The Missing Member of Troeltsch's Trinity: Thoughts Generated by Weber's Comments

Abstract

Troeltsch (1931:903), his sociohistorical analysis of Christianity, identified three main types of the sociological development of Christian thought, the Church, the sect, and Of the last he said, This mysticism has expressed itself very vital way at all (italics mine) periods of Church history, and particularly at all periods of criticism of tradition, of religious decline, and of new religious developments (Troeltsch, 1931:733). What then has happened to mysticism American sociology of religion? Henri Desroche Jacob and the Angel (1972:xii-iv) suggests that there are, indeed, at least two sociologies of religion ... sociology which treats the nonreligious factors of the religious phenomenon and sociology which treats the religious factors of non-religious phenomena. It is the concentration of interest the first that is probably one significant factor the absence of mysticism. The relevant section from Troeltsch's Social Teachings . . becomes the section which he contrasts the church and sect, spelling out the social characteristics of each (Troeltsch, 1931:331-43). Weber's definition of the church and sect appear not his sociology of religion but what Guenther Roth calls Weber's sociology of domination (Weber, 1968:LXXXII), wherein he is most concerned with the forms of hierocracy and the relationship between them. It is this same section that Weber (1968:1164,1207) contrasts the sect to the church. Thus it is that the saints of religious organization do not spell out the characteristics of mysticism as concentrated form as the other two, nor do they contrast it with them explicitly, and thus do not make the direct linkage which would have forced us to keep it as clearly mind. Or is the linkage of church, sect, and mysticism seen only when one emphasizes some dimension other than the organizational? Is it matter of multiple dimensions? Troeltsch (1931:729) notes in the usual treatment of these questions the second element (mysticism) is unhesitatingly classed with the sect movement. Weber (1973:144-5) speaks of the strong presence of mysticism the Eastern Orthodox tradition, which certainly on many of the organizational dimensions approximates the church. Again Troeltsch (1931:933) says mysticism is a purely personal and experience; this leads to the formation of groups on purely personal basis, with no permanent form. . . although another place he says that this inward quality of religious experience . .. leaps over or complements traditions, cults and institutions (1910:4). Weber also emphasizes the uniqueness of experience as central to mysticism but recognizes the potentiality of the development of the mystagogue and that development some recognized forms of repeated action that are organizationally supported (1963:166-175).