Author: editornsrn

Leave a comment Posted on by editornsrn NSRN Blog

Nonbelieving Clergy

Alexandr Zamușinski is a scholar of religion specializing in secularism, nonreligion, and religious change. He holds a PhD from the University of California, Riverside and is currently Instructor at the Defense Language Institute, Monterey, CA. Email: alexandr.zamusinski@dliflc.edu / ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-7807-8811

Keywords: The Clergy Project, nonbelieving clergy, nonreligion, secularism, behaving without believing

When we think about people leaving religion, we usually imagine ordinary believers quietly drifting away from faith. But there’s another group—smaller, quieter, and far more complicated—whose stories are rarely told: religious professionals who have lost their faith yet often continue to serve within their institutions. These are the nonbelieving clergy. Pastors, priests, rabbis, imams, ministers, monks, and nuns—people whose lives and identities are built around religious leadership but who privately no longer believe in God or the supernatural. Studying them might sound like a narrow niche, but in reality, this group offers one of the most revealing windows into how religion and nonreligion intersect.

For more than a decade, The Clergy Project (TCP)—an online support network for current and former religious professionals who no longer believe in supernatural[i]—has quietly provided a safe space for people in this position. Since its founding in 2011, TCP has grown to nearly 1,400 members from over 50 countries. My research draws on more than five years of engagement with TCP members, including interviews, surveys, and analysis of narratives across diverse traditions[ii]. These people once stood at the heart of religious institutions, trained to guide others in faith and ritual. Yet over time, they moved from supernatural belief to a naturalistic worldview. Their stories— often marked by secrecy, doubt, and deep moral struggle—offer rare sociological insight into what happens when belief collapses within the very institutions meant to sustain it.

The Hidden Side of Deconversion

For many people, leaving religion is already difficult. For clergy, it can be an identity earthquake. Their livelihoods, reputations, and social worlds are often tied to the institutions they serve[iii]. When belief collapses, it’s not just a private loss—it can mean losing family, community, income, and belonging all at once. Some clergy leave openly. But many stay, continuing to preach and perform rituals long after faith has faded[iv]. They do so for many reasons—financial stability, fear of rejection, stigma against nonreligion, or simply not wanting to hurt the people they love. Family is often central here. Many choose silence to avoid causing their parents or spouses pain, or making them feel like they failed as believers[v]. For example, Jim, an ex-clergy from Ontario, Canada, stated: “My mother is 80 and would not understand. It would be a tragedy for her. So, I keep it quiet.” Another poignant account comes from Oliver, a current Baptist deacon in South Africa, who remarked: “My exit strategy at this point in time is to continue maintaining my social life and ties to the church until my parents have passed on and my children have all finished High School. I have no intention of putting further strain on my parents, especially my mother whose health is not good. At that stage, after their death, I will make my lack of belief known and allow my children to decide for themselves the path of life they wish to follow.” This tension between authenticity and belonging produces what I call performative religiosity.[vi] It isn’t hypocrisy—it’s empathy and survival. These clergy navigate a world where their professional role demands belief, but their private conscience no longer allows it.

Behaving Without Believing

We often assume that religion is held together primarily by belief. For most members of TCP, that is indeed the case—once belief disappears, so does religious commitment, and they exit. Yet for others, who may wish to leave religion entirely but cannot due to social or material constraints, religion represents something deeper. It is sustained not only by faith, but by relationships. For many nonbelieving clergy, what keeps them within their religious communities is not doctrine but love—family bonds, communal rituals, shared expectations, or economic dependence, coupled with limited prospects for new employment if they were to come out openly. Another common factor is the pervasive anti-atheist stigma and the fear of ostracism[vii].

This is why studying this group can be valuable for scholars of nonreligion. Their experiences blur the neat boundary between “religious” and “nonreligious.” They reveal how people inhabit the gray zones in between—how belonging and behaving can outweigh believing, and how emotional and moral ties can sustain, or even compel, participation long after faith itself has faded. Such behaving without believing offers crucial insight into secularization. It reminds us that the shift toward nonreligion is not merely about the loss of faith, but also about how individuals and communities renegotiate identity, loyalty, and meaning when belief no longer aligns with behavior.

The Emotional Cost of Secrecy and Disclosure

What struck me most in these stories is the profound emotional cost of living a double life. Imagine standing before a congregation each week, preaching words you no longer believe, all while concealing your disbelief to protect your livelihood or shield your loved ones from distress. For many clergy, this state of secrecy becomes a kind of “closet”. The secrecy is exhausting, but often motivated by care. Remaining closeted can be a way of shielding loved ones from distress or confusion—a form of moral sacrifice that places compassion above personal authenticity[viii].

