martikainen-2012-towards-a-new-political-economy-of-religion-reflections-on-marion-maddox-and-nicolas-de-bremond-d-ars.pdf

440956 2012 SCP59210.1177/0037768612440956Martikainen: Towards a new political economy of religionSocial Compass social compass Article Towards a new political economy of religion: reflections on Marion Maddox and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars Social Compass 59(2) 173­–182 © The Author(s) 2012 Reprints a...

440956 2012 SCP59210.1177/0037768612440956Martikainen: Towards a new political economy of religionSocial Compass social compass Article Towards a new political economy of religion: reflections on Marion Maddox and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars Social Compass 59(2) 173­–182 © The Author(s) 2012 Reprints and permission: sagepub. co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0037768612440956 scp.sagepub.com Tuomas MARTIKAINEN University of Helsinki, Finland Abstract The author offers a commentary on Marion Maddox’s and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars’s articles in this journal. He suggests that taking into account macro-level changes in political economy is the key to understanding many current debates in the sociology of religion. He situates the Maddox and de Bremond d’Ars texts in the context of contemporary scholarship on religion and economy and discusses whether a new political economy of religions is emerging with reference to a growing economic reasoning among religions, new forms of religion and Church–State relations. The author raises many questions on the nature of contemporary religious change and the specific role of global capitalism and neoliberalism. He also suggests that religions will both adapt to and take advantage of the new state of affairs. Keywords Catholicism, Max Weber, megachurches, political economy, religion Résumé L’auteur commente les articles de Marion Maddox et de Nicolas de Brémond d’Ars dans ce numéro. Il suggère que la prise en compte des changements macro-structurels au niveau mondial du point de vue de l’économie politique est une clé pour comprendre plusieurs enjeux émanant des débats contemporains en sociologie des religions. Il situe ainsi les contributions de Maddox et de Bremond d’Ars dans le contexte de la Corresponding author: Tuomas Martikainen, Åbo Akademi University, Comparative Religion, Fabriksgatan 2, 20500 Åbo, Finland Email: [email protected] 174 Social Compass 59(2) production académique contemporaine en posant la question de savoir si l’émergence d’une nouvelle économie politique du religieux ne serait pas corollaire à la prégnance du discours de type économique au sein même des religions et des nouvelles formes de religiosité, ainsi qu’en ce qui a trait aux relations entre les Églises et les États. L’auteur soulève plusieurs questions quant à la nature des mutations contemporaines du religieux et au rôle afférant du capitalisme mondialisé et du néolibéralisme. Il suggère que les phénomènes religieux non seulement s’adapteront à ce nouvel état de fait mais aussi en profiteront. Mot-clés catholicisme, économie, Max Weber, politique, méga-églises, religion Introduction It is a truism that economic considerations have played an increasing role in society in the post-Cold War era. Such is the magnitude of the global economy and the related interdependence of States that – at the time of writing – fiscal problems in the minor economy of Greece are shaking the foundations of a major segment of the international State system: the European Union. In the political arena the reshuffled power relations between economics and politics are clear, but what about the sphere of religion? Has the latest wave of globalisation also made an impact on the political economy of religion? To start with, it seems a plausible expectation, because many observers have noted a growing economisation (in terms of marketisation and commodification) of religion (e.g. Lyon, 2000; Einstein, 2008), and the success of the rational choice theory of religion appears to support that observation (e.g. Stark and Bainbridge, 1987; Warner, 1993). Even the increasing globalisation of religious conflict can be seen as related to the new global political economy (e.g. Beyer, 1994; Roy, 2004). This article suggests that taking into account macro-level changes in political economy is indeed the key to understanding many current debates in the sociology of religion. The article is structured as follows. First, I will look at how Marion Maddox’s and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars’ views, as presented in this journal, fit the debate of an emerging scholarship of religion in global political economy. Second, I shall situate Maddox and de Bremond d’Ars in relation to the existing field of research in religion and economy. Third, I will discuss religion and political economy, and, with reference to Maddox and de Bremond d’Ars, I will note some of the emerging changes. Finally, I will summarize the key proposals. Maddox and de Bremond d’Ars on religion and economy Marion Maddox and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars belong to an increasing number of