Review: Empty Churches: Non-Affiliation in America, edited by James L. Heft, S.M., and Jan E. Stets

Abstract

Empty Churches provides interdisciplinary perspectives on the non-affiliated in America. As the title suggests, it is mainly concerned with the Christian context and “the increasing departure of people from organized religion” (4). It does not, however, focus on the emerging “spiritual but not religious” category that is trending in the study of religion. Further, since non-affiliation is occurring more frequently among adolescent mainline Protestants and Catholics, many but not all of the essays are particularly concerned with contesting and nuancing these commonly assumed identities.The first part of the book examines who exactly the non-affiliated are. It begins by complicating the standard picture of the “none”—the middle-class, educated white who leans toward agnosticism or atheism. Nancy T. Ammerman suggests instead that this group may include immigrants who are religious in ways that differ from the standard “American” idea of religiosity. She further argues that some of the nones, whom she calls “the other nones,” are comprised of people who have less than a high school education and are not economically stable. Joseph O. Baker introduces the helpful category of non-affiliated theists, arguing that “treating nonreligion as a monolith must no longer be a default position, for the general public and most especially for researchers” (66). Carol Ann MacGregor and Ashlyn Haycook focus on lapsed Catholics and compare them with Catholics who still affiliate and lapsed Protestants. Their analysis yields rather unsurprising results and trends framed as “more likely to” and “less likely to.” Their conclusion that even lapsed Catholics have some residual belief is rather self-evident in the identity itself. Part one finishes up with a refreshing look at non-affiliated seniors. It would seem that there is a lot of diversity in this group but also overlap between the non-affiliated and affiliated’s spiritual practices and belief (128).Part two examines the rise in non-affiliation in America. It is, perhaps, the most interesting section with contributions that address possible underlying causes from a variety of disciplines. Sam A. Hardy and Gregory S. Longo, both developmental psychologists, point out that the decline is highest among Latin American males whose relational networks are also disinclined religiously. Unsurprisingly, religious families tend to produce religious adolescents and the same is true for nonreligious families. William V. Trollinger poignantly and convincingly makes the case that the Christian Right and its politicization of Christianity are main reasons for non-affiliation among evangelicals. After giving a helpful historical background, he claims that the merging of conservative social positions with Christianity made it increasingly difficult for individuals who did not hold those position to maintain their identity as Christian in America since “Christian” has/had taken on the connotation of “intolerant right-wing culture warrior” (179). Matthew S. Hedstrom attributes part of the responsibility of disaffiliation on liberal Protestantism, which has given rise to an evolved vision of a cosmopolitan, universal religion, unbounded by specific denominational or religious affiliation.Part three looks at the consequences of disaffiliating from political scientific, philosophical, and social scientific points of view. David E. Campbell explores the relationships between civil society, non-religiosity, and secularism, noting that, “It is correct to conclude that non-religionists, which include many of the often-discussed religious nones, are disengaged both civically and politically. However, secularists have moderate levels of civic activity but high levels of political engagement” (237). He then argues that college campuses can do more to “acknowledge and facilitate religious/secular diversity” (244)—especially through voluntarism. Bernard G. Prusak’s examination of non-affiliation and objections of conscience is the outstanding contribution in this section, eschewing the piling up of statistical charts and paragraph after paragraph of nearly perfunctory data analysis that clogs up several of the other essays’ readability. In his chapter, he traces the concept of conscience vis à vis the demands of the state and how it was originally tied to religion. Then, he notes how “conscience” before God shifted to the register of personal integrity. He wonders how conscientious objections can continue when the concept of conscience itself has historically been framed within a metaphysics and not just a personal code, concluding that, “Growing religious non-affiliation threatens to weaken objections of conscience” (265). Non-religious readers may disagree, but the issue itself raises deep and urgent questions about the relationship between American religion and democracy itself.The final section, “Addressing the Challenge,” is the most didactic, offering emic views and advice on the phenomenon from faith leaders. Its tone implies that disaffiliation is not a good thing and essays suggest ways in which those at risk or already non-affiliated can be reached. Optimistically, Elizabeth Kirkland Cahill looks for what she calls “signs of hope” and notes that in the South religious affiliation still runs high. She offers principles that might help religious institutions navigate this cultural moment. Kerry A. Robinson presents eight more “principal points of intervention” to help young adults. The section (and book) ends with Marist priest and editor James L. Heft’s closing thoughts with a significant amount of critical reflexivity. Largely pastoral in tone, he concludes, “We need strong religious families in which the faith is shared, vibrant parishes, solid religious education, and mentors to accompany us through the inevitable ups and downs of a faith life lived in the secular world” (337).Given that the nature of the anthology genre precludes lengthy analysis, the introduction, interdisciplinary perspectives, literature reviews, and synthetic contextualization make up for what the book lacks in depth. It best suits an upper-level undergraduate course or graduate course in contemporary American religiosity—especially at a Catholic institution. The last section might also be helpful for faith leaders familiar with sociology and social psychology.