Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

"Churches" and "Sects" in North America: An Ecclesiastical Socio-Political Sketch

Author(s): Max Weber and Colin Loader


Source: Sociological Theory, Vol. 3, No. 1 (Spring, 1985), pp. 7-13
Published by: American Sociological Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/202166 .
Accessed: 16/01/2014 13:29
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 of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Sociological Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Sociological Theory.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 148.228.161.3 on Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:29:52 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

"CHURCHES" AND "SECTS" IN NORTH AMERICA: AN ECCLESIASTICALSOCIOPOLITICAL SKETCH


MAX WEBER
TRANSLATEDBY COLIN LOADER

The considerable development of ecclesiastical


communal life in the United States is a phenomenon
which strikes all but the most superficial visitor.
Nevertheless, today rapid Europeanizationis repressing
everywhere the total ecclesiastical permeation of life
that characterized authentic "Americana." One can
observe the singular compromises in which this
repression expresses itself, for example, the following statutory regulations at one of the two Chicago
universities: attendance at chapel, which is compulsory for students by penalty of expulsion, (1) can be
"discharged"by registering for certain courses beyond
the required minimum number, (2) and when one's
chapel record (sic!) has clearly exceeded the semester's requirements, either in naturaor by substitution,
the accumulated opera supererogationiscan be credited
toward subsequent semesters.
The American who is "modern" or wants to be
regarded as modern gets increasingly embarassed
when, in conversation with Europeans, the ecclesiastical character of his country is discussed. However, for true Yankeedom this is a recent phenomenon, and as far as Anglo-American circles are concerned, "secularization"has still not penetrated deeply.
These circles' exclusivity, on the one hand, and (as
will be demonstrated below) a part of their circumspection in the struggle for existence rest on this
"residuum." And, in truth, it is almost hyperbole to
speak of "residuum," since it remains one of the
most powerful components of conduct (Lebensfiihrung) as a whole. As far as we can perceive, this
component is entrenched in life in a grotesque, often
repugnant way. Even today, German-American families, who have been among the devout in Brooklyn
(as opposed to "New York proper") for more than
a generation, list as one of the impediments to
establishing close relations with the old native circles
the former's difficulty in giving a satisfactory and,
indeed, not simply "formal" answer to the inevitable
question: "to what church do you belong?" Today
it is still quite normal for a real estate developer,
who wishes to see his construction site developed,
above all to construct on the grounds a "church,"
i.e., a wooden shed with a steeple along the lines of
the patterns of our toyboxes. Then for five hundred
dollars he engages a recent graduate of a seminary
of one denomination or another with the agreement
(either explicit or implicit) that the position can turn
into a permanent appointment should the applicant
succeed in rapidly preaching the building "full." And
he is usually successful in doing this.
The private statistical collections available to us
show that even now an average of much less than

one-tenth (about 1/13) of the population is formally


"without church affiliation." And this occurs in a
country where the constitutional ban on the official
recognition of any church is interpreted so broadly
that we have no official statistics concerning religious
belief, for an official inquiry about religious belief is
considered unconstitutional. In addition, this occurs
under circumstances where the concept of "membership" in an ecclesiastical community means
something entirely different than it does for us, even
in purely material considerations. For example,
unskilled lumber mill workers and dock-workers of
a Protestant congregation near Buffalo each pledge
to their church a fixed yearly sum of over 80 marks,
not counting the extremely numerous collections
which are necessary for the minister and the upkeep
of the church itself. Just how much the question of
church membership, officially tabooed yet privately
still very important, corresponds to the Homeric
inquiry about homeland and parents was experienced by a German nose specialist, who had set up
practice in Cincinnati, when he asked his first patient
the nature of his complaint. To his considerable
astonishment, the very first statement of the man
was the announcement: I am from the Second Baptist Church on X Street. As the bewildered doctor
later determined, this circumstance naturally had no
causal connection with maladies of the nose, but
rather was meant to signify something else, which
for him was a matter of no little concern-don't
worry about the fee being paid!
Membership in a "reputable" (in the American
sense) church community guaranteed not only the
social reputableness of the individual but also, and
above all, his reputableness in business. An older
gentleman, who was a travelling salesman of undertakers' hardware (iron letters for gravestones) and
with whom I spent some time in Oklahoma, said to
me: "Mister, as far as I'm concerned anyone can
believe what he chooses. But when I learn from a
customer that he doesn't attend church, then for
me he's not good for fifty cents. Why pay me if he
doesn't believe in anything?" In a country with such
tremendous expanse, sparse settlements and mobile
population, where, moreover, legal proceedings are
anchored in Anglo-Normal formalism, where the
laws concerning debt and seizure are so lax and (due
to the homestead privileges) favorable to the bulk
of the Western farmers as to be inoperable, personal
credit has to rely chiefly on the crutch of such an
ecclesiastical guarantee as a credit reference. In the
Middle Ages, the bishops were known to have a
better credit rating than anyone else, because they

