Belonging and believing
Grace Davie, who coined the term “believing without belonging,” writes, “Europe believes, but it does not belong.” She is describing those who subscribe to some belief, however vague that belief may be—for example, “general statements of belief, the notion of a religious disposition, and denominational self-ascription” which “remain relatively high, whilst those that pertain to regular religious practice or to the creedal statements of Christian doctrine have dropped very markedly indeed.” Many Europeans believe, but their beliefs are vicariously experienced at a distance from mediating institutions like churches.”
The trend in Europe is not toward atheism. In fact only twelve percent of Europeans
“don’t believe in any kind of God, spirit or life force.” The number increases to 22
percent if you include those who “don’t know what to believe.”Europeans do
believe, even if most wouldn’t necessarily believe in a transcendent, personal God. Yet, many people are no longer looking to the Church as an institution for spiritual
nourishment or guidance. According to the European Values Atlas, a high percentage
(over 50% in most countries) of Europeans believe that they “can connect to the divine without churches or religious services.” I am sure that Australian anti-authoritarianism and anti-institutionalism would reflect a higher percentage.
Grace Davie has characterized this general European situation as “believing without belonging.” At the same time, however, large numbers of Europeans, even in the most secular countries, still identify themselves as 'Christian,’ pointing to an implicit, diffused, and submerged Christian cultural identity.
Danièle Hervieu-Léger has offered the reverse characterization of the European
situation as “belonging without believing.”
Although churches may be low in attendance and active membership, the general populous still know which team they are batting for, even if they are down at the pub at the time. They still have relatively conservative Christian beliefs, in spite of the more radical views often espoused from liberal pulpits. “Christian cultural identities are intertwined in complex and rarely verbalized modes.” What Thomas Luckmann called ‘invisible religion’ in the 1960s remains the dominant form of individual religion. The modern individual is condemned to pick and choose from a wide arrangement of meaning systems.
Perhaps both are correct. Perhaps there is a sense in which Australians believe but don’t belong: Between 2008 and 2010 I conducted more than 500 funerals in the Newcastle region of NSW. I conducted those funerals, not as a religious minister, but as a civil celebrant, conducting most funerals for ‘James Murray’s Funerals’ in Broadmeadow.
Of the 500 funerals I conducted, less than 1 % required atheistic funerals (with no
mention of God). 99% of these “no-religion” funerals involved the deliberate selection of Bible readings, hymns and prayers. Other non-religious materials were offered as an alternative selection. Over 90% of the time, both Psalm 23 and the Lord’s Prayer were requested, after considering and discussing the possibility of the non-religious option materials. I would often be requested by members of the family, or by the same funeral organisers, to conduct funerals for other members of their family, as these folk referred to me as their ‘padre,’ or chaplain. The effect of liberalism within the mainline churches with corresponding concerns that have developed into a Royal Commission, indicated that these people believed, but would not belong to the mainline churches. At the same time, they knew that they belonged to one religious denomination or another.
One family asked me “Who stole our church?” They were unaware that the Church of England had changed its name to the Anglican Church of Australia. However, they were more concerned that the Anglican Church of Australia no longer espoused the beliefs and values that they had grown up with in that denomination. They belonged, but no longer believed what the mainline liberal churches were espousing. Instead, they believed a somewhat more conservative version which was no longer tolerated in their religious denomination. They felt unwelcome by their former denomination. They believed, but did not belong. Often their children had been refused admission to their religious denomination through the refusal of the clergy to conduct infant baptisms for non-attenders.
The National Church Life Surveyfound that there was a pattern of decline in mainline
denominations.
Key findings of the changes between 1996 and 2001 include:
· Strong growth in Pentecostal and some Evangelical denominations (eg Baptist)
· Anglican and Protestant denominations grew by 1% as a sector
· Catholic mass attendance declined by an estimated 13%
· Overall, weekly church attendance in Australia declined by 7%.
There is a phenomenon in Europe and across many parts of the Western world that is sometimes underestimated — while religious structures and beliefs are struggling for survival, spiritual interest is alive and well. Secularism in Europe has not stamped out spirituality. Europe is not a continent that is full of secular atheists, nor secular rationalists. Of course they are there. But the spectrum of belief is not simply between those believers who hold to a traditional view of God and those secularists who deny God’s existence and have subscribed to a philosophy of scientific naturalism. To the contrary, we find in between these two poles a rich, complex population with a vast array of spiritual beliefs, fascinations, and interests.
