8/18/2019 2 TAYLOR, The Age of Mobilization (a Secular Age)

1/8

T-¡'toL,

h¡tl¿s

)o

4

fut

" ' l

o

I

,",.t

T

1' l

L ./- The

Ageof Mobilizarion

l

Letl Í/ to scewhere

we havegot to in this storJ'of

the r¡e of moden

rcula¡itl i¡

rhevsi. The end ofrhe eighleenth

entury aw he emergence

fa viable

her-

native o Chds¡i¡nit¡

n exdusive umanism;

t Jso sawa númberof

¡eacrió¡s

asains his,and hc undestrndins

f huúan life

whichp¡oduced . This

¡c

¡he

beginning fwhat

i'n calling henovaelTect,

hesreadil)wide¡n4 g¿müt

fnerv

posirions+one bclleving, ome

unbeli*ing, sone hard o clrssi&-which

ha'e

become vailableptions

or us.But all his shapper

rganons socl¡léli¡es,

ome-

dmeFwhen ir ónes to thed*dopmet ofnw fi rns ofunbelief-only among

rhe ntelligensi..And rhis

proce$oféLiteplur¿lizüion onrinus

thoughout .he

ni¡clee¡drcenrury,

t diffe¡ertpaces, nd

with

diff¿renrry

pacedntetruP(ions

n

diffe¡enr o.ieiies.t is hisprocesshat

harebeen ollowing, .leasr

¡ some fits

{pec¡s, n lhe

p¡ecedinghapre6.

Bur somehow,n rhc nreNering wo

cnturis, úe pcdicamenr irhe

üen up

persuta hasbeconeúat

ofwhol€ sóciedes. ot o¡ry

has

he

pále¡te f options

(r€lisious

nd aieLigious)idened, ut

theverl Locus fthe iellgious, r

dr€

spi¡i-

¡uai. nr social ife hasshifted. How did this cone ¿bou¡?

Herewe entero¡to the erein oF"secularization

heorl. This hasbeen

mainll

corcerne,l

ith explaining ariousacesofseculuiry

t

(rhe

ereat of religion n

public ife)and2 (thedecl;nen beliefmd pra.tice), otobviousli hefessoins o

be a oi ofonrlap beNcn rhcsend secul¡rity

(rhe.hange

n the condi¡ions f

beliei).In

pa¡ticular,he elation f üis latter irh sccul¿rity

is

bou¡¿to

b€clore.

Thn n nott¡ccausere

wo

chnses

are dentical, revenbound o go

og€tler. ur

rheclanse ú interescdn here,

3),

¡r'olrcsmongother thinss he¿risi¡gor

a

hurnanist Lte¡narive.his sa precondnion

or

(2)

he ise f actu¿] belle[ *hich

in tu¡¡ o¡en conúibulcso

(2)

he decline

f pffdce. Nothi¡s natles hesc onse'

quencesnelucrable,rut ¡hcycannot appen

t all uniess r€o.islnalplúializ.tion

8/18/2019 2 TAYLOR, The Age of Mobilization (a Secular Age)

2/8

1: 4

So n or¡.¡

to u¡dúsand

how whar

werc

¿kernatircs

o¡ üe few

became

o or

rh. naD): t

will behclptul

o e¿n

n rdr¡t

is k¡own

at¡ourhe

dectjne r t¡ck

of

¿e.line

fbeliet Thc

story ere

6 incredibty

omptjakd,

$,úh

vide ári¡rions

e,

ñvecr

diff€rnr

counri€s, egions,

l¡$es,nitieux,

€tc.And

rs i¡ ¡hc

p¡ec€dn,g

.h¡p¡ex,

mf

discusior

he.enill rnatnl¡

ocus

n mnc

ptrdd ofrhe

prcce$,

¡

so¡r sócic¡ies

mrinlr

Brit¡in,

r¡nce ¡¡d

somerimes

h€ U.S.A.,

with

occ¿sio¡¿l

sidc

gl¿nceslscwhe¡e).

oneedl€s o

a),,

m), ena¡k

lere wjlt

be er*p¡oy¡ional.

Bu¡ veDturc

o hope

fiaths/.rr

¡eve¡ttele$

e helpfut,

har onre

€¡errl incs

of.hanqcc¡n bemad. isible, r ear nr hc counrriesriintl, discusse¿.¡d rh.t in

¡hk way

h€vnrr

mahe sm¿ll

onr¡ibu¡ion

rhe

geneGl lorv

ofsecut¡ri¿ario¡

\oir se

mish¡

bc ¡enpred

o think rhar

hespiirual

condidon

f ¡heélüe

becúe

¡harof rhc

ñ¿ss€sÍgel),

through

diffusion.

hls ras

aidcdby ihe

cxpansio¡

r-

rand¡¡(t

educarion,

hesp¡e¿d

l ln€Fcy,

a¡d rhe^

ofhishe¡ level¡

fsctoolins,

¿ndmore ecenrlr

h¡ough

e

srea¡

roúh in

u¡ive¡sjq, ainins.

The

élitc ondi_

¡ion

olienbecamc

enenlized

oo,b¡ the

act hatmodcrn

o.ieq,

nducs

weryone

inro ¡he

s¡ñ€ mode

of life, e¡ds

ro wip€

our the dis¡nrcrio¡

e¡reen

own

a¡d

.ou¡¡q', and

,t.ulcatesn

Ne¡,one

hesme social

magin¿ry,

cl¡dng o

rhcsoct€q,

as whol€,

faricuh¡lv

wirh ¡he

pcnet¡arion

crlvhere

of electu¡ic

media.