This content downloaded from 148.228.161.3 on Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:29:52 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LOADERAND ALEXANDER

faced papal excommunication if they wantonly


neglected their payments.And the atrociouscredit
system when I was a student, by which the Heidelberg fraternitystudent needed practicallyno "cash
at hand"to exist, or that questionablecredit enjoyed
by the Germanlieutenant, because his commander
would take steps against him if necessary-these
likewise rest on that (real or presumed)importance
of "social guarantee."Thus, the entire social existence of the borrower rests on his membershipin
that community which guaranteeshis credit reliability. The same condition now applies to membership in Americanchurches, indeed, there to the
highest degree. In areasof the United Stateswhere
the old relationshipsare still strongand where there
is still minor differentiationamong purposivesocial
the religious congregation
groups (Zweckverbdnde),
(the initial and most universal community) still
embracesalmost all "social"interests in which the
individualparticipatesbeyondhis own doorstep.Not
only instructional presentations, church suppers,
Sundayschool and all imaginablecharitableinstitutions, but also the most diverse athletic activities,
football practice and the like, are offered by the
church congregation;and time is allotted, circumstances permitting, for announcements of these
activities at the end of the church service. A man,
who in earlier times was publicly excluded for dishonorableconduct or who today is quietly dropped
from the rolls, suffers therewith a kind of social
boycott. He who stands outside of the church has
no social "connection."The guaranteeof socialqualities which is includedin churchmembershipis still
important, despite the diminution which (totally
apartfrom the developmentof modernity)naturally
accompaniesthe sharp competition among denominations in the attempt to proselytize souls, and
despite the general underminingof the churches'
position of power.
Today, large numberof "orders"and clubs of all
sorts have begun to assume in part the functionsof
the religious community. Almost every small businessman who thinks something of himself wears
some kind of badgein his lapel. However,the archetype of this form, which all use to guarantee the
"honorableness"of the individual, is indeed the
ecclesiasticalcommunity.Thisfunctionis most completely developed (and here we can direct only a
few words to this point) in those communitieswhich
are "sects"in the sense of the word discussedbelow.
This was made particularlyclear to me personally
when, on a cold Sunday morning in October, I
attended a Baptist baptism in the forelandsof the
Blue Ridge Mountainsin North Carolina.Approximatelyten people of both sexes in their Sunday-best
enteredthe icy water of a mountainstreamone after
another and after voluminous declarationsof allegiance bent their knees, leaned back into the arms
of a black-clothedreverend(who stood waist-deep
in the water duringthe entire procedure)until their
faces disappeared under the water, climbed out