contemporary scholars who are engaged in unveiling the relationship between religion and economy. Both of the articles draw, to some extent at least, on the sociology of Max Weber. Marion Maddox refers to the capitalist – though not the Protestant – ethic and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars to the relationship between religious ethics and economy. Thereby they also situate themselves close to the secularisation paradigm in the sociology of religion. Martikainen: Towards a new political economy of religion 175 Marion Maddox has studied Australian megachurches, redefined in her article as ‘growth churches’. Inspired by Ninian Smart’s (1996) seven dimensions of religion – ritual, doctrine, myths, emotions, ethics, social life and the material – she guides us through the key elements of growth churches. Maddox claims that ‘growth churches are capitalism’s cathedrals’, which ‘reproduce, naturalise, enlarge, enchant and, to some degree, civilise it.’ Moreover, ‘they are the corporations that sell the religion of corporations’. Hence, Maddox sees growth churches as successful mutations of religion in and for late capitalism and part of ‘a conscious and consistent effort to align the church’s activities and message not with any national culture but with the culture of global capitalism’. Whereas Maddox leaves the debate somewhat open, is seems clear that she sees growth churches as similar to global franchising businesses. Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars has studied the French ecumenical, but mostly Catholic, movement Les Entrepreneurs et Dirigeants Chrétiens (Christian Entrepreneurs and Managers). After introducing us to the history and theology of the movement, de Bremond d’Ars analyses how managers and lay Catholics active in the movement aim to overcome the ethical dilemmas of being religious businessmen. He describes their dilemma as the contradiction between the Catholic value system and the managers’ role being bound to practical reasoning and instrumental rationality. This contradiction and the dual distribution of salvation goods between laymen (e.g. piety, charity) and priests (e.g. sacraments) are crucial factors in the creation of tensions in the lay fraternity. Beside having a practical function in mediating between traditional values and external demands, the movement is structured around practical reasoning and business logic, and can thereby be regarded as more than just a modification of the traditional Catholic ethic. He explains its development using Georg Simmel’s concept of ‘religious sentiment’, which he believes is present in all areas of life but resides among nonreligious businessmen in a fluid or diffuse kind of piety. This, he argues, does not develop into something substantial, such as a distinct new religion, but rather makes use of existing social forms of religion – in this case ‘fraternity’ – thereby leading to an organisational amalgamation of Catholicism and capitalism. Research on religion and economy The September 2011 issue of Social Compass (58(3)), edited by François Gauthier, Linda Woodhead and myself, focuses on religion in consumer society. In the introduction we distinguish four categories of scholarship on religion and economy. The first one looks at the damaging features of consumer culture on religion. Consumerism is seen as shallow and hedonistic, and people immersed in it lose their sense of tradition. The approach has an inbuilt nostalgia and is sometimes apologetic in its flavour, but it provides an attractive explanation for those who do not fully appreciate or accept the impact of consumerism. The second body of research looks at the consequences of consumer capitalism on the religious landscape as a whole. The picture is mixed, with the organisational decline of mainstream churches accompanied by the flourishing of new religious and spiritual marketplaces. This approach resonates well with contemporary theorising on religious diversity by several influential scholars, and is the most prominent of the approaches incorporating both secularisation and rational choice theory of religion. 176 Social Compass 59(2) The third form of scholarship focuses on growth religions, especially on Pentecostalism, but also on other thriving movements, including Hindu and Muslim movements. These are seen as the winners of the major social transformations that have taken place around the world and which have their roots in urbanisation, globalisation and the loosening grip of Tradition. Their theologies are often conservative and may contain elements of prosperity theology. A fourth and recently growing field has been research on religion, welfare and neoliberal policy-making. The fact that faith-based movements and traditional Churches have gained strength in welfare provision and that religions are seen as providers of social capital has been linked to changes in welfare state policies that emerge from neoliberal economic and administrative trends, such as new public management emphasising outsourcing, privatisation and governance through networks and markets. This structuralist and institutionalist view focuses on political economy as the driver of social change. How do Marion Maddox’s and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars’ presentations fit into our categorisation? Marion Maddox’s presentation can be seen as representing the third category of our schema: focus on growth religions. As she vividly explains in her article, one does not need much fuzzy theorising to see the explicit link between growth churches and consumer capitalism. Even the mall-like buildings and light entertainment underline the tone of late capitalism, promoting consumerism as the way of life. Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars’s presentation seems to fit into the second category, looking at the consequences of capitalism among religious organisations. Even though he does not explicitly tie the discussion to the rise of consumerism and neoliberal rationality, the subtext is there: the use of economic vocabulary, the all-pervasive market, etc. Religion and political economy Political economy refers here to the political organisation of the economy through law, custom and government (see Rose, 1999: 102). A political economy perspective over the last few decades also sees that the weight of political actors has declined in relation to that of economic actors. The relative economic gain is related to both the globalisation of production and the growing importance of transnational corporations, whereby nation-states increasingly have to rely on the goodwill of corporations for their own success. In addition, the role of economic thinking and ideology in the form of neoliberalism has penetrated deep into many other areas of society (e.g. Harvey, 2005; Saad-Filho and Johnston, 2005). In Europe, this is related to the growth of so-called new public management, which has introduced business-based management strategies into public administration (e.g. Kjær, 2004; Pollitt, van Thiel and Homburg, 2007). In this way, economic ideologies have become naturalised to the extent that they are considered the normal way of action and thought in many areas of life. Opposition to these currents exists, but economic rationality has become increasingly hegemonic. Whereas the nation-state is still the main ‘container’ for many social processes (Wimmer and Glick Schiller, 2002: 307), new modes of governance have both changed historical bureaucracies and introduced new platforms for governance, most notably markets and Martikainen: Towards a new political economy of religion 177 networks, as well as various forms of outsourcing and privatisation. From the viewpoint of the citizen, this development relates both to the increasing role of consumerism as a desired way of life and the change in public administration from a Weberian hierarchy based on neutrality to a service market system (Kjær, 2004). We may thus expect that new forms of church–state relations and other religious repositionings will emerge, as religious organisations and individuals are not immune to societal developments. We can also presume that religions will both adapt to the changed circumstances and take advantage of them. If the previous general description of the changes in political economy holds, it suggests, among other things, novel opportunities and challenges for religious actors. These can be contrasted, at least in Western Europe, with the previous, more clearly defined institutional space with its own internal logic of religious actors, as it has been described in studies of modern religion in functionally differentiated societies (e.g. Dobbelaere, 2002). It the following, let us take a closer look at three potential developments: a growing role of economic reasoning among religious organisations; new forms of religion; and changes in the historical patterns of church–state relations. Economic reasoning First, a growing role of economic reasoning among religions in the new political economy should be evident. Beside changes in argumentation, we can also expect wide use of business-oriented practices, such as certain management styles, branding, organisational restructuring and the growth of advertising. As a matter fact, such transformations have been widely reported among a variety of religious organisations, including majority and minority religions as well as various forms of new or alternative spiritualities. For example, Jens Schlamelcher (2008) observes deep processes of marketisation among majority churches in Germany, and Mara Einstein (2008) notes novel forms of branding among religions. In her article Marion Maddox provides a case in point. Growth churches are according to her so fused with capitalism that capitalism’s key notion of constant growth becomes their central theological principle. Everything in growth churches is designed to support this aim and historical reasoning is put aside if it does not support the principal aim. Maddox therefore calls growth churches ‘capitalism’s cathedrals’, insofar as they adapt themselves to the competitive market of ideas. I think her conclusion is valid on this account, and it is a powerful example of the penetration of neoliberal logic deep into Protestant Christianity. However, as other authors have noted, these are not the only mutations of religious ideas in the face of global capitalism. Schlamelcher has identified a growing customer orientation (2008) and increasing economic discourses (2009) among majority churches in Germany, which also relate to the growing impact of neoliberalism. Actually, much of the scholarship on new spiritualities and also global Pentecostalism can be seen to support the growing role of economic thinking, not least with regard to prosperity theology, which has risen simultaneously with the advancement of neo-Pentecostalism around the world. 