The Bible Belt

[pieter]

The Bible Belt

The Bible Belt is an informal term for a region in the south-eastern and south-central United States in which socially conservative evangelical Protestantism is a significant part of the culture and Christian church attendance across the denominations is generally higher than the nation's average. The Bible Belt consists of much of the Southern United States. During the colonial period (1607–1776), the South was a stronghold of the Anglican church. Its transition to a stronghold of non-Anglican Protestantism occurred gradually over the next century as a series of religious revival movements, many associated with the Baptist denomination, gained great popularity in the region.
The region is usually contrasted with the mainline Protestantism and Catholicism of the northeastern United States, the religiously diverse Midwest and Great Lakes, the Mormon Corridor in Utah and southern Idaho, and the relatively secular western United States. Whereas the state with the highest percentage of residents identifying as non-religious is the New England state of Vermont at 34%, in the Bible Belt state of Alabama it is just 6%. Mississippi has the highest proportion of Baptists, at 55%. The earliest known usage of the term "Bible Belt" was by American journalist and social commentator H. L. Mencken, who in 1924 wrote in the Chicago Daily Tribune: "The old game, I suspect, is beginning to play out in the Bible Belt." Mencken claimed the term as his invention in 1927.


The Bible Belt in the USA



Geography

The name "Bible Belt" has been applied historically to the South and parts of the Midwest, but is more commonly identified with the South. In a 1961 study, Wilbur Zelinsky delineated the region as the area in which denominations are the predominant religious affiliation. The region thus defined included most of the Southern United States, including most of Texas and Oklahoma in the southwest, and in the states south of the Ohio River, and extending east to include central West Virginia, Virginia south of Northern Virginia, and parts of Maryland. In addition, the Bible Belt covers parts of Missouri, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. A 1978 study by Charles Heatwole identified the Bible Belt as the region dominated by 24 fundamentalist Protestant denominations, corresponding to essentially the same area mapped by Zielinski.
Tweedie (1978) defines the Bible Belt in terms of the audience for religious television. He finds two belts: one more eastern that stretches from central Florida through Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, Georgia, North and South Carolina, and into Virginia; and another that is more western, moving from central Texas to the Dakotas, and concentrated in Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Missouri, Kansas, and Mississippi.

The Bible Belt in the Netherlands


In The Netherlands

In the Netherlands, De Bijbelgordel stretches from the provinces of Zeeland to Overijssel. It was essentially the border between the Protestant and Catholic parts of the Netherlands after the Protestant Reformation (around 1560). The Dutch Bible Belt developed more explicitly in the 19th century. In the Bijbelgordel, the popular SGP favored a theocracy, and women were denied full party membership and the ability to be political representatives, although this was changed in respectively 1996 and 2012 when women were allowed to be members of the SGP (the Reformed Political Party) and the party granted passive suffrage to its female members. Immigrants from this area to the U.S. formed the Christian Reformed Church in North America.

In The United Kingdom

Scotland

In Scotland the Highlands and Islands are a stronghold of Christianity, both in the Church of Scotland and in smaller Presbyterian denominations such as the Free Church of Scotland. However, neither region is referred to as a 'bible belt'.

Northern Ireland

In Northern Ireland, the County Antrim area stretching from roughly Portrush to Larne and centered in the area of Ballymena is often referred to as a Bible Belt. This is because the area is heavily Protestant with a large evangelical community. From 1970 to 2010, the MP for North Antrim was Ian Paisley, a Free Presbyterian minister well known for his theological fundamentalism. The town of Ballymena, the largest town in the constituency, is often referred to as the "buckle" of the Bible Belt.

Comment Pieter: The Northern-Irish Bible could be connected to the Dutch biblebelt, because the Protestant presence in Northern-Ireland has to do with a Dutch king of England which conquered Northern-Ireland. The Orange marches of the Protestants in Northern-Ireland are directly linked to that past, because that Orange color is the color of the Dutch Royal family. The Dutch-born Protestant King of England, Ireland and Scotland William of Orange, defeated the army of Catholic James II at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690. ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_III_of_England )

Counter-revolutionary or anti-revolutionairy christian conservatives

The word "counterrevolutionary" originally refers to thinkers who opposed themselves to the 1789 French Revolution, such as Joseph de Maistre, Louis de Bonald or, later, Charles Maurras, the founder of the Action française monarchist movement. Henceforth, it is used in France to qualify political movements that refuse the legacy of the 1789 Revolution, which historian René Rémond has referred to as légitimistes. Thus, monarchists supporters of the Ancien Régime following the French Revolution were counterrevolutionaries, for example the Revolt in the Vendée and the monarchies that put down the various Revolutions of 1848. The royalist legitimist counterrevolutionary French movement survives to this day, albeit marginally. It was active during the purported "Révolution nationale" enacted by Vichy France, though, which has been considered by René Rémond not as a fascist regime but as a counterrevolutionary regime, whose motto was Travail, Famille, Patrie ("Work, Family, Fatherland"), which replaced the Republican motto Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité.
After the French Revolution, anticlerical policies and the execution of King Louis XVI led to the Revolt in the Vendee. This counter-revolution produced what is debated to be the first modern genocide. Monarchists and Catholics took up arms against the revolutionaries' French Republic in 1793 after the government asked that 300,000 Vendeans be conscripted into the Republican military. The Vendeans would also rise up against Napoleon's attempt to conscript them in 1815.
The supporters of Carlism during the 19th century to the present day are perhaps the oldest surviving counter-revolutionary group in Spain. Supporters uphold the legitimist view of royal succession, as well as regional autonomy under the monarchy, tradition and Catholicism. The Carlist cause began with the First Carlist War in 1833 and continues to the present.
The White Army and its supporters who tried to defeat the Bolsheviks after the October Revolution, as well as the German politicians, police, soldiers and Freikorps who crushed the German Revolution of 1918–1919, were also counter-revolutionaries. General Victoriano Huerta, and later the Felicistas, attempted to thwart the Mexican Revolution in the 1910s.

Anti-revolutionairy ideology of Dutch Calvinists



Orthodox-Protestant Dutch Calvinist christians opposed the French revolution and atheist socialism, communism and secular bourgeois liberalism fiercly, because they considered it as being anti-christian or non-christian. The very word "Anti-revolutionairy" means opposition to the Godless and evil French revolution, in the eyes of these Calvinist conservatives of the 19th and 20th century. This is connected to the "Bible Belt" because these people were/are from the Bible Belt and were very influential in the Calvinist Dutch Reformed Pillar and in the political arena of the Netherlands. There were quite a few anti-revolutionairy prime-ministers, ministers and parlaimentarians. Some Dutch-Americans have Calvinist anti-revolutionairy roots. Often these people are conservative republicans, conservative independent voters or Tea party supporters. They were against the French revolution which they considered to be "Godless", but not against the American revoltution, because the American revolution was in large part a revolution for religious freedom, puritinical Calvinist, Baptist, Methodist and other Protestants who migrated to America.


