Austral Comunicación
ISSN-L
2313-9129
ISSN-E
2313-9137
Volumen
14, número 2, 2025
e01415
Believing and Doubting in Science and Religion:
Exploring Attitudes among Mexican Religious ‘Nones’
Carlos Nazario
Mora Duro*
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0163-836X
Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen,
Tübingen, Alemania
cmora@colmex.mx
Fecha de finalización: 1 de abril de 2024.
Recibido: 1 de abril de 2024.
Aceptado: 8 de noviembre de 2024.
Publicado: 10
de abril de 2025.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26422/aucom.2025.1402.mor.
Abstract
This paper
aims to explore the non-religious population (“nones”) in Mexico, with an
emphasis on their attitudes toward religion and science. According to the
national census in Mexico, the “nones” represent 10.6% of the total population,
i.e., 13.3 million individuals (INEGI, 2020). Religion is a central discourse
for the unaffiliated identity. When analysing the reasons individuals give to
explain their religious disaffiliation, findings in the Mexican context show
common attitudes, such as criticism of religion, autonomy, and indifference.
The role of science, on the other hand, also frequently appears within the
non-religious narrative, especially as a validation of the irreligious
position. However, the incorporation of science is neither univocal nor
unidirectional. This work elaborates further on some identified attitudes, such
as: believing in science, science as a horizontal discourse, and the critique
of the scientific realm as a dominant ideology. Following the postulate that
individuals cope with social reality using religious and secular positions in
different parts of their lives, this paper also suggests that religious and
secular discourses, such as science, can coexist and converge in plural
identities—especially in a cultural context such as the Mexican, defined by its
baroque ethos.
Keywords: Nones, Religion, Science, Pluralism, Baroque
Modernity, Mexico.
Creer y dudar en la ciencia y la religión: explorando
actitudes entre los sin religiosos en México
Resumen
Este trabajo
tiene como objetivo explorar la población sin religión en México, con énfasis
en sus actitudes hacia la religión y la ciencia. Según el censo nacional en
México, los no religiosos representan el 10.6% de la población total, es decir,
13.3 millones de individuos (INEGI, 2020). La religión es un discurso central
para la identidad no afiliada. Al analizar las razones que dan los individuos para
explicar su desafiliación religiosa, los hallazgos en el contexto mexicano
muestran actitudes comunes, como la crítica a la religión, la autonomía y la
indiferencia. El papel de la ciencia, por su parte, también aparece con
frecuencia dentro de la narrativa no religiosa, especialmente como validación
de la posición irreligiosa. Sin embargo, la incorporación de la ciencia no es
ni unívoca ni unidireccional. Este trabajo profundiza sobre algunas actitudes
identificadas, como creer en la ciencia, la ciencia como discurso horizontal y
la crítica del ámbito científico como una ideología dominante. Siguiendo el
postulado de que los individuos enfrentan la realidad social utilizando
posiciones religiosas y seculares en diferentes partes de sus vidas, este trabajo
también sugiere que los discursos religiosos y seculares, como la ciencia,
pueden coexistir y converger en identidades plurales; especialmente en un
contexto cultural como el mexicano, definido por su ethos barroco.
Palabras
clave: sin
religión, religión, ciencia, pluralismo, modernidad barroca, México.
Acreditar e duvidar na ciência e na
religião: explorando atitudes entre os sem religião no México
Resumo
Este
trabalho tem como objetivo explorar a população sem religião no México, com ênfase
em suas atitudes em relação à religião e à ciência. Segundo o censo nacional no
México, os sem religião representam 10,6% da população total, ou seja, 13,3
milhões de indivíduos (INEGI, 2020). A religião é um discurso central para a
identidade não afiliada. Ao analisar as razões que os indivíduos dão para
explicar sua desafiliação religiosa, os achados no contexto mexicano mostram
atitudes comuns, como a crítica à religião, a
autonomia e indiferença. O papel da ciência, por outro lado, também aparece com
frequência dentro da narrativa não religiosa, especialmente como validação da
posição irreligiosa. No entanto, a incorporação da
ciência não é nem unívoca nem unidirecional. Este trabalho elabora mais sobre
algumas atitudes identificadas, como: acreditar na ciência, a ciência como
discurso horizontal e a crítica do âmbito científico como uma ideologia
dominante. Seguindo o postulado de que os indivíduos enfrentam a realidade
social utilizando posições religiosas e seculares em diferentes partes de suas
vidas, este trabalho também sugere que os discursos religiosos e seculares,
como a ciência, podem coexistir e convergir em identidades plurais;
especialmente em um contexto cultural como o mexicano, definido por seu ethos
barroco.
Palavras-chave: sem religião, religião, ciência,
pluralização, modernidade barroca, México.
Introduction
This paper
explores Mexico’s non-religious population (“nones”) and their attitudes toward
religion and science. Religious disaffiliation is a relatively new area of
research in Latin America (Lecaros and Barrera, 2017). Religiously unaffiliated
individuals express a distance from at least one confession of the religious
landscape, without necessarily exhibiting an absolute absence of beliefs and
practices rooted in religious traditions or spiritual backgrounds. These are
consistent findings observed across various Latin American contexts, such as
Mexico and Argentina (De la Torre et al., 2020; Esquivel et al.,
2020). In the case of Mexico, the 2020 national census registered that the
people without religion, unaffiliated individuals, atheists, and agnostics
represented 10.6% of the total population, i.e., 13.3 million individuals
(INEGI, 2020).
Religion
and science are both relevant discourses for the identity of secular individuals.
On the one hand, existing research shows a complex relationship between
non-believers and religion (Blankholm, 2022). When analysing the reasons
individuals give to explain their religious disaffiliation, findings in the
Mexican context reveal common positions, such as criticism of religion, a
search for autonomy, and indifference (Mora Duro, 2017a). On the other hand,
the notion of science frequently appears within the non-religious narrative,
especially as a validation of the secular viewpoint. However, the incorporation
of science into this identity is neither univocal nor unidirectional. This work
further explores some identified positions among non-religious individuals such
as belief in science, science as a horizontal discourse, and critique of the
scientific realm as a dominant ideology.
The next
section develops a theoretical framework to understand how individual
identities incorporate secular discourses, such as science, while
simultaneously recognising the relevance of religious representations and
practices. This interplay reflects the collective imaginaries of Latin American
societies, where the secular and the religious are interwoven in syncretic
representations that creatively process the “baroque modernity” of the
continent. The second section focuses on regional statistics, highlighting
broader patterns of pluralisation and disaffiliation, despite religious history
in the area. Here, I briefly explore findings on the complex identity of the
“nones” in Latin America. Finally, the paper analyses how Mexican “nones”
incorporate discourses of religion and science into their worldviews. These
observations support the argument that individuals can maintain a pluralistic
identity, especially in a context characterised by the dynamic interplay of
various discourses in everyday conversation.
