Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Will western Christianty survive?
Quote | Reply
I've posted before that I semi-regularly attend a Catholic service with my parents. The church is located in a more affluent part of the city in which I live, surrounded by nice apartments and a large private hospital across the road. The church and its grounds reflect the area in which it is located; well maintained and somewhat grandiose. It often hosts visiting priests from around the world, namely Africa and South America. It can at times be a challenge to understand them. It triggered a conversation with my younger brother (whose faith probably sits somewhere between mine and that of my parents) as to whether there are still priests coming through the ranks from 'western' parts of the world. Whether these religions can survive without relaxing some of the constraints imposed on them (i.e. celibacy in the case of the Catholic church).

It seems like it is becoming more difficult for an individual to take such a vow in light of increasing ridicule / hostility in western societies. Granted a good proportion of the (justified) opposition stems from the abuse that has taken place for an extended period of time; but again that comes back to issues such as celibacy. On the one hand enforced celibacy could be what separates out the true believers (that the church wants as priests), on the other it could make them less relatable to the real world.

I don't know how much of the ridicule is independent of the scandals, but if it is then it's a sad reflection on society. The service I attend isn't trying to brainwash anyone and the more recent, resident priests have tried to inject a bit of humour be it football teams or other local matters. Yes there are collections and (going back to the location) they seem to do well, but people are taking away something in return. It's hard to explain what that is (each to their own), much like someone attending a meditation class trying to prove what they got from the class. For me it truly is the one time of the week I actually stop and concentrate on how grateful I am for my three beautiful, healthy (touch wood) kids, the support of my family, the opportunities I've been given in life and the wonderful city/country I've been fortunate enough to be born in (relative to other parts of the world) and how I hope that collectively we can all do better. Sure this reflection could take place anywhere, but the reality is it would never happen with as much concentration/sincerity as it does in a place of worship.

I don't quite understand why some feel the need to mock that with such gusto. Is it really such a bad thing that people use religion as a means for a time out, to recalibrate their moral compass etc? I see the derision as perhaps one reason why young people are not taking up the vocation of priesthood. By all means eradication of the abuse must be achieved, but it does not require the full abolishment of the church. Being a priest and being an outstanding individual are not mutually exclusive.

If the decline continues then it takes away something special for a lot of people. I see significantly less upside. Some may cite abuse but as I've pointed out before significantly more abuse occurs in the family home and also occurs at the hands of other 'trusted' individuals such as teachers, coaches etc. It would be interesting to see the extent of the opposition in the hypothetical scenario where systemic abuse had not occurred. Unfortunately we'll never get to see that 'what if'.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A couple of comments. Catholicism is a small subset of western christianity, and yes they face additional challenges. I don't think ridicule/ hostility is a challenge for them at all - it is just a mild by-product of other issues. I certainly don't think ridicule is a factor of any real weight in the decision of a young man to commit to a life without physical intimacy - there are much more important implications than that.

Religion generally is in decline in the western world, and is doing very well in the undeveloped world. It is most prevalent in the most tragically disadvantaged parts of the globe. Religious adherence is inversely correlated with education, wealth and political emancipation; so where it is in decline that is to be celebrated because of what it represents. Of course it is no bad thing if people use religion as a means for a time out. It can be a problem if they use it to recalibrate their moral compass, because religion has such a bad record of promoting immoral beliefs that decent people would, in the absence of religious injunction, reject.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Previously lots of people went to church because they had to, because society required it. You neighbors would judge you for not attending. Now society has changed and the people attending church are much more likely to be people that want to be there and believe in it.

I think that is good. Would you have preferred we go back to the day where people just pretended to believe?
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think the abuse has swayed many.

I follow The Irish Times on Facebook and in the past two years the comments have shifted significantly.

This morning’s example:
https://www.facebook.com/...238653676158?sfns=mo

The treatment of women by the church especially in Ireland with the mother and baby homes and the laundries makes the whole organization come off as completely hypocritical. Add all of the abuse cover ups and it’s hard to see that those in charge actually believe what they are selling.

The latest evidence of priests impregnating nuns and getting them abortions is just another nail in their coffin.

The amount of money some of the churches bring in vs what they give is questionable.

That said there are lots of good things good churches bring to communities and individuals.

So maybe a massive structure change is needed. In addition to letting priests marry and have families I think women should be given equal footing, respect and treatment.

Men should be judged the same as women. If a young girl is outed from a parish for getting knocked up the boy/ man/ priest who did it should be treated the same.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If people feel better still believing in fairy tales then let them. My MIL is one of them. Her problem is that she get's in our face about it rather than keeping it to herself. I just want church and state kept separate and out of politics at all cost. Technically, my heritage is Catholic, but that's the most regressive church of them all IMHO.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [Bone Idol] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bone Idol wrote:
A couple of comments. Catholicism is a small subset of western christianity,.

