(a/n: "secularization" is the term for religion become less prominent, and a lack of religion (secularism) becoming the way that people operate. In the 60s, a guy called Peter Berger wrote a thesis saying that by the year 2000, religion would become obsolete. In 1995, he recanted his thesis. This essay is a discussion of the ideas of secularization and desecularization (religion becoming prominent, perhaps in a reaction to secularization).

Pluralism is where a society has many different religions within it. I live in a pluralistic and secular society in New Zealand, we have many immigrants and to legally cope with that, we have a government that is seperated from the church. Recently in New Zealand, we have seen the rise of a fundamentalist Christian church (called Destiny Church) which engaged in a march against the Civil Unions Bill, which proposed marital status to anyone in a long term relationship (homosexual or heterosexual) without the need for a religious ceremony. Destiny Church is the most prominent New Zealand fundamentalist group.

Anyway, enough rambling. This really is a fascinating topic...)

In the 1960s, Peter Berger wrote that he believed that the world was becoming more secular, and that by the 21st century, religion would be obsolete. The basic premise for this summation was that Berger thought that modernity and secularization went hand in hand. In 1999, he released a new theory of desecularization, recanting his previous argument, as religion had once more risen to the fore in society. Indeed, religion seems to go through a cycle of rising and falling, and Berger himself admitted he’d made a mistake in his first thesis, misinterpreting the wane of religious fervor for it’s imminent obsolescence. The question, however, remains. What is happening with religion in the modern world? Some areas of society are secularizing, while others are desecularizing. Are we simply becoming more pragmatic? Realizing that we do not live in a monotheistic world anymore, with the increase in immigration, are our societies are becoming more pluralistic? Are we just reacting to this with secularization? Is the well-published move towards secularization the drive for desecularization?

Secularization is the movement from the ecclesiastical to the non-religious. The most obvious example of secularization is that of government. The removal of state religion in countries such as the United States of America and New Zealand has resulted in religious groups having less political sway. Many see this as a positive move, presumably because religious groups are more likely to have unjustifiable and non-universally applicable dictates. However, is this really secularization? The removal of the religious institutions from government does not mean the majority of the country is non-religious. Gabriel le Bras is quoted as saying “…the talk of ‘de-Christianisation’ becomes meaningless when present day religiosity lies in individual hands.” Some have suggested that the secularization of government is not an attempt to oust religion from society, but merely to redefine it into a more appropriate place, so that the institution that runs the country has the ability to be flexible and apply to all citizens under its care. If a government is religious, then to be effective all individuals in the country need to be in accordance with its doctrines. A secular government focuses less on the controversial issues of morals, and more on the practical ethics of the society it governs. In short, a person of overt religious persuasion can live a lot easier under a non-religious government, than a person who is overtly non-religious can live under a religious government. In a democratic system, of course, religious groups have (and should have) their representatives in government as well, and religious groups are likely to seek to elect such representatives, but time has shown that when a government becomes theocratic (based on religious doctrine) no such tolerance is shown to a non-religious minority. The well-touted separation of Church and State is not secularization of society, it is the secularization of government, and is by no means representative of the population. The government has simply become our physical protector, leaving morality in the hands of whichever religious group the individual chooses, so long as it does not violate the laws set down for the common good of all.

The rise of fundamentalism is an obvious case for the desecularization of society. Since September 11th, 2001, the rise in militant Islam (or the extent it is prepared to go to) has been blatantly apparent. Western religious groups are also becoming more fundamentalist, a far cry from the ‘cult’ status that fundamentalist groups in the past have been given. Destiny Church in New Zealand have their own political party, and are an active part of New Zealand’s community, even organizing protests against lack of morality. The rise in Christian fundamentalism may be in reaction to the secular state, or in reaction to the rise in fundamentalism in other religions. One thing is certain, even if fundamentalist groups have been around for a long time, they’ve been in the wings, and are now becoming more vocal. These groups desire a return to the desecularized state that existed in the past, where religious groups had a loud political voice. The return to Biblical values is an important issue for such Christian groups as Destiny Church, with their pastor, Bishop Brian Tamaki vowing to wage war on “secular humanism, liberalism, relativism, and pluralism” and regain the attitude of militancy in the Church. With groups such as Destiny Church, Hamas and al Queda growing in prominence, it seems religion is returning to be a force to be reckoned with. However, the secular portion of society that class themselves as ‘non-religious’ do not want to return to a desecularized state. Many regard the separation of church and state as necessary, and do not remember the desecularized state with nostalgia. N.S. Rajaram writes that “European Secularism was a form of radical surgery; it was needed because the condition of the patient- Christian Europe- was…very grave.” Religion governed regimes are still fresh in people’s minds, especially those that went wrong. Puritanism and Nazi Germany are well-touted examples of largely theocratic states that had horrific consequences in the form of the Salem witch trials and the Shoah. Although religion has recently suffered a decline in numbers (as evident in censuses) it still remains a dominant force in our society, furthering the argument that our country (in particular) is not becoming more secular. More people are identifying with other non-Christian religions, or classifying themselves as non-religious, but fewer people are ambivalent on the subject. It appears that rather than dying out or becoming more popular, opinion is just becoming more polarized. The fundamentalists on every front (Christianity, Islam and non-religious groups) are reaching their extremities.

