family, ritual and secularization_ a cross-national study conducted in bulgaria, finland, germany...

7/28/2019 Family, Ritual and Secularization_ a Cross-National Study Conducted in Bulgaria, Finland, Germany and Ireland

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/family-ritual-and-secularization-a-cross-national-study-conducted-in-bulgaria 1/19

http://scp.sagepub.com/ Social Compass

http://scp.sagepub.com/content/19/4/519

The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0037768672019004021972 19: 519Social Compass

Günther Lüschen, Zaharj Staikof, Veronica Stolte Heiskanen and Conor WardBulgaria, Finland, Germany and Ireland

Family, Ritual and Secularization : A Cross-National Study Conducted in

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Assessment in Counseling and Education

can be found at:Social Compass Additional services and information for

http://scp.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://scp.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

What is This?

- Jan 1, 1972Version of Record>>

at The British Sociological Association on February 5, 2013scp.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://scp.sagepub.com/





http://www.sagepublications.com/


http://www.theaaceonline.com/

http://scp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts



http://scp.sagepub.com/subscriptions


http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav


http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav



http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml


http://scp.sagepub.com/content/19/4/519.full.pdf











http://www.theaaceonline.com/






519

Family, Ritual and Secularization

A Cross-National Study Conducted in Bulgaria, Finland,

Germany and Ireland

Günther LÜSCHENZaharj STAIKOF - Veronica STOLTE HEISKANEN - Conor WARD

A partir des résultats d’une étude dans plusieurs pays aux

degrés divers de modernisation, la fonction du rituel familialse dégage dans le sens d’une actualisation des liens familiauxet d’un renforcement de la famille nucléaire. Le rituel spéci-fique de la Noël devient plus orienté vers la famille qu’orientévers l’Eglise, tandis que soumis à un changement révolution-naire, il perd la plus grande partie de son sens et de sa fonc-tion.

Malgré les changements, uh intérêt fondamental pour lesacré l’emporte sur la modernisation. Là sécularisàtion appa-raît alors comme un processus de re-locatisation et de privati-sation du sacré, entre autre et surtoutdans la famille; plutôtque comme un mouvement de désacralisation des sociétés«plus traditionnelles » vers des sociétés « plus modernes >.

1. Introduction~ -

The process of secularization is only ’rarely discussed in connection

with the family., In many discussions it is more or less implicitly heldthat family reinforces religious ties - e.g. those’ to the church - andvice versa. Gerhard Lenski mentions this specifically for the extended

family and observes a stronger relationship between family, .kin and re-

ligion (church) among Catholics than Protestants, and supposedly the

strongest ties among orthodox Catholics.1 The limitation of his sampleto US groups and, among them, immigrants, restricts the extent to whichone can generalize from his findings and indications of change are

notably absent in his argument. Furthermore, the problem of secularizationis not mentioned. Yet, more studies along such lines are certainly needed.

* Greatful acknowledgement is made to Robert Blood, Michael Lewis and the inter-viewers for tlieir assistance in the conducting of the study as well as to . P. Jankov and

Paul Wiebe for their comments to the final version of the article._

’

_

1 Gerhard LENSKI, The ReligiousFactor,Doubleday, Garden City, N.Y. 1963, p. 212 f.








520

Talcott Parsons, in_ dealing with differentiation in society, and with

what he calls &dquo; spiritual malaise &dquo;, sees both church and family relationr

ships as structurally analogous involvements,2 influencing modem men

more through their moral hold&dquo; than through direct. means s. But,beyond carefully developed argumen.t, we can .nowhere learn much ofthe relations and interchanges between church and religion, on the one

hand, and family and kinship, on the other. High strain and demands,changer and lncreasmg rnobility in modern society may well encourage

the family to look for means of stabilization for its structure, and

emotional support for its members, through means of its own such as

family.-oriented ritual. Yet the net results, in light of declining contact

between family and church, may not. be one of secularization and decline

in the significance of the sacred, but one of the appearance of religion,in its very basic sense, outside the church and in other sections of society,such as the family.The following discussion will examine the family in the process of

secularization; with regard to involvement in church, the change of con-

tent of religious forms and the possible relocation of the .sacred, in lightof ritual conducted in the nuclear family during Christmas,. It will also

deal with the function of such ritual for the family and the actualization

of contacts with kin 4. Material collected in five metropolitan areas

representing different degrees of societal modernization will allow us to

make preliminary inferences about the direction of secularization withmodernization of ,society.The following hypotheses will be explored :1. Families in modern societies show less contact and concern for the

church as indicated through church.-going and in the evaluation ofchurch versus family in cases of conflict of interest than do families in

traditional societies.

