A Reconnaissance of Postmodern Religiosity

by Yvette Fawcett

‘Postmodern’ is a term which one often hears attached to front of anything from art and architecture to literature and philosophy but rarely knows to what it refers. Its use and influence is also gaining momentum in the areas of religious studies and sociology (resulting in the use of postmodernity as a socio-cultural formation). Some authors argue against the use of the term postmodernity to describe the condition of contemporary society, given its controversy. As Gary Bouma points out “few terms raise more dust than postmodernity” (2006:3). Instead these scholars prefer to use expressions such as ‘reflexive modernity’ (Heaphy 2007), ‘high modernity’ (Mellor and Shilling 1994), ‘late modernity’ (Giddens 1991) or even ‘liquid modernity’ (the shifted preference of Bauman (2007)). However, its application in this essay is in reference to social and cultural shifts away from modernity and also to serve as a premonition of emerging religious trends.

This essay explores how postmodernity is influencing and shaping the religious landscape, perhaps more significantly in Australia but also in other affluent and developed countries. Why bother exploring such an equivocal concept as postmodern society and its influence on religion? It is as Phil Zuckerman (2003) rightly asserts; while the influences of religion on society continue to be highly relevant, so too is it true that society influences religion. The first part of this essay dedicated to dispelling the assumptions of secularisation and to delineate briefly the postmodern condition in which society is placed. The third and second parts are focused on two forms of religiosity emerging from postmodernity, namely fundamentalism and the ‘New Age’ movement. I will argue that the postmodern condition is promoting and facilitating the propagation of both these movements.

The Death of Secularisation in Postmodern Society
Secularisation, or the decline in religion, has long thought to be a success, with modernists blazoning it with announcements of the ‘death of God’ and the entrance of the ‘post-Christian era’ (Berger 1990:1). However, it is becoming increasing obvious that religion is persisting, and that secularisation has not caused people to reject the existence of the supernatural (Possamai 2005: 35). Peter Beyer in his book, A Rumour of Angels (1990), explores the resurgence of belief in the supernatural in the US and Bouma asserts that religion and spirituality are still thriving in Australia (2006). However, this is not to say that the secularisation project was ineffectual, it has seen the decline in attendance of traditional and institutionalised religion, which is why many are led to believe its alleged disappearance. Indeed, Christendom has been shifted to the margins of Australian society (Bouma 2006). If this is true, how does one then measure the effect of secularisation? David Lyon contends that religion has often been misrepresented as being ‘customary behaviour’ (for example church-going) and cognitive activity (such as belief) when rather it has more to do with the faith-based, existential and emotive aspects of life (2000: 26). Michael York suggests that secularisation can be seen in terms of interest in religion (2001: 362). He concludes that while no study has evidenced a general disinterest in Western society, it has been shown that there is “dissatisfaction with traditional forms of religion” (York 2001: 362).

Both of these concepts, however, are dependent on definitional boundaries of what may be considered as religion and secularisation. The creation of these boundaries is something which postmodern scholars such as Zygmunt Bauman warn against because “practical application of the definition remains as tall an order, and in the end as contentious, as the definition itself” (1998: 57). New religious movements (which are often not included in these definitional boundaries) have meant that religion is not disappearing but changing; it is no longer confined to the actions which take place in a church, mosque, synagogue or temple. It is now seen that while the war between science and religion was being waged by the modernists, new forms of religiosities were forming. Possamai points out that it is one of the ‘hidden ironies’ of secularisation (2005: 35). Postmodernism serves to establish the weaknesses of such definitions; indeed exposing the assumptions of definitional boundaries is the postmodern project. Which leads to question what is postmodernism and how is postmodernity constructed into a socio-cultural form.

