‘Atheist Churches’ Aren’t New

The formation of the Sunday Assembly in London, and its offshoots in other parts of the world, have attracted the attention of the media; however, such types of nonreligious gathering are not entirely new. Nathan Alexander provides an400480_321189627925542_1317679353_n(1) overview of the historical forms of ‘atheist churches’, and highlights some of the issues faced by both old and new secular alternatives to religion.

The Sunday Assembly, an ‘atheist church,’ was formed in London in 2013, with offshoots in a number of cities in the UK, the US, and Australia soon following. These churches seek to replicate the ‘positive’ aspects of regular churches – the community, the ritual, the singing – only without the dogma. The media have taken notice of these churches, making irresistible comparisons of atheists with other religionists, most recently concerning a reported ‘schism’ between the London and New York chapters of the Sunday Assembly. What’s often missing from these kinds of media discussions, however, is that these atheist churches, and many of the dilemmas they face, are far from new. As people began to give up religion in significant numbers in nineteenth-century Europe and North America, many thinkers grappled with secular alternatives to religions, including what could be described as atheist churches.

Perhaps the first attempt to transplant religious ideas into a secular framework occurred during the de-Christianisation of the French Revolution. A succession of cults dedicated to reason, to the ‘Supreme Being,’ and to theophilanthropy, sought to mimic the trappings of religion except in a deistic or atheistic guise. Under these various cults, leaders celebrated festivals of reason, introduced a secular calendar, and recast literary and philosophical figures as secular saints. These new state religions did not survive the tumult of the Revolution, but they did lay the groundwork for the nineteenth century in which a number of similar – and more successful – attempts at secular replacements for religions were made.

One of the most prominent figures in this regard was a founder of sociology, Auguste Comte (1798-1857), who established the ‘Religion of Humanity.’ Comte believed that society was progressing from the theological and metaphysical stages into the positive stage – the final stage in his tripartite scheme – leaving orthodox religions behind, but he still believed a secular religion was necessary to fulfil humans’ religious needs and to promote altruism, a word Comte coined. Comte’s religion worshipped humanity in the collective but elevated women to the highest place of worship since Comte believed women represented the highest form of altruism, motherly love. Under this new religion, temples of humanity were erected and a new calendar was encouraged for adherents, with months named for famous historical figures, among them Shakespeare, Saint Paul, and Aristotle. The Religion of Humanity attracted followers not just in France, but throughout Europe and the Americas as well. Comte’s religion, however, was not universally praised. Some non-religious people objected to the authoritarian tendency in Comte’s religion as well as its assumption that the wealthy would be the natural rulers. Comte is remembered mainly as a founder of sociology though his Religion of Humanity has few followers today.

Another secular leader who experimented with alternatives to religion was Robert Owen (1771-1858), the Welsh socialist. Owen wanted to overthrow all religions since he saw them as the chief impediment to establishing a utopian society based on a new view of human nature. As part of his utopian movement, he established Halls of Science in a number of cities in the United Kingdom where services were held each Sunday. These services included sermons on ethical or philosophical issues and hymns on virtues that Owen saw as essential for the functioning of his socialist communities, like temperance, liberty, and benevolence. Owen’s antireligious ideas influenced the British Secularist movement, led by George Holyoake (1817-1906) and later by Charles Bradlaugh (1833-1891). When members of the Secularist movement expressed a desire for greater community, Holyoake adopted secular hymn books and ritual observances of marriages and burials, partially as a way to bring women and families into the fold. Bradlaugh, on the other hand, saw the movement as purely political in nature and rejected any attempts to ape religion, although his status as one of the leading atheists in Britain meant he was asked (and he reluctantly agreed) to perform many roles, like officiating at marriages, that were traditionally the jurisdiction of priests. Holyoake and Bradlaugh also clashed over the role moderate religious people should play in their movement. Holyoake maintained that the only way the movement could grow was to admit non-atheists, but Bradlaugh argued that there could be no compromise, since the aim of the movement, as he saw it, was the total elimination of Christianity. The friction between Bradlaugh and Holyoake led to the formation of rival groups, though the National Secular Society, founded by Bradlaugh, has continued up until the present.

Unitarian churches, for their part, have long been known for their liberal Christian doctrines, but one such church, South Place Chapel in London, gradually moved away from all supernatural claims under the leadership of the American abolitionist Moncure Conway (1832-1907). The chapel had its roots in late eighteenth-century America but was officially founded in London in 1822, before Conway became the leader in 1864. Conway himself had moved from Methodism to Unitarianism, and, by the time he became head of South Place, had rejected all religious dogma. His Sunday services offered readings from world literature and world religions, as well as lectures about the latest science. Conway inscribed the walls of the chapel with the names of the great religious and literary figures of history.

Conway left the chapel in 1884 to focus on writing and scholarship and was replaced in 1887 by Stanton Coit (1857-1944), another American, who was influenced by New England transcendentalism and the secular offshoot of Reform Judaism, the Ethical Culture Society of New York. Coit believed in the importance of ritual to create community and saw the chapel as a place to promote philanthropy, rather than to dwell on intellectual matters. But Coit’s changes did not sit well with the members and he left amicably in 1891, with Moncure Conway returning to take over until 1897. Coit formed the West London Ethical Society and established other Ethical Societies around the UK after his time at South Place. Following World War One, however, these Ethical Societies had become divided over, among other things, whether to support the war effort, as Coit did, or to adopt a pacifist stance. The societies persisted after the war, but did not maintain their pre-war numbers. South Place, meanwhile, struggled after Conway’s departure, but was moved to a new location in London in 1929 and renamed Conway Hall. Fittingly, the Sunday Assembly now holds its meetings in Conway Hall.

