Defining Religion

"Substantive definitions try to establish what religion is; functional definitions describe what religion does. These approaches can be illustrated by analogy with definitions of the concept chair. A substantive definition might state that a chair is an object of furniture that usually has four legs and a back; the definition might add further physical details to distinguish a chair from a sofa, bench, or toilet. A functional definition of chair might state that it is a seat, usually for one person. This functional definition is somewhat broader, encompassing objects that various cultures use as seats but that may have no legs at all."

"The major advantage to substantive definitions is that they are more specific than functional ones. They are more explicit about the content of religion. Substantive definitions tend to be narrower and neater than functional definitions; using them, one can specify whether a phenomenon is or is not religion. Substantive definitions also tend to correspond more closely than functional definitions to commonsense notions of religion because they are generally based on Western - especially Christian - ideas about reality. For example, the distinction between natural and supernatural is a product of Western thinking, such as the elaborate medieval cosmographies."

"The primary advantage of a functionalist definitional strategy is its breadth. Functional definitions tend to be better than substantive definitions for encompassing cross-cultural, transhistorical, and changing aspects of religion. Functional definitions encourage the observer to be sensitive to the religious quality of many social settings."

"The breadth of functional definitions is a mixed blessing. While functional definitions are less culturally and historically bound, this inclusiveness makes it difficult to use them for empirical studies requiring neat, quantifiable categories."

from Meredith B. McGuire's, "Religion: The Social Context" (5th ed.) pages 8-12.