The privatization thesis is a matter of debate in the sociology and study of religion.

The general idea is that religion in secular societies has been confined to the private sphere (household, among friends, family, etc.) and has become absent or invisible in the public sphere (among secular professions, the public space, etc.). These views are, of course, debatable and contentious. Post-secular theorists reject the claim that religion is privatized and instead argue that religion is experiencing a strong public presence, whereas other scholars, usually holding to some form of secularization theory, disagree and argue that there are several secularizing trends apparent in societies, one of which is privatization.

The following four features are associated with the privatization thesis:

1. Religion without churches. Many of the faithful no longer attend church and instead participate in worship through other methods, particularly technological platforms offering livestreams. Hart (1987) calls this the “electronic church”. Churches are considered voluntary associations, and many believe they can enjoy a vital spiritual life and even sometimes support religious causes without needing to attend or be a part of one.

2. Subjective Theology. Many faithful church members feel individually responsible for defining their own religious beliefs. This includes a variety of beliefs, which is the opposite of strict confessionalism. Often called “postmodern” or “postmodernism” (Beckford 1992; Sentes and Palmer 2000; Cohen 2016), many religious issues are essentially private and subjective matters of individual preference. Increasingly, the perception is that all beliefs are equally valid if sincerely held, which gives fewer reasons to debate and discuss religious beliefs openly in public. Religion is discussed in private settings, such as with family or friends. As people are compelled to shift back and forth daily between different social spheres.

Thomas Luckmann (1927–2016) defined this as “invisible religion” (1967), a form of individual religiosity based on “an individual religious phenomenon: the individuation of consciousness and conscience in the matrix of human intersubjectivity”. Experiencing “individual autonomy”, the individual builds up his own system of ultimate significance, which leads to point three below.

3. Religious Marketplace. Religious life has become infused with market logic. Just as consumers enter the supermarket to purchase items they desire and need, many of the faithful have also adopted this logic by which they enter the religious marketplace of beliefs in an attempt to maximize their spiritual well-being. This is not only apparent in new age spiritualities and unconventional religions but also in the Church. Many religious authorities in churches preach a message focusing on primarily attracting members, often to the exclusion of communicating transcendent values. Churches therefore adopt business logic and functions by competing with each other to meet the needs and wants of clients and potential clients.

4. Separation of Religion from the Public Domain and Concerns. The Church and religion in general are no longer the controlling forces over society. Other societal domains (politics, law, education, economics, entertainment, etc.) operate mostly autonomously from religion and contain their own logics. The Church has experienced regression as a result, with a major reason being its intent to remain relevant by adopting and adapting to the logic of other societal domains. It is subsumed into these other domains, which diminishes the independence and influence it formerly had.

Media is a powerful domain in this regard. In what is called the theory of mediatization (Hjarvard 2008, 2012, 2016), media logic, once regulated by religious authorities, has transitioned from the margins to the center. This has led almost all other societal domains to adopt and adapt to its logic, thus making it a very powerful institution. Religion has had to do so too, and in various locations in Northern Europe, media (television, video games, film, etc.) have become the primarysources of information about religion for most of the population. But as Luckmann (1967) rightly stated, “societies whose social structures perform no religious function [but] the fact that the social structure is ‘religion-less’ does not mean that a society is without religion”.

Obvious questions arise that interest religion scholars and sociologists of religion. Since religion is portrayed by secular media, how does it represent it in matters of ethics, deeds, beliefs, institutional structures and practices, progress, and so on.

References

Beckford, James. 1992. “Religion, Modernity, and Postmodernity.” In Religion: Contemporary Issues, edited by Bryan Wilson. London: Bellew.

Cohen, Signe. 2016. “A Postmodern Wizard: The Religious Bricolage of the Harry Potter Series”. Journal of Religion and Popular Culture 28(1):54-66.

Hart, Stephen. 1987. “Privatization in American Religion and Society”. Sociological Analysis 47(4):319-334.

Hjarvard, Stig. 2008. “The mediatization of religion A theory of the media as agents of religious change”. Nordic Journal of Media Studies 6:9-26.

Hjarvard, Stig. 2012. “Three Forms of Mediatized Religion Changing the Public Face of Religion”. In Mediatization and Religion: Nordic Perspectives, edited by S. Hjarvard and M. Lövheim, 21-44. Intl Clearinghouse.

Hjarvard, Stig. 2016. “Mediatization and the changing authority of religion”. Media, Culture & Society 38(1):8-17

Luckmann, Thomas. 1967. The Invisible Religion The Problem of Religion in Modern Society. MacMillan Publishing Company.

Sentes, Bryan., and Palmer, Susan. 2000. “Presumed Immanent: the Raëlians, UFO Religions, and the Postmodern Condition.” The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions 4(1):86-105.