The fastest growing religious group in America is the group I belong to, the non-religious:
…Nearly one in four Americans now declare themselves unaffiliated with any organized religion. The share of adults who identify as “none” has more than doubled since the 1990s — to 56 million and climbing. That’s now more than the membership of all mainline Protestants combined [Jean Hopfensperger, “Fastest Growing Religion Is ‘None’,” Minneapolis Star Tribune, 2018.11.11].
The decline in religious affiliation is seen in the ELCA’s membership. Since 2000, my favorite Lutheran group has lost 200,000 members and closed 150 churches—and that’s just in Minnesota, where declines in churches, members, and baptisms have not been as deep as the ELCA’s nationwide averages.
I don’t celebrate the growth of the non-religious portion of our nation; I’m long past needing the affirmation of others to feel comfortable in my irreligious skin. I’m certainly not looking for an unchurch or atheist coffee club to take up my Sunday mornings.
But I do look forward to the growing numbers of fellow unbelievers perhaps convincing my Democratic friends first and maybe someday Republicans too that pandering to theocratic impulses toward unconstitutional religious tests excludes a growing number of good patriotic citizens from civic engagement.
Here’s a counter-point:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/05/20/think-christianity-is-dying-no-christianity-is-shifting-dramatically/?utm_term=.d5a570cf3c97
Here are some quotes from the article (not my words):
While rising numbers of “nones” — those who claim no religious affiliation when asked — claim the attention of religious pundits, the world tells a different story.
Sociologists report that the process of migration typically increases the intensity of religious faith — whatever its form — of those persons crossing borders of nations and cultures. Fresh spiritual vitality in both North America and Europe is being fueled by the process of global migration.
In the United States, about 43 million residents were born in another country, and immigrated here. Of these, about 74 percent adhere to the Christian faith
I am mystified, for example, by political conservatives who cry for the resurgence of religious values in this country, and then support the deportation of those actually growing the nation’s religious vitality. And I am disappointed with political liberals, who, like I, support comprehensive immigration reform, but can seem deaf and dumb to the religious life of immigrants themselves, who often combine their unapologetic faith with commitments to social solidarity, welfare and reform of the broken immigration system.
Here’s another article that talks about the resurgence in Liberals going back to mainline churches under this administration:
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2017/0414/Church-revival-More-liberals-are-filling-Protestant-pews
A quote:
Since the rise of Donald Trump, liberal-leaning churches have reported surges in attendance and newfound energy in the pews. Will it prove a temporary ‘Trump bump’ or a lasting change after decades of decline in mainline Protestant churches?
Here is a interesting tidbit from Sean Carroll’s “The Big Picture” (p.86-87):
That thought process seems alive and well today given the animosity we often see against religious groups due to beliefs that do not comport with the beliefs of those who foster hatred and often violence against perceived wrong believers.
And, recent surveys indicate that atheists and Muslims, are the most hated groups of wrong believers among Americans. See e.g.,
https://twin-cities.umn.edu/news-events/atheists-remain-most-disliked-religious-minority-us
And in a somewhat ironic fashion, it appears many Muslims don’t particularly care for athiests, given that athiesm is illegal and punishable by death in at least 13 Muslim countries.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/12/13-countries-where-atheism-punishable-death/355961/
Ah, the joys of religion!
Odd, indeed, that Trump conservatives would oppose immigration when immigration, as TAG notes, is a key force to energizing religion in our country.
BCB, you offer a good reminder to our readers of why I have no interest in promoting the expansion of any theocracy, of any flavor. I do demand a certain level of assimilation from all comers to our shores: believe what you want, but recognize that you will not be allowed to impose your religion on others or deny others their freedom to believe as they want through the force of law.
It would be interesting to pill the growing “None” category and find out what groups they hate the most and whether they hate those groups with the same intensity that the broader population hates certain groups.
TAG, on Trump and greater attendance at liberal churches: is that a product of folks moving from conservative Trumpy churches to progressive churches with their heads screwed on straight, thus meaning no net churchgoing increase? Could it be less theology and more a desire for community and action driving that increase?