The first antip-revolutionairy leader Abraham Kuyper

The anti-revolutionary parliamentary caucus had existed since the 1840s. It represented orthodox tendencies within the Dutch Reformed Church. Under the leadership of Guillaume Groen van Prinsterer the anti-revolutionaries became a real political force, which opposed the liberal tendencies within the Dutch Reformed Church and the liberal tendencies within Dutch politics. Their three values were "God, the Netherlands, and the House of Orange". At the time the anti-revolutionary ideal was a Protestant theocracy in which Catholics and Jews were second-class citizens.


ARP election add

An important issue was public education, which in the view of the anti-revolutionaries should be Protestant-Christian in nature. The anti-revolutionaries had ties with the April movement, which opposed the official re-establishment of Roman Catholic bishoprics, and a mixed relationship with (liberal-) conservatives in the House of Representatives, who also opposed reforms to the social and political system but often on the basis of a mix of liberal Protestantism and secular humanism. During the 1860s Groen van Prinsterer became more isolated from his conservative allies. He also began to reformulate his Protestant-Christian ideals, and began to plead for "souvereiniteit in eigen kring" (sphere sovereignty) instead of theocracy. This meant that instead of one Protestant-Christian society, Groen van Prinsterer wanted a Protestant society within a pluralistic society ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillarisation ). Orthodox Protestants would have their own churches, schools, papers, political parties and sports clubs. This laid the basis for pillarization, which was to dominate Dutch society between 1880 and 1960.
In 1864 Groen van Prinsterer began to correspond with a young Dutch Reformed theologian named Abraham Kuyper. Kuyper was heavily influenced by Groen van Prinsterer's ideas and began to put the latter's ideal of an orthodox Protestant society within Dutch society into practice.



The Anti-revolutionairies had one practical political goal: equalization of payment between public and religious schools. It had one political strategy: the anti-thesis between religious and non-religious parties, which meant that they sought to break the cooperation between liberals and Catholics and to create an alliance between Catholics and Protestants.

The Anti-revolutionairy Party, ARP (1879-1980)


ARP election poster from the thirtees

Ideology and issues

The ARP started out as an orthodox Protestant party, heavily opposed to the ideals of the French revolution. Against the revolution, they put the Bible: instead of liberty, it favoured divine providence, instead of equality it favoured hierarchy and instead of brotherhood it favoured sovereignty in its own circle. Its ideals could be summed up in the trio "God, the Netherlands and the House of Orange". For most of its history it had this conservative Protestant image. In the 1960s and 1970s the party began to adopt a more leftwing radical evangelical image.


Anti-revolutionairy, ARP, election car

God

The ARP was a confessional Protestant party which based its politics on the Bible and opposed the concept of popular sovereignty.
The concept of sphere sovereignty was very important for the party. It wanted to create an independent Protestant society within the Dutch society, with its own schools, papers, hospitals, universities, broadcast organisations (Radio and TV stations), Protestant Unions and community life. It sought equal government finances for its own institutions. Societies should care for their own, therefore they opposed a large role for the state in social-economic policy.
The ARP saw an important role for the state in upholding the values of the Dutch people. It was socially conservative: it opposed co-education, mandatory vaccination, divorce, pornography, euthanasia, abortion, Feminism, Gay rights activism and environmentalism. It also favoured the death penalty.


Anti-revolutionairy prime-minister Barend Biesheuvel. He was prime-minister from 1971 until 1973.

The Netherlands

The party can be seen as rather nationalist. It favoured a strong defense to retain Dutch neutrality. It opposed decolonization. It saw the colonies in Indonesia, as vital for the continued wealth and influence for the Dutch people. It also wanted to enlighten the native population with Christian values.


Jelle Zijlstra (1918-2001), ARP-politician. Zijlstra was prime-minister and minister of Finance. The photo is from 1956.

Orange

The ARP favoured monarchy, and saw the House of Orange as historically and religiously linked to the Dutch people. It opposed changes to Dutch political system, it wanted to retain bicameralism, opposed popular referendums etc. Its commitment to universal suffrage was only tactical as the ARP expected that it would be able to gain more seats this way. Principally it wanted Householder Franchise where the father of each family would vote for his family.
The party was fiscally conservative: the Dutch government should be like a good father: it should not spend more than it got through taxes.

Dissolution

Meanwhile a process of merger had started between the Roman Catholic KVP, ARP and CHU (the Christian Historian Union). In 1974 they founded a federation called the Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA). In the formation of a common Christian-democratic identity anti-revolutionary Aantjes played a decisive role: he orients the party towards the sermon on the Mount where Christ says that Christians should clothe the naked and feed the hungry. In the 1977 elections they campaigned together under as the CDA. Some prominent anti-revolutionaries, like Aantjes did not agree the CDA/VVD cabinet (rightwing or centre-right coalition of Christian-democrats and secular liberal-conservatives of the VVD) that was formed after the elections, and wanted to continue with the PvdA (=the Dutch Labour party), however they supported the cabinet politically. A group of these anti-revolutionaries left the CDA in 1981 to found the left-wing Christian Evangelical People's Party.