I stopped reading here once you demonstrated you were incompetent to comment
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
cerveloguy wrote:
If people feel better still believing in fairy tales then let them. My MIL is one of them. Her problem is that she get's in our face about it rather than keeping it to herself. I just want church and state kept separate and out of politics at all cost. Technically, my heritage is Catholic, but that's the most regressive church of them all IMHO.

Do you have to be so crass and disrespectful and call them fairy tales?
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chaparral wrote:
Previously lots of people went to church because they had to, because society required it. You neighbors would judge you for not attending. Now society has changed and the people attending church are much more likely to be people that want to be there and believe in it.

I think that is good. Would you have preferred we go back to the day where people just pretended to believe?

How far back are you going? In the 70s and into the 80s, we went to church religiously (pardon the pun) every Sunday. In fact, my father went every single morning during the workweek as well. We were one of, maybe 3 or 4 families who went every Sunday. There definitely wasn't an expectation from society that we go to church.

I think what is more the issue is the number of distractions in our world today. "Back in the day," nothing was open, nothing was on tv, nothing to do before noon on Sunday. Now, Sunday is almost like any other day, so, people "don't have time" for church.

I'm not challenging the assertion that religion is losing followers. But, think there are a number of reasons why.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
Bone Idol wrote:
A couple of comments. Catholicism is a small subset of western christianity,.


I stopped reading here once you demonstrated you were incompetent to comment

Fine by me, fatboy!
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
Bone Idol wrote:
A couple of comments. Catholicism is a small subset of western christianity,.


I stopped reading here once you demonstrated you were incompetent to comment

What? More than half is small. :)

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
Do you have to be so crass and disrespectful and call them fairy tales?

Irony alert!!

You live to be crass and disrespectful. Live with it you fat princess.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [Bone Idol] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bone Idol wrote:
windywave wrote:
Bone Idol wrote:
A couple of comments. Catholicism is a small subset of western christianity,.


I stopped reading here once you demonstrated you were incompetent to comment

Fine by me, fatboy!

There are 1.2 billion Catholics imbecile
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [Bone Idol] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bone Idol wrote:
windywave wrote:
Do you have to be so crass and disrespectful and call them fairy tales?

Irony alert!!

You live to be crass and disrespectful. Live with it you fat princess.

Only to my intellectual inferiors
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I also wonder if the whole idea of The Virgin Mary and Immaculate Conception doesn’t write men not taking responsibility for actions into the base of the religion.

That is of course how every female ended up in the mother and baby homes and the laundries, isn’t it? I mean they may have lost their lives or large parts of it to hard labor- but no men were ever sent off for their part in it.

Here is an interesting article
https://www.irishtimes.com/...n-1.3782938?mode=amp
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [Moonrocket] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Moonrocket wrote:
I also wonder if the whole idea of The Virgin Mary and Immaculate Conception doesn’t write men not taking responsibility for actions into the base of the religion.

That is of course how every female ended up in the mother and baby homes and the laundries, isn’t it?

A) no
B) no
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [JSA] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JSA wrote:
chaparral wrote:
Previously lots of people went to church because they had to, because society required it. You neighbors would judge you for not attending. Now society has changed and the people attending church are much more likely to be people that want to be there and believe in it.

I think that is good. Would you have preferred we go back to the day where people just pretended to believe?


How far back are you going? In the 70s and into the 80s, we went to church religiously (pardon the pun) every Sunday. In fact, my father went every single morning during the workweek as well. We were one of, maybe 3 or 4 families who went every Sunday. There definitely wasn't an expectation from society that we go to church.

I think what is more the issue is the number of distractions in our world today. "Back in the day," nothing was open, nothing was on tv, nothing to do before noon on Sunday. Now, Sunday is almost like any other day, so, people "don't have time" for church.

I'm not challenging the assertion that religion is losing followers. But, think there are a number of reasons why.

I would say it started in the 60s, but it was not some instant thing. There was a lot of inertia.

I think you example of Sunday becoming is just more of an example. It used to be illegal to be working on Sunday. Then it became legal, but many of the owners would be at church, as would many of the customers, so they stayed closed. Slowly as more people don't go to church, they started to open. Still your point agrees with mine, that many people that were going to church were not going because of some deep belief. If they are not going to church because there is other stuff to do, they don't really believe.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [Moonrocket] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Moonrocket wrote:
I also wonder if the whole idea of The Virgin Mary and Immaculate Conception doesn’t write men not taking responsibility for actions into the base of the religion.

That is of course how every female ended up in the mother and baby homes and the laundries, isn’t it? I mean they may have lost their lives or large parts of it to hard labor- but no men were ever sent off for their part in it.

Here is an interesting articlehttps://www.irishtimes.com/...n-1.3782938?mode=amp[/quote[/url]]

Do you realize the virgin birth and immaculate conception are 2 different things. I am thinking you don't if you think one somehow absolves men of their responsibilities. One is related to Mary's conception and the other to Jesus's.

