Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Secularism on the rise in the UK
DairyLama
Veteran Veteran
The proportion of the population who identify as having no religion rose from 25% in 2011 to 48.5% in 2014, surveys show. So should I be looking out for abandoned churches to convert to Buddhist temples? Or since everyone is now worshipping at the supermarket on a Sunday morning, should I run a meditation group at Tescos, perhaps in the freezer section? 
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/23/no-religion-outnumber-christians-england-wales-study
2
Comments
Thank god secularism is growing.
I love religions or at least their inner component, which I would suggest have much of the ethics and morality of common sense secularists.
Buddhism is sometimes pitched as a secular religion. The question for me is whether a religion substitute is required. I would suggest for most people secularism is a perfectly acceptable way of being, suffering and not requiring or expecting enlightenment.
I however want more. Hence Dharma. I iz spiritually greedy ...
Well, if people can teach Meditation in Church Halls, (as has happened) I see very little effort in moving sideways into the Sacristy.....
It's the same in many parts of the word... In the Netherlands about 60% identify as not religious, rising with 1% per year. In Australia it's 65%, also rising about 1% per year.
I think it is down to science. Given where we historically are coming from - centuries of censure by the church - the last 200 years have slowly seen people coming around from modes of thinking which are religious first to modes of thinking where religion does not feature at all.
But I don't think you can remove the spiritual impulse from humans. I think it will probably rebound at some point, with new forms of spirituality emerging.
It seems to be a delicate area though: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/17/york-minster-criticised-zen-buddhist-meditation-grounds
So what do you think those might be? When I look in the "mind, body and spirit" section of the local bookshop there seem to be quite a few books on mindfulness and quite a lot of books about angels. It seems rather incongruous.
If I had to pick a single impetus for the dwindling social toe-hold of religion, I think I would pick the Internet. It is harder to weave wondrous tales where information -- right, wrong or indifferent -- is so readily available.
But I agree with the sentiment that suggests spiritual life will find another channel, another expression, in future. Just because popes and imams and rabbis and gurus lose their claim to some high seat does not mean that individuals have lost interest in a realm that is without doubt or free or joyous or enlightened or whatever word anyone might choose. The unsatisfactoriness/dukkha of Buddhism is true whether or not anyone calls it "Buddhism."
Is the diminishing-religion situation any more true or credible or devoid of fault than what preceded it? I seriously doubt it. Most of the truths anyone finds in life require a lot of wading through the lies. So I think new names will be found, but the wading will be pretty much the same.
I suspect it will be something more scientific than Buddhism - something more evidence focussed and more about the personal experience of God, the numinous, the supernatural. I think the conjunction of mindfulness, near death experiences, yoga, new age spirituality and the idea of personal spiritual crisis will give rise to a diaspora of new movements, of which a few will prove popular.
Influences from Buddhism, perhaps via psychotherapy, will likely continue to seep through, and some ideas about angels and God will likely persist though I doubt that the Christian church will make a comeback. It will be an interesting time, I'm sure the current thicket of views will persist for a long time.
I just wrote them an email.... And it was both gracious and instructive, before anyone jumps to conclusions as to motive.
Not sure where you are getting your figures from but Wikipedia states the last census in Australia in 2011 had No Religion running at about 22%. Roman Catholicism still in the lead at about 25%.
A friend actually mentioned it, although it appears I slightly misquoted. She was talking about the figures of actual regular attendance, not how people identify in a census.
Wikipedia has it that for Australia...
Why do you find more elderly people in church? ....They are cramming for the finals
On a more serious note...I wouldn't be surprised if the vast majority of church goers are there more for the 'social' interaction than for any god worship...ie, a nice cup of tea and biscuits along with catching up on the local gossip... "Ethel have you heard about misses Joneses daughter? she had a baby out of wedlock" "Oh my! Well I never"
I think Secularism is just becoming more 'open'.....out of the closet....
Yes, there is undoubtedly a strong social side to church-going, also the feeling of belonging.
Perhaps the same applies to attending a Buddhist group?
I hope the email didn't start: "Ere, you wiv the funny hat, get a bleedin' grip...."
Yes, no doubt there's a bit of this happening within Buddhist groups too...
No, it began "Ere, you wiv the funny 'AT, get a bleedin' grip...." My cockney is consistent, if nothing else.
I feel it is important not to confuse our secular/mundane needs with the requirements of the path.
Do we examine our needs for companionship, practices, teachers, experiences, problem solving and dietary tips? I do and very often confuse 'needs' with requirements.
Pah! Hanyway, 'ave you 'ad a reply to your he-mail? 'Ave you been hexcommunicated for using green ink?
It's supposed to be though. It would be kind of one-sided otherwise. We take refuge in the Sangha but we are a part of the Sangha.
Quite so, but of course there is an emphasis on community in most religious traditions.
Not so much as a peepy-deep.
That's true. Just saying it isn't necessarily a bad thing.