Qualitative
data analysed in this document are derived from my doctoral dissertation on the
non-religious phenomenon in Mexico. As part of this study, I conducted
semi-structured interviews using purposive sampling. The cases include
participants living in Mexico City who identified as non-religious (Mora Duro,
2017b, 2021). Furthermore, I draw on censuses from the Mexican National
Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI), and recent studies, such as the
National Survey on Religious Beliefs and Practices in Mexico (ENCREER)
conducted by the Network of Researchers of Religious Phenomena in Mexico
(RIFREM) (De la Torre et al., 2016).
Pluralism and Baroque Modernity
In
contemporary societies, there is more dialogue between contrasting points of
view, including religious and secular. In this context, Peter Berger proposes
that modernity does not necessarily lead to secularisation, but rather to
inevitable pluralisation, both in society and in the mind of individuals. As a
result of this pluralistic process, all viewpoints are nowadays relativised. In
other words, pluralism, as a global phenomenon, increases the chances of
dialogues among multiple worldviews. This dialogical encounter relativises the
previously taken-for-granted perspectives by realising that the world can be
understood differently. “Open one window and the whole turbulence of pluralism
may come in” (Berger, 2014, p. 29).
Berger
correlates the pluralistic experience with the emergence of a structure of
plausibility, where every point of view, religious and non-religious, is
plausible in society. The sociologist claims that an important difference from
previous pluralism is the powerful presence of secular discourse in society.
However, he criticises the premise that we live in a secularised world, arguing
that the world today “is furiously religious as it ever was, and in some places
more so than ever.” (Berger, 1999, p. 2). Modernisation would thus have some
secularising effects, but secularisation is only one of the possible outcomes.
This process can also correlate with the upsurge of religion or
counter-secularisation movements (Berger, 2002; Karpov, 2010).
Regarding
the notion of science, Harrison (2018) argues that the narrative of science as
a primary driver of secularisation—and as a catalyst for the
progression of human societies from a religious to a scientific stage—was a prevalent view in the 19th century, however, most scientists today
would reject that social change is driven primarily by scientific advancement.
At the same time, the available evidence does not support the prediction that
religion will decline due to science. Berger asserts that science does not
necessarily lead to a secular world, simply because “scientific reasoning” does
not “dominate the way they (modern people) think in ordinary life” (Berger,
2014, p. 19). In this sense, he critiques the debate between secularity and
religion, questioning whether we live in a secular or religious world when, in
reality, individuals must navigate both secular and religious attitudes in
their daily experiences.
Using the
example of a hospital, which can be considered a “temple of modernity,” Berger
(2015) argues that this space illustrates the interaction between secular
discourse and religious beliefs and practices. Regardless of religious
convictions among the hospital personnel, they are expected to operate, says
Berger, “as if God did not exist.” Religious people may view their medical
practices as actions to repair the universe, but their beliefs and spiritual
practices are not particularly in dispute during their job duties. Berger
concludes that, in structural terms, the secular discourse has not supplanted
other discourses in society, especially religious ones. Moreover, modern
individuals, particularly religious ones, may cope with the social reality by
employing both religious and secular perspectives; and “they find ways (not
necessarily coherent theoretically) of applying the two discourses in different
parts of their lives” (Berger, 2015, p. 410).
Thomas
Luckmann (1967) explored individual strategies to resolve the latent
contradictions between the secular and the religious viewpoints in modern
societies. He suggests that individuals may adopt a naive attitude,
where they remove inconsistent secular elements from their religious-secular
relationship, leading to an out-worldly commitment and tolerance of worldly
affairs. Another position entails a leap of faith, characterized by a
period of doubt, followed by the reconstruction of individual religiosity or a
return to a “pre-reflective attitude” and religious practices. Lastly, some
individuals prefer to organise a secular value system in which religious
elements are abandoned or performed on opportunistic occasions, resulting in
the privatisation of religion. In this sense, Luckmann argues that the sense of
autonomy in modern industrial societies resembles a consumer experience in a
marketplace, where one can access to a variety of sacred cosmos and secular
discourses.
Following
Luckmann’s hypothesis, the strategies to resolve the secular-religion tensions
imply reducing one domain in favour of the other. Berger attempts to transcend
this reductionism by suggesting that individuals can navigate social reality
using both frameworks in different areas of their lives. I argue in
addition that in a pluralistic context, individuals may simultaneously
incorporate both religious and secular discourses to shape a pluralistic
worldview. This fluid perspective, blending secular and sacred elements, can
influence numerous aspects of both social and individual life. In this respect,
I agree with the lived religion approach that individuals hardly ever express a
“totalizing identity”—in other words, they are neither entirely religious nor
wholly secular (Ammerman, 2014). Instead, social discourses, such as religion
and science, coexist in everyday conversation, whether in public affairs or
personal identities.
Existing
literature on discursive practices points out that individual identity is not
static but actively constructed and negotiated through the discourses employed
in multiple social contexts (De Fina et al., 2011). This argument is
especially relevant in Latin American religious pluralism, where complex
interactions between religious and secular discourses frame identities and
interactions in both public and private domains (Casanova, 2018). The modernity
that emerged in Latin America cannot be described as a secularising model, as experienced
in North Atlantic nations. In the region, modernity is defined by various forms
of adaptation/resistance to the social life promoted by North Atlantic
modernity. According to Bolívar Echeverría, a characteristic of Latin American
modernity is the baroque ethos, which involves the “theatricalization” of
modern attitudes, as the performance is capable of “inverting” the devastation
of the “social-natural nucleus of life” and rescuing that core “at least in the
plane of the imaginary”. The anti-modernity of the baroque, therefore,
challenges the expected “person” that capitalistic modernity imposes as a part
of its civilising project (Echeverría, 2019, p. 175).
Considering
the above, it is not difficult to imagine that individual identities in Latin America
incorporate secular discourses such as science, while simultaneously
recognising the relevance of religious visions and practices. This dynamic
reflects collective imaginaries in societies, where the secular and the
religious are interwoven in syncretic representations that creatively process
the orientation of baroque modernity. The Mexican context provides interesting
illustrations of reinterpreting symbols of Catholic Christianity through a
baroque style that simulates and resists the assimilation of the colonising
agents (De la Torre, 2023).