There is a phenomenon in Europe and across many parts of the Western world that is sometimes underestimated — while religious structures and beliefs are struggling for survival, spiritual interest is alive and well. Secularism in Europe has not stamped out spirituality. Europe is not a continent that is full of secular atheists, nor secular rationalists. Of course they are there. But the spectrum of belief is not simply between those believers who hold to a traditional view of God and those secularists who deny God’s existence and have subscribed to a philosophy of scientific naturalism. To the contrary, we find in between these two poles a rich, complex population with a vast array of spiritual beliefs, fascinations, and interests.
Stefan Paas comments: “By far the largest part of our populations may be called pagans...I do not use this term in a moral or derogatory sense, but simply to describe people who believe in a (usually vague and distant) higher power, who cherish rituals in the most important moments of their lives, and for the rest simply accept what works for them.”
Grace Davie (2012) has appropriately recognised that perhaps the word “post-secular” may be inaccurate as; “the world is deemed post-secular because we have chosen to take notice of religion rather than to ignore it. The religious situation itself has not changed that much. 'Post-secular,' secondly, is rarely a neutral term. The increasing visibility of religion is welcome or less welcome depending on who you are, what you do, and where you are situated in society. Religion, thirdly, “returns” in many different ways, but its return to the public sphere has been vigorously opposed by the New Atheists, whose opposition brings a more drastic recognition of the religious beliefs of a vast section of the society, particularly among academics.”
While Christianity may not have the influence it once had, in terms of outward practice, there is still a strong “collective memory” (a concept employed by Danièle Hervieu-Léger) of religion in Modern Europe.
Religion is literally in the landscape, popping up in church steeples and seen in monasteries throughout the European countryside. The Christian tradition can be envisaged as a cord — however frayed—that connects people to the past, present, and future, and which still provides a sense of cultural and national, if not personal identity. It seems that people are “ceasing to be ‘actively religious’ much more quickly than they are becoming wholly secular.”
Voas calls this ‘fuzzy fidelity.’ “Despite dramatic shifts in the prevalence of conventional Christian belief, practice, and self-identification, residual involvement is
considerable. Many people remain interested in church weddings and funerals, Christmas services, and local festivals. They believe in ‘something out there’, pay at least lip service to Christian values, and may be willing to identify with a denomination.
They are neither regular churchgoers (now only a small minority of the population in
most European countries) nor self-consciously non-religious. Because they retain some loyalty to tradition, though in a rather uncommitted way, we can call the phenomenon ‘fuzzy fidelity.’”
Goldsworthy comments that “spirituality is some vague religious or mystical feeling. Often it seems to mean nothing more than a sense of the aesthetic, a feeling of belonging within nature, or an intensified feeling of self-worth. It is a rejection of the hard-nosed scientism of the twentieth century that cannot admit to the inexplicable.”
Australia has most certainly developed a taste for spirituality, whether it is clothed in the newer garments of the old Christendom, or in the different garments of New Age religious spirituality.
“Spirituality is now well and truly part of the Australian landscape, as well.
When Sydney celebrated the new millennium with the most spectacular
fireworks display in the city’s history, it selected as its motto for the millennium
the word ‘Eternity’, which was spectacularly lit up across the city’s most famous structure, the Harbour Bridge. This word, in its readily identifiable cursive
writing style, was made famous by the enigmatic reformed drunk, Arthur Stace.
While the word carried undeniable Christian resonances, for most people its
appeal lay in the fact that it symbolized their awareness that there was something
transcendent about the changing of the millennium.”
Believing and belonging in the church community are a function of a sect-type
Believing and belonging in the church community are a function of a sect-type
volunteerist epistemology. It can stand in contrast to a generally accepted epistemology, as a counter- epistemology contrasting that of the general community, and finding its support from the sect-community. The sect-community would view themselves as counter-cultural.
