One of the benefits of studying the history of secularization—particularly as it manifests in the West—is that we are less prone to the assumption that we’re on a particularly perniciously anti-God trajectory. I mean, to be sure, secularization entails a de-churching of society. But locating ourselves in the larger history of modernity permits us a slightly more level-headed approach.
There are plenty of folks out there who want you to believe otherwise, of course. For example, there’s a whole ream of discourse out there that posits we are now living in a “negative world” in which Christianity is fundamentally opposed. And look, there is some truth to that. But the contrast seems to be most potent when we narrow the historical scope to the past 70 years or so. A more sober read is that secularization is this glacial reality, and has been slowly rolling down the valley for centuries now. As we review history, there are decades its progress seems to slow; in other decades it seems even to recede slightly. Still others feel like the ice age all over again as it expands rapidly. At scale, however, it’s still a glacier, and it’s there regardless of the slowing, receding, or even speeding up.
This is why I find arguments about whether the United States was founded as, or ought to be a Christian nation a bit misguided. It’s an interesting historical question, but it’s not really something we can attain in our present context (if it ever actually was possible). And yet, according to a 2022 Pew Research study, 60% of respondents believe that the founders intended for the United States to be a Christian nation, while 33% believe that it is a Christian nation. And then importantly, 45% believe it should be a Christian nation.
That’s all fine and good, but here’s my argument: secularization is, for all intents and purposes, an irreversible reality. At least in any single lifetime. Peter Berger argues that secularization is intimately bound up with the core features of modernity. I think he’s probably correct here. But that means that you really can’t reverse the one without the other. In other words, the possibility of reversing the trend in the modern West toward secularization is null unless modernity itself was reversed. This would be a cataclysmic transformation of society as we know it.
Well, that’s discouraging.
So let me clarify. Even though I believe secularization is here to stay, I don’t think that it will triumph. That is, I do not believe that it will—or can—create a religionless society such as the one in Asimov’s Foundation world. Modern secularity may be here to stay, but so is religion. Despite his formulation of the so-called secularization thesis, Peter Berger later retracted his position, and other scholars have done a great deal of work to show that religion is, and apparently will continue sticking around.
What this means is that religion and secularization exist in tension. There is a dynamic tug of war, as religion goes on stubbornly existing, yet is essentially relegated to its own sphere.
Excuse a quick sidebar. We should note here a difference between secularization, and secularism. The former is the process I have described in the previous post, and above. The latter is a normative set of beliefs about what ought to be; namely that society should be bound and governed by non-religious commitments, beliefs, and structures. Think of your friendly neighborhood atheist meetup group, or folks who advocate ferociously against any religious representation in government or public spaces.
I would argue that secularism has tried at various times, and failed, to become a unifying ideology, seeking to re-integrate society under a common set of beliefs (i.e., a philosophical materialism). The continuing existence and influence of religious systems, beliefs, and communities demonstrates that it failed in that task. Ironically, I would now locate secularism in the sphere of the religious as a competitor in the marketplace of cosmic-level meaning-making, along with other religious systems. If I am right in this assessment, it means that secularism is really just one idea in the religious marketplace of ideas.
Back to the larger argument. The processes which differentiated the spheres has left an indelible mark on society. The fact that we can even talk about the religious as opposed to the economic, political, etc., is evidence of this epochal shift.
So what do we, as Christians, do with this secular age? How do we integrate our faith with our lives in this secular world? We first recognize that this is simply the world we inhabit. And it’s most likely the world our children, and probably grandchildren, will inherit. It’s important to understand that it’s not a recent development. Despite what the neo-fundamentalists would like you to believe, it is not the creation of liberal politics, “wokeness,” consumerism, the sexual revolution, or any other cultural war talking point. The groundwork was laid centuries before our own time. In fact, we could argue that these culture war agenda items could not have occurred without modernity and the secularizing process, and so they are merely its fruit.
But that doesn’t mean that we are passive. This is still God’s world. And he made it good. The solution, however, is to keep doing what Christians have done for ages. To recognize our relative powerlessness and so live as faithful exiles in a world that awaits its redemption through Jesus Christ. Our own particular generational challenges may feel (and may be) novel, and we need to approach them with clear-eyes and humble hearts. But the underlying experience of being in the world, yet not of it, is an ancient one. Secularization simply reminds us that this fact hasn’t changed one bit.
—Till tomorrow.
This was helpful in terms of the reminder that we don’t need to panic or scramble. Zooming out in the historical gives better perspective in the here and now. Thanks, babe!
For school, I had to read Andy Crouch's book, "Culture Making". I have my own criticisms of the book, but his main thesis is on point, which is that you can't change culture... you can only create more of it.
I think the problem with Christianity's approach to the Culture War is that we approach it like a war. Now, I do believe that there is a spiritual battle and it is a warfare for souls, however to the world it only feeds into the belief that Christians want to force others who don't agree with us to conform to Christianity. But Crouch's point could be a valid pathway. Instead of focusing on changing culture, we should simply create more of it. Instead of forcing Christian principles (some of which I agree with) to oppose society, we should create an alternative and invite others to choose that path.
I mentioned in a previous response about framing and I think that can be done here too. Imagine if a missionary in a foreign, unreached country went overseas and stayed in their own corner of their Christian world and not engage with their secular society. Of course, they shouldn't conform to secularism, but they should engage in it missionally to win people towards Christ. I think that approach should be taken here in the US too.
A year or so ago, the youth pastor at our church was ordained and I went to his ordination service. They had a speaker (who I didn't know) who gave the message during the service. In that message he went on about technology ruining relationships and how the world has become more secular, etc... All of which isn't untrue. And he encouraged the newly ordained youth pastor to reject those things and only focus on Christ.
On one hand, I agree with him that Christ should be the main focus for Christians, pastors or not. However, I didn't agree with his exultation for a youth pastor. If I were to say something, I would have encouraged him to lean into what the youth are exposed to today, not to endorse it, but to understand it so that he could reach them. Know the songs they are listening to, the movies, what in culture they are exposed to. As a mature Christian, he can discern what is healthy or not and speak into it, but he won't know that if he were to just sit in the corner of the room where Christianity resides. Maybe I'm being a little nitpicky, but I was a little disappointed in that message, especially since both of my kids are now in youth group. Thankfully, I know the youth pastor well and he doesn't shy away with meeting the kids where they are to reach them. But I share this story to illustrate my point that instead of simply rejecting everything that is not Christian. Why not understand it to reach people and then create an alternative (culture making) for them to choose. Just my $0.02.