This theme group is for those interested in religion, faith, beliefs, values, spirituality and Education. The theme is linked to NICER, the National Institute for Christian Education and Research (www.nicer.ac.uk|), an institute of Canterbury Christ Church University.

Theme Focus

1. To develop a theoretical discourse around different aspects of educational research (theoretical and empirical) in the context of different responses in the 'post-secular age'.
2. To use these understandings (in 1) to explore aspects of religion and spirituality in education including religious education, moral education, spiritual development, notions of religiosity, forms of schooling, professional identity, learner experience, and forms of religious schools, colleges and universities.

Background

The idea of a "post-secular" context is based on a detailed survey of the religious situation in Britain and Europe and an apparent revival of religion evident in the work of many sociologists. Modernity has not banished religion from culture and society. Conventional sociology of religion tried to explain the gradual diminishing of religion, Christian institutions and faith practices in terms of a theory of secularization. It argued that modernization was a process by which society could be defined religiously as well. The assumption was that the more modern a society became the less religious it became; A fully modern Europe or Britain would be fully secular. However, this theory has been falsified by the empirical evidence that religion remains prominent in modern societies and public life and new developments in religion in Europe and Britain such as increased plurality (for example the growth of Islam and Pentecostal Christianity) resulting from geographic migration and the blurring of boundaries of groups and the emergence of detraditionalised forms of religion and spirituality.

Since it has become clear that the 'death of God' thesis was premature, there have been three main responses to the secularisation thesis. The first (Steve Bruce) maintains that secularisation is right and that the religious revival is something qualitatively different from religiosity in the past. The second is to say that the secularisation thesis was wrong because religion has revived itself and the third response is that the secularisation thesis was always wrong as the sacred/profane distinction is not a useful way of understanding religion in modernity.

Theme coordinators are Mr Bob Bowie and Dr Lynn Revell.