British Sociological Association Sociology of Religion Study Group

November Study Day 2006

GOD TALK - IN SOCIOLOGY & THEOLOGY

Saturday 18 November 2006, 10:30am - 4:30pm

Heythrop College, Kensington Square, London

Organisers: Dr James Sweeney and Dr Anthony Carroll.

MacIntyre: belief, historicism and nature: Peter McMylor

Alasdair MacIntyre's remarkable intellectual career has been for the most part marked by a commitment to the significance of sociological and historical understanding for both ethical theory and understanding religious belief. Since the mid-1980s MacIntyre has been committed to an Aristotelian Thomism that some have seen as incompatible with his emphasis on the sociological. This paper will argue that there is in practice no incompatibility between these elements but on the contrary that his work now points towards a philosophical anthropology that can enrich a sociology of belief and of ethics.

And the power and the glory be thy (or my best mate's) name: exploring God-belief in late modernity: Abby Day

This paper, arising from my doctoral research, explores orientations to God. Broadly, I have identified people as either theists or godless. What theists share is a faith that a loving, all-powerful God has created the universe and life within it in a purposeful manner, that he benignly oversees his creation, sometimes intervening in human affairs, and imparting feelings of peace and love to his believers. Other informants, whom I called the godless, do not believe that. Amongst the theists I identified differences in their relationship with God. Some had adherent, affective relationships with God, while most preferred to keep God at a distance and related instead with Jesus or with a dead relative. Amongst the godless there are also varieties of belief. What they share is a view of the irrelevance of that deity and the importance of their affective human relationships. Many non-theists believe in some form of supernatural phenomena and have views of the world which are not scientifically rational. I concluded that it is not instructive to categorise people on the basis of their apparent rationality or irrationality, but to look at where they seek meaning, power, authority and transcendence in their lives. I therefore suggested it was more useful to understand them in terms of their orientation, theocentric or anthropocentric.

The Cultural Silencing of God: Roy Dorey

What God is saying is transmitted in different ways indifferent cultures. The way we respond to what God is saying is also culturally dominated. Sometimes that cultural format is helpful, and at other times not. The helpful way was demonstrated in a service of thanksgiving for harvest recently in an inner-city church in South London. God was saying something about creation and responsibility, and the church was responding, from their own experience.The cultural wrappings of Christian truth can often obscure the word that God is wanting to say to His people. If we take discourse on justice and the way that is worked out in society we can see the cultural constraints on truth-telling regarding justice.At the beginning of the 19th century this was evident in the debate about slavery. Parliament for a lengthy period found the economic arguments dominating, and the justice argument were set on one side. At that time it would not have been possible to see Parliament as secular, in that it was inextricably linked with the Church of England. This economic culture of progress and prosperity being dominant was reinforced when eventually slavery was partially outlawed, in that compensation was paid to the slave-owners, and not to the slaves. Later in the century there was an outcry concerning the alcohol consumption of the mass of people who lived in the poorest housing, had inadequate food, and almost no health or education provision. The injustice of their situation in relation to the prosperity of the nation was not identified. The so-called Temperance Movement condemned the consumption of cheap alcohol without asking the justice question of 'why do so many engage so totally with alcohol?' God, it would seem, was speaking to those in power in society about safeguarding their privilege and suppressing the potential for 'unseemly behaviour.' God was not speaking to them about His commitment to the poor, and the unjust nature of a society that created such divisions and conditions.At this time we are globally facing the outcomes of the way we live and the reduction of irreplaceable resources. A response from one country is that it will pass no legislation that will mean that even one citizen will lose his job. In this we again have an economic authority and way of life over-ruling the more global implications, which may be set out as justice, not only for many in poorer countries, but also for succeeding generations. Again we find that loud voices defending the status quo which is destroying our world are raised by many who claim a Christian belief and commitment.As a conclusion to the paper I want to outline briefly the class captivity of the Protestant Church in this country, and the way in which this, as a cultural phenomenon, has created an excluding Church. It is a church in which the cultural parameters of privilege have silenced the voice of God for many.

'Methodological atheism' and 'the return of the sacred': James Sweeney

The resurgence of God-talk improves the job prospects of sociologists of religion, and rescues them - at least temporarily - from the prospect of simply charting the demise of their own discipline. But what other implications are there, now that the assumption of inevitable decline is no longer sustainable? Can questions about the 'deep reality' of religion still be bracketed by appeal to methodological atheism? The question hinges on the significance of the resurgence. What replaces the too easy assumption of decline? Perhaps nothing very much; resurgence might still be thought of as meaning no more than that religion is tenacious, its resurgence a mere social quirk. Or, it could be that religion still has important work to do; that's why it persists. Or that, as the theologically minded would have it, religion (or some form of it) happens to have truth on its side. No matter which view is taken, the new reality is that the dissolving effects of rationalisation and secularisation have been (partially) checked. Can sociology explain this while staying neutral on whether religion is epiphenomenal, or socially substantive, or ontologically sustained? The assumption that religion could not survive in modernity was not previously thought to compromise sociological integrity, although, of course, it often smuggled in an ideological bias and helped to shape the sociological agenda. What would be the effect of assuming that religion is more than epiphenomenal - or even true? Is methodological atheism still the path to take, or does it inhibit the sociology of religion?

Catholic Modernity: Historical and Systematic Aspects: Tony Carroll

In this paper, I shall consider the question of the confessionalisation of theories of modernity. Drawing on historical research on the early modern period, I shall argue that theories of modernity have neglected Catholic accounts of the modern period and have been often imbued with a Protestant metanarrative (Weber). I shall also note some aspects of a sytematic theory of modernity that is sensitive to Catholic motifs and could act as an alternative account of modernity to those which have predominated (Habermas).