“Not believing” and “belonging” may represent an adherence to an institutional church, without necessarily holding to the beliefs of that church.It is possible to “believe” and “not belong”. A person may believe Christian beliefs, but choose not to belong to any particular local religious institution. Perhaps the institutional church is believed to be the only church alternative, perhaps it is a product of strong denominationalism, ignorance of sect-type churches that demand individual commitment and public commitment, and the anti-institutional Australian attitude that may dominate the individual’s perspective. Perhaps the individual who “believes” but does not belong has reacted to subjugative attitudes within the church-type, or sect-type,and loss of confidence in the leadership of the institutional or sect-type church.
Subjugative relationships can be willingly or unwillingly entered into. Primarily there is a demand to subjugate the individual’s values and epistemology to the dominating epistemology. If the relational or promised rewards are motivating enough, the individual may consent to the subjugative epistemology. If the rewards either do not exist or fail, then a reactive situation may occur; the individual reacting strongly against the subjugative epistemology.
It is possible to “belong” and “not believe”, where perhaps the generalised epistemology developed from the positivist philosophical position has dominated the individual’s epistemology, and yet the social and relational benefits of belonging to a church or sect type organisation contribute to the individuals’ self-identity and sense of personhood.
It might be concluded by some that a diversity of religious belief may be appropriate or even desirable, so long as there is a high wall; a way of separating religious or spiritual belief from the public square, and most notably, from education. For some, this viewpoint would substantiate a notion of hard secularism in the public square; one that drives out all religious opinion as divisive and unhelpful. However, spirituality is such a deeply embedded, culturally necessary thing that to make such a strong separation in the educational realm dehumanizes the child or adult.
Cassanova, J.(2006). Rethinking secularization: A global comparative perspective. Hedgehog Review Spring/Summer 2006 vol. 8. p.14.
Davie, G. (1994). Religion in Britain since 1945: Believing without belonging. Oxford: Blackwell.
Davie, G. (2000). Religion in modern Europe: A memory mutates. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hervieu-Léger, D. (2004). Religion und sozialer Zusammenhalt in uropa. Transit: Europäische Revue 26 (Summer 2004). pp. 101–119.
Davie, G. (2001). The persistence of institutional religion in modern Europe. in Woodhead, L. Heelas, P. and Martin, D. (eds.) in Peter Berger and the study of religion. London and New York: Routledge. pp. 101-11. Martin, D. (2011). The future of Christianity: Violence and democracy, secularization, and religion. Farnham: Ashgate.
Pass, S. (2012) The crisis of mission in Europe –Is there a way out? Scandinavian Evangelical e- Journal 3 (2012). pp.16-51 retrieved from:
On the ‘spiritual but not religious’ phenomenon, see Zinnbauer, B. and Pargament, K.(1994). Religion and spirituality: Unfuzzying the fuzzy. in Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36:4(1997). pp.549‐564.
On the concept of ‘believing without belonging’ see Davie, G. (1994). Religion in Britain since 1945: Believing without belonging. Making Contemporary Britain. Cambridge, MA: Ashgate.
Paas, S. (2012). The crisis of mission in Europe: Is there a way out? Scandinavian Evangelical e-Journal 3. p.19. Williams, R. (2012) Faith in the public square. London: Bloomsbury, A & C Black.Williams makes a distinction between programmatic secularism and procedural secularism in order to find a place for religion in a crowded and argumentative public square managed by respect for law.
The New Atheists is a term coined by journalists for Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and Daniel Dennett, in their vigorous literary attacks against Christianity.
Dawkins, R. (2006). The God delusion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Harris. S. (2004). The end of faith: Religion, terror and the future of reason. New York: W.W. Norton and Co.
Hitchens, C. (2007). God is not great: How religion poisons everything. New York: Twelve Hachette
Book Group.
Dennett, D. (1996). Darwin’s dangerous idea: Evolution and the meanings of life. London: Penguin Science.
Davie, G. (2012). Thinking sociologically about religion: A step change in the debate? ARDA Guiding Paper The Association of Religion Data Archives Retrieved from:
Tacey, D. (2000). Re-enchantment: The new Australian spirituality. Sydney, Australia: HarperCollins Publishers. p. 17.
Goldsworthy, G. (2006). A biblical theological perspective on prayer. In the Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 10:4. p.14. Retrieved from:
Raiter, M. (2003). Stirrings of the soul: Evangelicals and the new spirituality. Kingsford, Australia: Matthias Media. p.74.
Comments
Post a Comment