Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T14:55:46Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Tese Breno Martins Campos.pdf: 1808092 bytes, checksum: 924beffaae55ecb4c71aacad09e530b1 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2006-05-22 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / Women in review: a sociology of knowledge of the feminine in the Presbyterian Brazil (1994-2002) is a thesis with three sociological interests: knowledge, domination and religion. With its focus on the Presbyterian Church of Brazil, it searches to understand the reason why women are excluded from the positions legally stated of power and domination: the ordered office. Its historical cut is the transition from the 20th to 21st century, in which there were official attempts and an alto for alteration of denominational status quo. Two enterprises of constitutional reformation were proposed and debated in the competent councils in less than eight years, that included in the discussion the alteration of women statute in Presbyterian Church of Brazil, for her official space of actuation was amplified and her condition as a member equaled to the men s, with complete rights. The same historical period watched to a movement in which the puritan ethics and fundamentalist theology were used by the reactionary group to reaffirm the tradition and stop the opening of a new time, more feminine, dialogic and inclusive. Inheritance of the United States protestant missions of the 19th century for Brazilian churches, the puritan ethics proposes as a way of salvation a kind of active ascetic practices that deny the world at the same time in which fight for its transformation; the fundamentalism is the literalist Bible interpretation pattern that works for the arrest of the truth rather than to exclude dissent groups and people. The hermeneutical literalism forbids that biblical texts could be used in behalf of feminine ordering; the puritan ethics suggests or imposes to the women a proper space under to men, at home and in the church. The changing projects intended by the Presbyterian Church of Brazil high hierarchy, leaded by Rev. Guilhermino Cunha, were aborted, in dynamic peculiar to the function of religious field. In the very 21st century women cannot be pastors, elders or deacons in IPB: condition in such a flagrant contradiction with the democratic-representative system of government. The reading of official speeches of the denomination, by its journal, the Brasil Presbiteriano, and by Sociedade Auxiliadora Feminina s magazine, the SAF em Revista, allows to affirm that the Brazilian Presbyterian leaderships, masculine and feminine, at the doors of 21st century, opted for the permanence in the 20th century, or rather than, in 19th century. To open the 21st century, or to open itself to it, is the challenge for the contemporary Presbyterian Church of Brazil, specially to the women, in order that the religious institution promotes and amplifies the internal dialogue, inter-religious and with society, the first steps to the legitimate exercise of democracy, inclusion, fight against prejudice and discrimination, and for the establishment of an ethical project for all / Mulheres em revista: uma sociologia da compreensão do feminino no Brasil presbiteriano (1994-2002) é uma tese com triplo interesse sociológico: compreensão, dominação e religião. Com o foco direcionado para a Igreja Presbiteriana do Brasil (IPB), busca compreender por que as mulheres são excluídas das posições legalmente estatuídas de poder e dominação: o oficialato ordenado. Ainda no calor da hora, seu recorte histórico é a passagem do século XX para o século XXI, na qual houve tentativas oficiais e pelo alto de alteração do status quo denominacional. Foram propostas e debatidas nos concílios competentes duas iniciativas de reforma constitucional em menos de oito anos, que incluíam na discussão a alteração do estatuto da mulher na IPB, para que seu espaço oficial de atuação fosse ampliado e sua condição de membro, igualada à do homem com plenos direitos. O mesmo período histórico assistiu a um movimento em que ética puritana e teologia fundamentalista foram utilizadas pelo grupo reacionário dos que detêm o poder na IPB para reafirmar a tradição e impedir a abertura de um novo tempo, mais feminino, dialógico e inclusivo. Herança das missões protestantes estadunidenses do século XIX para as igrejas brasileiras, a ética puritana propõe como caminho de salvação uma espécie de ascese ativa, que nega o mundo ao mesmo tempo em que luta pela sua transformação; o fundamentalismo é o modelo literalista de interpretação da Bíblia, que funciona pelo aprisionamento da verdade a excluir grupos e pessoas divergentes. O literalismo hermenêutico proíbe que textos bíblicos possam ser usados em favor da ordenação feminina; a ética puritana sugere ou impõe à mulher um espaço próprio e subordinado ao homem, na casa e na igreja. Os projetos de mudança pretendidos por parte da cúpula da IPB, Rev. Guilhermino Cunha à frente, foram abortados também pelo alto, em dinâmica própria ao funcionamento do campo religioso. Em pleno século XXI, as mulheres não podem ser pastoras, presbíteras ou diaconisas na IPB: condição em flagrante contradição com o autodenominado sistema democrático-representativo de governo. A leitura dos discursos oficiais da denominação, por meio de seu jornal, o Brasil Presbiteriano, e da revista da Sociedade Auxiliadora Feminina, a SAF em Revista, permite a afirmação de que as lideranças presbiterianas do Brasil, masculina e feminina, às portas do século XXI optaram pela permanência no século XX ou, antes disso, no século XIX. Abrir o século XXI, ou abrir-se para ele, é o desafio para IPB contemporânea, especialmente, para suas mulheres, a fim de que a instituição religiosa promova e amplie o diálogo interno, inter-religioso e com a sociedade, os primeiros passos para o exercício legítimo da democracia, inclusão, luta contra preconceito e discriminação, e para o estabelecimento de um projeto de ética para todos

No description available.