Christian democracy

Since 1880 the sizeable Catholic and Protestant parties had worked together in the so-called Coalitie. They shared a common interest in public funding of religious schools. In 1888 they formed the first Christian-democratic government, led by the Anti-Revolutionary Æneas Baron Mackay. The cooperation was not without problems and in 1894 the more anti-papist and aristocratic conservatives left the Protestant Anti Revolutionary Party, to found the Christian Historical Union. The main issues dividing Protestants and Catholics was the position of the Dutch Representation at the Holy See and the future of the Dutch Indies.
From 1918 onward the three parties had a majority in both houses of States-General, and at least two of three parties were represented in the cabinets. This majority lasted until 1967. After the war the three Christian-democratic parties were the Catholic People's Party (KVP), the Protestant Anti Revolutionary Party (ARP), and the Protestant Christian Historical Union (CHU). The KVP and its antecedent, the Roman Catholic State Party, had been in government without interruption since 1918.
In the sixties, the Dutch society became more secularized and the pillars faded, and voters began to move away from the three Christian-democratic parties. In 1963 the three parties held 51% of the vote, whilst in 1972 they held only 32%. This decline forced the three parties to work closer together. In 1967 the Group of Eighteen was formed: it was a think-tank of six prominent politicians per party that planned the future cooperation of the three parties. In 1968 the three political leaders of the parties (Norbert Schmelzer (KVP), Barend Biesheuvel (ARP) and Jur Mellema (CHU) made a public appearance, stating that the three parties would continue to work together.
This caused progressive forces within the three parties, especially the anti-revolutionairy, Calvinist ARP and Roman-Catholic KVP to regret their political affiliation. In 1968 they founded the Political Party of Radicals, PPR, a left-wing party that sought cooperation with the Labour Party (PvdA). Locally and provincially however the three parties had long cooperated well, in some areas they formed one Christian-democratic parliamentary party and proposed one list of candidates. In the 1971 general election, the three parties presented a common political program, which lay the foundation for the first Biesheuvel cabinet.
After the disastrous elections of 1972 the cooperation was given new momentum. Piet Steenkamp, a member of the House of Representatives for the KVP was appointed chairman of a council which was to lay the foundation for a federation of the three parties, and provide a common manifesto of principles. In 1973 this federation was officially formed, with Steenkamp as chairperson.
The cooperation was frustrated by the formation of the Den Uyl cabinet, established by the leader of the social-democratic PvdA and Prime Minister of the Netherlands Joop den Uyl. Den Uyl refused to allow members of the CHU in the cabinet that he would lead. This led to a situation where the CHU, ARP and KVP formed a federation and had one parliamentary party in both houses of parliament, but only the KVP and ARP supplied ministers and junior ministers. The cabinet Den Uyl was riddled with political and personal conflicts. Another issue that split the three parties was the place the Bible would take in the new party. Until this day the Anti-revolutionairies are dominant in the Dutch society, because the Protestant wing (about 50%) of the Christian-democratic party, CDA, has Calvinist anti-revolutionairy roots. The National Federation of Christian Trade Unions in the Netherlands, CNV, has a lot of Anti-revolutionairy leaders, activists and members. ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christelijk_Nationaal_Vakverbond ) And next to this the two small protestant christian parties in parlaiment represent different versions of the Anti-revolutionairy ideology, the Christian Union and the the Reformed Political Party, SGP.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Democratic_Appeal
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ChristenUnie
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformed_Political_Party
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_right

P.S.- Human history has always shown a tension and anti-thesis between Christian ethics, values, traditions, customs, the desire for harmony and peace (the mutual respect or mutualism of the christian faith and ideology) on one side and the human nature and the will for power [Machiavellist nature of politicians, political activists, leaders and governments], division/discord, powerstruggle, survival of the fittest and the Iron fist of political stuggle and war between fractions or parties. I mean the polarisation of our societes and the mutual hatred or intolerance between conservatives and liberals, Capitalists and real socialists, monarchists and anti-monarchists (for instance a lot of these Anti-revolutionairies, fierce monarchists, could drink the blood of Kaima, Kai the anti-monarchist).

[gobose]

On the USA, I must sadly report that the Bible Belt has gone the way of the liberal, atheist, socialists of the Northeast. The Evangelical religions are rapidly declining as our educational system, political party system, and Hollywood immorality replace it.

The country is moving to the left, and accelerating its pace. The Democrats are determined to show the Europeans that socialism can succeed. A fools errand.

It is one more effort by the Baby Boomers that will go down in history as: "What the hell were they thinking?" And the answer is: "Themselves."

The latest trend in the USA is to call yourself a Catholic if you're not around your liberal atheist friends (which is highly unusual to be separated). But even that is waning, as many Baby Boomers now enjoy calling themselves atheist and equally proud that they do not attend church service weekly.

They wear it as some demented badge of honor.

The Church of Christ is one of the more spiritual of the Christan religions in the USA. They have several universities: Lipscomb, Abilene Christian, Harding and a few others. Their Bible studies programs were always the pride of their schools; but not anymore. The number of students desiring to become preachers is way, way, down and they now boast of excellent business programs.

The students openly chastise their religions beliefs and practices with alcohol and sexual promiscuity rampant on campus. They now laugh at those students studying to be preachers.

So when the Church of Christ is experiencing this kind of revolt, you can imagine the rest of the country. Yes, Man's wisdom is now greater than God's. I know to you Europeans that's old news (over 100 years) but it's relatively new to us in the USA.

We always found great advantage in being spiritual Christians here in the USA and had pity on the Europeans for their lack of it. But here we come!

Consider this, the baby Boomers are eager to tear down the beautiful cathedrals built by their fore-fathers in the city centers of most major cities. They have been very, very, successful in tearing down these magnificent pieces of art and architecture. "Separation of Church and state" is a particular battle scream of the Democrats (forget the fact that our constitution has no such law nor amendment.

But I know in Germany that there is a ~2% tax paid by all citizens to preserve the very same cathedrals in their cities. You see, we've caught you already, and even passed you on our way to FDR's socialism.

So, Pieter, again, we're chasing your heels over there in Europe, and we're determined to throw away what made us great in order to be more like you guys. Down with Capitalism! Down with Christ! Down with Democracy! Down with Federalism! etc.,

[pieter]

Gobose,

What do you mean with the Church of Christ? A Protestant Reformation church, an Evangelical church or the mormon church of the Church of Christ (Latter Day Saints)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churches_of_Christ

I ask this question, because I come from a country with a lot of churches with different names, who are often hard to distinguish from each other for outsiders.

I have to correct you. The Netherlands and most part of Europe has a capitalist economy. We have no plan economy, we have a free market. Maybe there is more corporatism in Europe, but real socialists states are hard to find over here. Maybe you can call Belarus a socialist state. I consider that to be a socialist dictatorship, because the present Belarussian leader is a Sovjet stile leader. He is more Sovjet like than Putin or Medvedev. Although christianity is less present in Europe than in the USA, the Roman-Catholic church and Protestant churches are stil there.