For those who do “come out” as nonbelievers, the costs can be equally severe—sometimes even greater. Coming out often entails the loss of employment, reputation, and community, and in some cases, family. What one experiences as intellectual honesty or existential integrity, others may interpret as betrayal, arrogance, or moral collapse. The aftermath can be devastating: profound loneliness, social exile, and the painful process of rebuilding one’s life from the ground up. Many of my respondents spoke of rejection not only from their congregations but also from close friends and even family members, including spouses and children. Divorce, isolation, and stigma are common outcomes. For those in midlife, the challenge is especially acute. After decades spent in ministry, many find themselves forced to begin again—searching for new communities, and new sources of meaning. The transition can be profoundly disorienting. Individuals who once served as moral authorities and spiritual guides within their congregations suddenly face the loss of that status and identity. Moving from the pulpit to ordinary forms of employment—driving a taxi, working as a substitute teacher, cleaning, or taking shifts in a supermarket—represents not only a practical adjustment but also an existential one. For many, it feels like a collapse of the very framework through which they once understood their purpose and self-worth. The contrast between who they were and who they have become often brings a deep sense of grief, humility, and alienation. For many, networks like TCP become lifelines—a place to find understanding and support amid upheaval.

Of course, it is essential not to overgeneralize from the example of clergy. They represent a distinctive and highly visible segment of the broader population of nonbelievers. Their experiences of deconversion and disclosure differ markedly from those of lay individuals. Even among clergy, the trajectories of loss and adaptation vary widely. Some choose public transparency—publishing memoirs, giving interviews, or engaging in activism—while others remain silent, disclosing their nonbelief only to a few trusted confidants.

The Clergy Project offers a rare glimpse into this hidden world. It reminds researchers that behind the public face of religion are private, untold stories that complicate our assumptions about faith, doubt, and belonging[ix]. These clergy are not villains or hypocrites. They are people caught in a web of obligations and compassion, trying to balance authenticity with care. Their stories illuminate the emotional, relational, and moral dimensions of deconversion that statistics alone can’t capture. By listening to them, we gain a fuller picture of what it means to move from belief to nonbelief—not as a sudden break, but as a deeply human journey through the spaces in between.

Endnotes

[i] Upon joining TCP, during the application process on the web-site and during the entrance interview, all members are required to declare that they no longer believe in the supernatural.  For example, they must check the box under the statement: “I consider myself to be a non-theist who does not believe in a supernatural dimension. Specifically, I do not believe in an order of existence that is beyond the visible observable universe appearing to transcend the laws of nature, a mystical dimension, an afterlife, or a god.” – See section “Becoming a TCP Participant” – https://clergyproject.org/nonbelieving-clergy-join/.

[ii] Zamușinski, Alexandr. 2025a. “Understanding the Role of the Clergy Project: Misconceptions and Realities of a Support Network for Nonbelieving Clergy”, Secularism and Nonreligion, 14(1), p. 1-14. https://doi.org/10.5334/snr.211.

[iii] Dennett, Daniel, and Linda LaScola. 2013. Caught in the Pulpit: Leaving Belief Behind. Durham: Pitchstone Publishing.

[iv] Zamușinski, Alexandr. 2025c. “Hidden Apostasy: What Prevents Nonbelieving Clergy from Disclosing Their Lack of Faith?” Journal of Contemporary Religion. 40(3) (pages TBD), October 2025. https://doi.org/10.1080/13537903.2025.2580133

[v] Ibid.

[vi] Ibid.

[vii] Zamușinski, Alexandr. 2025b. “How Anti-Atheist Prejudice Keeps Non-Believing Clergy Silent: The Clergy Project Participants Share Their Pain”. The Journal of Religion and Culture. Vol. 30 p. 5-34. https://www.jrc-concordia.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Article1_ZamusinskiAlex_JRCVol30_2025.pdf

See also Abbott, Dena, and Debra Mollen. 2018. “Atheism as a Concealable Stigmatized Identity: Outness, Anticipated Stigma, and Well-Being.” The Counseling Psychologist 46 (6): 685-707.

Frost, Jacqui, Christopher Scheitle, and Elaine Howard Ecklund. 2023. “Patterns of Perceived Hostility and Identity Concealment Among Self-Identified Atheists.” Social Forces 101 (3): 1580–1605.

[viii] Zamușinski, 2025c. See also Gull, B. (2021). ‘We Are the Women Our Parents Warned Us Against’: Identity Reconstruction and the Re-imagining of Gender After High-Cost Religious Disaffiliation. Symbolic Interaction 45 (1): 97-122.

[ix] See also Fader, Ayala. 2020. Hidden Heretics: Jewish Doubt in the Digital Age. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Brewster, Melanie. 2014. Atheists in America. New York Chichester: Columbia University Press.

Brooks, Marshall. 2018. Disenchanted Lives: Apostasy and Ex-Mormonism Among the Latter-day Saints. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

Cottee, Simon. 2015. The Apostates: When Muslims Leave Islam. London: C. Hurst & Co.

Leave a comment Posted on by editornsrn NSRN Blog

Beyond Smudge and Creator: Recognizing Indigenous Nonbelievers in Canada

Jonathan Simmons is a sociologist specializing in nonreligion, atheism, and religious change. He holds a PhD from the University of Alberta and is currently on staff at the University of Alberta. Email: jssimmon@ualberta.ca

Keywords: Indigenous nonreligion, atheism, secularism, Canada, spirituality

A common, often unexamined, assumption clouds discussions about Indigenous peoples in Canada: the conflation of Indigeneity and spirituality. This widespread idea suggests Indigenous identity is inherently and uniformly linked to spiritual beliefs and practices. Such a perspective, for example, often assumes universal participation in traditional ceremonies like smudging (a spiritual cleansing ritual) or a ubiquitous belief in a “Creator.” This view frequently overlooks the many Indigenous people who do not hold such beliefs, contributing to what can be termed the “invisible atheism” among Indigenous populations. This conflation creates a significant gap in our understanding and research of Indigenous nonreligion.


