
I'm delighted to see gen Z men flocking back to church – I just hope it's for the right reasons
For decades, there has been a cultural narrative that the church is a declining institution, which has been backed up by data that shows fewer and fewer British people are attending services. You might expect churches to be busy over festivals like this past Easter weekend, or Christmas, but with otherwise sparse crowds and aging parishioners for the rest of the year.
However, a recent survey entitled The Quiet Revival, commissioned by the Bible Society and conducted by YouGov, shows that church attendance in England and Wales has actually increased by 50% over the past six years, and that young people aged between 18 and 24 are the second largest demographic in attendance (behind those who are 65 and over). The trend is especially strong with young men, with 21% aged 18 to 24 saying they attend church at least once a month, compared with 12% of young women. The data also shows that generation Z are particularly drawn to Roman Catholicism, which accounts for a significant rise in the number of Catholics in England, almost closing the overall gap between those who identify as Catholic and those who identify as Anglican.
England and Wales are not alone in seeing more young men attending church, with the New York Times religion correspondent, Ruth Graham, reporting that the same trend can be seen across the US. Graham is blunt in her proposed reason for this, stating that men are less educated than their female peers, while also placing a higher value on traditional family structures, meaning that they find encouragement and reinforcement in conservative church communities.
This is a somewhat unsympathetic reading of the circumstances, but when attempting to locate the possible influences on these young men, the landscape does look bleak. Thanks to the recent Netflix show Adolescence, there has been much public reckoning with the radicalisation of young boys and men through online spaces and podcasts that are overtly misogynistic – and plenty of these masquerade as platforms of Christian, specifically Catholic, values. The Instagram page warrior.4.christ acts as a Catholic 'meme page', with openly homophobic, antisemitic and culturally conservative content, posting quotes about anti-abortion movements and generally being against 'liberalism'. There is very little interaction with actual biblical scripture or Catholic practice, beyond using a vaguely defined idea of it to justify a celebration of rightwing ideas and talking points.
Tristan Tate, brother of the infamous male lifestyle influencer Andrew Tate, has also been vocal about his conversion to Christianity. The Tate brothers reside in Romania (where they are facing charges of human trafficking, which they deny), and Tristan has spoken about the strong belief in God among Romanians that encouraged him to convert. He also identifies abortion as one of the topics that he now 'takes seriously'. Tristan Tate and other influencers place emphasis on the real misogynistic or reactionary elements of some Christian movements, and make them part of their wider ecosystem of influence on young men and boys.
The Bible Society's report states that more research is needed to fully discern where a desire to join Christian faith communities has stemmed from. The murkier corners of the internet are very probably a factor, but I can't help but remain cautiously optimistic about the findings. The report also highlights how a significant concern for all of the gen Z participants interviewed is social activism, with far more churchgoing interviewees recording that they do frequent community and charity work compared to those who are not church members. This work is recorded as donating to food banks, financial donations to charities, voting in elections, writing to local representatives and communal work such as litter picking. These are hopeful statistics that demonstrate a positive participation in society that is encouraged by churchgoing.
What both of these possible influences highlight is an overriding wish for community, whether in the more rigid boundaries of the Catholic church, or in the collective work that English and Welsh churches of all denominations encourage and facilitate. An instinct towards a collective with a solid foundation is understandable in an age bracket that has had its education, whether in secondary school or university (or both), disrupted by a global pandemic. Where school or university should have provided a social outlet for young people alongside their education, necessity meant that they instead had isolated experiences.
On top of this, years of austerity in England and Wales has meant that community centres and public halls have drastically declined in numbers, with spending on libraries, theatres and museums falling. Young people looking for community may find that a local church or cathedral is the only place close to them with regular opening hours and people ready to talk and listen. That these same churches and cathedrals very often organise group charity work is a clear plus. In my own constituency area of Liverpool Riverside, Micah is the charitable arm of Liverpool Cathedral and other churches, providing food and financial aid to local people in need, and it was a big reason for my own initial interest in joining the church.