Nowrll rhes€ ar€ l.ved d iml]orrant¡ole, arricuta¡lyecent\,. ur hea.tu,l

rold

fion rhere o

he¡e s been

üch tnore

uhp¡ a¡d

irdirect han

asimple

if

fúsion

ory

ca¡ caprurc. o

tresi¡ wirh,

n a number

fcounries,

elisious

r¿c

iice msc

h ¡heninerccnth

ndsoñc¡ihes,lso

drcFentieth

ccntu¡r

Some eople

c¡l.ulare hat thc

¿Foseefcrholic

pnctice

¡ rr$ce

comesound

1870, frer

¡hec¡¡is ofrhc

Revolurion

ith irs "dech¡isrianiatio¡"

hpaigns,

con$itutio¡al

church,

¡d orh€¡ u.h

raum$.j

'l'h€¡edier

lhcre s ¿edine,

hi.h becomes

¡*p in úe

1960s.isures

or adher-

e¡cc

¡o chu¡chesnc

i¡ Ensland

u¡ins ¡he ineteendr

enrury,

eaching

peak

round he

bc€inni¡sof

rheNenrierh

c¡ rn befo¡e

low

decline

es n, which

becomer

s¡er af¡ei

heSecond ¡old

Ytu,

d qunepre.ipirare

tie¡ he 1960s.,

As o¡ rheU.S.A

some ].ul¿rc

¿ ead), ne

n ¡etisious dhcence

¡om

hcRevo,

lurion

jgltr h¡o%h o

rhe1960s, rrh

on\,a ¡el¿tivelynall dechrc ince.r'fhs,

of.oüre,

should¡i surp¡ise

s.Veshould

plt nhtheconBt

ofthe

drive

to Refo¡m,lvhich

rsuably

¡derlics hewhole

movehenr

f whi.h

.,secutarization,

is.n

ofshoor.All earlier

tror¡s r emaking

hechürch

imedar nc¡e$ing

ev€ls

f

orthodox racrice:

he di

grear r;ve flrench

Catholicisn, revióüs

o the

nine

reenrh-.erru¡y

ffo¡r,

&s rhe Counrer-Rcfo¡natio¡

f

the swenteenrh

entury,

*hich

súcceededn reachins

eople

who had prwiousl),

eenma¡ginal

.acritio-

MOBILIZATTON

12 5

(

. Jn¿ , , 'e8r" , , , ,s

.cm.

lr

.,

, .e .r

.r s oe runginBnr

8/18/2019 2 TAYLOR, The Age of Mobilization (a Secular Age)

3/8

4)A

A SECUIAR

AG E

b

¡heslo¡vofcod,

givhg

nuch

ofthe proceeds

o chariry,

rc.

SinilaL\,,

modeú

docrofwill

not

usuauysend

erpatien¡

u

roucha relic,

ur

he¡vocatio¡

o

nedi,

.xre

hay

be ¿eelly

grourded

¡

her anh.

Obvious

robtems

elatins

ifi¡renria

tion ro

secuiarity

follow5

'I

l ie

' ,u le

ir

rh.\

"

f l .^ " invót\ ingr1eooc,o,

.ro,d"rr :h

r .utJr /¿r ion

w,,h

d,.cn

5J,. tnen' .

,,

.

{ .L l " . ia

ó¡,

n oL.. .q t , /¿ . io , ,

. ,upp"_d

oin.

dude

some

in¿ofdeclin€

rrecssio¡

ofChrisrian a¡d/orJs¡h)fai¡h,

thn de¡_, i f ¡ ¡b1 an¡d

_. lú¿-

A. ebc..

C.r .1,

r . Be-grr

,d

n". ¡ orhe,.

¡ ,e

.pe", .

edly ,J ' "¿ .

borh

rd¿i

¡

rnd

,

i . . r r in

t-" \e h.ñ.et- .

a-J iRernr

. :mc.

in{e,cJ

r .ou.

i rJ,

ot

drer.hantmen¡.

José

a.¡ovahs

peauasivety

rsued

gáinst

he denrificarion

f difteenti¡rion

¿nd privaúdion.

A

sepahtior

our

and emanciparion

fseculd

sphe¡s. ike

h€

r1¡e, rhc

econonn

andscience,

a

undoubredty

ccurred.

ui r

doesnt olow

ar

-hJr

' l 'e

p

üe

,

o l .e.u 'e i¿

io l wor,d

o, 1g n

r

(

$ee

,h"

p i jq , i /J, ion

nd .

'orerdded

rqe .B,r¿Ji ¡ t .on

n.rc, ,g ior

n r \emoJcrnwo

d.

Or rhe.o_

ar¡ .

chims

Casúda,

oda), we

arewitnessi¡g

rhe

dep¡ivatizidon,

of ¡eiision.

. . .

Reli

Ei

r'

rd i ton.

a,oughoJr,hr

wo,,d

c,eru.rnt,ñ.c.ep,

hcmrrg,n¿l

nd

p, i -

\

, ' / -d ,o l -

w\, . \

'heo,F.

r odr.n,ry

A

veU

^

,heo,

".

or

,

Jt , , . /J, .or

¿d

c

Dimohies ofarothtr ki¡d arise irh g€¡eraliado¡sw¡ich look pláusibte

n a

nunberor

sáli€n

as€s,

t rurn

our

or b

hotdmo¡e

widely,

üch

üai

li¡ting

u 'brn ia lon

rd

r, r t ¡ , \

L

cor"

h"\e ,gue¿hr.

,hr

r ,- .e

.*_.

rc b" ,ru.

' : ,

rhc

U-( { ."

qnd

rhe

8ene,¿J

,,on

n¿Lnot

n¿ve

el - o,

r ie

|

.K. dui lC ,h"

Here

we

se

o ¡keypoin¡wi¡l

thiskind

ofhis¡orical

hinking.

ilu¿tio¡s.¡eso

\¿,

ou.¿¡,1

r i8er,

5.

J ,ecogl i¿bt '

'eDf¿r¿ble

aoon

n.y he,rrdenrood

nd

"..d ' -

d Tercndy

n

rhe.e\ i r r r .oL

h¡r r

rheend e,rn

o(,uÍ¡or .er i ¡ in

|d r

¡icuh¡ausal

ártriburio¡s

hao

we*cr

cu

ofwhat

appe¿¡

o be

he

se¡eraljzarions

h"

eJon

h"m

V"hci (- rs¿,eof,1 i \predi ,am(1.¿nJ

B-u.ebr ing,

,

ror . .

u j

,u

he{

i¡

cf i t ic iz ingsome

f h

8/18/2019 2 TAYLOR, The Age of Mobilization (a Secular Age)

4/8

424

1HI ACE

OF MOBILIZATION

429

But

th; doesnt

ispose f¡he su$€s¡ion

ha¡mudr

ofrhc sociotosl/hislo¡y

f

secuhiza¡io.

hN beenaffecredhh¡ped

r d 'unlhough¿,

which s

relatedn

a

'nore

comrlex ry

¡o rheoüttoók frhe

audro¡n ques¡io.,

Á¿t s, or sinply

d d

polemical

xtensio¡

f one\ riews,bur in

¡he more subde

way het one's s,n

f¡amesork

elicfs nd "lues.a¡

co¡$rict onet úeo.etic¿l

hasinarion.

