You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
Is religion fading away as societies modernise? What is the proper social role of the Church, and how far should it intervene in politics and economics? These questions sit at the heart of the AQA topic on Christianity and society. The specification frames it around the social role of the Church; the secularisation thesis applied to Christianity in Britain; the relationship between the Church and politics; Christian responses to materialism; and liberationist approaches. It also names the challenge of militant atheism (with Alister McGrath's The Dawkins Delusion? as the Christian reply) and the Church's own renewal movements — Fresh Expressions and the House Church movement — as evidence that the picture is more complex than simple decline. This lesson sets out the sociology precisely, distinguishes the dimensions of secularisation, and weighs whether the thesis really holds for Britain.
Before asking whether Christianity is declining, it helps to be clear about what the Church does in society, because secularisation is precisely the loss of these functions, and one cannot judge whether something has been lost without first knowing what it was. The Church's social role is wider than Sunday worship.
Key term: The social role of the Church is the set of functions religion performs in society — worship and pastoral care, moral teaching, welfare and education, social cohesion, and prophetic critique. The secularisation thesis claims modernity progressively strips the Church of these public roles, confining religion to private life.
A crucial nuance, often missed, is that several of these functions have been transferred to the state rather than simply abandoned. Education and healthcare, once overwhelmingly church provision, are now largely public — which can look like secularisation (the Church no longer runs them) but is in part the success of Christian values becoming embedded in secular institutions. Around a quarter of state-funded schools in England remain Church schools, and church-based welfare (food banks, debt advice, hospices, refugee support) has grown precisely as the state has retrenched. So the Church's social role has not vanished; it has been reshaped — diminished in some areas, persistent or even expanding in others. This is why measuring secularisation by any single indicator is so misleading, and why the "dimensions" distinction below is indispensable.
Two classic, and opposed, sociological readings frame the topic. Émile Durkheim (1858–1917) argued that religion functions to integrate society, expressing and reinforcing the "collective conscience" — the shared values that bind a community; on this view the Church's social role is fundamentally conservative and cohesive. Karl Marx (1818–1883), by contrast, read religion critically as "the opium of the people" — a comfort that masks and so perpetuates injustice, encouraging the oppressed to accept their lot in hope of a heavenly reward rather than to change their material conditions. The two readings set up the topic's central argument: is the Church a stabilising moral anchor that society can ill afford to lose (Durkheim's instinct), or an ideological prop whose decline is a liberation (Marx's)? Liberation theology, strikingly, agrees with Marx that religion can function as oppressive ideology, but turns the point around: rightly understood, the Gospel is not opium but a summons to liberate the oppressed. The secularisation debate is, in part, about whether anything now performs religion's integrating role, and whether its loss leaves a vacuum — filled, some argue, by consumerism or nationalism — or simply a more plural, secular settlement.
Key term: Secularisation is, in Bryan Wilson's classic 1966 definition, "the process whereby religious thinking, practice and institutions lose social significance." The secularisation thesis is the claim that modernisation — industrialisation, science, rationalisation and pluralism — causes this decline, so that religion inevitably retreats as societies advance.
The German sociologist Max Weber (1864–1920) is a founding figure. He argued that modernity brings rationalisation and the "disenchantment of the world" (Entzauberung): magical, mythical and religious accounts of reality are progressively displaced by rational, scientific and bureaucratic ones, so the world ceases to be experienced as charged with the sacred. Strikingly, in The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (1905) Weber suggested Christianity itself helped to bring this about: the Calvinist ethic of disciplined work and worldly asceticism nurtured the spirit of capitalism, which then outgrew its religious parent and became an autonomous secular force — religion, on this reading, digging its own grave.
Bryan Wilson (1926–2004), in Religion in Secular Society (1966), gave the thesis its classic British statement, documenting the declining authority of the churches to shape what people believe, how they behave, and how society is run. Steve Bruce (b. 1954) is its most forceful contemporary defender; in God is Dead: Secularization in the West (2002) he argues that:
The headline British evidence is stark: regular churchgoing has fallen from perhaps 40% of the population in the mid-nineteenth century to well under 10% today; in the 2021 Census for England and Wales, for the first time, fewer than half the population identified as Christian (down from 59% in 2011 to about 46%), while those of "no religion" rose to over a third; and the churches' influence over law and public morality (on divorce, abortion, sexuality, Sunday trading) has plainly receded. On these institutional and legal measures, Britain looks like a textbook case of secularisation.
The historian Callum Brown, in The Death of Christian Britain (2001), sharpens the British picture in a way worth knowing, because he challenges the standard Weber–Bruce story even while affirming decline. Brown argues that secularisation in Britain was not the slow, two-century erosion that modernisation theory predicts; rather it struck suddenly and catastrophically in the 1960s. His distinctive claim is that the decisive factor was the changing position of women: with the sexual revolution, feminism and expanding economic choice, women — long the principal carriers of family piety — abruptly "cancelled their mass subscription to the discursive domain of Christianity," and the church-shaped vocabulary of respectable femininity collapsed. Brown's thesis is doubly useful in an essay: it supplies a precise British timeline that the gradualist account misses, and it shows that even committed secularisation historians disagree about the cause, which weakens any claim that the thesis is a settled law.