Federalism in Europe only exists in Germany and Austria. Most countries have a central government, because we haven't got so many states like you guys in one country. Most of our European countries are smaller than the USA. And there is little European unity, because Europeans are very different fro eachother. And the European countries have very old roots. Both pagan (Headen) and christian. But the christian religion and culture is stronger than the old pagan heritage, because languages were shaped by the bible. The translation of the bible was the first book in any European language. Expressions and words from the bible shaped the vocabulairy of European languages. Even a lot of Family names and given names have christian roots, because they were taken from the bible. Like the Dutch protestant name Isaak Abrahamsen (Isack son of Abraham). And a lot of other names like that. Even secular people often don't know that the words and expressions they use, and even the ethics and values they have (which they think are secular-humanist or atheist) have christian roots, like the ten commandments, charity (virtue), mercy, virtue, sin, and the sense of good and evil (right and wrong) and the counter-proposition antithesis.
I believe that believing christian Roman-Catholics and Protestants (wether they are reformatorian or evangelical doesn't matter) have a good life over here, because they have freedom of worship and religion, and they find comfort, support and ballance in their faith, spirituality and community life. That is what is lacking in the secular life, that there is no day of rest, no community life, nor sermons, no rituals and no faith. But we have to respect non-believers, secularists and atheists, because we have chosen for our system of Freedom and Democracy. I know great secular people and leftists who live a life according to christian principles, but they don't know it themselves.

And I say something you may find inbelievable or strange, but several times I spoke with very leftist people, socialists, leftwing radical liberal or "communist", and they told me in private. "I prefer to work or make deals with a rightwing conservative-liberal [VVD party -in in the Dutch perspective comparable to the Republican party], because a deal is a deal with them, they are practical/pragmatic and fix things, in staid of dealing with other socialists or leftwingers".
The only real christian Councillor in the Arnhem city council is very respected by her non christian, lineral, socialist or secular christian-democratic fellow councilors due to here great file knowledge, rhetorical skills (learned in her church), journalistic past (christian press) and her great ethical drive in her fight against evil things and justice. She campaigned against prositution and help for prostitutes to get out of prostitution with help of local authorities. She went there to those places were these women work and examined their deplorable life conditions and illnesses (one of these women was killed by a murderer), and really tried to do something against this. She also fought for the removal from coffeeshops in the direct environment of primary schools. Her party, the ChristianUnion was a government party for a short while a few years back. They are one of the two small christian protestant parties in parlaiment who openly say that they make politicis according to the bible and follow biblical principles. She is always driven by her christian faith, and uses her journalistic, local political knowledge, her knowledge as a mother, and her sports and her file knowledge for her political goal. Even non christians, Roman-Catholics and leftwing people voted for her, because of her reliability, her strenght and her practical solutions for things (which are driven by her faith and her exellent party organisation).

arnhem.christenunie.nl/addy

I voted for her to the great surprise and sometimes mockery of friends or colleages. In don't care. She is honest, sincere and reliable. I voted for her in the local elections.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elections_in_the_Netherlands

Cheers,
Pieter

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antithesis#In_the_Bible
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_5#Antitheses

[gobose]

Pieter,

Great write-up. "Church of Christ" is an Evangelical religion in the USA; not Churches of Christ. Their two primary universities are Abilene Christian U. and Pepperdine University. At both schools, the campus life is presented above. They now laugh at their bible program.

You perhaps know this religion best through the anti-Christ to the Democrats, that of: Kenneth Starr, prosecutor of Bill Clinton.

Their message of Christ not the Pope, Christ not the priest, is going down in flames as the over whelming inundation of secular messages from the mass media has taken our country to the Left.

I have a decent understanding of European history and I have many years business experience ,visited many of your countries, and magnificent cathedrals. But, Pieter, the fact remains, that come Sunday, they are empty. The bible is never mentioned nor Christ in daily conversations. I never see anybody pray before a meal or wear forms of religious clothing / jewelry, etc.

You have the infrastructure for great spirituality, but the tap is empty. Your cathedrals have become tourist curiosities and nothing more.

I'm a "Catholic", is the term used in the USA by atheists in polite company. But they haven't picked up a bible or been to church in years, decades. It's meaning is: "I'm not religious, so lets change subjects." That's what has happened to religion in the USA.

The Church of Christ example is what has happened to spirituality in the USA. They are both dying, and quickly. A legacy of the Baby Boomers. Democrats take particular credit for this demise.

The religious community in the USA has not realized that a new paradigm now exists:

It had been Catholic vs Protestant. Catholics using the term "Bible Bangers" for them. Protestants study and learn their bibles and Catholics laugh at the idea. Protestants thought Catholics worshiped idols and Mary instead of Christ.

It was also Catholic vs Jewish and the long history between the two of them. Mostly this centered around past Wars and economic reprisals.

But today, the reality is: Religious (church attending) vs non-religious (non church attending). So it is Catholic, Protestant, Jewish all grouped together against those who are opposed to religion. And the later is winning in the USA.

The "Bible Belt" and "Bible Bangers" numbers and influence is way, way, down from 40- 60 years ago. Christian bigotry in the USA vastly surpasses any and all other forms of bigotry.

The liberals (Democrats), are especially voracious in their bigoted attacks on the religious. They are the most bigoted people in the USA and feel entitled and empowered to display this unwanted behavior with pride and honor.

[pieter]

Gobose,

Although I am a Roman Catholic myself, due to a Roman-Catholic upbringing by my mother, I am very sympathetic towards the Reformatorian Calvinist and Evangelical christian churches, because they are very close to the scriptures and try to follow the path of early christians. You are right that these protestants study and learn their bible, and are very focussed on the teachings and the example of Jesus Christ. I admire them for their faith and biblical knowledge and often ethics. They had to withstand the mockery and blasfemy of the secular-humanist or atheist non-believers, who were dominant in our Dutch West-European society the last decades. Mocking, bashing or cursing christianity, christ and churches was fashionable the last decades. But these people are strong in their faith, and their belief is stronger than the superficial or artificial emptyness of their attackers. They have strong families, their farms (the Calvinist, Dutch Reformed farmers), their fisherboats (a lot of the fishermen -most of them- are religious, Protestant or Roman-Catholic people. The sea gives and takes, and that strenghens their faith), their ministers, their christian communities, their middle class, their christian family companies, their middle class (Protestant, but also Roman-Catholic shop owners/keepers), christian businessmen, Protestant and Roman-Catholic university professors, politicians, employes, students and militairy. There stil are these christian pillars of Calvinists, Roman-Catholics, Lutheranians and new (in the Netherlands, which has a more Reformatorian tradition) Evangelical churches. (with American roots)

The Protestants and Roman-Catholics are not so hostile anymore like in the past (like you stated), because they have to survive in a secular-humanist society. Like in the USA there is a development of religious people cooperating and understanding eachother and on the other hand the non-affiliated secular people. Even a leading Dutch Orthodox rabbi said that he was sad about the fact that secularisation has hit the christian churches hard. He talked about shared values and ethics, and that the christian faith played an important role in the Dutch and European society. Secularism hits all faiths. Even Islam for that matter.