As a regular churchgoer, it would be lovely to celebrate the findings of The Quiet Revival and to leave it at that. However, the data is so unusual and unexpected that it invites analysis – and when digging for clues, not all of them are positive. What can be discerned is that more people are searching for meaning in an ever-changing and demonstrably politically unstable world, and they are finding this in multiple forms of Christianity. This is good and should be celebrated – but as people who have a vested interest in our neighbours, we should also look out for signs of possible online radicalisation and tendencies towards hateful speech in the guise of Jesus's influence.
Jessica White is a writer based in Liverpool
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


North Wales Chronicle
15 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Treasury minister Reynolds struggles over Lower Thames Crossing answers
The Lower Thames Crossing will link Essex and Kent but economic secretary Emma Reynolds was unable to give details of the precise location of the crossing or the total cost of the project. She also mistakenly referred to the existing crossing being the 'Dartmouth tunnel', apparently confusing the Devon town with Dartford, the location of the crossings for traffic across the Thames. 'I meant Dartford, excuse me, I had a very early morning,' the minister told LBC Radio. Asked about the proposed new crossing's location, she said: 'You'll forgive me, I can't recall the landing zone.' The crossing will involve two tunnels under the Thames to the east of Tilbury in Essex and Gravesend in Kent. Pressed on the cost, she said 'it's going to cost quite a lot of money', suggesting it would be 'several billion pounds'. LBC Radio presenter Nick Ferrari told Ms Reynolds: 'Is there much point continuing this conversation because you don't know where a bridge starts, where it ends and you don't know how much it costs?' National Highways has estimated the cost will be between £9.2 billion and £10.2 billion depending on the funding model chosen. It would connect the A2 and M2 in Kent to the A13 and M25 in Essex via a 2.6-mile tunnel under the Thames, which would be the UK's longest road tunnel. The funding for the Lower Thames Crossing will be part of the Government's 10-year plan for infrastructure. A new structures fund will also invest in repairing bridges, flyovers, tunnels and other transport infrastructure such as roads. The Lower Thames Crossing is aimed at reducing congestion at Dartford. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander has said that the project is 'essential for improving the resilience of a key freight route and is critical to our long-term trade with Europe'. 'It will speed up the movement of goods from south-east England to the Midlands and the north, crucial to thousands of jobs and businesses,' she added. Rachel Reeves has said ministers are 'going all in by going up against the painful disruption of closed bridges, crossings and flyovers'. The Chancellor added: 'This is a turning point for our national infrastructure, and we're backing it with funding to support thousands of jobs and connect communities, delivering on our plan for change.' It comes ahead of the Government's infrastructure strategy, expected this week, while public procurement rules are set to be overhauled so that public bodies will have to give more weight to firms which can prove they will boost British jobs when they are bidding for contracts. The Chancellor outlined a range of infrastructure investments as part of last week's spending review.


