When I was at school in the 1980s there was an accepted Christian framework, insofar as we participated in communal worship, sang hymns in assembly and so on, and the non-Christian pupils happily did so as well. But I don’t think more than a handful of fellow pupils actually believed in anything. It’s quite extraordinary to think that in my lifetime I may well see the virtual disappearance of active Christianity in many western countries.
Right. I think Christianity was just part of the furniture. Believing in Christianity was like believing in the curtains or in Sunday Roast. They were still nice and they still made me happy. I’m sad to see it disappearing and I am sad that my children won’t come to church with me. To them, it’s just a thing to ignore or oppose.
Nice article! I was running the atheist club at my university in the mid-late 2000s when New Atheism was culturally relevant. Anecdotally, quite a few members mentioned The God Delusion specifically as having "opened their eyes" and convinced them. Maybe they would have become atheists regardless, but seemed like they were at least influenced by the New Atheist books.
I got married here in Mexico without any whiff of religion in the ceremony. I'm happy my Christian parents came and supported me. Same with my brother and sister. Honestly, my parents were probably a bit disappointed but to their credit they never showed it. I'm happy that someone like me who really isn't convinced there's a god out there can live their life with a bit more acceptance. I'm happy people are questioning religion out in the open a bit more.
Religion is still a huge factor in the US. In many places, you have to show your faith to be elected to anything. With the left right schism, this has been an important issue in school boards.
Years ago, people in England would routinely put 'C of E' when filling in forms and asked their religion. I think for a long time this was more a vague cultural affiliation, and considered a socially acceptable answer, rather than a statement of actual belief. As you say, the need to even pretend, has fallen away in recent decades. Similarly, I suspect people who ostensibly belong to other religions - including Islam - have more of a cultural affiliation than a real belief in the tenets or any faith. I was shocked some years ago when I asked at a very large family gathering of my ex-husband's Jewish family at a Passover dinner - where the whole dinner is essentially a religious ritual - who, here, believes in God? Not one of them did. Not one! I was flabbergasted. I had assumed that because they bothered with the whole rigmarole of celebrating Passover and solemnly reading the Haggadah (the story from the Book of Exodus in the Bible) and all belonged to various synagogues (for which you pay a serious annual membership) that they must be true believers. Nope - they were all atheists! Go figure, as the Americans say....
This is a culture fact that Americans don't always grok. Back in the day, in England, you had to write your religion on every form you filled in — the way you have to say whether you are gay or straight or 'White British' on forms now. Even 7-year-old kids would be asked their religion and they would be taught to answer 'C of E' without even understanding what it meant.
When I joined the Navy, I had 'C of E' on my dog tags. Later, when I got promoted to officer, I got to start over and asked to have that changed to 'atheist'. Everyone told me not to do that as it would go badly for me. Did I listen? Reader, I did not.
Yes, 'C of E' was shorthand for: signed up to the same values. For the same reason, I've just advised my son - who is of course half-Jewish, not to join the Jewish 'club' at the large firm where he works, to avoid being labelled or stereotyped. No point pinning your colours to a mast when all you're doing is giving others a target to shoot at. Of course, naive boy that he is, assuming that because the current head of the firm is Jewish he will be 'safe', he ignored me. Needless to say, he is an atheist 😂
Hey Ragged. The elephant in the room is surely Islam. As Christianity has declined so Islam has become an increasingly significant cultural and political force in the UK. Sensitivities to Islam are de facto shaping public policy, and policing. And this will only increase over time. Our distaste at our own Christian heritage has created a vacuum, and Islam is not shy about wanting to fill it. As an illustration of this change is how I feel compelled to point out that these are observations, and in no way make me ‘Islamaphobic.’
There was a Supreme Court case in the USA in the 70s that challenged whether putting 'In God We Trust' on the currency was a violation on the First Amendment ban on the establishment of religion. The court ruled that 'Its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character' and actually has nothing to do with religion at all. They later used the phrase 'ceremonial deism' to characterise this kind of country-loving practice.