2. Families in traditional and modern societies show similar amount

of ritual and interest in the sacred. However, ritual in modern societies

is less church and more family oriented : in content, meanwhile, it is morefamilial than religious in orientation, and also more material, as indicated

through such .means as gift-giving as a form of exchange between

members of the family and kinship group in order to actualize and

reinforce kinship ties.

3. Ritual occasions are the predominant forms and times of family and

kinship interaction in modern societies whereas families in traditionalsocieties rely less on such ritual in order to stabilize their family systemand activate contacts with kin. In order to allow for such functionalityof ritual in modern societies, ritual is more dif f erentiated and carries a

higher commitment for family members than in traditional societies.

2 Talcott PARSONS, Social Structure and Personality,Free Press, London 1964, p. 305.3Ibid.,p. 311.4 Cf. Günther LÜSCHEN et al., "Family Organization, Interaction and Ritual," in

Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 33,. February 1971, pp. 228-234.








521

Data from ~a cross-national study on family and kinship interaction willbe used to discuss the above stated hypotheses, as well as the proposition.that secularization is a process which in reference to the family cannot

be seen in terms .of a general decline of the sacred and the supernaturalbut does rather imply changes at the organizational level of family and

church,. The materiah was collected by personal interviews with husbandsand wives, in 160 families with at least one child of elementary school

age (grades 1-4), in each of the following societal settings :1. Finland (City of Helsinki) as an example of a. Protestant society

with comparatively low modernization. After Marsh, the Index of Differ-entiation Score (IDS) ‘is 47,5 5,

2. Ireland (City of Dublin) as an example of a Catholic society with

comparatively low modernization. IDS 42,7.3. Germany (City of Bremen) as an example of a Protestant societywith comparatively high modernization. IDS 68,4.

4. Germany (City of Cologne) as an example of a Catholic societywith comparatively high modernization. IDS 68,4.

5. Bulgaria (City of Sofia) as an example of a society with com-

paratively low modernization, but recent revolutionary change. IDS 23.

The samples were controlled for social class in Helsinki, Dublin,Bremen and Cologne with the intention of obtaining equal numbers for

the LL, UL, LM and UM (including U) classes. Since not all of thecells were equal after the completion of interviews a number of eases:

were drawn from the sample at random and duplicated in order to weightthe samples, and each of the four cells equally according to social class,to an overall size of 180 each for the five metropoles. The sample of Sofiafamilies was increased at random without consideration of social class.

The study is composed to permit the analysis of factorial relationships.It is neither representative of the entire countries involved, nor of thecities in which the fieldwork was undertaken. In .a strict sense, the sample

represents onlydistricts within the

metropolitianareas. These districts

were selected on the basis of residential areas in which the four socialclasses could predominantly ,be found.. Furthermore, assuming that

participation in ritual would be high during that stage of the family lifecycle, only families with at least one child of elementary school age were

included. With these restrictions, the selection was random. The inter&dquo;

view schedule was first developed and pretested in English. It was then

separately translated into Bulgarian, German and Finnish by two personswho were bilingual. The, translation was then finalized by a third personbefore being pretested again. The Irish version was modified a little inf

accordance with the specific use of English in Ireland. Thus problems ofequivalence of meaning are minimized throughout. A problem of functional .equivalence with regard to Christmas ritualseems not to be very great for Finland, Germany and Ireland since even

5 Robert MARSH, Comparative Sociology, Harcourt, Brace and World, New York 1967,p. 329 f.








522

the. historical connections between Cologne and Dublin, as centers of

Catholicism, and Bremen and Helsinki= where the former was once thelocation of the bishop for the-latter - as important Protestant centers,

are quite obvious. ;Sofia, however-, poses problems with regard to functionalequivalence. Easter was traditionally at: least as important as Christmas

in the orthodox church. The church in Bulgaria changed 2, years agofrom the Julian to the Gre,gorian calender and this raised much curiosityand possibly supported the long prevailing scepticism of Bulgarians toward

the church. Furthermore, the government .has directly tried to popularizethe New Year rather than Easter or Christmas as the occasion of visits

and family interaction.