Th6,

¡arhe¡ han lming,

poleúic¡l parnanship

¡he cal

slumblins lockof

ne ú:l so.hl

sciencc.One

(á

.*d in

lhe P¡efac tu a oDieoponry

wo.k "vhich,

ifa¡x

of¡he ¡elicions earedic¡c

s ¡ue' is no buincs

of ¡hesocüt ciellisr,

who

should lwa)'spiÉ to value eurElity, venf¡larsrareisdinicuk o atrai¡."ilTh e

emplus¡

shoul.lbe on rhis as r

clause. erermining

usr

wha¡ hashappened

c-

pe¡dson ¡ ho$ of ¡terp¡crnr

udgdenB,

on

nsu6 such rheexact alure

freli

sion,

o. thc conenr ofchristia. f¿¡ h,

nd ihes€ ill

be deeply oloured

v ou¡

sub$anrive eliefs.

hus he authorofthe

above uotegoes n i¡

I¡ bool b

sive

soneot rhe.exso¡sor rhedecline

n religion. ene¡rio¡s

rhcd.velopnent fscj-

ence ¡d rechnologt

his s no¡ becauseeholds

hesta¡da¡d dea¡h

tiGod'the-

orr rhar cieD.e isproredeligion,

hich

thusdis¡ppears.

n thecofur¿.lihe

ex-

plicr¡ly

cjectshjs.Peoplee roo

sood

at nsulatinghejr beliefslom

app¡rentl),

cónr¡dicroryevide¡ce".

ul he does hi¡l< ha¡

he availabiliq,f kch¡ical

solu-

¡io¡s o lil¿probleñs en¿r o turn

u away ron rel igion. Th€¡e s

o need o¡ re-

ligioG

rires r spellso prorect ttle,gaior

ri¡gwormwhen

ou

en

buy

a drench

{hich nasproven ve andove¡ o be u *cellen¡ cun lo¡ theconditlo¡."'l

Bu

óis sccm ¡o ñe io confound isencfiantoent

i¡h he de.lineDf¡€lisio¡,

atrd hus o udge sain econplex,

son,etimesonmdicróq' el¿tion

etwee¡ rc

rlisions dominanr¡ our

civili?¡rion,

rdaish

a¡d chrisrianiry,

nddreench¡nted

-or

d

s\ i .

h |

-r

rcd

o b,.e.Orr d

"gr"em"r

l -e. -u,

on Ju.

- .pc., i .e

r.

deista.d¡,gs

f ¡elision,which cannotbu¡ be .iri¿lly

rery muchshaped ¡ our

I m not dsunrg

so.r

"poir

mode¡n hesishatw€ are€ách mprisoncd

n our

ówr oudook,

nd cando nothins o ¡arionall/ onvince rh

orhecO¡ the con

rary,I lh¡nk

we

canhaBhal arEunenb o nd uce rhers o modifi

their

udgmenr

a¡d

(wh.r

s closely onnecred)o wider theirsympathies.

ut his ask verydif

ficult,and üat is more npo¡ranr, r is neve¡

onplclc.We doni

u*

decide na

and or all rvhen r

errcr sociology l¡$ to leaye ü¡

"valuei'

at the door They

don(

jusr

c¡tc¡ as conscious¡eniseswhich we cn discounr. he).

conrinue o

shape ur hought a nuch deeper*el, and is onlya o¡ri.unrsope¡

exch¿nge

wiü rhose f difle¡ent andpoÑs whichwill help

us o correct ome f ¡hedisro¡-

Forthis ¡e¡sonwe have u be awareof the mys in which an "unthough

C'of secu-

larization, wellas ariousrodes freligiou

bel;ell anbedevilthe ebate. he¡e

n,

indecd,

powerfulsuch ¡nthoughtpentñe an oúlookwhich holds ha¡ eli-

sio.

nust decline ithcr

a)

becauser s alse,

ndsciencehowshis o be

ror

(b)

trcc¡úse t is i¡cr6insly ifteloq¡r

now ¡har we can cu¡e ringworm

by drcnchegor

G)

beeuse

eligions based n auihorir¡, nd

mode.o ocieiiesive incre6ingl)'

iñpo¡tur place o ndividul

¡ulonomyioi sohecombination

f dreabovc. his

s¡ro¡gnot somuchbecaur t is widelrsupporred

n lhe popúlatlon r algrho$

widet),

seeús o vaq' f¡om socieiy

o sociery-bur becauset is very $rcng mong

intellectu,ls nd ácademi6,

en ñ @unr¡iesike üe U.S.A.whe¡e

tene¡al

eli-

sious

ractie

n ve¡yhigh.Indeed,heexclusion/iÍelo¿ncef

rcligion s oftenpart

oi ¡hc unnoticed a.ksrcund fsocbl sci€¡ce, istory, hilosophy,ycholosJ¿n

ñct, *en unbeliwing ociologists

f religion ften emark ow heir colleasuon

otherpars

of

the

discipline xp¡essú¡prise r heaiiention wored

o such ma.

gin.l phenonenon.', this kind

ofclinare, djsrorlive

udgmens

úconñioüslr

ense¡deredut ofthis oudookc¿noften hriveunchallensed.his wd

rhe

well

r.kenpoi¡t of DavidMúi¡'s di de coeu¡ bour tlim;juting

sccuL¡riz¡don'

3

Now of couse,

m)' writing s also haped v a different u¡üoushl',

¡nd

I

w¡n

ro ryto ¿fti.ulaE ome fth¿ her€, ecause

drink h¡r ¡hn n rheray rc adyance

the

debate.