I started a website — CeremonialDeists.org — with a friend to support the idea that mentions of God in public use are patriotic rather religious. We did it as a joke (we were New Atheists!) but I sincerely believe that having a country adopt an official religion is a good idea, as long as no one is forced to actually believe it. C of E works great as a mild version of Christianity that serves to inoculate people against the more virulent forms of religion. But I think Druidism could work for England too as a form that is very English and very patriotic. Could be fun!
I have a post in the works about Why I Am a Ceremonial Deist. Coming soon!
Yes! I was just thinking that....maybe we, as a country, could once again decide we are collectively C of E because paradoxically it means something other than believing in God....
I think we, as a country, are being pushed in a different direction Bettina. There already is a religion we’re all meant to follow. It’s just we are non believers!
Why would adopting 'an official religion ... as long as no one is forced to actually believe it' be a good idea? What is the point of a religion if nobody believes it?
Having a shared set of cultural traditions helps to bring us together whether or not we believe in the literal claims of the traditions - myths can work for this purpose too. For most of the last 1500 years, Christianity has been the only game in town. Keeping Christianity would be a good choice even if we don't believe every claim that it makes.
Ok, I get you. I think the collapse of having shared traditions in Britain e.g. through Christianity is more to do with an awakening of what 'Britain' is (or more accurately isn't and hasn't been) than a belief or otherwise in Christianity.
Perhaps, had British leaders been upholders of Christian values (do unto others ...) even without buying into 'God' as such, citizens would also have retained those beliefs as 'British values'.
As it is I'd argue that an awareness of the hypocrisy of leaders has more to do with the demise, and watering down of belief, than politicians legislating for upholding the rights of others beliefs.
I agree that it is an issue to worry about, aside from any negative feelings that people might have about Islam.
Back in the day, there was an expectation that everyone — Christian or not — would go to daily assembly at school and join in the hymns (except for the three Catholics and the one Church of Scotland kid whose parents had asked for them to be excused). I think religious belief started dying out in England after the First World War but cultural religious practice continued for decades after this. As it dies out and is replaced by other practices, we lose another little marker of being all in this together.
Making exceptions and carve outs for different groups and religions was a mistake I think. Not just in schools, but right across society. It sets people in opposition to one another and opens the door to bad faith actors. Look what’s happening in the Michaela School. It’s too late to go back now. There might have been a space for a soft sort of ‘stand for the flag’ patriotism, at one point, but obviously this sort of thing is sneered at by the bosses, so it is a total non starter.
Replying to both LSO & Bettina here… I can't quite click 'like' on either of these replies (LSO's & Bettina's) though I partly agree with the sentiment behind them.
I am neither a socialist nor woke and I think it's a mistake to assume that (e.g.) folks in the Labour party or the Democrats or the Church of England or even universities are trending woke or socialist. There is a vocal minority that is woke but they are far from the mainstream still and the best way to oppose them is to appeal to the lefties who are not woke.
I think the Labour Party has passed Peak Woke already (Starmer has remembered that a Woman is an Adult Female Human, for example). We should encourage that rather than look for other woke beliefs to demonise and score more points in the culture wars.
As another example, the Open University just ended up in court over a trans versus GC dispute and the GC side was argued by academics at the OU (including one of my tutors — I am a student at the OU). We have passed Peak Woke.
I think there is a sensible compromise in sight where trans folk get the respect and accommodation they deserve and we can all let the culture wars die down a little as we did with same-sex marriage and even the atheism from my original post.
I do agree that what happened at the Michaela School was troubling.
I’m not attempting on any level to ‘demonise’ anyone. I do however feel demonised. Every time I open a ‘newspaper’, turn on the TV, watch the BBC, see an advert, or watch a movie. It’s blatant and systematic. People who look like me and are my age, are broadly conservative, but have also maybe voted Labour in the last thirty years, are dismissed as irrelevant, old, out of touch,-and if we complain about any of it,-racist.
