 88 Winekelmann emphasised that Weber was most of all concerned to stress the interdependence of factors tn the dynamics of history and was clearly against any notion of fmonocausality in bistory.1°* Winckelmann so rejected Tenbruck's hypothesis that Weber had discovered the impor tance of religous factors after 1915. Instead, Winckelmann Sawa continuity in Weber's writings that partrayed religious land economic factors ina relationship of mutual interdepen- ence, Winckelmann went on to criticise the notion of world- lew (Welle) that Weber had used as a legitimation for ‘various accounts of social action and Tenbruck had used in his ‘volutionist reading of Weber, and he proposed an alternative ‘conception of worldviews to acrount for the various stages of ‘buman evolution." tm his response to Tenbruck’s claims, Martin Rlescbrodt agreed with Winckelmann’s enticisms bol of Tenbruck’s chronology and of his systematic claims. Riesebrodt showed that both the introductory and systematic parts of Gesam: Imelte Aufedize zur Religonssczilogie (GARS) were already ‘composed by 1913, which contradicted Teabruck’s claim that Tater ecitions of these works had added the disenchantment Concept Ite also showed that dhis supposed new orlentation ‘yas not incorporated into WEWR. such asin the parts concer ing Hinduism and Judaism, which had later been revised, fand could thus have inehaded this new conception, as had ‘ccurted in the 1990 version of PE. Riesebrodt also suggested that rather than the chapters on the sociology of religion in WaG and GARSbeing superimposed upon one another. there was a relation of complementarity and inner unity between Uheze works, 1% On the level of systematic critique, Riesebrodt fargued that the importance of particular social classes had ‘Been ignored by Tenbnuck, These are important because it is only in particular social classes that religous ideas and inter~ sts can be brought together in order to impose a particular “Sision on society. Religious ideas alone could never act inde pendently as motive forces for the evolution of history.!°" As ‘Weber had argued, the evolution of religion itself was condi toned by external factor, ag had been shown by Uhe case of the overcoming of magic! Thus, the notion of finding am tthmate cause ora dominant factor in history inthe work of Weber i, for Riesebrodt, not consistent with Weber's overall systematic claims. ‘in 1079, Woligang Schiuchter had already criticised the chronology proposed by Tenbrick, =? but only in an article published in 1984 did he situate the problem of the organ Ration of Webers work in a systematic. context" Schluchter attempted to define the interests that oriented Weber's work, He disagreed with perspectives such as that proposed by Wilhelm Tennis, who seemed to think that Webers intentions ‘were camouflaged in his work and heeded to be uncovered. "©" Sehtuchter held that Weber had hho hidden intentions in his work and that the work was ‘lear enough in its intentions. He also considered it futile to Seek the one notion that would give a Uhematic unity to the variety of his output. Rather, Schluchter proposed that it ‘would be more frustfal to identify the main questions raised ‘by Weber and consider how, in his works, he proceeded to70 morse Mooessrr ve diferent solutions to them. He propesed three counter: ‘theses to that proposed by Tenbruck, First, he argued that WEWR and WuG should be read in. the light ofeach other and should thus be seen as comple: ‘mentary studies. Second, he suggested that Bintetung and Zutschenbetrachturg of WEWR provide a form of stra {or Weber's religious sociology. However, they are nelther >burriedly written in 1915 nor belated relletions, but rather, dare resources used by Weber o remodel is religious sociology land develop hie reflections