ut

e¡ best o ¡hisby conúsdng n with hat hplicir n muchn¡i¡-

súeam ecderiz¡tion eóry

The basicnsishr

nde¡li.ing \e

o¡¡hodox"

ods of lheory n lhis domnn', s

that'nodernity"

(in

someñrc) rends o repres ü reduc'relig ion"

(i¡

sone

se¡se).I uve no quarrelwithhk; the¡e s¿sensenwhich concui t is oneofrhe

o¡ñ ¿n¡s of this t¡ook to deline thn sensemore exactl¡: Nor do I guurel with the

delinition of religion which man), orthodox úeó¡irs oF€r Ths B¡uce off€6 rhe

foltowing e6nins escription:Relisiono¡ 6 consisB f acrions,

eliefs ¡d

¡sri-

tutioffpledicared pon

he

asumprion f rhe dislence feiih d

süpernaturalen i-

ries with power of aAe¡cl, o¡ impesonal powe^

or

processes ossessed

f

moral

purpose,which

avc reep¿city o se¡ heconditionso[ r to inteNenen, huñan

Ofcou6e, heres¿ or one ould€vil¿t in deail. O¡e of thebig problenswith

¡hisdcnni¡ion s dr¿winghe ine: he¡e re

¡¡ious

orns of

birilual"

outlook o

d¡y which doni secm o

irvoke

lhe

"sup€rn¡tu¡al",

but

it is

ofte. hard to say.But

this kind ofptoblemwill rffec an)'dennnion.Moe Íoúbling, supernaturals a

tern which hs dweloped n Ch¡istian civiLizatioq he sharp ine beween the "nar

ura1"md whar is beyond s not ¡rarked elsshe¡e. That would be m objection f

úis defi¡itio¡ {e¡e meár io sere a sociolog/history f theworld;but n fact, e

are

really ooknrg at

rhe

histoq, of úe vesr, of

úe

fonner rÁin

Chr¡rendon, and

within rhisdonair, iupe¡natu¡al fers a good is approximatio¡.

Mor€ove¡ I ágr* wirh Brucen nient he.e, which is ro prevmt such a b¡oad and

i¡clusive

.ñnnion of'religion'

harwe end

up

¡¡suing

hát

nothinshd ch¿.ged.

Plainly omerhidgnpoitadr h* happened;hee hx been decli¡e n sonerhing

8/18/2019 2 TAYLOR, The Age of Mobilization (a Secular Age)

5/8

A

SPCULARAC ¡

ve¡y

signii(Ir, which

mosrpeople

€osnik

unde¡ he

e¡m relision,.

vc do¡t

h¡ve o ollow

hemdses

n ou 6e

ofthis dm,

bu weneed ,a.

woi(t fwe a¡e

o

q'to

unde6rand

he sisnificance

f ih¡

decline, nd'religion

is certainly

h€

Another

hirg

rhat like about

B¡úcei'

efinirions rhai

r inclúds rhe.inper

son3l orc6

,

¿ndúu recognizes

he mponant

place

fwhat r ca

ed n Chapter

2 "mor¡l

forces" n

our

"e¡chan

ed ¡elisiouspat.

Y/nh úis delinidon n ¡nind,l can

¿gree hh Bruceon

hecrucial

henonenon:

Althoughit

s po$ible

o

@nceptualiz€r;n

orherways,

ecula¡iatio rim¡r

ilv reÉ^ ro

rhe b€liefsof people-

The

coÉ ofwhar

we nea¡ when we

Elk of

rhis socier/

being more iecul¿i'

than ihai

¡ rhár the ivcs

of fewer

ople

in

th. fo¡m€r he

in th€ arter

re ¡fluenced

y Éligiou belieB .r,

Having

abúdoned

heatt€npt

ro de6n€ eljgion

n

a

@y

rvhi.h

would

be uni,

ver¿]ly

pplicáble,

would ike

ro pafticulari,e

en no¡e

what s cone

u¡de¡

prcsure

¡hroush

moderniry

Dráwins on

lhc discussion

n the 6rt

chaptea mnr

to

coñe at rhe phenomenon

rom eo

directio¡s

¿r once_ vúr

ro focus or onjy

on ldiefs

and ácrio¡s predie¡ed

on ¡heaistence

fsupernaruful

nrides,'(a.k.á.

"Cod), bu¡ alsoon üe perspeciiv€f a r¡ansformadonfhunan bejnsswhich

takes

hm

beyond r

ou*ide ofwh¿tever

s ¡orm¡lty

úders¡ood

ashum¿¡

lou¡

ishins, even

n a cortext

of ¡asonabte

muruliiy

(üar

is,

wher we wo¡l

for ach

oüe¡s

ilour¡hing).

n dre

Chiis¡ian

ase,h;sm@ns

ú¡ parriciparing

n

üe love

(¿gip€)

of

cod tur human

bei¡gs,

which is

by dcfi¡ition

a tovewhich

go$ k), be,

)'ó¡d

any

posible

nutúality,a

self-givi¡got

bounded

y sonemeasure

f ¡ir¡e$.

we

gr.sp h€ specifi.iry

frhis beliefonly

¡ taking

t frcm

rwosides, ir

were,n

rc¡ñs

ofwh¿t

n supposes

asupra-hunan

ower

cod),

and ¡

te¡nsofwhar

his

power

calls us o,

the perspecrive

f

lEnsforhádon

n opens

l

I descend

o rhis wel

of speciticiq-

@ue

I b€liúe

rhar hemain

struggle,

oth

beñecn

a¡d wi¡hin

groups

d indñiduals,

o

been haped

y a polarization

e,

tween ú\is

k¡d of

¡ransfo¡n

ion pebpecrive,

ud

a viN which

emerges

n the

€ishteenrh€nturyn úe en¡exr of d1eModernMohl order andconmc¡cial o,

ciec¡

andwhich

described

n Chap¡er4.

his

sa vis which

sees ur

highe*goal

iD

e¡tu ófa

ceftain

ind óf hman

nou¡ishing,

n a conrcxt

f hulu¡tiq,,

pursuing

e¡chhis/her

wn

happi¡€s

on ihe bsis

ofdsured liͿ

and iberty,

n ¡ socicq,

f

tuutul

bene6r. hhoush

his

k 6rsr

ofall á p¡didcntblis t

vicw,

with

a

place

or

somekid

of Cod, variants

aose which

s.r thej. face

¿gáinst

ny llsions

of highe¡

úanfornarion,

which

drey aw

as doger

ro rheo¡de¡

ofñuruatiry,

¡ short

s

''rá¡adciso"

r't husiasn".