178 Social Compass 59(2) New forms of religion Second, it seems reasonable to expect that religious organisation will increasingly adapt not only to market rationalities but also to market forms and start to act as businesses. Hence, we should witness new forms of religion taking shape that are influenced by economic models and cannot be reduced to historical organisational patterns. These already exist. The best-known and most controversial of these is the Church of Scientology, which has a long track record of legal battles in its attempts to gain recognition as a religion. As Marion Maddox argues, some of the megachurches also illustrate this trend. Such developments are even evident among other traditions. For example, esoteric and New Age groups in Finland were previously generally organised as voluntary associations, but more recently have increasingly adapted business models of organisation (Ketola, 2008: 223–224). Whereas religious organisations are and have almost always been in some kind of interaction with the monetary economy, which is necessary for organisations of all kinds, the business model of commercial firms is increasingly obvious among newcomers to the field. As noted above, many New Age service providers are organised as small businesses in a way that resembles the by now classical notions of client and audience cults (Bainbridge and Stark, 1980). This model can change the role of the participants into that of consumers and change the organisation’s relationship to them into that of a service provider. Another variation on the theme is found in Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars’s article, in which a mostly self-organising Catholic lay movement has adopted an intermediary role between the Church and the world, as the Church, with its emphasis on doctrinal ethics, cannot or does not solve the problems stemming from the gap between religious ideals and the demands in terms of instrumental rationality that modern managers are confronted with in their business life. Thereby the movement is located in the negotiatory space between two different, all-encompassing ideologies and rationalities, namely those of capitalism and Catholicism. Hence, there is no single new form of organisation, but rather a plenitude of variations on the basic theme. Church–State relations Third, we may expect that historical patterns of Church–State relations to weaken or at least to be reformed along the lines of new public management. The path-dependent nature of change in a national context can be overridden by other modes of governance. Again, examples are in plenty. Especially in the British context new interfaith bodies have been formed both to promote the social benefits of civil society à la Alexis de Tocqueville and to create new monitoring mechanisms for social problems, as among the many Muslim representative councils in Europe (Ferrari, 2005). Whereas classical Church–State relations focus on formal legal arrangements, the new governance bypasses these by introducing networks and other means of control, such as funding and co-operation. This new governmentality has also attracted the attention of researchers (e.g. Tezcan, 2007). Martikainen: Towards a new political economy of religion 179 Even though Maddox and de Bremond d’Ars do not discuss or refer to Church–State relations, they both suggest new spaces for religion. However, Maddox does deal with the matter at length in her other studies (e.g. 2009). A general observation from these as well as other studies focusing on faith-based movements has been a growing interest of public authorities in instrumentalising the charity done by religions (e.g. Dinham, 2009). Whereas there is sometimes an embedded religious agenda (e.g. Hackworth, 2010), it can be seen as part of broader governmental efforts to cut public spending. One interpretation of these developments is that religious organisations (whatever their previous social position) face pressures to conform to a new role as participants in the creation of welfare. Thereby we see the emergence of new areas of society and social life to which religion becomes relevant. This development is joined with concerns over social friction that are at the core of, for example, what José Casanova (1994) calls ‘public religion’ and Jűrgen Habermas ‘post-secular society’ (2006). The historical institutional location of ‘religion’ has leaked to other areas of life. Even though there are many reasons for this development other than changes in political economy, it nevertheless clearly illustrates the difficulty of establishing