Across the United States religious groups have been changing in beliefs and practices in order to adapt to modern times. Different changes among different groups tend to be classified as either liberal or conservative based on attitudes towards adapting tradition to cultural changes, interpretations of the bible, and the organizations views of working with other religious groups. The evolving environment of traditional church life has led to a decrease in literalist, but also an increase in people who consider themselves spiritual but not religious, a considerable change to traditional church life in the United States. As had been present in the past the correlation between church goers and those who hold politically conservative or republican values has persisted, and in more recent times strengthened. Since 1992 the correlation between religiously active people and those who hold conservative political values or identify as republican has strengthened. Specifically, the correlation between weekly church attendees and political outlook on abortion, premarital sex, and homosexuality has strengthened at differing rates. In regards to legal abortion in any case regular church attendees have become significantly more conservative, though in regards to premarital sex and homosexuality, regular attendees have either remand the same of have even become more liberalized about the subject since the 1970s. The overall regular church going population though is still considered to be more conservative than not. In a greater sense, these trends continue to enforce that the shifting religious trends across the United States has a far reaching influence in all aspects of a person’s life.

This week in class we talked a lot about different types of religious organizations. First we talked about this in terms of Christian polities. Episcopal polity means the church or churches are led by bishops. (Lecture) Presbyterian polity means the churches are led by older members, particularly men. (Lecture) Congregational polity means the churches are led by the congregation. (Lecture) Finally, Charismatic polity is where a group of people are brought together by a particular person who leads them. (Lecture) These types of organizations are specific to Christianity. (Lecture) Judaism, Islam, and other major religions are arranged differently. (Lecture) Another way we looked at types of Christian organizations was based on our reading of McGuire’s book. In this case, four types of religious orientation were presented. (McGuire, Pg. 156-158) Churchly orientation means that the Christian group feels a responsibility to help society, but they believe their beliefs and ways are the only way. (McGuire, Pg. 156-158) Denominational orientation means that the group feels responsibility to society and they believe other religions have value and legitimacy. (McGuire, Pg. 156-158) Their way isn’t the only way. Sectarian orientation means the group is in tension with society and they believe their way is the only way. (McGuire, Pg. 156-158) These group are often outsiders in society and often just stick to themselves. (McGuire, Pg. 156-158) Finally, Cultic orientation means the group is in tension with society, but they are accepting of other religions and believe they have value. (McGuire, Pg. 156-158) These groups will just sometimes stick to themselves too. (McGuire, Pg. 156-158) In the end, these are all valid ways of separating Christian denominations into different types of groups. One is not better than the other; although some may have more negative reputations. These systems just help make identifying and studying these groups easier to do.

Countries and societies themselves can create a religion for its people. Civil religion is important because it shows that unity can be found amount the differentiated. According to Hammond, civil religion is “any set of beliefs and rituals, related to the past, present, and/or future of a people which are understood in some transcendental fashion.” Civil religion influences the people. Civil religion eclipses all ethnic and religious boundaries. In America, there are many civil ceremonies that mimic a religious quality such as the Fourth of July. There are also sacred places for Americans to make a “pilgrimages” to such as the Capitol building or war memorials. There are also sacred objects that many Americans “worship” such as the American flag. Many people have tried to ban burning a flag in political protest, showing that it is believed sacred because it should not be defiled. American civil religion also has its saints and myths. American saints would be Lincoln, Washington, or Theodore Roosevelt. American saints can also be anyone that society has looked up to such as Davy Crockett or MacArthur. There are stories of the American dream of land, social mobility and achievement. These stories influence people to carry themselves in a certain way and influence people to treat others in specific ways as well. American civil religion is a powerful force that drives the way people act. American civil religion is a nonofficial religion that effects the American people everyday and they may not even notice it.

In class last Monday we focused on what it means to be an “offical” religion vs what it means to be a “nonofficial religion.” We learned that official religions have a set time, place, doctrine, and leader whereas nonofficial religions can meet anywhere, anytime, with anyone. Growing up in a very small, Catholic community, I would have had difficulty understanding what nonofficial religion was, becase the only religion I knew was “official.” Now, as an adult at a liberal arts university, I see people practicing nonofficial religion sometimes more than official religion. In class we talked about different examples of nonofficial religious practices and we came up with many ideas. We talked about setting up mini alters,  sometimes at cemetaries or a specific place where a loved one had passed away, like on the side of the road or at a tree. We talked about how the act of meditating or praying in your home (or any other location) is an example nonofficial religion, and many people do this without realizing it. During times of hardship or tragedy, many find themselves praying or meditating to find a sense of peace and comfort. Many people practice nonofficial religion without even realizing it, which I think should be included in future religious polls in the US, to accurately determine the religiosity in America.