sneezing and shivering,were congratulatedby the


farmerswho had come in large numbers by horse
and wagon, and quickly made for home (which in
some caseswas hoursaway).Faithprotectsone from
catching cold, the sayinggoes. One of my cousins,
who hadescortedme fromhis farmandwho scorned
the procedureby spitting irreverently(he abstained
from joining a church as a sign of his German
descent), showed a certaininterest as an intelligentlooking young man submerged himself. "Oh see,
Mr. X. I told you so!" Pressed to explain, he
respondedat first only that Mr. X intended to open
a bank in Mt. Airy and needed significantcredit.
From further discussion I learned that admittance
into the Baptistcongregationwas primarilyof decisive importancenot on account of his Baptist customers but much more for the non-Baptist ones,
because the on-goinginquiriesabout moral and business conduct which precede acceptance [into the
Baptist congregation] are considered by far the
strongestand most reliable.(I thought automatically
of our inquiries concerning reserve officer candidates.) Unpunctualityin paymentof a debt, wanton
spending,visits to the tavern,in short, anythingthat
casts a doubtful light on the social qualificationsof
the person in question, mean rejectionby the congregation.If he is voted in, the individualis accompanied by the sect in all he does for his entire life.
If he moves to another place, the sect provides a
certificationfor him without which he would not
be accepted by the new congregationof his denomination. Should he experience difficultiesnot of his
own makingin payinghis debts, then the sect seeks
to "sanitize"him in order that its reputationnot be
damaged.(Thispracticeis in decline amongthe sects
today, but can be found in numerous"orders.")
The determinedseverity of the controlswhich all
sects that have developed from the groundworkof
the Baptists,especiallythe Quakers,exercise on the
conduct of their members (above all concerning
business
integrity)can be tracedthroughthe complete
course of their history. The puritanical "innerworldly asceticism" peaked with them just when
their "churchdiscipline"turnedparticularlytoward
this side. Unqualified integrity, evidenced by, for
example, a system of fixed prices in retail trade,
strong management of credit, avoidance of all
"worldly"consumptionand every kind of debauchery, in short, life-long sober diligencein one's "calling," appearsas the specific, indeed, reallythe only,
formby which one can demonstratehis qualification
as a Christianand therewith his moral legitimation
for membershipin the sect. If the forbiddanceof
introducingdogmaticthings,especiallythe so-called
"preachingof confessionaldistinctions,"in sermons,
frequent pulpit exchange (the occasionalexchange
of popularpreachersamong the sects) and the tendency to form interdenominationalcartels to prevent "unfaircompetition"in the acquisitionof members are all at present fairly noticeablein America,
then today, to be sure, this is in part a symptomof

This content downloaded from 148.228.161.3 on Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:29:52 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHURCHESAND SECTSIN NORTH AMERICA

the increasingindifferencewhich accompaniesEuro- predominanceof the former today. The basic fact
peanization.However, one also finds such particu- of smallnessin and by itself stands in close conneclarly "undogmatic"epochs in the past. Indeed, the tion with the sect's inner "essence,"but yet is not
(relative)indifferenceconcerningdogmais precisely that essence itself. With regardsto the church-state
a characteristicof "pietistic"(in the broadestsense relationship,naturallythe "churches"and "sects"
of the word) Christianity.The basic premise of all sharethe factualabsenceof state "recognition."The
varieties of ascetic Protestantism(radicalCalvinist, real distinction between the two types likewise is
Baptists, Menonites, Quakers, Methodists and the thatwhat for the "churches"(LutheranandReformed
ascetic branch of continental Pietism), that only as well as Catholic) is "chance" and in its entire
proving oneself in life, especially in the activity to structure contraryto principle, conversely for the
which one is called (Berufsarbeit),
provides the cer- "sect" constitutes an emanationof a religiousidea.
tainty of rebirthand exculpation,alwaysforces one The "separationof church and state" is a dogmatic
down the same path-the "proven"Christianis the axiom for all of the sects arising from the great,
person who is proven in his "calling"(Berufsmensch),popularBaptistmovementand is at least a structural
