Another interesting one Billy.  This was a surprise to me... “Even as
religious affiliations decline, religious books sales continue to rise, as
they have steadily for more than a half century.”  I would not have guessed
that there is an inverse relationship between religious affiliation and
religious book sales.  In makes sense in light of the article.

 

Chris

 

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 10:05 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [RC] The "spiritual but not religious” gospel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

rd

Religion Dispatches

 

 

·  Essay <http://www.religiondispatches.org/category/essay/>  

·  October 24, 2012

A History of the Unaffiliated: How the “Spiritual Not Religious” Gospel Has
Spread 

·  By Matthew S. Hedstrom
<http://www.religiondispatches.org/contributors/matthewshedstrom/> 

 

You can call them “unaffiliated,” as in a recent Pew poll, or “nones”—or
even just “not very religious
<http://www.religionnews.com/politics/election/the-biggest-slice-of-obamas-r
eligious-coalition-the-unaffiliated> .” A brand new poll by the Public
Religion Research Institute
<http://publicreligion.org/research/2012/10/american-values-survey-2012/>
divides this group further (and somewhat counterintuitively) into
“unattached,” “atheists/agnostics,” and “seculars.” But whatever you call
them, this ever-growing cohort of unchurched Americans makes up, at 23
percent
<http://www.religionnews.com/politics/election/the-biggest-slice-of-obamas-r
eligious-coalition-the-unaffiliated> , the single largest segment of Barack
Obama’s “religious coalition” (compared to the 37 percent of white
evangelicals who support Mitt Romney). 

While we have yet to see a “Seculars for Obama” bumper sticker, the
unaffliated are clearly having a moment
<http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/atheologies/6493/does_record_numb
er_of_religious_“nones”_mean_decline_of_religiosity/> . Media analysis,
however, has not gone very deep—there is a story here that goes beyond names
and numbers.

Recent sociological work from Courtney Bender
<http://blogs.ssrc.org/tif/2012/10/10/what-does-spirituality-mean-in-america
-today/> , Christian Smith <http://www.nd.edu/~csmith22/> , and others does
help us understand who the current crop of unaffiliated are and what they do
and believe. Yet we have precious little historical understanding of this
critical and growing demographic. What are their roots? What religious,
cultural, economic, demographic, and political processes shaped their
sensibilities, habits, and makeup? 

In order to understand these still-believing “nones,” we need to understand
that much of the religious dynamism in the United States happens outside the
church walls, and has for some time now. The “rise of the nones” is but the
latest phase in the long transformation of religion into what we now
commonly call “spirituality.” In my class on “Spirituality in America” at
the University of Virginia, we use Leigh Schmidt
<http://www.religiondispatches.org/contributors/leighericschmidt/> ’s
pathbreaking Restless Souls to trace this phenomenon over two centuries,
from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s break with New England Unitarianism in the 1830s
to the multibillion dollar spirituality industry of today.

Spirituality can mean many things, of course, and the language of
spirituality is used by traditional religious adherents as well as the
religiously unaffiliated. But only the “nones” have made it into a cliché:
“spiritual but not religious.”

The history of American spirituality reveals that our commonplace
understanding of spirituality—as the individual, experiential dimension of
human encounter with the sacred—arose from the clash of American
Protestantism with the forces of modern life in the nineteenth century.
While religious conservatives fought to stem the tide, giving rise to
fundamentalism, religious liberals adapted their faith to modernity, often
by discarding orthodoxies in favor of Darwinism, psychology, and comparative
religions.

The majority of today’s religious “nones”—those who claim no religion but
still embrace spirituality—are engaged in the same task of renovating their
faith for a new historical moment. And typically, they draw from this same
liberal religious toolkit. Today’s unaffiliated, like the liberals of
previous generations, typically shun dogma and creed in favor of a faith
that is practical, psychologically attuned, ecumenical—even cosmopolitan—and
ethically oriented.

This liberal spirituality, as it has evolved over time, has been deeply
entwined with media-oriented consumerism. Of course Americans of all
religious varieties have been deeply influenced by consumerism, but media
and markets have particularly shaped the religious lives of those without
formal institutional or community ties. The religiously unaffiliated might
not attend services, but they “do” their religion in many other ways: they
watch religion on TV and listen to it on the radio; find inspiration on the
web; attend retreats, seminars, workshops, and classes; buy candles and
statues, bumper stickers and yoga pants; take spiritually motivated trips;
and, perhaps most significantly, buy and read books. 

Since the 1920s, when the major New York trade presses first started
offering nonsectarian religious books in significant numbers, books have
been the most important conduit for spreading the “spiritual but not
religious” gospel.

This dependency on the consumer marketplace, and especially books, has had
significant consequences for the religious lives of all Americans,
especially the unaffiliated. First, it has enhanced the tendencies within
American religion toward a therapeutic understanding of the spiritual life.
The profit-oriented commercial presses that came to dominate religious
publishing naturally pursued the largest market possible for their goods,
and seized on the non-creedal, nonsectarian, and psychologically modern
forms of faith advanced by religious liberals as a common American religious
vernacular. These trends have only accelerated from the 1920s to the
present, such that now the line between religion and self-help disappears in
the spirituality section of Barnes & Noble.

Second, spiritual consumerism has fostered a robust cosmopolitanism. Books
allow readers entry into previously unimaginable religious worlds. Since
trade presses entered the religion game with vigor, the lines of
denomination and tradition have mattered less and less. The political and
moral imperatives of World War II provided the greatest stimulus to such
interfaith reading, and before long even the Protestant-Catholic-Jew
formulation of the era could not contain American readers. What matters to
the unaffiliated is not imprimatur but inspiration.

The Notre Dame sociologist Christian Smith has observed
<http://www.oup.com/us/catalog/general/subject/ReligionTheology/SociologyofR
eligion/?view=usa&ci=9780195371796> , “Liberal Protestantism’s
organizational decline has been accompanied by and is in part arguably the
consequence of the fact that liberal Protestantism has won a decisive,
larger cultural victory.” The “cultural victory” Smith and others write
about happened not because more Americans joined liberal churches, in other
words, but because liberal religious values and sensibilities became more
and more culturally normative. And no single cultural force has been more
significant to this profound religious shift than the unabashed consumerism
of the religious book business in the twentieth century.

Even as religious affiliations decline, religious books sales continue to
rise, as they have steadily for more than a half century. In this ultimate
spiritual marketplace, American religion displays its full shape-shifting
vitality.

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to