Religious decline among white working class.

[halconero]

On 4/14/2021 at 2:20 AM, Meadowchik said:

Your religious views moderate your political views, but others' religious views amplify their extreme views. 

What evidence do you have that secular beliefs don't moderate political views? There are lots of growing secular communities which are very morally and socially minded.

France, specifically its extreme application of laïcité.

Edited April 15, 2021 by halconero

[halconero]

On 4/13/2021 at 11:59 AM, Teancum said:

Well check out the trends in Europe and now the US.

I suppose I need to define functional religion for you, because you seem to be stuck using the substantive definition in pointing to trends in the United States.

Under the functional definition of religion, the supernatural, whether it be a belief in God, gods, angels, or whatever, is a medium rather than a fundamental base. The substantive definition, which appears to be the one you're using, places the divine at the center of its definition. This understanding of what religion *is* falls apart when moving east out of Europe or America where we encounter strains of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism that don't address the concept of deity or the divine, or even repudiate the notion and take an atheistic worldview, yet maintain all the ritual, codification of behaviour, reverenced scrit, and social activity that Western religions do. It is why the substantive definition of religion has fallen out of favour among any serious academic studying religion in society.

The functional definition of religion understands its practice as a method of understanding ourselves, others, and the world around us. It helps us govern our behaviours, social interactions, and to derive purpose from our activities. As mentioned previously, under this definition deity is medium for explaining the world. For the believing Latter-day Saint, a good way to explain this is what our relationship to Heavenly Father as His children teaches us how to behave, what our life purpose is, and how we are to treat others. It serves a social function, in other words. I would argue this even captures religion as understood by the culture that gave us the word - the Romans. For Romans, the specifics of deity did not matter so much as the state's behaviours in relation to them. Jupiter could be extrapolated to pertain to Zeus or Thor, despite very different origin stories and mythological doctrines underlying them. What mattered more was that religio helped the state explain its place in the world, and governed how the Romans ran their government. A more modern example, from a culture I am very familiar with and from which I originate, is Jewish practice of ritual. Most Jews in Israel are secular in their beliefs towards deity, many of whom are atheist, yet the practice of the Sabbath continues, as do the fasts on Yom Kippur. Why? Not because of belief in God, but because they create a common identity around which Jewish people can build social connections, find their place in the world, and govern themselves with purpose. To put it all together, how people view God is only one aspect of defining their religiosity.

My thesis here is that religion has not dissipated, only organized theism. The existence of civil religion, particularly as it pertains to partisan activity, has replaced it for many people. Civil religion is the idea that states (many, not all), create myths, narratives, saints, holy scrit, holy days, hymns, rituals, and other activities that teach citizens of their place in society, why their nation matters, and how people are to interact with each other and the outside world as it pertains to the states. Consider the United States, where the Founders have been elevated to a sort of political sainthood, ignoring many of their foibles, where people rise to place their hands on their hearts to say an oath, where hol(y)days take on a strong civic nature, and people sing anthems/hymns to the nation and its symbols. Even the office of the presidency is celebrated through inauguration, hearkening back to the Roman augur who read the entrails of animals to give the fortunes of incoming consuls for the year among the Roman senate. Lest we dismiss this as a form of religiosity, consider that some of the most extreme examples of this pertain to the less theistically organized white working class in places like the Midwest, where calls to imprison certain figures have taken on a chant like quality at communal rallies. In short, even as people abandon churches, they are not becoming less religious, because the substantive view of religion that says it's all about God is overly simplistic for explaining the phenomena.

Edited April 15, 2021 by halconero

[Meadowchik]

On 4/15/2021 at 6:14 PM, rodheadlee said:

You said " there are lots of secular communities which are very morally and socially minded."

I gave two examples of secular communities and asked if we should pattern ourselves after them. Perhaps you could give an alternate example. I believe these two Nations do not let religion interfere with politics, which would make them secular communities. 

China and Russia are vast places with many different religions in both. So which characteristics are you thinking of when you ask if we should pattern ourselves after them?

