Individual religion has been a recurring theme over the course of the semester. How religion is interpreted subjectively from an individual perspective brings forward many different themes from McGuire, including the distinctions between official and nonofficial religions. The idea of religions having to prove themselves to be “official” or religious individuals having to justify their means of belief based on characteristics of their own religion, seems an odd way to put someone’s belief in a box and labeling it how they see fit. In chapter 8, McGuire and Spickard touch on religious individualization and how it correlates to religion in the modern world. The idea of a shift in the characteristics of religion in a modern society from practices of the past present what may be interpreted as a cycle. They state, “There is not, in this view, a general shift from religious authority to religious individualism; there is, instead, a historically specific growth of religious authoritarianism and institutional control that has been reversed in recent decades.” (McGuire, Spickard, pg. 294). It seems that many devoted religious individuals today speak to a decline of religion within the United States, but it appears that many people have chosen to devote their time to religion in different ways than are typically expected, or even in ways which are not acknowledged as “official” in the eyes of some traditional religious practitioners. If, according to McGuire, a religion should be understood as according to its experiences, rituals, beliefs, and communities, then typically “unconventional” religions or belief systems should be interpreted with the same aspects in mind, especially given the shift in religious norms and the so called blurring of lines between religiosity and spirituality.

The four narratives in the sociology of religion presented by McGuire and Dr. Spickard are extremely important and understanding the American religious landscape and how it has evolved throughout the years. How dynamic are the four narratives? How often to things change? Exploring ways in which the four narratives in the society of religion are present in today’s dynamic society is something that seems important to do often. With the recent election of President Donald Trump, it seems as though many new and old religious issues are coming up. As students in this class, we are able to use Secularization, Religious Reorganization, Religious Individualization, and The Supply Side of Religious Markets in order to understand the American religious landscape today, and how current events are effecting it. We can see how the history of the American religious landscape compares to current events in the world and how that changes the United States. The approaches to secularization are also important factors: how do these change with society? Have the changed? Comparing ways in which the narratives are present in the United States and the ways in which they are in other countries is important in understanding differences between the societies.

Seeing ways in which the four narratives that are used in the sociology in religion have been present within the American religious landscape is something that can be very valuable to understand. The ways in which religion is changing society in America is something that seems extremely relevant, especially right now with the political situation we have.

This week in class we talked about religion and social change. These things are connected in some important ways. Religion can both help cause social change and prevent it. (McGuire, Pg. 245) Religion can also be affected by social change as well. (McGuire, Pg. 280) One of the best examples is the Civil Rights movement. During the Civil Rights movement, churches were places where people could rally together as a community during those challenging times. (McGuire, Pg. 273) Churches also had extensive networks of resources and connections that were also useful to the Civil Rights cause. (McGuire, Pg. 273) In these ways and many others, religion and the church helped social change. However, after the Civil Rights era, things changed. As we saw in a film in class, the social changes from the Civil Rights movement ended up having some bad effects on churches in the African-American community. Churches were no longer needed as bases of support for people in the community. Therefore, churches lost the power and influence they had had in the community. Also, more African-Americans became middle-class and successful, and this lead to a number of them moving to the suburbs and out of the inner-cities. The people left behind in the inner-cities then became more isolated as a result, and there were less people going to these churches. However, the film did also show how certain churches were still trying to be helpful and influential in their communities by offering different services and outreach to people in the inner-cities. Therefore, it isn’t fair to say that they lost completely. In the end, this is a perfect example of how religion and social change influence each other and the effects it can have on both, for better or for worse.

It seems with our current president, many people talk about the “good old days” and about “making America great again.” This makes me think if America isn’t great now, and what made it great before. In the religious sense, these people seem to long for a time when everyone went to church and had the same ideas about the world around them. This has become more difficult to do due to mass media and the internet. The whole world of information is available with the internet and news, so people see many different views from around the world. In the “good old days”  people only focused on their lives and their community because there wasn’t much else from the outside. Today, people can see pictures and get differing opinions first hand from people all around the world. People feel threatened by the pluralism because they feel it calls their beliefs into question. I would also argue that the times that these people are dreaming of, were not all that they promise to be. Many people and churches didn’t accept gay marriage or women’s rights.So, it was great to be a white heterosexual man, but other then that, you were considered less of a person. Personally, I do not want to go back to a time were rational thinking did not prevail and patriarchy ruled. Religion in the United States is shifting not dissappering, and people should embrace the change. I’m not saying that they should stop believing in their faith, but they should open themselves up to pluralism and accept others faiths.

Chapter 7 depicts the way in which religion influences social change. McGuire starts by stating “a religious idea or movement may become transformed into something very different from what it’s originators intended, and the influence of religion is often indirect” (237).  This idea interested me. She used Quakers as an example, but it reminded me of the Nazi movement and the effects that “religious” movement had on the world. While some consider this movement strictly political, I would argue that it is an example of a civil religious movement. It continues as a trend throughout history as well as the world that religious movements don’t always continue to preach what they did in the beginning.

McGuire continues her chapter with a small section on how religion supports the status quo. This section grabbed my attention as well because my religion has always been counter cultural. I have grown up being told “you are in this world, but not of this world.” This idea of religion is that it goes against the status quo and while the world continues to change, Orthodoxy stays the same. However, as we learned from the presentations, not all religions or Christian denominations believe this. Religion can be a way to incorporate modern ideas and promote them even more than they usually would be. Religion can release propaganda that can further a cause.

Like McGuire said “change itself is neither necessarily good nor bad” (237).

