Antropologia

To Study or Not to Study Religion and Society: The Institutionalization, Fragmentation andMarginalization of Sociology of Religion in FinlandAuthor(s): Titus HjelmSource: Acta Sociologica, Vol. 51, No. 2 (Jun., 2008), pp. 91-102Published by: Sage Publications, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20460041 .

Accessed: 28/08/2013 16:23

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Sage Publications, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ActaSociologica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 200.32.19.138 on Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:23:01 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=sageltd

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20460041?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


ACTA SOCIOLOGICA 2008

To Study or Not to Study Religion and Society The Institutionalization, Fragmentation and Marginalization of

Sociology of Religion in Finland

Titus Hjelm School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College London, UK

abstract: In the work of many of the classics of sociology, religion plays a major role. In post-World War II sociology, however, the study of religion gradually ended up in a marginal position. This article discusses the status of the sociological study of religion in Finland from the post-war period to the present. The focus in the article is on the institutional evolution of the field and the influence of that evolution on the role of the sociology of religion within Finnish sociology. Finnish sociology of religion is divided into three categories: studies carried out in sociology departments, sociological studies carried out within religious studies and church and social studies. The article examines the development and characteristics of each of these disciplines as well as the consequences of institutional scattering for the sociology of religion. The aversion of religion within sociology, the focus on folklore in religious studies and the public identification of church sociology with theology are identi fied as the reasons for the marginal position of the sociology of religion in Finland. The article closes with a review of recent studies in the sociology of religion and the 'new rise' of the field due to the rise in the societal significance of religion.

keywords: church and social studies * comparative religion * Finland * history of sociology * religious studies * sociology of religion

Introduction In celebration of the launch of the new Nordic Journal of Religion and Society (formerly Tidsskrift for kirke, religion og samfunn), the editors commissioned articles on the history of sociology of religion in each of the Nordic countries. In her article, sociologist Kirsti Suolinna outlines the development of the subdiscipline in Finland, from the founders to the present (2005). The bulk of the article is concerned with the formative period, especially Edvard Westermarck and his school - an understandable emphasis considering Suolinna's earlier publications (2000, 2003; Suolinna et al., 2000). Her discussion of later developments is concentrated on several key studies in sociology and practical theology, namely the subdiscipline known as 'church and social studies'.

As a historical exposition, Suolinna's article is a lucid and usefully critical overview of the

development of sociology of religion in Finland. Her discussion of major studies is detailed

and comprehensive. However, Suolinna's overview almost completely neglects the sociological research conducted in departments of comparative religion. The impression that one gets -

especially if hailing from a background in comparative religion - is that sociology of religion is given only two-thirds of the attention that its history in the Finnish university system deserves.

Acta Sociologica * June 2008 * Vol 51(2): 91-1 02 * DOI: 10.1 177/0001699308090037 Copyright C) 2008 Nordic Sociological Association and SAGE (Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore)

www.sagepublications.com



Acta Sociologica 51(2)

Therefore, I would like to reopen and refocus the issue by concentrating on the institution alization of sociology of religion in Finland, its subsequent fragmentation and its marginaliza tion, which is in tum linked to wider international concerns about the predicament of sociology of religion among the social sciences. My aim is to offer an analytical overview of the insti tutional processes that have influenced the status of sociology of religion in Finland. This includes examining the ways in which the division of the sociological study of religion into different university departments has affected the objects of study and the image of Finnish sociology of religion.

To clarify my point, it is appropriate to describe what I am not attempting to do. First, I do not explicitly discuss socio-cultural factors such as the status of the Lutheran church as a state church and its impact on the sociological study of religion. It is of course impossible to completely bypass the influence of the social and cultural context, but I engage in this discussion only when it is relevant for the study of the institutional development of the sub discipline. Second, I stress that my aim is not to provide an exhaustive bibliography of Finnish research, nor to describe particular important studies in any depth. Last, I have for the most part omitted the earliest developments in Finnish sociology of religion, as these have been comprehensively covered elsewhere (Anttonen, 1987; Haavio-Mannila, 1992; Suolinna, 2005).

The predicament of the sociology of religion

In his impressive overview of sociology of religion between the years 1945 and 1989, James Beckford (1990) laments the marginal status of sociology of religion among the wider field of sociology. The same sentiment has been the stock of articles and sociology of religion textbooks ever since (e.g. Bruce, 1995: xiii; Hamilton, 1998: 1 and 2001: vii; Ebaugh, 2002; Beckford, 2003: 1). Looking back to the time of classics such as Durkheim and Weber, mainstream sociology did indeed seem to lose interest in religion as an object of study during the latter half of the twentieth century.

Beckford himself (1990: 54 and 2003) offers some explanations for the current situation, as does Allardt (1990) in his response to Beckford (1990). Both stress macro-sociological changes in society and religion as factors that influence and set up priorities for sociological research: the status of religion in society inevitably affects the status of the study of religion in sociology. Therefore, arguing for the marginalization of sociology of religion is more difficult in the case of the United States, where religion has played a much more prominent role in public life (cf. Beckford, 1990: 48-51). However, the relationship between religion and society has gone through profound changes in the nearly 20 years since Beckford's (1990) overview. The

worldwide resurgence of interest in religion in politics, the media and other spheres of life does seem to have lifted sociology of religion from the nadir alluded to in Beckford's article.

Situated in this context, Finnish sociology of religion can be described as suffering from a 'double deprivation': not only is it marginal vis-'a-vis the field of sociology in general, but also the number of sociological studies of religion has been very low. This is in sharp contrast to the lively, if marginal, discussion in the international context (Bruce, 1995: xiii; Hamilton, 2001: vii). Rather than engage in abstract macro-sociological speculation on the impact of social change on the emphases of sociological study, my aim is to examine the predicament of the sociology of religion in Finland in terms of the institutional developments in post-World War II Finnish universities. It is to the analysis of these developments that I now turn.

