\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Secularization and Development in Africa: A Terrific Façade},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2013-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2013)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2013-01-15}
\title{Secularization and Development in Africa: A Terrific Façade}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Mustapha Hashim  Kurfi}

             \affil[1]{  Boston University, Massachusetts}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 10 December 2012 Accepted: 4 January 2013 Published: 15 January 2013}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


This article highlights secularization debate; identifying its major variants; critiquing the idea with particular reference to Peter Berger?s rendition; and presenting his recent position on the debate. The paper then provides a snapshot of development from the Western perspective, examining the relationship between religion and development, showing how it differs from an African perspective. The paper argues that,the Western models of development are not compatible with Africa because they are alien, incompatible with the norms and values of most Africans, and notably, neglect or relegate several important aspects of the people?s culture, including the role of religion in development.Thus, when African leaders embrace and applaud the Westernbased idea of secularized development at the expense of the subalterns, who do not feel the impacts of these superficial developments, it becomes a terrific façade. The article concludes by proposing a bottom-up approach to development conception and implementation in non-Western society, notably Africa, asserting that it has to beconsidered as a process compatible with the people?s realities, reflecting their values, including religion and culture generally.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{religion, development, secularization, peter berger, façade, ideas, practices.}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 
\section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par
his essay is divided into two main sections. The first section presents arguments on European 1 sociologists' conviction about the increasing secularization of "modern" society, drawing from the ideas of Peter Berger and Max Weber. The paper then reviews and critiques some of the contemporary postulates on the debate. The second section of the paper presents discussion on the nature of religion and economic development, examining how Western development models fail to work in Africa \hyperref[b0]{2} Author : Department of Sociology, Boston University, Massachusetts -U.S.A. E-mail : mustapha@bu.edu , and proposing a bottom-up approach that is compatible with the realities of the people, reflecting their values.  {\ref 1} The roots of the secularization idea can be traced to European scholars, but the later proponents are not necessarily Europeans. \hyperref[b0]{2} It is worthy to acknowledge that Africa is a huge continent with diversities and differences even within sub-regions and individual countries. This is not to generalize and say that all African societies are the same or should follow the same patterns of development. 
\section[{II.}]{II.} 
\section[{Increasing Secularization of "Modern" Society}]{Increasing Secularization of "Modern" Society}\par
Secularization is one of the main themes in sociology of religion. The terms of the current anthropological literatureon secularism are set in relation to both classic and recent developments in secularization theory (Cannell, 2010:86). As with most concepts in the social sciences, there is no single or widely accepted definition of secularization. There is, first of all, disagreement about its locus. Some definitions \hyperref[b2]{3} emphasize individual beliefs and practices, others the influence of religious norms, and elites, and still others the differentiation of religious and nonreligious spheres or institutions (Gorski and   Altinordu, 2008:57).InThe Sacred Canopy(1967) Berger first deals with his theory or conception on the nature of religion. He argues that humans are biologically fated to "exteriorize" and fill their world with meaning, that is create a culture, which is then "interiorized" by a process of socialization. Often, this leads to "alienation \hyperref[b3]{4} ", since humans start to regard products of their own activity as natural, unchanging and external objects that are "out there"(1967:2). Berger introduces the notion of "plausibility," structure-a conversation by which this particular reality \hyperref[b6]{5} Culture works, asserting that whenever the conversation stops, the world starts to shake. 