The reason why the US is much more religious than Europe

[latent aaaack]

Anyone know?

Is it because of the Cold War in which America's long term nemesis was viewed as having an atheistic idealogy?

Is because of the lack of a long history from which to draw national identity hence the need to make more of religious identity?

Is it because of America's long term status as a melting pot of religions, ethnicities, and nationalities which makes it harder to have a strong sense of group identity besides the fact that everyone believes in some kind of god?

Is it the two devastating world wars that occurred in Europe that makes it's population question more the existence of a god?

[andyandy]

this is a very interesting question, which has been touched upon in the religious education in schools? (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=90626) thread.

as a UK/US comparative;

from the long term;

I think the co-option of the Church of England within the political system far from giving the CofE strong political influence, actually serves to neuter its influence. The church remains largely apolitical for when it does enter political debates it is normally as an irrelevance. A good analogy would be with regards to drugs - regarding religion as a drug which in America is "illegal" (ie outside governance) whereas in the UK it is "legalised" (ie within governance). And as in the drugs debate where I would argue that legalisation and regulation serves the best utilitarian outcome for society, I would argue the same in general for religion. Although I acknowledge that the "drug" of evangelicalism/fundamentalism is more potent than CofE so this should be bourne in mind.

Equally i think that the free-market religious economy as it were of early settler America, of transplanted religions free from the European entrenched religious orders led to an evolution of the much more aggressive prolysising religious system as rival groups competed for converts - and that we see evangelicalism/fundamentalism thrive as a result.

In the shorter term;

I would argue that religious education within schools in much of Europe helps to inoculate against religiosity in general.

[andyandy]

A very comprehensive article....[10 pages, so very much edited]


A more plausible explanation [to the European/US religiousity differences] points to the very dissimilar histories of how democracy arrived in America and in Europe. The European democratic tradition, the model for which originated in the French Revolution, has been hostile to religion from its inception, and religion, especially the Catholic church, had until recently been hostile to it in return. In America, however, democracy and religion have mostly been friends. Alexis de Tocqueville understood this divergence clearly. "Among us," he wrote of the French in Democracy in America, "I had seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom almost always move in contrary directions." In America, by contrast, Tocqueville found the spirits of religion and democracy "united intimately with one another: they reigned together on the same soil."

snip

The French Revolution, despite its enormous abuses of power and its failure to establish a viable political order, won an honored reputation not just among the French but among generations of Europeans. It became the symbol of light--the vanguard of political freedom against all the agents of the old order, including religion. The anticlerical spirit of the Revolution, reinforced by school curricula and public traditions, has continued to typify European democracies.
snip
For many Europeans, to be a modern democrat means necessarily that one is also secular.

America's point of departure

In America, relations between religion and democracy developed very differently, in ways that have encouraged the flourishing of faith visible around the nation today. On first blush, this might appear surprising. The dominant view among scholars, at least until quite recently, has been that the American Revolution, like the French, was an expression of the secular Enlightenment--finding its inspiration in the commonsensical natural rights philosophy of John Locke.

snip

On the contrary: The very first act of the First Continental Congress in 1774, Novak reminds us, was an official prayer--a Psalm read aloud to the congressmen by an Episcopal clergyman. The Declaration of Independence, he notes, takes the form of a traditional American prayer not all that different from the Mayflower Compact, speaking of God in four ways--Creator (the source of our "unalienable rights"), Judge, Lawgiver, and Providence--that are, with the exception of Lawgiver, unambiguously biblical. Early American political debates made frequent use of biblical references and language. One scholar, Donald Lutz, surveyed 3,154 citations made by the Founders and discovered that more than one-third of them were to the Bible. (Montesquieu and Blackstone followed with 300 or so each, while Locke trailed far behind.)