Religion and post-World War II sociology in Finland

Edvard Westermarck (1862-1932) can rightfully be called the father of Finnish sociology (Haavio Mannila, 1992: 28). Although Westermarck's relationship with religion is often for some reason

92



Hjelm: To Study or Not to Study Religion and Society

reduced to his criticism of institutionalized Christianity (e.g. Koistinen and Raikka, 1997: 25-6), his work was very important for the study of religion in Finnish social science and inspired many significant studies (see Suolinna, 2005).

However, the influence of Westermarck and his school of evolutionary social anthropology waned soon after World War II (Suolinna, 2005: 109) and with it the interest in religion as an object of study. Of the sociological studies published between 1945 and 1960, only Rafael Karsten's book on current issues in sociology and religious studies (1947) and Toivo Palo's (1952) ground-breaking Gallup survey on the attitudes towards the Church of Finland stand out as significant contributions to the study of religion.

The structural changes that took place in Finnish Society from the early 1960s onwards changed the picture considerably. Compared to previous decades, sociology of religion reached new heights with multiple studies of issues such as the effects of urbanization on religious beliefs (Koskelainen, 1966a, b), secularization and the role of the church in a modernizing society (Seppanen, 1962, 1968; Siipi, 1965; Niemi, 1966) and religious movements (Haavio, 1963, 1965). The reason for this proliferation of research on religion may be attributed, first, to the Church of Finland's growing interest in the rapid social changes of the era, with subse quent support for research (Husu and Allardt, 1981: 24). Second, at that time Finnish sociology was influenced by the 'American type of sociology, which was characterized by a focus on contemporary national issues' (Eskola, 1973: 269. All translations by the author). Moving our focus to the next decade, however, changes the picture again. For example, none

of the scholars referred to above continued the study of religion after their initial publications in the 1960s (cf. Haavio, 1983: 76; Lempiainen, 1982: 113). Kirsti Suolinna (1975, 1977) stands out as a notable exception to mainstream sociology, which otherwise shunned religion as an object of study. Suolinna's research on religion began already during the more 'active' (from a sociology of religion perspective) 1960s (1964, 1966, 1969). She also consistently continued the sociological study of religion in the 1980s (see Holm et al., 1981; Suolinna and Sinikara, 1986; cf. Lampinen, 1995). In addition to Suolinna, Susan Sundback (1983, 1984, 1986) and Eila Helander (1986) were the only Finnish scholars of religion educated in the social sciences in the 1980s. Sundback, especially, has also been very active in a wider Nordic network of soci ologists of religion.

A glance at the curriculum development of the Department of Sociology at the University of Turku provides a further example of the change in the status of sociology of religion that took place in Finland in the early 1970s: During the Academic year 1966-67, sociology of religion (taught by Ari Haavio) was the only substantive course offered in the otherwise methodolog ically focused department (Toivonen, 1996: 42). In 1972, a committee responsible for the planning of teaching and research recommended that the department's emphasis should be in 'the study of social change, especially the changes in economic production and its immediate effects' (Haavio, 1996: 55). This, naturally, did not exclude the study of religion from the programme - the study of religious change has been and is an integral part of the study of social change. However, despite the department having offered sociology of religion courses in the past, the committee's list of practical areas of research did not include religion. Instead, the proposed emphases were '1) the regional distribution of industrial production; 2) the problems of small-scale agriculture; the centralization of production and the status of small businesses; 3) the social and individual effects of the nature of labour' (Haavio, 1996: 55).

One seemingly obvious explanation for the decline of sociology of religion - also discernible from the above list of research topics - is the massive success of Marxism in Finnish academic sociology (Eskola, 1973: 311-13; Haavio, 1996: 55). Inspired by similar developments elsewhere in Europe, and especially the 1968 student uprising in France, Finnish sociology embraced a class-conscious and often critical view of religion. Emeritus professor Antti Eskola, himself one of the foremost proponents of the 'new sociology', reminisces that during that time religion

93




was more or less a taboo among sociologists: a scholar speaking 'approvingly' of religion risked a loss of credibility, and the general sentiment was that, in the spirit of progress, religion would be obsolete sooner or later (Eskola, 2003: 25, 41).

On the other hand, the new sociology influenced by Marxism did not inspire critical studies of religion in society. If Marxism had an effect on the sociological study of religion in Finland, it was more in the form of a shift in research emphases than an active critique of religion. In an earlier article (1973: 310), Eskola mentions a study which showed that from the 1960s to the 1970s sociological research in Finland shifted from 'humanistic' studies to more 'technocratic' approaches. Religion simply did not fit into the research programme of a class-conscious sociology. Although the Marxist hegemony was later supplanted by more diverse approaches, lingering suspicion towards religion as a valid object of study in Finnish sociology is arguably a direct consequence of the changes that took place in the 1970s. One additional reason for the marginalization of religion as an object of study in Finnish

(and more broadly, Nordic) sociology has to do with the relative theoretical impoverishment of the sociological studies of religion that proliferated in the 1960s (Beckford, 2006: 5). As noted above, Finnish class-conscious sociology had little interest in empirical studies of religion alone. When this is doubled with the inability to engage in deeper theoretical discussion with the Marxist mainstream, the marginalization of sociology of religion becomes much more understandable.

