Appropos of those who will not offer to us where, say, the first atom of atoms came from before the first Big Bang ever, if not a Creator.
 
Most publicly, but hardly exclusively, the Western Roman Catholic Church is undergoing tremendous secular pressue...from an amorphous set of squeaky wheels influential enough to command media hype yet seemingly way less than a majority of the global population...to "democratize" its entire theology and clergy; such secular pressure demands laity elect Bishops, laity perform as Sacerdotal ministers, laity establish or influence local catechisms, women and gays be ordained, gays be allowed to marry in faith; too, "laity" should be broadly enough defined that anyone, even atheists who casually attend or people of other faiths, can be deemed as having an influential voice in shaping the contours of any faith. Indeed, say some officials, such are the type of practices due government aid (for now) in an age religious beliefs of any kind are invidiously discouraged.
 
I note the Universal Life Church, founded in 1959 in Modesto California by an ordained Baptist minister, for decades has been doing exactly what such aforesaid secular pressure today demands of all other Western faiths. But it does not appear ULC is the eminence griese of modern secularism.
 
For decades up to date, many of the same secular voices demanding uber-inclusiveness of older faiths insist ULC cannot be a real religion, at best being a one-horse Church capable only of issuing credentials indicating mass conversions to its one-line catechism: "Do the right thing". Grounds? ULC ordains any peaceful religious viewpoint; respects that all people are called by God to some degree of ministry; respects that even atheists have a right to speak in re religion; believes all legally capable parties, even same-sex, should be married; respects that each minister it ordains has a duty to obey all laws, yet may establish their own ministries or congreagtions, on "local catechisms" of their own creation, as long as they're peaceful and respectful of other faiths...indeed, there appear striking similarities between ULC and that which is today secularly pressured of all other Western beliefs.
 
But again, the same voices most usually refer to ULC as a non-faith by and through its practices, and often pursue it as a "marriage racket" or unlicensed practice of psychology by ministers of no protected religious beliefs...often, Courts through appellate have sided with ULC insofar as being a "real faith", yet only new angles against it for its practices constantly are plied.
 
This isn't a "plug" for ULC, or for or against anyone else. One simply wonders if the mad dash to overly-secular influence of and within traditional faiths isn't simply an attempt to jockey them into a ULC nature set of practices, and by such measure then pursue each such faith as the mere practice of psychology  wholly subject to regulation by government.
 
On the other hand, the same secular voices...completely separately...do not challenge theologies or demand democratization of non-Western faiths, sometimes going as far as offering to use public and/or private funds to ercet houses of worship for them...even those which curiously as peaceful faith strands trace their basal roots partly or wholly back to the same roots of Western faiths; it would be intriguing to see if democratization would be needed were any non-Western faith to attract large Western congregations.
 
Wherefore, perhaps world atheism or agnosticism isn't the goal of Western secular dynamics, maybe they just don't want it in their own back yards, on ground known only to them. It would seem to be for Courts to fathom if any officials, high or petty, establish any religion(s) through excluding others, or ( I meaning no collusion by any faiths )  unlawfully pre-empt free exercise of peaceful religious beliefs through rooting for or against the non-violent practices therein.