[Meadowchik]

On 4/15/2021 at 6:37 PM, halconero said:

France, specifically its extreme application of laïcité.

What makes you think France and its secularization is an example of secularization not moderating political views? Could you elaborate? 

Personally, as someone who has been closely tied to France for decades and lived there for half that, I see a level of involvement and comprehension of politics there that I admire and wish my fellow Americans would emulate.

[poptart]

5 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

What makes you think France and its secularization is an example of secularization not moderating political views? Could you elaborate? 

Personally, as someone who has been closely tied to France for decades and lived there for half that, I see a level of involvement and comprehension of politics there that I admire and wish my fellow Americans would emulate.

Does the Catholic Church over there function like it does in places like Germany?  A friend of mine who's first generation has grandparents in church one places in France, from the sounds of it the church is still active in people and societies lives. 

[Meadowchik]

1 minute ago, poptart said:

Does the Catholic Church over there function like it does in places like Germany?  A friend of mine who's first generation has grandparents in church one places in France, from the sounds of it the church is still active in people and societies lives. 

What do you mean? Are you asking about activity levels compared to Germany? The actual stats are something anyone can look up. But from my own limited observations, church membership seems to be older and on the decline. 

[poptart]

8 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

What do you mean? Are you asking about activity levels compared to Germany? The actual stats are something anyone can look up. But from my own limited observations, church membership seems to be older and on the decline. 

Was curious how they function in society, the German order still runs nursing homes and the Catholic Church is one of the biggest employers in the country.  Even here, about 20% of the rural hospitals built in the last few decades were built by the Catholic Church.  Not so much looking at how often people go to mass, curious about what the Church does in French society nowadays.

[rodheadlee]

6 hours ago, Meadowchik said:

China and Russia are vast places with many different religions in both. So which characteristics are you thinking of when you ask if we should pattern ourselves after them?

I'm not educated enough to answer that. That's why I asked for an example of a secular society. I've only visited Latin American countries (Mexico 2 years, Costa Rica,  Panama, El Salvador) and French Polynesia, American Samoa, Grand Cayman . I was able to spend about a month in each one. I presently live in Mexico when I'm home. 

[mfbukowski]

On 4/11/2021 at 8:50 AM, Robert F. Smith said:

A distant, impersonal god who cannot even overcome the logical and scientific strictures of Enlightenment thought is not much of a god.

Dang, you're good!

Exactly Nietzsche's "Death of God" argument - about the god of his time- the judgmental hellfire "unscientific" god who sent most of his children to hell, who could not possibly be a comfort for humankind and being transcendental, was beyond being a Father to humanity

 It's an unfortunate lack of education and a worship of dualistic "science" which is thought to be what educated people believe, demanding dualism and an uncrossable gulf between God and his children.

Such a shame!   You even see that right here on this board

[Meadowchik]

5 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

I'm not educated enough to answer that. That's why I asked for an example of a secular society. I've only visited Latin American countries (Mexico 2 years, Costa Rica,  Panama, El Salvador) and French Polynesia, American Samoa, Grand Cayman . I was able to spend about a month in each one. I presently live in Mexico when I'm home. 

So you're asking for examples? That wasn't clear to me at all. You might have just said that!

Like I said there are lots of examples of secular communities where secular beliefs moderate politics. American K-pop fans are an interesting modern example.

 

 

[mfbukowski]

On 4/15/2021 at 10:57 AM, halconero said:

I suppose I need to define functional religion for you, because you seem to be stuck using the substantive definition in pointing to trends in the United States.

Under the functional definition of religion, the supernatural, whether it be a belief in God, gods, angels, or whatever, is a medium rather than a fundamental base. The substantive definition, which appears to be the one you're using, places the divine at the center of its definition. This understanding of what religion *is* falls apart when moving east out of Europe or America where we encounter strains of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism that don't address the concept of deity or the divine, or even repudiate the notion and take an atheistic worldview, yet maintain all the ritual, codification of behaviour, reverenced scrit, and social activity that Western religions do. It is why the substantive definition of religion has fallen out of favour among any serious academic studying religion in society.