To fully appreciate this diverse population, clarifying “Indigenous” in the Canadian context is essential. The term encompasses First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples, the original inhabitants of the lands now known as Canada. These diverse nations and communities each possess unique cultures, languages, and histories spanning thousands of years. Understanding this immense cultural richness makes the prevailing research oversight concerning nonreligion all the more striking.

It is this gap that my own work seeks to address. My research, based on in-depth interviews with 18 Indigenous atheists in Canada, specifically challenges the pervasive assumption that Indigenous identity is monolithically spiritual. As I argue, “By overlooking Indigenous nonreligion, scholars not only miss an important aspect of atheist experiences, but they also perpetuate a Western-centric perspective that homogenizes Indigenous people as inherently spiritual and religious” [1]. This post aims to bring some of these research findings to a broader audience.

Data from Canada’s 2021 Census underscores this diversity. Nearly half of Indigenous people reported “No religion and secular perspectives,” a significant increase from 20% in 2011. This category, as Statistics Canada clarifies, includes those identifying as atheist, agnostic, or humanist. In contrast, about 4.5% reported “Traditional (North American Indigenous) spirituality” [2]. These figures clearly demonstrate a substantial and growing nonreligious demographic among Indigenous peoples in Canada. Recognizing this diversity is necessary for supporting Indigenous self-determination. For international readers, this principle affirms the right of Indigenous peoples to freely determine their political status and pursue their economic, social, and cultural development. Indeed, for such self-determination to be authentic and effective, it must be based on an accurate understanding of Indigenous communities in all their variety, including their nonreligious members, ensuring all voices can shape their collective future.

My research identifies various pathways Indigenous individuals take toward nonreligious identities, with intellectual inquiry being one of the most common. Many participants described a process of systematically questioning supernatural claims in favor of scientific or evidence-based explanations. This commitment to a consistent, evidence-based worldview was a core theme. For example, one participant, whose perspective is further detailed in my forthcoming work (Simmons, forthcoming 2026), explained that his sense of intellectual consistency (and humility) required him to examine traditional spiritual claims with the same critical lens he used for Christianity. He felt it would be dishonest to reject one set of beliefs for lacking evidence while accepting another without that same scrutiny [3]. This is not unique to a Canadian context. It in fact strongly parallels recent findings by Rahmani, Adds, and Senanayake (2024) in their work with Māori atheists in Aotearoa New Zealand. They also identified a pattern of “intellectual doubt,” where participants described a similar process of elimination in examining and rejecting religious frameworks [5]. This parallel across different Indigenous communities underscores the significance of this skeptical, evidence-based pathway to a nonreligious identity.

This critical stance sometimes extends to how Indigenous ways of knowing are positioned against what some participants termed “regular science.” While the Canadian government and many Indigenous scholars rightly advocate for recognizing Indigenous Science as a distinct, time-tested knowledge system, some Indigenous atheists in my research expressed a clear preference for empirical, non-supernatural explanations of the world, applying their skepticism broadly. This careful navigation of knowledge systems is also articulated by other Indigenous thinkers. David “Maheengun” Cook, an Anishinaabe atheist humanist, for example, emphasizes the importance of epistemological clarity, valuing cultural heritage alongside the distinct methods of scientific inquiry. [4].

Religious trauma also contributes significantly to Indigenous individuals becoming nonreligious. The devastating legacy of Canada’s residential schools is central here. These church-run institutions inflicted deep intergenerational harm. For many, this trauma directly leads to a rejection of organized religion and, for some, extends to all supernatural beliefs. A poignant familial example captures this sentiment: “I didn’t realize that it’s 100% a response to residential school. [My father’s] atheism isn’t just philosophical; it’s a direct reaction to religious trauma” [3]. Such responses to colonial religious imposition, framing atheism as a decolonizing act, are not unique to Canada. Similar motivations are found among Māori atheists in Aotearoa New Zealand, who often view the rejection of colonial religion as a form of resistance and cultural reclamation [5].


The experience of being an Indigenous atheist is often marked by navigating stigma. Many of my participants felt societal pressure to believe, and worried about being judged, sometimes fearing that openly identifying as atheist could be seen as a betrayal of their culture or as not being “‘Native’ enough” [1]. This pressure to conform can lead to what I term “navigating disclosure,” where individuals carefully manage how and when they reveal their nonbelief.


The growing presence of Indigenous nonbelievers has important consequences for ongoing reconciliation efforts. Reconciliation aims to build a renewed, respectful relationship between Indigenous peoples and Canadian society. If public understanding and institutional responses are based on the conflation of Indigeneity and spirituality, however, these efforts may fall short. For example, initiatives creating “smudge-friendly spaces” in public institutions, while intended to affirm Indigenous cultures, are centered on a spiritual practice. This focus can inadvertently marginalize Indigenous atheists, agnostics, or those of other faiths. While the provision of culturally relevant spiritual support is rightly seen as vital for many Indigenous individuals seeking to connect with their heritage and find healing, particularly in challenging environments such as correctional facilities [6], it is equally important that public understanding and institutional responses do not presume universal spirituality. Such presumptions risk deepening what my research identifies as a growing divide within Indigenous communities between those who practice traditional spirituality and those who embrace a more secular and naturalistic worldview [1]. Inclusivity requires acknowledging the full spectrum of Indigenous (non)belief.