There er¡

soon *eloped

a¡heist

r agnosric

orhs.

THTJ ÁCE OF MOBILIZAT ION

4] ]

Thereseen

to

be

oo very diffe¡ent stú.es inouicniliatio¡,

which o¡e crn de

s.ribe borh as enpers and as oudooks. fir¡ doc

one think ófl¡¡¡cis

.fAsski,

wnh his renu¡ciation ofhis po t€ntial ife ¡s ¿ mcrchr¡r,

h¡ añ€¡iries, his rigm¡t¡?

One can be deepl¡

moved

by this

call to go be¡ond liourishing,

rnd then one is

remptedbyrhe transf ornation perspect¡vq r one cr.

see in asa parádign eon

plúofwhat Humecalk the

monkishvütues', ¡prac¡i¡ionerof¡cnseles

self'denial

¡nd á threar ro civil ntrtualilv.

Ofcoursc, ther c are

ots

of

peoplewho want to situate hemñlves b€ñe€

rüat

we high¡ cll ¡he úansform¿tio¡ and

the iñmmence p€sp€ ctivei. l h¡ ¡

P3ricu'

l*1¡ so n our agewhen the arie¡ peispective e¡ds

io be supponed b¡ a mat*iaikt

outlook-

Mar¡ have aken a positió¡ beñeen rh e so excemes,

h¡hg awa¡ from

mare¡i¡lism, or f¡om ¿ nrrow vis of the moialiq' of muturl

bene6t, ard

¡et

not

wá¡¡insto ¡eturn o th€ srons dains of¡he Úanri)rñatlon view,

witl i¡s ñutach-

ing beliefsabour the power ofCod in ou¡ lives. n the ¡ine¡eenth ccntüry,

'i .ror

Hugo

comcs o

mi¡dr

or Unirarians

ánd d-U¡itariús like Enerson, or M.t¡hew

Arnol¿. The lisr coúld go o¡

irdeñnitely. This kind

ofposirion

is not insisni6 .dtj

indeed. n somecontempomr¡ socieries,n one or othe¡ v¡.ian¡,

ir ñar

be

a majoF

iq

(but

when

¡ou

take accourt of¡eoplet mbivalences, coun¡i¡g

is i¡¡ fióm .asy

in ¡his area).Bur peopleeke up a r¿¡ce ofthis

ki¡d in a 6eldvüich is polariz

8/18/2019 2 TAYLOR, The Age of Mobilization (a Secular Age)

6/8

432

üoo¡,

abour

¡h€ pl¡cc

ofretigio¡

roda¡

Vbere

has

the

wholc

hovemeor

lefr

us?

v'¡a¡

6 üe predicdre¡r,

sha¡

¡¡e the

vul¡enbilities

and

strcngtts

ofrligion

and

u¡b€tiefrodalt

H€re

we re

i¡ ihe

domain

rhat

r

haye

d$is*,.a

**hr;:,

".J

: l i , : .

'j

;

n .- ¡ ."eo,n.u,, .

dom¡i , .

¡cupDer.,oÍ,

,h . ,

.

. , . , . ; . ,

p" . .

p lc

non

s.hoIr '^ .

ur

nor

onl l

rhrm,

No*

muc¡

of¡re.oofsiór

about

wherher

or lor

o¡e

aarecs

wnh

,:ecuta¡ia,

¡ion".oms

frcn

rhe ¡iprecision

¡bout now muctr ofrne b,itdi"s we- co"_.n.d

{. 'h , ' , ¡ '

iu . , , É

8.ú1d

f loo

w?

rJkind

¿bou,.

ner

Inüe,. r . ,or

¿s.eeher¡

¡¡ / r

-

8cne."r

d.rh.

e

cr

rhorg\, t_- .(

oe om",r \ i t , :n8

3r

he der j l .

B ;ú

"t

e,

ope i . ,

br

{J. I u . .

h oh.hol ,

- ( ro¿t

"Bedtvrg,tr .n

r .utrur , ion..n,trd inB.

| 1rrn.r .

M¿,

,r

¿rd

Be.ge,.

t \ , .

Jrn

ho.¿.

ir

ont"

ú,"no.

ro

¡hegrourd

F

o.On."-cEe

cob"nen,

J.d

herope..

üe¿dr,e,s.n-e." ts i ;en,.

r .r , ,ec

shJr

rh

re,r onn,.

repror.n

aintr¡e

rheo. i . . \

o.

Alvc.Ju

¿bov(,

?

.

g oh

c\, o ,

. . rh"r , f9

aie..

m-

¡e¡rure

ot

nuder l r" , . .n .

t i t r

I

.bJn.tur ion

oriodu$riaiizaion,

or

rhe

d*elopment

ofclss

socrery,

r úe

ris€

ofscience^cch-

nol%rl

md

se rheft

as

wúking

se¿diry

¡o undermi¡e

and

sid€he

religious

airhj

w¡c¡ed,

a¡stre

he rqnio¡iss,

rhe

a.rual

mov€ment

is

nót

ar alt tine;

in

many

". .. Br ¡¿.n.u bJ, .a, ion .1d ,ndJi ,¿ t i tu . ,u1 d ,o h" dr\et

oprcn

"1,

r

or¡

$¡ i .h

a,,uJtv

C,nv

du, ing

rhe

n.1e.cen,h

en,u

.

q

.;h

lr .

qe

r '8h, n '

l 'JJe. lo

Betg ium.

nd

.or

\om"

pJf l .

o t t_ tu

e. then

rhere

r

\pe-

. ' .

e h,

:

b,o,D. l ,kc.het,hh$o.Lns J^ .. thcwet,h

¿nd,oun.