Without a doubt, our societies are becoming more pluralistic. No longer can one talk about West in religious terms any more and refer solely to Christianity. In modern society one has to refer to Islam as well as other less well-known faiths that have communities within a society. While many will argue that these religions have more in common than they do differences, there are still many doctrinal clashes over semantic points. To further muddle the issue, each religion has separate subsets or denominations that seek to impose their doctrinal preferences over other denominations. To achieve a balance of power one has to remove it from their grasp. Even if the government was religious, what religion would it be? Would we all be members of Destiny Church? Or would be all be Shiite? The fragmentation of religion has forced us to secularize the ruling bodies of our nations. The atheist or agnostic portions of society reject many religious tenets, including those that many religions have in common. Often, they hold to “desacralization”, the rejection of “esoteric-supernatural forces” and adhere to an ideal of human rationality. They are the ultimate products of the Enlightenment and often champion the cause of secularization. Their effect on religious groups is more profound. Many modern denominations have embraced the rejection of the idea of the divine’s interaction with the world. Because of this plurality evident in our society, and the fact that the pragmatism of the modern age is seeping into the more liberal elements of religion, the shift towards secularization, particularly of government, is just common sense.

However, perception is the crucial element in this discussion. Whilst government is secular, as mentioned earlier, that does not mean society is. But religious groups now feel marginalised. Religious communities have embraced the concept that religious values are being put by the wayside in favour of secular ideals, and a consequent resurgence in religious activism is a logical conclusion. From a religious point of view, the government allowing practices such as homosexuality (which is condemned in the Bible) and banning smacking (which is encouraged) is an outright rejection of tenets that the Church has embraced and enforced. Religious groups are now attempting to wrest back some of their lost influence by campaigning for government, staging protests and gaining more economic sway, which makes them much more visible. Whilst the argument of secularization may not be valid, it is accepted by religious groups as a sign that action needs to be taken, and that it is time to reimpose religious morals on society.

Secularization and desecularization are concepts, rather than actual facts. The reaction of various groups to these concepts is what affects our society. Our society is not (and probably never will be) fully secular. Even our government, which is largely secular, has representatives of religious groups in it. However, the fear of losing any kind of say in how the society is run causes a backlash against secularism on the part of religious groups, resulting in a rise in religious activism, such as the Destiny Church’s “Enough is Enough” protest against homosexuality. The world is not becoming more or less religious, the religious elements are merely redefining and restating their position, as are the secular groups, in reaction to theories espoused about society by academics, media and popular opinion.

Bibliography

Berger, Peter

Epistemological Modesty: An Interview with Peter ?title240

Berger, Peter

The Desecularization of the World

(Religious Studies Course Reader 1999)

Destiny Church- The Breakthrough

Glasner, Peter E.

The Sociology of Secularization – A critique of a concept

(London: Routledge & Kegan Paul 1977)

Haring, Bernard

Faith and Morality in the Secular Age

(Slough: St. Paul Publications 1973)

Pratt, Vernon

Religion and Secularization

(London: Macmillan 1970)

Rajaram N.S.

Secularism- The New Mask of Fundamentalism. (Religious Subversion of Secular Affairs)

(New Delhi: Voice of India 1995)

Statistics New Zealand

http:www.stats.govt.nz/quick-facts/people/religion-and-ethnicity.htm

Tamaki, Bishop Brian

The New Zealand Herald (19/06/05) referenced ?cid1&objectid10331506

The Holy Bible (New Living Translation)

(Tyndale House: USA Online Dictionary