Home 亚洲 Why Do Most Chinese People Have No Religious Belief?
亚洲

Why Do Most Chinese People Have No Religious Belief?

Share

Abstract: This article examines why China has one of the world’s largest populations without formal religious affiliation. Drawing on official Chinese statistics, academic surveys, and international research data, it argues that China’s high level of secularization is rooted not only in modernization and atheist education, but also in the long-term structure of Chinese civilization itself. Unlike many Western societies centered on theology and organized religion, Chinese culture—particularly Confucianism—has historically emphasized secular ethics, family responsibility, and social order. The article further argues that Chinese society is not truly “without belief,” but instead possesses a distinctive spiritual structure characterized by weak institutional religion and strong secular moral culture.

Keywords:China; religion; secularization; family ethics; atheism

By Bi Yantao Published on May 22, 2026

For a long time, China has been regarded as one of the most secularized major countries in the world. Compared with highly religious societies such as the United States, the Middle East, and Latin America, the proportion of people with formal religious affiliations in China is significantly lower. Although statistics vary depending on methodology, the core conclusion remains remarkably consistent: the overwhelming majority of Chinese people do not possess a clear, stable, and institutionalized religious identity.

However, “having no religious belief” does not mean that Chinese people lack a spiritual world. In fact, China has developed a highly distinctive civilizational structure. It differs both from Western monotheistic societies and from a completely non-believing society. Instead, it is a civilization centered on secular ethics, family culture, and pragmatic realism.

I. Data Consensus: China Has the World’s Largest Population Without Formal Religious Identity

Data from Chinese official sources, academic research, and international institutions all indicate that the phenomenon of “no formal religious affiliation” is highly prominent in Chinese society.

1. Official Data: About 86% of the Population Has No Formal Religious Identity

In 2018, the State Council Information Office of China released the white paper China’s Policies and Practices on Protecting Freedom of Religious Belief, stating that China had approximately 200 million religious believers. At the time, China’s population was around 1.39 billion, meaning that roughly 14% of the population had a formal religious identity, while approximately 86% did not.

The official statistics mainly include Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Protestant Christianity, and Catholicism. Among them, Muslims numbered about 20 million, Protestants about 38 million, and Catholics about 6 million.

This statistical standard is relatively strict, relying primarily on officially registered religious venues and institutionalized religious activities. It does not include many forms of folk belief, cultural religious participation, or informal religious networks. Therefore, it may be regarded as a conservative estimate.

2. Chinese Academic Surveys: 73.56% Report No Religious Belief

The China Family Panel Studies (CFPS), conducted by Peking University, presents somewhat different findings. CFPS is one of China’s most representative nationwide social surveys.

According to the 2012 CFPS survey, 89.6% of respondents stated that they had no religious belief, while only 10% identified with a religion. Among them, approximately 6.7% identified as Buddhist, 1.9% as Christian, and 0.5% as Muslim.

The 2012 survey used a “denomination-based” approach by directly asking respondents which religion they belonged to. The survey options covered the five major religions but excluded folk beliefs and ancestor worship. Such an approach may underestimate the religious practices of Chinese people.

In 2014, CFPS adopted a “belief-oriented” measurement approach, asking respondents what they believed in rather than what religion they belonged to. The revised survey included ancestor worship, occasional Buddhist worship, and folk beliefs. Even under this broader standard, 73.56% of respondents still stated that they “did not believe in any gods or ancestors.”

However, CFPS did not include regions such as Xinjiang, Tibet, Qinghai, Inner Mongolia, Ningxia, and Hainan, where Muslim and Tibetan Buddhist populations are relatively concentrated. As a result, the proportions of Buddhism and Islam may have been somewhat underestimated.

Overall, although the exact numbers vary across different rounds of the CFPS survey, the central conclusion remains highly consistent: the vast majority of Chinese people do not possess a clear and institutionalized religious identity.

3. International Data: Conclusions from Pew and Gallup

International research institutions have reached similar conclusions.

Pew Research Center noted in its 2023 research on religion in China that roughly 90% of the Chinese population does not have a clear religious affiliation. Buddhists account for approximately 5% of the population, Christians 2–3%, and Muslims about 1.5%.

Meanwhile, Gallup surveys conducted in 2018 showed that the proportion of deeply religious believers in China was extremely low, while atheists and those uncertain about religion constituted the overwhelming majority.