New Statesman
38 minutes ago
- New Statesman
Britain is preparing to take back its water system
Photo by Nick Nomi / Getty Images The only thing more annoying than the British media's obsession with wild swimming – or 'swimming', as it was once known – is the fact that when you actually want to go swimming in open water, you can't. The rivers are a toxic soup, the fish are addicted to methamphetamine, and no-one in Westminster has an answer that the country can afford. That may be about to change, however: for the first time, MPs are now formally raising the idea of new ownership structures, including renationalisation. The issue of polluted rivers and steeply rising water bills has been a running political sore for years now. Most people agree that privatisation of a monopoly on which we all depend for survival was a terrible idea; when your free-market dogma is so damaging that even the Americans won't repeat it, a mistake has certainly been made. But it has also been generally agreed that un-privatising the water and sewerage system would be so expensive that it's not achievable, and so the only thing to do was to try to ask private water companies to stop doing capitalism. This didn't work, obviously, as a report published this morning by the cross-party Environment, Food and Rural Affairs committee makes clear. The water sector, the committee finds, is 'failing'; it 'has completely lost sight of its purpose and increasingly operates as a network of financial services businesses rather than custodians of a public good.' Almost any Briton over the age of six could have told the MPs this, but it is encouraging to see it recognised formally by a parliamentary committee. However, the important part of the report is this: 'We see merits in the argument that the current models of ownership in the water industry may not be bringing about the culture the sector needs.' It encourages the Independent Water Commission (or IWC, which is currently preparing its own proposals for reform of the water sector) and the government to explore 'different ownership models', including 'degrees of public or employee ownership'. 'The government should feel able to use its temporary nationalisation powers', it states. To a great extent, the report recognises that the structure of the water industry itself – complex financial structures loaded with debt, executives who award each other extremely high salaries and pay out tens of billions in dividends to owners – is the fundamental problem. What looks like 'serious economic mismanagement' to the rest of us has made a handful of people a great deal of money. It doesn't go as far as recommending a full return to public ownership, which would be hugely expensive; companies such as Thames Water aren't worth much themselves, but their assets are, and the government can't illegally help itself to large chunks of private property, especially as much of it is owned by people in other countries. However, a mix of new rules, structures and reformed regulators could tie up the water industry so tightly that it might as well be nationalised. With another parliamentary committee (the influential Public Accounts Committee) also investigating water regulation and the IWC readying its own report, it may be that the tide is turning. [See more: The £39bn housing paradox] Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Related


ITV News
an hour ago
- ITV News
‘We'll keep fighting' — Pontypridd family's plea after brother's death in Benidorm
The family of a man who was found dead in Benidorm less than 24 hours after arriving in the Spanish tourist destination say they have "been through hell", and want better support from authorities for families like theirs in future. Father-of-four Nathan Osman, 30, was found dead at the base of a remote cliff less than 24 hours after arriving in Benidorm last September. His family, from Pontypridd, told S4C's Y Byd ar Bedwar programme that they 'didn't get the support' they expected from the Foreign Office, and are now campaigning for a change in the law. Within hours of finding Nathan's body, police initially concluded that the cause of death was suicide – something which the family refutes. Alannah Hughes, Nathan's sister, said: 'We knew straight away that there was something untoward behind this story and behind Nathan's death. 'I received a phone call off a Spanish number... they said 'your brother has been found dead at the bottom of a cliff'... and that was it." As a result, the family travelled to Benidorm to gather their own evidence to present to the National Police – which Nathan's brother, Lee Evans, described as 'instinctive'. This evidence included proof of attempts to use Nathan's bank card in the hours after he died on 28 September. Their dossier also included a list of properties with CCTV which hadn't been collected by local police. Lee said: 'We've had to fight for evidence and for answers, but there is still so much we don't know.' After the family presented the evidence, the National Police in Benidorm reopened Nathan's case as a homicide investigation. Despite this development, the family feels that there was a lack of support throughout. Alannah said: 'We reached out to the police here in Benidorm... We had no help. No support from any authority'. Now, they're calling for a change of law to provide more help for families of British nationals who have been murdered abroad – with the backing of their local MP, Labour's Alex Davies-Jones. This would include a statutory framework to provide consistent communication in English to bereaved families, as well as a named point of contact. Lee told Y Byd ar Bedwar that this framework should extend to increased financial support – something which would have helped them pay the £7,000 needed to get Nathan's body back to the UK. In response, a spokesperson for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office said: 'Our staff stand ready to support British nationals around the world. In any given year, we support around 20,000 British nationals and their families. "In cases of British nationals who die abroad, we can provide personalised support including practical information regarding processes in different countries.' For Alannah, she feels these changes are necessary. She said the family have 'been through hell' and that they 'want families in the future, if they lose loved ones abroad, to have a structure that we didn't have". 'We're exhausted but we'll keep fighting," Alannah said. Lee added: 'We can look at the family, to Nathan's children and tell them we've tried everything and done everything to get answers." We contacted the National Police in Benidorm to respond to the family's claims about the way they've handled Nathan's case, but they said they cannot comment or share information as the investigation is still ongoing.