In the Bible Jesus took responsibility for Jesus when he did not have to so I don't see how this story is about man not being responsible.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [chaparral] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chaparral wrote:
JSA wrote:
chaparral wrote:
Previously lots of people went to church because they had to, because society required it. You neighbors would judge you for not attending. Now society has changed and the people attending church are much more likely to be people that want to be there and believe in it.

I think that is good. Would you have preferred we go back to the day where people just pretended to believe?


How far back are you going? In the 70s and into the 80s, we went to church religiously (pardon the pun) every Sunday. In fact, my father went every single morning during the workweek as well. We were one of, maybe 3 or 4 families who went every Sunday. There definitely wasn't an expectation from society that we go to church.

I think what is more the issue is the number of distractions in our world today. "Back in the day," nothing was open, nothing was on tv, nothing to do before noon on Sunday. Now, Sunday is almost like any other day, so, people "don't have time" for church.

I'm not challenging the assertion that religion is losing followers. But, think there are a number of reasons why.


I would say it started in the 60s, but it was not some instant thing. There was a lot of inertia.

I think you example of Sunday becoming is just more of an example. It used to be illegal to be working on Sunday. Then it became legal, but many of the owners would be at church, as would many of the customers, so they stayed closed. Slowly as more people don't go to church, they started to open. Still your point agrees with mine, that many people that were going to church were not going because of some deep belief. If they are not going to church because there is other stuff to do, they don't really believe.

Yep. I see what you are saying. To me, the more interesting question is whether "faith" is declining or merely organized religion is declining. It seems like you hear about a lot of people who say they have faith or are "spiritual" but, don't follow organized religion.

If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went. - Will Rogers

Emery's Third Coast Triathlon | Tri Wisconsin Triathlon Team | Push Endurance | GLWR
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In a few hundered years the last remaining embers of Christianity will only smoler in small regions of South America. Islam is the most likely heir to the title of world's dominant religion. Eventually Islam's control will fade to sectarian beliefs. Then a few thousand years later, the Emperor Shaddam IV will install the Duke Leto Atradies on Arakkis. This will ultimately lead to the fusion of the Bene Gesserit and Fremen mysticisms.

Its all just fiction anyway...

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
When you talk about celibacy you are talking about a unique challenge of the Roman Catholic church. I understand your concern about he supply of priests for the RC church. I have somehow become the doctor for local Catholic priests and half of them locally have been from the second world (mainly India). Western Christianity will survive. It has been around for 2000 years now. And Roman Catholicism will be part of it.

https://www.cbc.ca/...ces-minors-1.5006609

Today there was a report of over 200 coaches in amateur sports convicted of child abuse in Canada. Is there going to be an end of coaching?

Thirty or forty years ago many people went to church because it was respectable or expected. But many were not that committed. A greater proportion of the people who come now are committed. Jesus didn't talk about cultural hegemony in fact he talked about suffering for the gospel.

Will Western democracy survive? Full participatory democracy has been around for maybe one hundred years. Scholars are now talking about liberalism (in the classic sense) failing because of inherent problems in its basic premises.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Last edited by: len: Feb 10, 19 19:33
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
After thousands of years, tell me which key Biblical tales have historical evidence as told Biblically? Where is the actual proof of a god? There must be an element of mythology (or fairy tale as one might say), as that’s simply how humans naturally tell stories that are meant to invoke the divine. As I’ve made clear before countless times here, I believe there’s beauty and value in those stories, but it doesn’t make them any less mythical. And there’s nothing wrong with acknowledging them as such while still preserving their transformative power.

And in that vein, I’d have zero issue seeing Western evangelical Christianity die its death, but the high church, orthodox (particularly Eastern), and emergent branches remain strong in their traditional roles. Evangelical Christianity, to me, occupies more space in group think and politicalization of religion than it does the values of Jesus.


windywave wrote:
cerveloguy wrote:
If people feel better still believing in fairy tales then let them. My MIL is one of them. Her problem is that she get's in our face about it rather than keeping it to herself. I just want church and state kept separate and out of politics at all cost. Technically, my heritage is Catholic, but that's the most regressive church of them all IMHO.

Do you have to be so crass and disrespectful and call them fairy tales?
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Many people (not sure of %), feel or intuit there's a something to revere or show gratitude to, and are not sure how to proceed. Their mistake is placing their trust in folks (priests, pastors, etc.) who really know no more than they do, or, is there really is anything to know. Fact is we have to grow our own peaches.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [LorenzoP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Peaches come from a can and they were put there by a man, Lorenzo.