Th€

a.cusarion

hrown

a

onhodox

theorisrs

s tha¡

ü9,

husr

somehow

belide

¡rrafthese

ñodern

d€vetopments

ofrhemsetvs

undermi¡e

belief

o¡ mike

it

hdderi

r¡thef

th¡n

s€ci¿g

¡¿¡

¡he

new

¡ructures

i¡deed,

unde¡ni¡e

ol¡:tñrms,

but leave

opetr

the possibilitr

of¡ew

foms

which

c¿n lourish.

The

at¡iburion

sems

jusi,

+¿

oe." .¡ .

dheNi . .

' l - -y

-o: ldn,

|

" , .

,o

e¡ ly

u\er toote¿

hi .

,on, i r ) ñ

-

trnr .

inu r f l L .^rd..Lr .e

di . ionr. :r retav.ngrhemisr¿te

jhed.o_or

rhe"rn_

¡nouÉhr

or m¡ 'ntr ¡e

rheorú6.

- l ' . . m"\ b" , t 'o ,ch, , , r ¿ r pJr i i .J tJr , , r" .o . otoer. . ur" .e r" td n _or , t_e

nm-

-

,rh e i 'L f .

¿rd shu

oi ten

rcer h"

rhe)

don

\Ne ro

.on,ern ,heh.etvL

wrh

h¡toq,.

Bur

n*enhetess,

tte¡e

does

seem

something

rc it.

The inpression

n

r¡e¡grhe¡ed

wh€¡

one ook

ar ¡he a¡swe¡

rhar v¡lt¡

áM

B.uce

"trer

rcihe

*.ep

¡ons.

Thev

asree

¡ha¡

chu¡ch*

e¡

li¡d

a ¡ote

whic¡

srom

dowr

or i¡hibirs

sectr-

l¡riza¡io¡,

a the hish

and

polish

css

shm,

but

rhen hey

corclude

Thse

speci6c

is¡o¡ical"n¿

cuhu¡ál

patterns

ugge$

asihple

h۟rntic

piqci,

pre,

nanlelr

rh¿t{oci¿l

differe¡¡i¿rion,

soci€t¿lizadon

nd ratjon¿li,*io;

gen_

erÍe

secul¡¡ia¡ion

eKepr

ñ.herc

€ligio¡

rinds

a.d

¡ehins

*ük

b

,lo .;hr

¡lun

¡€litirg

nrdividu¿k

tu

úe supe¡n¿tural.r.

THE

¡CE

OF MOBILIZATION

The

1a5¡

aue

hej

o be

read n

rhe lighr

of the ,le6nnio¡

of ¡eLigion

qrlie¡

in

'ern.

úf ' .Lpon"(ml

m, , io

. to .¿r

üat ,e t is ion

nd.

",1,.

,h i ;s ,

, "

d. ,h , ;

rerrrr8

ú

'o

ihse.

b b

uy ú¿r

Etigjous

od,et

6nd

oüej

tuncrion.

, .ótG.

by

dehni r ion.

ú ' .Rl ig ios

on$.

H"¡e

ct ,g ion

.ot

ru.c t ro, ing

""

i r

" "n.

b"r

¡

¿ suppo¡r

o

sonethidg

etse.

i hd

a "funciion'

i¡ uorher

dohai¡,

here

tuhur¿l

What rhis eeDs to impl), is lhai .,.eligio " is @ lonser

an indcpenrlent

moti,

várins

foce

in

@ndjrions

of

mode.niq,.

Tenslared

in;

,h. .",_;

.f

_), pol-,

'q,

abok,

rh€ r¡ns]¿rn¡tion

pc¡specriE,

¡

is dsumed,

h6

losr

mct of

is

;ows

to

daw people

n

moderniry

so rhat

sonerhing

like

rhe saoc

acrions

úd

inrüu,

lotr

which

h 6ed

¡o susrain

@ o.t¡

Énai¡

ifthe),

are powerd

by sooe

oúer

,

Bu'

wi rh

úi

lcnd

ofd¿in. we

e

¿1,€dy,n

he

uppa

o¡ey

I ¡ ru¡n

ou,

h¿l

o¡senel t

ndh.Bher

oor F

.nr im"kt ) ,

infd:

hár

i " . rh¡ r

ü.

e ip j¿nat ion

ne

giv$ fü

¡he

d

8/18/2019 2 TAYLOR, The Age of Mobilization (a Secular Age)

7/8

134

THD

ACE OF

MOBILIZATION

4l l

¡o th€

crnió ofihe

seculdizaiioq

pproách',

har he¡e s,.an

nduring atent

de-

But I ah,lso

att¡iburing

heseh€s6

o Bruce ndW¿llis

ndB¡uce

o¡ because

the)'

hale

(f ll¡

andcledl¡)

sraredh€n, bur

on ¡he

Gdni ¡edly

ndirecd

¡oúnds

rhat f rher

held he €garion

f these

roposiiions

heI woutd.or

.rgu€ h€w.),

tha{

doior ar ear

would eel h¿rsoae

frheüratehena

necd

o¡e deiensc.

u¡

ot course,otsofpeople o hóld somcrhingike hesewo

¡opositio¡s.

¡d weca¡

undüst¡nd

$ür

rhq. nigh¡ ¡pper

plauible

to people irmty

occup),ins

he mha,

I

cn¡p{sp€dive.

t ca¡ appe¡rplausible,

ithe¡

G)

bec¿úe

t seems

o pcoplen thn

standpoinr

hatsciencehas

lready

efuted elisioo,

nd/or

b)

because

h€ elisious

hotive was

onb'

ever ied o the

oisery sufrerirg,

nddespátr

fthe hum,n

ondi

tion

(

heartof

a heatlesswotld"-Mary

despair-E.

p.

Thohp$,ri

whenhr

ma¡s@m€

o cólrolibei¡

worldand

sociery,he eligious

mpulse

mur arrophy.),

vhat

then

do6 Brucc

eeh ó

bc suggesins

boút he pj¡ce

ofrelisio¡

rod¡y?

