Editing Secularization (section)

==Current issues in secularization==
At present, secularization as understood in the West is being debated in the [[sociology of religion]]. In his works ''Legitimacy of the Modern Age'' (1966) and ''The Genesis of the Copernican World'' (1975), [[Hans Blumenberg]] has rejected the idea of a historical continuity – fundamental to the so-called 'theorem of secularization'; the [[Modern history#Modern Age|Modern age]] in his view represents an independent epoch opposed to Antiquity and the [[Middle Ages]] by a rehabilitation of human curiosity in reaction to theological absolutism. "Blumenberg targets [[Karl Löwith|Löwith]]'s argument that progress is the secularization of [[Hebrews|Hebrew]] and [[Christianity|Christian]] beliefs and argues to the contrary that the modern age, including its belief in progress, grew out of a new secular self-affirmation of culture against the [[Christian tradition]]."<ref>{{cite book |first=Cornelius A. |last= Buller |title=The Unity of Nature and History in Pannenberg's Theology|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EBwpiVj5skoC |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=EBwpiVj5skoC&dq=%22Hans+Blumenberg+targets+Lowith+'s+argument+that+progress+is+the+secularization+of+Hebrew+and+Christian+beliefs+and+argues+to+the+contrary+that+the+modern+age,+including+its+belief+in+progress,+grew+out+of+a+new+secular+self-affirmation+of+culture+against+the+Christian+tradition%22&pg=PA95 95]|year=1996|publisher=[[Rowman & Littlefield]] |location=[[Lanham, Maryland]] |isbn=978-0-822-63055-5}}</ref> [[Wolfhart Pannenberg]], a student of Löwith, has continued the debate against Blumenberg.<ref>{{cite book |first=Wolfhart|last=Pannenberg |author-link=Wolfhart Pannenberg |chapter=Christianity as the Legitimacy of the Modern Age (1968) |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dS4mAQAAMAAJ&q=%22Christianity+as+the+Legitimacy+of+the+Modern+Age%22 |title=The Idea of God and Human Freedom, Volume 3 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dS4mAQAAMAAJ |pages=178–191 |year=1973 |publisher=Westminster Press |location=London |isbn=978-0-664-20971-1}}</ref> Hans Blumberg's assumption that secularization did not exactly grow out of a western-christian tradition also seems to be in line with more recent findings by Christoph Kleine and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr who have shown that similar historical developments can also be found in largely non-christian contexts such as Japan or Sri Lanka.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Kleine |first1=Christoph |last2=Wohlrab-Sahr |first2=Monika |date=2021 |title=Comparative Secularities: Tracing Social and Epistemic Structures beyond the Modern West |journal=Method and Theory in the Study of Religion |volume=33 |pages=43–72|doi=10.1163/15700682-12341505 }}</ref>

[[Charles Taylor (philosopher)|Charles Taylor]] in ''[[A Secular Age]]'' (2007) challenges what he calls 'the subtraction thesis' – that science leads to religion being subtracted from more and more areas of life.

Proponents of "secularization theory" demonstrate widespread declines in the prevalence of religious belief throughout the West, particularly in Europe.<ref name=":0" /><ref>Bruce, Steve. God is Dead: Secularization in the West. (2002)</ref>  Some scholars (e.g.,&nbsp;[[Rodney Stark]],<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Stark|first=Rodney|date=1999|title=Secularization, R.I.P.|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3711936|journal=Sociology of Religion|volume=60|issue=3|pages=249–273|doi=10.2307/3711936|jstor=3711936|issn=1069-4404|url-access=subscription}}</ref> [[Peter L. Berger|Peter Berger]]<ref>{{Cite book|last=Berger|first=Peter|title=The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion|publisher=Doubleday|year=1969}}</ref>) have argued that levels of religiosity are not declining, while other scholars (e.g.,&nbsp;Mark Chaves, N.&nbsp;J. Demerath) have countered by introducing the idea of 'neo-secularization', which broadens the definition of secularization to include the decline of religious authority and its ability to influence society.

In other words, rather than using the proportion of irreligious apostates as the sole measure of secularity, 'neo-secularization' argues that individuals increasingly look outside of religion for authoritative positions. 'Neo-secularizationists' would argue that religion has diminishing authority on issues such as [[birth control]], and argue that religion's authority is declining and secularization is taking place even if religious affiliation may not be declining in the United States (a debate still taking place).<ref>Rick Phillips, Can Rising Rates of Church Participation be a Consequence of Secularization?, Sociology of Religion, Volume 65, Issue 2, Summer 2004, Pages 139–153, https://doi.org/10.2307/3712403</ref>

Finally, some claim that demographic forces offset the process of secularization, and may do so to such an extent that individuals can consistently drift away from religion even as society becomes more religious. This is especially the case in societies like [[Israel]] (with the [[Orthodox Judaism|ultra-Orthodox]] and [[Religious Zionism|religious Zionists]]) where committed religious groups have several times the birth rate of seculars. The religious fertility effect operates to a greater or lesser extent in all countries, and is amplified in the West by religious immigration. For instance, even as the white British became more secular, [[London]], England, has become more religious in the past 25 years as religious immigrants and their descendants have increased their share of the population.<ref>Kaufmann, Eric. 2011. [https://www.amazon.com/Shall-Religious-Inherit-Earth-Twenty-First/dp/1846681448/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1324053524&sr=1-1 Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth: Demography and Politics in the Twenty-First Century]. London: Profile Books. Also see [http://www.sneps.net www.sneps.net] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120117082322/http://www.sneps.net/ |date=2012-01-17 }}.</ref> Across the board, the question of secularization has generated considerable (and occasionally heated) debates in the social sciences.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Dromi |first1=Shai M. |last2=Stabler |first2=Samuel D. |title=Good on paper: sociological critique, pragmatism, and secularization theory |journal=Theory & Society |date=2019 |volume=48 |issue=2 |pages=325–350 |doi=10.1007/s11186-019-09341-9 |s2cid=151250246 |url=https://osf.io/ke2d8/ |url-access=subscription }}</ref>