precisely what ‘religion’ is in late modern society. Discussion The theme of the 31st conference of the International Society for the Sociology of Religion was ‘Religion and Economy’. Was it a reflection of the post-financial crisis state of affairs, or a sign of a desire to redirect the sociological gaze to something emerging, something powerfully new? Whereas it could have been both, I would emphasise the latter intention. The major academic success of the rational choice theory of religion in the US since the 1980s is in itself a sign of something taking place. Although the concept has only limped over the Atlantic, questions of economy and religion, and increasingly of political economy, are now preoccupying scholars in Europe. As in other spheres of life, the growing prevalence of an economic perspective is ultimately not surprising in the sociology of religion, as economics is becoming the social science following the tidal wave of neoliberal globalisation and the reorientation of Western societies to it. Current debates on religion and economy are many, and curiously there are several borrowings from political science that might illustrate an erosion of the post-Westphalian and post-Enlightenment social order and the place given to religion, or more precisely to the historical Churches in Europe. Why are we interested in faith-based movements? Why do we need to return to Church–State relations? What is happening to the welfare states? Why are the New Agers apparently happy consumers of spirituality? Whatever the situation, the penetration of economics and the relatively weakened, or at least reshaped, role of politics have shaken some of the foundations of the modern nation state, leading to radical changes in the way people live and the way institutions are function. This is the social and political context in which I am tempted to situate Marion Maddox’s and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars’s articles. Both see a thorough restructuring of society, embedded in history, as de Bremond d’Ars reminds us, but sometimes floating free of historical baggage, as Marion Maddox suggests. However, we should not take the 180 Social Compass 59(2) economic vocabulary for granted and simply accept that it is the normal state of affairs. Rather, we should recast our tools, reformulate our questions and rethink the context. In other words, what is the political economy in which religions function today? In this endeavour, I believe, Maddox and de Bremond d’Ars are showing us what to look for and how to get there. The above-mentioned three types of change suggest that a political economy perspective on religion in at least plausible. I am aware that there are alternative interpretations of all of these developments, but overall it seems difficult to deny that we are dealing with ‘extra-religious’ developments that have major spillover effects on contemporary religion. Beyond that, we can identify religions that are taking advantage of these changes, as Maddox notes. I would, therefore, argue that these three identified modes of religious change in the new political economy cannot be reduced to historical, path-dependent explanations as in the modernisation paradigm, but are rather examples of the new opportunity structure in which religions now operate. Without exaggerating these changes, which also include the growing role of law and new forms of identity politics (see Comaroff and Comaroff, 2009), it seems fair to expect that globalisation and its neoliberal impulse will make lasting changes to the religious landscape. I am also hesitant to accept the rational choice theory approach, because this denies the historical creation of the market as an institution among others and, thus, naturalises the changes that are ‘man-made’ as well. And, of course, it is not only religion that is changing. To conclude my brief commentary, I would like to refer to a passage from a 2009 book by the anthropology professors John L and Jean Comaroff, Ethnicity Inc. They discuss recent changes in cultural and ethnic identities as follows: Against the telos of both classical and critical theory, the rise of ethno-commerce in the age of mass consumerism is having counterintuitive effects on human subjects, cultural objects, and the connection between them. While the commodification of identity is frequently taken as prima facie evidence of the cheapening of its substance, the matter has never been quite so straightforward. … The widely noted shift in the production of value from the material to the immaterial … signals the entry of the market into domains of existence that once eluded it. … To a greater extent than ever in the past, perhaps, it involves the fulsome cultivation of highly charged attachments, at once emotional and cognitive, to chosen lifestyles. (Comaroff and Comaroff, 2009: 27–28) Summary This article is intended as a commentary on Marion Maddox’s and Nicolas de Bremond d’Ars’s articles in this journal. It situates the texts in the context of contemporary scholarship on religion and economy and discusses whether a new political economy of religions is arising as a result of increasing economic