in this area. Third, Weber did not conceive WEWR as a simple elaboration of PE, nor did he abandon his projet of studying Islam and Christianity. Rather, from the basis ofthese studies he intended to reine: gate PE into the context and significance of WEWR© Schluchter concludes that the change in perspective that Weber underwent around 1910 is important sn understanding ‘the direction of his later work, After this time, Weber aban= doned his initial project of investigating the various elements that had contributed to the process of modernieation in the ‘West and instead enlarged his investigations by means of the concept of ratignalisation that Is so clearly expressed in the Vorbemerkung.'® Marianne Weber expresses this in her biography: “For Weber, this knowledge of the particularity of ‘Western rationalism and its most important role for Western culture was one of his most important discoveries. m this context. for Schluchther. itis Uhus imparant to value the WEWRand WuG equally. as different ways of working ‘oa the same question. In WuG, Weber's intention isto elabo= these historical and empirical investigations in the form in ‘which they have combined to shape modern rationality. For Schiutehter, Doth works need to Be read in the ight of each bother in order to gain a clear idea of Weber's later intention bof imvestigating the specifiy of Western rationality. Eiletung. Zulschenbowachtung, and the eleventh part ofthe sociology ‘of religion in WuG are. for Schtuchter, theoretical and meth ‘odelogical works that were necessary if he was to pass from his earlier empirical work to his later works and, indeed, set ‘out to define their field of research.!® Thus, rather than cr ln tt eh Sincere aN pen SSIES pops he we ct eee tere ct a ee a epost omega ek iar mre sn ree Set err teertaomte ippracteces ramsiter feu Eten aces Secs sobs re ent taces Toi cogs Sowa ca ara ia tat ate he iberty of socal processes. ETc nw Weber's Gesarmelie Asatze ar Mitacncehstlere (GAN) ae his main work, which tested {Gis comment tote reed of esearch fom ll forms SE ecreieal contrat. Tals intervention by Tepbrack Beste ale reoponse by Wagner and Ziprian, "an een fave na rm he emereateal eu con ‘Rane the work of Weber to focus on de work of Tenbrack Shu his Meas about curentsoctoogy ye ew afte debates surrounding the work of Weber rks cert allo hese nent tempi ave ne ‘Tian ay sought some loge or coherence, some basic reo artes lich car act aa a gide for understanding, the Sepa imtentions chat Weber had in his wings. How SISERE tian nature has made tear Unt no abso {State canbe appled to Weber's work. Ths eview has ‘io ced some of te base sues nvelvedin considering WeePwork according fo the line of engury of secuariaation Tiedey elon Toul Hke to make t clear that tere is ee etton Here tg Rd the hermeneutial ey to the ttaty ‘of Weber's work.!® Rather, in considering Weber's work as a Secon theory. this work highlights one aspect sta TEGUNY Shatpess of swore supports, As Coder Roth i ToS ey enterpoe of te soil of plein is eet Sern stoical proces of secularist.a PROTESTANT MOOEROETY ‘susand. duet, Sesame dace ister: ema dea sco compen Fa Tamper de eran pr nar Sr ns ones pr gre tnamote sone spose cme tse de wags ‘Seque tayemane thon 68 i pc eth ie Str St ton tly Se sehen, Greg 1994 189-180, eee A ee Sito cers stg fiw, Stephen P. Ter an regs fact sages tbe Ped oe nt Se reer sory. Bet rea val eet, wi Sib soe sl press eon beeen te de Suites wu ctecent enon aseeeoy nase ‘Sn tay Webs ten bg ea nc ost ‘Spay Attensa a eS a ora tore of he deta urounding l y ad ita sono funn nes co rp ees) 08 3S mre ees og 105 S07 Fo hre faethe spine rat sori 8 Rain," aa sale nae Bw ona Chapter 3 arate tone rom Ce" and‘ mse opt for easing as ard as tel” oe 5 Se bon Ter a UE Fert i tbr aroun he neato ry avon an