training of correctional personnel, use of "open institutions," prison labor, and juvenile delinquency will be major areas of interest on the agenda. A feature of the section on delinquency will be a report on practical programs (in guidance clinics, juvenile aid bureaus, educational programs, and preventive programs) prepared by the London Institute for the Study and Treatment of Delinquency. In the past, such congresses were organized by the International Penal and Penitentiary Commission, which was founded in 1875. With the transfer of the latter's functions, library, and archives to the United Nations in 1951, the General Assembly authorized the convening of similar congresses by the United Nations every five years. Report of Committee on Awards to the ACSS Convention It is the considered opinion of the members of the Standing Committee on Awards of The American Catholic Sociological Society that no publication of any member of the Society between October 15, 1953 and October 14, 1954, merits the award annually conferred on the person whose published research meets the standards set up in the resolution of the Society's annual convention at Milwaukee on December 29, 1952. Respectfully submitted, John Donovan, Boston College Sister Mary Edward, College of St. Catherine FINANCIAL REPORT OF THE ACSS In December 1953, there were 287 subscribers to THE REVIEW as compared with 329 subscribers in December 1954. BOOK REVIEWS BROTHER GERALD J. SCHNEPP, S.M. St. Mary's University, San Antonio 1, Texas Social Relations in the Urban Parish. By Joseph H. Fichter, S.J. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1954. Pp. vii+264. $5.50 This book advances the sociological study of the parish, not least because a reading sociologist is likely to introduce his own qualifications or questions into virtually every chapter. Father Fichter is provocative in the best sense; he uses the previous literature in the field and his own studies to examine important general problems which he formulates sociologically, and these formulations, tentative as they are acknowledged to be, may be expected to stimulate in turn further critical effort. The fundamental problem of a sociological definition of the Catholic parish is raised in the second chapter. While this reviewer would acknowledge the influence of some of the same theorists to whom Father Fichter expresses gratitude, he would, on the basis of their work and Father Fichter's own data, state the problem somewhat differently. The large urban parish may often appear to be "not a social group in the strict sense" (p. 18), but not all parishes are urban, or American, or twentieth-century. Perhaps what is needed is a more generic approach to definition, and an attempt to construct on the basis of empirical findings a typology of parishes, as Zimmerman, for example, attempted in The Changing Community to distinguish between locality groups on the basis of their solidarity and self-consciousness. Findings relevant to this problem may be gleaned from various chapters, but it is the typology of parishioners, the subject of Part I, which actually provides the focus for most of the book. The distinction between nuclear, modal, marginal, and dormant parishioners is not "the first descriptive typology of Church membership in sociological literature," as the publisher's dustjacket "blurb" would have it, but it is noteworthy that this typology is more than merely classificatory; it is used in an approach to a systematic analysis of parochial organization. This is done in relation to problems of leadership, solidarity, institutional roles, and defection in Part I. Part II treats "Social Correlates of Religious Participation" in terms of the religious life-profile, the effects of urban mobility, and the interrelation of parochial with other statuses in American society. The pastoral role, social relations of the laity, parish societies, and parish schools receive limited attention in Part III. It is apparent throughout that one of the aims of the author is an exposition of the role of the social scientist in the study of religious institutions. This is dealt with explicitly in the introductory chapter, in Part IV, "Problems of Conceptualization and Research," and in an appendix entitled "Utility of Social Science for Religion." These parts are helpful; the presentation of potentially relevant approaches or "conceptualizations," however, suggests the need of more studies of this kind, as well as field investigations testing the hypotheses offered, preliminary to more definitive sociological analysis. Father Fichter's chapters, about half of which reprint or elaborate upon materials previously published elsewhere, furnish example as well as counsel for the student of religious groups and institutions. C. J. NUESSE The Catholic University of America, Washington 17, D.C. Culture and Personality. By John J. Honigmann. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1954. Pp.x+499. $5.00. Since Du Bois and Kardiner collaborated in studying the Alorese, the field of personality and culture has suffered no dearth of investigation. So numerous, in fact, have been the studies in this area that an attempt at integration, such as is "Culture and Personality," has become a growing need. Honigmann's work presents culture and personality as a "cross-discipline" born of the interdisciplinary attempts of psychology, psychiatry, sociology, and anthropology. The content, varying approaches, methods, and techniques are presented in parts one and two. The process of personality patterning and the development of model personality are treated in part three. Modal personalities in caste, class, region, and occupation constitute the subject matter for part four. The relationship between personality disorder and group membership is discussed in part five. "Culture and Personality," the reader will find, is a most useful survey of the methods, approaches, observations, and evaluations of those working in the field. Honigmann, however, does not present the field as a true cross-discipline. Culture and personality is usurped as "the branch of anthropology which studies culture in the individual . . ." (p. 428). We are also told that "personality is now seen as a reflection of a segment of culture in the individual" (p. 428). Honigmann treats thoroughly the process of patterning personality in culture but provides no analysis of the dynamic nature of personality such as was attempted by Kluckhohn, Murray, and Schneider in their recent work. No consideration whatever is given to the function which personality plays in the enrichment of culture. Without these latter considerations culture and personality is not a true cross discipline. Works in this area of study would profit by being the collaborative efforts of authors from the several disciplines involved. JOSEPH G. GREEN, JR. Regis College, Weston, Mass. Social Stratification in the United States. By John F. Cuber and William F. Kenkel. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts Co., 1954. Pp. x+359. $4.00. Three theoretical themes constitute the frame of reference of Cuber and Kenkel's work on social stratification. The American stratification system is multi-dimensional, continuous, and functional up to a point. A number of well known and more recent studies constitute the material around which the theoretical discussion centers. West's study of Plainville, Lenski's findings in Danielson, Conn., Warner, Meeker and Eell's Social Class in America, Kenkel's study of Columbus, Hollingshead's Elmtown stratification system, Jones' Life, Liberty and Property, Center's Psychology of Social Classes, Warner and Havighurst's Who Shall Be Educated each of these come in for summarization and evaluation. Those studies which put forth systems of discrete classes do not, believe the authors, have sufficient evidence to substantiate their claims. Warner, Hollingshead and Centers are offenders on this score. These and other studies, however, do reveal “a status range of acceptance." Not only are there no discrete classes to be found, but there appears to be no American class system of stratification. The criteria of social class are found to differ from one community to another. In evaluating social class in America, Cuber and Kenkel decry the waste of much talent as a result of the differential advantage operating in American society. Differential advantage and unequal social power solidified into numerous pressure groups, furthermore, militate against the democracy we profess. On the credit side, the authors do find hope in the vertical mobility, lack of categorical distinctions and the many measures taken by government and education to equalize living levels and make education available to an increasing number. Social Stratification in the United States is a useful presentation of the problems of social structure and its functioning in this country. It should be particularly helpful in developing in students a critical approach to the field of stratification. JOSEPH G. GREEN, JR. Regis College, Weston 93, Mass. Soziologie: Geschichte ihrer Probleme. By Dr. Helmut Schoeck. Munich, Germany: Verlag Karl Alber, 1952. Pp. x+431. $5.95. This volume is part of a series called Orbis Academicus, de signed to give a comprehensive "intellectual history" of the various branches of learning. In its thematic presentation, this series is to provide eventually an encyclopedia of the decisive problems of all the sciences in the widest sense of the word. Helmut Schoeck, author of the present book, teaches sociology at the State College of Fairmont, W. Va. Originally, he seems to be philosopher (Nietzsche specialist). Although not one of the better known sociological authors in either Germany, from where he appears to have come, or in this country, his book proves him to be unusually familiar with and well-read in, the field. His European background and philosophical training may account for his still rather all-inclusive concept of sociology. He feels that a history of sociology cannot operate with too strict a definition of the science. Instead of starting out with the antecedents and forerunners of sociology, he operates from the beginning with a concept of the science which has as its object matter everything in which a plurality of men participates and which includes cultural anthropology, economics, and social psychology. Thus it is not surprising that Schoeck begins with what he calls a discussion of sociological problems in pre-Christian and Christian Antiquity and in the Middle Ages. In so doing, he soon drifts off into the boundless sea of the social sciences and finds himself under the compulsion of looking for sociology where hardly any is to be found, as e.g., in the writings of Voltaire, Montesquieu, Adam Smith, Schleiermacher, Nietzsche, and Schmoller. Of course, sociologically relevant statements can be discovered in practically every piece of writing from the beginning of civilization. Had Schoeck traced the genesis of sociology "from lore to science" (cf. Becker-Barnes), he could have dealt more summarily with the pre-scientific phases and saved much time and effort for a broader and more thorough treatment of the newer history of sociology or, more correctly, of the history of sociology proper. Of course, Schoeck may retort that an author has a right to define his own topic and subject matter, and that nobody is bound to accept the "American" viewpoint which regards sociology as a specific, narrowly defined branch or subdivision of the social sciences. Schoeck could also point out that he himself has stated that before Comte there are no writings which even in some part or passage reflect directly on the essence of sociology. While all this may be quite true, there can be little doubt that the trend, even in European sociology is for some time in the direction of a special social science whose viewpoint is of a distinctive character. It does not seem to serve the synthesizing purpose of the series for which Schoeck wrote this book, to obliterate the boundary lines between the sciences, for it is the series as a whole rather than the individual contribution, which should be "encyclopedic." And yet, I am very happy to have this book. It is a veritable. |