A nuanced perspective is also important in areas like healthcare. My research found that for some participants, “spirituality” was associated with “complementary and alternative medicine, magic, and various contemplative practices,” and some expressed concern that “spirituality and pseudoscience often went together” [1]. While traditional Indigenous medicines hold cultural value, some nonreligious Indigenous people may prioritize evidence-based medical treatments exclusively, particularly if they perceive some traditional spiritual healing practices as lacking empirical support. An overemphasis on traditional spirituality in healthcare, without acknowledging secular or skeptical Indigenous perspectives, can create tension. Recognizing diverse Indigenous viewpoints is key to developing healthcare that is both culturally sensitive and medically effective.

A critical advancement in Indigenous studies and related disciplines necessitates moving beyond simplistic, spiritualized conceptualizations of Indigenous peoples. Future research must prioritize the recognition of Indigenous individuals as contemporary subjects possessing a wide spectrum of beliefs, experiences, and identities. Engaging with this inherent heterogeneity does not constitute a dilution of Indigenous identity; rather, it affirms its dynamism and resilience.

Endnotes

[1] Simmons, J. (2024). Indigenous Atheists in Canada: Challenging Assumptions and Navigating Belonging. Secular Studies, 6(1), 62–83. [Page 64 for “By overlooking…”; Page 63 for “Jackie” quote; Page 74 for “Native enough”; Page 71 for “spirituality and pseudoscience”]. doi:10.1163/25892525-bja10060.

[2] Statistics Canada. (2022). Table 98-10-0288-01 Religion by Indigenous identity: Canada, provinces and territories. Release date: October 26, 2022. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/37z6n4tn.

[3] Simmons, J. (forthcoming 2026). De-Converting from North American Religious Traditions. In The Oxford Handbook of Apostasy and Religious Deconversion. Eds. Zuckerman and Zamușinski.

[4] Jacobsen, S. D. (2025, April 22). Navigating Indigenous Identity and Atheist Humanism. Humanists International Blog. (https://humanists.international/blog/navigating-indigenous-identity-atheism-humanism/; the content is based on an interview with David “Maheengun” Cook).

[5] Rahmani, M., Adds, P., & Senanayake, R. (2024). Māori atheism: a decolonising project? Kōtuitui: New Zealand. Journal of Social Sciences Online, 19(4), 522-541. doi:10.1080/1177083X.2024.2333544. Available at https://doi.org/10.1080/1177083X.2024.2333544

[6] See, for example, Tetrault, J. E. C. (2022). Indigenizing Prisons: A Canadian Case Study. Crime and Justice, 51(1), 637-680. doi:10.1086/720943. Tetrault’s research highlights the value incarcerated Indigenous peoples place on Indigenized programming, including spiritual supports, for cultural connection and healing.

Leave a comment Posted on by editornsrn News and Events

PhD position in nonreligion

Three full-time four-year paid PhD positions are available at the School of Theology and Religious Studies, University of Tartu. The positions are fully funded and successful candidates will be hired as Junior Research Fellows for the duration of their PhD studies.

There are no predetermined research areas or focuses, the candidate has to propose one’s own topic – and projects on nonreligion are very welcome. For that, contact dr Atko Remmel: atko.remmel@ut.ee.

NB! Application deadline is very soon, May 15. For more information see https://usuteaduskond.ut.ee/en/news/open-call-three-full-time-paid-phd-positions-theology-and-religious-studies.

Leave a comment Posted on by editornsrn News and Events

NSRN Annual Lecture 2025

You are cordially invited to the NSRN Annual Lecture 2025, which will be given by Anna Strhan and Rachael Shillitoe. The title of the lecture is Growing Up Godless: Childhood and the Formation of Non-Religion.

How are children’s non-belief and non-religion formed in everyday life? While previous studies have shown that what happens during childhood is crucial in driving the growth of non-religious populations, we know little about the experiences of the growing numbers of children for whom being non-religious is the “new normal” or about how their non-religion and non-belief are formed in everyday life. Drawing on rich ethnographic fieldwork and in-depth interviews with children, their parents, and teachers across different parts of England, this lecture addresses this scholarly gap, examining the formation of children’s non-religious identities and perspectives and how these relate to shifting moral landscapes.

The lecture will take place via Zoom on May 22, 2025, 9.30 am PDT / 12.30 pm EDT / 5.30 pm BST / 6.30 pm CEDT.

Registration is open at: https://ut-ee.zoom.us/meeting/register/riF2v789QDGz_i_3JK1_Zw.

Leave a comment Posted on by editornsrn Publications

New Book: Families and Religion (2025)

Families and Religion: Dynamics of Transmission across Generations

Edited by Christel Gärtner, Linda Henning, Olaf Müller.

This comparative study examines the transmission of religion in families in Germany, Italy, Hungary, Finland and Canada. The authors rely on the widely shared argument that religious change can primarily be understood as an intergenerational process. Based on a mixed-methods design, the book investigates the question of how, when exactly and under what conditions the following generations become less religious than the previous ones. From the perspective of familial and historical generations, the authors examine the significance of (religious) socialization for the transmission of (non-)religious worldviews, affiliation, practice, and identity. According to a central finding, religious change takes place primarily in the phase of adolescence against the background of the respective social context.