While distance from relatives is about even for the five samples (witha somewhat higher average for Helsinki

families)the actual number of

relatives has to be controlled in the evaluation of visiting patterns. Asindicators for the number of available kin the mean number of livingparents, sibs; uncles/aunts .an’d cousins is as follows : Bremen (30.68),Cologne (36.83), Helsinki (44.72), Dublin (46.28), Sofia (26.25).

II. Results .

1. Family and Church - Relative Position and Participation

In inquiring, into the interdependence of the family and other institutionsof society, respondents were asked whether in eases of conflict of interest

between the family .and such institutions as the church, polity, communityand ..occupation the family would

&dquo;

always come first &dquo;, &dquo; more than halfof the time come first

&dquo; &dquo;

less than half of the time come. first &dquo; or whetherthe above institutions would

&dquo;

always come first &dquo;. Only the percentagesof families that decide, always in favor of the family are given in the

following table.I

1 .

TABLE I : Family always favored over other institutions by husb,and,and wife (in %)








523

First, it can be observed that the family ranks relatively high in all of

the five societal’ settings. The percentage of those that would rank other

institutions first all the time was low in almost all instances. The data

indicate that the more modern units (Bremen and Cologne) show the

strongest family-centeredness as indicated in the index, whereas the leastmodern unit, Sofia, shows the weakest family centered1!less’ÎÍl theseattitudinal data. One may want to argue that the openndss of the familyin Bulgaria is the result of recent revolutionary change. And this is in

part indicated in the relatively strong consideration given to the polityhere. Yet, it is somewhat surprising that the interests’ pertaining to

occupation rank even higher.With regard to the secularization hypothesis, families in Catholic

Dublin give a marked consideration to the interests of the church, whilefamilies in&dquo;

traditional&dquo; Protestant Helsinki and families in the

formerly orthodox Catholic Sofia do not. The most secular families, as

indicated by low consideration given to the church are to be found in

Bremen and in Sofia. As compared to other institutions, the relativeposition of the church is low if compared to interests of the familyexcept in Dublin. However,- one should bear in mind that at least in thisinstance church and family may be perceived as corresponding socialstructures. Thus, an overall comparison between social institutions shouldnot be derived from these data.The most obvious form of religious participation is, of course, going to

church, although rates may have to be interpreted differently fordifferent denominations. A certain substitute form is to be found in

programs on radios and television. The latter was investigated in the

present project together with regular church-going and church over

Christmas.,

TABLE 2: Church attendance during the year and last Christmas, plus programs

followed on radio and TV

(in °~oof ~amilies) .








524

Church attendance does not follow an expecially ,clear pattern althoughthe higher attendance of Catholic families under traditional conditions isobvious. But although low on modernity, families in H.elsinki do not go

regularly, thus refuting the pattern of less secularization. Yet one should

keep ,in mind that the number of those that never go is almost as lowas it is in Dublin, and the rate o’f those participating in religious programsin the mass media during Christmas is higher here than it is in the othercities. Modernization via the political system is very rapid in Bulgaria :not surprisingly, this results in very low attendance rates.

Hypothesis I is confirmed, globally with the qualification that secularization appears to be the strongest under conditions of revolutionarychange. Furthermore, Protestantism does appear to result in low rates

of church-going even in traditional societies more than Catholicism inmodern societies ; this is, of cours, also a reflection of the different

meaning of the indicator, church.-going, among Protestants and Catholics.

Excursus : Superstition and S’ecularization. Accounts of secularization are being extended at times to cover other

than religious forms. Among these are superstitius beliefs. AroundChristmas time, the so-called &dquo; 12 Rough Nights ’&dquo; figured prominentlyin certain areas of Europe and resulted in a number of taboos beingexercised between Christmas and the feast of the Three Kings. Thus, two

general questionswere included in the interview to determine whether

the families knew of&dquo;

certain things that people say should not be doneover the time of Christmas and New Year &dquo; and whether these taboos

were observed by members of the family.