You are right that our magnificent cathedrals, churches, sinagogues and temples are empty on saturday's and sundays. Except maybe for the New Evangelical churches which attract a lot of people with their gospel and spiritual approach of christianity. Some of the Protestant churches regrouped and formed one new Protestant Dutch church, the Protestant Church in the Netherlands. ( www.pkn.nl/organisatie/protestant-church/Paginas/default.aspx )


Logo of the Protestant church of the Netherlands

The Roman-Catholic church in the Netherlands was for a long time polarised between a liberal, Modern wing and a conservative, traditional wing. The latter received the support of the Vatican and won the battle. So the Dutch Roman-Catholic church is quite "orthodox" (like we say in the Netherlands for a conservative direction), and went back to it's traditional roots of Roman-Catholic lithurgy, customs, faith and mass.

The Catholic Church in the Netherlands, is part of the worldwide Catholic Church, under the spiritual leadership of the Pope, Dutch Conference of Bishops, and curia in Rome. The Metropolitan Archbishop of Utrecht, currently Willem Jacobus Eijk, is Primate (bishop) of the Netherlands.
Although the number of Catholics in the Netherlands has decreased significantly in recent decades, the Dutch Catholic Church is today the largest religious group in the Netherlands. Once known as a Protestant country, in 2007 Dutch Protestants made up only 16.8 percent of the Dutch population (down from 60 percent in the early 20th century; defections primarily due to secularization). This is considerably less than the 26 percent of Dutch Catholics in 2007. There are an estimated 4.166 million Catholics (31 December 2010) in the Netherlands, 25.0 percent of the population down from more than 40 percent in 1970's. The number of Catholics in the Netherlands continues to decrease, roughly by half a percent annually, as do the number of Protestants. Muslims, however, continue to increase and are currently 6% of the population.
Sunday church attendance by Catholics has decreased in recent decades to less than 200,000 or 1.2 percent of the Dutch population in 2006 (source KASKI – the official Dutch Roman Catholic statistics source). More recent numbers for Sunday church attendance have not been published (with the exception of the diocese of Roermond), although press releases have mentioned a further decline since 2006.

In the 1980s and 1990s the church became polarized between conservatives, whose main organization was the Contact Roman Catholics, and liberals, whose main organization was the Eighth of May Movement, (Dutch: "Acht Mei-beweging") which was founded in 1985. The founding of the 8 May Movement was inspired by the disputes about the papal visit in that year to the Netherlands. The organization had a difficult relationship with the bishops. It was disbanded in 2003. In spite of that, tensions between conservative elements in the Catholic Church and more liberal elements have, as of 2011, not completely disappeared.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eighth_of_May_Movement / en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catharina_Halkes

[pieter]

My country and a large part of Western-Europe is secular. And next to that the Czech republic is a secular country, and to a large extend the Russian Federation too due to the influence of 70 years of Sovjet State socialism, with it's forced atheism and agressive policies towards the religious communities and faiths in the SovjetUnion. (with a larg scale destruction or denigrating degradation of places of worship, like Russian orthodox churches, monastries, sinagogues and mosques)

Secularism

Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions, and the persons mandated to represent the State, from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. In one sense, secularism may assert the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, and the right to freedom from governmental imposition of religion upon the people within a state that is neutral on matters of belief. (See also separation of church and state and *Laïcité.) In another sense, it refers to the view that human activities and decisions, especially political ones, should be unbiased by religious influence. (See also public reason.) Some scholars are now arguing that the very idea of secularism will change.

Secularism draws its intellectual roots from Greek and Roman philosophers such as Marcus Aurelius and Epicurus; medieval Muslim polymaths such as Ibn Rushd; Enlightenment thinkers such as Denis Diderot, Voltaire, Baruch Spinoza, John Locke, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine; and more recent freethinkers, agnostics, and atheists such as Robert Ingersoll and Bertrand Russell.


Marcus Aurelius (April 26, 121 AD – March 17, 180 AD), was Roman Emperor from 161 to 180 and is also considered one of the most important Stoic philosophers.


Epicurus (341 BCE – 270 BCE) ancient Greek philosopher and the founder of the school of philosophy called Epicureanism.


The Muslim philosopher Averroes or ʾAbū l-Walīd Muḥammad bin ʾAḥmad bin Rušd (Arabic: أبو الوليد محمد بن احمد بن رشد‎), commonly known as Ibn Rushd (Arabic: ابن رشد‎) or by his Latinized name Averroës (pron.: /əˈvɛroʊ.iːz/; April 14, 1126 – December 10, 1198), was an Andalusian Muslim polymath


The French enlightenment philosopher Voltaire (1694-1778)


The Jewish-Dutch philosopher, Baruch Spinoza and later Benedict de Spinoza (24 November 1632 – 21 February 1677)


John Locke (August, 29 1632 – October, 28 1704), Father of Classical Liberalism, English philosopher and physician regarded as one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers.


James Madison, Jr. (March 16, 1751 (O.S. March 5) – June 28, 1836) American statesman and political theorist, the fourth President of the United States (1809–1817). He is hailed as the “Father of the Constitution” for being instrumental in the drafting of the United States Constitution and as the key champion and author of the United States Bill of Rights.


Thomas Jefferson (April 13, 1743 (April 2, 1743 O.S.) – July 4, 1826) American Founding Father, the principal author of the Declaration of Independence (1776) and the third President of the United States (1801–1809).


Bertrand Russell (18 May 1872 – 2 February 1970) British philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian, and social critic.

The purposes and arguments in support of secularism vary widely. In European laicism, it has been argued that secularism is a movement toward modernization, and away from traditional religious values (also known as secularization). This type of secularism, on a social or philosophical level, has often occurred while maintaining an official state church or other state support of religion. In the United States, some argue that state secularism has served to a greater extent to protect religion and the religious from governmental interference, while secularism on a social level is less prevalent. Within countries as well, differing political movements support secularism for varying reasons.