That said, it should be noted that religion was never completely forgotten by Finnish soci ologists. However, the few writings that addressed religion were not primarily about religion, but about elements of larger projects. For example, Erik Allardt's influential paper 'Uskonto sosiologia' ('Sociology of religion'; 1986 [1974]; see also Allardt, 1970) was a theoretical assess ment of one of society's sectors, not a contribution inspired by the study of religion as such. Similarly, Risto Alapuro's (1977) article on the effects of religion on political mobilization in rural Finland was part of a larger project not focused especially on religion.

Sociological approaches in comparative religion

If Edvard Westermarck is the godfather of Finnish sociology, Uno Harva occupies the same position in comparative religion. Despite the fact that he is mostly remembered for his ethno graphical studies of the northern peoples of Siberia, Harva was also the holder of the first professorship of sociology at the University of Turku (Anttonen, 1987: 101-2; Haavio-Mannila, 1992: 37-8). Interestingly enough, his sociological research does not explicitly address religion, although he considered the study of religion an important part of the sociological study of primitive cultures (Haavio-Mannila, 1992: 39-40).

Unlike the Scandinavian religionshistoria, Finnish comparative religion was formed along the lines of German Religionswissenschaft, thus incorporating multiple approaches to the study of religion, sociology of religion among them (Pentikainen, 1986). However, despite its explicitly interdisciplinary character, the influence of Harva and folklorist Martti Haavio had the effect that, after comparative religion's inception in 1963 in Turku and in 1970 in Helsinki, it became overwhelmingly focused on the study of folklore, anthropology of religion and ethnographi cal fieldwork in Lapland, in Karelia and among the indigenous people of Siberia (see Honko, 1972; Pentikainen, 1986; Markkula, 1997).

That said, there has also been a 'sociologically informed' undercurrent in comparative religion throughout its short history in Finland. For example, in an article originally published in 1961, Lauri Honko, the first professor of comparative religion at the University of Turku, discusses 'functional analysis' as a tool for the study of folklore motifs (1972: 20-1). Honko acknowl edges the sociological origin of the concept of 'function', but clearly differentiates between its use in sociological research and in the study of folklore. Similarly, other studies (e.g. Gothoni,

94




1982) have been sociologically informed, but with an anthropological focus. Of the earlier research in comparative religion, Helena Helve's (1987) work on youth and religion stands out as explicitly sociological, using a longitudinal survey method and employing sociological theories of identity. Arguably, then, ever since the establishment of comparative religion as an independent disci

pline, the study of religion in society has been a minor strand of research in a field focused on ethnography and anthropological approaches. In an article on the history of sociology in Finland, Erik Allardt (2003: 14) mentions the establishment of 'independent sociology of religion' in the final decades of the twentieth century. However, the remark can be considered mistaken if, as it seems, he is referring to the establishment of comparative religion as an inde pendent academic discipline: sociological approaches did not become part of the mainstream of comparative religion until the very last years of the millennium.

'Parish sociology' and the establishment of church and social studies Writing in the 1960s, eminent sociologist of religion Thomas Luckmann commented that while the sociology of religion seemed outwardly to be flourishing more than ever, it had turned into a descriptive endeavour, without the sociologically profound touch of classics such as Durkheim and Weber:

The new sociology of religion consists mainly of descriptions of the decline of ecclesiastic institutions - from a parochial viewpoint, at that. The definition of research problems and programs is, typically, determined by the institutional forms of traditional church organization. The new sociology of religion badly neglected its theoretically most significant task: to analyze the changing social - not necessarily institutional - basis of religion in modem society. (Luckmann, 1967: 17-18)

Luckmann's own work has since been an inspiration for new directions in the sociology of religion, with studies of non-institutional religion, i.e. 'invisible religion', 'implicit religion', 'folk religion', and so on gradually replacing narrowly institution-based research. At the same time in Finland, however, the sociological study of religious institutions, namely the Lutheran Church, was strengthened. Unlike the case in other European countries and the United States, church-sponsored sociological research of religion took off where academic sociology (and to a lesser extent, comparative religion) had left it. After the demise of religion as an object of interest in sociology, and because of the marginality of sociological approaches in comparative religion, the study of religion and society was carried on for some time mainly at the Church of Finland-affiliated Church Research Institute (Kirkon tutkimuskeskus), established in 1969, and in the subdiscipline of 'church and social studies', incorporated into the Department of Practical Theology at the University of Helsinki in 1985.

The impetus for church-sponsored sociological research came with the rapid social changes of the 1960s and its perceived effects on the role of the church in society. According to Huotari

(1982: 232) the objective of the Church Research Institute was to 'provide information on the church, religious life, and social currents, which is necessary and useful for decision-making and development of the church'. Similarly, as a part of the university discipline of practical theology, the objective of church and social studies is to 'provide information for the function ing and development of the church, and evaluate the church's activities critically' (Lampela Kivistb, 2001: 151).

The practical objective of both church-sponsored sociology and the subdiscipline of church and social studies is a feature that differentiates 'church sociology' from general sociology of religion. However, perhaps even more relevant to the positioning of church sociology within the wider framework of sociology is its sometimes explicit theological self-identification. The connection between sociology and theology has been understood in different ways within the

95




subdiscipline of church and social studies. At the other end of the spectrum, the relationship has been seen mainly as practical. For example, Paavo Kortekangas, the first director of the Church Research Institute and the first person to hold the professorship of church and social studies, stated that 'systematic theology can show us the relevance of different questions' (1975: 9). Echoing Kortekangas, Pentti Lempiainen (1982: 113) argues that the aim of church sociology is to study the representations of theological principles in the everyday life of the church. At the other end of the spectrum, sociology's relationship with theology and living faith is

often expressed much more explicitly, as in the following excerpt from a book chapter entitled 'Church and Social Studies as a Science':

