The Study of Religion and the Canadian Social Order
Dans son livre From Seminary to University : An Institutional History of the Study of Religion in Canada, Aaron Hughes propose une analyse unique de la façon dont l’étude de la religion s’est développée à travers l’histoire du Canada en examinant l’évolution de son contexte institutionnel, soit des...
| Published in: | Studies in religion |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Review |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Sage
2022
|
| In: |
Studies in religion
|
| Review of: | From seminary to university (Toronto : University of Toronto Press, 2020) (Seljak, David)
|
| IxTheo Classification: | AA Study of religion AH Religious education FB Theological education KAH Church history 1648-1913; modern history KAJ Church history 1914-; recent history KBQ North America |
| Further subjects: | B
Multiculturalism
B Canada B Book review B study of religionAaron Hughes B Aaron Hughes B Laïcité B étude de la religion B multiculturalisme B Secularization B Sécularisation B Secularism |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | Dans son livre From Seminary to University : An Institutional History of the Study of Religion in Canada, Aaron Hughes propose une analyse unique de la façon dont l’étude de la religion s’est développée à travers l’histoire du Canada en examinant l’évolution de son contexte institutionnel, soit des séminaires et collèges théologiques confessionnels aux départements laïques d’études religieuses. Il situe ces changements institutionnels dans le développement de l’ordre social canadien. Dans ce contexte canadien unique, l’étude de la religion est passée, note Hughes, “de l’exclusion religieuse au sécularisme, du christocentrisme au multiculturalisme, et de la théologie aux études religieuses séculières”. Bien qu’il s’agisse d’un argument important et original, Hughes ne propose qu’une analyse superficielle des développements uniques dans les universités québécoises francophones (comme il l’admet volontiers) et ignore l’étude de la religion dans d’autres disciplines. De plus, alors que Hughes attribue la motivation de la transformation de l’étude de la religion dans les années 1960 à la nouvelle diversité ethnoreligieuse du Canada, je soutiens qu’elle devrait être attribuée à un cosmopolitisme libéral croissant qui avait infiltré la société canadienne, y compris ses églises, ses séminaires et ses collèges de théologie. Enfin, si Hughes examine le patriarcat et le colonialisme dans son analyse de l’étude de la religion dans les périodes antérieures, il abandonne ces sujets dans sa discussion sur la sécularisation de l’étude de la religion, laquelle n’aborde pas suffisamment l’une ou l’autre de ces questions. In his book From Seminary to University: An Institutional History of the Study of Religion in Canada, Aaron Hughes provides a unique analysis of how the study of religion developed throughout the history of Canada by examining the evolution of its institutional context, that is, from faith-based seminaries and theological colleges to secular departments of religious studies. He situates these institutional changes in the development of the Canadian social order. In this uniquely Canadian context, the study of religion moved, Hughes notes, “from religious exclusion to secularism, from Christocentrism to multiculturalism, and from theology to secular religious studies.” While this is an important and original argument, Hughes offers only a cursory analysis of the unique developments in francophone Quebec universities (as he readily admits) and ignores the study of religion in other disciplines. Moreover, while Hughes traces the motivation for the transformation of the study of religion in the 1960s to the new ethno-religious diversity of Canada, I argue that it should be traced to a growing liberal cosmopolitanism that had infiltrated Canadian society, including its churches, seminaries, and theological colleges. Hughes does not adequately explore the religious roots of why Canadian Christians decided to secularize the study of religion. Finally, while Hughes examines patriarchy and colonialism in his analysis of the study of religion in earlier periods, he drops these topics in his discussion of the secularization of the study of religion, which did not address either of these issues sufficiently. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2042-0587 |
| Reference: | Kommentar in "He shoots, he misses again, but what about our goalie…: A response (2022)"
|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Studies in religion
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/00084298211041995 |