reasoning among religions and the emergence of new forms of religion and Church–State relations. The articles raise many questions on the nature of contemporary religious change and the specific role of global capitalism and neoliberalism. It also suggests that religions are both adapting to and taking advantage of the new state of affairs. Martikainen: Towards a new political economy of religion 181 It is beyond the scope of this text to analyse these questions, but I nevertheless propose that changes in the global political economy since the 1970s have made a deep impact on many questions that religious organisations today address. It remains for future research to find out whether this indeed has been the case. Acknowledgements I would like to thank Peter Beyer, François Gauthier and, especially, Christiane Königstedt for their inspiring ideas on how to improve this commentary. References Bainbridge WS and Stark R (1980) Client and audience cults in America. Sociological Analysis 41(3): 199–214. Beyer P (1994) Religion and Globalization. London: Sage. Casanova J (1994) Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Comaroff JL and Comaroff J (2009) Ethnicity Inc. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Dinham A (2009) Faiths, Public Policy and Civil Society. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Dobbelaere K (2002) Secularization: An Analysis at Three Levels. Brussels : Peter Lang. Einstein M (2008) Brands of Faith: Marketing Religion in a Commercial Age. London: Routledge. Ferrari S (2005) The secularity of the state and the shaping of Muslim representative organizations in Western Europe. In: Cesari J and McLoughlin S (eds) European Muslims and the Secular State. Aldershot: Ashgate, 11–23. Gauthier F, Martikainen T and Woodhead L (2011) Introduction: Religion in consumer society. Social Compass 58(3): 291–301. Habermas J (2006) Religion in the public sphere. European Journal of Philosophy 12(1): 1–25. Hackworth J (2010) Neoliberalism for God’s Sake: sectarian justifications for secular policy transformation in the United States. In: Molendijk AL, Beaumont J and Jedan C (eds) Exploring the Postsecular: The Religious, the Political and the Urban. Leiden: Brill, 357–379. Harvey D (2005) A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ketola K (2008) Uskonnot Suomessa [Religions in Finland]. Tampere: Kirkon tutkimuskeskus. Kjær AM (2004) Governance. Cambridge: Polity Press. Luckmann T (1999) The religious situation in Europe: the background to contemporary conversions. Social Compass 46(3): 251–258. Lyon D (2000) Jesus in Disneyland: Religion in Postmodern Times. Cambridge: Polity. Maddox M (2009) An argument for more, not less religion in Australian politics. Australian Religion Studies Review 22(3): 345–367. Pollitt C, van Thiel S and Homburg V (eds) (2007) New Public Management in Europe: Adaptations and Alternatives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Rose N (1999) Powers of Freedom: Reframing Political Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Roy O (2004) Globalized Islam: The Search for a New Ummah. New York: Columbia University Press. Saad-Filho A and Johnston D (eds) (2005) Neoliberalism: A Critical Reader. London: Pluto Press. Schlamelcher J (2008) Ökonomisierung der Kirchen? In: Wegner G and Hermelink J (eds) Paradoxien kirchlicher Organisation: Niklas Luhmanns frühe Kirchensoziologie und die aktuelle Reform der evangelischen Kirche. Würzburg: Ergon, 145–178. Schlamelcher J (2009) Unternehmen Kirche? Neoliberale Diskurse in den deutschen Großkirchen. In: Ötsch WO and Thomasberger C (eds) Der neoliberale Markt-Diskurs: Ursprünge, Geschichte, Wirkungen. Marburg: Metropolis, 213–256. 182 Social Compass 59(2) Smart N (1996) Dimensions of the Sacred: An Anatomy of the World’s Beliefs. Berkeley: University of California Press. Stark R and Bainbridge WS (1987) A Theory of Religion. New York: Peter Lang. Tezcan L (2007) Kultur, Gouvernementalität der Religion und der Integrationsdiskurs. In: Wohlrab-Sahr M and Tezcan L (eds) Konfliktfeld Islam in Europa. Baden-Baden: Nomos, 51–74. Warner RS (1993) Work in progress toward a new paradigm for the sociological study of religion in the United States. The American Journal of Sociology 98(5): 1044–1093. Wimmer, Andreas, and Nina Glick-Schiller (2002) Methodological nationalism and beyond: nation–state building, migration and the social sciences. Global Networks 2(4), 301–334. Biography Tuomas MARTIKAINEN is a university researcher in Comparative Religion at the University of Helsinki, Finland. He is part of The Governance of Transnational Islam in Finland, Ireland and Canada Project, which is funded by the Academy of Finland. His areas of interest include religion, migration and consumer society. He is currently studying how recent changes in welfare state structures and policies change State–religion/minority relations. His publications include Immigrant Religion in Local Society (2004, Åbo Akademi University Press) and ‘The Governance of Islam in Finland’ (2007, Temenos). Address: Åbo Akademi University, Comparative Religion, Fabriksgatan 2, 20500 Åbo, Finland. Email: [email protected].