When it is understood that God's salvation occurs in a historical-social process, both church history and church and social studies can be understood to study the reality in which God works within the framework regulated by the laws of history and sociology. (Huotari, 1982: 236-7)

It is obvious that this is where the premises of church and social studies differ most strikingly both from the study of religion in sociology and from sociological studies conducted within the framework of comparative religion (Suolinna, 2005: 114-15; see Haavio, 1983: 75; Sundback, 2004: 204-5). Although individual differences of interpretation remain, mainstream sociology of religion has anchored its methodological premises in 'methodological atheism' at least ever since the term was coined by Peter L. Berger (1973: 106; cf. Hamilton, 2001: 5). That is to say: 'It is impossible within the frame of reference of scientific theorizing to make any affirmations, positive or negative, about the ultimate ontological status of this alleged reality' (Berger, 1973: 106. Emphasis in the original).

In practice, methodological approaches naturally vary considerably within church and social studies. Neither does church and social studies require any identification with a particular - or any, for that matter - theological perspective. This is demonstrated by the studies of civil religion that proliferated in church and social studies in the 1980s (Huotari, 1976; Lampinen, 1984, 1989; Sihvo, 1991; vrt. Sundback, 1983, 1984). However, perhaps because in Finland civil religion was (for good reason, see Sundback, 1984) likened to the Evangelical Lutheran Church, these studies did not, from general sociology's point of view, manage to broaden the subdiscipline's 'parish sociology' image. Harri Heino's ground-breaking surveys of religious

movements in Finland (Heino, 1984,1997) are also exemplary of an approach aiming at objec tivity, but because of their descriptive nature they contributed little to sociological discussions about religion in Finland.

Returning to the question of self-identification, the spectrum between Kortekangas's practical vision and Huotari's religious-theological view naturally covers much ground. However, the methodological discussion about the location of individual studies within the field has rarely been explicit - not to mention discussion about the position of church and social studies as a discipline in general (see Ryokas, 1995; Lampinen, 1995). Sensitivity about the issue is amply demonstrated in a recent (Yeung, 2006) description of the current state of the subdiscipline, where the author glosses over the above questions regarding the close relation between theology and sociology by bluntly stating that they do not apply to contemporary church and social studies.

Latest developments in Finnish sociology of religion The social developments of the past 15 years have brought religion back onto the agenda of Finnish social scientific research. Even if the acceptance of the role of religion as a social force to be reckoned with has been slow, Finnish social science has awoken - following other European social scientists struggling with similar questions - to the importance of religion in

96




contemporary society. Two developments have had a specific impact on this. First, the economic depression of the early 1990s brought the Church of Finland back into the limelight as an alternative and necessary addition to inadequate social security (Malkavaara, 2000; Terasvirta, 2002). Second, the new importance of religion was perhaps even more profoundly brought to public attention by the growing immigration of the early 1990s. Above all, immigrants from Somalia had a very visible effect on the understanding of the role of religion in public life. For the first time veiled women became a common sight in many Finnish cities and schools were required to draft rules regarding the clothing, food regulations and prayer routines of Muslim pupils (see Sakaranaho and Pesonen, 1999).

Even if Finnish society has slowly but surely adjusted to the growing importance of religion in public life, institutional responses within academia have varied. Scholars in sociology depart

ments have widely acknowledged the advent of multiculturalism, to the point that it has become one of the major research agendas in contemporary Finnish sociology (e.g. Lepola, 2000; Hautaniemi, 2004; Rastas et al., 2005). However, the link between religion and multi culturalism has been largely neglected in studies conducted by sociologists, whereas for scholars of comparative religion it has been the major focus (e.g. Sakaranaho and Pesonen, 1999; Martikainen, 2004). Sociologists have still been slow to acknowledge religion as a major theme, but the 'new generation' of researchers in comparative religion has created a growing corpus of studies pertaining to various topics, such as new religious movements (Junnonaho, 1996; Ketola, 2002), religion in local society (Martikainen, 2004; Pesonen, 2004) and the interplay between religion and the media (Sakaranaho and Pesonen, 2002; Hjelm, 2005).

Research in church and social studies has recently tried to break out of its parochial role by widening its field of study. For example, the reports on the state of the Lutheran church, published every four years (e.g. Kaariainen et al., 2004), also offer a view of religion in Finnish society more generally. Many of the recent studies still work on the micro- and meso-levels, but are not restricted solely to the study of the Church of Finland (e.g. Sorri, 2001; Nieminen, 2002; Rikkinen, 2002; Helander, 2003; Leskinen, 2003; Kokkonen, 2003; Salomaki, 2004; Yeung, 2004). A welcome attempt to link more general theoretical propositions to the religious situation in Finland has recently been made by the Church Research Institute in their publication Religion in Finland (Kaariainen et al., 2005).

Conclusion: fragmentation, marginalization, resurgence? The above remarks show that Beckford's (1990, 2003) lament over the marginality of the sociology of religion is relevant also in the case of Finland. It is not as if there was some moment when the significance or usefulness of sociology of religion per se was questioned. However, the study shows that the institutional developments of the past 40 or so years have led to a fragmentation which in turn has relegated the study of religion to the margins of Finnish sociology. In sociology, the interest in religion dropped dramatically after the intro duction of Marxist sociology in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Finnish comparative religion, in turn, concentrated from the outset in folkloristic and anthropological research. Finally, the sociological study of religion in the subdiscipline of church and social studies remained

marginal because of a provincial focus on the Lutheran church and because of the dominant image of church and social studies as a theological discipline. The recent global developments and local social changes in Finland have brought religion

back onto the research agenda of sociological research. That said, general social interest is not

likely to be sufficient in itself to alter the marginalized position of Finnish sociology of religion. However, some steps have already been taken towards gaining a more recognized status.

