Secularisation is the process of changing certain aspects of daily life so that it is no longer under the influence of religion. This paradigm is being increasingly noticeable and dominant within the politics and civil life of the Western World. But are these impious changes in social behaviour beneficial or troublesome for our modern society?

In 1999, Moojan Momen, a graduate from Cambridge University, devised the process of secularisation into the points below:

  • A decline in church attendance, with fewer marriages, baptisms and funerals being performed under religious auspices.

• The loss of prestige of religious institutions and symbols.

• The separation of society from the religious world so that religion becomes a personal matter.

• The loss of the idea of the sacred. As science increases our understanding of humanity and of the world, the area of ‘mystery’ and the supernatural decreases.

• Religious groups themselves become increasingly concerned with the things of this world rather than the spiritual world.

Many supporters of secularisation feel that this shift in social behaviour allows individual freedom, yet those who disagree feel that an unhappy and meaningless future is at risk from a lack of devotion to religion.

I would like to know what you think.

  1. Do you have a religion? If yes/no, why?
  2. Are any aspects of secularisation that are beneficial to society?
  3. Are any aspects of secularisation disadvantaged to society?
  4. What is your overall opinion?
  5. Are there any literary novels, poems, plays, etc. that you feel support your opinion.
  • Feel free to use these questions as a guidance. I just want a chat and a feel for opposing opinions. Remember that this is a safe space and all values and opinions are respected!
  • I will look forward to hearing from you all.
  • Thanks,
  • Join the Conversation


    1. Secularisation is not a bad thing. It’s just the realization that the public sphere should remain neutral from what (religion) is by definition a personal opinion or belief. To do otherwise would exclude other people with different beliefs because a society affirms itself to be of one creed.

      Because faith draws from a subjective rather than objective point of view, there are very few facts that all facets of society can agree on. The public sphere should be reserved for things that everyone has in common: observable fact, decision-making and common governance and safety.

      As for whether or not we “lose” our spirituality, religion does not have dominance over it. You can be spiritual and not religious at the same time. There is a certain spirituality to be found in all things if you look closely enough. But complaining that we aren’t spiritual enough is to omit the fact that there are other ways of feeding the spirit. Or better yet, what is “spirit”? If the question is to be a citizen of good standing, there are faithless people who help others just as well as there are faithful people, bound by their beliefs, taking the same actions to nurture their spirit.

      Again, the answer is no. It’s just the change in sources of moral power. If we take out historical cases of abuse by any group as an argument, the fact most people notice is that you can be moral and follow a code whether you believe or not. Nothing is inherently good or bad, but individuals are the products of the environment they are raised in as well as the choices they make. Nothing is good or bad, but either pure or corrupt of heart people make either determination for themselves.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. I agree with your statement that individuals are the products of their society and that, when looking at the overall picture, secularisation is not bad. Religion brings many benefits to a society, but as you said ‘nothing is inherently good or bad’ and so religion also has it’s vices. Thank you for taking the time to comment, it is very much appreciated!

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Yes, I use religion, I consider myself Christain, tho I believe that all religion serves a similar purpose. Why? Of merely myself I am prone to selfish and fearful decisions. With religion/ spirituality, I am able to have more compassion for others that are different, to see them as created beings such as myself. Secularism has its place but is prone to divide rather than unite
      I enjoy the writing of C.S. Lewis

      Liked by 1 person

    3. Man is both flesh and spirit. The temporal aspect of our nature is often at odds with the eternal. Secularization favors the former, to the exclusion of the latter.

      Both aspects of man’s nature, however, have been flawed by sin as continual wars, crime, and corruption across the generations demonstrate. Only religion can address that. But true religion cannot be mandated. It is inherently a matter of free will submission to God’s authority.

      I am, by the way, Christian so believe that mankind is in desperate need of a Savior in the Person of Christ.


    4. My first reading on this topic was late 1960’s reading Harvey Cox “Secular City”. Was so thought provoking for me earned BA in religious studies 1971. Much of his effort was exploring demythologization of religion. Consider myself born again Christian(Presbyterian) and don’t need myths and miracles as faith foundation . Adam / Eve, 6000 year old earth ? Just stories with meaningful allegorical value .


    Leave a comment

    Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

    You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

    Twitter picture

    You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

    Facebook photo

    You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

    Connecting to %s

    %d bloggers like this: