CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 6Study and Philosophy of ReligionReligion and Society InteractionsReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Field, at the Moment, Is Up for Redefinition: Twenty Five Years of Manufacturing Religion

McCutcheon, Russell T.·2022·Method & Theory in the Study of Religion
DOI 10.1163/15700682-bja10088
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Abstract Reflecting on the shape of the current field, this essay argues for the continued relevance for Manufacturing Religion , a book first published in 1997; describing the conditions of its writing, publication, and reception, it provides a variety of current examples to illustrate that the critique of scholarship that conceives of religion as a unique or deeply personal experience, one that defies explanation and merely requires understanding or even appreciation, continues to be an important critical tool in the contemporary study of religion.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1163/15700682-bja10088

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 23

  1. Anonymous (1998). Review of Manufacturing Religion. Christian Century 115/5:187.
  2. Braun, Willi and Russell T. McCutcheon (eds.) (2018). Reading J. Z. Smith: Interviews and Essay. New York: Oxford University Press.
  3. Feil, Ernst (2000) [1995]. On the Concept of Religion. Brian McNeil (trans.), Albany: State University of New York Press.
  4. Fitzgerald, Timohty (2000). “Russell T. McCutcheon’s Manufacturing Religion,” Culture and Religion 1(1), pp. 99–104.
  5. Geertz, Armin (1999). Review of Manufacturing Religion. Journal of Religion 79(3), pp. 508–509.
  6. Griffiths, Paul J. (1998a). Review of Manufacturing Religion. First Things: A Monthly Journal of Religion and Public Life 81 (March), pp. 44–48.
  7. Henking, Susan (1999). Review of Manufacturing Religion. Religious Studies Review 25(1), pp. 50–51.
  8. Hobsbawm, Eric and Terance Ranger (eds.) (1992) [1983]. The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Hughes, Aaron W. and Russell T. McCutcheon (eds.) (2021). What is Religion? Debating the Academic Study of Religion. New York: Oxford University Press.
  10. Ludwig, Theodore (1998). Review of Manufacturing Religion. The Cresset 61, pp. 34–36.
  11. McCutcheon, Russell T. (1999). Review of David Chidester, Savage Systems. History of Religions 39(1), pp. 73–76.
  12. McCutcheon, Russell T. (2000a). “A brief response from a fortunate man,” Culture and Religion 1(1), pp. 131–139.
  13. McCutcheon, Russell T. (2000b). Review of Talal Asad. Genealogies of Religion, Zygon 35(4), pp. 705–708.
  14. McCutcheon, Russell T. (2004). “Religion, ire, and dangerous things,” Journal of the American Academy of Religion 72(1), pp. 173–193.
  15. McCutcheon, Russell T. (2020). “Critical thinking begins at home: On making a shift in the study of religion,” Implicit Religion 22(2–3–4), pp. 349–372.
  16. McPhillips, Kathleen and Naomi Goldenberg (eds.) (2000). The End of Religion: Feminist Reappraisals of the State. New York: Routledge.
  17. Miller, Richard B. (2021). Why Study Religion? New York: Oxford University Press.
  18. Oxtoby, Willard (ed.) (1996). World Religions. 2 vols. New York: Oxford University Press.
  19. Penner, Hans (1999). Review of Manufacturing Religion. Teaching Theology and Religious Studies 2(1), pp. 56–57.
  20. Strenski, Ivan (1987). Four Theories of Myth in Twentieth-Century History: Cassirer, Eliade, Lévi-Straus, and Malinowski. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press.
  21. Sutcliffe, Steven (1999). Review of Manufacturing Religion. Bulletin of the British Association for the Study of Religions 86 (March), pp. 29–31.
  22. Thursby, Gene (1998). Review of Manufacturing Religion. Choice 35(6), pp. 429.
  23. Wiebe, Donald (2017). “The ‘Luther (Martin) effect’ on the study of religion – Up to eighty,” Religion 25(1), pp. 99–108.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
McCutcheon, R. T.
Affiliations
University of Alabama (US)
Corresponding author
McCutcheon, Russell T.
ORCID
McCutcheon, Russell T.
Venue
Method & Theory in the Study of Religion
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Published
2022-11-03
Volume
35
Issue
2-3
Pages
260-279
ISSN
  • 0943-3058 (ISSN-L)
  • 1570-0682
DOI
10.1163/15700682-bja10088
OpenAlex
W4308340366
Cited by
6
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4
FWCI
7.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Method & Theory in the Study of Religion (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Study and Philosophy of Religion
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Religion and Society Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Health › Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Keywords
sociology of religion, history of religious studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review