First, the gradual lowering of disciplinary boundaries has enabled a wider dissemination of ideas. Finnish researchers from different disciplines have had very little mutual dialogue in

97




the past. In a positive development, this has changed in recent years. For example, the estab lishment of a working group for sociology of religion at the annual meeting of the Finnish sociological association (The Westermarck Society) has brought together scholars and students from varying disciplines, breaking (or at least lowering) some of the parochial boundaries of disciplines.

Second, Finnish researchers have broadened their research agenda to include other countries and cultural contexts (e.g. Sakaranaho, 1998, 2006; Ketola, 2002; Granholm, 2005). This means that sociological research is not completely dependent on how interesting research into religion is deemed in a particular situation in the Finnish context. Third, and most importantly, the advent of a 'new generation' of sociologists of religion

(regardless of disciplinary background) promises that teaching and research in the sociological study of religion will be active for some time. Whether recent developments will eventually culminate in a 'tradition' or a 'school' of sociological research remains to be seen, but if the current rapprochement between disciplines continues, sociology of religion will most probably be (re)recognized as a legitimate and important field of Finnish sociology.

Yet, much remains to be done. The increasing prominence of sociologists of religion in comparative religion and church and social studies has not yet had an equivalent in Finnish sociology. This is of course partly explained by the lack of expertise resulting from the almost 40-year lacuna in research on religion in departments of sociology. In light of this, the disciplin ary rapprochement described above is also important for activating sociologists and creating inclusive research networks. The fragmentation of sociology into a myriad of subfields may be an irreversible process, but at the same time the much-discussed interdisciplinarity of today's academia may be the key to raising scholarly awareness of religion and, consequently, awareness of the need for solid sociological research on religion. A more important question is whether Finnish sociologists of religion are able to utilize the

recent resurgence of public interest in religion in order to formulate the sort of universally sociologically significant contributions demanded by, for example, Allardt (1990). In Allardt's view, good social science always has an impact outside its immediate sphere (Allardt, 1990: 66; see also Wuthnow, 2001: 22-3). This general sociological impact is obvious in the case of classics such as Durkheim and Weber, and in the case of scholars building on the classic tradition (e.g. Bellah, 1967; Berger, 1973). In the North American context, contemporary sociology of religion has made significant contributions to discussions of civil rights, political sociology and the theory of social capital (e.g. Bellah et al., 1996; Wolfe, 1999). In Europe, discussions of multiculturalism and the pluralization of society have benefited from research originating in sociology of religion (e.g. Baumann, 1999; Sakaranaho, 2006). Although social scientific research has a varied role in different social contexts, the above may well be the areas where an inter disciplinary sociology of religion can leave its mark on the field of Finnish social science, thus shaking off the mantle of a fragmented and marginalized discipline.

Notes

Parts of this article have been reworked from an article published in Finnish in Sosiologia (vol. 42 (2), 2006). I would like to thank Kirsti Suolinna, Minna Rikkinen and Kimmo Ketola for comments on the earlier version.

References

Alapuro, R. (1977) 'Uskonto ja poliittinen mobilisoituminen maaseudulla', in M. Kuusi, R. Alapuro and

M. Klinge (eds) Maailmankuvan muutos tutkimuskohteena, pp. 121-47. Helsinki: Otava.

Allardt, E. (1970) 'Approaches in the Sociology of Religion', T?menos 6: 7-19.

98




Allardt, E. (1986) 'Uskontososiologia', in J. Pentik?inen (ed.) Uskonto, kulttuuri ja yhteiskunta, pp. 32-45. Helsinki: Gaudeamus. (First edition published in 1974 with the title Uskonto ja yhteis?.)

Allardt, E. (1990) 'Commentary on James Beckford's and Emile Poulat's Papers on the Predicament of the Sociology of Religion', Social Compass 37: 65-9.

Allardt, E. (2003) 'L?pimurtoja suomalaisen sosiologian kehityksess?', in A. Antikainen (ed.) Sosiologia susirajalla. Sosiologian opetus ja tutkimus 30 vuotta Joensuun yliopistossa, pp. 3-20. Joensuu: Joensuu

University Press.

Anttonen, V. (1987) Uno Harva ja suomalainen uskontotiede. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. Baumann, G. (1999) The Multicultural Riddle: Rethinking National, Ethnic and Religious Identities. London:

Routledge.

Beckford, J. A. (1990) 'The Sociology of Religion 1945-1989', Social Compass 37: 45-64.

Beckford, J. A. (2003) Social Theory and Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Beckford, J. A. (2006) 'The Sociology of Religion in the Nordic Region as Seen from the Other Side of the North Sea', Nordic Journal of Religion and Society 19: 1-11.

Bellah, R. N. (1967) 'Civil Religion in America', Daedalus 21: 1-21.

Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A. and Tipton, S. M. (1996) Habits of the Heart: Indi vidualism and Commitment in American Life. Updated edition. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Berger, P. L. (1973) The Social Reality of Religion. Harmondsworth: Penguin. (Originally published in 1967 as The Sacred Canopy.)

Bruce, S. (1995) 'Introduction', in S. Bruce (ed.) The Sociology of Religion, vol. II, pp. xiii-xvii. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.

Ebaugh, Helen Rose (2002) 'Return of the Sacred: Reintegrating Religion in the Social Sciences', Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 41: 385-95.