Mexican Baroque Religiosity
In 1979,
Pope John Paul II proclaimed “Mexicum, semper fidele, siempre fiel”
(Mexico always faithful) during his first pastoral visit to Mexico, evincing
the vibrant Catholicism of the nation. He declared that Mexico’s religious
history involves devotion to the faith set down by the first missionaries—a simple but deep-rooted religiosity—and sincere faithfulness to the point of sacrifice (Juan Pablo II,
1979). According to Bolívar Echeverría, this statement reaffirmed the vitality
and unquestionable validity of Catholic doctrine, rituals, and ecclesiastical
organisation in Mexico, despite the growing presence of statistical data
suggesting a decline in these elements (Echeverría, 2019, pp. 137–138).
The
significance of Catholicism in Mexico is also evident in the association
between the nation’s identity and the devotion to Our Lady of Guadalupe, the
most important symbol of popular religiosity (Lafaye, 2015). This figure played
a central role during Mexico’s War of Independence in 1810. The priest Miguel
Hidalgo y Costilla used the Virgin’s image to lead the movement for
emancipation from Spanish colonialism. Even today, the centrality of this
religious symbol is evidenced in the identification of the country as a
Guadalupian and Catholic nation.[1] Pope Francis,
head of the Catholic Church since 2013, has claimed that the devil is punishing
Mexico with violence because the Virgin of Guadalupe appeared in the territory
(Expansión-CNN, 2015).
Against
this background, some scholars view Mexico as an illustration of “assertive
secularism,” which has dominated since the late 19th century. This political
programme promotes an active and sometimes anti-clerical state that seeks to
exclude religion from the public sphere (Kuru, 2009). In this context, public
secular discourses challenge the idea of religious national cohesion by drawing
on the ideology of state secularism. Political classes, along with intellectual
elites, actively reject the influence of religion in public affairs, while
supporting and promoting the North Atlantic modernity and secularisation in the
country. Peter Berger describes this group in the global context as a highly
influential stratum of secular intellectuals, educated in the Western outlook,
and predominantly found in humanities and social sciences (Berger, 2002).
Despite the
expectations of assertive secularism, in practice, religion and politics often
intersect in various aspects of public life in Mexico (Blancarte, 2001). In
2016, Pope Francis expressed that Catholicism and devotion to the Virgin of
Guadalupe remain important in the nation, even for those who declare “I am
Atheist, but Guadalupano” (Konferenz Weltkirche, 2017). The Guadalupano-atheist
imaginary emerges dialectically within the public discussion between religious
and secular (sometimes anticlerical) discourses in Mexico. Identifying as Guadalupano
does not necessarily imply personal devotion to the Virgin, just as identifying
as an atheist does not mean the complete rejection of religious symbols. This
social figure exemplifies the pervasive influence of Catholicism in Mexican
society, even amid strict political secularisation (Navarro Floria, 2004).
Sandra Lorenzano notes, when describing Mexican identity, that Mexicans are Guadalupanos;
even progressive and left-leaning individuals often describe themselves as Guadalupano-atheists
or Guadalupano-Marxists (Lorenzano, 2016).
Figure 1. Marx and Guadalupe.
Source:
X, @Marx_ilustrado (2022).
The image
of the Virgin of Guadalupe embracing Karl Marx (Fig. 1), circulating on social
media, offers a compelling synthesis of the secular and religious interplay in
contemporary Mexico. Individuals may identify as atheists or Marxists while
expressing religious sympathies or participating in the popular religiosity of
the Guadalupana. When analysing the growth of non-religious individuals
in Mexico, it is crucial to consider this baroque orientation within their
secular identity. Moreover, the growing presence of “nones” should be
understood as a part of the broader phenomenon of pluralisation, where multiple
discourses coexist in society and individual identities.
‘Nones’ in Latin America and Mexico
In recent
decades, the Americas have witnessed a decline in Catholicism in parallel with
the rise in both non-Catholic affiliations and non-religious individuals
(Lipka, 2019; Pew Research Center, 2014; Smith et al., 2024). Some scholars
emphasise American exceptionalism—a secular modern society which remains
religious— or the growing number of “nones” in the U.S. (Casanova, 2007). On
the other hand, in Latin America, religious studies often focus on the rise of
Protestant and Evangelical churches. Scholars such as Peter Berger consider the
growth of non-Catholic Christianity in the region as evidence that the world
today is as religious, if not more so, than in the past; noting that this
proliferation has brought about significant cultural transformation in
societies (Berger, 2010).
Interestingly,
less attention has been paid to the growing number of “nones” in Latin America.
In some cases, the proportion of the religiously unaffiliated exceeds that of
nations in the global North. However, no one has argued that this trend
represents a cultural transformation. For example, recent studies show that in
the U.S., 29% of the population is religiously unaffiliated (Pew Research
Center, 2022), while in Chile this figure reaches 35%, in Uruguay 31%, and in
El Salvador 30% (Fig. 2).
Figure 2. Non-Religious Individuals in Latin America, 2017 (%).
Source:
Latinobarómetro (2017).
The Mexican
religious landscape has undergone similar transformations, particularly since the
second half of the 20th century. Contrary to the assumption of an entrenched
Catholic tradition, the country’s religious affiliations reflect a dynamic and
pluralistic market for salvation goods. This is evident in the expansion of
non-Catholic Christianity (Bastian, 2013) and the increasing plausibility of
religious disaffiliation for many individuals. In 1895, almost all Mexicans
identified as Catholics. However, by 2020 that figure has dropped to 77.7%
(around 97 million people). This data clearly shows a trend of Catholic decline
in the last century. In contrast, the category of Evangelicals &
Protestants—which includes Protestant, Pentecostal, self-identified Christian,
Evangelical, or belonging to the Biblical religion, and other non-Evangelical
denominations—accounted for less than 2% of the population until 1970.
Nevertheless, by 2020 this figure had risen to 14.1 million people,
representing 11.2% of the population (Fig. 3).
Figure 3. Catholics, Protestants & Evangelicals, and Non-Religious Persons in
Mexico, 1895, 1970, 2020 (%).
Source:
INEGI (2010, 2011, 2020).
