Discuss the impact of secularisation on Christianity and provide a case for how a specific denomination could respond to the

challenge of secularisation. Secularisation is vital for a Church to thrive in modern society. The Secularisation thesis speaks of secularisation being related to modernisation. People such as Marx and Freud have suggested that as society modernises, religion will decline. This is because religious creeds and practices are are begining to lose significance in society today. The modern secularisation thesis states that one of two things could happen to religion. 1.1. Religion will dissapear due to privatisation and pluralisation: (The Disappearance Thesis) 1.2. Religion will continue in transformed expressions: (The Developmental Thesis) We can see through the developmental thesis that it is essential for the Church and any other religious establishment to transform with society in order for them to grow, or even survive. If this does not happen, the Church will dissapear, and religion will hold no place in society. There is nothing wrong with transforming the way in which the Church runs, as long as its theology does not change. Secularisation is not changing a religion, it is more making a religion more relevant in todays culture. There is no problem with letting go of tradition in order for the Church to continue and flourish. With the age of enlightenment came a need to use reason to explain the unknown. For something to be legitamate, it had to be reasonable and explainable. Max Weber writes, One need no longer have recourse to magical means in order master or implore the spirits, as did the savage, for whom such mysterious powers existed. Technical means and calculations perform the service. This above all is what intellectualisation means. We can see here that with the rise of intellectualism, there is no longer a need for theology. It has become outdated as such, and for it to keep up, the Church needs to modernise. Auguste Comte spoke of how humanity would develop and related it to 3 phases. Firstly the Theological phase. In this phase, people would relate things that were not fully understood, such as creation, to God. They would follow this blindly as they had no other explanation. The next phase would be metaphysical. I would personally call this the philosophical phase because in this phase, people began to use reason to explain things. They would question why things happen and search for answers. However, in this phase they would find no real evidence. The final phase Comte speaks of is the scientific phase. In this phase, mankind begins to answer questions that were previously put down to God. For example, what created the universe- in the scientific stage, the answer would be the big bang. To conclude, Comte rationalised that there is no longer a need for theology, and therefore it would die out. People can now explain the unknown with science, rather than God, and therefore God has become unneccasary. If this is the case, it is more important than ever that the Church secularises to carry on existing. A Church is made of people and therefore, as the people modernise, the establishment needs to modernise with the people. If a Church fails to do this, it could mean that the Church fails to thrive, and as a result, the Church will eventually diminish. However, it is important that the ideologies of the Church do not change. After all, they are still worshipping the same un-changing God. The Churches theology must stand solid through the changes, but to secularise, the way in which we worship can change. This is possible because God is un-changing yet adaptable, but the people are a changing people. This means that even though people change and modernise, their theology is still relevant. They still worship the same un-changing God, but in different ways. A problem
Max Weber taken from, Political Thought, edited by Michael Rosen & Jonathan Wolff (Norfolk; Oxford University Press, 1999)

that may arise however, is that the Churches identity needs to stand out from society. Is every step that is made towards secularisation a step away from God and towards society itself? Can the Church both be set apart from society and yet be accesible to society? I aim to look at the Church of England, and see how they have already secularised, but also look at how they could further accomodate a society that is modernising. Firstly it is important to say that the Church of England has varying styles of worship to accomodate for all. There are High Anglo-Catholic Churches, where their worship is mainly based on liturgy, all the way through to the more charismatic Churches, in which the worship could mainly be manifested in a musical, more openly charismatic context. Both of these still hold a place in society, but are extremely different. So how can these Churches be so different, and yet still be under the same banner of the Church of England? These churches still share the same authority, being under the rule of their diocese but more importantly, worship the same God. Although a service in either Church may be completely different, their theology is basically the same, however the way they express this is completely different. One Church focuses on the liturgy to inspire them, and this is how they encounter God. A charismatic Church however will encounter God through musical worship, or charismatic practices such as using gifts of tongues or prophecy. We can see that rather than these being completely different practices, they are different routes to the same goal: encountering God. I am going to focus mainly on the more charismatic Churches, to see how they have secularised, and see how they can do even more to keep up with an ever changing society. Musical worship is very important in these Churches, and is therefore very noticable in a charismatic Church of England institution. It is fair to say that musically the Church has developed vastly as it has secularised. This form of worship could have began as early as the psalms, in which David sang to the Lord to seek him out, with only perhaps a harp. It had developed to great hymns of praise by Charles Wesley, in which a congregation would sing with an organ accompaniment. Now however, with society and culture changing, what is most relevant is to have guitars, drum kits and other instruments you would expect in a rock band. We can already see how this can on the surface look like Church becoming one with society. What is in place to ensure that services do not simply become gigs? Is this modern secular music really bringing us towards God, or has it just become something enjoyable to listen to? It is important that when making the Churches music more secular, that the focus is still on God and on teaching, however the boundaries can be elusive. Many Anglican Churches have encorperated secular musical worship by having one slot at the start of the service and one at the end. This can be productive because as the service begins, people encounter God, and this makes puts them in the right mind frame to recieve teaching. Then after the teaching there will be another musical worship slot in which people can reflect on what has been said and respond to God. People can relate to the music because it is not much different to music that they regularly encounter. This familiarity makes worship more comfortable, and therefore more accesible. However, there is a danger of the teaching becoming the bit in the middle and the music becoming the main part of the service. Therefore it is important for Churches to stress the importance of the teaching. It is also important to ensure that the music is a genuine expression of worship, and not just notes played for effect. If the music is not worshipful, it has no place in Church. Liturgy has always been a big part of Church but the terminology used is becoming more and more outdated. Godfried Cardinal Danneels writes in Liturgy Forty Years After
Godfried Cardinal Danneels, Liturgy Forty Years After the Second Vatican Council: High Point or Recession, sourced from, p.11 Liturgy in a Postmodern World edited by Keith Pecklers SJ (London; Continuum, 2003)