LorenzoP wrote:
Many people (not sure of %), feel or intuit there's a something to revere or show gratitude to, and are not sure how to proceed. Their mistake is placing their trust in folks (priests, pastors, etc.) who really know no more than they do, or, is there really is anything to know. Fact is we have to grow our own peaches.
Last edited by: MidwestRoadie: Feb 10, 19 19:52
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
this song gets to it soon enough even for the impatient; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ6INAayEJI
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [LorenzoP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply


Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [Guffaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply

Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I went to a Catholic elementary school, Catholic boys’ high school, and still attend church. I, too, wonder what’s going to become of the Catholic Church. Catholic elementary schools are closing in droves, parishes are being consolidated due to the shortage of priests, and attendance at Mass is on the decline. I’m confident that it’ll survive, although—at least in the U.S.—it’ll continue to shrink. There are many reasons why the church in America is in a long-term decline. (It was shrinking long before the abuse scandals became known, though that looks to have greased the skids.) A lot of Catholics, including myself, aren’t happy with the current Pope, and that's not helping anything. He cozies up to leftist dictators and caves to the Chinese Communists, while he goes around decrying capitalism. He’s no John Paul II. Not even close.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, it will.

(FYI, a long-term church worker)
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MidwestRoadie wrote:
Peaches come from a can and they were put there by a man, Lorenzo.

LorenzoP wrote:
Many people (not sure of %), feel or intuit there's a something to revere or show gratitude to, and are not sure how to proceed. Their mistake is placing their trust in folks (priests, pastors, etc.) who really know no more than they do, or, is there really is anything to know. Fact is we have to grow our own peaches.


Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [oldandslow] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
C
oldandslow wrote:
Yes, it will.

(FYI, a long-term church worker)

I second oldandslow...and I understand what is a Christian/Christianity...what is this "western" Christianity?
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The short answer to this is no, I don't see it surviving.

The reason - with the advent of the information age people have more access to more information than ever before. That, tied in with the movement of rationality, and an ever improving western education system that is (quite rightly) moving away from religious education, means that more people have easy access to the information for them to make the rational decision that, on the face of it, God does not exist and that christianity is nothing more than an attempt at a small elite controlling a less successful/intelligent/wealthy majority.

As people become more educated in the scientific method, become more rational, more objective and have access to more information, the less appeal religion as a whole will hold.

And before anyone jumps in - this does not mean the moral death of mankind. Far, far from it. I always take issue with anyone that implies that only religious people do good and that religion is a moral compass without which we would be lost. Tripe. Non-religious people do good, just as religious people do bad. The key here is that they are people. People will always do good things, and bad things, things of great love and things of great evil long after religion has stopped being a factor. It has nothing to do with it. It just tends to be the reason that some religious people use to justify the existence of religion in the face of more compelling evidence that strongly suggests that it is nothing more than a bunch of stories.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [lbmxj560] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think you far over estimate how much the rational and how little the emotional plays in the psyche of many if not most people. Christianity isn't going anywhere. Sure it will be less popular but there will always be a significant percentage of the population that it appeals greatly to. I think even in the least religious western Christian countries it's still something like a quarter or third of the population who believe.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, as long as there are poor people, religion will be here. https://thehumanist.com/...-poor-more-religious

Not saying it's a good or bad thing. Religion can provide hope to keep going, strength to move forward and be thankful for what you have. It can also be exploited by individual and corporate greed to keep the poor segregated and powerless.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [lbmxj560] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
As people become more educated in the scientific method, become more rational, more objective and have access to more information, the less appeal religion as a whole will hold
---

I hear what you're saying. Then I hear that the number of higher-educated people are choosing to not vaccinate their kids, increase in alternative medicine, increase in anti-evolution sentiments, climate change deniers, flat-earthers... Religion is still a thing and won't go away any time soon.






Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [Tri-Banter] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Religion ain’t going anywhere. From The Hustle.

The Land-Lord Almighty:
Trinity Church’s path to a $6B real estate empire

Trinity Church, an Episcopal-affiliate in Manhattan that was chartered in 1697, has amassed a $6B real estate development empire, according to a recent report from The New York Times.

Since religious institutions in the US get tax breaks, many churches across the country own lots of land. But few churches have developed it as well as Trinity, which rents out commercial space to massive corporations (last year, it signed a $650m deal with Disney).
Royalty, religion... and real estate
Trinity traces its profitable property portfolio back to 1705, when Queen Anne of England donated a plot of 215 acres of Manhattan ground to the church.
The church held on to its land through the years: In the 19th century, Trinity was the 2nd-largest landowner in the city, home to several (148) notoriously filthy and dangerous tenements.

By 2013, Trinity’s land dwindled to just 14 acres, but had appreciated to $2B in value, which gave the church a new lease on its development efforts.

The Holy Spirit doesn’t pay taxes
In less than 6 years, Trinity tripled the value of its real estate empire by entering a joint development venture.

Today, Trinity’s real estate company runs an interactive website to show off its valuable Hudson Square properties. But there’s another reason Trinity does so well: It doesn’t pay taxes.
Tax breaks are a good deal for churches: They’ve helped the Catholic Church become the largest non-government landowner in the world and the Mormon Church become the largest landowner in Florida.