Eskola, A. (1973) 'Suomalaisen sosiologian uudistuminen', in R. Alapuro, M. Alestalo and Elina Haavio

Mannila (eds) Suomalaisen sosiologian juuret, pp. 269-317. Porvoo-Helsinki: WSOY. Eskola, A. (2003) Tied?n ja uskon. Helsinki: Otava. Goth?ni, R. (1982) Modes of Life of Theravada Monks: A Case Study of Buddhist Monasticism in Sri Lanka.

Helsinki: Societas Orientalis Fennica.

Granholm, K. (2005) Embracing the Dark. The Magic Order of Dragon Rouge - Its Practice in Dark Magic and

Meaning Making. ?bo: ?bo Akademis f?rlag. Haavio, A. (1963) Evankelinen Hike her?ysliikkeen?: sosiologinen tutkimus. Helsinki: Suomen luterilainen

evankelioimisyhdistys. Haavio, A. (1965) Suomen uskonnolliset liikkeet. Porvoo: WSOY. Haavio, A. (1983) 'Kirkkososiologia tieteenalana', Sosiologia 20: 75-6.

Haavio, A. (1996) 'Suunnittelun ja ohjelmien vuosikymmen, 1970-luku', in T. Kynt?j?, A. Konttinen and

P. Vanttinen (eds) Sosiologiaa ajassa ja tilassa. Turkulaista sosiologiaa 70 vuotta. Sosiologisia tutkimuksia B30, pp. 52-8. Turku: Turun yliopisto.

Haavio-Mannila, E. (1992) 'Etnologia ja sosiaaliantropologia', in R. Alapuro, M. Alestalo and E. Haavio

Mannila (eds) Suomalaisen sosiologian historia, pp. 27-75. Helsinki: WSOY. Hamilton, M. B. (1998) Sociology and the World's Religions. Basingstoke: Macmillan. Hamilton, M. B. (2001) The Sociology of Religion: Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives, 2nd edn. London:

Routledge.

Hautaniemi, P. (2004) Pojatl Somalipoikien kiistanalainen nuoruus Suomessa. Nuorisotutkimusseuran julkaisuja 41. Helsinki: Nuorisotutkimusseura.

Heino, H. (1984) Mihin Suomi uskoo? Helsinki: WSOY.

Heino, H. (1997) Mihin Suomi t?n??n uskoo? Helsinki: WSOY. Heiander, E. (1986) To Change and to Preserve: A Study of the Religiosity of Evangelical Students and Graduates

in Trinidad. Missiologian ja ekumeniikan seuran julkaisuja 50. Helsinki: Missiologian ja ekumeniikan seura.

Helander, E. (2003) 'Uskonto ja globalisaatio', in E. Helander (ed.) Muutoksen tulkkina. Kirkot ja uskonnol linen el?m? osana yhteiskuntaa. Helsingin Yliopiston K?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitoksen julkaisuja 106.

Helsinki: Kirjapaja. Helve, H. (1987) Nuorten maailmankuva. Seurantatutkimus p??kaupunkiseudun er??n V?hion nuorista.

Kansalaiskasvatuksen keskuksen tutkimuksia ja selvityksi? 1/87. Helsinki: Kansalaiskasvatuksen keskus.

99




Hjelm, T. (2005) Saatananpalvonta, media ja suomalainen yhteiskunta. Nuorisotutkimusseuran julkaisuja 55.

Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Holm, N. G., Suolinna, K. and Ahlb?ck, T. (eds) (1981) Aktuella religiosa r?relser i Finland. Abo: ?bo

Akademi.

Honko, L. (1972) Uskontotieteen n?k?kulmia. Porvoo: WSOY Huotari, V (1976) 'Kansankirkon sosiologinen luonne', Teologinen aikakauskirja 81: 185-93. Huotari, V (1982) 'Kirkkososiologia tieteen?', in I. Askola, T. Lampinen and P. Lempi?inen (eds) Kirkkoso

siologia, pp. 228-39. Helsinki: Kirjapaja. Husu, L. and Allardt, E. (1981) Sociology in Finland. Working papers of the Department of Sociology 21.

Helsinki: University of Helsinki.

Junnonaho, M. (1996) Uudet uskonnot - vastakulttuuria ja vaihtoehtoja. Helsinki: Suomalaisen kirjallisuuden seura.

Karsten, R. (1947) Stridsfr?gor inom den moderna sociologien och religionsvetenskapen. Helsingfors: S?derstr?m.

Ketola, K. (2002) An Indian Guru and His Western Disciples. Representation and Communication of Charisma in the Hare Krishna Movement. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.

Koistinen, O. and R?ikk?, J. (1997) Taivaassa ja maan p??ll?. Johdatus uskonnonfilosofiaan. Helsinki: Edita.

Kokkonen, S. (2003) Ty?tt?m?n? is?n? perheess?ja yhteiskunnassa. Helsinki: Suomalainen teologinen kirjal lisuusseura.

Kortekangas, P. (1975) 'Kirkkososiologian asema ja teht?v?t', in E. Koskenvesa (ed.) Johdatus teologisiin oppiaineisiin. Toinen painos, pp. 93-100. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.

Koskelainen, O. (1966a) Uskonnosta ja uskonnollisuudesta Helsingiss?: havainnointiin perustuva tutkimus. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksen tutkimuksia 61.

Koskelainen, O. (1966b) Uskonnollisuudesta Helsingiss?. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksen tutkimuksia 74.

K??ri?inen, K., Hyt?nen, M., Niemel?, K. and Salonen, K. (2004) Kirkko muutosten keskell?. Suomen

evankelis-luterilainen kirkko vuosina 2000-2003. Kirkon tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja 89. Tampere: Kirkon tutkimuskeskus.