As we have seen, all these atheistic substitutes for religion have struggled with similar issues: How should they incorporate religious rituals and ceremonies while remaining secular? Should non-atheists be welcomed into their communities? How should these groups engage with political issues? Who has the authority to lead such congregations? How can these organizations build a foundation that will persist beyond a generation? These are questions that modern atheist churches struggle with – as, indeed, do many religious groups – and will only become more pressing as secularisation continues and non-religious people seek to create new communities. Examining the experiences of past atheist churches might provide a guide for modern atheists as they begin to confront these issues.

Further Reading

Budd, Susan. Varieties of Unbelief: Atheists and Agnostics in English Society 1850-1960. Heineman: London, 1977.
Charlton, D.G. Secular Religions in France 1815-1870. London: Oxford University Press, 1963.
de Botton, Alain. Religion for Atheists: A Non-Believer’s Guide to the Uses of Religion. London: Hamish Hamilton, 2012.
Harp, Gillis J. Positivist Republic: Auguste Comte and the Reconstruction of American Liberalism, 1865-1920. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1995.
Royle, Edward. Victorian Infidels: The Origins of the British Secularist Movement, 1791-1866. Manchester: University of Manchester Press, 1974.
Royle, Edward. Radicals, Secularists, and Republicans: Popular Freethought in Britain, 1866-1915.  Manchester: University of Manchester Press, 1980.
Smith, Warren Sylvester. The London Heretics 1870-1914. London: Constable, 1967.

Nathan Alexander is currently a PhD student in the School of History at the University of St Andrews. He completed his BA (Honours History) at the University of Waterloo and his MA (History) at Wilfrid Laurier University, both of which are in Canada, where he is also from. His research project examines the views of atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers on the idea of race in the nineteenth-century Atlantic World, with special focus on the United States and Britain. Nathan is also an Assistant Editor of NSRN online and a member of the Nonreligion and Secularity team.



This entry was posted in Historical, NSRN Blog and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to ‘Atheist Churches’ Aren’t New

  1. Regarding Comte’s “Religion of Humanity”, I’m reminded of Thomas Huxley’s witty remark about it: It is Catholicism minus Christianity.
    To the above named “atheist churches“ I can also add the Sea of Faith Network, which was established in late 80’s or early 90’s by an English Anglican Priest who formulated a “non-realist” theology. The network is still functioning, but I think it is declining like all other attempts to create religions stripped of supernaturalism. Tbe fundamental question for me is why? It seems that some form of supernaturalism (at least on a formal level) is a necessary condition for anything that seeks to be religion or religion-like.

    • Nathan Alexander says:

      Thanks for the comment, Mohammad. I think you’re right that the problem all these ‘atheist churches’ need to solve is how to build something that will last for more than a few decades and indeed if it is even possible without that supernatural element to unify people. There definitely seems to be a desire among some people who’ve given up their religion to create a secular substitute, but thus far I don’t think there’s been a hugely successful model.

      • I wonder Nathan whether you have consciously excluded communist states from your historical examination of ‘atheist churches’ or you simply haven’t thought about it. I think it is possible to argue that the closest and most successful example of an ‘atheist church’ is communist parties. Comparing communism to religion is something that has been done a lot, but I wonder whether anyone, given this recent academic interest in ‘atheist churches’, has taken communism into consideration.

  2. Nathan Alexander says:

    Mohammad, probably a bit of both. I was mostly focused on nineteenth-century atheist churches, so didn’t really consider communists (although Robert Owen might be described as a pre-Marxian communist). But the point you raise is really interesting. I wonder though if the difference might be that the examples I’ve given have been explicit substitutes for religion, whereas I think Marxism intends to be a solution for religion. Under a communist state, the need for supernatural comforts would inevitably disappear, the thinking goes. Nonetheless, I do wonder if there were community-building, ritualistic activities that took the place of churches in these communist states?

  3. This is a great rundown of a history that, I think, is often overlooked by nontheists today.

    Another example I’ve come across in my research is the First Secular Church and Sunday School of Portland, Oregon run by Katie Kehm Smith and Nettie Olds circa 1890. Historian Patricia Brandt discusses the Church and the machinations of the Oregon Secular Union in her article “Organized Free Thought in Oregon: The Oregon State Secular Union.” _Oregon Historical Quarterly_ 87.2 (Summer 1986): 167-204.

  4. Pingback: “Non-event” report: Why the Sunday Assembly event did not launch in Japan | Nonreligion and Secularity

  5. Two comments of tangential relevance. Owen greatly influenced Alfred Russel Wallace, at least in his early years. And Compte remarked that we shall never know the chemical composition of the stars, at the very time that Wollastone and Fraunhofer were studying the dark lines in the solar spectrum that soon afterwards would enable us to do just that.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s