Ta Satins of te contr omosety and protmoderty sn ofthe enna nar se a ering tn cnet evo ys Tak our Te epg ek Wes nae a ‘sii sone Poop als Lae darren Eat e= Apel, ‘in Pilosoph su heen Doe ter uns far die Zen der crete der wahee Philoseph. Weil Philosophie nicht ine Tortachretende Wissenschaft int de one zeiose Wabi erent miles in {eehachiches sus der Unbosingtele im Dick au Transxnden eh solhichendes Leben jewels var Wetiieikett werden, Max Weber hat ane Batosophe gers erwar eine Pinson” Janpers (194042. Te gpa owes view of Une eof Max Weber Is tthe Ogaphy ‘writen hs we Maranne Weber Soe Weber Marianne (1950) ‘Reunite or he graphy tat Webs en ce Oe iat ue teeta provides the mesg nk TRS Niner fl and work Rusia cnderetands ate ae al te vertu ich Weer ba to operate nts eee Br te Ter toed fee apd he eter one fhe Sate ns ef te day. Wren “acne culos pace of Weber conontton wth te Te Sh Maes cor cand sare nts mee Broun ater a conontaon wheter. Te Secon fet ‘Gast Webers ped of sepresson ad aro travels inte Usted Sam Sood ae patton of en TBOL-1008. He san SeeSSorr tars omen canner th Egar Jal wie ve sr atee Mina Tar: Tee inadetn meet te een at eens yt avn sett Ply. At Pee eee WES St heath afer 1 and is tenella acy eee hres own te th a eth 1000 Per 8 ‘gle geyser se Sa gE, Woes en our of x maseaine ome taper sound ine colies wah nate, ee Tas 2006) et Monmaen 801 Fe elon of the economical ple! wenioos i period oe Wane 989). 21 Ser 6 2 Sh Gade 009,25, 2. Se ut 802 2 Sec Ban Tuer (1900: 21 Be SRO, ral mst of eters wk hs conte 3s Mose 570 "EES an conor expansion wader Biamarc was daa od eee papain neared fate lion 1880 Wy aBr ion 1018, and ty 1014 Gemanys set production Sa ee tof Rasa, Hance Sa Sain comb TEENS mg uch ac Stamens sn AO ane to dome Spe Seater ake ths ane, and German doamance se eeeet jana wa noha suse Sex Ban. Tum ‘om 2ie (er weber ts thus sceptical of Man’s confidence that the Germast weg cei cae cnt on bebe ta Gh“ noresnar wopensery working clas aces an eaogy en hepa experience necessary [such atevlton, Hele farther seep ofthe tn at scat ‘weg clase party cold trang abut sich sop. since, fr Weber ‘ch scat plang of te Sony wld ring ao atonal. ‘on of sect sonar to capa’ As'aconsequesce, x small ec ‘otic png ee thane tpt sent at wach {Ser Somalia in tasman ond Spel te) G80) 27-008 ‘2: See Wen (1988) 62 2 Tn athe nck to Wry eprint ong hr ls Beryl and "Der Rachopasidre" Fora dacsson of tle {Soue and the nuence of Weber's thought on Car Sch theory of Tega si legitimacy" see Momma (1974): 896-415, 50. or kre Vogels and Lao Strurs eary plosphieleitques sf Weber war. soe Vesti (1005) and Senne 1068) 99-78 A shore ‘Summary of these ertsgues can be found i Mile 1988) 1-16 SI Se etary 2001} 1-213, 52. In confining mye to thee thee major influences, t do not ‘pean 6 cust tha! other Rgures were not moran inthe shaping of Wiebers ork. Indes one figure whom {wll not mention, Covtie cena to have been importa lor Weber Is eng itn to roo the {easlons present in the Protestant anan eal femerork Rates Tan onto suggere nt tae ifunces wes he et Important {ne shaping of Weber overall son of hs work. Porm dictson of thetntsence of Goethe on Weber see Abow 1900} 62°77 Seinen an sae Weber's lation to Mary. hat hl Neo Kanan backaroond was mer {ane for etucing Mars materi eoneeption of try ab: Rk 142-149, Se ln Ringe (1007) 92 58, Por a survey of tha ducusstn, see Ringer (1997) 96-62, nd aes (1988). Sr Se fstanne Weber (1880): 296 238, Soe Gat 171 and Feckere (1902) 08. 158, See Rickert (1002 60, 701-708, 40, Fora good sure of einen of Wendelband and Ricker on Weber ne nga 1957. 