Link to publisher’s website.

Posted on by editornsrn News and Events

NSRN 2025 conference CfP – Extended

Nonreligion and Secularity Research Network Conference

8-10 September 2025

Institute of Ethnology and Social Anthropology at the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava, Slovakia

Extended deadline for session and paper proposals: 31 March 2025

Scholarly discussions on nonreligion often begin by noting that nonreligion and its related phenomena are primarily studied within Western, particularly Anglophone contexts, with recent efforts to expand global perspectives. However, these broad categorizations – “Western,” “Anglophone,” or “global North or South” – oversimplify the notable diversity of nonreligion within those demarcations. Various phenomena that are considered nonreligious emerge from complex intersections of national histories, political contexts, and religious influences – or the absence thereof – while simultaneously being shaped by global media and generational dynamics.

The Nonreligion and Secularity Research Network (NSRN) invites paper and session proposals for its 2025 conference, Nonreligion and Secularity at Cultural Crossroads. We aim to explore how secularity and nonreligion function and are manifested in various contexts, social and cultural interconnections, and power relations. Potential topics include, but are not limited to:

  • Theoretical and methodological challenges of studying nonreligion and secularity – (alternative) conceptualizations of nonreligion; liminalities and ambiguous forms of nonreligion; nonreligion and language
  • Nonreligion among minority and majority populations – how its reach affects the perceived boundaries of nonreligion and its “important others”
  • Virtual secularities and nonreligion – how nonreligion is shaped within social networks on the internet
  • Secularity and state – different aspects of the position of non-religion in different states; regional and global forms and manifestations of nonreligion
  • Nonreligion and values – nonreligion in changing cultural landscapes and how the cultural context influences what is considered nonreligion
  • Nonreligion and demographics – the aspects of age, gender, and generations, socialization into nonreligion

We welcome scholars at any career stage (we especially encourage PhD-students) from sociology, anthropology, religious studies, demography, and other fields to apply and bring interdisciplinary approaches and methodologies.

The 2025 NSRN conference will take place as a face-to-face conference that will be held in partnership with the Institute of Ethnology and Social Anthropology at the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia, and Comenius University in Bratislava.

We expect the participants who present their papers, to join us in person in Bratislava, Slovakia from 8-10 September 2025. However, there will be an opportunity to listen to the presentations and ask questions via Zoom throughout the conference. There will be no fee to attend the 2025 NSRN conference either in person or virtually.

Instructions for submitting session and paper proposals:

Each individual may only present one paper at the 2025 conference, on top of being a co-author on other papers, chairing/organizing a session, and/or being part of an author-meets-critics session. Each session will be allocated a 1h30min time slot during the conference.

To submit a paper proposal:

  • Title of the paper
  • Abstract of the paper (max. 150 words)
  • First and last name, institutional affiliation, title/position, and contact e-mail address of the primary author
  • First and last name(s), institutional affiliation(s), title(s)/position(s), and contact e-mail address(es) of the co-author(s) (if applicable)

To submit a session proposal (with 3-4 papers and a chair):

  • Title of the session
  • Abstract of the session (max. 150 words)
  • First and last name(s), institutional affiliation(s), title(s)/position(s), and contact e-mail address(es) of the session chair and organizer
  • Titles of each of the (3-4) papers
  • Abstracts of each of the (3-4) papers (150 words max. each)
  • First and last names, institutional affiliations, titles/positions, and contact e-mail addresses for each paper’s primary author and co-author(s)

To submit an author-meets-critics session:

  • Book title, publication year, and press
  • Book abstract (150 words max.)
  • First and last name, institutional affiliation, title/position, and contact e-mail address of the session organizer
  • First and last name(s), institutional affiliation(s), title(s)/position(s), and contact

e-mail address(es) of the book’s author(s)

  • First and last names, institutional affiliations, titles/positions, and contact e-mail addresses for each of the (2-4) critics

All paper and session proposals must be e-mailed to nsrnconference2025@gmail.com by the end of the day on 31 March 2025. Notifications of acceptance will be e-mailed to conference participants by April 15, 2025. Preliminary program will be sent out by the end of May 2025, registration date is June 30, 2025 at the latest.

For any questions, please contact us by e-mail at nsrnconference2025@gmail.com.

Leave a comment Posted on by editornsrn NSRN Blog, Review

Atheist Spirituality: Reflections on André Compte-Sponville’s L’Esprit de l’athéisme: Introduction à une spiritualité sans Dieu

Ehsan Sheikholharam, Kennesaw State University

Keywords: atheist spirituality, laïcité, pluralist ethics, post-Christian Europe

It’s not surprising to hear that someone identifies as Jewish, while not believing in a transcendental God. Likewise, it’s not unlikely to hear that some Muslims don’t observe daily prayers or believe in the Day of Judgement. The categories “cultural Muslim” or “secular Jew” are well established and widely used. But what about “athée fidèle,” or faithful atheist? What are the implications of declaring oneself atheist, while also remaining faithful to Christianity as a tradition?