On the
other hand, by 2020 the proportion of the religiously unaffiliated has reached
10.6% of the total population (13.3 million people), representing the highest
growth rate of any group within Mexico’s religious landscape. This is a
significant shift, given that less than 1% of the population was reported as
non-religious in both 1895 and 1970. In fact, between 1970 and 2020, the
“nones” experienced an average growth rate of 53.2%, Protestants & Evangelicals
grew by 51.5%, and Catholics declined by 1.2%. Thus, Mexican non-religious
exhibit an upward trend as significant as in countries such as the U.S., where
the proportion of “nones” increased from 5% in 1972 to 29% in 2021 (Pew
Research Center, 2022).
The 2020
census in Mexico disaggregated the non-religious category (sin religión),
as shown in Figure 4. Among the Mexican “nones,” 23% identify as religiously
unaffiliated believers (sin adscripción religiosa creyente), while 71%
claim to have “no religion.” In contrast, only 5.4% identify as atheists or
agnostics, representing just 0.6% of the total population. The evidence does
not indicate a substantial rise in atheism and agnosticism, despite the overall
growth of the religiously unaffiliated in Mexico.
Figure 4. Non-Religious Subgroups in Mexico, 2020 (%).
Source:
INEGI (2020).
The
distinction between non-religious and non-religious-believers can
be challenging, as even atheists or agnostics may exhibit characteristics
associated with transcendental beliefs. According to the National Survey on
Religious Beliefs and Practices in Mexico (ENCREER), while only about one out
of four “nones” identifies as a believer (whether traditionally, by conviction,
practising, or in their own way), 71% state they believe in God or a supreme
being (De la Torre et al., 2016, 2020). This exemplifies the complexity
of the relationship between the “nones” and the religious discourses.
In 2017,
the Brazilian journal Estudos de Religião published a dossier on the
non-religious in Latin America, which was an important contribution to this
relatively new area of research, with case studies from Uruguay, Argentina,
Brazil, Mexico, and Ecuador (Lecaros and Barrera, 2017). The research in Mexico
has shown that the “nones” hold a common disaffiliation from at least one
tradition within the religious landscape. However, this religious abandonment
cannot be interpreted as an absolute absence of beliefs and practices rooted in
religious traditions or spiritual backgrounds (Mora Duro, 2017a, 2017b, 2018).
Similar findings have been observed in other studies conducted in the Americas.
In Peru,
Romero and Lecaros (2017) explain that the contemporary non-religious
population (about 4% of the national population) involves atheists and people
who, being believers and/or occasionally attending religious activities, have
distanced themselves, temporarily or definitively, from a religious community.
Furthermore, those who consider themselves non-religious may exhibit a lack of
firm convictions or express an intention to explore other beliefs or religious
communities. Hence, “nones” in Peru may alter their opinions on religious
matters depending on the circumstances (Romero and Lecaros, 2017, p. 114).
In
Argentina, the approach of Hugo Rabbia (2017) defines this group as
non-religious by belonging (sin religión de pertenencia). These
individuals represent those who indicate in censuses or surveys that they do
not belong to or have no religion. This does not necessarily imply a position
of religious indifference, irreligiousness, or unbelief, although these states
may be present. What is clear, according to Rabbia, is that the trajectory of
disaffiliation among religious “nones,” non-identification, or unbelief in
Argentina, as evidenced by their autobiographical narratives, is not
necessarily linear (Rabbia, 2017, pp. 133–135).
In the case
of Brazil, Denise Rodrigues (2007, 2009, 2012) identifies two profiles: the
non-religious “nones” and the religious “nones.” Among the first group, one can
find atheists and agnostics, however, the researcher points out that they do
not represent most individuals in the religiously unaffiliated category.
Accordingly, most Brazilians “nones” express a degree of religiosity, while
they reject religious institutions, as they do not consider them necessary to
express their spirituality. These individuals maintain close ties with the
sacred and do not reject the notion of higher intelligence (or force), thus
maintaining private deterministic beliefs such as a particular notion of God.
As the
literature shows, religious disaffiliation in Latin America does not follow a
singular path of decline in confessional beliefs or practices, although
criticism of religion is often directed toward established institutions, such
as the Catholic Church. I consider the attitudes of Latin American “nones” as
counterevidence to secularising modernity, which assumes that increased
modernity leads to a greater decline in religious practices and beliefs or
their privatisation to the private domain (Casanova, 2007). Instead, the
“nones” reflect social imaginaries where the religious and the secular are
interwoven in syncretic representations that creatively process orientations of
the baroque ethos.
Positions on Religion and Science among Mexican
‘Nones’
This
section presents some excerpts from my investigation of the non-religious
phenomenon in Mexico. I conducted 30 semi-structured interviews in Mexico City,
beginning with the question: “What is your religion or church?” If respondents
identified as non-religious, atheist, or agnostic, the interview proceeded with
a pre-set questionnaire, allowing space for open-ended responses to build a
comprehensive narrative. Participants were selected through personal networks,
which facilitated trust and rapport, although public spaces such as parks,
public transport, and social media platforms were also used to diversify the
sample. Data collection occurred between 2014 and 2015, alternating with
fieldwork in the rural community of San Pablo Chalchihuitán in Chiapas, Mexico.[2]
In the
Mexican context, religion appears as a central discourse for the identity of
the “nones,” but one cannot reduce this relevance to binary oppositions:
believers or non-believers, religious or non-religious. Mexican “nones” of
course tend to describe a dispossession or lack of identification with a
religious tradition. Dispossession occurs when individuals question their
belonging to a belief lineage, often received involuntarily, as part of family
or community traditions. This attitude is predominantly directed against the
Catholic Church, whereas a growing distance from other churches is a notable
feature of the recent pluralist experience in the region.
Recent
studies have revealed a complex relationship between the “nones” and religious
discourse. Blankholm (2022) has explored how the attitudes of non-believers
relate to their understanding of religion. If religion primarily signifies
belief, other practices may be purified and drawn into the secular
realm; however, a broader understanding of religion may contaminate
elements of confessionalism to a large extent. In this regard, the unaffiliated
status in Mexico is associated with various perceptions: 1) distance from a physical
community where people interact, communicate, associate, and show solidarity—a
concept Durkheim referred to as the moral community of religion (Durkheim,
1915, p. 46); 2) separation from an imagined community of past believers and
potential successors within a religious tradition (Hervieu-Léger, 1993); and 3)
an increasing secularisation of religious institutions and ecclesiastical
hierarchies—the structure that administers and
mediates between religious symbols and the faith community. Bureaucratic
cadres, stripped of their divine charisma, are therefore constantly
scrutinised, and this criticism constitutes one of the commonplaces to explain
the rupture with religious belonging (Mora Duro, 2017b, p. 260).