1 Se Schluhter (1006: 78-7, ‘oF ed suey fe pawn of ego he Sout western Sool oe Ol 1987) "tS Gee Windlbend (1928) 200, toa 9 ‘2h for ascusoin of this pott see Gottman (19985 152-354. Sh Sea aon Jeet em her in Rede stbende SEES, deta mee ot dart endieh uchdeeiee ei eens au besoin ten Were’ und iene Rede pga ratoneles Handel sotarn, und desto ahr SEMIN Gllanfers “ora scan ofthe imparance the Webern aaa sate -peromli” cn ts relevance to bis sol ey (eer 1900) 42-45. "3. See Sesom (2002) 1 See ie Protestant nature of Weber's methodology. soe Woin (296i 7 So Kater (1998) 24 36 Sec uc Ce tenia 180. 59. om spots. ne anger 1997201, Be fac a." jes tandem tam ash da ee Haein cn at aenweh und von anderen Menschen und Sit ‘Cogentinden det AsSomect und von Cee trmartungen sl Bedngunge ofer sl Mite fr SS ana apgewonene ogee Zeck 2 raya durch orubten Chuan an dexr-chin, attache net dace mer sonst. deutendensnbedingen gene a rakens ra ss slehe uid wnat gO Caan ndcretrecroiona: arch exe AE Ue Scaignen pata car cogacie Cosi. ttm conned tat Weber ently i the Ss srttng ut the aavequcres of Ntaches Zeon ea oe ena chert mahink our human ation na goenden™ 25 Feopnctosen” cps See Hennis (1087): 167-191 Pe yan 3 Poe (1908) 8 pare wens 558, Por an interesting argument, which suggests tha, Wel est seed by herein of asta source, seeMcCarthy (2005): 63-110. McCarthy also sakes the same {or the eciolgy ofboth Marx (1555, and Durcheem (11-156) ‘7. See Bryan &. Turner (1991), (8. Sex Balen (1983) 158, Se, for example, Momsen (198027 70: Sex Boyan Pasne U90 M 71 Se Schuhe (1985 102-126 ‘See ca. 608-000 75, Schlueter speaks ofthe derence as beoreen a “gotemden sand 2 pot Zet Se Schlucher (1065) 80. The wen ot that {Got stip absent fom the tines, Dut rather, thatthe ery notion of ‘Gotastrnge or orig tate mes "Se. ov expe Schroeder (1992. 78. see GARG aan 1 78. dens 971) 221, 17, For Weber’ etiqe of the materiale conception of try, 8 his“ Sammlers Oberwindung der materastachen Ceashich ‘assung.in cave 201-398 "7s: SeeObjektrat n GAN! 160-170 79. Fora discussion of tls point, se Ringer (1097: 150-167 20, Soe Weber, Max" Stamler rg der materi ‘hun Geschiehtauastung GAVE 204 296, 1 See Loth e) (1062)100, 82. Here one can leary see the infuence of the Noo Kanan epi ‘emology of considering realty to be mde up of an nie varie of 57, Sce Abrow (19005 13.1 ahall omsder In some conskterse depth below the extent to whe Weber's oom soda teary. and rast pavteulry hi theory of sculaaon, was msenced by hie om Protectant hertage 18. See Abrow 1900 14 89, aI. 6 (1004) 65. ‘Denn Sch bin rear reli absolut tunmusthaisch “upd. habe weder ‘Sedaris "noch Fangs, Ingendweiche eelischen “Bauwerker’relgtcen Charakters ttt ‘Avermichten~das geht einfach nicht, reap Teh iehne ea. Aber leh ‘in ach geaauer Profung weser ancielgses nach telgte leh lrapine mich such in dleaer Hinsiht als einen Rrappe ale cen ‘erstumpelen Mencehen, desven toneres Schickel es ist Ses chr eungestencn 24 mussen, sch damit—om nicht in ‘omantiachen Sehwtndel zu vefalien Weber woes this metaphor of ‘ligious musicality and wnmustalty also ta his Binsin to ee mu at tlre oe we am teomotin mene omar aaa ae aa cement ratne e mcs ne a a ce eae Be eget dst a oreer nae ts hae nee patti Fie a bce SP gm de wr oo nsec ioetceme Sa Se AS ee meen ema eee ee achat ear aad ae oa Serre oe cecega ta incurs Soseeeamors ee aan! BG un ee, tenn ier Sasa Se eae sche ea" ws Sc ie cee ee oe bean ie Fe a bm mr ey ache ee a an ie SAL -snatecneetenine Reha Seonetacthntaicin erin ee Sans ae oii sae ei Sociedad Sine me Seenane toa ton os a Se cme mm ft a ine of ace as seem ects Soe sina gene nur ciraneer ars Si i ero ata mcm cnsbaa cei ccwceauntr amine Ste merartag cee Ge tears ait See reg nen eet Boren crag earecdaremae catwaaen eeeeeeen TO ae muon ce at Le emo scare ren oe sea ta a a ee ny ang ee a oe ia tien‘lc gusto of the human spi a em could e safeguarded ‘gune the derermbtc Idee of votre and naires ‘Ped eotciesttheestthe wook of fant bos tla at oop as a care pet heen open tcsed ‘Sangh ne material anata ih tis otc tao ‘hte about religous a ror took Pace Soe Chepman GOty 108 or fut cussion ofthis sci ant ts intuence x Geman ‘tera helo he star ofthe frente cena he Coa ons re “ 106 For tdscussion ote pon, ce oth (1919: 756-707 155 Se Adena ioe 109. 