2408-9338Research result. Sociology and Management2408-933810.18413/2408-9338-2014-1-2-31-37422SOCIOLOGY OF CULTURE AND SPIRITUAL LIFETHE CROSS-CONFESSIONAL MODEL FOR STUDYING RELIGIOSITY: ELABORATION AND IMPLEMENTATION IN BELARUSTHE CROSS-CONFESSIONAL MODEL FOR STUDYING RELIGIOSITY: ELABORATION AND IMPLEMENTATION IN BELARUSKarasyovaSvetlana GennadievnaKarasyovaSvetlana Gennadievnakarassyova@mail.ru20141200

To make studying religiosity of the poly-confessional Belarusian society constant and systematic, the model of research was elaborated based on the mixed qualitative-quantitative methodology, a wide (cross-confessional) concept of religion, a multi-dimensional model of religiosity, and a flexible scaling of parameters of individual religiosity in each dimension. Religion is defined in the model as a sphere of society (individual) being an institutionally formed symbolical system of beliefs and activity focused on the meaning of the transcendent contents. The source and the channel for transmitting the transcendent meaning is religious experience understood in its both narrow the condition in which a person finds him/herself in a living and straight unity with the transcendent and broad any act of a person’s participation in the life of religious tradition sense. The transcendent is also understood broadly  as the idea of self-sufficient and self-acting reality outstanding the actual world in its essence but appearing in it through actions symbolised as powers, spirits, demons, gods, God, world soul, etc. Thus, in the research, religion is modelled as a two-aspect phenomenon including religious experience (the inner, latent aspect) and a system of articulating and transmitting the contents of experience (the outer, measureable aspect). The outer system creates a unity of beliefs (expressing the idea of religion), activity (performs the religious ideal), institutes (fixes statuses and functions in the tradition of reconstructing the ideal). These dimensions may have different degrees of spreading in various religions, that’s why religions are traditions or movements. Religiosity is understood as the combination of degrees of involvement into each of the named dimensions of religion. For each dimension the empirical parameters of involvement are set. The sum of the parameters of each dimension gives the corresponding characteristic: the certainty of religious position; the degree of religious activity; the level of integration into community. The combination of intensity of each of the named characteristics gives the integral characteristic of religiosity for each respondent. The hypothesis is that the degrees of religiosity of the respondents form a range from declarative through weak and moderate to deep involvement.

To make studying religiosity of the poly-confessional Belarusian society constant and systematic, the model of research was elaborated based on the mixed qualitative-quantitative methodology, a wide (cross-confessional) concept of religion, a multi-dimensional model of religiosity, and a flexible scaling of parameters of individual religiosity in each dimension. Religion is defined in the model as a sphere of society (individual) being an institutionally formed symbolical system of beliefs and activity focused on the meaning of the transcendent contents. The source and the channel for transmitting the transcendent meaning is religious experience understood in its both narrow the condition in which a person finds him/herself in a living and straight unity with the transcendent and broad any act of a person’s participation in the life of religious tradition sense. The transcendent is also understood broadly  as the idea of self-sufficient and self-acting reality outstanding the actual world in its essence but appearing in it through actions symbolised as powers, spirits, demons, gods, God, world soul, etc. Thus, in the research, religion is modelled as a two-aspect phenomenon including religious experience (the inner, latent aspect) and a system of articulating and transmitting the contents of experience (the outer, measureable aspect). The outer system creates a unity of beliefs (expressing the idea of religion), activity (performs the religious ideal), institutes (fixes statuses and functions in the tradition of reconstructing the ideal). These dimensions may have different degrees of spreading in various religions, that’s why religions are traditions or movements. Religiosity is understood as the combination of degrees of involvement into each of the named dimensions of religion. For each dimension the empirical parameters of involvement are set. The sum of the parameters of each dimension gives the corresponding characteristic: the certainty of religious position; the degree of religious activity; the level of integration into community. The combination of intensity of each of the named characteristics gives the integral characteristic of religiosity for each respondent. The hypothesis is that the degrees of religiosity of the respondents form a range from declarative through weak and moderate to deep involvement.