The functional definition of religion understands its practice as a method of understanding ourselves, others, and the world around us. It helps us govern our behaviours, social interactions, and to derive purpose from our activities. As mentioned previously, under this definition deity is medium for explaining the world. For the believing Latter-day Saint, a good way to explain this is what our relationship to Heavenly Father as His children teaches us how to behave, what our life purpose is, and how we are to treat others. It serves a social function, in other words. I would argue this even captures religion as understood by the culture that gave us the word - the Romans. For Romans, the specifics of deity did not matter so much as the state's behaviours in relation to them. Jupiter could be extrapolated to pertain to Zeus or Thor, despite very different origin stories and mythological doctrines underlying them. What mattered more was that religio helped the state explain its place in the world, and governed how the Romans ran their government. A more modern example, from a culture I am very familiar with and from which I originate, is Jewish practice of ritual. Most Jews in Israel are secular in their beliefs towards deity, many of whom are atheist, yet the practice of the Sabbath continues, as do the fasts on Yom Kippur. Why? Not because of belief in God, but because they create a common identity around which Jewish people can build social connections, find their place in the world, and govern themselves with purpose. To put it all together, how people view God is only one aspect of defining their religiosity.

My thesis here is that religion has not dissipated, only organized theism. The existence of civil religion, particularly as it pertains to partisan activity, has replaced it for many people. Civil religion is the idea that states (many, not all), create myths, narratives, saints, holy scrit, holy days, hymns, rituals, and other activities that teach citizens of their place in society, why their nation matters, and how people are to interact with each other and the outside world as it pertains to the states. Consider the United States, where the Founders have been elevated to a sort of political sainthood, ignoring many of their foibles, where people rise to place their hands on their hearts to say an oath, where hol(y)days take on a strong civic nature, and people sing anthems/hymns to the nation and its symbols. Even the office of the presidency is celebrated through inauguration, hearkening back to the Roman augur who read the entrails of animals to give the fortunes of incoming consuls for the year among the Roman senate. Lest we dismiss this as a form of religiosity, consider that some of the most extreme examples of this pertain to the less theistically organized white working class in places like the Midwest, where calls to imprison certain figures have taken on a chant like quality at communal rallies. In short, even as people abandon churches, they are not becoming less religious, because the substantive view of religion that says it's all about God is overly simplistic for explaining the phenomena.

Thanks for putting it so well.

I have been preaching the functional view of religion here for years, but not in those words, which I find far more effective than mine.  I personally would use the word "ostensive religion" rather than "substansive religion".

The 'political sainthood" of the founding fathers, as you have stated it, I think also is mirrored among LDS folks in regard to some early church leaders, and "ignoring some of their foibles" while yet accepting their philosophy.   We also do that regarding the question of the historicity of the Book of Mormon, which is demanded by the substantive view of religion by so many here, while what is important is how that belief functions in giving us a view of Christianity never before dreamed of.

The entire idea of seeing  God as an image of Human perfection, as an Ideal Human to be emulated, could have vast implications if seen functionally, for even the secular world, and the implications of that for society has been missed, while we are busy preaching instead the substantive view that God is a real human.

My view does not mean for a second that God does NOT have a body in a traditional LDS sense, but seeing the notion functionally as an Ideal for humankind could effectively, give us a new dimension in missionary work among secular people.  Ours also is a way of life, which is what is sought functionally by secular folks, and yet here we are preaching a notion which they find alien. 

"God is a glorified physical human being?  Give me a break!"

Seeing the idea from a functional perspective could help us escape many apoligetic wars as well as bring us much much closer to secular mankind, seeking for an ideal and meaning in their lives.

Instead they find it elsewhere as you so eloquently show, in politics and social movements, concerns for global warming, etc.  That is a GOOD thing of course, but if we could see these beliefs both functionally and substantively, in my opinion, we would be far ahead of where we are today both as a church and as an effective social movement.

Being both would be nice. 

My little slogan is "If God is Human, Humanism Becomes Theology!

 

Edited April 17, 2021 by mfbukowski