106-199 {or See Entrar (20001 9-94. 108 Se a ans 08 108. See a Gans I: 10-106. To. se cans ut 136-120 1S See asa 8 113 See GAS 09 113. See Gas oo 1 See A. ans ace 1s, See Gunkel er 16 Se a GANS 28 112 Foran nays of the eaanship between Weber and Ouse! “Ue gerlacweoel Rak ab Beuemere cee 11s, Se tt 275. thin, Weber eas ela ah Bow of is ‘send rst Tench, hough Toh dda sees so pease Weta he Pn seen ta ae fehl and pint sosern sna ceca: Sok hapman 20008 ereiza. vee Sac an 8 121 For Risch tell datne, se Rc (1890). 128s ete he Hint of Reg Sant he ‘schlan way of deng tela etc Sto te wn mappa 08 provahal ba, but rae on the Mtr pare of Soa, ich was Cental othe Ht Regn Schl Hower sd be meted that moog the ibe Peestant tesegans te ee ko groupe ho wont to integrate te theo Corson {eh Kee ef the natal sence hu, waet Wiis Hern ‘Slonerof tactic ne Christan fat inthe ncape aka ‘ure fat Brat Troctach dec the tore cope wee rstanty ba contol robe ts sins In sh of ne een ‘te ings Fora Tew o these fron wb he Wniioe ok itera Prdetantam ace Soke (1908) serve rie scene 7 125, Sex Hamack, Aol (1902: 45-47 1 See outsch (904), 16D. Pors ncueion oft importance ‘Sersoaiy a: Gotaman Goa Tae men ae Graf ay 168-09. 126 Soe hn Wee “Wescnchat la Ber" tn GAN: 612, 12t, See Tone (1929): 95596. 12k See Ma Weber “Pla a erin GPS: 507-508, 120, Se Gunuel 10" 3, 130 sewer, cae Berlin AW BU 193 hie 638 18. i. S07 Der Onis. ode Dison de Pec kb mit er Oot. Baumgarten (1816) 3S, Lobbe (1965; 69, ‘Die At. ia der Weber geegentich den ego der Sakularsterang verwendet, wrde es rece, sine eipinseislogachen Unereccsungeninegesarel unter esc Mel ‘ie In this reconstruction of the debates surrounding te imerpre- {atom of the work ef Weber, ave drt on he work of Tors (1900 197 See Tenbrk 1978. 138 Te Sa fas ttrpretaton My tn heft ha wn. Masanne’s grap of er husband. se sated several es hat Wi was hs imsjr wae, Se or example Naranne Webs (1980) 465,727. 30. Soe Paeana, Talo (15495 302-091 148. pia, 11s The Vorboerang to be fa athe star of Pin CARS 116 ie ani be fu ae ae of WEWN OARS: Gast: s05-578 Terk 7." Water nega gn eae ede Energia dor Eric da ie Raiser. ti ser Istorachen Fragtat toa denn Zang ene ineren Log gage80 rronesnam wopessere Instoreene Idensiccrang der Torgings sondern die Sere 2aangasgae ver Abige este e iung Weber er echitse! bern ete Autaaung Weber eg njenr Abel de oom le Forachrite der Atnegang inten Salen Fl et \nvrpeatin idrstande ha iin ar WENT "Se tan Weber, Erg, GAR 1 289 {gr Ten sks to guid ts iterpetaton by providing wo SEIS ete een ot ra wane td the sen to te the malnear Sle each 75 8 oes ‘Wseane (G00) a aera 149, Se Gate 39 . 13. See Ga 26... 18, See fluc 308, Wincktmann deduced form is tay of ie cemmpoatn of Wut that thi par na ony or pb 1043, Sha tr “ber used the ton of an “elype” asa methodol oto trots sme ef the tans os sai eh (cated general phenomena The hypothe eect ide pe ‘an then be compared wich aetua! cultural and social phenomena tw analyse sifeenecs fom Use ideal. causal connections beeen ‘Phonsmena, ad posable motives for such aifernes mead oe the ‘olan of ight ratenaly which Weber tebe to the ie age standing of weal pe. coe CAW: 145-214. For a good wher sad Seatgpen and Svar use In Weber methodology. eee Ranger 1982) 1NO-121- Asta noton is used by Habermas fits reconsrucuon of Istria materi when tan asout Aerences between the loglcand the dynes of cevlopmen. See Habermas (1970, 38 See Maw Weber. “ermerinngen 2 de ore Repl" sg Wacken 8) 7 4. Oued hy Whack 2. 