As Tocqueville emphasized, religion and democracy "reigned together" in America long before 1776. The colonies, populated by deeply devout religious dissenters, had nourished vibrant republican traditions. More to the point, unlike in Europe, where religion took the side of the established authorities in opposition to democracy, America's Puritan pulpits helped to ignite the American Revolution itself.

snip

For the Founders, religion did more than help the nation win independence. Successful self-government required moral virtues--self-control, self-reliance, and a disinterested concern for the commonweal--that only religion could provide, at least for the majority. (Some refined souls, with minds of "peculiar structure," President George Washington conceded, could be moral without this aid.) Washington's Farewell Address praised religion as the "indispensable" support of the "dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity." Benjamin Rush agreed:

What can be said with more certainty is that the Founders sought not to diminish and degrade religion but to help it flourish. And on that score, they succeeded. George Washington once said that a nation's "first transactions" form the "leading traits in its character." With regard to the relations between religion and democracy, anyway, this dictum has held true both for America, a republic founded in deep religious convictions it still largely affirms, and for Europe, where democracy was forged against religion and citizens have become less and less pious.

.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0377/is_155/ai_n6143340/pg_1

[andyandy]

and from the same article...

A free market of religions

America's lack of an established state church and its religious pluralism together may point to another, related reason why America has diverged from Europe in matters of faith. It was not Tocqueville but his Scottish predecessor Adam Smith who first described the process at work.

In his classic treatise of political economy, The Wealth of Nations, Smith argued for the existence of what one could call a religious market. Just as in the economic sphere, where monopoly breeds stagnation and decline while competition tends to encourage striving and generate wealth, Smith believed well-established churches would lose their appeal over time since their clergymen, having no real incentive to make their message compelling to the population, would grow complacent. Religions facing competitive pressure, however, would work harder and thrive.

Several contemporary sociologists have developed a theory of "religious economy" that builds on Smith's original insight. "Monopolies damage religion," emphasizes Massimo Introvigne, director of the Center for Studies on New Religions in Turin, Italy and a major proponent of the theory. "In a free market, people get more interested in the product. It is true for religion just as it is true for cars." With the "demand" for religion assumed to be constant, Introvigne explains, the amount and intensity of religiosity a culture exhibits depend on "the quality and quantity of religion available."

On this view, the European tradition of established churches has contributed to the decrease in religiosity among Europeans. Religious pluralism, by contrast, has made America more religiously energetic.

snip

In fact, observes Rodney Stark, the leading "religious economy" theorist, America has provided ample confirming evidence for the theory. Not only has church attendance progressively risen over the course of American history; American religion, he explains, also has been more vibrant in America's pluralistic cities than in its smaller towns or the countryside. It turns out that the "religious marketing" theory even holds for antiquity: State religions initially did well in the ancient world, but over time, protected from competition, they grew decadent and withered

[cj.23]

I'm personally fascinated by this, and discuss it at length in this my first JREF thread
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=70686

I can't remember if i ever discussed my actual beliefs, but I think the UK lost religiousity in the period 1750 to 1900 as the traditional parish support mechanism was lost in rapid urbanisation, wheareas in the US it persists as a form of "welfare system" and may have acted as an important social bond among successive waves of immigrants who clung to religious identities in the great melting pot of US culture. I may discuss it more in the other thread.

What really puzzles me is why Dispensationalism, a marginal if not generally considered heretical theological position came to be so prominent in North American Protestantism, and why Fundamentalism of a type alien to Christianity in Europe has arisen in the last 100 years. Thsi seems to simply come down to the popularity of the 1904 (?) Schofield Reference Bible with its dispensationalist notes? Dunno!

I think the supposed separation of Church and State and lack of an Establsihed Church may have also been a key factor, and its curious than in the absence of the UK's mandatory school prayer and compulsory Religious Education Young Earth Creationism appears to have emerged since the 1960's. At least I can't find much evidence of YEC beliefs being widespread before that decade? is there any?

cj x

[andyandy]

I

What really puzzles me is why Dispensationalism, a marginal if not generally considered heretical theological position came to be so prominent in North American Protestantism, and why Fundamentalism of a type alien to Christianity in Europe has arisen in the last 100 years. Thsi seems to simply come down to the popularity of the 1904 (?) Schofield Reference Bible with its dispensationalist notes? Dunno!
cj x