State secularism

In political terms, secularism is a movement towards the separation of religion and government (often termed the separation of church and state). This can refer to reducing ties between a government and a state religion, replacing laws based on scripture (such as the Torah and Sharia law) with civil laws, and eliminating discrimination on the basis of religion. This is said to add to democracy by protecting the rights of religious minorities.
Secularism is often associated with the Age of Enlightenment in Europe and plays a major role in Western society. The principles, but not necessarily practices, of separation of church and state in the United States and Laïcité in France draw heavily on secularism. Secular states also existed in the Islamic world during the Middle Ages.
Due in part to the belief in the separation of church and state, secularists tend to prefer that politicians make decisions for secular rather than religious reasons. In this respect, policy decisions pertaining to topics like abortion, contraception, embryonic stem cell research, same-sex marriage, and sex education are prominently focused upon by American secularist organizations such as the Center for Inquiry.
Most major religions accept the primacy of the rules of secular, democratic society but may still seek to influence political decisions or achieve specific privileges or influence through church-state agreements such as a concordat. Many Christians support a secular state, and may acknowledge that the conception has support in Biblical teachings, particularly the statement of Jesus in the Book of Luke: "Then give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's." However, some Christian fundamentalists (notably in the United States) oppose secularism, often claiming that there is a "radical secularist" ideology being adopted in current days and see secularism as a threat to "Christian rights" and national security. The most significant forces of religious fundamentalism in the contemporary world are Fundamentalist Christianity and Fundamentalist Islam. At the same time, one significant stream of secularism has come from religious minorities who see governmental and political secularism as integral to preserving equal rights.
Some of the well known states that are often considered "constitutionally secular" are the USA, France, India, Mexico, South Korea, and Turkey although none of these nations have identical forms of governance.

Secular society

In studies of religion, modern Democracies are generally recognized as secular. This is due to the near-complete freedom of religion (beliefs on religion generally are not subject to legal or social sanctions), and the lack of authority of religious leaders over political decisions. Nevertheless, religious beliefs are widely considered a relevant part of the political discourse in many of these countries. This contrasts with other Western countries where religious references are generally considered out-of-place in mainstream politics.
The nature of a secular society could characterize a secular society as one which:
1. - Refuses to commit itself as a whole to any one view of the nature of the universe and the role of man in it.
2. - Is not homogenous, but is pluralistic.
3. - Is tolerant. It widens the sphere of private decision-making.
4. - While every society must have some common aims, which implies there must be agreed on methods of problem-solving, and a common framework of law; in a secular society these are as limited as possible.
5. - Problem solving is approached rationally, through examination of the facts. While the secular society does not set any overall aim, it helps its members realize their aims.
6. - Is a society without any official images. Nor is there a common ideal type of behavior with universal application.

Positive Ideals behind the secular society:

1. - Deep respect for individuals and the small groups of which they are a part.
2. - Equality of all people.
3. - Each person should be helped to realize their particular excellence.
4. - Breaking down of the barriers of class and caste.

Modern sociology has, since Max Weber, often been preoccupied with the problem of authority in secularized societies and with secularization as a sociological or historical process. Twentieth-century scholars whose work has contributed to the understanding of these matters include Carl L. Becker, Karl Löwith, Hans Blumenberg, M.H. Abrams, Peter L. Berger, Paul Bénichou and D. L. Munby, among others.
Some societies become increasingly secular as the result of social processes, rather than through the actions of a dedicated secular movement; this process is known as secularization.

Secular ethics

George Holyoake's 1896 publication English Secularism defines secularism as:
"Secularism is a code of duty pertaining to this life, founded on considerations purely human, and intended mainly for those who find theology indefinite or inadequate, unreliable or unbelievable. Its essential principles are three: (1) The improvement of this life by material means. (2) That science is the available Providence of man. (3) That it is good to do good. Whether there be other good or not, the good of the present life is good, and it is good to seek that good."

Holyoake held that secularism and secular ethics should take no interest at all in religious questions (as they were irrelevant), and was thus to be distinguished from strong freethought and atheism. In this he disagreed with Charles Bradlaugh, and the disagreement split the secularist movement between those who argued that anti-religious movements and activism was not necessary or desirable and those who argued that it was.
Contemporary ethical debate is often described as "secular", with the work of Derek Parfit and Peter Singer, and even the whole field of contemporary bioethics, having been described or self-described as explicitly secular or non-religious.

Organizations

Groups such as the National Secular Society (United Kingdom) and Americans United campaign for secularism are often supported by Humanists. In 2005, the National Secular Society held the inaugural "Secularist of the Year" awards ceremony. Its first winner was Maryam Namazie, of the Worker-Communist Party of Iran. And of the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain which aims to break the taboo that comes with renouncing Islam and to oppose apostasy laws and political Islam.
Another secularist organization is the Secular Coalition for America. The Secular Coalition for America lobbies and advocates for separation of church and state as well as the acceptance and inclusion of Secular Americans in American life and public policy. While Secular Coalition for America is linked to many secular humanistic organizations and many secular humanists support it, as with the Secular Society, some non-humanists support it.
Local organizations work to raise the profile of secularism in their communities and tend to include secularists, freethinkers, atheists, agnostics, and humanists under their organizational umbrella.
Student Organizations, such as the Toronto Secular Alliance, try to popularize nontheism and secularism on campus. The Secular Student Alliance is an educational nonprofit that organizes and aids such high school and college secular student groups.
In Turkey, the most prominent and active secularist organization is Atatürk Thought Association (ADD), which is credited for organizing the Republic Protests – demonstrations in the four largest cities in Turkey in 2007, where over 2 million people, mostly women, defended their concern in and support of secularist principles introduced by Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.
Leicester Secular Society founded in 1851 is the world's oldest secular society.


Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (May, 19 1881 – 10 November 1938), Ottoman and Turkish army officer, revolutionary statesman, writer, and the first President of Turkey. He is credited with being the founder of the Republic of Turkey.

[pieter]

*

Laïcité:

French secularism, in French, laïcité (pronounced [la.isiˈte]) is a concept denoting the absence of religious involvement in government affairs as well as absence of government involvement in religious affairs. French secularism has a long history but the current regime is based on the 1905 French law on the Separation of the Churches and the State. During the twentieth century, it evolved to mean equal treatment of all religions, although a more restrictive interpretation of the term has developed since 2004. Critics do not consider it neutral but hostile to religion, whereas since World War II, some have seen the evolution of a "positive" laïcité which manages competing pluralities rather than serving as secular alternative to religion. Dictionaries ordinarily translate laïcité as secularity or secularism (the latter being the political system), although it is sometimes rendered in English as laicity or laicism. While the term was coined in 1871 in the dispute over the removal of religious teachers and instruction from elementary schools, the term laïcité dates to 1842.
In its strict and official acceptance, it is the principle of separation of church (or religion) and state. Etymologically, laïcité is a noun formed by adding the suffix -ité (English -ity, Latin -itās) to the Latin adjective lāicus, loanword from the Greek λᾱϊκός (lāïkós "of the people", "layman"), the adjective from λᾱός (lāós "people").

