In its initial research project description, the Centre for Advanced Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences (CASHSS) took a position on the longstanding academic and public debates on secularism, secularisation, and secularity. In doing so, it referred to the concept of Multiple Secularities, which had been developed in a previous research project,1 and which Kleine had applied to pre-modern Japan.2 Against this backdrop, an idea arose for a multidisciplinary project combining sociology, history of religion and study of religions. ‘Secularity’ is an analytical concept, which seeks to avoid the ideological connotations of the term secularism. The term, which is conceived as an ideal-type, describes how conceptual distinctions and institutional differentiations are made between religious and non-religious spheres and practices. In this context, ‘differentiation’ is not a complete separation, but entails some form of relation between two conceptually distinguished spheres.:1 Introduction and Background ................................................................................. 3 1.1 History of the Research Project.......................................................................... 3 1.2 The Academic Debate.......................................................................................... 5 1.3 Current State of Research in Selected Research Areas..................................10 2 Research Findings from the First Funding Period (2016-2020)........................13 2.1 Further Developing and Refining the Concept..............................................13 2.2 Assumptions and Hypotheses..........................................................................15 2.2.1 Internal Social Differentiation − Social Structures.....................................15 2.2.2 Taxonomies, Classifications, Knowledge Systems: Epistemic Structures.. 18 2.2.3 Differentiation of Spheres of Activity.........................................................24 2.2.4 Reference Problems and Guiding Ideas.......................................................26 2.2.5 Cultural Interaction and Acquisition, Transfer, and Integration Processes...........................................................................................................29 3 The Centre for Advanced Studies’ Aims in the Second Funding Period (2020−2024)..............................................................................................................30 3.1 Regional Expansion and Intercultural Encounter.........................................30 3.2 Systematic Perspectives.....................................................................................37 3.2.1 Critical Junctures and Path Probabilities.....................................................37 3.2.2 Culturalisation of Religion, Materiality of the Secular...............................38 3.2.3 Art, Culture, and Architecture as Spheres of Activity................................42 4 Bibliography..............................................................................................................45

Im Fokus dieser Dissertation steht die sozial-liberale Partei D66 (Demokraten 66) und deren Säkularitätspolitik in den Niederlanden. Die Arbeit nimmt die Partei zum Ausgangspunkt, um politische Kämpfe um konkurrierende Säkularitätsmodelle zu untersuchen. Die Arbeit umfasst erstens eine historische Analyse des säkularitätsbezogenen Wandels in den Niederlanden und zweitens mehrere umfassende Fallstudien zu gegenwärtigen Auseinandersetzungen um Säkularität in unterschiedlichen Settings.:Table of Contents 2 List of Tables and Figures 6 List of Abbreviations 7 Acknowledgments 8 Introduction: Politics of Secularity 10 1 A Theoretical Approach on the Politics of Secularity 21 1.1 Contested Secularity 22 1.2 Multiple Secularities 26 1.3 The Diversity of Nonreligion 31 1.4 The Political Field as an Arena for Contested Secularities 36 1.5 The Rhetoric of Political Struggles 42 2 Data Collection and Interpretation 46 2.1 The Grounded Theory Approach in Very Brief 46 2.2 The Research Process 48 3 The Secularity of Politics 63 3.1 The Construction of a Pluralist Modernity since mid-19th Century 63 3.2 D66 and the Secularization of Dutch Politics 82 3.3 Summary and Discussion 98 4 Secularity for the Sake of Individual Equality and Liberty 104 4.1 Contested Individualism and Shifting Power Relations 105 4.2 The Opening of Civil Marriage 121 4.3 Self-Determination and Euthanasia 131 4.4 Blasphemy, Demonization, and Secular Politics 139 4.5 The Contested Purple Heritage 146 4.6 Summary and Discussion 150 5 Islam and the Renegotiation of Secularity 155 5.1 Shifting Integration Policies, Shifting Secularities 156 5.2 Searching for A Positioning in the Debate on Islam 188 5.3 Defending the Liberal Model 200 5.4 Summary and Discussion 214 6 A Party Working Group on Religion and Worldviews 218 7 The Political Integration of Muslims: A Case Study from a Secular City 230 7.1 Religion in a Secular City 235 7.2 A Liberal Campaign in a Secular City 238 7.3 A Campaign for Migrant Voters 244 7.4 Summary and Discussion 262 8 Politics of Secularity in the Bible Belt 266 8.1 A Small Town in the Bible Belt 267 8.2 Confessionalizing the Public 274 8.3 A Contested Public Order 292 8.4 Pluralist and Individualist Aspects of the Election Campaign 316 8.5 Summary 324 9 Overall Summary and Discussion 328 9.1 Summary 328 9.2 Discussion 351 References 365 Appendix 390

Report of a hybrid Workshop on “Differentiation Theory and the Sociology of Religion and Secularity” on 8 and 9 October 2020 hosted by the Centre for Advanced Studies in the Humanities and Social Sciences (CASHSS) “Multiple Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities” at Leipzig University and organised by the CASHSS's directors Christoph Kleine and Monika Wohlrab-Sahr together with Daniel Witte from the University of Bonn.

Dans cette thèse je démontre comment les imaginaires de la nation serbe, de l’Occident et des valeurs universelles (démocratie, droits de l’homme et tolérance) véhiculées au sein de la revue ‘Orthodoxie’ (publiée par l’Eglise Orthodoxe Serbe) ont pour but final la préservation de la position sociale de l’Eglise et de ses intérêts en tant qu’une institution religieuse au sein de la société serbe. Cette ‘résistance’ aux changements construit des imaginaires sociaux qui nous appréhendons comme des représentations sociales et ont tendance à (re)devenir la vision dominante de la société serbe. J’étudie le discours de la revue ‘Orthodoxie’ et des acteurs qui y contribuent afin de montrer le processus des créations des imaginaires sociaux et leurs tentatives de se présenter au public et dans la sphère publique comme les courants de pensée dominants concernant la nation serbe, l’Occident et les valeurs ‘universelles’. J’ai répondu aux questions suivantes : - comment la tradition nationale « se traditionalise », la culture nationale s’idéalise et l’identité nationale se sacralise ? - comment l’imaginaire de l’Europe et de la culture européenne/occidentale (‘EUX’) se construisent en opposition à l’imaginaire de la nation serbe (‘NOUS’) ? - comment les valeurs de la démocratie, des droits de l’homme et de la tolérance sont imaginées à travers une telle construction opposée (‘EUX’ versus ‘NOUS’) ? / In this thesis I demonstrate how do the imaginaries of Serbian nation, of Occident and of ‘universal’ Values (democracy, human rights, tolerance), constructed in the journal published by the SOC serve as factors of conservation and protection of the social position of the Church, its social and political interests in the sense of national religious institution in the Serbian society. The ‘resistance’ to change allows the construction of social imaginaries that we comprehend as social representations with a tendency to become (again) or to impose them as a dominant vision of the Serbian society. I studied the discourse in the ‘Orthodoxy’ journal and the social actors that published their articles in order to demonstrate the process of the creation of social imaginaries and the tentative to present them publicly/in the public sphere as dominant currents of social thoughts on Serbian nation, Occident and ‘universal’ values. I answered to the following questions:- The way national tradition is “traditionalized”, national culture is idealized and national identity is sacralized.- How the imaginary of Europe and European/western culture (‘THEM) are constructed in an opposition to the imaginary of a Serbian nation (‘US’)?- How the values of democracy, human rights and tolerance are imagined through this opposed imaginary construction (‘US’ vs ‘THEM’)?