religiositymulti-dimensional model for studying religiositycross-confessional concept of religiositydimensions of religiosityparameters of religiositytypology of religiosityreligiosity in Belarusreligiositymulti-dimensional model for studying religiositycross-confessional concept of religiositydimensions of religiosityparameters of religiositytypology of religiosityreligiosity in BelarusСписок литературыKarassyova S.G., Shkurova E.V. Multi-dimensional Cross-confessional Approach to the Study of Religiosity in Belarus: Urgency and Conceptualization // Sociologija. 2012. №3. Рp. 123-133.Hill P.C., Hood R.W., Jr. Measures of religiosity. Birmingham, Alabama: Religious Education Press, 1999. 531 p.Swatos W.H., Jr. Religiosity // Encyclopedia of Religion and Society [Swatos W.H., Jr., ed.]. Hartford Institute for Religion Research. http://hirr.hartsem.edu/ency/Religiosity.htm (accessed: June 02, 2014).Kehrer G., Hardin B. Sociological Approaches // Theory and Method in Religious Studies: Contemporary Approaches to the Study of Religion [Waling F., ed.]. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1995. Pp. 321-349.Allport G. The Individual and His Religion: A Psychological Interpretation. New York: Social Science Research Council, 1960. 147 p.Allport G. The Nature of Prejudice. New York: Perseus Book, 1979. 537 p.Old Churches, New Believers. Religion in Mass Conscience of the post-Soviet Russia [Ed. Kaariajnen K., Furman D. E.]. Moscow; Saint-Petersburg: Letnij sad, 2000. 248 p.Chesnokova V. F. Along the narrow path: The process of churching the people of Russia at the end of the 20th century. Moscow: Akademicheskij proekt, 2005. 297 p.Novikova L. G. «Religious boom» in Belarus: myth or reality? // Sociologija. 1999. №2. Р. 29-36.Glock Ch.Y., Stark R. Religion and Society in Tension. Chicago; NY; SF; London: Rand McNally & Company, 1965. 316 p.Faulkner J., DeJong G. Religiosity in 5-D: An Empirical Analysis // Social Forces. 1966. №45. Рp. 246-254.Fukuyama Y. The Major Dimensions of Church Membership // Review of Religious Research. 1961. Vol. 2. №4. P. 154-161.Prutskova E. The Concept of Religiosity: Operationalization in Empirical Research // Gosudarstvo. Religija. Cerkov'. 2012. №2(30). Р.268-292.G.K.P., Jo. H., N. Sm., W.L. Re., U.B., H.D.L., F.E.M., A.G.N.F., K.E.N. Systems of Religious and Spiritual Belief // Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 1-32. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1985. Macropaedia. Vol. 26. P. 530-577.Hailer F. A Study in the History and Psychology of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press, 1932. 376 p.Söderblom N. The Living God: Basal Forms of Personal Religion. London: Oxford University Press, 1933. 398 p.Radin P. Primitive Religion: Its Nature and Origin. New York: The Viking Press, 1937. 322 p.Otto R. The idea of the Holy / Transl. By J.W. Harvey. New York: Oxford University Press, 1958. 234 p.Zabiyako A.P. Religious Experience // Religiovedenie: Jenciklopedicheskij slovar'. Moscow: Akademicheskij proekt, 2006. Pp. 866-867.Proudfoot W. Religious Experience. Berkley, Los Angeles; London: University of California Press, 1985. 174 p.Durkheim E. The Elementary Forms of Religious Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. 358 p.Wach J. Sociology of Religion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1944. 412 p.Soloviov Vl. Faith // Filosofskij slovar' Vladimira Solov'eva. Rostov-on-Don: Izd-vo «Feniks», 1997. 464 p.