Following the
above, when examining how Mexican “nones” disclose their religious
disaffiliation, a prevalent attitude identified is the critical one.
According to the analysis of the Encreer survey (De la Torre et al.,
2016), around 50% of Mexicans exhibit this position. It reflects statements
such as, “All religions are false,” and “I do not believe in religious
authority and have my own beliefs.” Typical profiles in this group include
“atheists” and “freethinkers”. These individuals often question the plausibility
of a higher entity’s existence (e.g., God, creator, or divine substance) and
claim that religion restricts freedom of thought (Mora Duro, 2017a, p. 175).
Common narratives, especially among the highly educated and urban sectors,
express a critical deconstruction of religious institutions and actors,
sometimes drawing on assertive secularism in the country. This perspective can
be seen in the following comments by Tamara (34, female), a research professor
at a university in Mexico City, who questions the control and power
concentrated in religious hierarchies.[3]
For me,
religion is a form of control—effective, very effective—because it does not
allow human development; on the contrary, religion limits it. The potential of
human beings to act [freely] within these coordinates is being reduced, and I
don’t like that [...]. I find the existence of churches and the existence of a
God quite absurd and questionable in the face of so many injustices [...]. Some
people can be worthwhile in religious formation, but I detest those who profit
from faith. They have too much power.
A second
attitude among non-religious people in Mexico is one of autonomy. This
group demonstrates individual agency to reorganise resources of religious
traditions, alongside other spiritual and secular discourses, including
science. The autonomous subject, about one out of four individuals according to
our research, includes personas such as the “spiritual but not religious,” the
“spiritual seeker,” or those expressing interest in “studying the Bible” (Mora
Duro, 2017a, p. 175). This position is reflective of the pluralistic experience
in Mexican society in recent decades. Carla (29, female), who oscillates
between atheism and agnosticism, is an intern at a public institution. She
describes that, although she cannot conceive of a world without religion, she
prefers mysticism in her personal life.
Religions
legitimise an order of things. If we didn’t have religions, everything would be
allowed, and although I would prefer a world without churches, I think it is
dangerous [...]. A relationship with a religious institution is not important
to me; however, mysticism might have a place in my life, as it makes me feel at
peace. The universe would be a big joke if it weren’t possible to have something
higher.
A third
position one can identify in the Mexican context is indifference or an
uncritical attitude, which is present in two out of ten “nones.” Here we find
people who identify themselves as “agnostics,” but also those who practise
“traditions” without categorising them as religion, as well as those who
have been socialised in a family environment with little or practically no
religious orientation. Like the autonomous position, some of these “nones” can
accept the existence of something transcendent, but very often their
positioning reflects a direction of indifference or apathy rather than
criticism or autonomy (Mora Duro, 2017a). Alejandro (36, Male), a master's
student who used to participate assiduously in a non-Catholic Christian church,
expresses his current disinterest in religious discourses.
I would
define myself as disinterested in religious matters—not in everything
religious, but in spirituality and so on. I’m very interested in it [religion]
as a social and cultural phenomenon. But in terms of transcendentality, I don’t
think like that [religiously] anymore. I've never openly said that I’m an
atheist, because I think that requires a level of commitment I don't feel. I'm
not committed to the idea of ‘God doesn't exist, and I don't care’ no, no, no.
It is
important to note that the positions expressed by the “nones” show a visible
correlation with their life course. The analysis of individual narratives
reveals varied trajectories among Mexican non-religious: 1) The experience of lax
religion involves people who were ritually incorporated into a religious
tradition (baptism) and other religious rituals without explicit commitment,
gradually drifted away from the confessional space. 2) De-conversion corresponds
to a reconfiguration of personal identity, often involving a turning point,
from confessional practices and religious worldview to a position where
religion has reduced its importance.[4] 3) The
trajectory of the secular native describes almost no contact with the
resources and symbols of any organised religion (no baptism). Throughout their
lives, there is a lack of incentives for a specific religious doctrine, and
this absence of faith produces in the individual a sense of estrangement from
religious forms and actions (Mora Duro, 2017b).
Echoes of
the baroque ethos are evident in all the attitudes described above. Individuals
may identify as atheists while still believing in a transcendent entity, such
as the universe. Moreover, they may engage in religious practices, such as
daily prayer or wearing religious symbols in their everyday interactions. These
actions do not contradict their non-religious identification, simply because it
does not entail a fixed or totalitarian identity. The intersection of the
religious and the secular does not pose a dilemma for Mexican “nones,” because
confessional elements are purified by their relevance to socialisation and
personal concerns, beyond their religious significance (Mora Duro & Fitz Herbert,
2024). Rafaela (36, female), a teacher with a lax religious background,
explains that she always carries religious items because they signify a connection
with her mother.
I keep an
image of the Virgin of Guadalupe and El Señor de las Maravillas
in my wallet. Why? Because my mum is reassured that I have that accompaniment,
and it doesn’t harm me either. If you ask me if it has helped me, well, no, I
don’t think a mugger would stop because I have holy images. It doesn’t hurt me
to carry them [religious images] though.
The
attitudes of the “nones” feed back into the baroque amalgam in the public space—where the assertive ideology of the secular state and the continued
participation of religions in politics and social life coexist. I have defined
this confluence as sacred secularism, since the religious can be purified by
the secular, but the secular can also be sacralised by the religious (Mora
Duro, 2024). This continuous interplay can also be observed in the identities
of the religiously unaffiliated and their incorporation of discourses such as
science. In this way, I argue that, just as religion cannot be reduced to a
mere realm excluded from the identities of the “nones,” science cannot be
relegated to a strictly secular discourse that grounds attitudes without
religion.
My research
on Mexican “nones” included specific questions concerning religion, e.g., What
is your religion or church? Do you attend religious services? And what factors
have influenced your current attitude towards religion? (Mora Duro, 2017b, p.
283). In contrast, without inquiry, science appeared in the narratives of
several individuals as a relevant social discourse characterising their
position as non-religious. The perspectives of the interlocutors indicate,
nevertheless, that the incorporation of science is neither univocal nor
unidirectional. It cannot be argued in this sense that the more scientific an
individual is, the less religious they become.
One
attitude observed among the Mexican “nones” is belief in science. This stance
reflects the use of scientific discourse to fill the space left by religious
disaffiliation or to shield individuals’ non-religious position, especially
when religious accompaniment is necessary, such as in moments of personal
vulnerability. The perspectives of the following interlocutors illustrate this.
Malena (45, female), a political consultant, states that she has no religious
affiliation, while Daniela (26, female), a master's student in social sciences,
identifies as agnostic.
