Church

Category: Fields of research

Church is a type of religious organization that is most closely connected with Christianity. The theoretical concept of the church is often not applicable to religious organizations in other world religions, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, and Daoism. In this article, we will discuss the definition of the concept of church, the relation of church concerning other religious organizations within Christianity, and relations between church and state in predominantly Christian countries. The decline of church attendance and church religiosity in the 20th and 21st centuries is the subject of a separate article – Secularization.

Definition of Church and Classification of Religious Organizations

Émile Durkheim, in his famous book The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912), defines the church as a community that connects its believers through shared beliefs and practices relative to sacred things.

Max Weber, in his Economy and Society (1922) defines the church as a religious organization that can enforce its decisions and orders using psychic coercion by providing or denying religious benefits and claims "a monopoly on the legitimate use of hierocratic coercion.". Church has a hierarchical and, bureaucratic organizational structure, belonging to the church is universal and compulsory (usually by birth). Weber sees sect as a second type of religious organization that differs from the church in several aspects. Belonging and participation in a sect are most often voluntary, sects are far less bureaucratic, membership to a sect is restricted only to those that fulfill certain religious requirements, and sects have a higher level of intensity of participation. Weber argued that sects start as associations of followers of some charismatic leader, but throughout their development, sects tend to routinize charisma and transform into churches.

A German theologian, Ernst Troeltsch, in his book The Social Teaching of the Christian Churches (1912), further developed Weber’s typology of religious thought and participation. Troeltsch presents three different approaches to Christianity that developed over time: (1) church – it is an institution that can adjust to the outside world; (2) sect - a voluntary association of believers, separated from the outside world; and (3) mysticism - the personal emotional experience of Christian teachings. Troeltsch argues that in early Christianity there were two basic tendencies of organizational development. The first stressed the importance of unity of free and equal believers, they had idealistic tendencies and they kept apart from wider society. The second stressed the importance of a strong organization that can implement its practical goals. Church developed from the first tendency and sect from the first tendency. The church is more conservative, and it wants to integrate with the state and upper classes and use them as a means of ruling all aspects of the public and private lives of believers. The sect is a small organization oriented to inner perfection and close relationship with believers. Sect functions outside wider society and has uninterested or hostile relationship with it. Sects are often oriented toward oppressed classes of people. Misticism, as a third type of approach to Christianity developed as a result of conflicts between churches and sects.

For Niklas Luhmann (1977) church is religiously specialized communication. The church, or religious communication, is the function of the religious subsystem. Religious communication is governed by a dual code (transcendence/immanence), but lacks its own medium.

Richard Niebuhr, in his book The Social Sources of Denominationalism (1975), studies the dramatic transformations of religious organizations and institutions in the United States. Niebuhr expounds on dual church-sect typology, introducing the third type of religious organization – denomination – that is position between the church and the sect. Denominations are bigger and more institutionalized than sect, but are smaller and less monopolistic than churches. Denominations, like churches, have bureaucratic and hierarchical organization and are inclusive and appeal to all members of society. Denominations differ from churches as they don’t claim a monopoly on religious truth, they are separated from the state and believe in the separation of church and state.

Bryan Wilson, in his book Religious Sects (1970), gives precise definitions of sect and denomination. The sect has the following characteristics: it is a closed religious organization, membership in the sect is based on a voluntary approach, joining the organization requires an act of conversion, great commitment is expected from members, violating members can be easily expelled, each sect believes it has the only true learning, it has no contact with the wider society, and there is no professional clergy. The denomination has voluntary membership, but there is no formal way to expel it from membership. The denomination is less isolated from the wider society, has good relations with other churches and denominations, and does not claim to have a monopoly on religious truth. They have professional clergy.

Roland Robertson, in The Sociological Interpretation of Religion (1970), introduces a four-tiered classification of religious organizations. This classification has two dimensions. In the first dimension organizations are divided on the basis of their rules toward membership – is it closed or open? Another dimension looks at the source of legitimacy – whether it is plural or singular. In the end, he comes up with four types: 1) institutionalized sect (closed membership and plural legitimacy, 2) sect (closed membership and singular legitimacy), 3) denomination (open membership and plural legitimacy), and 4) church (open membership and singular legitimacy).

Milton Yinger, in his book Religion and the Struggle for Power (1947), studied both sects and cults. He introduced a six-level classification of religious organizations: cult, sect, established sect, class church/denomination, ecclesia, and universal church. He believes that many sects and cults have the potential, depending on complex social and historical conditions, to grow into institutionalized churches. Yinger believes that both churches and sects can lose their significance, churches because they adapt too much to secular society, and sects because of their exclusivity and radical action.

