Freddie Doust examines the state of religious faith in the United Kingdom and wonders whether we are becoming far too apathetic…
THE past 30 years has seen an unprecedented socio-cultural shift in the UK. Religion, and in particular, Christianity, had for centuries been the centre of British life. After a fraction of this time – around a quarter of a century – this couldn’t be farther from the truth. Clearly, for an atheist such as myself, on first inspection this can only be a good thing. When the actual situation is analysed, however, I’m not so sure.
Today, just 44 per cent now describe themselves as Christian. I’d be willing to bet that the majority of that 44 per cent are not actually ‘Christian’ at all. They, for the purposes of a survey, will have felt pressured to put it down for various reasons – tradition, perhaps, but more importantly because they wouldn’t describe themselves as theologically ‘atheist’. They are, instead, apathetic. To progress further into the world of scientific objectivism (and, implicit in that, away from antediluvian ritual and belief in dubious metaphysical entities, for which there is no proof) will require further, and better education. Are we on this path? I don’t think we are.
Ed Miliband has, since snatching the leadership of the Labour party from his (probably more deserving) brother, made plain his religious views. He is not, he claims, overtly atheist; neither is he (rather vaguely) a man of religion. He is however a man of “faith” (by this he means belief in an – abstractly – “better” United Kingdom). The important thing to take from this is not the prevaricating nature of the sentiment. The fact is, one of our most public men – the leader of the Opposition – is not Christian. And not religious either.
David Cameron doesn’t wear religion on his sleeve. Surely then, it’s a thing of the past. An archaism. Thatcher was dogmatic about her faith. She even recited the words of St Francis of Assisi to justify her political moves. But then again, Thatcher was an ideological, principled prime minister. Our politicians today – not least Miliband and Cameron, by virtue of today’s society – must be pragmatists. The natural implication that arises from this is that, as modern pragmatic politicians, they must reflect the national mood. The fact that they make no reference to religion (and in particular, Christianity) whilst Thatcher, as recently as 1990, was nostalgically aiming for a society based on “Victorian values”, underpinned by Christian faith, must be showing a mirror up to society itself: a society disinterested in Christian dogma.
What are the implications of this? Are we now living in a totally objectivist, scientifically-rationalist society thanks to better education? I would say no. Has mass immigration, resulting in an increasingly (conservatives would say) fractured society resulted in this move away from traditional faith? Possibly. Is it simply a natural progression in what is a progressive, Western society? If it’s natural, does it even matter?
Evidently such a statement throws open a whole world of questions and implications. Clearly this move away from traditional Christianity is multifactorial. But we can surely hem down some factors. Certainly education, albeit not the main one, is one. More people than ever are now going onto tertiary education in the UK. University: a place where, shamelessly, students can gather and quasi-academically (and certainly pretentiously) discuss the big metaphysical questions, religion, the nature of things, without having to worry about getting up for work in the morning. But that’s a small elite.
It doesn’t explain the all-encompassing move away from religion that we’ve witnessed over the last 30 years. There must be more important factors.
How about our celebrity academics – Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins? How much of an impact have they had on the cultural shift? Certainly, the dates they have been in operation, arguing against religious practice, is loosely the same time span in which this shift has occurred. But saying that this is the reason, like saying that better education is the reason, presupposes something that – I’d argue – is not the case; that is, that the shift is actually an ideological one – a shift away from one doctrine to another (Christianity to atheism). This is not the case. It is, instead, a shift away from religion towards something loose and indefinable. Nothing in particular. Unbelief, as opposed to belief in anything. Even Hitchens and Dawkins believe in something – a scientific, rationalist approach to metaphysical thought.
Instead it seems that the general make up of society is apathetic. We are apathetic in what we believe religiously, and politically (as illustrated by plummeting voter turnout). So perhaps this shift is best described as a shift towards apathy, a shift to laziness. This may be quite a nihilistic, dystopian standpoint. It would be lovely to say that the shift is thanks to a kind of Neo-Enlightenment, but it is simply not true.
Our politicians – Miliband and Cameron – reflect this. At least Thatcher had conviction in her views and was not frightened to share them.
Freddie Doust
exeposedev 