The first thing that one will understand when exploring the concept of postmodernism is its ambiguity; almost every writer will establish this fact. Ernest Gellner in his book Postmodernism, Reason and Religion ascertains this by saying “Postmodernism …is strong and fashionable. Over and above this, it is not altogether clear what the devil it is.” (1992: 22). However, in my understanding, defining postmodernism would be contradictory to such a way of thinking. As previously noted, definitions are the projects of modernists, which postmodernists seek to expose as literary constructions rather than representations of an objective truth. Despite this, postmodernism can, and must for the purpose of this essay, be said to have loose boundaries. In 1984 Jean-Francois Lyotard famously defined the concept to its simplest nature as “incredulity toward metanarratives” (1984: xxiv). While this appears to discredit any religious system of beliefs, which may be considered as a ‘metanarrative’, it is not necessarily so. A common critique of postmodernism is that adheres to absolute relativism and concedes that all forms of epistemology (including that of an individual) are equal (Hoffman et al. 2009: 142). However, it more correct to view postmodernism as pluralistic (engaging many different approaches to knowledge) rather than relativistic (maintaining that they are all equal) (Hoffman et al. 2009: 143). It is this notion of pluralism that essential to postmodern society as well.

Bouma considers Australian society to be postmodern because of its multi-faith and multi-cultural nature (2006: 5). Lyon argues that delineation of postmodern society may be traced from 1980s, forming from “the expansion of some aspects of modernity [and] at the expense of others (2000: 37). Among the aspects that have experienced expansion are, of course, the champions of modern times: capitalism and globalisation. Globalisation, that ever growing feeling of interconnectedness, has been put on steroids by what Manuel Castells refers to as ‘the information age’ (1996 cited in Lyon 2001: 36). It has meant that global society is transforming into a ‘network’ and capitalism is becoming decentralised with unpredictable flows of power. Another change within capitalism is noted by Bauman. He argues that we are no longer producers in an industrial society but consumers in a postmodern society (Bauman 2005). Bauman admits that while there are both producer and consumer behaviour within both societies, there has been a shift in emphasis. This shift, from producing to consuming, causes vast changes to culture, society and the individual (Bauman 2005: 24).These changes will be discussed more fully later. Also of importance is Generation Y, the children of postmodernity. Michael Mason et al. in their studies of Generation Y in Australia and their spirituality conclude that while the generation is often described as being individualistic, it is more appropriate to recognise them as ‘individualised’ by being part of postmodern society rather than by choice (2007: 161). “Their eclective mix of worldviews” is developed from the fragile support of their friends and family without the social structures, such as communities, church bodies and other organisations which previous generations relied upon (Mason et al. 2007: 161). The lack of these social structures in postmodernity will be the focus of what follows.

Resisting the Anomie: Fundamentalisms
The disintegration of social structures is an important factor in diagnosing postmodernity in Western society. Bauman refers to this aspect as ‘liquid times’ which involves a few processes which are occurring simultaneously (2007). Firstly, social structures which limit individual choice and provide guidelines of acceptable behaviour are liquefying and all new ones are melting faster than the time it takes for them to set (Bauman 2007: 1). Secondly, there is the decentralising of power from nations to global arena where it has become unregulated and politically uncontrolled (Bauman 2007: 2). Thirdly, the decline and disintegration of the social welfare systems means that responsibility has shifted from the state to the individual. This has also meant that society “is increasing viewed and treated as a ‘network’ rather than a ‘structure’” (Bauman 2007: 3). This degradation of social structures has also had ramifications for the individual sphere of life. With little support from these liquefying structures, crises in identity have become more predominate. Postmodernism is now challenging the assumption that individuals create a coherent and consistent identity (which has been the foundation for much psychological research) (Gergen 2005: 137). The notion of a pluralistic person, who in fact, wears a multitude of ‘masks’ as Kenneth Gergen puts it, may cause anxiety in many (2005: 143). Sombre as this may be, it is important to recognise the uncertainty and fear it may in turn create.

A suggested remedy to these ‘liquid times’ is provided by what is called fundamentalism, a term which is increasingly equated with violence and narrow-mindedness in popular usage. However, this phenomenon should not be dismissed as being the epitome of irrationality of people who frantically clutch onto the past (pardon the caricature) because as Gilles Kepel comments, it has “the capacity to reveal the ills of society” (Kepel 1994 cited in Bauman 1998). Fundamentalism, a movement which saw its birth in modernity, has continued evolving , taking a place among the forms of religiosities that are gaining momentum in postmodern times; and, somewhat ironically, with good reason. It provides the structure and certainty for which society is so desperate (Bauman 1998: 73). This craving for consistency can be seen in one of the core beliefs within the Christian fundamentalist movement, namely the inerrancy of the Bible. This principle maintains that the Bible is infallible and that it must be taken as the literal Word of God (Harris 2006: 18). This stance is reinforced by a belief referred to as ‘the domino effect’; to admit one error will cause the rest of dominos to fall leaving one only with doubt and unbelief (Harris 2006: 820). This principle of inerrancy disallows ‘personal interpretation’ (‘an impossibility’ as a postmodernist would dutifully insist) which in turn rejects the need of an eclective worldview that is so commonplace in postmodern society and provides an unwavering social and moral structure.