The devil’s in the developments
Despite Trinity’s success, God doesn’t always make a great real estate developer: Across the country, churches with declining congregations are struggling to keep the lights on.
The difference between Trinity and other churches is that it chose to play an active role as a real estate developer -- instead of just sitting on the value of its untaxed land.
But Trinity has money to spare: For the past several years, it has donated $10m annually to other (struggling) churches.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MidwestRoadie wrote:
Peaches come from a can and they were put there by a man, Lorenzo.

...in a factory downtown, as I recall.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here is a sweeping religious history in the United States for the last 120 years:

At the turn of the 19th century Church and Culture were synonymous. But Culturally things were starting to change. Women wanted to vote, Blacks wanted to own businesses. Religion had peen a powerful pawn in keeping the status quo. So the only class of people that mattered for the first 125 years of the US - White Men - decided it was time to start the Fundamentalist movement. Fundamentalism would keep them in charge. The problem is Fundamentalism created a fissure between Culture and Church. It was effective at keeping White Men in power, but it eroded the Church's Cultural relevance.

This fissure grew and reached its pinnacle with the Religious Right movement. The Religious Right is an outright rejection of Cultural relevance. Their embrace of Donald Trump - an immoral race-bating misogynist - is their final declaration. Fundamentalism has never been about Moral authority guided by Religion, it was simply an attempt to maintain the status quo.

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Albeit a sweeping account and quite generalized, you’re pretty well correct as for as generalizations go.

That said, for the church to have cultural relevance going forward, my opinion is it must hitch itself squarely to the culture and not the politics bleeding out of culture, which we’ve seen are too often linked together in a binary sense. To do this the church as a whole needs to embody a third way between liberal and conservative politics, leading in the embrace of solutions to cultural issues, cohesion of values over hard, inflexible absolutes, and ecumenical coalitions both within Christianity, other religions, and irreligious organizations.

Fewer people are taking a stance with the church we’ve known and its continued stance of drawing lines and borders will hasten evangelical irrelevance.


ajthomas wrote:
Here is a sweeping religious history in the United States for the last 120 years:

At the turn of the 19th century Church and Culture were synonymous. But Culturally things were starting to change. Women wanted to vote, Blacks wanted to own businesses. Religion had peen a powerful pawn in keeping the status quo. So the only class of people that mattered for the first 125 years of the US - White Men - decided it was time to start the Fundamentalist movement. Fundamentalism would keep them in charge. The problem is Fundamentalism created a fissure between Culture and Church. It was effective at keeping White Men in power, but it eroded the Church's Cultural relevance.

This fissure grew and reached its pinnacle with the Religious Right movement. The Religious Right is an outright rejection of Cultural relevance. Their embrace of Donald Trump - an immoral race-bating misogynist - is their final declaration. Fundamentalism has never been about Moral authority guided by Religion, it was simply an attempt to maintain the status quo.

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MidwestRoadie wrote:
for the church to have cultural relevance going forward, my opinion is it must hitch itself squarely to the culture and not the politics bleeding out of culture, which we’ve seen are too often linked together in a binary sense.

100%
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If Churches are shooting for cultural relevance, they are missing the boat. They should be trying to be biblically relevant. It seems like the Churches who stay true to their doctrine are doing better than those who have bowed down to culture. member retention is much higher in Catholic, Mormon, Evangelical and other "stricker" churches who have not migrated towards what every you believe is ok with us type churches. Had a great link which showed numbers by religion, but can't find it anymore.

I don't find this too shocking. If anything is ok why stay in your current church.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
>> Catholic, Mormon, Evangelical and other "stricker" churches

Or to simplify, do as I say not as I do...
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patf wrote:
If Churches are shooting for cultural relevance, they are missing the boat. They should be trying to be biblically relevant. It seems like the Churches who stay true to their doctrine are doing better than those who have bowed down to culture. member retention is much higher in Catholic, Mormon, Evangelical and other "stricker" churches who have not migrated towards what every you believe is ok with us type churches. Had a great link which showed numbers by religion, but can't find it anymore.

you are the problem.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
Here is a sweeping religious history in the United States for the last 120 years:

At the turn of the 19th century Church and Culture were synonymous. But Culturally things were starting to change. Women wanted to vote, Blacks wanted to own businesses. Religion had peen a powerful pawn in keeping the status quo. So the only class of people that mattered for the first 125 years of the US - White Men - decided it was time to start the Fundamentalist movement. Fundamentalism would keep them in charge. The problem is Fundamentalism created a fissure between Culture and Church. It was effective at keeping White Men in power, but it eroded the Church's Cultural relevance.

This fissure grew and reached its pinnacle with the Religious Right movement. The Religious Right is an outright rejection of Cultural relevance. Their embrace of Donald Trump - an immoral race-bating misogynist - is their final declaration. Fundamentalism has never been about Moral authority guided by Religion, it was simply an attempt to maintain the status quo.

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...