TABLE 3: Families reporting knowledge of taboos over Christmas and New Year, and

observance of those taboos (in ’0/0)








525

Not all of the taboos are of superstitious quality.. Indeed, the majorityof those in more traditional Dublin and Helsinki are not. But the known

taboos in the modern setting of Bremen and Cologne are. Thus, one may

conclude that the more modern societies show a higher rate of suchbeliefs, and to a large degree families, notably the wives, actually do

observe these taboos. This, of course would account for a most interest-

ing trend in secularization whereby superstitions would seem to replaceaccepted religiously determined forms of the supernatural along the way.

Yet, in light of the superficiality of these two questions and no clear

indication off the trends in superstitious beliefs, no firm conclusion should

be drawn at this point. A further investigation into this problem is,however, in order.

2. Values and Attitudes Toward Christmas and Christmas Ritual

a. Problems- of Meaning

Two questions, one closed, the other open-.ended, were asked in orderto measure the meaning attached to Christmas.

TABLE 4:&dquo;

Can you tell me what Christmas makes you think of. above all ? &dquo; (in, %f aneilies,)

(More than one response allowed)

~

Regardless of the meaning of the above results, the high percentageof. answers that cannot be classified into the categories of the code- is

striking. This can be interpreted as a shortcoming of the code itself, butit also indicates the individualiiy of associations or

&dquo;

privacy &dquo; connected

with Christmas in all societies but Ireland..








526

TABLE 5 :&dquo;

What for you and your family is the meaning 9f Christmas ? &dquo; (Answersin °~o of families to a list of 8 items of which the most and 2nd -most

. important one had to be chosen) .-

One should first recognize the high proportion of&dquo;

no answers &dquo; in

Bulgaria, to both questions, another indication of ,the relatively lowinvolvement in and considered- importance of Christmas there. Also, in

Germany and Finland one finds a substantial proportion that cannot

&dquo; think &dquo; of anything in t6rin~tctibff- with Christmas, -thus, displaying a‘

stronger tendency toward secularization.

I Regardless of these. percentages of no responses and the privacyobvious in &dquo; other items &dquo;, as mentioned above, the overall results indicatef6r both questions, three major value components that families attachto Christmas : family, religion and ’peace/relaxation. The latter complexis , fairly diffuse and ranges from thoughts about peace in the world

with religious overtones, to the individual’s and family’s well-being in

having a time of recreation without disturbance. It would require further-probing to learn what specific backgrounds these thoughts have. However,to‘ a high degree they must be related to both family and religion. Theirmarkedly lower commitment to established religious values is in ’line witha tendency toward more secularization in the more modern societal settings( Bremen, Cologne) and with Protestantism in Helsinki.

~ _._ ~ _

’

In the first question, also, gift-giving stands out very prominentlywhereas in the closed question focusing on values it almost disappears:

The first question thus seems to reflectmore

the reality of the way inwhich Christmas is conceived, the second more the normative and valuelevel of the conception. In weighing the answers, it stands out clearlythat Christmas, in..all societies is more ielated. to family meanings than

to its religious, meaning, although this is less so in Ireland on the norm-

ative and value level. The least religious orientation is expressed in Bul-

garia, Bulgarians .also.. do’ -not appear to attach thoughts .of peace andrelaxation to Christmas. These values figure..,rather strongly .in Finland








527

and Germany. With regard to the family Christmas is seen first. and

foremost as a feast of the nuclear unit. I

.The- interest of children appears also to be relatively strong.Overall hypothesis 2 seems to be supported as far as ‘a strong.er familyorientation of Christmas in modern societies is concerned.

, _

,

b. Ritual Patterns over Christmas ’

In order to learn more about the amount and quality of ritual engagedin by families, respondents were asked to name all the

&dquo;

happenings that

occur every year over and again &dquo; and then d.escribe in detail the most

important one.

TABLE 6: Mean number of ritual patterns per family (as computed against those that

answered the question) ,

By and large this result confirms the attitudinal data about the

comparative weakness of Christmas in Bulgaria. No clear pattern with

regard to modernization is evident here. The less modernized Protestantfamilies in Helsinki have clearly the highest number of ritual patterns.The pattern of churchgoing is mentioned

fairlyoften by Catholics

(36 % ) whereas Protestant and non..affiliated families report more

family-oriented ritual.

c. The Most Important Ritual Pattern

Ritual. patterns again included a high variety and in the more mo,dern

settings of Bremen and Cologne accounted for a substantial proportionthat did not fit the code, thus, indicating what was earlier called theorientation toward privacy among~ families in more modern

societies.,For an insight into the content of the most important pattern onlythose mentioned by more than 2 %~ of the families are listed in their rankorder offrequency.,

A supposedly secular, non-religious pattern emerges predominantlyin both modern Bremen and Cologne and also in more traditional

Helsinki. Giftrgiving is the most important pattern in very many families. According to .descriptions, it includes not only the actual exchange ’0£








528

TABLE 7 : The most important titrial patterns in, order of importance (indicated by °Joof ,families).