Related to this is the suggestion of Dennis Owens et al. that fundamentalists are authority-minded rather than authoritative (as commonly conceived of today) (1991). They respect and seek authority, especially of the God and the Bible (Owens et al. 1991: 76). When analysing the writings of a fundamentalist Protestant, they conclude that “the most central concern of these Protestants is ultimately an epistemological one, a requirement for certainty…which is a major factor in distinguishing authority-mindedness from authoritarianism” (Owen et al. 1991: 79 emphasis in original). Fundamentalism, it may be argued, is a cure for the uncertainty which the postmodern condition has cultivated. So if these symptoms continue then so will the need for the cure; fundamentalism does indeed reveal the ‘ills of society’ and as such should not be ignored in hope that it will disappear.

Embracing the Consumer within: The ‘New Age’ Movement
Rather than ending with such foreboding as the messages of fundamentalism being the only cure to postmodernity, I prefer to be reminded of the existence of other perceptions. Postmodernity, it seems, is not always considered a curse (lest we have a situation where the majority of society were either fundamentalists or suicidal) but rather it is seen as liberating. Individuals now, more than ever, have the freedom of self-determination from the hegemony of these social structures, in particular church bodies. This in part has been attributed to the effects of consumer society. Consumerism, the result of expansion of capitalism and global markets, has reached all aspects of life. Even leisure has transformed into a commodity; encompassing much of popular culture from music and art to food and clothing (Possamai 2005: 43). Adam Possamai argues that religion has now become part of this consumer culture as well (2005: 45). Everywhere religions are forced to speak this capitalistic consumer language. It has resulted in the construction of ‘mega churches’, modelling shopping malls and equipped with auditoriums, cafés, bands and seven-day-a-week worship (Possamai 2005: 45).

Lyon refers to this as the “Disneyization” of religion (2000). This process incorporates both the technological and consumerist aspects of postmodernity. Disneyland “encapsulates…the preoccupation with consuming-fashion, film, and music” with the highest forms of technology (Lyon 2000:6), which is a concept not far removed from these ‘mega churches’. While this seems to condemn society to a life of mindless mass consumption, there are those who view it as an opportunity to actively consume in order to create a unique identity (Possamai 2005: 44). The ‘New Age’ movement has this appeal.

Unlike the defiance of fundamentalism to the liquid social structures of postmodernity, the ‘New Age’ embraces its consumerist nature without the boundaries of these rigid structures. It is what Possamai refers to as a ‘hyper-consumer’ religion (Possamai 2005: 49). Among its wide-ranging commodities are: an array of books, crystals, CDs, tarot cards, aromatherapy products etc. There has also been a proliferation of ‘New Age’ magazines, as well as festivals and ‘psychic fairs’ (Possamai 2005: 50). However, this is not the only aspect of postmodernity by which it is influenced. Consistent with the postmodern condition, the ‘New Age’ is also pluralist in nature. It enables the perennist (a term Possamai utilises to refer to people who practice ‘New Age’ spiritualities, resulting from confusion of what the overused term refers to and speculation that ‘New Age’ is now dead (2005: 52)) to create a ‘subjective myth’ i.e. a personalised paradigm (Possamai 2005: 67).

While the ‘New Age’ is seen as a form of self-religiosity, Paul Heelas identifies some of its central elements, its ‘lingua franca’ (1993: 108). Firstly there is a belief that all of which is in existence forms the spirit of the Unknowable. It is known by different names in different cultures. The purpose of the spirit is to convey love, knowledge and wisdom. Secondly human have two components, the outer personality and the inner being (the ‘soul’ or the ‘higher self’). The outer tends to materialism and the inner to love. As all religions are seen to reflect this same reality of the Spirit and the ‘higher self’, they express the same wisdom and although practices within the movement are varied they more or less produce the same result i.e. to remove the ‘higher self’ from the outer personality (Heelas 1993: 105). This is one of the reasons the ‘New Age’ is consistently pluralistic in nature. The perennist may be interested in Buddhist meditation, the Angels of God and astrology without creating disaccord (Heelas 1993: 105). Although there are links between traditions in particular Eastern spirituality and Cultic religion the ‘New Age’ is largely seen as ‘detraditionalised’; the traditional being the voice of established authority (Heelas 1993: 108). This emerging form of spirituality has created a niche within postmodernity. Rather than attempting to remedy the postmodern condition, the ‘New Age’ encompasses its pluralistic nature.