In his 2006 publication, L’Esprit de l’athéisme: Introduction à une spiritualité sans Dieu, French philosopher André Comte-Sponville presents his case for spirituality without God. One does not need to throw out the baby of culture with the bathwater of organized religion. For Comte-Sponville, Christianity is not simply a religion among the rest. It represents a vast philosophical, literary, and social tradition that can still offer valuable intellectual and moral resources for life in the 21st century.

Unlike the populist claims about the decadence of the Judeo-Christian civilization by thinkers such as Michel Onfray, or the xenophobic framings of Islam as the civilizational Other of Christianity by Marcel Gauchet, Comte-Sponville’s The Spirit of Atheism takes on an optimistic and positive tone. It draws on diverse cultural, spiritual, and intellectual traditions of Europe to build a new re-enchanted collectivity.

André Comte-Sponville’s advocacy for reframing Christianity as a tradition worth defending emerged out of his worries about two tendencies in secularized France. First, the disoriented youth—who no longer believe in a religion—often face difficulties in finding a moral compass. Second, the historical process of secularization (laïcisation) did not eliminate religion. Instead, it created disembodied religiosity: beliefs without collective rituals or public presence. This forcing out of religion from the public sphere contributed to the rise of new forms of extremism and religious fundamentalism.

Even before the post-colonial growth of Islam in Europe, the continent’s intellectual and cultural traditions were diverse, and to a certain degree, contradictory. From Greek paganism to Israelite monotheism, from the Talmudic Law to Epicurean hedonism, and from the Inquisitions to the Enlightenment, European heritage encompasses elements that are not oriented towards a singular nexus. Within this mixed heritage however, some commentators have traced lines of continuity — as reflected in the hyphenated term “Greco-Judeo-Christian.”  

Today however, many have suggested that this civilizational lineage is in a state of decline. Statistics point to the waning of church attendance on the one hand, and the emergence of new forms of religiosity, on the other. Many of the latter exhibit tendencies towards obscurantism and fanaticism. To ‘save’ the intellectual, cultural, and spiritual heritages of Europe, André Comte-Sponville embraces Christianity as a repository of ethical values worth preserving. Unlike the paranoid and xenophobic outcries of far-right voices in France demanding a return to the “Judeo-Christian roots,” Comte-Sponville doesn’t subscribe to the essentialization of the tradition. He keeps the genealogy open and invites a pluralist reading of Europe’s history. Europe is inevitably becoming more diverse, ethnically and culturally. The book is a remedy for his compatriots who are troubled by the unraveling of their national, ethnic, and cultural identities. It offers those anxious about the presence of other cultural expressions, especially immigrant identities, to feel grounded in Europe’s larger civilizational substance.

Would a French adolescent who visits the Louvre today still recognize any Christian symbolism in the paintings of Raphael or Michelangelo? Probably not; and for Comte-Sponville, this is a consequential loss.

By setting aside confessional religions as well as a religiosity embedded in the belief in a transcendental divinity, Comte-Sponville’s “Godless” spirituality presents a vision of reenchanted collectivity that is more open, tolerant, and resourceful. What is important here, is that his version of atheist spirituality doesn’t discard aspects of culture only because they carry vestiges of religion. He regards Christianity as the repository of diverse moral values and civilizational resources of the West, especially Europe. Yet one does not need to believe in Christian God to engage with cultural and spiritual resources associated with Christianity.

Proponents of the “secularization thesis” professed that with Europe’s progress towards rationalization, religious authority (and religions more broadly) would decline from the public, political life. It is naïve, however, to declare their prophecy readily bankrupt. While certain types of religious commitments are in decline, other forms are on the rise—especially when one compares the decline in church attendance with accounts of religious violence. Furthermore, with the rise of anxieties over ethnic identities, religious sentiments lend themselves to forms of communitarianism. On the one extreme, there are metonymies of white, conservative, ultra-nationalist, neoliberal, anti-immigrant politics; on the other, Salafist, Islamist, and separationist outcries. Comte-Sponville bemoans that new religious phenomena lean toward obscurantism, dogmatism, and fundamentalism. To save Europe and its Enlightenment heritage from both of these tendencies, one does not need to fight religion as such. To the contrary, the Judeo-Christian tradition, according to him, can serve as a repository of cultural and civilizational resources that can foster more open forms of shared values and collective identities. Comte-Sponville underlines values such as compassion, humility, and fraternity without falling into traps of identity politics. On a more practical level, he advocates for teaching religion in public schools solely as a historical and social phenomenon. Enshrined in the principle of laïcité and freedom of conscience, this secular education will help to restore a sense of collective heritage beyond race, ethnicity, or any other exclusionary categories.

Religio, religare or religio, relegere?

Comte-Sponville draws on different etymologies of religion to make a case for his atheist spirituality. In the first formulation, he traces religio to religare and the French relier. Religion in this sense operates as a social bond and offers common values necessary for social cohesion. Secondly, he examines religio in connection to the Latin relegere, connoting the act of reverent and contemplative reading. In this latter sense, religion is akin to the love of a Logos. Using these definitions, then, Comte-Sponville’s privileges the joy of life over religion of fear and persecution, communion over sectarianism, loyalty to ethical values over blind faith, and love over otherworldly hopes and despair.

