Final answer:
One criticism of the structural-functional approach to religion is its inability to explain social change and the circular nature of the theory. However, functionalism still has value in mid-level analyses.
Step-by-step explanation:
One criticism of the structural-functional approach to religion is that it can't adequately explain social change. Another criticism is the circular nature of the theory; repetitive behavior patterns are assumed to have a function because they are repeated, but this assumes that they have a function in the first place. The theory also fails to account for dysfunctions that don't serve a function, which contradicts its basic premise. Despite these criticisms, functionalism still has value in mid-level analyses.