At the same time, Pew emphasized that China contains a large population that does not identify with a formal religion yet still maintains religious practices, including ancestor worship, incense burning, prayer rituals, feng shui beliefs, and concepts of karmic causality. This suggests that although institutionalized religion is relatively weak in China, spiritual belief has not disappeared.

II. Why Did China Develop Such a Highly Secular Structure?

China’s secularization is not merely the result of modern politics or education. More fundamentally, it is rooted in China’s civilizational structure itself.

  1. The Confucian Tradition: Concern for This World Rather Than the Afterlife

One of the greatest differences between Chinese civilization and Western civilization lies in their respective central concerns.

Western religious traditions often emphasize God, salvation, heaven, final judgment, and the destiny of the soul. Chinese traditional thought, especially Confucianism, focuses more on ethical order within the real world.

Confucius once said: “If we do not yet understand life, how can we understand death?” This reflects the Chinese cultural emphasis on how to conduct oneself, manage social relationships, and maintain family and state order.

In this sense, Chinese civilization is fundamentally an “ethical civilization” rather than a “theological civilization.”

2. China Never Developed an Independent Religious Authority System

In European history, churches often stood above monarchies, religious authority shaped politics, and religion profoundly structured society.

China never developed a comparable structure. Throughout Chinese history, imperial authority consistently remained above religion. Religions were expected to serve state order rather than challenge political authority.

Although Buddhism once flourished in China, it also experienced repeated suppressions. Taoism, meanwhile, remained closely intertwined with the state system.

As a result, Chinese society historically evolved into a system in which “secular political power dominated religion,” rather than “religion dominating society.” This fundamentally distinguishes China from Europe and the Middle East.

3.Family Ethics Replaced Some Religious Functions

In many Western societies, religion provides spiritual belonging, social support, moral norms, and explanations for life and death.

In China, many of these functions have instead been fulfilled by family structures, kinship networks, ancestor worship, and relationship-based social systems.

Chinese culture emphasizes ideas such as honoring one’s ancestors, bringing glory to the family, and maintaining family harmony. For many Chinese people, spiritual support derives from family responsibility, continuation of the family line, kinship identity, and social relationships.

Consequently, Chinese society developed a structure in which “ethical communities replaced religious communities.”

4.Modernization and Atheist Education Further Strengthened Secularization

Since the nineteenth century, China has also experienced scientism, enlightenment movements, the May Fourth Movement, revolutionary politics, and socialist educational systems.

Modern China has long emphasized scientific rationality, anti-superstition, materialism, and atheistic education. These educational structures further reinforced secularization.

Particularly during urbanization and modernization, the influence of religious organizations declined, traditional religious authority weakened, and pragmatic values strengthened.

As a result, China became one of the few major societies where modernization did not weaken secularization but instead consolidated it.

III. Do Chinese People Really “Lack Faith”?

If “faith” is understood narrowly as joining a religious organization, attending regular worship services, and maintaining a formal religious identity, then most Chinese people indeed do not possess religious belief.

However, from a broader perspective, Chinese people are not without belief; rather, their belief structure differs from that found in many religious societies. Many Chinese people still believe in causality, fate, feng shui, ancestral protection, heavenly order, and moral retribution.

At the same time, core spiritual values in Chinese society often derive from family, nation, collective identity, practical striving, and social responsibility.

Therefore, China is not truly a “spiritual vacuum.” Instead, it represents a civilizational structure characterized by low institutionalization, weak exclusivity, and strong secular ethics.

IV. Conclusion

Taken together, data from Chinese official sources, academic studies, and international institutions indicate that China is indeed one of the world’s most secularized major countries. Most Chinese people do not possess a formal religious identity. This reality is closely connected to China’s long-standing emphasis on practical ethics, as well as its state structure, family culture, modern education, and modes of social governance.

At the same time, Chinese society is not truly “without belief.” The spiritual world of many Chinese people is grounded more in secular ethics, family responsibility, cultural traditions, and practical life concerns.

In a sense, Chinese civilization has not organized society primarily through “God,” but rather through moral and social relationships. This may be one of the deepest distinctions between China and many religious civilizations.

Bi Yantao is a professor at the College of International Communication and Art, Hainan University, and a senior researcher at the Charhar Institute. The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not represent the positions of affiliated institutions.

Related Articles

CCP and Govt Should Exercise Caution in Joint Institutions with Universities

Overall, the disadvantages of party and government agencies co-establishing research institutions with...