Republicans don’t oppose legal immigration. Whoever says that is lying.
Alas, Jason intrudes to shove words in others’ mouths. Sigh.
Republicans have hung a clear “Foreigners unwelcome” sign on America’s door. Republicans have elected a false Christian who paints everyone he doesn’t like as an outsider and an enemy. Republicans base their campaigns on a very un-Christlike fear that makes it harder to make people feel welcome in our country.
In that regard, Republicans deter immigration. Their conservatism and their fallacious mix of their politics with church also seems to drive some people away from those churches.
Try welcoming people. Try pluralism and diversity. It makes for stronger churches and a stronger country.
“…is that a product of folks moving from conservative Trumpy churches to progressive churches with their heads screwed on straight, thus meaning no net churchgoing increase? Could it be less theology and more a desire for community and action driving that increase?”
From what I gathered from the article, it is being driven more by folks that had previously left mainline churches (more progressive) for various reasons, and now are going back because they see the church as a place they can be a force for good, volunteering in social justice-type activities. But the other thing driving the increase is the embrace of immigrants seen more in the mainline churches. To me, that is another positive.
You mentioned assimilation. One of the reasons ISIS has been able to recruit people from the immigrant minority populations of europe is the fact that those societies, while opening their borders, still have not made those communities feel welcome in the larger culture. That lack of assimilation is a problem that terrorists exploit. The more we can let these newcomers into our lives and cultures, like joining our churches, the better for everyone.
The Christian Science Monitor, for those that don’t know, is not a source of religious-based news (despite the title). They are a supremely unbiased news source that produces lengthy, well-researched articles. Great source for intelligent reporting of factual news. I highly recommend it.
Jason doesn’t seem to be paying attention to what Republicans are doing, rather than what they are saying. All Republicans may not oppose legal immigration, but people on Trump’s staff do, and they seem to be pushing this line hard. They certainly put forth lower limits on legal immigration as a negotiating position in order to pass a DACA fix. They are making it increasingly difficult for refugees to claim legal status. It hardly matters whether they come out and announce their position opposing legal immigration if they can extort a gradual closing down of every route for legal immigration.
I think churches can be a great source for “a mighty flood of justice and a torrent of doing good,” but also for the opposite, ie., hate. If churches were just about the social gospel, I’d go. Unfortunately, you actually have to swallow the whole whale, to switch around the Jonah story, and my throat isn’t big enough.
“Republicans don’t oppose legal immigration. Whoever says that is lying.”
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2018/06/12/donald-trump-cutting-legal-immigration/692447002/
“That’s further confirmation that the administration’s official policy toward legal immigration is restriction by any means necessary,” said David Bier, an immigration policy analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute. “They’re looking across all programs for ways that they can reduce the number of new legal permanent residents, and other foreign workers in the U.S. economy.”
My hypothesis is that people are leaving organized religion for the same reason many are distasteful of partisan politics: dogma. Instead of coming across from a core of belief and value, religion comes across as a list of arbitrary rules.
A secondary reason is the cooption/corruption of organized religion as a political tool. I have been told by priests that religious topics such as the sin of obscene wealth is not spoken of here because it offends parishioners. To me, that is political ideology pushing out theology. How often is the current Pope heralded as a hero or a fool based on how political ideology either agrees or disagrees with his proclamations? Religion ought to be above politics — not another player rolling in the mud.
I will throw out a third for discussion: religion overreaches to always be literal when so much is meant to be figurative. I believe that any supreme being capable of creating all the beauty and wonder of the universe is capable of using figurative language. (I even believe understanding the figurative language is a key to seeing the beauty.)
On the topic of immigration and religion: I say it is wrong to justify immigration as a means of helping the US economy. That is a political stance. As a (religious) moral stance, we should be pro-immigration to help the less fortunate PERIOD.
Instead of concerning ourselves with who uses which designated bathroom, or who gets to kiss whom, or railing against the drain of welfare, or any other the other “them” versus “us” controversies, we ought to speak about helping ALL our brother/sisters. I would bet a nation committed to THAT discussion would see a spike in good-old religion participation.