5 Wickean (19805 26-27. $8. ia sta 156. See Resebrodt (19805 115-116, 157. Mid: 121, 1268. $6. 138, Soe CARS 215,268 190, Gee Senate (1008): 40. 160. This artic, oveialy pled in the Raber Zetschif fr ind Sociale was ster publahed in Schchter (0902: 557-500. To See Sehiuehier (2968, 2: S6Dn, 2. Seuchter sere eer to Henne arte Max Waters Fragen” ater pabsbed in Hennis tiosn 3-3. Ted Soe Schlucher 18a), 2: 561-562. 168. See ax Weber, Vorbemarnurg in CARS: Tes. Marianne Weber (1090) S8i. "Far Weber bedeutet dese Entenntns der Beconlemets des okzidentlen Rationales Und ‘Serine rugfllenes Rol fae die abendlanaische Kultur ee sener ‘chgaten rece oa, See Seine (10880, 2: 564-589, 1. See Tentruck (1985. 7 See Wage ane Zoran (1967. (5 echould be state at not ofthe pnts aed by Tenbrck. in his interventions have bee seerted by researchers inion, ne ior cnntn tht eas mde 9 Wee ech 2 ean {he emportanos ef rigs sci ae = mor pst of Wee's syste ‘thc concern, tus haa been admirably deepest ne work of his itn aslstant Gated Raensien See Hoeazien (980) “oo, Coniher Rath sugges sat Weber aceon of the course of relutionary beefs in Potestantinn he se of eubeante rata ‘sed on educl soil afer tse French Revo, and te re [Skin eres of ec social bp Maroon peficsing the necessy (douse of cota fe a secular theory thet tterapt to ge a spect Sip ictnealeplnatonofroderiy anne atta aay oat ‘xT oceg. 1b pee aod ot total He seroe that anaes the ‘om loner mre ats tga gba than ea Tamar sages os Sane, Soe Ron and Sects S79) 147=154 70, So ud, 14 Thin te ea of ating the acl of eign ‘wthn the hntosel process ofeccuarssaton i interpreed in erent ‘ory hari ich and Heeger 957) nk ‘terest ner ign cms Herc rg fe set ‘Shay of tga toe lated im Oe roe ofan aerate stentc rus nd explanatan f rca rely hat coral competes ‘Sth that proposed by tenon:CHAPTER 3 Secularisation in Weber's Sociology of Religion In this chapter, I will analyse the major texts of Max Weber's sociology of religion! that are relevant for elucidating his tnnderstanding of secularisation.® Furthermore I val draw but the Protestant metanarrative tht informs Weber's theory ff secularisation and will assess the importance of Uns Protestant heritage for his theoretical work. ‘The Protestant Bthic and the Spirit of Capitalism (PE) Max Weber's essay PES was fist published tn the Arch fir Souiahulssenschaft und Sorialpotise Volumes 20 and 21 s3 1904-1905, le was reprinted in 1920 as the frst study in is Gesammelte Aujettar sur Religinssoziologie (GARS). Which ‘was unfinished duc tos deal im the same year * The second ‘edition of PE incorporated a large number of additions and ‘changes to the original text, which Weber made inthe light of the many varied criticisms he had received after the publication of the frst edition.” The various forms of the word ‘ilulristerung feocularisation) occur tn both the 1004/1005 ‘and 1020 texte only four times.© the word Entzauberung (disenchantment, wich playe an important part in Weber'so morestase wopeiuery understanding of secularisation. also appears.” Yeti is a Inistke to think that the ony time Weber i talking about {he proces of secalarsation i when he uses this specie word. ‘That would be to fll ito a kind of exegetical fundamental >My tankcin analysing Weber's works acording tothe heuristic Cegory ofa dhearyof secularization wil be to ofsanise his ‘work inthis light and to demonstrate how. by looking at Weber according 0 this category. full inight can be [une into is understanding of ie role played by religon in ‘oder soley Tes important to ben by considering the genera narrative of Pein order to se ast how the theory of sovalarsation ean Organize the fasbework of Webers general argument. Put at {tr rimpiest, one might sm up the general argument of PE tas an investigation into the relationship between the ethic of Protestantism and