I don’t believe Labour has reached peak woke at all. I think it has simply calculated that there is an election coming and it needs to rein it in a bit if it is to win over those broadly left wing, traditional voters you mention. Once in power expect it to continue full speed ahead. Woke is a vocal minority, but it is a very powerful one.
And if there is anything which I do wholeheartedly believe about this movement it is that it does not believe in ‘compromise’ on any level. It wants what it wants and will not stop until it gets it. The literature it puts out, and the academics who have championed its cause are very explicit about that.
Everyone I know, and me, was more than happy to accommodate trans adults, ‘none of my business pal, you do you’, but we weren’t allowed to do that. We are told that anything but wholehearted acceptance of ‘transkids’, drag queen story hour, stupid annoying ‘pronouns’ , a ban on ‘conversion therapy’ (concerned adults having a quiet word or simple talking therapy for confused kids) is not only wrong, but potentially a crime. A hateful evil crime. I can accept it all, or I can expect get a visit from the police to ‘correct my thinking’. I see no compromise here.
The same for a whole range of issues. I don’t see a ‘culture war’ at all. The war has been won. Now they seem to be intent on criminalising dissent.
I agree 100% that we need to appeal to the left. The right is falling down badly on that. And in my opinion, even more importantly we need to appeal to the young. The idea that Reform is the solution (I know they are not for you, I’m talking about the Right’s attitude) is plain daft.
We need something that brings us together, accepts a range of views, and looks for a positive future, for everyone. Just as I think Reform offers no long term hope from the right, this Labour Party, which to my eyes is little more than the (to use a shorthand) stereotypical ‘HR department’ in the form of a political party, offers no hope from the left. We need something new.
Sorry if that seems like an angry rant Ragged. I’m just a little bored of being told I need to ‘compromise’ when what the progressives really want me to do, is surrender my values, morals and culture.
I liked this one, LSO! I think we'll need to agree to disagree though.
I think where we are on trans issues is about where we were on same-sex marriage 20 years ago. There's a compromise in sight but the advocates (for and against) need to battle all the way while most people don't really care very much either way.
I think the leadership of the Labour Party doesn't care very much either except where it thinks it will win votes but I think that's something to celebrate. As the public forms more of an opinion about trans issues, Labour will bend with the public winds.
I'm as annoyed as you are with declaring my pronouns and with being talked down to but I think we are past the worst of it. Two years ago, for example, The Guardian purged all their GC advocates but just yesterday, they had an article that was pro-GC. Opinions are changing.
I think the public does have a view on trans. It’s pretty much the live and let live attitude I suggested above. But as I said, we’re constantly told that not good enough- bigots.
I certainly don’t see trans as analogous to the gay rights at all. On any level. Thats one of the huge missteps and problems with this issue imho, the way these two completely separate things have been conflated.
I’m glad to see you are keeping the faith. But I don’t see the Guardian as a weather vane for anything but sanctimony, misanthropy and narcissism. It’s like a smug teacher, looking down its nose at her pupils. Yuk!
What does this actually mean 'Sensitivities to Islam are de facto shaping public policy, and policing' in real terms? Can you give examples? The only thing that springs to mind is when a local authority decided to try and ban Christmas decorations in the office due to 'sensitivities to Islam'. Of course they hadn't asked their Muslim colleagues beforehand; and when there was an outcry about the ban it was Muslims, for the most part, leading the charge. As they pointed out - they in no way found the decorations insensitive, had no issue with them whatsoever, and couldn't understand why whoever came up with the ban might think they would!
I am not Christian, but don't you think this has contributed to the significant fall in birthrates?
I think it probably has… but birthrates are declining all over the world, including Iran.
When I was at school in the 1980s there was an accepted Christian framework, insofar as we participated in communal worship, sang hymns in assembly and so on, and the non-Christian pupils happily did so as well. But I don’t think more than a handful of fellow pupils actually believed in anything. It’s quite extraordinary to think that in my lifetime I may well see the virtual disappearance of active Christianity in many western countries.
