It’s the complacency, stupid! My new pet theory on secularism

Last updated on: March 20, 2017 at 8:02 am by Jane the Actuary

It’s the complacency, stupid! My new pet theory on secularism 2017-03-20T08:02:49-06:00 Jane the Actuary

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Sure, there’s probably tons written about this in the academic literature, but remember, I’m just an actuary, who blogs as a way of thinking about issues that are interesting to me, rather than with (most of the time) a specific agenda to promote.

Something that’s always seemed “off” to me is the explanation that secularism is the inevitable result of the prosperity of our current times, so that religious observance will inevitably, absent a catastrophe that sends us back into collective poverty, disappear in the United States just as it (nearly) has in Europe. I wrote about this a couple years ago:

But the funny thing is, taken on an individual basis, Christianity is not, and has not, necessarily been a religion of the poor. The first Christians tended to be not the poor, but the wealthy (or at least middle-class) and educated, looking for something that was more meaningful and made more sense to them than the worship of the gods of their fathers and mothers. A favorite sort of conversion story was that of the wealthy man or woman rejecting wealth, and Francis of Assisi was the son of a merchant. In fact, the story around St. Francis goes like this: the economic growth of the High Middle Ages produced this new breed of voluntarily poor Brothers and Sisters such as the Franciscans and the Poor Clares, as a way of responding to their un-ease about the new money economy. At least, that’s what I remember from a book from my Medieval history grad student days.

And now? I’m still reading Robert Putnam’s Our Kids, and just saw a chart saying something I’d seen before, that, in the United States, it’s the poor who are “losing their religion” and there’s a sharp divergence, as the middle-class and better educated are not only doing a better job keeping their families intact, but are keeping up church attendance in a way that the less-educated and poorer class aren’t. I have the impression, too, that in China the rise of Christianity is a middle-class phenomenon, too.

I was mulling over this again more recently, and asking myself the question, “why is it that new-found wealth seems to be bringing more people to religious observance but in the U.S. the conventional wisdom says the reverse is true?” But is it really more simple than that? — is it the case that transitions of various kinds bring about religious observance? In China, there is a definite economic transition that’s leading people — not everyone, but a significant number — to search out some sort of larger “meaning of life.” In the United States, well, in some ways, you might say that people are seeking out different ways of finding that “meaning of life,” whether it’s new age practices or pursuing a cause such as environmentalism. But I’m not so sure that’s the answer.

There’s a book out now, The Complacent Class, by Tyler Cowen, the blurb for which on Amazon states,

Since Alexis de Tocqueville, restlessness has been accepted as a signature American trait. Our willingness to move, take risks, and adapt to change have produced a dynamic economy and a tradition of innovation from Ben Franklin to Steve Jobs.

The problem, according to legendary blogger, economist and best selling author Tyler Cowen, is that Americans today have broken from this tradition―we’re working harder than ever to avoid change. We’re moving residences less, marrying people more like ourselves and choosing our music and our mates based on algorithms that wall us off from anything that might be too new or too different. Match.com matches us in love. Spotify and Pandora match us in music. Facebook matches us to just about everything else.

Of course, this “matching culture” brings tremendous positives: music we like, partners who make us happy, neighbors who want the same things. We’re more comfortable. But, according to Cowen, there are significant collateral downsides attending this comfort, among them heightened inequality and segregation and decreased incentives to innovate and create.

So here’s a theory to test:

Traditional societies, that is, those with a strong in-group pressure to maintain cultural practices = continuity of whatever religious practices already exist.

“Complacent” modern societies => decline in religious practice.

“Dynamic” modern societies => growth in religious practice.

Why would “dynamic” societies produce more religiosity? Because it is in time of social and political change that people are looking for some sense of meaning, a greater purpose, and also because of the concrete benefits of mutual aid and support for people uprooted from traditional communities.

After all, why should it be that the United States was historically more religiously observant than Europe, when subsequent to the initial immigration by Puritans, the new arrivals were no longer distinguished by any particular levels of religiosity? In fact, the level of religious observance in the U.S. also waxed and waned, with various “Great Awakenings” throughout its history. Are there correlated with periods of change?`

And what about the ancient Roman world? Bear in mind, in addition to my statement in my prior post that the first Christians were not necessarily the poor but the wealthy, the context was not simply one of pagans converting to Christianity, the end, but instead, Christianity fell on fertile soil as there was already an interest in something other than the traditional gods, and by this I don’t simply mean the mystical cults of which Christianity is sometimes accused of having started out as. In fact, previously Judaism had its own converts, or, rather, the ancient Roman version of “seekers” who were not interested in “becoming Jewish” with its circumcision and ritual practices, but were attracted by its monotheism and ethics, and subsequently those people found that Christianity gave them what they were looking for while being fully welcomed into the community. (Or something like that — I don’t recall the particulars, but do recall having read that Jews and Christians initially viewed themselves as rivals for converts from paganism.)

And, again going purely on memory, when we think of the Roman Empire, we think of bread-and-circuses and brutal emperors, and the Fall of the Roman Empire with its barbarian hordes, but Christianity grew prior to that, at the time of the Pax Romana, which I would think would have been a very dynamic time.

Now, what about the notion that it is poverty and catastrophe which brings about religious observance, as everyone flocks to the temple to pray for a cure/rain/success in battle/etc., or simply to seek out comfort? Is this based on evidence, or just an assumption? Here’s an example: the Holocaust. It’s my understanding that there were those who turned towards prayer, but there was a large segment of Jews who “lost their religion” as well. As a present-day example, I don’t see any reports of a resurgence in religion in those regions of the country hit hard by the opioid epidemic, neither among addicts nor those who suffer because of the addictions of others.

So it’d be interesting to explore more deeply the particular circumstances in which religious revivals occur — because when I say “dynamism” I’m not entirely sure myself what I mean by this but it seems like at least a tool to thinking about this more than the simplistic “European countries are more secular because they’re taken care of by their social welfare programs.”

Readers, your thoughts please. (And, no, mocking comments about the foolishness of believing in a deity don’t really further the conversation.)

Image: https://pixabay.com/en/baptism-christianity-jordan-river-1959655/; public domain

Uncategorized

religious revival

secularism

Previous Post

March 17, 2017

Do you celebrate St. Patrick's Day?

Next Post

March 20, 2017 Are you watching "This is Us"?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Actuarial/Retirement Issues Politics Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 December 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 June 2021 April 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

I went uninvited before the king, risking death, saying 'If I perish, I perish.' Who am I?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Deborah Ruth Vashti Esther