It should be patently obvious to everyone: people are disgusted by phony right wing kristians and their ability to claim they are god fearing humble people then proceed to trash the 10 commandments and the constitution with equal relish.
BTW the convention the US signed about asylum seekers says they cannot be turned back for crossing a border at any point regardless of whether it is a designated entry point.
To those Republicans that support legal immigration and are Christians, here’s an idea:
Rather than send ICE agents and soldiers to threaten, harm and detain refugees and asylum seekers, send ICE agents and soldiers to help those folks comply with immigration rules by creating places where applications for asylum and immigration are encouraged. We could provide help with transportation to immigration friendly facilities, along with making all necessary paperwork easily available and giving assistance to those who need help in making the applications. We could expedite processing with a presumption of admissibility. We could supply decent food and safe shelter for anyone in need during their efforts to comply with our laws. We could stop arresting and deporting people without papers and start helping them obtain whatever paperwork our laws require.
Think of the money we would save by declining to arrest and detain people simply because they lacked “papers,” and instead helping them find work and shelter, which would contribute to our society while building a better life for their families. Meanwhile, with such positive help and a presumption of admissibility we could literally eradicate the cost of enforcement by punishment and deportation and thereby save tax dollars galore.
And from a Christian standpoint, such policies would comport with a variety of biblical teachings:
https://www.biblestudytools.com/topical-verses/bible-verses-about-immigration/
Imagine treating the so-called caravan as an opportunity to help those traveling to join our country and contribute to America, rather than treating them as enemies. That would go a long way toward encouraging “legal” immigration.
Meanwhile, if there were a legitimate reason to prevent someone from immigrating, a process that encouraged every potential immigrant to come forward would enhance our ability to learn about such reason and act accordingly. Removing fear and hostility from the immigration process would certainly be a giant step toward actually supporting “legal” immigration.
o, I kind-of think the opposite is true with regard to why people leave religion. The more restrictive, dogmatic, political and hypocritical churches (to me, that describes evangelical churches) seem to inspire/demand more loyalty. The more liberal, relative, and figurative translations of the bible, and liberal churches, inspire less loyalty IMO. That’s why you are seeing this long-term trend of mainstream churches losing membership. The church is less demanding, so missing service is less of a big deal.
It’s unfortunate, because I find a less literal reading of the bible to contradict itself far less, and allows for more diverse individual beliefs within the same church. As a christian that believes fully in science, I have my own interpretation that sometimes differs from my church. It creates less of an “us” that way, though.
You better think of something quick, ol’ Marlboro Barbie is the Number 2 expletive in the Senate. He really does have a brown nose for sure.
“wrong believers” Thats a good way to put that, BCB.
I agree that the evangelical/political leaders like Falwell, Dobson, Graham, White and others have soured many people on Christianity. Their misinterpretations of the Bible to support their misogyny don’t help either.
Mainline Protestants? Remember when mainlining coke was the fad. Injecting drugs or injecting religion. One gets you higher quicker and probably better for your overall well being and I am not referring to dogma.
Mr. H, you and I are in many groups together, but I think this might be my favorite one.
Anyone who is “in” a group including grudgingly should reassess the group. On the other hand, grudznick wants so badly to be “in” a group that (s)he’s afraid to disclose her name because she knows that all around would resign their membership thereto. Sweet lil grudging, yll knower if y’see her, blue eyes and empty mind.
Anyone who is “in” a group including grudgingly should reassess the group. On the other hand, grudznick wants so badly to be “in” a group that (s)he’s afraid to disclose her name because she knows that all around would resign their membership thereto. Sweet lil grudzie, yll knower if y’see her, blue eyes and empty mind.
TAG, first, thank you for really engaging in an issue discussion; being thoughtfully challenged is the one thing that drew me to Cory’s blog in the first place — and the great reporting of course — two, two things brought me to Cory’s blog.
I actually had that reservation as I wrote the point about dogma. Knowing that hate and fear are effective political motivators, I have to concede you are right in that they also can motivate religious adhesion as well. Maybe I wanted to be a Pollyanna and believe that religion could rise above current political pettiness.