I don't know how accurate wiki is, but

Dispensationalism was first introduced to North America by John Inglis (1813–1879), through a monthly magazine called Waymarks in the Wilderness (published intermittently between 1854 and 1872)[citation needed]. In 1866, Inglis organized the Believers' Meeting for Bible Study, which introduced dispensationalist ideas to a small but influential circle of American evangelicals. After Inglis' death, James H. Brookes (1830–1898), a pastor in St. Louis, organized the Niagara Bible Conference to continue the dissemination of dispensationalist ideas. Dispensationalism was boosted after Dwight L. Moody (1837–1899) learned of "dispensational truth" from an unidentified member of the Brethren in 1872. Moody became close to Brookes and other dispensationalists, and encouraged the spread of dispensationalism, but apparently never learned the nuances of the dispensationalist system. Dispensationalism began to evolve during this time, most significantly when a significant body of dispensationalists proposed the "post-tribulation" Rapture. Dispensationalist leaders in Moody's circle include Reuben Archer Torrey (1856–1928), James M. Gray (1851–1925), Cyrus I. Scofield (1843–1921), William J. Erdman (1833–1923), A. C. Dixon (1854–1925), A. J. Gordon (1836–1895) and William Eugene Blackstone, author of the bestseller of the 1800s "Jesus is Coming" (Endorsed by Torrey and Erdman). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dispensationalism

If this is the case, then this fits rather well with the free market agressive model of religious evolution - with the tie-up between dispensationalism and rapture presenting both as a package - and as a hard-sell sales pitch it is hard to beat the "believe in my God because the rapture is coming, any day now! Quick! If you don't want to fry in hell for all eternity and it's going to happen very soon, then convert!"

[cj.23]

Thanks Andy. I had not thought of wikipedia! Stupid of me, and yes it fits well with what I know. American Chriostians who come to my college seem often confused that our Christian Union students have no idea about The Rapture and find the idea odd to say the least, and are often frankly dismissive of dispensationalists ideas. That first alerted me to how normativ they were in the USA. I'm currently trying to trace the roots of the popularity of Young Earth Creationism in the US - I wonder if it had much real presence before the 1960's? I'm wondering if it might have emerged from the Seventh Day Adventists? Any ideas? Wiki seems fairly solid in discussing it, but I can't get an idea if the ideas were widespread before the 60's?

cj x

[andyandy]

Thanks Andy. I had not thought of wikipedia! Stupid of me, and yes it fits well with what I know. American Chriostians who come to my college seem often confused that our Christian Union students have no idea about The Rapture and find the idea odd to say the least, and are often frankly dismissive of dispensationalists ideas. That first alerted me to how normativ they were in the USA. I'm currently trying to trace the roots of the popularity of Young Earth Creationism in the US - I wonder if it had much real presence before the 1960's? I'm wondering if it might have emerged from the Seventh Day Adventists? Any ideas? Wiki seems fairly solid in discussing it, but I can't get an idea if the ideas were widespread before the 60's?

cj x

In a Morris biography, Gould is quoted as attributing Morris with the creation of modern day [sic ;)] creationism...

Henry M. Morris, the man who would revive the creationist movement in 1961 with a popular book promoting the idea of a worldwide flood and then, two years later, found the Institute for Creation Research, grew up in the Texas of the 1920s and 1930s as a religiously indifferent youth. Shortly after his graduation from Rice in 1939, however, Morris accepted the Bible, from Genesis through Revelation, as the infallible and literal word of God.

snip

In 1961, Morris and John C. Whitcomb, an Old Testament scholar, published The Genesis Flood, which Stephen Jay Gould calls “the founding document of the creationist movement.” (C&S, 126) In April 2003, the book, which attempts to account for how an ancient deluge might have covered the entire planet—even covering the summit of Mount Everest—for a full year, had its forty-forth printing.

Two years after The Genesis Flood hit bookstores, Morris and nine other like-minded scientists founded the Creation Research Society, dedicated to established scientific support for the Genesis creation story. Seven years later, Morris moved to San Diego to found a creationist center called the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). ICR is an openly Christian operation. Morris closed his monthly letters to “Friends” of ICR with the words, “Sincerely yours in Christ.” (S&C, 22) Scientists seeking to join ICR had to first sign a statement confirming their own belief in the inerrancy of the Bible, effectively excluding all but fundamentalist Christians.