6 \hyperref[b2]{3} Berger subscribes to the modernization definition. He defines the term as a process in which religion diminishes in importance both in society and in the consciousness of individual secularization is the direct result of modernization (2001: 443). \hyperref[b3]{4} He borrows the idea from Marx \hyperref[b6]{5} Social construction (externalization, objectivation, internalization) \hyperref[b7]{6} Berger refers culture to the totality of man's externalized products and the term "society' to refer to the specific social arrangements upon which culture rests (1967: 6). and society are rooted in man's biological nature. Society structures, distributes, coordinates, and provides the infrastructure for the world-building activities of man. Society is a necessary condition for culture because "only in society can the products of those activities persist over time" (p.7). Berger asserts that religion itself has been probably the most powerful agency of alienation because religion has been a very important form of false consciousness (1967:87).It is worthy to note that Berger's ideas on secularization stem from Weber, and is therefore an extension of Weber's analysis of the"secularizing \hyperref[b8]{7} When Max Weber designates as secularization the process whereby the concept of "calling" moves or is relocated from the religious to the secular sphere to signify, now for the first time, the exercise of secular activities " function of Protestantism. Let me briefly recount Weber's idea on secularization. \hyperref[b9]{8} in the world, he is using as analogy the canonical meaning of the concept (Casanova, 1994:13). Similarly, Hughey (1979) argues that, with reference to Max Weber's work, secularization \hyperref[b10]{9} Peter Berger in his The Sacred Canopy (1967)   defines secularization as "the process by which sectors of the society and culture are removed from the domination of religious institutions and symbols". Additionally, he sees secularization as empirically available "processes" of great importance in "modern Western may refer to very different phenomena in different situations, depending on the content and specific sociohistorical context which it occurs(90). Rationalization, with particular reference to religious intellectuals can be used to illustrate that. The process of intellectual rationalization results in a systematization of religious values in terms of their own autonomous and internal logic. At the same time, secular sphere of value (political, economic, kinship, military, aesthetic, intellectual, etc.) undergo the same process of intellectual rationalization and how they are organized into logical systems based on their own immanent laws. The further the rationalization and sublimation of the external and internal possessions ofin the widest sense-'things worldly' has progressed, the stronger has the tension on the part of religion become (Weber 2011). Thus, the more intellectual rationalization proceeds toward systematizing each institutional order in terms of its logic and values, the more the internal logic of each sphere can be seen to conflict with that of every other sphere. \hyperref[b11]{10} history" (1967:107). To explain modernity, Berger contends that secularization operates in dialectical tension with "pluralism. 11 \hyperref[b8]{7} Weber did not seem to use the term secularization but instead disenchantment, which could mean secularization \hyperref[b9]{8} Secularization of religious motives \hyperref[b10]{9} Disenchantment of the world \hyperref[b11]{10} He justifies modernWestern based on its roots in the religious tradition (Berger, 1967:124). \hyperref[b12]{11} A social-structural correlate of the secularization of consciousness (Berger 1967:127)   " Berger uses pluralism as a key part of his discussion of how religion has changed from its previous roles in human culture. The plausibility of all religious systems become undermined when encountered with competing belief systems, consequently producing a "crisis of legitimation" for organized religion. Along with this crisis is competition among religious groups with "the same legal status" but pits these groups against "nonreligious rivals in the business of defining the world" (1967:137). Against this background, Berger concludes that Pluralism is particularly detrimental to "religious exmonopolies" (1967:137). On the effect of secular society on religion, Berger asserts that it represents a severe rupture of the traditional task of religion, which was precisely the establishment of an integrated set of definitions of reality that could serve as a common universe of meaning for the members of society (1967; 134). Couple of decades later, Berger changed his mind and debunked his theory. The next section reviews some critiques of the secularization theory. 
\section[{III.}]{III.} 
\section[{Secularization: A Critique}]{Secularization: A Critique}\par
In The Desecularization of the World, Peter Berger(1999) identified mistakes in his theory andrefuted his claims that "modern" society would become increasingly secularized. "My point is that the assumption that we live in a secularized world is false" (1999: 2) he declared. The world today, he further argues, "with some exceptions to which I will come presently, is as furiously religious as it ever was, and in some places more so than ever" (1999:2). But even before that, his ideas and theory were challenged. On decline of religious beliefs, Berger (1999) surveys the contemporary world scene and found little evidence of religious decline, except on some American university campuses and perhaps in Western Europe. Again, it was apparent to him that modernization has had some secularizing effects, more in some places than others. But it has also provoked powerful movements of "counter-secularization" (1999:3). In fact, secularization operates at different levels-for instance societal