Church-State Relations

The most simple classification of church-state relations in different countries is one that divides countries in two types, countries that have an official state church and countries that don’t have an official state church. This classification has been shown to be imprecise, so several authors introduced the multi-tier classifications of church-state relations. In their book The Challenge of Pluralism, Stephen Monsma and Christopher Soper present three models of the church-state relationship. The first model is the division of church and state so that religion and politics are seen as distinct areas and the state is neutral toward religion, and the best example of this model is the U.S. context. The second model is the model of the established church: “The state provides the church with recognition, accommodation, and often financial support; the church provides the state with an aura of legitimacy and tradition, recognition, and a sense of national unity and purpose”. Said authors distinguish formally (constitutionally) established churches and informally established churches, which gain their status by means of state favoritism and the cultural domination that some church has in the community. The best examples of the second model are England, Denmark and Norway while Germany could be perceived as a state with two informally established churches, Catholic and Lutheran. The Third model is the pluralist model. Within this model, “society is understood as made up of competing or perhaps complementary spheres”. The domains of education, family, economy, religion and governance have special activities and responsibilities and have the autonomy to achieve them.

Alfred Stepan, in the article ”The Multiple Secularism of Modern Democratic and Non-Democratic Regimes,” distinguishes three models in his analysis of secularism: the separatist model of the U.S., the model of the established religion of Germany, Great Britain, Denmark and Iceland and the model of positive accommodation of the Netherlands. Gerhard Robbers forms a tripartite scheme of the relationships between the church and the state. According to his scheme, there are three basic models: the systems of the state church, the systems of strict separation, and the system of common goals. In the article “The Emerging Pattern of Church and State in Western Europe: The Italian Model” Silvio Ferrari also distinguishes three models of church-state relationship - separation systems, concordatarian systems, and national church systems”.

In the article “Divergent Trends in Legal Recognition of Religious Entities in Europe: The Cases of Slovenia and Hungary” (2015), Lavrič and Flere, with respect to legal regulations for registration of religious organizations discern four major types of countries: 1) post-communist countries with very difficult and complicated registration procedures; 2) countries with antiquated or multi-tier system for registration of religious entities; 3) countries with state or established church; 4) French model, established with intention to control religion. Maurice Baribier used the concept of laicity (the constitutional separation of the church and state) to formulate a four-partite divide: secular state – France; quasi-secular state – Italy, Spain, Portugal; semi-secular state – Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands; and non-secular state: Denmark, England, Greece.

Mark Chaves and David E. Can have offered a more nuanced methodology. Although they still see the relationships between the church and the state one-dimensionally, they study this dimension through six variables: 1) the existence of one recognized state church; 2) the existence of a number of denominations that are recognized by the state, while others are not; 3) the state is tasked with the initiation of the state officials; 4) the state pays the wages of the state officials; 5) the existence of taxation for the benefit of the church conducted by the state; 6) the state gives direct financial support for the church. Summing up the values for each variable they reach a tripartite scheme: 1) full establishment church (Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden); 2) partial establishment (Austria, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Germany, Great Britain, Italy, and Switzerland); 3) separation (Ireland, the Netherlands, France).

Veit Bader, in the article “Religions and States. A New Typology and a Plea for Non-Constitutional Pluralism” (2003), analyzes two dimensions: the establishment of religion and religious pluralism. The dimension of establishment is concerned with the institutionalization of one or more religions within a particular society so that there are constitutional, legal, administrative, political, and cultural establishment. Pluralism is centrally concerned with the number of religious organizations with which the state enters into a special relationship so that we can distinguish: monism, constitutional pluralism, and strict separation. By combining constitutional formation and the type of pluralism Bader reaches a five-partite divide of the relationship between the church and religious organizations: 1) firmly established state church – Greece; 2) loosely established church – England and the Scandinavian states; 3) plural formation (constitutional pluralism) – The Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Germany; 4) non-constitutional pluralism of the state; 5) private pluralism – USA.

Javier Martinez-Torron and Cole Durham, in their article “Religion and the Secular State” (2010) present a two-dimensional model of the study of the relationship between the church and the state in various countries. The first dimension is centrally concerned with the position of religious organizations with regard to corporate freedoms and has two extremes: the absence of religious freedoms and the optimal religious freedoms. The second dimension studies the neutrality of the state towards religious organizations. In the middle of the spectrum is the neutrality, that is to say, the non-identification of the state with religious organizations. In essence, this means that the state treats all religious organizations equally and that they have the equal right to action. On one pole of the relationship is the state that actively supports the religious freedoms of religious organizations, and on the other pole, it denies even the negative freedoms of religious organizations. When the graph that depicts this is connected with a curve, this curve has the U shape. Hence, ideal types of this relationship range from theocracy and state church, through cooperation and secularism, and towards the hostility and the prosecution of religion.