Malena: You
place your faith or belief in things. Perhaps for me, it is the scientific
method, because it is accessible to my reasoning—far more than the idea of a
God who observes and decides everything. I don’t think I could deal with that
idea [of God]; I would have to be able to sit down and talk to that God to feel
at ease.
Daniela: My
mum was diagnosed with cancer. Luckily, it wasn’t cancer in the end. I felt
angry and scared, [...] but I never said, ‘hey God, or anything like that’. I
just said, ‘let’s trust in science,’ right? That’s why I’m not an atheist, I
believe in fucking science—scientism, whatever you call it. ‘It’s going to
be fine, and if it’s not? Well, that’s it.’ The body has an expiration date.
In the same vein, Mariana (64, female), a government
employee who defines herself as non-religious yet with an esoteric and
metaphysical mindset, expresses a suggestive plural identity that incorporates
the discourse of science as a belief. When she describes that she was convinced
by the scientific method, she describes a sort of scientific conversion that
dictates her life path.
I had a
workshop on scientific methodology—totally subversive—and I have since been
convinced (convencida) to scientific thinking. [...] If God exists, we
have a good relationship, we respect each other. [...] You go to India, you see
these colourful, voluptuous, glamorous goddesses—a goddess with a flute, a
spear, an animal. I would like to believe in that kind of character, however, science
dictates to me ‘No, and there is no way.’
Belief in
science, rather than describing a secular worldview, practically embeds science
in the baroque cosmos of religious, spiritual, and other secular discourses,
thus rejecting the idea of a totalising secular identity. Indeed, for some religiously
unaffiliated individuals, science can be a way of approaching the mystical
understanding of life. For example, when people claim not to believe in God,
but argue that we are part of a whole—a universe—since science has shown that
matter is neither created nor destroyed.
Another
perspective identified among Mexican “nones” is the narrative of science as
a horizontal discourse. Some informants described in this line that science
is not superior to religion or any other social knowledge; while others claimed
that science cannot explain everything in the world. These views do not reject
the scientific perspective but see science as complementary to other discourses
available in society. This supports the argument for a structure of
plausibility in plurality that allows for the consideration of any point of
view in society. Much like a consumer in a market, where the scientific is one
discourse among others that individuals can incorporate. Antonio (33, male) is
an employee who declares himself an atheist because “there is no place for God”
in his life. He believes in “evolution,” but also notes that science has its
limits in explaining certain phenomena, e.g., energies or ghosts.
I think
there are many things science cannot explain. You can call them whatever you
want [...] ghosts, energies. It doesn’t mean that they are really demons, but I
do think that there are things that science cannot explain [...]. The so-called
demons, but they don’t have to be bad.
The “nones”
in the research group also emphasised a critique of science as a dominant
discourse. Just as some question religion, they also disagree with the idea
of science as the ultimate standard and judge of all matters concerning
humanity. Their attitude therefore questions the unreflective assimilation of
scientific discourse. As already mentioned, this perspective does not imply an
anti-scientific or anti-modern position; instead, they are objecting to a
version of modernity in which science, rather than enlightening humanity, is
seen as leading to its oppression. The opinion of Juventino (25, male), a
freelancer living in Mexico City, provides an interesting perspective on this
position. He defines himself as an atheist and “highly sceptical” of both
religion and science.
I’m very
sceptical [...] I’ve heard of the evil eye, binding spells (amarres),
purifications (limpias), and Cuban Santería, but I don’t believe
in any of that either. However, this is more cordial (simpático) to me.
Sometimes they seem like spaces that can be good because the imposition of
science over all kinds of knowledge bothers me. I don’t believe in the
scientific capacity to measure and be accurate about life experience. And I
like the capacity of witchcraft (brujería) or that kind of stuff to
challenge taken-for-granted scientific knowledge, although I don’t believe in
witchcraft either.
The 2017
Survey on Public Perception of Science in Mexico found that seven out of ten
Mexicans consider that the country relies too much on faith and too little on
science (INEGI and CONACYT, 2018). Some researchers argue that the questioning
of science, from a politically secular position (laicidad) also leads to
criticism of dogmatic scientific positions—namely that scientific knowledge
must be critically scrutinised to ensure its advancement (Salazar et al.,
2015, p. 50). Beyond a linear—secular and scientistic—assimilation, it can be
concluded that the “nones” exhibit, in their beliefs and doubts about science
(and religion), a creative identity far removed from the model expected by Western
capitalist modernity. The pluralism of the Mexican context and its baroque
cultural tendency are undoubtedly frameworks that help us to understand the
range of attitudes that intertwine science and religion among non-religious
people.
Conclusion
The
non-religious population in Mexico has grown visibly in recent years within a
context of increasing pluralisation of the religious landscape. This context
fosters the plausibility of multiple discourses in society, including both
religious and secular ones. Moreover, the baroque modernity in the region
encourages the logical and paradoxical confluences of religious symbols and
secular elements, as observed in the sacred secularism of the country and the
suggestive reinterpretation of devotional figures. This paper has illustrated
the latter phenomenon with social imaginaries such as the Guadalupano atheist—
a secular attitude imbued with the sacralisation that permeates cultural
representations in Mexico.
Against
this background, individuals cope with social reality using religious and
secular positions in varying domains of their lives. This paper also suggests
that in a pluralistic context, individuals can maintain a baroque identity,
both secular and sacred at the same time. This configuration influences
numerous aspects of both social and individual life. As individuals do not
ordinarily display totalitarian identities, religious and secular
discourses—such as science—can coexist and converge in the conversations and
attitudes of everyday life. Thus, rather than propose that religious
disaffiliation in Mexico is evidence of secularising modernity, the work has
observed that Mexican “nones” navigate a spectrum of attitudes towards religion
and science, influenced by social imaginaries and individual biographies.
Regarding
religion, the critical position entails a rejection of religious authority and
doubts about the plausibility of religious beliefs. It resonates especially
among the educated urban population, which questions religious institutions and
actors for their perceived flaws. There is also an attitude of autonomous
reorganisation of religious resources, alongside other discourses such as
mysticism, new spiritualities, and secular humanism. This approach reflects the
pluralisation of the religious landscape in Mexico and underlines the baroque
fluidity of religious identities. On the other hand, indifference or an
uncritical attitude expresses a lack of active engagement with religious
traditions. Although some individuals in this category may recognise the
existence of transcendent elements, their disinterest in religious matters is
manifested as apathy rather than explicit rejection.