level secularization is not necessarily linked to secularization on the level of individual consciousness. James Beckford (2003) provides a detailed analysis of clusters of ideas about secularization. These are: differentiation, rationalization, modernization, metamorphoses, continuing vitality, and universality of religion. Stark (1999) argued that secularization certainly seemed to have slowed or even stopped, asserting that it had never happened, urging for expunging the term from the sociological lexicon. He based his arguments on a number of events that disproved the secularization apologists' claims. These include the Iranian Revolution, the rapid spread of Pentecostalism in the global South, communal violence in Southern Asia, the collapse of communism qua secular religion, etc. Another dimension of attack on the secularization thesis is looking at it from the privatization of religion angle. Jose Casanova (1994) questioned this, utilizing empirical data within the United States and other continents including Africa. He concludes that we are witnessing the "deprivatization \hyperref[b13]{12} citing examples with social movements that have appeared which were either religious in nature or challenging in the name of religion for legitimacy and autonomy of the primary secular spheres, the state and the market economy. More so, "religious institutions and organizations refused to restrict themselves to the pastoral care of individual souls" and continue to raise questions about the interconnections of private and public morality and "to challenge the claims of the subsystems, particularly states and markets, to be exempt from extraneous normative considerations" (Casanova 1994:5). Chaves (1994) puts forward another puzzle by shifting emphasis on the secularization debate from a supraindividual level to the power of ecclesiastical elites and institutions. He argues that secularization is most productively understood not as declining religion, but as the declining scope of religious authority. Strikingly, Warner (2002) came up with some data that proved particular social and institutional conditions in the U.S.A. which made its religious scene distinctively different from Europe's. Thus, secularization theories based on the European canon are no particularly useful for understanding religion here. This point further validates the fallacy of Berger (1967) that makes bolder claims that his model applies to all religions. Another important stride in critiquing the secularization debate is Berger's (2001) reflection that he was wrong when he had thought that, modernization necessarily meant secularization. He further traces the source of his idea to an interpretation that was eloquently expressed in Weber's phrase of "the disenchantment of the world" (2001:443).\par
James Beckford (2003) considers the idea of secularization with reference to the metamorphoses \hyperref[b14]{13} From the above, we can appreciate the role of religion and religious ideas in "modern" society. If Berger's secularization idea was extending the works of Weber and perhaps Durkheim, one needs to ask if the Sacred Canopy ever existed in the first place because we have to be critical of the contexts -the times and processes (events). What led to Weber and Durkheim's idea as "deceptive" (2003:52). He then cites David Lyon who asserts that 'the idea of secularization, if taken to refer beyond institutional religiosity to the attenuation of all forms of faith, spirituality, and belief, is plainly mistaken' (2000:x). To buttress this point, David Lyon refers to Robert Bellah's works since the 1960s, insisting that it is no longer possible to divide mankind into a binary of believers and non-believers. Rather, all believe something. mode of thoughts? Both of these classical scholars were noticing industrialization and modernization happening in their own societies at those periods. It was an established fact that there was "disenchantment of the world" in Weber's case, which was linked to the idea of economic development, although, he was not saying in explicit terms that there was secularization. If Berger missed the point \hyperref[b15]{14} There are many variants of secularization with emphasis on various aspects. I have highlighted six:differentiation, rationalization, modernization, metamorphoses, continuing vitality, and universality of religion. Peter Berger's "favorite" was the modernization, which assumes that modernization means the decline of religion and the institutional order and then the consciousness of individual. These ideas have been challenged by scholars including Berger himself, a leading proponent of the theory. As Casanova (1994) asserts, and he is right, there are two take-homes: religion has come to stay, thus putting to rest one of the cherished dreams of the Enlightenment. Second, religion shall continue to play important public roles in the ongoing construction of the modern world. Empirical data across continents and the U.S. dispute the secularization idea. Modernity does not necessarily lead to secularization, but pluralism. Although the debate on secularization seems to focus around Europe and or "modern" society, students of sociology of religion in Africa have many things to learn from and explore in their study\par
, then what was he not noticing? 15 IV. 
