In a 2006 article in the William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, Frederick Mark Gedicks points out the impotence of civil religion in a pluralist society:

“The irony  of civil religion  is that it is  supposed  to  provide  a  substitute  for theestablished church, a means of morally instructing and spiritually unifying the peopleso as to bind them to republican  government.  Yet, in a radically plural  society likethe United  States,  like  most of the  countries  of Western  Europe,  there is no  set  ofreligious beliefs that is both sufficiently broad to command the assent of most citizensand, at the  same time, sufficiently  deep to  contain serious theological  content.”  He is skeptical, as am I, that a pluralist society can have a civil religion with any meaningful content to it.