The quore

¿trout ingworn

in cattle

docs on

to alignhim

wirh a modified

er-

sionof(a). The

posirion

oúndsike

a chasrened,a¡e

senti*h-century

cousi^

o

Rcúaot

obsr

prediction:

l viendra

¡

jour

oü I'humaniÉ

e

croira tu. mais

ü

ellesau¡riun oür oü ell€saurac nonde mér.ph¡sigue rnorat, comne e € sair

déjá e

nonde

h)'sique"to

i¡ werc,whar

Re¡ú mishr

have aid fhe

hadappre_

ciated

owgood

people ctuallr

r€ar nsulatidg

heü

beliefs¡om

¿pparendy

o¡-

t¡dicti¡s

újdene'.

Bu¡

B¡¡cevisorously

en¡

¡o sepa¡a¡eimsetf

¡om the

old

malerialbcralionalist

osirion,

he

Comtea¡ de¿

hat ¡ci€ne

will evenrually

o

Rf,üe¡

he seems

o see

different nd

point o the

wholedwdopñenti

nor

u¡i-

vers¿l

nát€¡i¡];m,

bui widespread

¡differenc€.

The

ngmenr¿tion

f úe

Éligiou

cuhurems,

in ¡ine, to

see e widespread,

takcn

for'granred

and

une){dined

Chriridily

óf üe pre-R€fornation

pe,

¡iod replaced

t,

an eqü:lly

widespread,

aken-for-granted,

nd mexamnred

indiffere¡ceo rcligioo.rz

Principl€d

heism

úd.gnosiicism

willprob¿bty

or becomcth€

efautr osirions,

¡o¡ ¡hg"'are

l¡atures

of relisious

c¡l¡ures

and we¡e

¿t their heighr

n rh€ Victorian

€¡d.rJ

Rarhe¡,

hesussesrion

eems

o re,üe whole

ssuewill

de_ ¡

wil be virh

relisio¡

$

$ch, hthd

d h has

been

wiü

ceft¿id

olirical

ssuesu¡roúnding

el i

gion, ike he

6e¡c€

arrlen lrance

beMeen

onrchisr

Caüolics

ndanli,cle¡ic¿l

Republians.

ommitted

¡nisas

o¡

bott sides

windle,

nderenru¿tb,

we

hope)

larer

cnerado¡s

ill wonder

wh¿t

he rss

wasaltabou¡.

Or,

rs Brrcc pus

it in a

ater book:

ln so f¿.

s l.ú imagi¡e

a¡ endPoint,

t

would ¡ot

be selfco¡scious

iseii'

gion;

you havc o

care oo nuch

about

religion ro

be nreligious'

t wouLd

be

widdp¡e¿d

indift¡rcnce

(what

Veb€r

called beins

¡eligioury

ú¡nuricd)r

¡o

socially

ignifi ant

shared

eligion;and

religious

deas entg

no motc common

than sould be the c¿\e f3ll útrds Í€re ped blank ¡nd Peoplcbesn lrom

scratch

o úhk

about ¡hcworLd

and their

place n

nr^

Ths, of coune,

might be

right, but

it s€eds c

ñe de€plI

imPlausible

Btrüh¡ ¡

bec.use

enno¡ see

úe

"denan¿

fo¡ religion'jüst

¡isáPPearing

ike that ft

seems

to me th.t our

siruadoi

Ghe

pe¡enni¿l

human siluation?)

s to

be oPe¡ o

so sol'c-

i¡¿tions.

O¡e

(n,

ou

.ivillzalion,

mr1r.v) ¡

rhe draw ro

a úansiorm¡ron

PcAPec

dve.

The other comcs

f¡on a conseris

of resisdn.es

o h¡

kind of

$li'it¡tion

'l

hese¿r¡epaúl)

from

úe abuses nd

disto¡tions

1hi.hafieci dre

soingrcrsio¡s

of

rhe úansformaiion

pebpecrive n our

culture; and

pard¡ from

the ñ.¡ thlt

follo"'

ing this

perspective

¡kr ptrlling us

aml f¡om the

modes of

huma¡

llourishi¡g

which have,lcveloped¡ our culture, and ro which we arcdeeplvcommitted

In our society

(the

vst, I me¡n),

the firt dnw

¡ to some

ñ¡m of Ch¡isdan

fairh, or

in oür lndcdingL¡

pLural

wüld. aJsnh, orMüsLin,

o¡

Buddhistconmn

nent. The

second esponse

as uken

fom in thc

'laiqtre' o¡ secülr"

.r;tique/re

j€ciion

of

feligion. as a da¡ger.

wen enemy

to hunan

ltoudshins.

The second

c-

sponse

enúencbes

ne n r certain

defi¡i¡ion of

úis

goúrishing

*hich n

nade thc

absolLrc tandud

ofgood

a¡d ba(t, ighr

drd wrong

Each ofdreñ

Positions

s

in -

here¡rryfragile,

nüe pÍ¡icularl¡

open to

8/18/2019 2 TAYLOR, The Age of Mobilization (a Secular Age)

8/8

1960s,whe¡c

he hi6r ñ¡ ¡he

¡bsoLftewas ery.idenr,

evenúough

n oft€n

didnt t¡ke a .elisious" om.

Now I

¿n no¡.lainins for Inyselfin

ll rh¡ a posnio¡

ofobje.¡iviq, rcc

iom ary

'n¡¡houshi'.

on

rhecon¡ra.,. rand i¡ rhc

othú pespecrircr

an noved b¡

üe

life oflmn.is

of¡¡sisi, fo¡ insancer

nd tharhassometling

o do wi¡h whr

thn

Di. 'u f

. .

d rpper,¿n.

"

o-in¿..( 1d.n,,et i8 ior,

p,r",

^n.err.,o

ne.o,., .

rhusiblc. Bur ¡ha¡does.t me¿. ü¡¡ we hay€ impl), sr¿nd ffhere,wherewc

nake

decl¡¡¿rionio each ther ron

out ofour respecrive

kimr€ p¡€mises.re ,

sum¡blr oneo¡ othe¡ iew rbour

rellgious pimrion

c¡¡ allowus ¡o male betLc¡

sen¡c fsh¡r has ctuallr appcncd.

eins n oft or

orhq perspe.rive akesr

ean

ie¡ o¡ som€ r o¡her nsighrs

o come o

¡our

but rhere s $ill rheques'ior

of hos

rhesensighs

panou¡ ¡ üe rcrualaccoun¡

fhisro ,

Solerme rv¡oserour

a¡ alrc¡n1¡iverl{e n dre asr

en¡uries,whichfire^

dif

fe¡enr idure of secularti¡ion.