* Families in. Sofia again have a low response rate.

gifts, but also a number of connected items that in part may have religiousconnotations.

&dquo;

Bescherung &dquo;, as it is called in Germany, may even include

reading from the Bible ’as one of the steps in the pattern. Nevertheless,the basic value orientation of

&dquo;

Bescherung&dquo;

seems to be secular. Church..

going on the other hand is clearly religious, but almost all other patterns- with the exception of the family/child rituals that figure prominently-cannot easily be determined in their content. A more traditional orientation

is to be seen in the appearance of Santa Claus in both Helsinki and

Dublin. But whether or not Santa vis clearly a religious figure is at leastdoubtful for Helsinki. Another more traditional pattern seems to be theChristmas meal in all three of the less modernized societies. Although it

is -more or less family oriented it may still have religious meanings as

well. Singing as -an important ritual in both German metropolitan areas

definitely has religious meaning content. The majority of Christmascarols are Christian in orientation, with the notable exception of &dquo; OTannenbaum &dquo;. Other new non-religious songs so strongly backed duringthe Nazi era have all but disappeared as we found in an extensive pilotstudy in rural and urban North-West Germany. A very clear difference

is to beseen

in the pattern ’that we labeled &dquo; child’s performance &dquo;. It isspecifically to be found in Protestant Bremen, where about one third,of the families mention that the child has to perform with the citation of

poetry, playing a piece of music or singing a carol. An orientationtoward individual achievement is apparent in this pattern, and it would

seem ,the Protestant ethic expresses itself in it, were it not for the factthat also 14 % of Catholic families in Cologne mention it as a generalpattern. Yet, assimilation seems all too easy at this p.oint.,








529

As far as the single elements of the most important pattern are con-

cerned, they were coded as to content and to overal’1 number of stepsinvolved.

TABLE 8 : Classified content of most important ritual pattern (in °J’o of families reportingindividual steps) _

Although the material aspects (gifts, meals, drinks) as part of these

patterns appear in the majority in all five units, their fairly frequentmentioning is more striking in traditional, Protestant Helsinki. Yet, -a

rather rich ritualistic Christmas culture seems to be prevalent there

although it is not religious in the Christian sense. At this point thedetermination of Christmas by specific cultures in the selected societalunits, regardless of religion and modernization seems to be obvious.

Indeed, Scandinavian countries are known for their richness in folkculture in connection with seasonal rites ; such traces are also indicated

in the fact that Helsinki families had the highest proportion of most

important rituals that were unclassifiable in our code (19 % )..The- number of steps in the most important ritual pattern appears to be

a valid indicator of the differentiation of the pattern. Thus, familieswere asked to describe carefully the sequence of the event from beginningto end. Interviewing was done particularly carefully at this point and

included extensive probing.

TABLE 9: Mean number of steps of most important ritual per family








530

A rather clear pattern does .appear at this point. The more modern

settings have the more differentiated forms of ritual.. Furthermore,Protestants have a more differentiated ritual than Catholics. Another

indicator of the quality of this ritual is the rigidity .of commitment that itcarries for family members.

A

TABLE 10: What besides illness would be reasons under which a member of your

immediate family could be excused .from this event?&dquo;&dquo; (°~o_ of’families stating

,

&dquo; no reasons’’’) ,

This clearly supports the foregoing results showing higher commitment

in more modern societies. In Sofia and Helsinki work is the major reason

for excuse from ritual. The responses in Sofia are, of course, only thoseof the 40 % of the fami’lies mentioning such ritual patterns. Within thisgroup, however ritual procedure .seems to be ’fairly ’strict.

Overall the results support Hypothesis two and part of Hypothesisthree since Christmas ritual is less church oriented but more differentiated,with more committal and being more family.-oriented in modern societies.