The
incorporation of science among the Mexican “nones” provides another layer of
complexity to their worldview. Some individuals believe in science and
prioritise scientific discourse in their life trajectories; however, this does
not exclude mystical or religious thinking. Rather, science is embedded in the
cosmos of religious, spiritual, and other secular discourses. Others see
scientific knowledge as a complementary discourse alongside religion and
spirituality since science “does not have all the answers” to human experience.
Meanwhile, there is also an opposition that criticises science as a hegemonic
discourse. This group questions the notion of a monolithic scientific worldview
and stresses the importance of pluralism in public discourse.
Some
scholars have observed that there is a paradox among secular individuals, while
“avoiding” religion and “embracing” something like it (Blankholm, 2022). We
have found that individuals may identify as atheists and science-believers
while maintaining a belief in a transcendent entity, e.g., the whole or the
universe. Even if they have an apathetic attitude towards religion, they may
engage in spiritual practices, such as daily prayer or carrying religious
symbols, which are purified by their relevance to socialisation and personal
concerns (Mora Duro & Fitz Herbert, 2024). These actions do not
contradict their non-religious identification, because it does not entail a
fixed or totalitarian identity. In this sense, believing in and doubting both
religion and science implies an opposition to total identities, whether
scientific or religious. Even in the face of possible tensions in the
definition of personal identity, this can be addressed within the framework of
the baroque ethos. This cultural orientation, beyond the predominance of plural
and modern discourse, has meant resistance and adaptation to hegemonic social
discourses, producing creative representations, and reversing the exercise of
power, at least on the imaginary level.
References
Ammerman, N. T. (2014).
Finding religion in everyday life. Sociology of Religion, 75(2),
189–207.
Bastian, J.-P. (2013). Pluralización religiosa y
lógica de mercado en América Latina. In M. A. Cuadriello & M. T. Kuri
(Eds.), El fin de un sueño secular: Religión y relaciones internacionales en
el cambio de siglo (Primera edición, pp. 91–112). El Colegio de México.
Berger, P. (1999). The Desecularization of the
World: A Global Overview. In P. Berger (Ed.), The Desecularization of the
World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics (pp. 1–18). Ethics and Public
Policy Center.
Berger, P. (2002). Secularization and
de-secularization. Religions in the Modern World: Traditions and
Transformations, 336.
Berger, P. (2010). Max Weber is alive and well,
and living in Guatemala: The Protestant ethic today. The Review of Faith
& International Affairs, 8(4), 3–9.
Berger, P. (2014). The Many Altars of
Modernity: Toward a Paradigm for Religion in a Pluralist Age. Walter de
Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
Berger, P. (2015). The hospital: On the interface
between secularity and religion. Society, 52(5), 410–412.
Blancarte, R. (2001). Laicidad y
secularización en México. Estudios Sociológicos, 19(57), 843–855.
https://doi.org/10.2307/40420692
Blankholm, J. (2022). The secular paradox: On
the religiosity of the not religious (Vol. 5). NYU Press.
Bullivant, S. (2022). Nonverts: The making of
ex-Christian America. Oxford University Press.
Casanova, J. (2007). Rethinking secularization: A
global comparative perspective. In Religion, globalization, and culture
(pp. 101–120). Brill. https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004154070.i-608.39
Casanova, J. (2018). Parallel reformations in
Latin America: A critical review of David Martin’s interpretation of the
Pentecostal revolution. David Martin and the Sociology of Religion,
85–106.
De Fina, A., Schiffrin, D., & Bamberg, M.
(2011). Discourse and identity. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary
Introduction, 263(13), 263–282.
De la Torre, R. (2023). Saints and their
Replicants: A Decolonization of Power through Ultra-baroque Devotion. In
Gurminder K. Bhambra, Lucy Mayblin, Kathryn Medien, & Mara Viveros-Vigoya
(Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Global Social Theory (pp. 315–333). SAGE.
De la Torre, R., Hernández Hernández, A., &
Gutiérrez Zúñiga, C. (2016). Encuesta Nacional sobre Creencias y Prácticas
Religiosas en México. Rifrem 2016 (1st ed.). Red de Investigadores del
Fenómeno Religiosos en México.
De la Torre, R., Nahayeilli Juárez Huet, Mora
Duro, C. N., & María del Rosario Ramírez Morales. (2020). Sin religión. In Tomo
II. Diversidad religiosa (1a ed., pp. 127–154). Colegio de la Frontera
Norte-CIESAS.
Durkheim, E. (1915). The Elementary Forms of
the Religious Life (J. W. Swain, Trans.; Ebook). The Project Gutenberg.
Echeverría, B. (2019). Modernity and
‘Whiteness’ (R. Ferreira, Trans.; 1st ed.). Polity Press.
Esquivel, J. C., Funes, M. E.,
& Prieto, M. S. (2020). Ateos, agnósticos y creyentes sin religión:
Análisis cuantitativo de los sin filiación religiosa en la Argentina.
Expansión-CNN. (2015, March 13).
El diablo castiga a México porque ahí se apareció la Virgen: Papa.
Expansión. http://expansion.mx/nacional/2015/03/13/a-mexico-el-diablo-lo-castiga-con-mucha-bronca-dice-el-papa-francisco
Harrison, P. (2018). Science and secularization.
In Narratives of secularization (pp. 47–70). Routledge.
Hervieu-Léger, D. (1993). La religión, hilo de
memoria (M. Solana, Trans.). Herder.
INEGI. (2010). Censo de
Población y Vivienda 2010. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía.
https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/ccpv/2010/
INEGI. (2011). Panorama de
las religiones en México 2010 (p. 270). Instituto Nacional de Estadística y
Geografía. https://perma.cc/26GP-CK7G
INEGI. (2020). Censo de
Población y Vivienda 2020. Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía.
https://bit.ly/37Pa0cA
INEGI & CONACYT. (2018). Encuesta
sobre la Percepción Pública de la Ciencia y la Tecnología (ENPECYT) 2017
(p. 17). Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía y Consejo Nacional de
Ciencia y Tecnología.
https://www.inegi.org.mx/contenidos/saladeprensa/boletines/2018/OtrTemEcon/ENPECYT2018_06.pdf
Juan Pablo II. (1979, January 26). 26 de enero
de 1979, Catedral de Ciudad de México. Vatican.
https://www.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/es/homilies/1979/documents/hf_jp-ii_hom_19790126_messico-cattedrale.html
Karpov, V. (2010). Desecularization: A conceptual
framework. Journal of Church and State, 52(2), 232–270.
