Abstract (EN)

Since Richard Laughlin presented his PhD dissertation in 1984, numerous pieces of research have purported to address the linkages between accounting and religion. In 1986, Hoskin and Macve incidentally evoked the Roman Catholic Church as a discoverer of double entry bookkeeping. In 2004 and in 2008, Quattrone scrutinised on accounting and accountability in the Society of Jesus form an historical viewpoint. Otherwise, most pieces of research have investigated Anglo-Australian Protestant denominations. Although the object of inquiry was almost the same, radically opposed conclusions were drawn. These emphasised two bodies of literature. One concludes that there is a semantic dichotomy between accounting and religion. The other stream arrived at the opposite conclusion that accounting is a religious practice. When noticing such disputes on a similar object, we wondered how it came that the same object allowed opposed conclusions. In the present paper, we endeavour to answer it. Referring to Quattrone (2000, 2004b) and to Lowe (2004a, b), we demonstrate how ontological assumptions, epistemological stances and methodology choices as a continuum could have influenced the nature of the conclusions drawn. Each of the two streams evidenced one ideal-typical research continuum.