My experience with religion has been one that rather than promote social change and modernity, it centered around traditional, I would call “outdated” values. I’m a person that has always wanted to create social change to better people’s lives, specifically those who have been marginalized. In our current day, we need people from all sides to unite under common ground to resist a fascist president. Ch. 7 of the “Social Context” delves into the impact of religion on social change and how while it has been used to maintain the status quo, it could also be an enormous vehicle to promote change.

Earlier in the book we learned the historical construct of religion and the power it gave some, while purposely denying power to others. McGuire speaks of one way that religion has been used to simply maintain traditional values is by reactionary movements that typically fight “modernity” and urge the cultural return to values and norms of an earlier, more “pure” era. This goal translates into crusades against equal rights for women, abortion, sex education in schools, gay rights, and other nontraditional family lifestyles (240). Simultaneously though, religion is a promoter of social change through its vision of how things might or ought to be (245). This is due to religion’s history in uniting people’s beliefs with their actions and their ideas with their social lives.

If more religions now a days could unite its people to fight against a common enemy, then social change could be a real possibility. People can have different political ideologies, but have the same faith and with that, we can find similarities amongst a multitude of differences.

To compare religion as an institution like that of an economic system seemed odd to me at first, but in reading chapter 7 of McGuire, especially in regards to Marxist theories, I came to understand it from a new perspective I had not thought about. In explaining aspects of social change, or lack thereof in religious settings, McGuire expands on the idea of Marxist interpretations of religion and how it naturally halts change by “support[ing] the status quo”(pg. 237). McGuire writes, “Another concept explaining the change-inhibiting aspects of religion is the idea of alienation, which is central to the Marxian definition of religion.”(pg. 239). Thinking in Marxist terms, the idea–or if one is to truly believe–the illusion of religion is merely a tool to keep society functioning smoothly. Marxist theory follows that like the way capitalism profits off of the products of labor while alienating a laborer from their finished work, religion takes the most sacred of beliefs and ideals and separates them from an individual while placing them on an unknowable deity. Thinking in these terms really does make religion appear as an institution, which in itself seems to contradict itself. Although I have not thought of myself as being particularly religious, this class has made me rethink what I previously thought of myself. If individuals are supposed to surrender themselves to a belief system and devote and sacrifice their divine beliefs–whatever they may be–for the sake of following what Marx has presented as an illusion and just another social system, how has it persisted throughout history while undergoing relatively few drastic changes in beliefs despite the evolution and creation of new religions.

In this day and age, it definitely feels relevant to discuss how religions influence “social change”. “Social change” is described by McGuire as “any alteration in the social arrangements of a group or society”, and chapter 7 dives into how religion can impact a society, creating social change.

When thinking about America’s history–and the world’s history, for that matter–it is really interesting to see how specific religions, and religion as a concept, have impacted the given society. Specifically today we can see ways in which religion is impacted American politics and social stratification, which we have been able to discover more about with the Religion in the News write-ups. People discriminate toward others because of the religion that they practice and what their beliefs are. Some also choose to live their lives free of religion, which impacts the society as well. Not in a good or bad way, necessarily, but that is also an interesting aspect of “religious climate” and how it can impact a society and its people. I also think it is interesting to explore the trends we study, and to try and foresee future changes: being able to understand history and ways in which we can improve our society is extremely important. I don’t think it is a good idea to try and force social change per se, but I believe it is good to understand history and how religions have effected society, to try and understand why our society is the way it is today.

This week in class we gave oral reports on the churches and synagogues we visited and wrote papers about. We also finished up the last of the case studies that were being presented as well. It was interesting talking about my experience, but it was even more interesting to hear about other peoples’ experiences. A lot of them talked about how friendly and welcoming the people were when they showed up for the services. This was similar to what I experienced. Some went to more traditional churches, others went to more modern ones, and two or three people went to synagogues that were pretty modern too. Some places had a lot of members, others had fewer members. Everyone also talked about what the services were like. Once again, some were done in the more traditional style, others were more informal, less Bible-based, and modern. The most popular church that a number of people went to was the Methodist church down the street. One could argue that these trips were kind of like the case studies we read about and presented in class. In both cases, we were each able to get a glimpse into these other worlds and what they were all about. For instance, the final case study that was presented was about one of the rare multi-ethnic churches that can be found in America. (A Mosaic of Believers, Marti) The book was about what this church was like and how it was able to achieve this in some new and innovative ways. (A Mosaic of Believers, Marti) This case study revealed possible ways in which other churches could become more diverse as well. (A Mosaic of Believers, Marti) In the end, these projects were all about getting a new point of view and a new understanding about different groups of people.

The younger generation is changing the landscapes of churches by bringing in new ideas of what church could be. This was shown in Reinventing American Protestantism and a Mosaic of Believers. Our generation wants more out of church then just sitting and listening to a person preach. We want to modernize the idea of church, we want to be creative and look at the Bible in a different light. Most churches don’t really like change but these modern churches are adapting to the constant change of modern society. In Sandals, they play loud rock music and dance. These types of churches are either exactly the kind of church you’ve been looking for, or it turns you away completely. For some, it does not seem formal enough to feel like worship. For others it is exactly the kind of worship they have been craving, one that isn’t as stuffy. It seems to shut out much of the older generation because it is so different from normal church worship. The older generation doesn’t seem to connect to the music or the creative side these churches bring in. I don’t feel that this new way of worship will eliminate traditional worship, but I think churches have to accept and implement some of the new ideas so they can attract the younger generation that hasn’t been coming in to fill the pews. Our generation is redefining what church is and it will be interesting to see where churches like Sandals goes in the future.