The unmistakable aim of ICR is not to convert leading scientists to their way of thinking—an all-but-impossible task—but rather to influence textbook writers, school boards, and the unskeptical public. ICR scientists generally to not seek review from “peers” in the scientific community, and rarely collaborate in any way with university researchers. The goal of ICR, simply put, is to influence the way schools teach science. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/morrish.html

[Math Maniac]

As an American for all of my life (my wife included) I believe it's relatively simple: we're a younger country without the historical religiousness that's been present in Europe for over 10 plus centuries. Simply put, compared to Europe, America is in it's toddler to adolescent years (comparatively speaking). Not to mention that America (as a whole) is founded on the principles of religious freedom (compared to Europe's system of religion according to who is in charge). Whereas I agree that this has not been the total case everywhere in our history, there has been a place where "each to his own" has prevailed.

ETA: I am not religious, by the way.

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Beats me. Puzzles me, too.

I'm Polish-American and Polish culture is very strongly Catholic so I grew up pretty religious in the United States- but it felt like I was the only one. Where I grew up, everyone was very secular. I was one of only two kids in my class and I think one of maybe five in my entire grade to go to Sunday school and have a communion.

I was shocked to find out Europe has such a low church going population and the US has such a large one because in my experience it was always the exact opposite!

I think the numbers for the US are really exaggerated, though. It's supposssed to be something in the ballpark of 50 percent but I personally don't know anyone who regularly goes to church. Anyone.

Well, maybe the people in the parish down the street! The priests, most certainly. :D It's half full on Easter, though, so.

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'd say that we just happened to be the center of an Evangelical movement that has been terribly good at mass marketing coupled with a strong Bible Belt that has been self perpetuating since the country was founded.

That Evangelical movement has been spreading worldwide. As has the Islamic religion. This is one of those waxes of the never ending waxing and waning religion has gone through during historical times.

Pure speculation mind you. No sources and no particular expertise short of voracious observation.

[plumjam]

My guess would be it's mainly because a lot of those who emigrated to the USA early on were europeans escaping religious persecution (particularly non-conformist protestant groups). The USA offered a guarantee of freedom of religion.
The fact that these emigrants had been willing to suffer persecution for their faith in Europe suggests a high degree of commitment. Then, when they've gone to the bother of upping sticks to another continent I think you'd expect them to practice their religion with at least the same, or increasing fervour.
Because they 'got in' early, they pretty much set the tenor of the whole society.

No, I haven't investigated it at all. So there's a high chance of being completely wrong, but that makes it more fun. :)

[UnrepentantSinner]

I think a paragraph head in one of andyandy's quotes summed it up as succint as possible.
A free market of religions

I don't agree with Libertarianism, but Shermer made this same point on Coast to Coast AM a few years ago.

Whether we're inherently a more or less religious population than Europe I don't think matters as much as that we can, if we so chose, be any religion we want as well as being non-religious.

Don't like your church? Start a new one. Disagree with the Imam? Find a new Mosque.

[Herzblut]

I'm Polish-American and Polish culture is very strongly Catholic so I grew up pretty religious in the United States- but it felt like I was the only one. Where I grew up, everyone was very secular.

I'm happy for you. There might be quite contrary Polish / American experiences as well.

POLISH EXCHANGE STUDENT IN US
My Half-Year of Hell With Christian Fundamentalists
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,448350,00.html

Herz

[EeneyMinnieMoe]

Whoa!! :eek: I've heard of American religion seeping into Poland- my cousin has told me all about the American Mormon missionaries she and her friends have come into contact with in Poland, which I find hilarious, Mormons in Poland- but nothing like that. Taking a kid in just to recruit him for a delusional scheme to build a church halfway around the world, my God.

To ask most Polish-Americans, however, the problem with Americans is that they aren't religious enough. A good helping of North Carolina is exactly what they should be given, these religious nuts deserve each other.