The Church of Taylor Swift?

A picture of Taylor I snapped at The Eras Tour over the summer. Yes, it’s blurry because I zoomed in with the camera.

Yep, you read the title right. The Church of Taylor Swift. Hopefully it doesn’t sound too shocking considering her fanbase is bigger and louder than ever. I have been noticing social media posts talking about the Swifties being a cult, and I’ll be graduating with a Religious Studies minor in the spring, so I was intrigued.

Let’s talk about the implications of Swiftie Nation being a religion. Listening to Taylor’s music could certainly be considered ritualistic, and Taylor herself could be the goddess. Some may feel she has been touched by the divine, just as Christians believe about Jesus.

The Swifties also have an origin story for Taylor’s career, which is present in her songs. Another thing about her music is that it has healing effects for listeners, adding to her divineness. This is just to name a few ways Swifite Nation could be argued as a religion. From tapestries to candles, Taylor’s face has been photoshopped onto Jesus’ body, so we can also add sacred objects to the list.

Now you may be thinking That’s ridiculous! There’s no way the Swifties are a religious group. Think again. If they are already being referred to as a cult, would it really be that shocking if one or a few Swifties spearheaded a movement to get Swiftie Nation recognized as a religion, special protections under the law and all?

Something similar is happening now and has been for the past 18 years. In 2005, Bobby Henderson wrote a letter to the Kansas State Board of Education, asking for the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (commonly called Pastafarianism, but I won’t use this term) to be taught alongside intelligent design and evolution in public schools. This was to get board members to understand that intelligent design is religious indoctrination and that it should not be taught alongside evolution.

Henderson’s letter is known as the origin of the current Flying Spaghetti Monster, or FSM, movement, but many take it more seriously than satire, even claiming the Church of the FSM existed in secrecy for centuries until “his noodlieness” touched Henderson with his noodly appendage.

Ever since 2005, there have been many questions raised about whether the Church of the FSM should be considered a real religion. Who gets to decide what a religion is? Can anyone prove the FSM exists? Should this be taken seriously, or is it all purely satire?

While I can’t answer these questions, I can say the debate over who gets to decide what religion is has been around for a while. The truth is, nobody can really define religion because in doing so, many aspects of each definition exclude established religion or include things that are religious, but aren’t considered religion. Long story short, each definition is either too broad or too narrow.

These types of movements also raise the question: if this is a religion, how far can the definition of religion go? Religion is one of those things where we know it when we see it, but don’t always agree with it. Some religious groups, such as the Church of the FSM, are shut out and deemed “not real religion” by lawmakers and anyone else powerful enough in our political and economic systems to say anything about it.

This, in turn, influences the general public to also think the FSM is ridiculous and anyone who follows that religion is crazy. Now anyone involved with the FSM, whether for satire or religious purposes, are left to defend themselves against mainstream culture.

I think the best way to handle these situations is to have conversations and to find out how FSM followers think of themselves. Many of them felt shut out by more traditional religions, like Christianity, and wanted to be part of a community where they could express their beliefs. This is exactly what the Swifties have in one another, and who is anyone to stop them from that?

If, some day, they decide they want to be a religion, the cycle will repeat, questions will be raised, and further division of people and opinions will occur. The Swifties may also decide being part of a community with one another is enough and that they don’t need or want to be considered a religion.

It’s really ironic that the Swifties are being called a cult, because I bet if they tried to become recognized as a religion under the law, the same people who call them a cult now will lose their minds. That’s my prediction, anyway.

Note: I do not use the word “cult” in my every day vocabulary because it is a word with a lot of baggage that has come to represent “religious movements we (the general public) don’t like.” Instead, I use “new religious movements.” Yes, there are problems with certain new religious movements, but to label it as a “cult” places a lot of bias and stereotypes on the movement.

For example, the MOVE organization in the 1980s was clearly starving their children and there were problems with sexual harrassment, but labeling it as a “cult” didn’t actually take care of any of those problems, which needed to be addressed separately from their religious beliefs.