dhe spn of Western capitalism. By elbie of Protestantism. Weber means the main principles of the Protestant way of He, which govem dhe actons of individual followers. He outlines two main principles that govern Ind Vidal enact. The fret is derived from Martin Luther's conception of calling, and the second fromm Jean Calvin's conception of predestination ® For Weber, the radieal newness of Luther's Eonoeption of caling was that appled to al people and Concerned the dally activities of people in the world It provided a moral justieation for acti tn the orl, which ‘va now seen as the place in which one allied one's deity Towards God, Al actives, 1 Gey were truly willed by God, ‘were seen a beng of equal worth in Ue jes of Goa “Ie second principle, Calvin's conception of precestination sean that God had already choaen those who were to be ved and thove who were {o be damned, even before ther farthly existence. Thus, indvidual good work didnot con {Hbult fo ones salvation, and piesa could not reassure Catvnists that Get sins could be forgiven and that Chey ould goto heaven. Weber bellvea that this led toa form of {mer lonelmess, since Calvinists could not be eure on, even ‘worse, be reassured, that they would goto heaven. The only Troy to gain some reassurance waa ove a form of systematic ‘contol inallone's ations, «notion Weber ale aaceten since this could be considered as a sign that such a person Inad been saved by God." ‘Weber analyses four forms of Protestant asceticism: Calvinism, Pletism, Methodism. and the Baptist sects." He fs not particularly concerned with this theoretial basis, Dut focuses tather on the peyehological sanctions that issued ftom the beliefs and practices ofeach form of Protestantison land directed the practical actions of individuals." Since in Calvinism the inner laneliness resulting from the doctrine of predestination is the strongest. € leads to the most ascetic form of Protestantism. Weber refers to this Protestant asceti- fis as “inner worldiy” asceticism ((wenveliiche Askese) Since the rational or systematic control of one's activity is no Tonger lived outside of the world in monastic communities Dut in the world, in one's daily activities. He sums up his ‘efinition of the ete of Protestantism by saying: ‘but as we have sen thi ascetic conduct meant ration en atin fhe whole of one's en aocrdanes wih Go's we And ths ese was, fnger an opss sxpererogatonis, Bal ‘sting which could be required of everyone who wosld be Cera a satin Teel io sit ining This word, but fr Deane of de wer beyond. asthe conse uence of te concept of ealing of acre Protestants. = Weber tums, in the next section of Part Il of PE, to a demon Siralion af how this ascetic Protestantom relates to everyday ‘eoriomnte conduct. Prior to this, in Chapter 2 of Part 1 of PE, he outlines the meaning ofthe term “spint of capitalism," draoing on the tings of Benjamin, Franklin, the elghteenth ‘century Ihmeriean politician and author who wrote popular books on how to get rich, Weber draws particularly on to of Franklin's works! Necessary Hints 10 Those That Would be Rich and Uhavice fo a Young Tradesman written in 1736 and 1748 Fespectively.” Both works contain popular sayings that have become part and pareel of our modern language: “Time is money." and “The good paymaster is lord of another man'spurse." fo mention but two. For Weber, the peculiar aspect of| this spint of capitalism is that dhe pursult of wealth fs com bined with the strict avoidance of taking any pleasure in i. To make money becomes a religious duty, a moral precept {that must be followed, In contrast, traditional economies had been content to preserve the stalus qua, to earn enough to live on, without aspiring to ever-increased production and wages. 