B¡iegx úe mri¡line

thes¡ s riglr ro rhis

c¡renr,

that rost

ofthe cha¡gei her dentiry

e.g.,

rb.niz.rio¡, ¡dúrrializarion,

mig¡a

riotr,dre irdu¡ins ofeadief oñmurniet

ha¿a ¡e8átive

lTecrn rhe

¡dousl),

exis¡ins elisioüsorms.

T|cr oñennade some frhc

eailie¡ ncricesnpossible,

fhile orh€s losr

¡hei¡ ñ€ani¡s o. úei¡ force.

This di¿ somerimese¿d

$tole

grouts o ¿dop¡rome uire úer oudóok, n¡itheticalo Ch¡isridrirj,,rindeed, o

an)- elision: uch

Jacobirism,

rxism or sarchism

(¡s

n Spain)i ur ir also

happened

rar people espondedo the

breakdown ¡ d€velopn€ s

rcligious

fo¡ñs. This happenedardy

h¡ough he ou¡dingof new

de¡omnuriors, üch s

I,l€thodism

id ¡tsoffjLoors.Bur r aLso

ouldh¿ppcn htuush ewmods

ofo¡-

ganizarion ndns spi¡irull

di¡.crio¡s n olde¡e$ablishedhurches,

heCatholic

Oú¡ cónrenpo¡ary

itualio0 csul¡s¡on a ñfthd

developrnent,hich an be

dated o thc period after he Second

Vorld

\Var,

more

recifl¡

rhe I

960s¿nd heir

aft€rmxrh.¡ this

hc

n;rct.cn¡h

a¡¿ ead)'M€nrie¡h nlul1

co¡$ruc¡ions, lich

¡espondedo thee ]ierbrcakdoNn, ere

hemselves¡de¡hined. n wharca¡

only

b€ ¿escribeds¿ cuhural elolúrio¡ ofsone nasnitu¿e. swe analysend d¡cuss

th¡, ¡.'w

io¡ms¿eain ¡e.olvins.

'Íhis

Edins

allows s o sce e¡ttn rhi¡gswhich hemainline

tadingoccludes.

Fnsi, (

docs¡'t cúhe dedineó linea¡,hatis, hed€cline

f o¡e uch¡nging thins.

ove¡ enm¡ies, nderüe sread)-pü¿tion

of¿ single etof€ues. The continuity

consk$ ¡ rhc act h¡r etrrlie¡orm were ndemi.ed boü i.

Gouel

)

theeadie¡

ninetee¡¡h nd rhe ares€¡rie¡h cenru.y. ut

drediscontinuiryesides¡ t¡e facr

that he o¡ms once¡ned,.d rhe oBs

undermininsheh,

w€r€

ifFrenr.r6

ec-

THE ACE

O¡ MO

BlIIZATION

437

on¿, ir xllows

us o appreciate

hat and

how the for¡¡s ofrclisi on

actu¡llv

.hanged,

rnd

arechangirg again

oda)¡

I¡ brief,

I cone closer

rc agreeme¡t

with ¡he

úainhre thesis

or the ground

lloo¡; as o the

basemen¡, here

s sonrcconversencel

actos lile urbaniarion'

nr'-

gr¡tion,

etc. didcou¡t.

Bu the

wa¡ they ounted

wo

nor bI bringins

abour a¡ a'

toph¡

ofindependent

religious

morivation.

On ¡hc @rtary

this was

and s 4ident

i¡

the crea¡io¡

of new fonns.

replacing

hose dhrupted

o¡ ¡e¡der€d

un"i¡ble

bv

¡l¡ese secul¡rizins"asens The v ector of this

whole developme¡r

does o

Poi¡¡

towards

a kind

ofhea¡ dcath

offaith

k should

thus

be cLea¡ u¡

this is no an

aftemP¡

o show that

¡eLision c¡uins

co¡rdt,

th¡¡, suihb ,

dc6ned,

ts con¡inuance

ctutes

ecul¡¡iation

(the

g¡ound

flóor). Onúe

co¡Í¡¡y,

rhe present

enc, shorn

of the earlier

orms,

s diF€re¡ an¿

uorecogniable

o anyearlier€poch

I¡ isnarkedba¡

unhcard

of

Piur'lism

ofout

looks,

relisiousand

non and

anti religios

in which

the nunber

of possible

osi-

rions scens

to bc

increding

withoüt end.

ft ¡ ma¡ked

n consequence

v

'

g¡eat

deal of rnutual

fngilization,

¡nd

hence movenent

between

dilfc¡e¡¡

outlook

lt

naturaily

depends

n one\

niLieu, but

ir is harde¡

an'lh¡rder

to 6nd ¿

nichewhcrc

eitherbelieforunbeliefgo

withotrt s¿)'ing

A¡d ¡ ¡

conseque¡a

thep¡oPoúronor

belicf s

snaller ¿nd

rhat ofunbeliefn

luger than wer

befo¡e;

nd úls is em

mórc

cleatly he case, fyou define clision ¡ term ofthe ¡ansform¿tionPe6pcctive'

Thus ny own

vio of

'teulaiarion',

which

I ÉeeLy nfes

hasbeen

shapedb¡

m)' ow

peispecrive

a bel;wd

(bor

lhr

I would

nryertheless

ope to be

able ¡o

defend

with

argünera),

is har thue

hascenainLy

een

a "decli¡d'

of¡eligion

R€li

giou

belief nov

aiss h a

field of choices

which

in¡l'rdc

wious fo¡¡N

of de¡ruí31

and cjectioü

Chrislian

fai¡fi *iss

in a

6eld where

rhe¡e s also

¿ wide

nnse ot

oth€r

spiritu¡l

optio¡s

Bui the

i'rercsing story

is not

simplv one

of declioe'

but

al-

of a n*

placeme"t

of the saúed

o¡ sPi¡nual;¡

relation o

i¡dividu¿lúd

social

lifc.

This new placenent

is now lhe occásio¡

o¡ ¡ecompositions

fspünual

life

in

rw forms,

an