The single biggest mark of a strong answer is to distinguish the dimensions of secularisation, because they can move independently.
| Dimension | What declines | Strong in Britain? |
|---|---|---|
| Institutional | Churchgoing, baptisms, church weddings, clergy numbers | Yes — clearly declining |
| Social/political | The Church's influence over law, education, public morality | Largely yes |
| Subjective (belief) | Personal belief in God, prayer, an afterlife | Less clearly — belief lingers |
This distinction is what generates the most important criticisms of the thesis.
Taken together, these criticisms do not refute secularisation so much as complicate it. The strongest version of the thesis — that modernity necessarily and uniformly secularises everywhere — is hard to defend in the face of the United States, the Global South and Britain's own renewal movements. The defensible version is more modest: that institutional and political religion has clearly declined in modern Britain and much of Europe, while belief and spirituality have proved more durable and more mobile than the early theorists expected. Holding that distinction steady is the key to evaluating the topic well.
If the Church has a social role, how far should it press it into politics? Christians have answered very differently, and the spectrum is itself examinable.
| Position | Claim | Associated with |
|---|---|---|
| Engagement (prophetic) | The Gospel demands action for justice; the Church must speak against injustice | Liberation theology; Martin Luther King Jr; Desmond Tutu (1931–2021) |
| Critical distance (realism) | Engage politically, but never identify the Gospel with a party or programme, mindful of human sin | Reinhold Niebuhr (1892–1971) |
| Quietism / two kingdoms | The Church's business is spiritual; it should keep out of worldly power | Some Anabaptist and pietist traditions; one reading of Luther's "two kingdoms" |
The underlying theological question is the relation of church and state. Models range from theocracy (Calvin's Geneva), through establishment (the Church of England, with the monarch as Supreme Governor and bishops in the House of Lords), to separation (the US First Amendment; French laïcité) and outright persecution (the Soviet Union). The New Testament itself holds a creative tension: Romans 13:1 urges submission to governing authorities as "instituted by God," while Acts 5:29 ("we must obey God rather than any human authority") sets a sharp limit when the state commands what God forbids — the warrant for Christian civil disobedience from the Confessing Church under Nazism to the civil-rights movement.
Reinhold Niebuhr's "Christian realism" is the most influential middle way: because human beings and their institutions are deeply marked by sin, Christians should work for justice in society without the utopian illusion that they can build the Kingdom of God on earth. His maxim — that humanity's capacity for justice makes democracy possible, but humanity's inclination to injustice makes it necessary — captures a politics that is engaged yet chastened. This contrasts sharply with the more confident transformationism of liberation theology.
In Britain the live form of the church-and-state question is the debate over establishment itself. Defenders argue that the established Church of England, with bishops in the House of Lords and a duty of care to every parish, gives faith a constructive public voice, anchors national life at moments of crisis and celebration, and (paradoxically) protects religious freedom by modelling a tolerant, non-coercive establishment. Critics — including some Christians, who note that disestablishment might free the Church to be more prophetic, and secularists who object to any privileged religious voice in a plural society — argue that establishment is an anachronism in a country where most no longer practise the faith. The very fact that this is debated shows the topic's central tension: an institution losing its grip on the population yet still woven into the constitution. A strong answer can use establishment as a concrete case of the abstract question, "what social and political role should the Church now have?"
The specification names Christian responses to materialism — both philosophical materialism (the claim that matter is all there is) and economic materialism (consumerism, the pursuit of possessions as life's goal).
Key term: Materialism has two senses relevant here: the metaphysical claim that physical matter is the only reality (denying the soul, God and the supernatural), and the moral/cultural condition in which the acquisition of goods and wealth becomes the dominant value.
Christianity opposes economic materialism at its roots. Jesus warns, "You cannot serve God and wealth [mammon]" (Matthew 6:24), counsels storing up "treasures in heaven" rather than on earth (Matthew 6:19–21), and tells the rich young ruler to sell his possessions, adding that "it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God" (Mark 10:21–25). The Letter to Timothy adds that "the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil" (1 Timothy 6:10) — note: the love of money, not money itself, the careful distinction a good answer preserves. The tradition channels these warnings into the sanctity of the person over things — human beings are made in God's image and so have a dignity that no quantity of goods can confer — and into stewardship: wealth is a trust to be used for the common good, not an end in itself. Catholic Social Teaching (from Rerum Novarum, 1891, onward) develops a sustained critique of both unrestrained capitalism and atheistic communism, defending workers' rights, the universal destination of goods, and the "preferential option for the poor."
Subscribe to continue reading
Get full access to this lesson and all 10 lessons in this course.