God is Dead: Secularization in the West (Religion and Spirituality in the Modern World) [Hardcover]

After this first encounter with the British sociologist of religion Steve Bruce, I would certainly want to read more of his work. I see that much by him is available, some of which are:
Sociology: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions)
Fundamentalism (Key Concepts)Religion in the Modern World: From Cathedrals to Cults

This book itself is a reminder to me of the importance of sociology. Bruce is not without opinions but brings a perspective that a psychology or religion scholar would be unlikely to.

Bruce's presentation of the pre-existing secularization paradigm begins the book and he continues to elaborate on and "defend" it throughout the book as he considers topics, especially as evidenced in Great Britain but also in the U.S. and Europe, pertinent to the impact of secularization on Christian institutions.

His assessment of "the world we have lost" provides a staggering list of seemingly impossible to deny claims arguing for the demise of religiosity in Great Britain. Bruce also analyzes the failure of the New Age movement in attempting to provide an alternative to Christianity as well as the (so far small) impact of Eastern religions in Great Britain.

Bruce explains why he concludes that liberal Christianity is indeed dying out relatively quickly and why he believes there are good signs that even conservative Christianity in the U.S. is weakening under the challenges of the secularization of Western society.

Despite the secular paradigm (which is not his) being somewhat awkward to explain and making for a relative lack of flow in first chapter, I found this book to be engaging. Bruce seems clear-minded, upfront about his assumptions and a world-class sociologist.

To some people it seems obvious that "religion" suffers a long-term decline (known as "secularization) in a modern, industrialized society. But a few writers, notably Rodney Stark, have made a lot of noise putting the opposite point of view: there is no decline, secularization is a myth. This is a very welcome message to those who believe that we are all born with a thirst for religion.
Others agree that secularization is a reality in Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, and so on, but claim that the US is the one great exception. Steve Bruce's book is the best available argument for the common-sense theory that the decline is real and that while America is about fifty years behind Europe in religious development, America is no exception.
Although Bruce is from Britain, and a lot of what he says is about Europe rather than the US, he has made a special study of American religion, and he has a chapter devoted to the idea that "America is the exception". He brings together all the most important evidence, from opinion polls, church attendance, and other sources, and most readers will find that the case made for the reality of secularization is irresistible.
There are still some areas where it would be helpful to have more good evidence. For example, in polls, around 40 percent of Americans say that they have attended church in the last week. This number is remarkably stable, going back to before World War II. Recent studies of actual church attendance show that the answers to polls inflate the actual attendance by about 100 percent. In reality, about 20 percent of Americans go to church regularly. So church going is distinctly a minority pastime in America today. But the opponents of the secularization theory claim that it was never any different: according to them, it has always been the case that 20 percent of Americans actually went to church but that 40 percent said they did. Bruce and other sociologists present some evidence to show that actual attendance used to be closer to claimed attendance: the gap between actual and claimed attendance has grown over the decades. But this is a tricky area since it's difficult to measure actual, rather than claimed, church attendance fifty years ago. So there is definitely room for further debate here.
The anti-secularization theorists generally caricature the views of the secularization theorists, rather than describing them fairly. So you will often find anti-secularization writers like Stark pointing out that not everyone went to church in the Middle Ages and that Christianity is not about to disappear completely next week. As Bruce makes quite clear, hardly anyone has ever maintained the views held up as "secularization" by the anti-secularization camp.
Two things are going on at once: fewer and fewer people are involved in church, and what the churches actually preach is more and more this-worldly. 99 percent of what Joel Osteen preaches is about how to achieve worldly success, and Osteen is not the only one. Bruce's books is quite informative, and quietly amusing, on this emptying of truly Godly material from Christian preaching.
I strongly recommend that you read this book by leaving the first chapter till last. Begin at Chapter 2. This is because Chapter 1 lays out the abstract sociological theory while the rest of the books looks at the facts. I also happen to think that the hard, sober, observable fact of secularization is very well established, while some of the sociological theories appealed to by Bruce, concerning precisely why secularization occurs, are much more wobbly.

Just a quick review: The first chapter is Bruce explaining the secularization theory (paradigm, idea, whatever). He uses a graph to illustrate this. It is very intricate and complex, but he explains each part very clearly. The rest of the book is basically him refuting any opposition the theory faces - chapter by chapter. He states what people often argue, state what they don't understand about the theory (which they obviously must NOT understand, or else they wouldn't be arguing, or so he'd say ;) and then state how what they're saying isn't true. It is a complicated book, and you may not agree with it (MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE THEORY COMPLETELY BEFORE DISAGREEING, its not as theo-bashing as it may sound!) but it is interesting, well done, and relevent to today.