Right. I think Christianity was just part of the furniture. Believing in Christianity was like believing in the curtains or in Sunday Roast. They were still nice and they still made me happy. I’m sad to see it disappearing and I am sad that my children won’t come to church with me. To them, it’s just a thing to ignore or oppose.
Nice article! I was running the atheist club at my university in the mid-late 2000s when New Atheism was culturally relevant. Anecdotally, quite a few members mentioned The God Delusion specifically as having "opened their eyes" and convinced them. Maybe they would have become atheists regardless, but seemed like they were at least influenced by the New Atheist books.
I got married here in Mexico without any whiff of religion in the ceremony. I'm happy my Christian parents came and supported me. Same with my brother and sister. Honestly, my parents were probably a bit disappointed but to their credit they never showed it. I'm happy that someone like me who really isn't convinced there's a god out there can live their life with a bit more acceptance. I'm happy people are questioning religion out in the open a bit more.
Anyway, great Substack! I've subscribed.
Excellent, thank you! I hope to post a bit more in the near future.
Religion is still a huge factor in the US. In many places, you have to show your faith to be elected to anything. With the left right schism, this has been an important issue in school boards.
I like that you are writing so much, keep it up.
Thank you, Steve! I do enjoy writing.
Years ago, people in England would routinely put 'C of E' when filling in forms and asked their religion. I think for a long time this was more a vague cultural affiliation, and considered a socially acceptable answer, rather than a statement of actual belief. As you say, the need to even pretend, has fallen away in recent decades. Similarly, I suspect people who ostensibly belong to other religions - including Islam - have more of a cultural affiliation than a real belief in the tenets or any faith. I was shocked some years ago when I asked at a very large family gathering of my ex-husband's Jewish family at a Passover dinner - where the whole dinner is essentially a religious ritual - who, here, believes in God? Not one of them did. Not one! I was flabbergasted. I had assumed that because they bothered with the whole rigmarole of celebrating Passover and solemnly reading the Haggadah (the story from the Book of Exodus in the Bible) and all belonged to various synagogues (for which you pay a serious annual membership) that they must be true believers. Nope - they were all atheists! Go figure, as the Americans say....
This is a culture fact that Americans don't always grok. Back in the day, in England, you had to write your religion on every form you filled in — the way you have to say whether you are gay or straight or 'White British' on forms now. Even 7-year-old kids would be asked their religion and they would be taught to answer 'C of E' without even understanding what it meant.
When I joined the Navy, I had 'C of E' on my dog tags. Later, when I got promoted to officer, I got to start over and asked to have that changed to 'atheist'. Everyone told me not to do that as it would go badly for me. Did I listen? Reader, I did not.
Yes, 'C of E' was shorthand for: signed up to the same values. For the same reason, I've just advised my son - who is of course half-Jewish, not to join the Jewish 'club' at the large firm where he works, to avoid being labelled or stereotyped. No point pinning your colours to a mast when all you're doing is giving others a target to shoot at. Of course, naive boy that he is, assuming that because the current head of the firm is Jewish he will be 'safe', he ignored me. Needless to say, he is an atheist 😂
Tell him well done! And check out my reply to Low Status Opinions below about Ceremonial Deism below. Similar kind of deal.
Hey Ragged. The elephant in the room is surely Islam. As Christianity has declined so Islam has become an increasingly significant cultural and political force in the UK. Sensitivities to Islam are de facto shaping public policy, and policing. And this will only increase over time. Our distaste at our own Christian heritage has created a vacuum, and Islam is not shy about wanting to fill it. As an illustration of this change is how I feel compelled to point out that these are observations, and in no way make me ‘Islamaphobic.’
There was a Supreme Court case in the USA in the 70s that challenged whether putting 'In God We Trust' on the currency was a violation on the First Amendment ban on the establishment of religion. The court ruled that 'Its use is of patriotic or ceremonial character' and actually has nothing to do with religion at all. They later used the phrase 'ceremonial deism' to characterise this kind of country-loving practice.
I started a website — CeremonialDeists.org — with a friend to support the idea that mentions of God in public use are patriotic rather religious. We did it as a joke (we were New Atheists!) but I sincerely believe that having a country adopt an official religion is a good idea, as long as no one is forced to actually believe it. C of E works great as a mild version of Christianity that serves to inoculate people against the more virulent forms of religion. But I think Druidism could work for England too as a form that is very English and very patriotic. Could be fun!
I have a post in the works about Why I Am a Ceremonial Deist. Coming soon!
There is a conspiracy theory that the late Queen was a druid, so maybe it's already 'establishment' !
Something to promote social cohesion would make a nice change. Our current creed seems to involve little more than spreading distrust and division.
This is a good way of framing it. I'm certainly pro-social cohesion. Could be onto something here, LSO!
Yes! I was just thinking that....maybe we, as a country, could once again decide we are collectively C of E because paradoxically it means something other than believing in God....
I think we, as a country, are being pushed in a different direction Bettina. There already is a religion we’re all meant to follow. It’s just we are non believers!
Why would adopting 'an official religion ... as long as no one is forced to actually believe it' be a good idea? What is the point of a religion if nobody believes it?
Having a shared set of cultural traditions helps to bring us together whether or not we believe in the literal claims of the traditions - myths can work for this purpose too. For most of the last 1500 years, Christianity has been the only game in town. Keeping Christianity would be a good choice even if we don't believe every claim that it makes.
Ok, I get you. I think the collapse of having shared traditions in Britain e.g. through Christianity is more to do with an awakening of what 'Britain' is (or more accurately isn't and hasn't been) than a belief or otherwise in Christianity.
Perhaps, had British leaders been upholders of Christian values (do unto others ...) even without buying into 'God' as such, citizens would also have retained those beliefs as 'British values'.
As it is I'd argue that an awareness of the hypocrisy of leaders has more to do with the demise, and watering down of belief, than politicians legislating for upholding the rights of others beliefs.
I agree that it is an issue to worry about, aside from any negative feelings that people might have about Islam.
Back in the day, there was an expectation that everyone — Christian or not — would go to daily assembly at school and join in the hymns (except for the three Catholics and the one Church of Scotland kid whose parents had asked for them to be excused). I think religious belief started dying out in England after the First World War but cultural religious practice continued for decades after this. As it dies out and is replaced by other practices, we lose another little marker of being all in this together.
Making exceptions and carve outs for different groups and religions was a mistake I think. Not just in schools, but right across society. It sets people in opposition to one another and opens the door to bad faith actors. Look what’s happening in the Michaela School. It’s too late to go back now. There might have been a space for a soft sort of ‘stand for the flag’ patriotism, at one point, but obviously this sort of thing is sneered at by the bosses, so it is a total non starter.
Replying to both LSO & Bettina here… I can't quite click 'like' on either of these replies (LSO's & Bettina's) though I partly agree with the sentiment behind them.
I am neither a socialist nor woke and I think it's a mistake to assume that (e.g.) folks in the Labour party or the Democrats or the Church of England or even universities are trending woke or socialist. There is a vocal minority that is woke but they are far from the mainstream still and the best way to oppose them is to appeal to the lefties who are not woke.
I think the Labour Party has passed Peak Woke already (Starmer has remembered that a Woman is an Adult Female Human, for example). We should encourage that rather than look for other woke beliefs to demonise and score more points in the culture wars.
As another example, the Open University just ended up in court over a trans versus GC dispute and the GC side was argued by academics at the OU (including one of my tutors — I am a student at the OU). We have passed Peak Woke.
I think there is a sensible compromise in sight where trans folk get the respect and accommodation they deserve and we can all let the culture wars die down a little as we did with same-sex marriage and even the atheism from my original post.
I do agree that what happened at the Michaela School was troubling.
I’m happy to like your comment Ragged.
