Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion

The authors propose that religion is analogous to a commodity that people buy. Religious behavior is said to be the result of people acting in their own interest. It is reinforced by dogmas claiming that good behavior will be rewarded in this life and the afterlife. Feelings of solidarity, friendships between parishioners, and other social interactions also reinforce religious behavior. These factors are most likely to be found in conservative religious groups. These assumptions allow the authors to account for many features of religion in contemporary society. One of their most interesting arguments is that the absence of satisfactory sellers of religion suppresses church attendance in Europe whereas the abundance of denominations in the US stimulates church attendance. An equally interesting topic is the way they account for the decline in the number of people wishing to join Roman Catholic religious orders following Vatican II. The treatment is very compelling but dry and academic. Much of the evidence derives from the authors' own research which focuses on the US and Europe. Latin America, Canada, Australia, and Islamic countries are not adequately covered. The rest of the world is not covered at all. The book is marred by occasional criticisms of liberal religions, apparently because the authors perceive a bias against conservative religions in the literature. I would have preferred a more objective approach.

I'm not sure whether to give this book a 4 or a 5...but to play it safe I'll make it a 4. One of the main points of this book is that religion/religious groups far from being a display of "irrationality" are very rational and based in logic of members...and these same groups hold many benefits for their members. Moreover, the author shows how "fundamentalist" churches have more to offer their adherents and thus are growing, while on the otherhand "mainline" churches have less to offer and are thus shrinking. He moreover goes on to discuss the structure of the successful "mega" churches. He notes that while they are technically one big church, they are in reality a bunch of smaller fellowships (about 40-80 people large) within a bigger church. It's these intra-church fellowships which are the real facilitators of growth, not the huge sunday morning studies where people feel lost in the crowd. Anyways, what I just mentioned is the tip of the iceburg in regards to this book. It also goes into issues of religious economy, how that economy differs from nation to nation, conversion vs natural increase, and many other aspects concerning the dynamics and organization of religious groups

My thinking on the subject of church dynamics has been strongly influenced by other works of Stark (The Rise of Christianity) and of Stark and Finke (The Churching of America). This latest in their combined efforts is also quite good. HOWEVER, I have found that a conservative bias is beginning to show. In my opinion, they have let biases against Liberal Theology taint an excellent exposition of research. I will support this statement with an example.They have some excellent numbers which compare the success of Evangelical ministers with in the United Methodist Church to Ministers within the UMC which were co-officiants at a particular homosexual union ceremony. The data clearly indicates that there is stronger growth among the Evangelical ministers. This is used as evidence that "Liberal" (whatever that abused word means) theology is damaging to church growth. I would believe that a better interpretation of this is: Those who go to pick apples get more apples than those who simply seek to polish apples.As long as Stark and Finke stick to their last, they are wonderful, but when they wander over trying to do theology they faulter. I would encourage anyone who is interested in Church Growth and Dynamics to buy this book, but please be sure to be on the alert for the conservative bias.

This authors of this book do not, as one reviewer rather superficially whined, claim that the religious perspective is the only valid perspective from which religion can be observed. Their argument is more simply for the validity or "rationality" of the religious perspective. They rightly dismiss the secularization thesis, and contend that religion is here to stay. Furthermore, as an enduring component of human life, religion (and the religious person) deserves to be treated with an appropriate seriousness. The scientific study of religion has for too long been plagued by the presupposition that all religion and religious sentiment is based on illusion or foolishness/irrationality. Stark and Finke, however, give religion and the religious person the respect they deserve by taking their claims at face value. There is no argument for the existence of God (or the validity of any particular truth-claims); instead, the authors put forth an argument for the validity and genuineness of religion as an enduring human construct. The question of transcendence they do not even approach. Finally, it should be noted that Stark and Finke do us a great service by specifying what they mean when they use terms like "religion," "miracle," "prayer," and, yes, "rational." Let there be no mistake: this book is written from the perspective of rational choice theory, and that can be distasteful to many--especially when the subject is religion. But Stark and Finke go a long way toward making their thoughtful, honest and cogent perspective more palatable to the rest of us.