To popularize his pluralist ethics, Comte-Sponville evokes binary choices that are difficult to disagree with. Across cultures, he suggests, courage is valued over cowardice, sincerity over lies, and kindness over cruelty. His atheist spirituality, therefore, is a patchwork of “values” woven from diverse religious cultures.

But should the universal horizon of understanding be built upon religious values? Can foundational values capable of fostering social cohesion be made up of “secular” elements such as equality between the sexes, the chance to participate in democracy, or the right to secular education? Such questions are – at their root – political questions. Which history should be included in public schools: the history of Christianity or civilizational exchanges across religions/cultures? In short, is European democracy a product of the Enlightenment’s critique of religion or a historicist development of Christianity itself?

Closing Thoughts

L’Esprit de l’athéisme inspires readers to formulate new questions surrounding the role of religion in public life. Can Europe rely on something other than religion to create a shared horizon of history and a foundation for cultivating social cohesion? Isn’t Europe’s legacy in music, literature, philosophy, and architecture powerful enough to serve such a purpose?

On a material level, Comte-Sponville doesn’t assign Christianity the task of building social solidarity. He doesn’t trust charity—whether individual acts of generosity or organized religious giving—as a means of ensuring everyone’s right to a dignified life in a capitalist society structured around individual and egoist interests. Instead, he urges his compatriots to defend collective solidarity as expressed in the state’s social programs. It is primarily in building a shared symbolic horizon that he promotes critical engagements with Judeo-Christian tradition.

But has not the time come to find new horizons? For many, the call has long been overdue. Alain Badiou, for example, reformulates the concept of neighborhood to envision new forms of collectivity organized on porous boundaries and shared experiences. Bruno Latour, Michel Serres, and Philip Descola, for their part, advocate for new modes of collectivity and social contracts that recognize the Earth and “all the Living” as subjects of right and collective decisions.

Contrary to self-serving oppositional framings of Islam versus the West, Comte-Sponville’s philosophy promotes trans-civilizational affinities. To highlight shared horizons, he elaborates how Spinoza’s notion of immanence resonates with key elements of Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism. In formulating a “wisdom for our times,” Comte-Sponville selectively connects these dots in surprising but delightful fashion. Andre Comte-Sponville’s philosophical project is complex, nuanced, and at times ambivalent. While this brief reflection cannot capture the depth and breadth of his thinking, I hope that this piece sparks your interest in learning more about this work.

Ehsan Sheikholharam has a multidisciplinary background in architecture, religious studies, and philosophy. He holds a Ph.D. in Religious Studies from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and a terminal degree in Architecture from the University of Miami. He has also served as the Coordinator of Religion and Public Life fellowship at the Kenan Institute for Ethics at Duke University. Building on his diverse scholarly and cultural identity, Ehsan’s work cuts through key questions in the Humanities and design disciplines, including representations of minority identities in public space and critical cultural productions in the Global South. He is currently an Assistant Professor of Architecture at KSU.

Leave a comment Posted on by editornsrn NSRN Blog, research

‘Christianity Showed Its Face’: The Role of Power in the Process of Christian Exiting and Formation as a Religious None

Tess Starman, Howard University

Keywords: secularization, politicized religion, deconstruction, deconversion

U.S. Christianity has seen a sharp decline in affiliation over the last 20 years. Scholars have often associated this decline with the growing secularization of society and other forces including industrialization, rationalization, and urbanization.[i] However, one alternative explanation for religious decline is the concept of political backlash, positing that Christianity’s growing conservativeness has led moderates and liberals to reject religion.[ii] Given the increasing association of Christianity with republicanism in the public square and growing nationalism, I aimed to see how political backlash might be at play in Christianity’s accelerating decline in the United States.  

My work aims to test how Christianity’s maintenance and support of larger societal systems of inequality have contributed to disaffiliation and deconversion. My larger dissertation study answers several research questions: (1) What is the process of leaving Christianity, and how does Christianity’s maintenance of power systems impact this process? and (2) How do ex-Christians form their social and political identity after leaving religion? Here I present three key findings from preliminary analysis of interviews with 58 ex-Christians.

Building Discontentment

Participants were overwhelmingly committed Christians who had robust knowledge of tradition and scripture. This commitment to their religion led most to explore inconsistencies from a young age. For many, their questions date back to learning about the biblical creation story. A biblically literal seven-day creation story conflicted with what they learned about in library books and science classes. When Matt (a 30-something Black male ex-Evangelical) learned about the creation story, he recalls asking his pastor, “but what about the dinosaurs?” Matt felt disappointed in the reductionistic answer from his pastor: “well they just must not have made it onto the arc.” He also felt this answer did not match with an image of God as master and creator of all things. Why create dinosaurs, only to have them die in the flood?

Other commonly discussed sources of discontent amongst participants were a lack of women in leadership and anti-LGBTQ sentiment. Jules (a 30-something white female ex-Mainline protestant) noted her discontentment with the role of women in her church:

“There were no women in “real” leadership roles, like the only woman ‘leader’ was the worship pastor who was also the lead pastor’s wife… But they never let women preach. It always bothered me, but not enough to say something about it, like I get you using the bible and this tradition of patriarchy to justify these gender roles.”