I’m not attempting on any level to ‘demonise’ anyone. I do however feel demonised. Every time I open a ‘newspaper’, turn on the TV, watch the BBC, see an advert, or watch a movie. It’s blatant and systematic. People who look like me and are my age, are broadly conservative, but have also maybe voted Labour in the last thirty years, are dismissed as irrelevant, old, out of touch,-and if we complain about any of it,-racist.
I don’t believe Labour has reached peak woke at all. I think it has simply calculated that there is an election coming and it needs to rein it in a bit if it is to win over those broadly left wing, traditional voters you mention. Once in power expect it to continue full speed ahead. Woke is a vocal minority, but it is a very powerful one.
And if there is anything which I do wholeheartedly believe about this movement it is that it does not believe in ‘compromise’ on any level. It wants what it wants and will not stop until it gets it. The literature it puts out, and the academics who have championed its cause are very explicit about that.
Everyone I know, and me, was more than happy to accommodate trans adults, ‘none of my business pal, you do you’, but we weren’t allowed to do that. We are told that anything but wholehearted acceptance of ‘transkids’, drag queen story hour, stupid annoying ‘pronouns’ , a ban on ‘conversion therapy’ (concerned adults having a quiet word or simple talking therapy for confused kids) is not only wrong, but potentially a crime. A hateful evil crime. I can accept it all, or I can expect get a visit from the police to ‘correct my thinking’. I see no compromise here.
The same for a whole range of issues. I don’t see a ‘culture war’ at all. The war has been won. Now they seem to be intent on criminalising dissent.
I agree 100% that we need to appeal to the left. The right is falling down badly on that. And in my opinion, even more importantly we need to appeal to the young. The idea that Reform is the solution (I know they are not for you, I’m talking about the Right’s attitude) is plain daft.
We need something that brings us together, accepts a range of views, and looks for a positive future, for everyone. Just as I think Reform offers no long term hope from the right, this Labour Party, which to my eyes is little more than the (to use a shorthand) stereotypical ‘HR department’ in the form of a political party, offers no hope from the left. We need something new.
Sorry if that seems like an angry rant Ragged. I’m just a little bored of being told I need to ‘compromise’ when what the progressives really want me to do, is surrender my values, morals and culture.
I liked this one, LSO! I think we'll need to agree to disagree though.
I think where we are on trans issues is about where we were on same-sex marriage 20 years ago. There's a compromise in sight but the advocates (for and against) need to battle all the way while most people don't really care very much either way.
I think the leadership of the Labour Party doesn't care very much either except where it thinks it will win votes but I think that's something to celebrate. As the public forms more of an opinion about trans issues, Labour will bend with the public winds.
I'm as annoyed as you are with declaring my pronouns and with being talked down to but I think we are past the worst of it. Two years ago, for example, The Guardian purged all their GC advocates but just yesterday, they had an article that was pro-GC. Opinions are changing.
Yes Ragged. Let’s agree to disagree!
I think the public does have a view on trans. It’s pretty much the live and let live attitude I suggested above. But as I said, we’re constantly told that not good enough- bigots.
I certainly don’t see trans as analogous to the gay rights at all. On any level. Thats one of the huge missteps and problems with this issue imho, the way these two completely separate things have been conflated.
I’m glad to see you are keeping the faith. But I don’t see the Guardian as a weather vane for anything but sanctimony, misanthropy and narcissism. It’s like a smug teacher, looking down its nose at her pupils. Yuk!
Enjoy!
Yes, it's also a shame that religion is dying out WITHIN the C of E - woke socialism being the current liturgy.
What does this actually mean 'Sensitivities to Islam are de facto shaping public policy, and policing' in real terms? Can you give examples? The only thing that springs to mind is when a local authority decided to try and ban Christmas decorations in the office due to 'sensitivities to Islam'. Of course they hadn't asked their Muslim colleagues beforehand; and when there was an outcry about the ban it was Muslims, for the most part, leading the charge. As they pointed out - they in no way found the decorations insensitive, had no issue with them whatsoever, and couldn't understand why whoever came up with the ban might think they would!