Can it also be that the more liberal/progressive churches do not DEMAND blind loyalty? It is not so much a case that congregations are less loyal, but they are asked to demonstrate their loyalty so vehemently? If a church his based on compassion, inclusion, forgiveness, and understanding, how does one take a radical stance on being compassionate, inclusive, forgiving and understanding? Can there be the “fire and brimstone” disdain of others for not being compassionate, inclusive, forgiving and understanding?
Ironically, my falling out with the Catholic Church revolves around it’s inability to take on the social issues at the core of religious teaching: care for the poor, the sins of greed and economic exploitation. . . Somehow reading a Playboy was more endangering to a soul than hoarding wealth while employees go hungry. National health care was a moral atrocity because it would include birth control. We were told that “religious liberty” was in peril as we sat in our chosen church with NO fear of it being closed or of government censorship of message. I was looking for more ire to be thrown at the “bad guys.”
Attacking the “other” wins in politics and keeps butts in the pews, so what does that say about our great society? What does it say about institutions, especially religious institutions that are willing to take that tack, to appeal those most base instincts souly (see what I did there?) to perpetuate their own survival?
I’m of the opinion if someone wants to attend and abide by moral rules in a group they are free to do so and I see no reason to trash someone as ignorant or stupid because they believe in God or attend a church. Look at our Constitution for an example: I am not so arrogant to think I am as smart as the founding fathers that wrote such a wonderful timeless document that “all of a sudden” today I would think I could rewrite it or trash it to because I could do better. . . Those same founding fathers also believed in God yet there are those today that have done nothing of value with their lives that would like to trash our Constitution which seem to be of the same group that trashes people who believe in God and go to church.
Can any of you people that hate God believers tell me of a nation or state that is successful that doesn’t have some sort of God centered belief? Just a question.
Anyone who is “in” a group including grudgingly should reassess the group. On the other hand, grudznick wants so badly to be “in” a group that (s)he’s afraid to disclose her name because she knows that all around would resign their membership thereto. Sweet lil grudzie, yll knower if y’see her, blue eyes and empty mind, and hands that aren’t stained yellow from the demon weed smoke. Mr. H, you and I are in that group together, too.
I certainly enjoyed firing up cocaine more than I ever did the message I got from the pulpit.
“The same founding fathers believed in God”.
Are you sure about that Old Sarge?
I, for one, drank plenty of scotch as I sat in the front row. At church. And the movies. And this really bad musical put on by some long hairs.
I like scotch. Had the speedy study and still prefer McGregors.
Roger, yes.
There’s always a problem with any church, denomination or religion that operates from a fear based place. That wasn’t what Jesus emphasized, as a reading of the gospels shows.
If a church keeps butts in the pews through fear, they have a religion, and it could be Abrahamic, but it’s not “Christ”ian. “By grace you are saved through faith,” was Jesus’ mantra, repeated in various forms throughout his ministry. Not by church attendance, tithing, various good works, certain acceptable sexual behaviors, income, etc. Faith.
It’s not something You Do. It’s something you get– freely given. That’s why Jesus could forgive the people who executed him when they didn’t even ask.
That’s always been the hardest thing for humans to accept, and mostly we don’t like it. We want to take some credit and the charlatans/fake revs know that and play it up. You must be straight, wealthy, tithe, come to church, come to THIS church, pray the right way, vote the right way, can’t drink smoke use caffeine, look nice, dress well, be employed, be white, be Republican, love trump, love guns, etc.
More and more people are seeing through the charlatans. Unfortunately, they universalize them to all forms of Christianity and dump it all. That’s a loss.
There are millions of Christians in the US who are much less concerned with judging others and more about trying to make lives better for everyone, that Jesusy thing. When they get it about forgiveness being a gift, people tend to respond by wanting to share that.