\section[{Religion and Development -An}]{Religion and Development -An}\par
African Perspective including observing the continuous importance of secularization debate as an important theme in sociology of religion. The next section of the essay is devoted to the idea of religion vis-à-vis development. It first briefly gives an overview of the notion of development in Africa, highlighting how it is conceived, challenging the Western models, and advocating for a bottom-up approach that considers the felt-needs and realities of the target recipients.\par
The secularization paradigm, based on European history and the modernist model of the progressive exclusion of religion from the public sphere, has seen religion as an obstacle to progress, to be sidestepped, ignored or eliminated (Barbara Bompani and Maria Frahm-Arp 2010). From the outset, modern ideas about development generally overlooked the role of religion in Africa, or assumed that it would be relegated to a matter of private belief as secular states gained strength and confidence, or even represented religion as an obstacle to development. As wasindicated in the introductory notes, development process in Africa should consider religion. Strikingly, Gerrie Ter Haar (2010) observes that it is now apparent that religion is a growing force in public life in Africa, as in many other parts of the world. She further asserts that development schemes designed without due reference to local cultures are bound to run into difficulty, and cultureshowever interesting they may be from folkloric viewpoint are bound to change.How are the Western models of development viewed, especially in relation to Africa?\par
Building on the debate on secularization, Dorothea (2010) observes that development in the twentieth century Western European model was seen as progress from a deeply religious, irrational and nonbureaucratic world, to a modern space where material advancement was achieved that led to secularization and loss of the spiritual. This trajectory has not been universal and the United States of America is a good example of a developed nation-state that has not lost all sense of the spiritual and religious discourse in the public sphere. It is worthy to understand the shift from progress to process in understanding development. Progress is about material increase while process tries to bring about the advancement of the whole person and their society. Development should be about helping people realize their potential-what they are, what they can do for themselves, and who they could be. By implication therefore, students of African religion should not be imposing or creating meanings or defining for their subjects what development is. Rather, the subjects should not be objectified or made "other" since they know better what their situations are.\par
In line with the above, Elizabeth (2010) identifies a difficulty among the Westerners in comprehending how, in African culture a continuum exists between visible and invisible worlds. It is also a surprise to some that religion reaches all sectors of public life, and how religious ideas come to have a bearing on the way political power is actually perceived and exercised. Studying aspects of religion in Africa therefore requires the researcher to appreciate the nature and relationship between the visible and the invisible to the subjects. In other words, isolating or treating religious aspects alone without bringing into cognizance other aspects of the society will not help. Several good examples exist-Linda Thomas' Under the Canopy (1999) is a good case, where she considered not only the health but equally social, economic, political, symbolic, etc. aspects of the Saint John's Church in South Africa.\par
V. 
\section[{Conclusion}]{Conclusion}\par
This essay briefly highlighted Peter Berger's idea on secularization as well as Max Weber's and providinga critique, and discussing the relationship between religion and development from an Africa perspective. It argues that, the Western models of development are not compatible with Africa for many reasons: they are alien, as well usually attached with conditionalities-just like many African countries experienced with the IMF/World Banks' structural adjustment programs in the 1980s and 90s. In addition, the Western models of development as we have illustrated, are not compatible with the norms and values of the people. This means that it neglects or relegates several important aspects of the people's culture, including the role of religion in development. Over the past decade there has been growing interest in engaging with religion, both as a means to achieving established development goals and as it is increasingly recognized that religion is central to the lives and values of most people in developing countries, thereby also paying a potential role in shaping development programs (Ter Haar and Ellis, 2006). As demonstrated, several empirical studiesproved that the contraposition between modernity and religion rooted in Western interpretations of secularism does not ring true in non-Western societies. This relationship needs to be rearticulated in theoretical and interpretive manner. Religion remains the most important means by which Africans secure access to the invisible world. They can achieve their development through utilizing religious ideas and resources  {\ref 16} 1. Ann, Swidler. . Development, when referred to Africa, should not be considered only in a unilineal, Western, top-down. Instead, it should be from bottomup, allowing people from the grassroots to identify their problems and prioritize their needs. Failure to appreciate this and apply it to non-Western, mostly African societies, wherethe leaders embrace and applaud the secularized developmentidea at the expense of the citizens who do not benefit from the artificial development, it becomes a terrific façade.\begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png}
\caption{\label{fig_0}}\end{figure}
 			\footnote{With variants though, a popular point for recent argument about the metamorphosis is the decline in the number of young people who regularly participate in mainstream Christian churches(Beckford  2003:53).} 			\footnote{ 2  18    ( )C © 2013 Global Journals Inc. (US)Secularization and Development in Africa: A Terrific Façade} 			\footnote{© 2013 Global Journals Inc. (US)} 			\footnote{( ) C Secularization and Development in Africa: A Terrific Façade} 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Cambridge]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		\textit{},  		 			U K Cambridge 		.  		University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Washington]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		\textit{},  		 			D C Washington 		.  	 	 		\textit{Ethics and Policy Center}  		 	 
\bibitem[Berger and Peter ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		\textit{},  		 			L Berger 		,  		 			Peter 		.  	 	 		\textit{The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent, Religion and World Politics}  		1999.  	 
\bibitem[Gorski and Ates ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		‘After Secularization’.  		 			Phillip Gorski 		,  		 			Altinordu Ates 		.  	 	 		\textit{Annual Review Sociology}  		2008. 34 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Barbara and Frahm-Arp ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		\textit{Development and Politics From Below: Exploring Religious Spaces in the African State},  		 			Bompani Barbara 		,  		 			Maria Frahm-Arp 		.  		2010. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.  	 
