Using theory syllabi and departmental data collected for three academic years, this paper investigates the institutional practice of theory in sociology departments across Canada. In particular, it examines the position of theory within the sociological curriculum, and how this varies among universities. Taken together, our analyses indicate that theory remains deeply institutionalized at the core of sociological education and Canadian sociologists' self-understanding; that theorists as a whole show some coherence in how they define themselves, but differ in various ways, especially along lines of region, intellectual background, and gender; that despite these differences, the classical versus contemporary heuristic largely cuts across these divides, as does the strongly ingrained position of a small group of European authors as classics of the discipline as a whole. Nevertheless, who is a classic remains an unsettled question, alternatives to the 'classical versus contemporary' heuristic do exist, and theorists' syllabi reveal diverse 'others' as potential candidates. Our findings show that the field of sociology is neither marked by universal agreement nor by absolute division when it comes to its theoretical underpinnings. To the extent that they reveal a unified field, the findings suggest that unity lies more in a distinctive form than in a distinctive content, which defines the space and structure of the field of sociology. La presente etude examine les pratiques institutionnelles des departements de sociologie au Canada en se basant sur une analyse des syllabus, des programmes et des donnees departementales pour trois annees consecutives. Elle examine la position occupee par la theorie dans le champ de sociologie et en particulier les variations observees entre universites. Nos analyses demontrent que la position de la theorie demeure profondement institutionnalisee, notamment en ce qui a trait aux methodes pedagogiques et les facons dont les sociologues canadiens percoivent leur profession. Dans l'ensemble, les theoriciens different selon les regions, les trajectoires intellectuelles, et le genre, dans les manieres dont ils se representent; en depit de ces points de divergence, la demarcation entre theories classiques et contemporaines transcende ces differences, tout comme le fort ancrage d'auteurs europeens consacres en tant que classiques dans la discipline. Cependant, la question de ce qui constitue un classique demeure ouverte, puisqu'il existe des alternatives a l'heuristique entre 'classiques vs contemporains,' alors que divers auteurs faisant figure de classique sont invoques dans les syllabus de cours. En somme, nos analyses demontrent que les fondements theoriques du champ sociologique ne sont ni marques par un consensus ni par de profondes divisions. Dans la mesure ou les donnees revelent une certaine unite du champ, les analyses suggerent que cette unite reside davantage dans la forme que dans le contenu definissant l'espace et la structure du champ sociologique., FROM ITS FOUNDATION TO THE PRESENT, sociology has been keenly concerned with the state of sociological theory and its position within sociology at large (Camic, Joas, and Levine 2004; Levine [...]