OldSarge,
I too acknowledge (not believe) there is a freedom of religion in the US; that is a demonstrable fact. I also do not think people are ignorant for believing in God; I do think they are ignorant when they use that belief to undermine or replace demonstrable fact. Those wise founding fathers included a process for amending that Constitution because they were not so arrogant as to believe they had all the answers or that this nation would remain stagnant for the rest of time. They made the constitution a living document; they did not carve it into stone. Those same founding fathers also believed that the worship of God had its place – and that was separate from their government and Constitution. And as John Stewart often reminded us, they also owned slaves and pooped in buckets. They were great men, not perfect deities.
Can any of you God believers tell me of a nation or state that is free of corruption that has some sort of God centered belief? Just a another question.
I read in Pew Research about five years ago that twenty percent of Americans are Christians that no longer go to church. Some would say that those people are no longer Christian and they would say that they are. Then there are those who are not sure about God but they are sure that they are spiritual. So they think there is something out there but just trying to find out fully what that is. And some Christians would say that we will never fully understand God anyway. Just as the Native Americans say that The Great Spirit is a mystery that no one fully understands. And there are serious atheists who really do not believe in a God. It depends on how the questions are asked on a poll.
from o, “If a church his based on compassion, inclusion, forgiveness, and understanding, how does one take a radical stance on being compassionate, inclusive, forgiving and understanding?”
That is kind of a catch-22, isn’t it? I’d say that most churches that emphasize those traits in an honest way are typically more laid back about it… which eventually promotes less fanatacism. I’d say that Jesus was a radical about those things, though.
“my falling out with the Catholic Church revolves around it’s inability to take on the social issues at the core of religious teaching: care for the poor, the sins of greed and economic exploitation. . .”
I still think the Catholic church takes its role in social justice seriously. It’s one of the things I admire about it. You are right that they fret too much about the small things that make them hypocritical, though. Like how often you attend, or divorce, or birth control, or gays, or cursing, or masturbation, etc. More and more those things are falling away, as Catholics become more mainline. Which also means they will lose members.
Lutherans are sometimes called “lazy Catholics”, and i agree with that assessment. My denomination, the ELCA Lutherans, are sometimes derided as “pickers and choosers” because we choose to just focus on Jesus’s message of grace, love and forgiveness, and ignore most of the Old Testament. Even the parts of the New Testament that contradict this message are either ignored or interpreted liberally.
For example, banning divorce and gays is not just based on backwards crap from Deuteronomy. There are very specific mentions of it in the New Testament, and yet we choose to ignore that part. I’m fine with that, because it allows me to still believe in God, but not hate gay people, and to think that it is OK for an abused wife to divorce their husband. It does require a bit of mental gymnastics, though, to justify belief in a book that explicitly hates gays in multiple refrences.
That might be another reason many Americans are leaving the church.
“Can any of you people that hate God believers tell me of a nation or state that is successful that doesn’t have some sort of God centered belief? Just a question.”
After a simple Google search:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_irreligion
2017 percent of population that is athiest or “not religious”
90% China
73% Sweden
72% Czech Republic
69% UK
ect.
The USA is 30th on this list at 39% athiest/ not religious
most of the developed nations in the world are majority athiest/ not religious.
TAG, this is an unfortunate byproduct of faulty translations, copying errors and editorial assumptions/corrections throughout the centuries:
“book that explicitly hates gays in multiple refrences.”
It doesn’t. Paul does in a couple places. That’s it. But you’re absolutely right about the mental gymnastics.
TAG gets me thinking with that comment about assimilation, Europe, and ISIS. Assimilation isn’t about shouting at newcomers, “Act like us!” Assimilation is about making newcomers feel welcome, making them feel like they belong here as much as anyone who’s been here a while, and making them want to act pretty much the rest of us because living here is just so good. Exclusion, ridicule, bigotry—none of those selfish, insecure responses make newcomers want to assimilate. Instead, such Trumpist behvaior makes newcomers think, “Geez, if Americans feel that badly about themselves that they have to act like jerks, why would we want to be like them?”
Embrace difference, and you’re more likely to win common loyalty.
O makes a very good observation that the Republican anti-immigration stance is un-Christian, and that, as much as I may try to fight their economic fire with economic fire, Americans claiming to be part of a Christian nation would live up to their own rhetoric by welcoming all people in need.