La dialectique pluralisme religieux/incertitude religieuse, sur laquelle porte cette thèse, se révèle être un thème majeur dans la pensée de Peter L. Berger, en sociologie des religions et en théologie protestante. Une analyse systématique et détaillée des concepts-clés qui la constituent débouche sur la question des rapports entre sociologie et théologie à laquelle Berger lui-même s’est confronté. Abordée sous l’angle de l’idée du principe protestant, cette question s’est résolue, dès la fin des années 1960, en un certain « mariage » entre son approche de la sociologie de la connaissance et son approche théologique libérale. Les concepts de foi et théologie « inductives », de « voie médiane entre le fondamentalisme et le relativisme », semblent jaillir de cette dialectique et de ce « mariage ». Si néanmoins cette dialectique se retrace dans la pensée de Berger dès ses premières œuvres, la défense d’une via media théologique appliquée à toutes les religions se révèle être la conséquence de l’abandon (dès 1967), de sa posture théologique néo-orthodoxe. Dans cette posture, la dialectique bergérienne s’appliquait à toutes les religions mais laissait la foi chrétienne intouchée et pensée en termes de certitude. Or, une analyse critique de sa pensée permet de situer au moins à trois niveaux un certain nombre de problèmes : le niveau de sa conception de la religion manifestant une ambiguïté; le niveau des rapports entre sociologie et théologie révélant un biais libéral et une absence de contenu religieux concret pour le principe protestant; enfin le niveau de sa critique des quêtes contemporaines de certitudes religieuses, critique dont le fondement sur sa dialectique peut être questionné par des exemples de conception différente de la religion et de la certitude religieuse. Pour ces trois niveaux, l’exemple de la conception de la certitude religieuse par les protestants évangéliques permet au moins une ébauche d’un tel questionnement. Cette conception, surtout dans son idée de l’« assurance du salut», se fonde, dans son approche surnaturelle de la certitude religieuse, sur une adhésion et une confiance fortes quant aux contenus traditionnels de la foi chrétienne. Si les arguments avancés dans cette perspective demeurent discutables, ils semblent assez pertinents puisque la vitalité contemporaine de la religion à l’ère du pluralisme religieux (voir notamment le protestantisme évangélique aux États-Unis) constitue une indication que la validité empirique de la dialectique bergérienne, et la critique qu’elle fonde, sont largement problématiques si l’on tient compte de l’auto-compréhension des groupes religieux eux-mêmes. / The dialectic religious pluralism/religious uncertainty, with which deals this dissertation, reveals itself as a major theme in Peter L. Berger’s thought, in sociology of religion and in protestant theology. A systematic and detailed analysis of the key concepts which constitute that dialectic leads to the question of the relationship between sociology and theology, which has been confronted by Berger himself. It is at the time Berger studied that question from the point of view of the idea of the protestant principle, during the late sixties, that he solved it by a kind of ‘wedding’ between his approach in the sociology of knowledge and his liberal theological approach. Concepts as ‘inductive faith and theology’, ‘middle position between fundamentalism and relativism’, seem to emerge both from that dialectic and from that ‘wedding’. Nevertheless, while that dialectic can be retraced in Berger’s thought since his earlier works, the defence of a theological via media applied to all religions, appears to be the consequence of his rejection (since 1967), of his earlier theological stance deployed from the neo-orthodox approach. In that stance, the bergerian dialectic was applied to all religions but not to the Christian faith, thought in terms of certainty. But, a critical analysis of Berger’s thought allows one to identify some problems at least at three levels: the level of his concept of religion which evidentiates an ambiguity ; the level of the relationship between sociology and theology which reveals a liberal bias and a lack of specific religious content for the protestant principle; and finally, the level of his critique of the contemporary religious certainty impulses; a critique whose base on his dialectic can be questioned by some examples of different conceptions of religion and of religious certainty. About those three levels, the example of the conception of religious certainty by the Evangelical Protestants allows at least a draft of that questioning. It deploys a supernatural conception of the religious certainty, especially by the notion of « assurance of salvation », based on strong adherence and confidence in the traditional contents of the Christian faith. While the arguments of that conception can be subjected to questions, they seem enough relevant since the contemporary vitality of religion at the pluralistic era (cf. Evangelical Protestantism in U.S.A for example) constitutes an indication that the empirical validity of the bergerian dialectic, and of the critique based on it, is largely problematic if one takes into account the self-understanding of the religious groups themselves.

No description available.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / A theoretical understanding of stratification and inequality is necessary to understand social phenomena in general. Unfortunately, professional sociology in the United States has historically promoted a limited theoretical understanding of stratification that tends to ignore economic realities, social structures, institutional mechanisms, power relations, and other important factors such as racial discrimination in reproducing social class. In fact, mainstream sociology has replaced class-based theories altogether with the concept of socio-economic status (SES) and, at the same time, all too often embraces problematic theories that justify inequality. This critical literature review of social class in American sociology attempts to: 1) provide a more comprehensive history of sociological theory in the United States regarding stratification and social class, 2) expose the sociological factors affecting these social theories and concepts, and 3) deconstruct and critique mainstream social theories that offer weak explanations of stratification.