You had me sort of until the last sentence. The prevailing culture is individualistic. Liberalism has done some great things such as advance the interests of women get rid of slavery etc. But the emphasis on the individual is breaking down institutions. I don't see the church as being helpful being part of that.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was God, and the Word was with God. He was with God in the beginning. Through God all things were made. Without him, nothing was made that has been made...The true light that gives light to everything was to come into the world...The Word became flesh and dwelled among humans. The glorious one came to live among humans, from the father, full of grace and truth."

Or Word of God. Or Jesus.

Not Word of God being Bible.

So what is this "living Biblically" you speak of?

Because when I think of "living Biblically" I can think of either living by a bunch of ancient words written to an ancient people in a foreign, unfamiliar place in a foreign, unfamiliar time with its unique cultural constructs, try to philosophically and theologically parse out the specific meaning of those, allowing the creation of law and "dos and don'ts." I can use that ancient Bible and the texts that have been added to it to create the Christian Bible as a tool to suppress those people, if not physically at least through terms of moral superiority. I can use that ancient text to decide which individual actions, economic states, governmental set ups, laws, etc. are deemed acceptable by God depending on how I read the book -- always leaving someone out, which is necessary in a binary world where God reigns supreme over all and those who don't abide need to change to be part of it.

Or I can look at the thematic example of Jesus, the Word of God, and I can look back at all of those ancient words in a different way. I can look at the Jesus who rejected the church and inserted himself into the culture the church rejected. I can look at the Jesus who reached out to the broken, rejected, forgotten, and lifted them up first as a person, anything theological disconsidered, the Bible of his day capitulated to the human needs of the people, their hearts, and not rejecting them, accepting them as they were. I can use that example of recognizing the relevance of all of culture and all of humanity to have the heart of compassion to see the individual, do my part, and recognize that the whole of culture and humanity is of greater importance than myself, for seeing the whole of all in even the individual is the only way to knit myself into the fabric of the whole.

I'll choose the latter. As Gandhi said, "I like your Christ, but I do not like your Christians." I concur.



patf wrote:
If Churches are shooting for cultural relevance, they are missing the boat. They should be trying to be biblically relevant. It seems like the Churches who stay true to their doctrine are doing better than those who have bowed down to culture. member retention is much higher in Catholic, Mormon, Evangelical and other "stricker" churches who have not migrated towards what every you believe is ok with us type churches. Had a great link which showed numbers by religion, but can't find it anymore.

I don't find this too shocking. If anything is ok why stay in your current church.
Last edited by: MidwestRoadie: Feb 12, 19 12:52
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patf wrote:
If Churches are shooting for cultural relevance, they are missing the boat. They should be trying to be biblically relevant. It seems like the Churches who stay true to their doctrine are doing better than those who have bowed down to culture. member retention is much higher in Catholic, Mormon, Evangelical and other "stricker" churches who have not migrated towards what every you believe is ok with us type churches. Had a great link which showed numbers by religion, but can't find it anymore.

I don't find this too shocking. If anything is ok why stay in your current church.

It seems part of the problem we have in communicating is our conceptions of culture. I think you are saying the culture is about money, personal advancement etc. Others seem to think of culture as the changes they see in the last hundred years or so (advancement of women, less racial discrimination) that are beneficial.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Agreed that classical liberalism has led us to a place where certain individual rights have been improved significantly.

I'd also pose another question, though -- Has it also led us to a place where individual rights are so trumpeted now that we've grown to almost put the individual above all else? Have the economic and social implications of a society that values the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" mentality also had adverse effects on large swaths of the population who are not able to or are never going to be able to achieve the pinnacle of economic success that our society values?

I have to ask, because it seems to me that a part of the problem with our current health care debate is the idea that it's not a right to have basic health care, but if you have the means to purchase it or work for a company that can provide it you should take advantage of it....just don't tax me more so my neighbor can have it. The "don't tread on me" argument of this liberal individualism seems fine with emergency room care being available to all, but not the care to prevent emergent visits...even if it leaves the individual unable to deal with the recovery afterward (i.e. I have a diabetic emergency, didn't know I was diabetic, visit the emergency room, but how am I to afford management of my condition after I'm discharged?).

Surely there's a place between the individual having no rights or limited rights and the place of individual rights triumphing over all. Surely there has to be somewhere in between where I recognize that when I take care of myself I take care of my community, and when I take care of my community to my own expense to a degree I also take care of myself. Perhaps it's in this regard that classical liberalism has done us an injustice.



len wrote:
ajthomas wrote:
Here is a sweeping religious history in the United States for the last 120 years:

At the turn of the 19th century Church and Culture were synonymous. But Culturally things were starting to change. Women wanted to vote, Blacks wanted to own businesses. Religion had peen a powerful pawn in keeping the status quo. So the only class of people that mattered for the first 125 years of the US - White Men - decided it was time to start the Fundamentalist movement. Fundamentalism would keep them in charge. The problem is Fundamentalism created a fissure between Culture and Church. It was effective at keeping White Men in power, but it eroded the Church's Cultural relevance.