particularlythe businessmanwho from a capitalist principlefor the radicalpietistic communities(Calstandpointis capable.Christianityof this stampwas vinistic Independentsand radicalMethodists).
one of the prime educators of the 'capitalistic"
A church sees itself as an "institution"(Anstalt),
person. As early as the seventeenthcentury Quaker a kind of divine endowed foundation(Fideikomissst-fwritersrejoicedover the visiblegrace of God, which tung) for the salvationof individualsouls who are
also broughtthe "childrenof the world"as custom- bornintoit and are the objectof its efforts, which are
ers to Quaker businesses, because they could be bound to the "office" in principle. Conversely,a
certain to find in the latter reliable service, fixed "sect" (the terminologyused here has been created
prices, etc. And it is the constitutionof the religious ad hoc and would not be used by the sects in discommunitiesas "sects" in the specific sense of the cussing themselves) is a voluntary community of
word, then, that played and (as stated) even today individualspurely on the basis of their religious
to a certain extent still plays a role in this "peda- qualification.
The individualis admittedby virtue of a
resolution
gogical"achievement.
voluntary
by both parties.The historically
Andjust what is this meaning[of the word "sect"]? given forms of the religiouscommunallife (here as
And accordinglywhat is a "sect" in contrast to a always)are not examplesthat perfectlyconform to
"church"within the sphereof WesternChristianity? the conceptual dichotomy. One always has to ask
simply in what respecta concrete denominationcorrespondsto or approachesone "type"or the other.
II
However, one can alwaysperceive the fundamental
Neither the simple limitation of the number of contrast in the basic ideas. Whereas the
baptismal
followers-the Baptistsare one of the largestof all ceremony itself, exclusivelyon the basis of the volProtestant denominations-nor the statutory fea- untaryresolutionof adultfollowers,was the
adequate
ture of a lack of "recognition,"i.e., privilegedposi- symbol for the "sect-like" characterof the
Baptist
tion, for the churchby the state-which in America community, the intrinsic falsity of the "confirmais shared by all denominations-can be considered tion" (whose
postponement beyond the childhood
decisive in themselves.
Of course we know that the years even Stoecker is known to advocate)demonsize of a social group exercises the most decisive strates the intrinsic contradiction of the avowal,
influenceon its internalstructure.And the canonical which is
only formally"spontaneous,"to the struclimitationof the size of the unity, the congregation, ture of our "churches." The latter, as such, can
to such dimensionsthat all memberspersonally
know basicallynevergo beyondthe not-so-"naive"peasant
one anotherand, therefore,can judge and supervise conception that the
priest, as administratorof the
their "probation"reciprocally has always been a divine endowed foundation, must be morefaithful
fundamentalBaptistprinciple. A form of this prin- than the rest of the
congregationand also must be
ciple was also found in genuine Methodism in the capableof such due to a specialdispensationof grace.
cultivationof the so-called class meetings in which The "universalism"of the "churches"allows their
memberspractice(originallyweekly)a kindof recip- light to shine on both the
righteousand the unrighrocalexaminationthroughconfessions,just as it was teous. Only a rebellion
against authority that is
in the smallcommunities(ecclesiolae)
of Pietism.One expressed as a public and obstinate impenitence
needs only to see the BerlinCathedralto know that leadsto "excommunication."The
communityof the
the most consequentialformof the Protestant"spirit" "chosenfew" remainsthe "invisiblechurch"whose
is alivenot in the caesaro-papiststate hall but rather composition is known
only God. Conversely, the
in the smallchapelsof the Quakersand the Baptists "purity" of its
membershipis a vital question for
which lack such mystical ornamentation. Con- the genuine "sect." In the formative
period of the
versely, the considerableexpansionof the followers pietistic sects, the driving impulse was the continof Methodism,which exhibits in its variousforms a uous deep fear of
havingto participatein the Lord's
singular mixture of "church-like"and "sect-like" Supper with a "reprobate,"or even to receive it
principles, clearly has fostered the unquestionable from the hand of a reprobate,an official"hireling,"

