64 Grace Davie
the process known as secularization – through which the world becomes progressively
“disenchanted.”
These three assumptions underpin Weber’smagnum opusin the field,The Sociology
of Religion(Weber 1922/1993), that is, his comparative study of the major world faiths
and their impact on everyday behavior in different parts of the world. Everyday behav-
ior, moreover, becomes cumulative as people adapt and change their lifestyles; hence,
the social consequences of religious decisions. It is at this point that the question of
definition begins to resonate, for it is clear that,de factoat least, Weber is working with
a substantive definition of religion, despite his celebrated unwillingness to provide a
definition as such. He is concerned with the way that thecontent(or substance) of a
particular religion, or more precisely a religious ethic, influences the way that people
behave. In other words, different types of belief have different outcomes. Weber goes on
to elaborate this theme: The relationship between ethic and behavior not only exists,
it is socially patterned and contextually varied. Central to Max Weber’s understanding
in this respect is, once again, the complex relationship between a set of religious beliefs
and the particular social stratum that becomes the principal carrier of such beliefs in
any given society. Not everyone has to be convinced by the content of religious teach-
ing for the influence of the associated ethic to be widespread. The sociologist’s task is
to identify the crucial social stratum at the key moment in history; it requires careful
comparative analysis.
Such questions, moreover, can be posed in ways that are pertinent to the twenty-
first century rather than the early modern period, the focus of Weber’s attentions. One
such, for instance, might engage the issue of gender rather than class or social stratum:
Why is it that women seem to be more preoccupied by religion than men at least in the
Christian West (Walter and Davie 1998)? Will the disproportionate influence of women
as the principal carriers of the religious tradition in modern Western societies have an
effect on the content of the tradition itself, or will a male view continue to dominate
despite the preponderance of women in the churches? What is the relationship between
lifestyle and belief in such societies when the roles of men and women are evolving so
rapidly?^1 Such questions are just a beginning, but indirectly at least they build on the
work of Max Weber; the approach, once established, can be taken in any number of
directions. Inquiries also could be made, for example, about minority groups, especially
in societies that are both racially and religiously diverse; it is likely that minorities –
and the key carriers within them – will sustain their traditions in ways rather different
from the host society, a contrast that leads at times to painful misunderstandings.
Emile Durkheim (1858–1917), the exact contemporary of Weber, began from a
very different position. Working outward from his study of totemic religion among
Australian Aborigines, he became convinced above all of the binding qualities of re-
ligion: “Religion celebrates, and thereby reinforces, the fact that people can form
societies” (Beckford 1989: 25). In other words, his perspective is a functional one.
Durkheim is concerned above all with what religion does; it binds people together.
(^1) A recently published account of religion in Britain (Brown 2001) turns on precisely this point:
That is, the crucial importance of women in the religious life of Britain up to and indeed after
World War II. The 1960s and, more especially, the feminist revolution were the watershed in
this respect – no longer were women prepared to be the carriers of familial piety. Not everyone
would agree with this argument, but Brown is undoubtedly correct to highlight the significance
of gender in the analysis of religious change (and not only in Britain).