Researchers disagree on how to explain abandonment of faith – Deseret News

Within a month this fall, two different analyzes of American religious exodus were published—the first, a book-length treatise by secular humanist sociologists Ryan Cragun and Jesse M. Smith on “the causes and consequences of secularization,” and the second, a lengthy Wheatley -Report on “Leaving, Remaining, and Returning to the Faith” by Latter-day Saint scholars Stephen Cranney, Justin Dyer, Sam Hardy, Paul Lambert, and Loren Marks.

Although essentially the same phenomenon, the conclusions of these analyzes could not be more different. While one downplays family influences on leaving religion, the other highlights them as having consequences. While one paints an attractive picture of life after faith, drawing on interviews with people who have become alienated from faith, the second emphasizes the range of data that illustrates the longer-term consequences of faith dissolution.

The first report leaves the impression that young people mostly don’t care about faith, that religion is mostly determined by politics and that people are less tolerant as a result. The authors also make the case that religion is destined to eventually become a thing of the past and something that, for the most part, makes people happier to leave it behind. The second report paints a completely different picture and refutes each of these points.

At a time when many Americans seem to have embraced a mirror-image view of religion that is rife with seriously misleading ideas, it seems helpful to outline at least some of the competing interpretations about the beliefs in circulation. Below I summarize three issues on which the Wheatley Report departs significantly from a more secular view of religious alienation:

1. Is distancing oneself from faith a one-way street, individual or social?

On the Internet, it is common to hear comments like, “I have left this religion and will never return.” Some spread much the same message about the ultimate decline of religion as a whole: “Modern society is leaving this behind and not returning back there.”

“The decline of religion is a persistent theme in public discourse,” the Wheatley report says. Although “predictions about the death of religion are centuries old, the data shows that the world as a whole is actually becoming more religious.” (The authors go on to explain that highly religious people continue to have more children, while birth rates in secular areas continue to decline).

Although there are slightly fewer people joining the faith in the United States (7 out of 10) compared to the rest of the world (8 out of 10, or 84%), the Wheatley authors do not sugarcoat the challenges and see “clear signs for people … “in the United States and elsewhere to abandon religion” (the number of “nobodies” who have no religion has risen from 5% three decades ago to about 30% today).

“Some evidence suggests that secularization has already weakened,” the report adds – leading lead author Stephen Cranney to say that this was “to some extent predicted theoretically, but now we are starting to put it a little empirically to recognize.”

“Will it now remain on a plateau?” That is still uncertain, he says. What seems clear, Justin Dyer adds, is that these changing beliefs are “not a one-way street where more and more people are becoming more secular. I think there’s more going on than people usually consider.”

“The most important message for me,” Paul Lambert tells the Deseret News about the report and Wheatley’s work overall, is that “religion is important for human flourishing.” And that is the misunderstanding I hope we avoid He points to “easy narratives that say religion is obsolete, or is no longer relevant, or is becoming irrelevant, or is, at best, an interesting social factor.”

“I just don’t think that’s true. “The data doesn’t suggest that at a global or national level,” emphasizes Lambert, director of Wheatley’s Religion Initiative. “Religion is important, and we cannot deny its impact.”

2. How much is politics driving religious migration?

The intersection between religion and politics has been at the heart of the country’s recent elections, with political hostilities sometimes seeping into faith communities like any other group. But a groundbreaking study by More in Common recently debunked the common assumption that politics is what most motivates people of faith.

This comprehensive national survey found that political expression was among the least common reasons for religious involvement: Only 6% of Americans said they turn to their faith community to express their political views, and fewer than 9% said they turn to their faith community to express their political views , that they turn to their faith “to move forward.” social or political causes.” Instead, other reasons such as seeking guidance in life (37%), finding comfort in difficult times (46%) and deepening a relationship with God (54%) motivate believers more.

The authors of the Wheatley report come to the same conclusion after examining the broader literature – writing that “people’s religious backgrounds, beliefs and identities shape their political leanings.” Lambert elaborates on rejecting the idea that disaffiliation patterns are simply “a social trend or a liberal trend or a conservative trend.” Instead, he argues that “religion existed long before our current views of the world and will continue to exist long after those views of the world have disappeared.”

“Religion transcends all of these ideological frameworks,” Lambert says. “Religion is not defined by our political ideologies or our political lenses. There’s something deeper going on.”

3. How reliably does turning away from faith lead to negative consequences?

Promotional efforts for the above secular analysis included an infographic asking, “How does religion affect society?” In several colorful blocks, the authors claim things like “For most people who give up their religion, it is renunciation on religion is NOT a CRISIS and generally does not affect their health, charitable giving or volunteer work.” Additionally, “fears by some that massive religious withdrawal would lead to a decline in family values ​​or less civic engagement, unfounded.” (Capital letters for emphasis are her own).

“Non-religious people don’t have a ‘religious hole’ in their lives,” wrote columnist Jana Riess in her summary of the book, emphasizing the authors’ criticism of the idea that non-religious people “somehow miss the presence of God.” religion in their lives” and quote their summary of respondents who insist: “Not only is it not bad to be without religion, I have lost nothing.”

The Wheatley authors understand the unique challenges facing believers today, but are vocal about clear trends in decades of data. “We recognize that everyone’s experience is unique,” ​​says Lambert. “But if you want to increase the chances that your own life has meaning and meaning, then the data suggests that actively engaging with religion increases the chances.”

If something is generally beneficial, deviating from it will generally be harmful, the Wheatley authors explain. “Because of the positive impact of religion on both individuals and societies,” their report concludes, “the growing trend of religious out-migration has significant negative impacts on individual health and well-being, family relationships, community cohesion and demographics Stability.”

“We want to take everyone’s individual experiences into account,” emphasizes Lambert again. “But when we look at aggregate data, it is clear that religion plays an important role in enabling human flourishing – both by increasing the things that bring meaning and meaning and by increasing the chances over risky ones Behavioral or mental health challenges.”

Such a probability statement is “much less exciting” than more dramatic black-and-white statements about religion, Lambert admits. “It’s a lot less neon lights, but that’s what we’re trying to say. We do not want to say that those who leave the religion are all crazy, and that those who follow the religion are all thriving at level 11. It’s just more complicated.”

But the overall pattern is still hard to deny. “The majority of social science research,” concludes Sam Hardy, “seems to indicate fairly consistently and reliably that for most people, in most cases, religion has positive effects on individual well-being – less risk-taking behavior, more pro-social behavior, psychological well-being, better relationship quality.”

“For this reason,” Hardy continues, “as more and more people leave their religion, we should expect potentially some negative consequences for them.” While some data shows that non-religious youth are sometimes comparable to religious youth, He explains that non-religious young people generally fare worse when there are differences.

Comparing religious people to non-religious people, Cranney adds that premarital sex, alcohol, drugs, etc. – the risky behaviors – are actually more common among less religious people.” He says, “I guess the non-religious people party harder – however you want to put it – they behave more riskily. “So there’s some truth to that.”

The Wheatley report concludes by presenting a “complex picture that neither portrays religion as a relic of a bygone era nor downplays the significant headwinds facing religion in the 21st century.” What seems clear, the authors say, is that “society will continue to be shaped by religion, religion will in turn be influenced by society, and faith will continue to be a powerful force in the world.”