This content downloaded from 148.228.161.3 on Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:29:52 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

10

LOADERAND ALEXANDER

whose conduct did not bearthe sign of beingchosen. been urged. Not objectivizedcontracts and tradiThe "sects" see themselves as a religious "elite," tions but rather the religiouslyqualifiedindividual
which sees the "invisiblechurch"displayedin plain is seen as the bearerof revelationwhich continues
church,
sight in the community of "proven"members.The withoutever beingcompleted.The "invisible"
intervention of the religiouslyunqualifiedinto the therefore, is largerthan the "visible"sect and so it
sects' internal affairs(especially every relationship is a question of assemblingits members.The Protof the holders of worldly power) was necessarily estant missionis seen as central not by the circles of
intolerablefor them. The principlethat "one must the "churches,"which are correctand boundby the
obey God above men," whose various interpreta- parochial fixation of their "office," but rather by
tions and explanationsin a certainsense incorporate Pietism and the sects. The above-cited examples
the whole cultural mission of Western European indeeddemonstratewhich powerfuleconomicinterChristianity,acquireshere its specific anti-authori- ests are taken by the sect-like pattern of communal
tariancharacter.
formationto serve it. The sect itself is a naturally
The exclusiveappraisalof a personpurelyin terms "particularistic"
formation,but the religiosityof the
of the religious qualities evidenced in his conduct sect is one of the most specific forms of vital, not
necessarilyprunes feudal and dynasticromanticism just traditional,"popular"religiosity.The sects alone
from its roots. To be sure, the aversionto all kinds have achievedthe combinationof positivereligiosity
of idolatry was neither confined to the "sects" in and political radicalism.They alone, on the basis of
our technical sense, nor has it been immediately Protestantreligiosity,have been able to instill in the
characteristicof all communities constituted along broadmasses, and especiallyin modern workers,an
the lines of the sect. It is much more an attributeof intensity for ecclesiasticalinterests which is elsethe religiosity whose essence is asceticand, in the where to be found only in the bigotted fanaticism
caseof the CalvinistPuritans,is a directconsequence of backwardpeasants. So in this the sects' imporof the idea of predestination.Before the frightful tanceextends beyondthe religioussphere.Onlythey
earnestnessof this idea of predestinationall earthly give, for example, American democracy its own
institutionsbased on the "divineright of kings"had flexible structure and its individualisticstamp. On
to crumbleinto nothingbut a blasphemousswindle. one hand, the idea that the religious qualifications
To be sure,however,this frameof mind only reached bestowedon the individualby God arealonedecisive
its fullest expression in the naturallyanti-authori- for his salvation,that no form of sacramentalmagic
tarianclimate of the sects. If, by their strict avoid- is of use to him here, that only his practicalconduct,
ance of all oaths of allegiancethat were courtly or his "probation,"can be taken by him as a symptom
stemmed from court life, the Quakers took upon that he is on his way to salvation,places the indithemselvesnot only the Crown of Martyrsbut also vidual absolutely on his own in the matter most
the much heavierburdenof everydayderision,then importantto him. On the other hand, this qualifithis standcame from the convictionthat those oaths cation through self-probationis viewed exclusively
of allegianceshould be made to God alone and that as the foundation for the social union of the conit is an insult to His majesty to accord them to gregation. Thus, the tremendous flood of social
people. The unconditional rejection of all such structureswhich penetrate every nook and cranny
demandsof the state that went "againstone's con- of Americanlife is constituted in accordancewith
science" and the demand that the state recognize the schema of the "sect."
Whoever represents"democracy"as a massfrag"freedomof conscience" as the inalienableright of
the individualwere conceivablefrom the positionof mented into atoms, as our Romanticsprefer to do,
the sect only as a positive religiousclaim. This claim is fundamentallymistaken so far as the American
reached its logical conclusion in the Quaker ethic, democracyis concerned. "Atomization"is usuallya
one of whose guiding principles was that what is consequence not of democracybut of bureaucratic
duty for one can be forbiddento another,when the rationalismand, therefore, it cannot be eliminated
voice of one'sown carefullyexploredconscience
implied throughthe favoredimpositionof an "organizational
engagingin the action for the formerand abstaining structure"from above. The genuine Americansocifrom it for the latter. The autonomyof the individ- ety-and here we include especiallythe "middle"
ual, then, is anchored not to indifference but to and "lower" strata of the population-was never
religiouspositions;and the struggleagainstall types such a sandpile.Nor was it a buildingwhere everyof "authoritarian"arbitrarinessis elevated to the one who entered without exception found open
level of a religious duty. In the time of its heroic doors. It was and is permeatedwith "exclusivities"
youth, this individualismconjointly produced an of everykind.' Where the old relationshipsstill exist,
eminentpower to form communities.The "church's" the individualdoes not have firm footing, either at
universalism,which goes hand in hand with ethical the universityor in businesslife, when he has been
moderation,stands in contrast to the sect's propa- unableto be accepted into or maintainhis position
gandism,which is pairedwith ethicalrigorism.Again, in a socialorganization(earlier almost always religious,
the latterreachesits logicalconclusionin the Quaker today of one kind or another). And the old "sect
ethic with the idea that God can spread his "inner spirit"holds swaywith relentlesseffect in the intrinlight"also to those upon whom the Gospelhasnever sic nature of the associations.The latter are always

This content downloaded from 148.228.161.3 on Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:29:52 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CHURCHESAND SECTSIN NORTH AMERICA