With regard to the latter qualification, further indication of thefunction of the most important ritual pattern is provided by the, question,&dquo; Who is usually present, during this event ?

&dquo;

Although the nuclearfamily is clearly to be found in the majority in all metropoles, relativesare reported present to a relatively large degree.

’TABLE- 11 : ,Families (in ‘’%) mentioning relatives present during most important ritualsevent.

’

I

This result indicates a

strongerorientation in ritual toward the extended

family in .more modern and more Protestant societies. It can be interpretedas another indication of the functionality of Christmas ritual for actual-ization of family and kinship ties :àt the expense of religious commitments

in the.,narrow,se-n~ se- of church and Christianity. Relatives- living togetherif one household do not account for a high proportion of the above

percentages - because numbers are very low in Helsinki (2 %. of families,repor.t ~a 4rela_’tiue~ liuing _ wi.th~ them )~ .an.d in, Bremen- (,8~% ).. They-.are








531

somewhat higher only in Dublin ( 16. % ) , Cologne ( 17 % ) and Sofia

(26% }’,. Furthermore, these numbers are not in the predicted direction

and, thus, rather confirm the result of the functionality of ritual for

actualization of kin contacts in mode.rn settings..

/

3. Visiting Patterns of Nuclear Families

An, orientation toward the extended. familiy over Christmas can also

be seen in the visits exchanged on Christmas eve and the two days of

Christmas (St. Stephan’.s Day or Boxing Day in Ireland on Dec. 26)..

Figures must be adjusted to take account of the different numbers of kin

available in the five cities in order to allow for a proper evaluation of

contacts. Thus, a visit index that accounted for the above mentionednumber of relatives to each nuclear family was constructed.

TABLE 12 : Visits of fkmilies to relatives over three days of Christmas

Although by actual numbers families in traditional Helsinki and Dublin

participate in more visits among kin than is true in the more modem

cities, relatively againstthe number ,of

kin,this

patternall but

disappearsand, indeed, modern Bremen shows the highest value in this respect. In

Sofia, the numbers support the notion already appearing over and againin other contexts that Christmas is, weak and has hardly any function in

relation to visits with kin for a farge proportion of the populations.In all societies events before Christmas are known and at the occasion

of Advent Sundays, Barbara Day, etc. attract a certain number ofrelatives as well.

TABLE 13: Visits of ~am.ilies with relatives at rituals- before Christmas








532

In no society are these events particularly powerful in activating kin

contacts, but in light of the availability of relatives the figures are

slightly in favor of more modern Bremen and Cologne .as well as Sofia.

The majority of ritual events originally had a religious meaning althoughthe celebration of St. Nicholas or Advent is more family than religiouslyoriented, and customs like the wreath of Advent are very recent inventions

that account more for a response to family than religious needs.

The relative functional importance of Christmas for visits of the

family to relatives sho,uld be more obvious in the light of visits over the

year, in general. Questions were asked &dquo; Which of your relatives do

you visit at least once a week ?&dquo;

and &dquo; ...at least once every three months,,but less than once a week ?

&dquo;

TABLE 14: Visits of families with relatives during the year (mean number)

In absolute figures families in Dublin pay more visits to their relativesand are seen more often by them than in any other city. Also, families in

Sofia and Helsinki show a

highamount of interaction with their kin. In

relation to this one should take into consideration the fact that Helsinkihas the most recent urbanites of the five samples and, thus, because ofthe distance f.amilies there have less -chance to see their relatives weekly.The absolute figures for Dublin, Helsinki and Sofia support the conclusionof the lesser necessity of contacts with kin over Christmas. However,relative values as expressed in the index, level the significance of these

differences, except for Sofia where families relatively show by far the

highest involvement with kin.