1® Weber quotes the example of the pieee-rate policy (thats, pay by amount of work) of the agnicutural workers ofthe time as an example of how they functioned. The terms “ethic of Protestantism” and “spin of capitaliam” provide the basic clements of his main argument, However the question ull remains: What i the Telaionship between capitalison and Protestantism? Weber speaks in a number of passages about, lavestigating {he “interior relationship” (rmere Verwanaischaf!® or “elective affinities" (Wahluerwandschafter)® between the ethic of Protestantism and the spin of capitalism. After developing his largument step by step, Its Uhe Concept of asceticism” that frentually allows him to crystalie this elationsinp In the final Secton of PE, entiled “Asceticssm and the Spirit of Capitalism” lAskese und kaplalistischer Geis, hie outlines succinctly is understanding of the relationship, using the concept of Ascaticiam as the link or common term shared by both (One of the fusamental ements ofthe ep of medern captal- ‘sn. and not only of that but of moder cular: rational com ‘4a the base of Use ea of cling, was Barmah i wht {his dlscusion hao sought to denonstatetom the spi of {Christian ascetics. One has only to reread the pateage ot Frans, quoted atthe beginning of tha easy, inorder to {hat the covental mente ofthe atte, wes wae there ‘led the pit of capital are the sme as what we hae ast Shown tobe the content ofthe Puta worldly aoeeticem. On ‘without the eligous basi, which by Frank had died sway ‘Thus, the secularisation of asceticism. that i, the transfor: mation ofthe religous understanding of following a vocation Jina monastery into the Protestant understanding of following 4 caling n the secular or worldly realm of modern labour, {= the baste narrative of PE. So, even though Weber only uses SECUIAFCSATION I WEBER SOCTOLOGY OF RELIGION 87 various forms ofthe word secularsation fur times in PE, the ‘General framework in which the narrative unfolds. can be lunderstood as a. general theory of secularisation.”° Weber understood this secularsation of asceticism to be a rational: ‘sation of conduct in the world that promoted the splat of ‘modern capitalisn.** This is brought out clearly in the intro- ‘uction t0 PE, which he added in 1920 for the whole series ‘on the Sociology of Religion. Here, the key question is “uncover the particularity of Western rationality a the source of the singularity of Western capitalism. Thus, transposing the area for the application of the principles of Western rationality from the monastery (considered to be outside the ‘world to the world, and transforming daily Ife in the world {Gotin the solitary soul ofthe cloistered monld was the result ofthe secularisation of monastic asceticism“ Weber puts this Polat almost poetically im one of his most famous passages in PES ‘Chstian asceticism, a at Ning rom the word to sotude, ‘nad already ruled the wera which th renounce! fem te ‘aonastery,Uiroagh the Chur. But han te wh ee ‘tually He character of daly ei the oid untouched. Now ‘estiods into the mat place of Me, stand the do of te ‘monastery beh and unsertok to penetrate jr at dally Fest fhe wth tx methods to fehion ito ei the ‘Sor bat ner ofr tis o> ‘The Disenchantment of the World ‘Weber speaks of,the disenchantment of the world?” in a smumber of ways.#® The first isin terms ofthe rejection ofthe Sacramental mediation of salvation. For Weber. the process of the disenchantment of the world, which began in the prophetic tradition of ancient Judaism, had reached its his- {oricalfullmentin Calvinis, which. in his view, presented the ‘most consistent religious form of refection of the sacramental mediation of salvation.» ‘Weber sees the disenchantment ofthe world as a process of the elimination of magi, and here he makes tle distinction Detween ancient Egyptian, Babylonian magic, and modern