• Home
  • About the Book
  • About the Authors
  • Blog
  • Religious Trends
A Church Beyond Belief

The Reshuffling of Religious Affiliation

10/30/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
One of the difficulties in building community is that people can be fickle in their commitment. They join a congregation and participate for a period of time; then they disappear. Some see this as exemplifying our growing individualistic attitudes. Claude Fischer, who analyzes social and cultural change, sees it differently. He says, “it is not that Americans are individualistic, they do believe in community, but it is a community that is voluntarily chosen and rechosen every day.”

People are certainly rechoosing churches. Studies show that nearly half of all Americans have changed their religious affiliation by changing churches, denominations, or faith traditions. Some change because they’re frustrated with church doctrine or dogma. Others change because they married someone from another tradition. Still others change because they wanted a different worship style. (Interestingly, of those who were raised with no religious affiliation, half will be belong to a community of faith as an adult.)

This phenomenon has been labeled as a consumer mentality that has spawned competition between providers of religious goods and services. However, what people overlook in this reshuffling of religious affiliation is that we are a highly mobile population. According to the U.S. Census, 35% of Americans have moved at least once in the last five years. Therefore necessity as well as choice is driving the redistribution of church members.

If there is good news in this, it is that people are still choosing and rechoosing community. As patterns of affiliation change, in the end, we still yearn to be connected and a part of something larger than ourselves.

Michael S. Bos


0 Comments

People Want More Religion in Politics?

10/15/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
There has been much discussion of a recent study by the Pew Research Forum’s Religion and Public Life Project. The study found that nearly three-fourths of all Americans believe religion’s influence is waning. Most Americans don’t like this (see our post “Changing Our Religion to Match Our Views”). The study concludes that most want religion to play a greater role through involvement in politics, of all things.

That conclusion has drawn attention to the study. But while the invocation of politics incites various sentiments, two questions must be asked soberly: what does it mean to say that religion’s influence is waning? And, what sort of influence is both possible and needed now?

Our work offers clear answers to these questions. First, the American legacy of a few, well-organized religious institutions is clearly in decline. The conflicts that embroil every historic religious body signal the end of historic assumptions. Specifically centralized organizations are shifting toward localized spiritual communities. The shift is both bemoaned and welcomed.

Second, the capacity of religious America to align with political life has become fluid and unpredictable. Irish Catholics, for example, may not be as solidly Democratic as they once were. The new pluralism derails older patterns of political and religious intersection. In that sense religious influence is waning.

In a different regard religion’s influence may be growing. The capacity of faith to promote local community is advancing. As various authors show, notably Robert Wuthnow, religion is a prolific source of community and gives rise to impressive forms of service. The jury remains out on how much civic good this new religious style can engender. But it clear that faith and community engagement are intertwining in new ways.

How far “spirituality” and “community” may extend remains to be seen. But the Pew study suggests a deep longing many are trying to address.

William L. Sachs 



0 Comments

The Heart of Conflict

10/7/2014

1 Comment

 
Picture
It’s hard to believe that we didn't see it coming: the rise of religion and religious conflict in the world. Just decades ago scholars and diplomats were dismissive of religion and its global influence. Case in point: Henry Kissinger’s 900-page tome on diplomacy, published in 1994, does not address religion.

Today views have changed. The eminent scholar of religion, Philip Jenkins, has said that “the twenty-first century will almost certainly be regarded by future historians as a century in which religion replaced ideology as the prime animating and destructive force in human affairs, guiding attitudes to political liberty and obligation, concepts of nationhood and, of course, conflicts and wars.”

Must we accept this as inevitable? Are religious people prone to be embroiled in conflict? We are witnessing armed insurrection by religious extremists, denominations dividing and congregations splitting, while seminary faculties protest and strike. Religion seems defined by conflict.

The pattern is familiar. Lines are drawn, people cease speaking to one another, friendships end. Litmus tests intrude: are you with me or against me? Zero-sum thinking triumphs: there must be winners and losers. So things go downhill.

Conflict in religious life is often traced to theological differences: liberal versus conservative, progressive versus orthodox. There is obvious truth in the distinctions, if only because many people cite them. But the source of religious conflict lies deeper.

What is really at stake is who we are called to be as religious people, and how we are going to get there. What is our relation to the world nearby and far away? What stance do we strike in regard to cultural and religious difference? How does our distinctive religious identity relate to the diverse identities around us?

This raises soul-searching questions about the malleability of religion. Some want religions to be set, static, fixed for all time, and they refuse to negotiate new ways of being. Others embrace change, but are unclear about its means and ends. Both draw lines in the sand and divide.

This is the heart of conflict: must we stay the same or should we change? If change, then how? There are no ready answers. But the way toward answers is to ask the questions together. This divide will not be bridged by supplying more information or data to one another. It is a relational gap. Coming together and daring to listen as well as speak, is the beginning of the answer. By God’s grace it will surface, if we seek it together. 


1 Comment

    William L. Sachs
    Michael S. Bos

    Following the trends that impact our lives.

    Archives

    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014

    Categories

    All
    Atheism
    Belonging
    Church Decline
    Conflict
    Friendship
    Generations
    Millennials
    Religion & Politics
    Religious Affiliation
    Selfishness
    Social Media
    Spirituality

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.