This fissure grew and reached its pinnacle with the Religious Right movement. The Religious Right is an outright rejection of Cultural relevance. Their embrace of Donald Trump - an immoral race-bating misogynist - is their final declaration. Fundamentalism has never been about Moral authority guided by Religion, it was simply an attempt to maintain the status quo.

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...


You had me sort of until the last sentence. The prevailing culture is individualistic. Liberalism has done some great things such as advance the interests of women get rid of slavery etc. But the emphasis on the individual is breaking down institutions. I don't see the church as being helpful being part of that.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
len wrote:
ajthomas wrote:

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...


You had me sort of until the last sentence. The prevailing culture is individualistic. Liberalism has done some great things such as advance the interests of women get rid of slavery etc. But the emphasis on the individual is breaking down institutions. I don't see the church as being helpful being part of that.

Could it be that the rise of individualism occurred because of the Church's exodus from Cultural relevance? I think people want to be a part of something bigger than themselves. Rooting for the local sports team - most certainly a collective experience - has thrived in the last 120 years.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is what I am thinking about a lot recently. When I think of the women I know that have been screwed both in and outside of my church circles it has not been domineering husbands who kept them down. It has been guys that cheated on them and then when caught left them. I guess it may be quite different in certain parts of the states but here in Canada probably less than 20 percent of the population goes to church and of those many are not that committed. I can't say we have had much of a fundamentalist movement in Canada the dominant churches when most people went say one hundred years ago were Methodist, United (Presbyterian and Methodist) and Anglican. And Catholics. The Catholics would be the only ones who I would say had fundamentalist views. The Catholics are dwindling but less so than the others. I would say we are at the point now where the church may be blamed for past ills like residential schools and abuse by priests but it has so little influence that it cannot be blamed for our current problems.

I think part of the disconnect of us talking about this is we are saying different things when we say culture. My perception is when you say culture you mean the progressive culture that has increased rights and opportunities for minorities and women. Which is largely a good thing we may disagree about certain details. And then I say culture and mean people seem to be less and less committed to institutions like marriage and family.


MidwestRoadie wrote:
Agreed that classical liberalism has led us to a place where certain individual rights have been improved significantly.

I'd also pose another question, though -- Has it also led us to a place where individual rights are so trumpeted now that we've grown to almost put the individual above all else? Have the economic and social implications of a society that values the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" mentality also had adverse effects on large swaths of the population who are not able to or are never going to be able to achieve the pinnacle of economic success that our society values?

I have to ask, because it seems to me that a part of the problem with our current health care debate is the idea that it's not a right to have basic health care, but if you have the means to purchase it or work for a company that can provide it you should take advantage of it....just don't tax me more so my neighbor can have it. The "don't tread on me" argument of this liberal individualism seems fine with emergency room care being available to all, but not the care to prevent emergent visits...even if it leaves the individual unable to deal with the recovery afterward (i.e. I have a diabetic emergency, didn't know I was diabetic, visit the emergency room, but how am I to afford management of my condition after I'm discharged?).

Surely there's a place between the individual having no rights or limited rights and the place of individual rights triumphing over all. Surely there has to be somewhere in between where I recognize that when I take care of myself I take care of my community, and when I take care of my community to my own expense to a degree I also take care of myself. Perhaps it's in this regard that classical liberalism has done us an injustice.



len wrote:
ajthomas wrote:
Here is a sweeping religious history in the United States for the last 120 years:

At the turn of the 19th century Church and Culture were synonymous. But Culturally things were starting to change. Women wanted to vote, Blacks wanted to own businesses. Religion had peen a powerful pawn in keeping the status quo. So the only class of people that mattered for the first 125 years of the US - White Men - decided it was time to start the Fundamentalist movement. Fundamentalism would keep them in charge. The problem is Fundamentalism created a fissure between Culture and Church. It was effective at keeping White Men in power, but it eroded the Church's Cultural relevance.

This fissure grew and reached its pinnacle with the Religious Right movement. The Religious Right is an outright rejection of Cultural relevance. Their embrace of Donald Trump - an immoral race-bating misogynist - is their final declaration. Fundamentalism has never been about Moral authority guided by Religion, it was simply an attempt to maintain the status quo.

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...


You had me sort of until the last sentence. The prevailing culture is individualistic. Liberalism has done some great things such as advance the interests of women get rid of slavery etc. But the emphasis on the individual is breaking down institutions. I don't see the church as being helpful being part of that.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MidwestRoadie wrote:
After thousands of years, tell me which key Biblical tales have historical evidence as told Biblically? Where is the actual proof of a god? There must be an element of mythology (or fairy tale as one might say), as that’s simply how humans naturally tell stories that are meant to invoke the divine. As I’ve made clear before countless times here, I believe there’s beauty and value in those stories, but it doesn’t make them any less mythical. And there’s nothing wrong with acknowledging them as such while still preserving their transformative power.