"artifacts" of "societies" (Gesellschaften) and not
"communities" (Gemeinschaften),to use the terminology of Ferdinand T6nnies. In other words, they
neither rest on "emotional needs" nor aspire toward
"emotional values." The individual seeks to maintain
his own position by becoming a member of the social
group. Missing is that undifferentiated peasant-vegetative "geniality" without which (as Germans are
accustomed to believe) there can be no community.
The cool objectivity (Sachlichkeit)of the sociation
(Vergesellschaftung)promotes the precise placement
of the individual in the purposive activity (Zwecktatigkeit)of the group, be it a football team or a political
party. However, this in no way means a lessening of
the individual's need to constantly attend to his selfaffirmation. On the contrary, this task of "proving"
himself is present more than ever within the group,
in the circle of his associates. And thus, the social
association to which the individual belongs is for
him never something "organic," never a mystical
total essence which floats over him and envelops
him. Rather he is always completely conscious of it
as a mechanism for his own material and ideal ends
(Zwecke).The same holds true for the highest social
bodies, in relation to which the "lack of respect"
typical of modern Americans so energetically manifests itself. Discounting bills of exchange is a business, as is the introduction of dispositions into government records, and the latter cannot be distinguished from the former by some sort of
"consecration." Unsuspecting German officials very
often concede with great astonishment, "it works
that way as well!" when they come to know the
excellent work accomplished by American officers
which takes place hidden from our eyes under a
heavy blanket of big city corruption, party maneuvers and bluff.
The democratic character of North America is,
without doubt, dependent on the colonial character
of its culture and so demonstrates the tendency to
decline together with the latter. In addition, a part
of those particular American characteristics that were
discussed here is determined by the sober, pessimistic estimation of mankind and its works which
is characteristicof all forms (even those of the "church"
type) of Puritanism. However, the connection of the
internal isolation of the individual (which means that
most of his energy is deployed externally) with his
ability to form social groups having the most stable
cohesion and maximum impact at first was realized
most fully in the climate of the foundation of the
sects.
We modern, religiously "unattuned" people are
hard pressed to conceptualize or even simply to
believe what a powerful role these religious factors
had in those periods when the characters of the
moder national cultures were being stamped. The
factors overshadowed everything at a time when
people were most immediately concerned with the
"hereafter." It is and remains the fate of us Germans
that, due to numerous historical causes, the religious

11

revolution at that time meant a development that


favored not the energy of the individualbut the
prestige of the "office." Hand in hand with this
development,that situationarosewhich, on account
of the religious community remainingnow as ever
only as a "church,"i.e., an institution,had to force
all individual striving for emancipation from
"authority,"all "liberalism"in the broadestsense of
the word, along the path of hostilityto the religious
communities.At the same time, the religiouscommunitywithheld from itself the developmentof that
community-formingenergywhich the school of the
"sects"-along with other historical factors-has
imparted to an Anglo-Saxon world so completely
differentin these respectsfromthe German.It stands
to reason that today this development cannot be
"recovered"in the sphere of religious communal
life, even if one so desired. Today's "voluntary
churches"would neitherwant to nor could become
"sects." Moreover, a "religion of cultivation," which
is oriented toward the teaching of Goethe, is just as
unconditionally contrary as any theology (especially
liberal ones) to the genuine sects. To be sure, the
sects have not neglected to develop a theology of
their own. However, the genuine and consistent
"sect" protests against nothing so vehemently as
against esteem for the academic analysis of the religious. The religious qualification of the personality,
and not any kind of academic knowledge, legitimates
the leadership of the congregation. This is a principle
for which all types of specific Protestant sects have
fought. For example, the struggle of "Saint" Cromwell eventually focused itself directly into a war
against theology, the "office," the "tithe" that supported the "office" and therewith against the economic and ideal foundations of the politically and
intellectually cultivated leisure classes and especially
the universities. The tragic flaw in Cromwell's lifework was that, as a "realpolitician," he had to separate himself from his true nature on this point. For
it meant that he measured the religious postulates
against nonreligiouspolitical and intellectual values of
culture. Hence his death-bed declaration that he had
once "stood in Grace." However, about one thing
there is no mistake. All the present arguments against
the "narrowness" and "confusion" of the sects that
we hear from the best, the most "modern" and least
dogmatically fettered representatives of the universal
Protestant "Church's" ideal mean simply this-cultural values, and no genuinely religious needs, are
decisive for them.
A "value judgment" on the religiosity of the
"sects" as such is not intended here. The examples
that have been included here, as anyone will admit,
have in no way been chosen in order to awaken
sympathy for this religiosity in and of itself. They
are more likely to strengthen the usual German
beliefs concerning Puritanism, that it basically has
been and still is idle "hypocrisy." So-it simply was
not my intention at this juncture to contradict this
foolish conception. However, my personal view is

This content downloaded from 148.228.161.3 on Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:29:52 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LOADERAND ALEXANDER