the Second Vatican Council: High Point or Recession, One of the primary concerns of Vatican II and of the Church is and remains that the liturgy be understood by the celebrating community. Every reform proposed by the Constitution is rootes in that concern. Understand what you do is a basic demand of everything we do, including what we do in the liturgy. It is hard for people to relate to, or even understand much of the liturgy that currently exists. To improve this, there would need to be liturgical reform. Liturgy would need to be accesible to modern society, but yet not comprimising the theology that the liturgy presents. The language of liturgy must be changed in order for the liturgy itself to be understood and fully appreciated. If liturgy are just words that are spoken for the sake of using liturgy, is it an expression of worship at all. The beauty of liturgy is that the Church gathers in communion to express their belief, and to truly express this, it must be in words that everyone can understand. Another simple way to secularise is to use modern versions of the Bible. The language used in the King James Version has become outdated, and it is now a struggle to understand it. This may seem like a very small step, but it is extremely effective. The use of technology is critical in the secularisation of the Church. As we have reached a digital age, it is important that the Church moves with this. Simple things can be done to drastically improve the smoothness and accesibility of a Chuch service. For example, using a projector instead of Hymn books. This can help worship to flow, as there is no need to flick through a book and find the correct page. Also, there is a beauty in the entire congregation facing the same way to worship. It helps people to feel united, and this unity and smoothness can assist in creating the right worshipful atmosphere. Using computer technology in sermons can also be useful. Powerpoint presentations and other such things have proved useful in teaching, and so why should teaching in the Church be any different. With the aid of computer technology, teachings in Church could be better learned, which will assist in the lives of the congregation. It could also make sermons more interesting, as visual aids can liven things up. People often associate teaching with visual things such as pictures, and so the Church could utilise this when teaching the congregation. There could be an issue however that a projector screen could ruin the beauty of the Church, and therefore make it a less worshipful environment. But I fear that the cost of protecting a building may be the Church itself. Another way of secularising is through childrens work. The Church needs to look to the future and by investing time into childrens work, it can do this. However, children are an audience that need to be addressed in a way they will understand. This means that if the church is planning on branching into childrens work, they will need to use modern techniques that children can relate to. There will only be children in Church if the children find it enjoyable. To do this, the church needs to address modern culture. They need to look at things that children already find enjoyable, utilising things such as music, cartoons and other things that children can relate to. Many Church of England churches already have childrens workers, and I think that this is essential to progress. What is also necessary is to have a regular childrens event, specially designed around the needs of the children. This also needs to have a strong theological background. In this way, the Church can invest in tomorrow, creating the leaders of the future, and allowing the Church to advance further. Schools work is essential in this, because children need a proper understanding of theology. There is no better place to educate children than in a school. Secularising is the only way for the Church to survive and I think that each of these things is vital for the Church to do so. The only way to defend the Church and Christianity itself against this age of science is for people to have a proper theological understanding.

Science cannot explain everything, and I think that both science and theology can co-exist. However, if the Church chooses to continue using traditional methods, theology will become irrelevant. I think that the actual Christian message still holds relevance today, and will never lose significance. With all the manpower of the Church of England, I believe that they can effectively make changes to create the Church of today. A Church that stands firm through the challenge of modernisation. I also believe that the Church is doing this currently, but there is always more that can be done. There is still a place for tradition, and many people enjoy traditional worship. However, there is a void that must be filled by secularisation. Approximately a third of the world is Christian, and I believe that secularisation holds the key to evangelism. People need a God that is relevant to their lives, and if the Church does not secularise, Christianity itself will not be relevant to anybody.