北京对台认知战的三个新特征

认知战的目标不只是“让对方相信什么”,还包括“让对方怀疑什么”,进而削弱对方社会形成共同判断的能力。 作者:毕研韬  发布:2026年8月20日 美国外交政策研究所(FPRI)亚洲项目近日发表文章《中国对台“认知战”行动手册》(Inside China’s Cognitive Warfare Playbook Against Taiwan),作者Bram Wells。文章从灰色地带竞争、社会裂缝以及人工智能等多个角度,分析其所称的北京对台认知战新变化。 一、从传统信息战走向“灰色地带”认知战...

中国党政机关应审慎与高校共建专业机构

政校共建机构,初衷是借助高校专业力量提升治理能力,但现实中,机构的行政负责人未必就是最适合的专业领军人才,机构建起来了,真正优秀的专业人才却可能被排除在外。 作者:毕研韬  发布:2026年8月20日 首先声明,本文主要讨论党政机关与高校在人文社会科学领域共建学院、研究院(中心)等机构的问题。至于自然科学、工程技术等领域,笔者并不熟悉,因此不敢妄加评论。 近年来,党政机关与高校共建学院、研究院(中心)已蔚然成风。合作初衷值得肯定:党政机关希望依托高校专业资源提升治理实力,高校期待借助党政扶持转化科研成果,进而推动学科发展。 但有三个问题值得反思:党政机关了解今日之高校吗?政校共建是党政机关对接高校资源的最优方式吗?共建机构真能帮助提升职能部门的专业素养与治理效能吗?对此不能想当然地给出肯定答案。 一、共建逻辑:传统路径与跟风惯性 共建机构大致源于两个考量:历史传统的延续与跟风效仿的倾向。 长期以来,高校被视作高层次人才、知识与智力资源的重要集聚地。党政机关处理专业性事务时,寻求高校协作本具内在合理性。但当下,这种合作逻辑正在被简单化处理。看到其他地区、其他部门与高校共建机构,便跟风设立,仿佛“不共建,工作就落后了”。 然而广为流行的未必都是好的,新冠肺炎疫情曾风靡全球,但世人都谈之色变。 党政机关在筹划与高校共建机构时,首要应厘清三个核心问题:开展共建是否确属必要?不共建机构,能否实现同等工作目标?共建之后,究竟能够新增哪些履职能力? 倘若上述问题没有清晰答案,仅仅效仿外界做法就挂牌成立学院、研究院或研究中心,最终很可能只是新增一块机构牌子,而并未真正提升治理能力。...

美国政府持续封杀孔子学院及其变体

孔子学院正在美国高校中“退场”,但与其相关的合作网络并未消失,美国政府的审查正从“孔子学院”本身延伸至各种替代形态。 作者:毕研韬 发布:2026年8月18日 孔子学院在美国高校中的数量已经大幅下降,但美国政府对孔子学院的关注并没有随之结束。相反,随着正式的孔子学院陆续关闭,美国政策讨论的重点正在转向“后孔子学院时代”,开始专注“孔子学院关闭之后发生了什么”。 这意味着,美国对孔子学院的限制正在出现一个值得关注的变化:从针对一个具体机构,逐渐转向审查与中国高校、教育机构及相关组织之间的合作关系。 据美国政府问责局(GAO)2023年发布的调查,美国高校中的孔子学院数量已经从2019年前后的约100所下降到2023年7月的不足5所。GAO指出,2018年美国国会开始限制相关高校获得联邦资金,此后绝大多数孔子学院陆续关闭。 但“关闭”并不意味着相关教育合作全部终止。 美国国家学者协会(NAS)对104所已经关闭孔子学院的高校进行追踪,并获得其中75所的较完整信息。其研究发现,至少28所高校在关闭孔子学院后,又建立了具有相似功能的新项目;另有12所高校曾尝试这样做。与此同时,58所高校继续与原来的中国合作高校保持密切关系,另有5所曾尝试维持这种关系。此外,还有5所孔子学院转移到了新的主办机构,另有3所曾尝试转移。 这组数据揭示了一个重要现象:孔子学院的“机构数量”下降得非常快,但与之相关的部分教育合作网络并没有同步消失。 一、从孔子学院到“后孔子学院” 孔子学院最初主要承担中文教学、中国文化活动以及部分教育交流功能。随着美国政策环境变化,一些高校关闭孔子学院后,并没有完全放弃中文教学,而是采取了不同的替代方式。 一种比较直接的方式是改名。...