Jonathan Fox, in the article “World Separation of Religion and State in to the 21st Century” (2006), further develops Durham’s classification scheme and applies it to the empirical study of separation of state and religion in 152 countries through four variables (which have a total of 60 components), for every year during 1990–2002 period. In the end, all countries were ranked on the ordinal scale into one of nine categories: 1) established religion; 2) multiple official religions; 3) civil religion; 4) cooperation; 5) supportive; 6) accommodation; 7) separationist; 8) inadvertent insensitivity; 9) Hostile.

Criticism of the Church

Anarchist and feminist author Emma Goldman viewed the church as an institution that is as oppressive as the state. She saw the origin of religion in the inability of people to understand natural phenomena. The church has always acted as the greatest opponent of progress, so Goldman advocated atheism as a rejection of that oppressive system.

Michel Foucault studies the relationship between power and knowledge in his The History of Sexuality, 4 vols (1976-2018). One type of social control and expression of power in the Middle Ages was in the sphere of sexuality. It can best be seen in how the Catholic Church used confessions in front of a priest to encourage people to talk about sex and thus gain control over their sexual behavior.

Books and articles:

Ammerman. Bible Believers: Fundamentalists in the Modern World (1987);

- Baptist Battles: Social Change and Religious Conflict in the Southern Baptist Convention (1990);

- Southern Baptists Observed (1993);

- Congregation and Community (1997);

- Pillars of Faith: American Congregations and their Partners (2005);

Bader V., “Religions and States. A New Typology and a Plea for Non-Constitutional Pluralism”, in Ethical Theory and Moral Practice (2003);

Beckford. Religion and Advanced Industrial Society (1989);

Beyer, P. Religion and Globalization (1994);

Chaves, M., Cann, D. E., “Regulation, Pluralism, and Religious Market Structure. Explaining Religion’s Vitality”, in Rationality and Society (1992);

Davie, G. „Believing Without Belonging“, in Social Compass (1990);

Di Maggio, P. „The Relevance of Organization Theory to the Study of Religion“, in: Demerath, N. J., III (Ed.). Sacred Companies (1998);Goldman. Anarchism and Other Essays (1910);

Durkheim, E. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1912);

Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality, 4 vols (1976-2018);

Fox, J. “World Separation of Religion and State In to the 21st Century”, in Comparative Political Studies (2006);

Iannaccone, L. R. „A Formal Model of Church and Sect“, in American Journal of Sociology (1988);

Jelen, Ted G. To Serve God and Mammon: Church-State Relations in American Politics (2000);

Lavrič, M., Flere, S. “Divergent Trends in Legal Recognition of Religious Entities in Europe: The Cases of Slovenia and Hungary”, in Politics and Religion (2015);

Lenski. The Religious Factor: A Sociological Study of Religion's Impact on Politics, Economics, and Family Life (1961);

Luckmann, T. The Invisible Religion (1967);

Luhmann, N. Funktion der Religion (1977);

Luhmann, N. Die Religion der Gesellschaft (2000);

Lynd. Middletown (1929);

Martin. A General Theory of Secularization (1978);

Martinez-Torron, J., Durham, C., “Religion and the Secular State / La Religion et l’Etat laique: Interim Reports, General Rapporteurs”, in Durham, C. (ed.). Religion and the Secular State / La Religion et l’Etat laique: Interim Reports (2010);

Moberg, D. O. The Church as a Social Institution: The Sociology of American Religion (1984);

Monsma, Stephen V. Positive Neutrality: Letting Religious Freedom Ring (1993);

Monsma, Stephen V., and J. Christopher Soper. The Challenge of Pluralism: Church and State in Five Democracies (1997);

Niebuhr, R. H. The Social Sources of Denominationalism (1975);

Parsons, T. The Social System (1951);

Robertson, Roland. The Sociological Interpretation of Religion (1970);

- Church-State Relations: Tensions and Transitions (1987);

Stark. The Churching of America 1776-1992 (2005);

Stark and Bainbridge. A Theory of Religion (1987);

Stark, Rodney, and Roger Finke. Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion (2000);

Stepan, Alfred. “The Multiple Secularism of Modern Democratic and Non-Democratic Regimes”, in Rethinkins Secularism (2011);

Tocqueville. The Old Regime and the French Revolution (2014, in French 1856);