K??ri?inen, K., Niemel?, K. and Ketola, K. (2005) Religion in Finland: Decline, Change, and Transformation of Finnish Religiosity. Kirkon tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja 54. Tampere: Kirkon tutkimuskeskus.

Lampela-Kivist?, L. (2001) 'K?yt?nn?llinen teologia', in Petri Luomanen (ed.) Teolog?a. Johdatus tutkimukseen, pp. 149-71. Helsinki: Edita.

Lampinen, T. (1984) The Preaching of State: Civil Religion in the Proclamation of Church and State in Finland. Geneva: Lutheran World Federation.

Lampinen, T. (1989) 'Yhteiskuntauskonto ja luterilainen teologia', in S. Peura (ed.) Usko ja rakkaus. Luter

ilaisen teologian mahdollisuudet t?n??n. Suomalaisen teologisen kirjallisuusseuran julkaisuja 165, pp. 85-102. Helsinki: Suomalainen teologinen kirjallisuusseura.

Lampinen, T. (1995) 'Kuilun yli. Kirkkososiologia Helsingin yliopiston teologisessa tiedekunnassa 1975-1985', in H. Vapaavuori (ed.) Usko El?m?n k?tk?ss?. Kirkkososiologian vaiheitaja n?kymi? vuosituhan nen lopulla. K?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitoksen julkaisuja 82, pp. 167-77. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston k?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitos.

Lempi?inen, P. (1982) 'Kirkkososiologia', in P. Korhonen (ed.) Johdatus teologisiin oppiaineisiin. Kolmas

painos, pp. 111-19. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.

Lep?la, O. (2000) Ulkomaalaisesta suomenmaalaiseksi. Monikulttuurisuus, kansalaisuus ja suomalaisuus 1990

luvun maahanmuuttopoliittisessa keskustelussa. Helsinki: SKS.

Leskinen, T. (2003) Globaalin auttajan arvot ja asenteet. Tutkimus suomalaisten asennoitumisesta ja osallistu

misesta vapaaehtoiseen kehitysyhteisty?h?n. Helsinki: Kirkkopalvelut. Luckmann, T. (1967) The Invisible Religion. New York: Macmillan.

Malkavaara, M. (2000) 'K?yhyys, kirkko ja ruokapankit', in M. Heikkil?, J. Karjalainen and M. Malkavaara

(eds) Kirkonkirjat k?yhyydest?. Kirkkopalvelujen julkaisuja 5, pp. 11-17. Helsinki: Kirkkopalvelut. Markkula, H. (1997) 'Kuka ottaisi uskontotieteen? Uskontotieteen asema Helsingin yliopistossa 1969-1996',

inH. Pesonen (ed.) Uskontotieteen ikuisuuskysymyksi?. Uskontotiede 1, pp. 17-41. Helsinki: Uskontotieteen laitos.

Martikainen, T. (2004) Immigrant Religions in Local Society. Historical and Contemporary Perspectives in the

City of Turku. Abo: ?bo Akademis f?rlag.

100




Niemi, I. (1966) Uskonnollinen toiminta uudenaikaistuvassa yhteiskunnassa. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksen tutkimuksia 56, 59.

Nieminen, R. T. (2002) Seurakunta aluety?n j?nnitteess?. Organisaation ja toimintayhteis?n muutosprosessi aluety?t? toteuttavassa seurakunnassa. Kirkon tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja A 78. Tampere: Kirkon tutkimuskeskus.

Palo, T. (1952) Kansan kasitys kirkosta Gallup-tutkimuksen valossa. Helsinki: Suomen Kirkon Seurakuntaty?n Keskusliitto.

Pentik?inen, J. (1986) 'Uskontotieteen tutkimusalat', in J. Pentik?inen (ed.) Uskonto, kulttuurija yhteiskunta, pp. 11-31. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.

Pesonen, H. (2004) Vihertyv? kirkko. Suomen evankelisluterilainen kirkko ymp?rist?toimijana. Bidrag till k?nnedom av Finlands natur och folk 106. Helsinki: Suomen tiedeseura.

Rastas, A., Huttunen, L. and L?pytty, O. (eds) (2005) Suomalainen vieraskirja: kuinka k?sitell? monikult tuurisuutta. Tampere: Vastapaino.

Rikkinen, M. (2002) Yhteis?n nimeen. Kirkon identifikaatioprosessi uususkontokeskusteluissa. Uskontotiede 9. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston Uskontotieteen laitos.

Ry?k?s, E. (1995) 'Kirkkososiologian murros - onko sit??', in H. Vapaavuori (ed.) Usko El?m?n k?tk?ss?.

Kirkkososiologian vaiheita ja n?kymi? vuosituhannen lopulla. K?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitoksen julkaisuja 82, pp. 178-94. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston k?yt?nn?llisen teologian laitos.

Sakaranaho, T. (1998) The Complex Other. A Rhetorical Approach to Women, Islam, and Ideologies on Turkey. Uskontotiede 3. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston Uskontotieteen laitos.

Sakaranaho, T. (2006) Religious Freedom, Multiculturalism, Islam: Cross-Reading Finland and Ireland. Leiden: Brill.

Sakaranaho, T. and Pesonen, H. (eds) (1999) Muslimit Suomessa. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino. Sakaranaho, T. and Pesonen, H. (eds) (2002) Uskonto, julkisuus ja muuttuva yhteiskunta. Helsinki: Helsinki

University Press.

Salom?ki, H. (2004) Tosi rakkaus odottaa. Seksuaalieettinen nuortenliike Suomessa. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino. Sepp?nen, P. (1962) Muuttuva kulttuuri ja kirkollisuus. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston sosiaalipolitiikan

laitoksen tutkielmia 21.