4. Ritual Events other than Christmas and Visiting Patterns

Besides Christmas there are many other ritual events celebrated

throughout the year. Families in the more modern settings of Bremen

(50 % ) and Cologne (50 % ) again use the event of Easter, originallyreligious, to visit relatives, and then do this more frequently than is

the case for the more traditional settings of Helsinki (32 % ) , Dublin








533

( 15 % ) and Sofia (14%). Families in Sofia clearly favor non-religiousevents and report 79 % of their visits to relatives at birthdays and

40 % over the officially supported New Year events ; these also figure

strongly in the other cities, although less so. Conta,cts over vacation timeseem to be more a pattern in traditional societies families in Helsinki

(49%) report the most numerous visits of that type. An indication of the relative importance of special events for meetingwith relatives is the overall number of contacts mentioned over a list of

14 different events, plus other ritual events that are reported by the

families. These events ’have a strictly ritual character. They ra.nge from

Sunday afternoon coffee or ,tea to ceremonies around birthdays, Easter,Thanksgiving, Dead Sunday, New Year’s Eve, Funerals, Weddings,

Christenings,Confirmation Midsummer, Carnival and

special familygatherings.

TABLE 15 : Visits to relatives at 14 different ritual events (mean number)

These figures for ritual events support the general trends reported so

far. Religious events figure more strongly in modern settings and in

Protestant Helsinki as occasions for visits ,to kin. Whether they stillhave predominantly religious meanings may be questioned in the light ofthe transition of the meaning of Christmas ritual for family purposes. In

line with this trend, events like Easter, Advent and All Souls’ Day are

definitely highly religiously relevant in Catholic Ireland yet hardly resultin any substantial contacts with kin : only 15.3 and 1 % of Dublin familiesrespectively mention such contacts at those events. The religious rather

than the familial function of these events is, thus, strongly suggested in

traditional Ireland. Considering the number of available relatives the

figures in Table 15 turn out to be even more in favor of visits to

relatives than is true in the absolute values for the modern societal

settings.

III. Summary and Discussion

Results of this cross-national study in 5 metropolitan areas representing5 societal settings each with a different degree of modernization show

that ritual over Christmas and other ritual in the course of the year serves

an important function for the nuclear family and for its interaction with








534

kin in more modern societies. The higher functionality of specific .ritualpatterns in such societies- can be inferred from a higher differentiation,stronger commitment, more family oriented content and subsequentlyhigher invo’lvement of kin in the most important pattern over Christmas.Results in the investigated factorial indicators do not; generally, discriminate

equally strong in . the same anticipated direction, in all’ chosen settings.This in part may be due jto the selected metropolitan areas for these do

not -in all aspects represent the. social structure of the societies to which

they belong. Also the variance in modernization is not to.o large for

the units .selected. Furthermore, unique cultural characteristics withinthe societies seem to account for certain differences as may be seen in

the relatively rich ritual culture of Scandinavian Finland 6. A more severe

problem ,does,. however, arise from the concept of modernization as such,.Modernization obviously means different things for each of the countries

in the sample. On the value level, and particularly in regard ,to religiousvalues, Bulgaria appears as modern and secular as any of the three othercountries. On the level of regional mobility, the same holds for Helsinkiwhere families in our sample have moved more than those in the other

metropöles in the direction of becoming urbanized. On the level of social

structure, ’in general, if one looks for the common indicators like tech-

nological .development and industrialization, the cities of Bremen andCologne are the most modern.

No less problematic is the concept of secularization. This can not onlymean different things within the societies in question but also can mean

different things to sociologists. Louis Schneider 7 lists in his analysis of the

concept four different meanings : 1. Desacralization with rationalization in

society ; 2. A possible decline of religion because of societal differentiation

(which is, after Parsons 8, only a matter of freedom from organized con-

trol) ; 3. Transformation of religious values into secular ones - religionbecomes &dquo; denatured &dquo; ; 4. Loss of social significance of religious thinking,practice and institutions.

The resultspresented

above on

a comparativebasis between the five

different typ’es of societal settings probably suggest only a limited processof desacralization,, with the exception of families in Bulgaria. Indeed, the

data .on superstition possibly indicate a basic attitude reflecting a need’for the supernatural and the sacred despite the rationality of the modern

world and modern church life.

Societal differentiation according to the second meaning is probably a

more powerful way of explaining secularization in families of differentsocieties. The demands on the individual and his family are obviouslystrong in the more modern pluralistic societies. In order to survive, the familyhas to employ means to reinforce and actualize its existing structure.

6 The importance of cultural variables is also indicated by the relative weakness in

many instances, involving not material aspects, to explain differences on the basis ofsocial class. These results are not included in the foregoing discussion.