A modernist today will look to decline of interest in traditional institutional religion as proof of secularisation, believing its activities represent the definitional confines of ‘religion’. However, the creation of these boundaries has limited the understanding of this enigmatic concept. Religion should not be bound by these parameters (something a postmodernist will remind us) lest we neglect to understand emerging forms of religiosity. It is as Lyon remarks, “secularization may be used to refer to the declining strength of some traditional religious group in a specific cultural milieu, but at the same time say nothing of the spiritualities or faiths…growing in popularity and influence” (2000: 21). The cultural milieu has been shifted; a shift which has been represented in this essay as postmodernity. Among the most significant changes which have manifested within the postmodern condition are decentralisation of power from the states to the unregulated global arena and the switch of emphasis from producing to consuming. The first of the changes has resulted in the disintegration of social structures which in turn has created uncertainty and eroded foundations for which people have traditionally based their identity upon. In these times, fundamentalisms are looked to as they provide certainty among the chaos. The other change has caused the shift to consumer society. It has meant that society has become more pluralistic, shaping a context in which spiritualities like the ‘New Age’ have emerged. Differing religious traditions are no longer viewed as conflicting but rather reflecting the same reality. This essay in no way does justice to the intricacies of postmodernity and religion. However, it is intended as a sweeping reconnaissance of two emerging forms of religiosity, which I hope will act as a reminder that religion is not dead or dying, but alive and begging to be explored and understood!

Reference List
Bauman, Z. (1998). postmodern religion? Religion, modernity and postmodernity. P. Heelas. Oxford; Malden, Mass, Blackwell Publishers.

Bauman, Z. (2005). Work, consumerism and the new poor. Maidenhead, Berkshire ; New York, Open University Press,.

Bauman, Z. (2007). Liquid times : living in an age of uncertainty. Cambridge, U.K, Polity Press.

Berger, P. (1990). A rumor of angels : modern society and the rediscovery of the supernatural. New York Anchor Book.

Bouma, G. (2006). Australian soul : religion and spirituality in the 21st century. Cambridge ; Melbourne Cambridge University Press.

Gellner, E. (1992). Postmodernism, Reason and Religion. London ; New York, Routledge.

Gergen, K. (1995). The Healthy, Happy Human Being Wears Many Masks. The truth about the truth : de-confusing and re-constructing the postmodern world. W. T. Anderson. New York Putnam.

Harris, H. (1998). Fundamentalism and evangelicals. Oxford ; New York Oxford University Press.

Heelas, P. (1993). "The New Age in Cultural Context: the Premodern, the Modern and the Postmodern." Religion 23(3): 103-116.

Hoffman, L. S., S ; Warren, D; Meek L (2009). "Toward a Sustainable Myth of Self: An Existential Response to the Postmodern Condition " Journal of Humanistic Psychology 49(2): 135-173.

Lyon, D. (2000). Jesus in Disneyland : religion in postmodern times. Cambridge ; Malden, MA Blackwell Publishers.

Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition : a report on knowledge. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.

Mason, M. S., A; Webbe, R (2007). "The spirituality of young Australians." International Journal of Children's Spirituality 12(2): 149-163.

Owen, D. W., K; Hill,S (1991). "Authoritarian or Authority-minded? : the cognitive commitments of fundamentalists and the Christian right." Religion and American Culture 1(1): 73-100.

Possamai, A. (2005). Religion and popular culture : a hyper-real testament. Bruxelles P.I.E.-Peter Lang.

York, M. (2001). "New Age Commodification and Appropriation of Spirituality " Journal of Contemporary Religion 16(3): 361-372.

Zuckerman, P. (2003). Invitation to the sociology of religion. New York, Routledge.