Konferenz Weltkirche. (2017). Die Jungfrau von
Guadalupe. Konferenz Weltkirche.
https://weltkirche.katholisch.de/artikel/40880-die-jungfrau-von-guadalupe
Kuru, A. T. (2009). Secularism and state
policies toward religion: The United States, France, and Turkey (1st ed.).
Cambridge University Press.
Lafaye, J. (2015). Quetzalcóatl y Guadalupe: La
formación de la conciencia nacional en México. Abismo de conceptos. Identidad,
nación, mexicano. Fondo de cultura económica.
Latinobarómetro. (2017). El papa Francisco y la
religión en Chile y América Latina. Latinobarómetro 1995-2017 (p. 28).
Latinobarómetro. https://bit.ly/3KdrwUZ
Lecaros, V., & Barrera, P. (2017). Dossier:
Los ‘Sin Religión’ en la Modernidad Contemporánea. Estudos de Religião, 31(3),
5–7.
Lipka, M. (2019, July 1). 5 facts about religion
in Canada. Pew Research Center.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/01/5-facts-about-religion-in-canada/
Lorenzano, S. (2016, December 11). Guadalupana,
¿cómo de que no? SinEmbargo MX.
https://www.sinembargo.mx/11-12-2016/3124496
Luckmann, T. (1967). The invisible religion:
The problem of religion in modern society. Taylor & Francis.
@Marx_ilustrado. (2022, December 12). Marxismo
Ilustrado en Twitter [Xcorp. San Francisco, EUA]. Twitter.
https://twitter.com/Marx_ilustrado/status/1602340044143992833
Mora Duro, C. N. (2017a). Entre la crítica, la
autonomía y la indiferencia: La población sin religión en México. Estudos de
Religião, 31(3), 157–178.
Mora Duro, C. N. (2017b). Creer sin iglesia y
practicar sin Dios: Población sin religión en el contexto urbano y rural de
México en los albores del Siglo XXI [Doctoral Dissertation, El Colegio de
México]. https://bit.ly/3OjKwmt
Mora Duro, C. N. (2018).
Población sin religión. In Diccionario de religiones en América Latina
(1a ed., pp. 475–485). Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Mora Duro, C. N. (2021).
¿Quiénes son los ‘sin religión’ en la Ciudad de México? In Formas de creer
en la ciudad (1st ed., pp. 223–259). IIS-UNAM.
Mora Duro, C. N. (2024). Desecularisation of the
State and Sacred Secularism: Politics and Religion in Mexico within the
Latin-American Context. Working Paper Series of the CASHSS “Multiple
Secularities – Beyond the West, Beyond Modernities”, 28, 64.
Mora Duro, C. N., & Fitz Herbert, A. (2024).
Atheist Thanks to God: Exploring the Secular Paradox among Latin American
‘Nones’. Secular Studies, 6(2), 164–191.
Navarro Floria, J. G. (2004). VV. AA., Foro Internacional
sobre Libertad Religiosa. Anuario de Derecho Eclesiástico, 624–628.
Pew Research Center. (2014). Religion in Latin
America. Widespread Change in a Historically Catholic Region (p. 310). Pew
Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project. http://pewrsr.ch/1BaP6g0
Pew Research Center. (2022, September 13). 1. How
U.S. religious composition has changed in recent decades. Pew Research
Center’s Religion & Public Life Project.
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/09/13/how-u-s-religious-composition-has-changed-in-recent-decades/
Rabbia, H. (2017). Explorando los “sin religión de
pertenencia” en Córdoba, Argentina. Estudos de Religião, 31(3),
131–155.
Rodrigues, D. (2007). Religiosos Sem Igreja: Um
Mergulho na Categoria Censitária dos Sem Religião. Revista de Estudos da
Religião, 31–56.
Rodrigues, D. (2009, July). Sem religião: Uma
categoria censitária entre a secularização e a dessecularização. GT 12 O
fenômeno Religioso. XIV Congresso Brasileiro de Sociologia, Rio de Janeiro,
Brasil.
Rodrigues, D. (2012). Os sem religião nos censos
brasileiros: Sinal de uma crise do pertencimento institucional. The without
religion in Brazilian census: Sign of a crisis of affiliation. Horizonte,
10(28), 1130–1153. https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2175-5841.2012v10n28p1130
Romero, C., & Lecaros, V. (2017). Quiénes son
los ‘sin religión’en Lima. Estudos de Religião, 31(3), 111–130.
Salazar, P., Barrera, P., &
Espino, S. (2015). Estado Laico en un país religioso. Encuesta Nacional de
Religión, Secularización y Laicidad (Los Mexicanos Vistos Por Sí Mismos.
Los Grandes Temas Nacionales, p. 230). Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
- Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas.
Smith, G. A., Tevington, P., Nortey, J., Rotolo,
M., Kallo, A., & Alper, B. A. (2024). Religious ‘Nones’ in America: Who
they are and what they believe. Pew Research Center.
https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2024/01/24/religious-nones-in-america-who-they-are-and-what-they-believe/
*Roles de autoría/ CREDIT author statement
El autor tuvo
a su cargo todos los roles de autoría del trabajo. Manifiesta no tener
conflicto de interés alguno.
The author
was responsible for all aspects of authorship in this work, and declares that
he have no conflicts of interest.
Obra
bajo licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual
4.0.
[1] Mexican Catholicism is in
fact a guadalupanismo. A cult that emphasises the Marian figure of the Virgin
of Guadalupe as just another goddess in the religious cosmos. This
performativity recreates a polytheistic constellation that changes according to
the places of worship and the times; and thus denies the formula of monotheism
implicit in Catholic dogma (Echeverría, 2007).
[2] The interviewees in Mexico
City included 16 women and 14 men, with an average age of 35, and ages ranging
from 17 to 75. Most (63%) reported being single, while 37% were married or in a
partnership, and only one out of three interviewees had children. Educationally,
over half held a university degree, and a third had completed postgraduate
studies. Most interviewees were employed in various sectors, including
government, private companies, academia, freelance work, NGOs, and local
businesses, while only two were economically inactive. Moreover, 77% earned
over 10,000 pesos (632 dollars) monthly, while 23% earned below this (Mora
Duro, 2017b).
[3] All translations are mine,
unless otherwise noted. Interlocutors’ names have been changed for anonymity.
Excerpts have been edited for readability. All participated with consent.
[4] Another term used in the
literature on the subject is nonverts. This describes the subset of “nones”
that were previously affiliated, but at the time of the study are not
(Bullivant, 2022).