Controversy

The word laïcité has been used, from the end of the 19th century on, to mean the freedom of public institutions, especially primary schools, from the influence of the Catholic Church in countries where it had retained its influence, in the context of a secularization process. Today, the concept covers other religious movements as well.
Proponents assert the French state secularism is based on respect for freedom of thought and freedom of religion. Thus the absence of a state religion, and the subsequent separation of the state and Church, is considered by proponents to be a prerequisite for such freedom of thought. Proponents maintain that laïcité is thus distinct from anti-clericalism, which actively opposes the influence of religion and the clergy. Laïcité relies on the division between private life, where adherents believe religion belongs, and the public sphere, in which each individual, adherents believe, should appear as a simple citizen equal to all other citizens, devoid of ethnic, religious or other particularities. According to this concept, the government must refrain from taking positions on religious doctrine and only consider religious subjects for their practical consequences on inhabitants' lives.
Supporters argue that Laïcité by itself does not necessarily imply any hostility of the government with respect to religion. It is best described as a belief that government and political issues should be kept separate from religious organizations and religious issues (as long as the latter do not have notable social consequences). This is meant to protect both the government from any possible interference from religious organizations, and to protect the religious organization from political quarrels and controversies.
Critics of laïcité argue that it is a disguised form of anti-clericalism and infringement on individual right to religious expression, and that, instead of promoting freedom of thought and freedom of religion, it prevents the believer from observing his or her religion.
Another critique is that, in countries historically dominated by one religious tradition, officially avoiding taking any positions on religious matters favors the dominant religious tradition of the relevant country. They point out that even in the current French Fifth Republic (1958–), school holidays mostly follow the Christian liturgical year, even though Easter holidays have been replaced by Spring holidays, which may or may not include Easter, depending on the years. However, the Minister of Education has responded to this criticism by giving leave to students for important holidays of their specific religions, and food menus served in secondary schools pay particular attention to ensuring that each religious observer may respect his religion's specific restrictions concerning diets. To counter the traditional influence of Christian festivals educationalists in line with market forces have often promoted references to Santa Claus, Valentines and Halloween, particularly at primary school level.
Other countries, following in the French model, have forms of Laïcité – examples include Mexico and Turkey.

Contemporary French political secularism

The principle of laïcité in France is implemented through a number of policies. The French government is legally prohibited from recognizing any religion (except for legacy statutes like those of military chaplains and the local law of Alsace-Moselle). Instead, it recognizes religious organizations, according to formal legal criteria that do not address religious doctrine:
whether the sole purpose of the organization is to organize religious activities (so that, for instance, the pretense of being a religious organization is not used for tax evasion)
whether the organization disrupts public order.
French political leaders, though not prohibited from making religious remarks, refrain from it. Religious considerations are generally considered incompatible with reasoned political debate. Of course, political leaders may openly practice their religion (for instance, former president Nicolas Sarkozy is a Catholic), but they are expected to differentiate their beliefs from their actions. Christine Boutin, who openly argued on religious grounds against a legal domestic partnership available regardless of the sex of the partners, was quickly marginalized.
The term was originally the French equivalent of the term laity, that is, everyone who is not clergy. After the French Revolution this meaning changed and it came to mean keeping religion separate from the executive, judicial, and legislative branches of government. This includes prohibitions on having a state religion, as well as for the government to endorse any religious position, be it a religion or atheism.
Although the term was current throughout the nineteenth century, France did not fully separate church and state until the passage of its 1905 law on the separation of the Churches and the State, prohibiting the state from recognizing or funding any religion. All religious buildings in France (mostly Catholic churches, Protestant temples and Jewish synagogues) became the property of the City councils. Those now have the duty to maintain the (often historical) buildings but can't subsidize the religious organizations using them. In areas that were part of Germany at that time, and which did not return to France until 1918, some arrangements for the cooperation of church and state are still in effect today (see Alsace-Moselle).
Laïcité is currently a core concept in the French constitution, Article 1 of which formally states that France is a secular republic ("La France est une République indivisible, laïque, démocratique et sociale.") This of course does not prevent an active role on the part of the state (Presidence of the Republic, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of the Interior) in the appointment of Catholic diocesan bishops – see Briand-Ceretti Agreement. Many see being discreet with one's religion as a necessary part of being French. This has led to frequent divisions with some non-Christian immigrants, especially with part of France's large Muslim population. A debate took place over whether any religious apparel or displays by individuals, such as the Islamic hijab, Sikh turban, (large) Christian crosses and Jewish Stars of David, should be banned from public schools. Such a ban came into effect in France in 2004; see French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools. In the spring of 2011 there was a reinforcement of laïcité in hospitals, advocated by the Minister of the Interior, Claude Guéant, and in public service generally, by the official non-discrimination agency, la HALDE. The simultaneous broadcasting of the traditional Protestant and Catholic Lent Sermons (operating since 1946) has been interrupted. Earlier the broadcasting of the Russian Orthodox Christmas night liturgy was similarly stopped on 6/7 January.
The strict separation of church and state which began with the 1905 law has evolved into what some see as a "form of political correctness that made bringing religion into public affairs a major taboo." President Sarkozy criticised this approach as a "negative laïcité" and wants to develop a "positive laïcité" that recognizes the contribution of faith to French culture, history and society, allows for faith in the public discourse and for government subsidies for faith-based groups. Sarkozy saw France's main religions as positive contributions to French society. He visited the Pope in December 2007 and publicly acknowledged France's Christian roots, while highlighting the importance of freedom of thought, hinting that faith should come back into the public sphere. Sarkozy publicly declared the burqa "not welcome" in France in 2009 and favored legislation to outlaw it, following which, in February 2010, a post office robbery took place by two burqa-clad robbers, ethnicity unknown, who after entering the post office, removed their veils.
In line with Sarkozy's views on the need for reform of laïcité, Pope Benedict XVI on September 12, 2008 said it was time to revisit the debate over the relationship between church and state, advocating a "healthy" form of laïcité. Meeting with Sarkozy, he stated: "In fact, it is fundamental, on the one hand, to insist upon the distinction between the political realm and that of religion in order to preserve both the religious freedom of citizens and the responsibility of the state toward them." He went on: "On the other hand, [it is important] to become more aware of the irreplaceable role of religion for the formation of consciences and the contribution which it can bring to – among other things – the creation of a basic ethical consensus within society.”
Following March 2011 local elections strong disagreement appeared within the governing UMP over the appropriateness of holding a debate on laïcité as desired by the President of the Republic. On 30 March a letter appeared in La Croix signed by representatives of six religious bodies opposing the appropriateness of such a debate.
A law was passed on April 11, 2011, with strong support from political parties as well as from Sarkozy, which made it illegal to hide the face in public spaces, affecting a few thousand women in France wearing the niqab and the burqa.