\bibitem[Marx ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		\textit{Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels On Religion},  		 			Karl Marx 		.  		1957. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House.  	 
\bibitem[Elizabeth ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		‘Marshalling the Powers: The Challenge of Everyday Religion for Development’.  		 			Graveling Elizabeth 		.  	 	 		\textit{Development and Politics from Below: Exploring Religious Spaces in the African State},  				 			Barbara Bompani,  			Maria Frahm-Arp 		 (ed.)  		 (New York)  		2010. Palgrave Macmillan.  	 
\bibitem[Tar Haar's The]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		\textit{Mbulili Principle?" (2010) has demonstrated how religious leaders utilize local resources to fight poverty. Also, several faith-related agencies have done creditably well in the fight against many social ills including poverty, violence against women, illiteracy, etc. Certainly, this is related to increase in foreign aid},  		 			Gerrie Tar Haar's The 		.  		 	 	 (failure of many African states, etc) 
\bibitem[Casanova ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		\textit{Public Religions in the Modern World},  		 			Jose Casanova 		.  		1994. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  	 
\bibitem[Stark (ed.) ()]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		\textit{Rational Choice Theory and Religion},  		 			R Stark 		.  		Young, L (ed.)  		1999. New York: Routledge.  	 	 (Bringing Theory Back In) 
\bibitem[Berger and Peter ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		‘Reflections on the Sociology of Religion Today’.  		 			L Berger 		,  		 			Peter 		.  	 	 		\textit{Sociology of Religion}  		2001. 62 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Dorothea ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		‘Remaking Society from Within: Extraversion and the Social Forms of Female Muslim Activism in Urban Mali’.  		 			Schutz Dorothea 		.  	 	 		\textit{Development and Politics from Below: Exploring Religious Spaces in the African State},  				 			Barbara Bompani,  			Maria Frahm-Arp 		 (ed.)  		 (New York)  		2010. Palgrave Macmillan.  	 
\bibitem[Chaves ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		‘Secularization as Declining Religious Authority’.  		 			M Chaves 		.  	 	 		\textit{In Social Forces}  		1994. 72 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Beckford ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		\textit{Social Theory and Religion},  		 			James Beckford 		.  		2003.  	 
\bibitem[Cannell ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		‘The Anthropology of Secularization’.  		 			Fenella Cannell 		.  	 	 		\textit{Annual Review Anthropology},  				2010. 39 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Hughey ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		‘The Idea of Secularization in the Works of Max Weber: A Theoretical Outline’.  		 			Michael Hughey 		.  	 	 		\textit{In Qualitative Sociology}  		1979. 2  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Gerrie and Haar ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		‘The Mbuliuli Principle: What is in a Name?’.  		 			Ter Gerrie 		,  		 			Haar 		.  	 	 		\textit{Development and Politics from Below: Exploring Religious Spaces in the African State},  				 			Barbara Bompani,  			Maria Frahm-Arp 		 (ed.)  		 (New York)  		2010. Palgrave Macmillan.  	 
\bibitem[Riesebrodt ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		\textit{The Promise of Salvation: A Theory of Religion},  		 			Martin Riesebrodt 		.  		2010. Chicago: University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Weber (ed.) ()]{b21}\label{b21} 	 		\textit{The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism},  		 			Max Weber 		.  		Stephen Kalberg (ed.)  		2011. Oxford: University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Weber (ed.) ()]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		\textit{The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism: with Other Writings on the Rise of the West},  		 			Max Weber 		.  		Stephen Kalberg (ed.)  		2009. New York: University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Emile (ed.) ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		\textit{The Rules of Sociological Method},  		 			Durkheim Emile 		.  		Steven Lukes (ed.)  		1982. New York: Free Press.  	 
\bibitem[Berger and Peter ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		\textit{The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion},  		 			L Berger 		,  		 			Peter 		.  		1967. Garden City, N.Y.; Doubleday.  	 
\bibitem[Warner ()]{b22}\label{b22} 	 		‘Work in Progress: Towards a New Paradigm for the Sociological Study of Religion in the United States’.  		 			R S Warner 		.  	 	 		\textit{American Journal of Sociology}  		1993. 98 p. .  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
