Secularisation in the US (AQA A Level Sociology): Revision Note

Evidence for secularisation in the US

• Wilson (1962) found that 45% of Americans attended church on Sundays

• He argued that religion in the US was becoming superficial – churchgoing was more about the 'American way of life' than genuine faith

• Since the 1940s, around 40% of Americans have consistently claimed in surveys that they regularly attend church

• However, Hadaway et al. (1993) studied church services in Ohio and found that actual attendance was much lower than people reported

• This gap between self-reported attendance and real attendance exists because going to church is still seen as socially desirable

• Many people who no longer attend still claim they do in surveys, which supports Wilson’s view that American religion is superficial and secular in nature

Explanations for secularisation in the US

Secularisation from within

• Bruce (2002) built on Wilson’s view, arguing that America is secular not because people reject religion, but because religion has become psychologised – focused on personal improvement rather than salvation and glorifying God

• This change allows religion to remain popular by becoming less religious and more compatible with secular society

• Bruce (2011) observed that many evangelical churches emphasise practical success and prosperity over spiritual depth

• In line with Herberg’s (1960) idea of internal secularisation, Bruce argued that Christian churches have had to compromise their beliefs to remain competitive and survive

• Bruce also suggested that religion in America has become a commodity, where churches market themselves to attract “consumers” and keep attendance high

Civil religion

• Bellah (1991) argued that Americans are united by a shared 'civil religion', where loyalty to God and America are treated as the same thing

• Civil religion transcends divisions between faiths and gives Americans a sense of common purpose and identity

• Civil religion involves loyalty to the nation, expressed through rituals such as saying the pledge of allegiance or celebrating Thanksgiving

• This reflects Day's (opens in a new tab) findings in the UK, where people claim a religious identity (e.g., Christianity) mainly to appear part of the national culture

Religious diversity

• Berger (1967) claimed that growing religious pluralism in the US undermines the credibility of religion

• Churchgoers are becoming less dogmatic, with Bruce pointing to a trend of practical relativism – the acceptance that other people’s beliefs are equally valid

• However, this diversity erodes the monopoly of truth once held by a single church, creating doubt in all religions and leading to the decline of absolutist belief

Religious market theory (RMT)

• Stark & Bainbridge (1985) argue that secularisation theory is Eurocentric because it focuses on religion’s decline in Europe and ignores its vitality in America and elsewhere

• They criticise secularisation theorists for assuming there was a past 'golden age' of religion and predicting an inevitable future where everyone becomes an atheist

• Instead, they propose Religious Market Theory (RMT), which is based on two assumptions:

  • People are naturally religious – the overall demand for religion remains constant

  • All humans seek rewards and want to avoid costs – when people make choices, they weigh up the costs and benefits of the different options available

Compensators

• Religion attracts people by offering supernatural compensators when real rewards are scarce or unattainable

  • E.g., immortality is impossible, but religion compensates by promising life after death

The cycle of renewal

• Stark & Bainbridge believe that, as an alternative to secularisation theory, religion moves through a cycle of decline, revival and renewal

• When established churches decline, they leave a gap in the market for sects, cults and New Age movements to grow

• This explains why religious revivals keep emerging instead of permanent decline

Competition

• Religion in the US thrives because of competition between denominations

• Religious choice forces churches to adapt and meet people’s needs

• The US Constitution guarantees religious freedom, creating a strong religious marketplace where people 'shop' for religion

• In contrast, Europe has state churches (e.g., the Church of England) that hold monopolies, leading to lower participation

Evaluation of religious market theory

Strengths

• Evidence to support RMT

  • Hadden and Shupe (1998) argue that the rise of televangelism shows religion in the US is supply-led

  • Christian denominations compete by spending large sums of money on television advertisements - evangelical churches have thrived as a result

• Further evidence to support Stark & Bainbridge's view

  • Asian immigration in the 1960s introduced new faiths (e.g. Hare Krishna, Transcendental Meditation), expanding consumer choice and proving popular in the marketplace

Criticisms

• Diversity does not increase competition

  • Bruce (2011) rejects the idea that diversity and competition boost religion

  • In both Europe and America, diversity has often coincided with religious decline

• RMT misrepresents secularisation theory

  • Bruce argues that secularisation theory doesn't claim there was a past 'golden age' of religion, and it doesn't predict universal atheism

  • It simply claims that religion is in long-term decline in Europe and the US

Alternative view of secularisation in the US

• Norris and Inglehart (2011) reject Religious Market Theory (RMT), arguing it only applies to America and fails to explain differences in religiosity across societies

• International studies show no evidence of a link between religious choice and participation, as Stark and Bainbridge claimed

• Instead, Norris and Inglehart propose existential security theory

Existential security theory

• Norris and Inglehart (2011) argue that religion meets a need for security

• The demand for religion depends on how secure people feel in their lives

• People in insecure societies have higher religiosity, whereas those in secure societies have lower religiosity

• Therefore, demand for religion is not constant (as RMT claims) but varies within and between societies

Poor societies vs rich societies

• In poor societies, people face life-threatening risks such as famine, disease and natural disasters. This creates insecurity, leading to higher levels of religiosity

• In wealthy societies, people have higher living standards and feel more secure in their survival, so religiosity is much lower

• Even within wealthy societies, poorer groups remain less secure and are therefore more religious than wealthier groups

• This explains why poor developing countries remain highly religious, while prosperous Western countries are becoming increasingly secular

Europe vs America

• Norris and Inglehart argue that Americans are more religious than Europeans because the US lacks a strong welfare state and universal healthcare

• Poorer Americans feel less secure in their survival and turn to religion as an alternative source of reassurance

• The large gap between the rich and the poor in the US makes this insecurity worse, sustaining higher religiosity compared to Europe

Evaluation of existential security theory

Strengths

• Evidence to support existential security theory

  • Weber (1905) claimed that the poorest are more likely to be religious, as it provides them with theodicies that explain and justify their poverty

  • Gill and Lundegaarde (2004) found that the more a country spends on welfare, the lower the level of religious participation

  • This explains why European countries, which invest more in welfare than the USA, are generally more secular

Criticisms

• Incomplete explanation

  • Gill and Lundegaarde (2004) do not expect religion to disappear completely

  • This is because welfare doesn't answer religion's 'ultimate' questions about life and death

• Data lacks validity

  • Vasquez (2007) criticises Norris and Inglehart for relying only on quantitative data about income levels

  • Vasquez argues that qualitative research is needed to capture people’s own definitions of existential security

• Negative perspective

  • Norris and Inglehart present a negative view of religion by focusing on deprivation

  • They ignore positive reasons why people, including the wealthy, might be attracted to religion