Religion in France

About three-fourths of the French people belong to the Roman Catholic church. Only a minority, however, regularly participate in religious worship; practice is greatest among the middle classes. The northwest (Brittany-Vendée), the east (Lorraine, Vosges, Alsace, Jura, Lyonnais, and the northern Alps), the north (French Flanders), the Basque Country, and the region south of the Massif Central have a higher percentage of practicing Roman Catholics than the rest of the country. Recruitment of priests has become more difficult, even though the church, historically autonomous, is very progressive and ecumenical.

Reflecting the presence of immigrants from North Africa, Algeria, and Morocco, France has one of Europe’s largest Muslim populations: more than 4,000,000 Muslims, a sizable percentage of them living in and around Marseille in southeastern France, as well as in Paris and Lyon. Protestants, who number 700,000, belong to several different denominations. They are numerous in Alsace, in the northern Jura, in the southeastern Massif Central, and in the central Atlantic region. There are more than 700,000 adherents of Judaism, concentrated in Greater Paris, Marseille, and Alsace and the large eastern towns. In addition to the religious groups, there also are several societies of freethinkers, of which the most famous is the French Masonry. Large numbers, however, especially among the working classes and young population, profess no religious belief.

In the early 21st century the government approved a number of measures that reflected both France’s dedication to being a secular state, a principle known as laïcité, as well as the ambivalence and, in some cases, hostility felt by some French toward the country’s large Muslim population. In 2004 the government banned Muslim head scarves and other religious symbols in state schools. Additional controversial legislation passed in 2010 prohibited face-concealing garments—i.e., veils that fully covered a woman’s face—in public places.

[Nictoshek]

For the first time on television, God in America explores the tumultuous 400-year history of the intersection of religion and public life in America, from the first European settlements to the 2008 presidential election. A co-production of AMERICAN EXPERIENCE and FRONTLINE, this six-hour series examines how religious dissidents helped shape the American concept of religious liberty and the controversial evolution of that ideal in the nation's courts and political arena; how religious freedom and waves of new immigrants and religious revivals fueled competition in the religious marketplace; how movements for social reform -- from abolition to civil rights -- galvanized men and women to put their faith into political action; and how religious faith influenced conflicts from the American Revolution to the Cold War.

WATCH THE FULL PROGRAM ONLINE:

www.pbs.org/godinamerica/view/

_

[pieter]

Interesting Nicetoe. I watched it with interest!

[gobose]

Jan 3, 2013 14:16:11 GMT -7 pieter said:

Gobose,

Although I am a Roman Catholic myself, due to a Roman-Catholic upbringing by my mother, I am very sympathetic towards the Reformatorian Calvinist and Evangelical christian churches, because they are very close to the scriptures and try to follow the path of early christians. You are right that these protestants study and learn their bible, and are very focussed on the teachings and the example of Jesus Christ. I admire them for their faith and biblical knowledge and often ethics. They had to withstand the mockery and blasfemy of the secular-humanist or atheist non-believers, who were dominant in our Dutch West-European society the last decades. Mocking, bashing or cursing christianity, christ and churches was fashionable the last decades. But these people are strong in their faith, and their belief is stronger than the superficial or artificial emptyness of their attackers. They have strong families, their farms (the Calvinist, Dutch Reformed farmers), their fisherboats (a lot of the fishermen -most of them- are religious, Protestant or Roman-Catholic people. The sea gives and takes, and that strenghens their faith), their ministers, their christian communities, their middle class, their christian family companies, their middle class (Protestant, but also Roman-Catholic shop owners/keepers), christian businessmen, Protestant and Roman-Catholic university professors, politicians, employes, students and militairy. There stil are these christian pillars of Calvinists, Roman-Catholics, Lutheranians and new (in the Netherlands, which has a more Reformatorian tradition) Evangelical churches. (with American roots)

The Protestants and Roman-Catholics are not so hostile anymore like in the past (like you stated), because they have to survive in a secular-humanist society. Like in the USA there is a development of religious people cooperating and understanding eachother and on the other hand the non-affiliated secular people. Even a leading Dutch Orthodox rabbi said that he was sad about the fact that secularisation has hit the christian churches hard. He talked about shared values and ethics, and that the christian faith played an important role in the Dutch and European society. Secularism hits all faiths. Even Islam for that matter.

You are right that our magnificent cathedrals, churches, sinagogues and temples are empty on saturday's and sundays. Except maybe for the New Evangelical churches which attract a lot of people with their gospel and spiritual approach of christianity. Some of the Protestant churches regrouped and formed one new Protestant Dutch church, the Protestant Church in the Netherlands. ( www.pkn.nl/organisatie/protestant-church/Paginas/default.aspx )

The USA has a powerful mass media that is 90%+ dominated by liberal secularists (Democrats). In the entire country, you but one news network that even slightly resembles the other 50% of the country, that of Fox News. (Satan on Earth according to the Far Left).

But the most damaging thing to young people who are deciding what their core beliefs will be is: "bigotry". The Far Left (Liberal Democrats) openly utilize this hideous tool with great frankness and bravado.

Christan bigotry is rampant in the USA. The mass media is openly bigoted towards Christians and the president even chimes in every now and then in public. But Obama never addresses this bigotry in defense of Christians.

The hypocrisy of the Far Left in always talking about how "bigoted" the "Right" is, but has no compulsion about its own open bigotry.

The Baby Boomer parents have left their children to "blow in the wind" of this bigotry and dare not oppose it. It is very much like my situation and Polack jokes growing up.

What did the Polish young do in the face of it? Deny that they were Polish or just suffer from this bigotry. Same for the Christian young today.

[Nictoshek]

The Broken Covenant: American Civil Religion in Time of Trial

Chapter 1: America’s Myth of Origin

Once in each of the last three centuries America has faced a time of trial, a time of testing so severe that not only the form but even the existence of our nation have been called in question. Born out of the revolutionary crisis of the Atlantic world in the late 18th century, America’s first time of trial was our struggle for independence and the institution of liberty. The second time of trial came not long before the end of the nation’s first hundred years. At stake was the preservation of the union and the extension of equal protection of the laws to all members of society. We live at present in a third time of trial at least as severe as those of the Revolution and the Civil War. It is a test of whether our inherited institutions can be creatively adapted to meet the 20th-century crisis of justice and order at home and in the world. It is a test of whether republican liberty established in a remote agrarian backwater of the world in the 18th century shall prove able or willing to confront successfully the age of mass society and international revolution. It is a test of whether we can control the very economic and technical forces, which are our greatest achievement, before they destroy us.

ALL SIX CHAPTERS:

www.religion-online.org/showbook.asp?title=3042