Sepp?nen, P. (1968) 'Finland: A Country of Conformist Religion and Secular Protest of Working Class',

Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksen tutkimuksia, 99-103. Sihvo, J. (1991) 'The Evangelical-Lutheran Church and State in Finland', Social Compass 38: 17-24.

Siipi, J. (1965) Luopumisen aika: kirkosta eroaminen sosiaalisena ilmi?n?. Karisto, H?meenlinna. Sorri, H. (2001) Lama ja ahdinko. Henkinen pahoinvointi Palvelevan puhelimen soittojen valossa. Kirkon

tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja B 81. Tampere: Kirkon tutkimuskeskus. Sundback, S. (1983) 'Civil religion' i Finland efter andra v?rldskriget. Meddelanden fr?n Ekonomisk-statsveten

skapliga fakulteten vid Abo Akademi A 192. ?bo: ?bo Akademi. Sundback, S. (1984) 'Folk Church Religion

- a New Kind of Civil Religion?', in B. Harmati (ed.) The Church and Civil Religion in the Nordic Countries of Europe, pp. 35-40. Geneva: Lutheran World Federation.

Sundback, S. (1986) 'Folkkyrkan och folkets passivering: en Studie av uttr?dandet ur de nordiska lutherska

folkkyrkorna', Meddelanden fr?n Ekonomisk-statsvetenskapliga fakulteten vid ?bo Akademi. Ser. A; 229. ?bo: ?bo Akademi.

Sundback, S. (2004) 'Sociologin och religionsvetenskaperna', in T. Sj?blom and T. Utriainen (eds) Mika ihmeen uskonto? Uskontotiede 10. Helsinki: Uskontotieteen laitos.

Suolinna, K. (1964) Religionsfaktorn i samh?llet. Master's thesis. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston Sosiologian laitos.

Suolinna, K. (1966) 'V?xelverkan mellan religiosa r?relser och samh?llet', Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksen tutkimuksia 56, 59. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.

Suolinna, K. (1969) Yhteiskunnan ja uskonnollisten liikkeitten suhteista. Licenciate thesis. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston Sosiologian laitos.

Suolinna, K. (1975) 'Uskonnollisten liikkeitten asema yhteiskunnallisessa muutoksessa', Helsingin yliopiston sosiologian laitoksen tutkimuksia 203. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopisto.

Suolinna, K. (1977) 'Lestadiolaisuus ja agraarin v?est?n puolustusmekanismi', in M. Kuusi, R. Alapuro and M. Klinge (eds) Maailmankuvan muutos tutkimuskohteena, pp. 112-20. Helsinki: Otava.

101




Suolinna, K. (2000) 'Hilma Granqvist: A Scholar of the Westermarck School in its Decline', Acta Sociol?gica 43: 317-23.

Suolinna, K. (2003) 'Edward Westermarckin ja ?mile Durkheimin v?linen kiista', in A. Antikainen (ed.) Sosiologia susirajalla. Sosiologian opetus ja tutkimus 30 vuotta Joensuun yliopistossa, pp. 93-102. Joensuu: Joensuu University Press.

Suolinna, K. (2005) 'The Sociology of Religion in Finland', Nordic Journal of Religion and Society 18:103-20. Suolinna, K., af H?llstr?m, C. and Lahtinen, T. (2000) Portraying Morocco: Edward Westermarck's Fieldwork

and Photographs 1898-1913. Abo: Abo Akademis f?rlag. Suolinna, K. and Sinikara, K. (1986) Juhonkyl?: tutkimus pohjoissuomalaisesta lestadiolaiskyl?st?. Helsinki:

Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.

Ter?svirta, Laura (2002) 'Objektiivisia uutisia vai merkityst? tuottavaa retoriikkaa? Suomen evankelis luterilainen kirkko yhteiskunnallisena toimijana Helsingin Sanomien uutisissa', in T. Sakaranaho and

H. Pesonen (eds) Uskonto, julkisuus ja muuttuva yhteiskunta, pp. 47-74. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press.

Toivonen, T. (1996) 'Kuohuva kuusikymmenluku', in T. Kynt?j?, A. Konttinen and P. V?nttinen (eds) Sosiologiaa ajassa ja tilassa. Turkulaista sosiologiaa 70 vuotta. Sosiologisia tutkimuksia B30, pp. 34-51. Turku: Turun yliopisto.

Wolfe, A. (1998) One Nation, After All. New York: Penguin. Wuthnow, R. (2001) 'Studying Religion, Making it Sociological', in M. Dillon (ed.) Handbook of the Sociology

of Religion, pp. 16-30. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Yeung, A. B. (2004) Individually Together. Volunteering in Late Modernity: Social Work in the Finnish Church. Helsinki: Finnish Federation for Social Welfare and Health.

Yeung, A. B. (2006) 'Rajojen ylityksi? -

uskonnosta, kirkosta, sosiologiasta', in A. B. Yeung with H. Pesonen

and S. Sundback (eds) Rajojen ylityksi?: Uskonto, kirkko, sosiologia, pp. 50-63. Helsinki: Suomalainen

teologinen kirjallisuusseura.

Biographical Note: Titus Hjelm is a lecturer at the School of Slavonic and East European Studies, University College London. His main areas of expertise are sociology of religion, religion in Finland, new and alternative religions, and the study of religion, media and culture. He is currently working on a book on Social Constructionism (to be published by Palgrave Macmillan in 2008).

Address: Titus Hjelm, School of Slavonic and East European Studies, SSEES, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK. [email: [email protected]]

102



Date post:	21-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	nicolas-panotto
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

Antropologia

Documents