12

and howsoever
that in generalwherever
the contents of
an intensive religious consciousness have met and
meet with external social configurationsand (with
or without their knowledge or intention) amalgamate themselveswith political,economic and "social"
interests, this process can be viewed in the same
manneras the idea of "boilingin water"2-simply
(which today is readilyforgotten),not onlyin water.
Were it a matterof "valuation,"then the question
would very well be whether, for one who does not
confuse the "religious"contentswith the formalpsychologicalqualityof such aestheticsentimentalityas
is again today so gladly produced through musical
and optical mystification,the most adequate form
of religious service must not be, for example, the
"sober" Quaker meeting, which reduces the
"achievements"and "intentions"of religiousinteraction to a minimum and often passes only in deep
silence and contemplation. Ought to be!-for in
generalit holds that where the "modem" person in
a concrete case actually(or occasionallyonly allegedly) is also "attuned"to religion,he is, nevertheless,
in absolutely no way a religious communal entity
and, on accountof this, is predestinedto belong to a
"church"(of which he takesno heed if he so desires)
but not to any kind of "sect." However, we should
make no mistake about it-it

is just this factor (in

connectionwith an absoluteindifference,which asks


onlywhat is customaryandexpedientfor the "proper"

of the religious
motive,
citizen), in short, the weakness
which is fostered by the "establishedchurch," and
not only by it but by the "church"in general, for
the forseeablefuture.
In addition,to avoid possiblemisunderstandings,
I would like to note that I am fully cognizantof the
fact that it is quite feasable to develop a highly
ideologicaltheory of the establishedchurch from a
genuinely religious point of view, startingwith the
absolute irrationalityof the religiousindividualand
his experiences and proceedingto the consequence
that it runs contraryto the particularessence of the
religious to have a union whose consensus as an
"association"(sect) is based on certain criteria of
belief or conduct. The deep inner insincerityof that
establishedchurch, as we find it representedeven
by those innovatorswho are filledwith a subjectively
unquestionable,earnestly intended zeal for reform
(such as FriedrichWilhelm IV in his time and perhaps now by Stoecker), lies certainly not in the
"concept" of the establishedchurch itself as such.
Ratherit lies in the totallynaiveandmassive"snakelike cunning" which, on behalf of the postulated,
exclusive,"devout" church, also "accepts as part of
the package"the monopoly on the budget for education and public worshipand (what is more important, for these materialpowersare in no way decisive
right here) the secularprivilegein governmentaland
social life. And then, just because, notwithstanding
its "exclusivity,"it is and wants to be a "church,"
it cultivatesin the religiousclaims of the "secular"
privileged classes such Erastian moderation that

Stoecker, for example, heretofore expressed in his


comments about Moltke in such a classic fashion.
I believe, however, that what has been saidabove
holds true neverthelessnot simply for such caricatures of objectively "authentic"Christianzeal for
reform, but also for the current posture of the
"learnedranks"vis-a-vis the empiricallygivenestablished church in general. With regardto this, however, I do not want to be understood as believing
(and let there be no misunderstandingabout it) that
nearly all of those whose lifework is the service to
church could gain this
a-perfect-established
position only from cultural values outside the religious sphere. That, as I very well know, does not
correspondto the facts. Yet Rothe's statementthat
"a maximumof religioncorrespondsto a minimum
of church" probablymust be of inescapableconsequence for that view which is based on the irrationality of the religiouspersonality.And, held next to
the ideas of the sects, this has consequencesfor the
religious penetration of social life "from below"
which, as I see it, are obvious.

1. If my time were not exhaustingly claimed by other


work, I would gladly take the opportunity here to
present some points of contention which take issue
with those in the address of my friend and colleague
Troeltsch to the Breslau Evangelical-SocialCongress.
At this point it may only be noted that the consistent
identificationof "conservative"and "aristocratic"by
Troeltsch (as by so many others) leads to many questionable propositions. On the contrary, it is in my
opinion undeniable that the two concepts are not at
all identical and that they have come to be identified
so often with one another by us Germans only as a
result of the present historical constellation. A "fully
realized"democracy (in the usual sense of this word)
is in more than one sense virtuallythe "most conservative" structure imaginable.By contrast, the process
of social, economic and political differentiationrepresents a revolutionarydevelopment.In addition,I believe
that Troeltsch's (and many others') use of the terms
"aristocracy"and "democracy"is too undifferentiated.
If one takes aristocracy to mean simply the social
exclusivity of a group, then it is necessaryabove all to
determine:whether membershipin that group is determined by personalqualitiesor achievementsof the individual(predestination,"probation"with regardto religious, social, sporting, "human," etc. attributes), or
whetherhe receivesthe attributesof qualification
through
his inherited place in a social stratum or the social
position of his ancestors, which is attributed to him,
etc.-in short, whether the exclusive group is constituted not on the basis of individualqualitybut rather
on that of individualsocial position.We have come to
think of the latter when we speak of "aristocracy."
Upon close consideration,this is indeed curious(!), for
it in no way concerns a community of persons such as
can be found in the unique format which is characteristic of the exclusivities incorporated by American
"democracy."Over there even the millionaires'clubs
do not necessarily constitute an exception. One can
easilyobserve that, while for us the consecrationof the

