Britains decline linked to decline of Christianity?

[Mount_Carmel]

Well, from the perspective of someone who went through his teens in the late 50s through to the mid 60s, I reckon the ‘crossover’ point regarding Christianity had much to do with such as ‘my rights’ clouding ‘duty and responsibility’, of drugs, open and ‘free’ sex, greater challenges to all forms of authority. It was perhaps less to do with the decline of Pax Britannica, and more to do with claims that science has rendered God as being defunct, and the outcomes and claims of the emerging social concepts of the ‘Teenager’.

My father said that he never experienced social ‘Teenagership’, that in pre-WWII days you went from child to adult.

 

[SAVINGRACE]

Granted Britain is no longer the great empire it once was and the 2 World Wars in the last century affected the population and the economy, I am not sure of their financial decline. I think the U.S. has experienced more of a financial decline than Britain. Moral decline might be more true for both Britain and America because of the decline of Christianity. That is my :twocents:

 

[GKC]

It is rare to find such illogical, irrational, pretentious un-historic twaddle compacted like garbage into the one article.

DNA is not affected by culture, temperament or social mores.
“The First world war had an epigenetic effect in that mothers made anxious by the way gave birth to an unusually aggressive generation which was the main cause of the Second World War."

The main cause of WW2 was Hitler’s aggression and a small island nation’s brave rejection of Nazi’ ideological barbarity. Anxious mothers do not breed unusually aggressive children.

“The Second World War in turn produced not only the Vietnam War but the militant anti-war students of the late 1960s. But now we are becoming a lot less war-like and much more reluctant to fight. People no longer want to join the army, or become engineers… And it’s not about money because these professions often pay very well. It’s because we lack the biological temperament. People would rather do arts degrees.”

If the First World War produced more aggressive children how can two more wars produce peaceful violence- adversive children. There is no internal logic to this argument.

Have we all taken up macrame and are doing Arts degrees due to our new cultural temperament? No, the world has arguably become more violent and Britain’s decline could be more likely attributed to a nation exhausted economically from a loss of empire and two world wars. Immigration has changed Britain’s cultural DNA more than some warped reversion to Lamark in the Professor’s view of evolution.

“Dr Penman believes Britain is now at the same point as Rome in 100BC. Despite military victories which had increased the sway of the empire throughout the western Mediterranean there was trouble brewing at home where conditions were deteriorating for the Romans.”
Dr. Penman’s understanding of history has the same tinge of motley as his genetics. Britain has now lost its empire and is in the stage of decline to a second tier world power, both economically and in military force. It is likely that it would be hard pressed to maintain control of the Falklands.
Sad to see a Doctorate giving credence to such silliness.

Well said.

GKC

 

[friardchips]

Since Christianity in Britain can be dated back to the 1st century I would look towards more contemporary reasons for the “…altered the way families behaved, children were raised and women were treated” instead of waiting 18 centuries to take root.

Your link is sourced to the Beeb! I wouldn’t trust their attempts at rewriting history, ever. Christianity came to Britain after the first century. We are talking centuries later for the arrival of Romans in Britain bringing Christianity along with them.

To the OP: after the Second World War, things ‘looked up’ in the U.K. Britain began focussing on working families, and thus, material possessions were looked upon as being a sign of healthy living etc…doing well - luxury equalled affluence and normality. So we are probably talking about technology, and distractions, such as the legacy of Hollywood glamour and the accumulation of ‘things’, and then the 60s later on with its escapism mentality, and yet playing further into the hands of the media-image world.There are so many factors I don’t think it can be pinned down to one or two issues. And it has lasted. I think it is just a stage soon to grow out of itself. We’re going through a tragically childish, atheistic thumb-in-mouth era, but sooner or later we Brits will wake up and realise: “Oh yes, money, worldly success, ME - there is more to life than these. And other nations count too, in the neighbourly/solidarity sense!” The question is: how will things change: will the U.K continue to be even less moral, under the mirage of equality and choice, or will its conscience grow back better than it ever was? I for one choose to remain hopeful. That is my free choice!

 

[cheese_sdc]

Re: Britains decline linked to decline of Christianity?

The article doesn’t state that. However it does say

"Penman claims it was this change which allowed the great thinkers and innovators of the Industrial Revolution to thrive. Christianity also promoted the importance of chastity, marriage and the nuclear family which, coupled with growing prosperity, allowed national stress levels to drop.

This increase in national confidence fuelled the desire for the First World War, but the conflict set in motion a series of biological events which would lead to the beginnings of decline."

So if you want to argue that the decline of Christianity is causing the end of Western Civilization, then you have to argue that Christianity caused WW1.

And if you want to argue that religion is the cause of civilizations rising and falling, there’s a good argument to be made that the rise of Christianity caused the fall of the Roman Empire.

Remember, correlation does not equal causation.

 

[TypesAndShadows]

It is rare to find such illogical, irrational, pretentious un-historic twaddle compacted like garbage into the one article.

DNA is not affected by culture, temperament or social mores.
“The First world war had an epigenetic effect in that mothers made anxious by the way gave birth to an unusually aggressive generation which was the main cause of the Second World War."

To be fair, epigenetics is a real thing that is a very new area of study, which suggests it could be theoretically possible that living in emotional stress for a number of years before and during a pregnancy could lead to subtle genetic changes (the ‘flipping’ of a genetic ‘switch’ that was already present) in either the child born from that pregnancy, or their children. (The main areas studied were about malnutrition leading to subtle genetic changes.)

But that is a long way from saying that this is something that did happen, let alone that it is responsible for what followed.