I was raised in a traditional Catholic household and attended Catholic school from 1st grade till my high school graduation. During puberty is when my mother started explaining to me the clear differences between women and men because of religion. She would tell me that the Bible taught that women had to be subordinate to men and that I could not be a sexual being like a man because my worth came from my virginity, and my husband AND God would be disappointed in me if I was not virgin on our honeymoon. These ideas did not coincide well with who I believed to be, because I felt that my sexuality should not determine my relationship with God. I realize now that my mom did not mean to hurt me, but that she was raised on these traditional beliefs.
In “The Social Context”, McGuire speaks about the history as to why women sexuality has been demonized to be seen as something evil. As a result, it does not necessarily make women happy or give them a positive identity. I think that’s why I strived away from religion, because I did not identify with those beliefs. This is when I began to become more of a “spiritual” person. I believe more women would want to be religious again, if these traditional ideals were no longer in place. The idea that women’s sexuality is evil is a historical construct, but it does not mean that it must remain permanent. Getting rid of some traditional beliefs and adapting to modern times could be away for religion to gain popularity from those people who have turned against it.

Distinguishing between official and nonofficial religions at first may seem simple, however there are many different factors that go into making those distinctions. The term “nonofficial religion” does not sit well with me, simply because I believe that there are endless ways in which an individual can show their reverence.  Although official religious traditions and staples make it appear that there most definitely is a way in which to live one’s life according to their religion, and display their religiosity, there are countless different ways in which people worship. No matter the size or spectacle of a religious act, an individual’s beliefs are valid. Skepticism and judgement of different and less known “nonofficial”religions are present in many different sects and denominations of official religions, who may look down on the small scale and unorganized religious beliefs of others. For centuries beliefs and rituals that did not fit the status quo of the dominant religion were invalidated and claimed as heretical, feared and therefore persecuted. What is so often forgotten in regards to “official vs. nonofficial religions” is that dominant religions such as Christianity were once persecuted and thought of heresy just as many new nonofficial and untraditional religions of today. In chapter 5, McGuire quotes Emile Durkheim, stating, “It is life itself, and not a dead past which can produce a living cult.” (pg. 186). The liveliness and unique aspects of new religious beliefs and sentiments should be celebrated, no matter if official religions choose to accept them as religions, or cast them aside as a new spiritual youth trend. Differences between official, nonofficial, old, and new religions, no matter their status should be respected and validated.

Measuring religiosity in the developing American culture today in a truly meaningful way presents many problems, but from each difficulty, new information is uncovered. As recommended by Chaves, many survey respondents say they attended a religious service in the past week in order to assure the pollster of the person’s commitment to religion. Outwardly and traditionally, commitment to religion is expressed in service attendance. Though in regards to the information provided by the time journals allocated to respondents previous to the interview a majority of respondents who said they went to service, didn’t.

Many information collection methods are narrow in their understanding of the modern world. Certain question regarding religious services as church, automatically alienates any respondent belonging to a religion who attends any other religious service like synagogue, temple, ect. Either way religious service attendance is any way you look at the information gathered decreasing or in the least stagnant in the United States today. Again go back to the first week of class we heard from several students how their parent’s religiosity impacted their own throughout their childhood and their practices and commitments today. Comparatively to national data the information presented to us that day was hardly different from that of which we have read this weekend, non-religious parents turn out on average less religious children and vice versa with variables and special circumstances to be considered of course. I’d like to explore further what exactly compels people to falsely state that they have attended a religious service regularly or just in a single week in order to defend their religiosity. How exactly has this been reflected in our own class discussion regarding religion? In what other ways do people defend their religiosity unconsciously and daily?

Considering “official” vs. “nonofficial” religion is a very interesting concept for me, especially when adding the third idea of occultism. I had never thought of the factors that would make a religion official or nonofficial or something that would be defined as a cult.  I don’t consider myself to be a religious person but I do have some religious practices in my everyday life. Thinking about official religions and nonofficial religions is interesting when considering what my life’s religious practices have involved.

After the class discussion this past week, I still have questions and thoughts regarding the difference between being a religious group and a cult. McGuire defines official religion as “a set of beliefs and practices prescribed, regulated, and socialized by organized, specifically religious groups” (page 104), and she defines occultism as “a worldview based on a set of claims that contradict established scientific or religious knowledge and that typically emphasize ‘hidden’ teachings” ( page 337). Would being an unofficial religion be considered a cult? Where is the line drawn? At what point does a cult become a religion and vice versa? I’m curious about this topic because I feel as though it isn’t discussed as much as maybe it should be. I find that cults can be seen as a negative thing, and they are looked down on my others. How does the negative stigma around occultism effect the way the groups are seen? How does it effect the way they interact with each other?