7 Louis SCHNEIDER, Sociological Approach to Religion, Wiley, New York 1970,p. 176 f.8 Talcott PARSONS, ibid.








535

Ritual‘ is’such. a means and the redefinition of the content of religiousand, other ritual for its own purpose is another one for the family. In thisway, the institution of the family in its privatistic orientation rivals: the

institution of religion and its organizational form, the church. This is one

facet of the contraction of the conjugal family after Durkheitrc e ; yet themodern nuclear unit by no means appears to be in isolation with regard to

kinship contacts ; the contrary seems rather to be true.

With reference to the third mode of secularization one may well state

that the family transform religious values and patterns into familial ones.This is also indicated by the history of Christmas which, prior to moderntimes was not the most important religious event during the year

- andstill in our investigation is not for Bulgaria. It was the family and itsfunctional needs that made Christmas the most

importantfestival

and then transformed it since the beginning of industrialization into a

familial structure of its own. If one would extend the meanings of thesacred and the supernatural far enough, then one may with Thomas

Luckmann 1° conclude that the bulk of religious thought and‘ belief hasremained much the same in the process of modernization and consecutive

secularization. It has changed only its location from church to, amongothers, the family. It would. also suggest ‘that modern man ‘despite thedifferentiation of society and the ever greater segmentation of institutionsat specific moments, such as in ritual events, regains’ the totality of his

social existence in the privacy of his nuclear family and with thosemembers of the modified extended family, that fits into the structure ofmodern society quite well 11.. Where such need does not exist as in theextended system of the Bulgarian family 12, family ritual may be employedonly rarely and, thus, through special efforts of the polity can be easilyshifted from Christmas to the New Year, or it may be strongly bound to

the organization of the church, as in Ireland.Secularization in its fourth meaning is to be seen in terms of church and

only partly in terms of Christianity. Thus a loss of religious significancewith modernization can be seen

predominantlyon the institutional and

organizational levels whereas religious thinking and practice in its broader

9 Emile DURKHEIM,"

La famille conjugale," in Revue Philosophique, Vol. 41, 1921,pp. 1-14.

10 Thomas LUCKMANN, The Invisible Religion, The Problem of Religion in Modern

Society, Macmillan, New York 1967.11 Eugen Litwak suggests as the most resourceful kin group in modern industrialized

society the"

modified extended family" which is being composed of autonomous

nuclear units and other relatives that together with resources provide great flexibility.Eugen LITWAK,

"

Technological Innovation and Ideal Forms of Family Structure," in

R. HILL and R.KONIG,

Families in Eastand West,

Mouton, Paris 1970,pp. 338-396.Our results do indicate that this type is being composed predominently of the nuclear

unit plus members of nuclear units of which the parents have been once a part.Communication and interaction within this modified extended system is oftener providedby female than by male members. But there are no strong discrepancies metween

the sexes.

12 An indication of the family and kinship orientation in Bulgarian society besides

regular visits were 23% of Bulgarian wives who on being asked to name their most

distant relative mentioned relatives of 6th degree and more. The next highest group in

this regard were only 6% of husbands in Bremen who gave the same information.








536

I

sense is very much alive although transformed for the good of the family.Most objections to the foregoing interpretation will be raised in par-ticular from the heavy involvement of families in gift-giving, a process

which to many appears as a clear indication of materialistic thought. Inlight of the foregoing results, one would certainly agree that there are

such tendencies but one should also be aware of the fact that the symbolicmeaning of these gifts goes beyond their material value. Furthermore,giftrgiving- is a true exchange process where one cannot gain. Finally, in

the majority of families where gift-giving figures prominently it is an

integral part of a more extended ritual.

If nothing else, the analysis and the following discussion demonstratesthat the interchanges between religion and family are more complicated,as the

interpretationof Lenski’s data at the

beginning suggests,and the

institutional and moral concordance between family and religion is not

as broad as Parsons indicates. But in line with Parson’s thought the keyto the analysis of data like ours lies in viewing the totality of socialstructure, social system and change. For such analysis these data are

cumbersome, not only as a result of the fact that they are responses of

individuals, while the sociologist’s interest is directed toward the systemlevel, but also because they reflect influences of factors which in this typeof comparative research are only controllable in part. Further analysismay bear out certain factorial influences from the data in hand. But these

,factorial relationships must also be dealt with in subsequent investigations.

family, ritual and secularization_ a cross-national study conducted in bulgaria, finland, germany...

Documents