This content downloaded from 148.228.161.3 on Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:29:52 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE HISTORICISTCONTROVERSY

13

line is acknowledged only with the grandchildof the


dealing with the usual counter-concept of "aristoc"parvenu,"the genuine Americans, on the contrary,
racy," separate the aristocracies of "position" and
esteem not the million or the man in the millionaire's
"quality,"and at first carefullyseparatethe concept of
the "conservative."
position, but rather the man who is skilled in making
the million. Therefore, if one wants to discuss, as 2. Translator'snote: Here Weber refers to a proverb,
Troeltsch does, the relationship of Christianity to
"everywherethings are boiled in water,"meaningpeople are the same everywhere.
"democracy"or "aristocracy,"one should probably,in

THE HISTORICIST CONTROVERSY:


UNDERSTANDING THE SOCIOLOGICAL PAST.
A symposium with contributions by Steven Seidman, Robert Alun Jones, R. Stephen
Warner, and Stephen Turner.
INTRODUCTION:STEVENSEIDMAN

This symposiumis based upon a roundtablediscussion held at the 1984 ASA meetings. As chair of
that discussionI invitedBobJonesand SteveWarner
to address themselves to general methodological
questionsregardingthe historyof sociology.I requested
that their remarksbe organizedaroundthe current
methodologicaldiscussionbetween "historicists"and

"presentists."This symposiumis a follow up on the


roundtablediscussion and indicates various directions current methodologicaldebate in the history
of sociology is moving. Following the papers by
myself, Jones and Warner, Steve Turnerprovidesa
final critical reflection upon some of the key issues
in the historiographyof sociology.

THE HISTORICIST CONTROVERSY: A CRITICAL REVIEW WITH A DEFENSE OF A


REVISED PRESENTISM
STEVEN
SEIDMAN
SUNY-Albany

In the last decade or so we can perceivea serious


interestin the historyof sociology.This is exhibited,
for examplein recent historicalreassessmentsof the
classical tradition (Alexander, 1982; Collini, 1979;
Habermas,1983;Hawthorn,1976;Lewisand Smith,
1980; Seidman,1983; Therborn,1976), the appearance of histories of social research (e.g., Bulmer,
1981; Cullen, 1976; Oberschall, 1972), historical
analyses of the institutionalizationof sociology in
differentnationalcontexts (e.g., Clark,1973;Kasler,
1982; Haskell, 1977; Soffer, 1978), and in the wave
of historical studies on American sociology (e.g.,
Bierstedt,1981;Hinkle,1980;Matthews,1977;Wiley,
1979). A significant indication of this developing
historical reflexivity among sociologists is the
appearanceof a new methodologicalself-consciousness regarding problems in the historiographyof
sociology. An important and unifying focus of the
current methodological discussion is the so-called
"historicist controversy." The historicist controversy refers to methodologicaldisputes concerning
the hermeneuticalproblem of understandingpast

texts. Simultaneously,this controversy addresses


broader methodological issues regarding the proper
form and aim of a history of sociology. This paper

criticallyreviews the historicistcontroversy.I conclude with some brief remarks suggesting a shift
from the theme of understandingpast texts to the
problem of the development of sociology which
entailsa parallelmethodologicalshift to elaborating
models of scientificdevelopment.
Thehistoricistcontroversydivides,roughlyspeaking
between presentistsand historicists.Presentistsassert
an underlying continuity between the sociological
past and present.They assume,in other words, that
there is a common set of theoreticalaims, disputes,
and conventions that unite classics and contemporaries.Accordingly,presentistsclaim that it is legitimateto interpretpasttexts in relationto the current
theoreticalcontext. For example, in TheStructure
of

SocialAction(1968), Parsons not only reads the problems of social order into the past but interprets past
texts (e.g., the works of Hobbes, Locke, Weber,
Durkheim, etc.) in the contemporary theoretical

This content downloaded from 148.228.161.3 on Thu, 16 Jan 2014 13:29:52 PM


All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Вам также может понравиться