These topics were early and ongoing sources of discomfort with religion. Questions or inconsistencies themselves were just one side of the discontentment coin; the other side was that religious authorities lacked in-depth critical engagement with these issues. Nearly all participants attempted to reconcile these feelings of tension on their own, engaging in a deeper study of scripture and church history. In other words, their initial response was not to pull away, but to lean in.

Pivotal Movement  

While attempts to reconcile inconsistencies and discontentment varied, all participants came to a pivotal moment where they felt they could no longer be part of Christianity. Oftentimes, this moment was neither large nor devastating, but simply one final straw that broke the camel’s back. Rose (a 30-something white female ex-Evangelical) shared her pivotal moment:

“I was invited to dinner at this church family’s house. I had been to dinner there several times and they were so inclusive of me as a single person in the church. I had known them for maybe 4-5 years at this point. When we’re getting ready to sit down for dinner, [the son] looked at me and said, ’I am missing a $20 from my wallet… did you take it? No, [he laughed] you didn’t take my money, you’re not Black.’ and I was appalled…It was willful ignorance, and that, coupled with everything else, was the turning point for me.”

Like Rose, many participants’ pivotal moments revolved around maintenance of systems of power, or more specifically, Christianity’s support of sexism, heteronormativity, racism, and conservative-bent nationalism. Sometimes moments came in direct response to an event, but other moments were smaller, internal dialogues. Amber’s (a 30-something white female Ex-Mainline) pivotal moment occurred when reading an article about Christian support of Trump before the 2020 election and thinking, “this is not my religion.” Avery (a 20-something Black gender queer ex-Evangelical) described a similar moment before the 2016 election: “Evangelical Christianity showed its face, and I couldn’t be a part of it anymore.” A seemingly decisive moment came after years of trying to see love and goodness in what they described as a “toxic religion.” Carlos (a 30-something Latino) eloquently described this process as an avalanche. All of the questions, problems, and tensions were not individually enough to walk away. But eventually one more light snowfall creates an avalanche, thus dismantling a mountain of faith.

Political and Social Formation as a None

Since leaving Christianity, participants shared that they feel more free to express progressive and liberal social attitudes. Many participants noted their direct support for abortion access, the Black Lives Matter movement, belief in gender equity, support for LGBTQIA+ rights, and many more progressive and contrarian attitudes. Most describe these attitudes as a direct response to their religious socialization, be it an internal response as a coping mechanism or a social response as a form of activism.

Even when Christian, many participants believed in these stances as fundamentally just, but they were not able to express that in their religious context. Others note that they supported and even participated in the pro-life movement and patriarchal and white supremacist structures, but after leaving their religion, they reassessed and changed their stances on these topics. Many are taking intentional efforts to engage in the political process or social movements to try and undo some of the wrong they believed they did while Christian. Some attended women’s marches and free Palestine rallies, while others found smaller forms of resistance, like assessing their household’s gendered division of labor.

Each participant’s social and political formation as a non-religious person is complex, with many seeking mental health services and communities of other ex-Christians for support. Leaving religion is greater than leaving a community. It involves leaving a worldview, belief systems, support network, and sometimes, family.  

These preliminary findings lend support to the proposed political backlash concept. The unique politicization and growing ideological conservatism of Christianity in the United States has been a direct catalyst for many to opt out of religion. While each story is unique and nuanced, many formerly devoted Christians recognize recent politicization as an example of Christianity’s use of power to maintain the status quo. Unwilling to be complicit and unable to reconcile this with their lived experiences and surrounding social realities, they feel like they have no option but to leave.

Tess Starman (she/they) is a PhD Candidate in Sociology at Howard University. Her research specializes on intersections of race, gender, sexuality, and power at the nexus of religion and politics. She studies progressive Christian attitudes, religious exiting, and religion’s impact on political attitudes and engagement. Her dissertation, entitled, “A Corrupted Faith: The Role of Power in the Process of Christian Disaffiliation and Rise of the Religious Nones,” examines the religious exiting process and non-religious identity formation of ex-Christians. She serves as the Research Assistant for Howard University’s Initiative on Public Opinion. Tess is the co-chair of the American Sociological Association’s Student Advisory Board and serves on the Pedagogy Committee of Sociological Forum. 

References

[i] See for example Calhoun, Juergensmeyer, and VanAntwerpen 2011; Kasselstrand, Zuckerman, and Cragun 2023; Voas and Chaves 2016

[ii] See for example Chaves 2017; Fischer and Hout 2008

Calhoun, Craig, Mark Juergensmeyer, and Jonathan VanAntwerpen, eds. 2011. Rethinking Secularism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chaves, Mark A. 2017. American Religion: Contemporary Trends. Second. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Fischer, Claude S., and Michael Hout. 2008. “How Americans Prayed: Religious Diversity and Change.” in Century of Difference: How America Changed in the Last One Hundred Years (The Russell Sage Foundation Census Series), edited by C. S. Fischer and M. Hout. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Kasselstrand, Isabella, Phil Zuckerman, and Ryan T. Cragun. 2023. Beyond Doubt: The Secularization of Society. New York: NYU Press.

Voas, David, and Mark Chaves. 2016. “Is the United States a Counterexample to the Secularization Thesis?” American Journal of Sociology 121(5):1517–56. doi: 10.1086/684202.