Blog By Demand

Is there a connection between physical rootlessness and spiritual rootlessness? I.e., does a mobile society tend to weaken religious convictions? -- Lorraine

If the real question is whether the integrity and cohesion of a society's shared religious convictions are damaged by high levels of mass mobility, then the answer is almost certainly yes. Watch how paleocons and libertarians leap at each others' throats on the open borders question, and you will see this throbbing beneath the surface.

But the more interesting question if we read Lorraine's words at face value is whether the religious convictions of members of a given society tend to lose them if that society is typified by high internal levels of mass mobility. Here I think experience is inconclusive. Americans have always been mobile sorts. Yet religion remains very powerful and vibrant. Indeed, areas in Old New England where Americans have been least mobile are often the ones associated with a general abandonment of religious convictions. And then the Mormons were only highly mobile because the locals kept running them out of town.

Probably moving around a lot -- or even a moderate amount, if great distances are involved -- relates not so much to a dimming of religious convictions but a weakening of personal ties with co-religionists, which may in fact contribute to a strengthening of religious convictions insofar as God goes everywhere with you in a way people, including members of one's former congregation, do not. So is there a link between mobility and Protestantism? Quite possibly -- and quite possibly in both directions as well.

Comments

[Lorraine]

Thanks for speaking to this.

Yes, I suppose it depends upon whether your religious convictions are, to begin with, a highly individual expression of faith or whether they are defined by a set tradition held in common with others. Still, it seems to me that a society of great internal mobility will not generate any culture in the true sense, i.e. customs and habits of living which follow upon shared first principles. Why? Because the first principles of a society are passed on to succeeding generations through education of the young, and I suspect this education is an activity only carried out successfully by a stable community. One might argue that the most essential education is received from the family, but in any case a single family rarely achieves such a level of self-sufficiency that it need not participate in a broader community too. In any case, your suggestion about Protestantism is very interesting. Perhaps the only first principle passed on by a mobile society is the spirit of individualism?