Book Review: The Secularization of the European Mind in the 19th Century, Owen Chadwick

     Believing that “knowledge of God when acted upon generated human well-being and progress,” British jurist Adam Lord Gifford in 1885 funded “the Gifford Lecture series [which] has been one of the foremost lecture series dealing with religion, science and philosophy.”[i]  The 1973-4 Gifford Lectures in Edinburgh featured Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge, Owen Chadwick, whose series “The Secularization of the European Mind” was turned into a book published in 1975 titled; The Secularization of the European Mind in the 19th Century.  Chadwick, who was “ordained to the diaconate and priesthood of the Church of England,”[ii] has “distinguished [himself] not only as a historian, but distinctive in being a Christian scholar.”[iii] 

     In the Introduction Chadwick poses two questions that form the outline of his book; “Was the process [of secularization] the result of new knowledge, or the result of a new development of society?”[iv]  Realizing the necessity of both social history and intellectual history and their impact upon the secularization process the book is partitioned into two parts; Part I: The Social Problem and Part II: The Intellectual Problem.  Because of the vastness of the subject Chadwick limited his study in space and time; the space being modern Europe and the time being the second half of the nineteenth century.[v] 
 

     In Part I, Chadwick identified the evolving social conditions that gave rise to secularization.  One of those social conditions was the increasing insistence of Christianity for the freedom of conscience to worship God as one desired.  Coupled with a fear of the modern centralized states, the “doctrine of human rights arose”[vi] which “was new in European thinking.”[vii]  The right to be irreligious proceeded from this Christian conscience which furthered secularization because “[i]f the right to be irreligious is won, then the institutions, privileges, customs, of a state and society must be dismantled.”[viii]  As Marxism gained a foothold, an increasing antagonism between workers and religious institutions magnified because the Church was increasingly seen as part of the ruling order.  More and more workers began to question, not religious truth itself, but “whether it is desirable or undesirable for society.”[ix]

     Part II, the intellectual aspects of secularization, had at its root hostility to Christianity that was “more ethical than scientific.”[x]  The promoters of Darwin and Darwinianism became symbols for general masses who accepted their propaganda uncritically as it solidified their own prejudices and helped in their quest against the establish orders that were predicated upon religion.  Historical study shifted away from Ecclesiastical history towards a new “historical consciousness”[xi] in which the “theological bias or axioms”[xii] were discarded.  Historians began writing within his time frame “selecting as his eyes see”[xiii] the evidence in which the times devalued religious beliefs thus fueling secularization.  As men sought to ignore, if not renounce, religious beliefs they were forced to concede that even though “moral principles could exist, did exist without religion … they were the moral principles of the religion.”[xiv]

     In identifying secularization as Lübbe stated in Säkularisierung in 1965 as “the relation … in which modern European civilization and society stand to the Christian elements of its past and the continuing Christian elements of its present,”[xv] Chadwick sought to uphold the integrity of the design of the Gifford Lecture series by ignoring the inherent difficulties of Christian doctrine based upon the supernatural.[xvi]  Even though he acknowledged that an erosion of belief in miracles “comes near the heart of that elusive shift in the European mind”[xvii] he still leaves open his own question; “were there some ideas or doctrines which could neither change nor develop without Christianity ceasing to be Christianity?”[xviii]  The line between religious beliefs and secularization appeared to be blurred as Chadwick sought to define to narrow a difference between changes; changes in fashion or custom, changes in Christian doctrine or even readjustments in religious understandings with a continuity of religious beliefs.[xix]  This definition of secularization, which continues to pose problems for historians, is the one weakness of Chadwick’s book.  He has aptly identified the social and intellectual problems of the latter half of the nineteenth century that fueled secularization, even if secularization’s definition is elusive. 

 

---

[i] Gifford Lectures, History of the Gifford Lectures, http://www.giffordlectures.org/online.asp (June 27, 2011)

[ii] Wikipedia, Owen Chadwick, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owen_Chadwick (June 26, 2011)

[iii] Gifford Lectures, Authors: William Owen Chadwick, http://www.giffordlectures.org/Author.asp?AuthorID=40 (June 27, 2011)

[iv] Chadwick, 12-13.

[v] Chadwick, 18.

[vi] Chadwick, 25-26.

[vii] Chadwick, 25.

[viii] Chadwick, 27.

[ix] Chadwick, 59.

[x] Chadwick, 156.

[xi] Chadwick, 192.

[xii] Chadwick, 193.

[xiii] Chadwick, 197.

[xiv] Chadwick, 237.

[xv] Owen Chadwick, The Secularization of the European Mind in the 19th Century, (Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 1975), 264.

[xvi] According to the Gifford Lectures series website the aim of the lectures was  “[i]n dealing with their particular area of interest and expertise, lecturers are to discuss natural theology as a science, that is, "’without reference to or reliance upon any supposed special exceptional or so-called miraculous revelation.’"  http://www.giffordlectures.org/online.asp

[xvii] Chadwick, 17.

[xviii] Chadwick, 15.

[xix] Chadwick himself stated that “[i]f ‘secularization’ is supposed to mean, a growing tendency in mankind to do without religion, or to try and do without religion, presumable we need to know just what it is which he is supposed to be doing without. -  Chadwick, 17 ; Other historians, in their reviews of Chadwick’s book, emphasized the nature of secularization as accompanying a decline in religious beliefs.  Joseph N. Moody wrote: “In the accepted version, religion once sanctified constitutional structure and organized human activity; today it is an optional interest of private individuals.  Most surveys refer to this phenomenon under the rubric of secularization.” - Joseph N. Moody, Review: The Secularization of the European Mind in the 19th Century, The American Historical Review 81:5 (December, 1976), 1098. (http://www.jstor.org/) ; Geoffrey Rowell wrote: “Secularization embraces both changes in society and in society's self-understanding, and the emergence and re-expression of intellectual challenges to Christian faith and its theological formulations.” - Geoffrey Rowell, Review: The Secularization of the European Mind in the 19th Century, The English Historical Review, 93:366 (January, 1978), 210-211. (http://www.jstor.org/) ; Alan Ryan who wrote rather critically of Chadwick’s book : “… what is religion? which confronts us; it is the question, what is essential and inessential in Christianity?  If secularization is understood as the slackening of Christian belief, who can tell whether the past century has witnessed a sloughing off of superstition or a turning away from the essentials of the faith?  Professor Chadwick may seem somewhat casual in the way he dismisses the impact of history on Christianity …” -  Alan Ryan, Review: The Secularization of the European Mind in the 19th Century, The Historical Journal, 19:3 (September, 1976), 801-802. (http://www.jstor.org/)