And in that vein, I’d have zero issue seeing Western evangelical Christianity die its death, but the high church, orthodox (particularly Eastern), and emergent branches remain strong in their traditional roles. Evangelical Christianity, to me, occupies more space in group think and politicalization of religion than it does the values of Jesus.


windywave wrote:
cerveloguy wrote:
If people feel better still believing in fairy tales then let them. My MIL is one of them. Her problem is that she get's in our face about it rather than keeping it to herself. I just want church and state kept separate and out of politics at all cost. Technically, my heritage is Catholic, but that's the most regressive church of them all IMHO.


Do you have to be so crass and disrespectful and call them fairy tales?

I think that calling someone's religious beliefs fairy tales is disrespectful. I has the negative connotation that anyone who believes must be insufficiently intelligent to see through the otherwise obvious ridiculousness of the beliefs.

I think "myth" is more respectful, as it's generally a neutral term to anyone other than the easily offended, and it casts a wider net to cover certain religious beliefs of uncertain and unprovable origin.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
That's why these conversations can be so darn difficult; we're so often talking past each other thinking we're talking about the same thing when we're talking about entirely different things altogether. But then we're too damn entrenched in trying to prove our point we forget to step back and define what "'is' is" (to use my favorite example of a pedantic moment) so we can productively move forward and find common ground. As biting as the LR can be, it's often pretty productive compared to the typical standard of online forum conversation and moreso than plenty of in-the-flesh conversations I've witnessed. It takes a lot of work to find the frame of reference both parties can come to terms with and begin talking from, and most of us (myself included much of the time) are just too damn lazy to do the rigor of getting to that first step.



len wrote:
I think part of the disconnect of us talking about this is we are saying different things when we say culture. My perception is when you say culture you mean the progressive culture that has increased rights and opportunities for minorities and women. Which is largely a good thing we may disagree about certain details. And then I say culture and mean people seem to be less and less committed to institutions like marriage and family.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [AlanShearer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
From the standpoint of productive conversation, I agree. Calling it a fairy tale does invoke an incendiary, holier-than-thou, superiority that's disrespectful and counterproductive to productive conversation.

From a semantics standpoint and being technical about it, the similarities are too close between fairy tale and myth for the two to be distinctive. When does a fairy tale become mythology? There are certainly differences in the application, history, and use of the tales that have lived long enough to grow to mythology. But that's splitting hairs and me trying to justify it as someone who can live with either term and not be offended (but, then again, it takes a lot to offend me and make me feel disrespected, something more deeply personalized), so I agree with you.



AlanShearer wrote:
I think that calling someone's religious beliefs fairy tales is disrespectful. I has the negative connotation that anyone who believes must be insufficiently intelligent to see through the otherwise obvious ridiculousness of the beliefs.

I think "myth" is more respectful, as it's generally a neutral term to anyone other than the easily offended, and it casts a wider net to cover certain religious beliefs of uncertain and unprovable origin.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I don't want to see the demise of any of it. There's lots of good people out there still doing lots of good.

The Catholics suffer from a worldwide huge organization. Protestants are split up enough into denominations and smaller national/local groups it isn't as huge a scandal when things happen.

What's more fascinating? The POTUS having a scandal or the local mayor?

One huge issue for lots of the big tent churches and some of their members (usually, but not always the more evangelical the worse it is)........it's all about everyone else's sin. And then legislating those view. Screw the gays, the aborting mothers, etc......... But all the divorced folks and other sinners are fine. Really? And this crap always makes it into national level politics.

I feel like a very vocal and financially powerful minority wing of evangelical America is totally responsible for souring the US public on faith groups by wanting to send the US back to the 1800's.

I'd rather want to see the family values of the good Christian folk out there donating time, money, and resources to lots of programs that really help America while not trying to promote Christian sharia law.

We're tired of that rich evangelical minority trying to push their agenda at the national level in politics. Screw those crotchety old white guys.

Also, get a clue if your church is part of the "Acts 29" network and bans women from church leadership. You're probably helping contribute to the problem but don't even know it.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [MidwestRoadie] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
MidwestRoadie wrote:
From a semantics standpoint and being technical about it, the similarities are too close between fairy tale and myth for the two to be distinctive. When does a fairy tale become mythology?

Seems to me that a Fairy Tale is an intentionally created story usually for kids that is suppose to be entertaining and maybe instructive. The problem really lies with myths where they can range from clearly doing something similar to a fairy tale (maybe with more emphasis on explaining why things are the way they are) to stories that are suppose to be historically true, but probably aren't (e.g. the whole Bethlehem Birth story about Jesus) or certainly aren't (e.g. Noah's flood).
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [lbmxj560] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I would also like to question, what time frame are we working on for "will it survive." It seems like in the history of religion, all religions have been replaced with different religions.

I dont see why Christianity would be any different.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [patentattorney] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patentattorney wrote:
I would also like to question, what time frame are we working on for "will it survive." It seems like in the history of religion, all religions have been replaced with different religions.

I dont see why Christianity would be any different.

Yeah but a general trend in cultural homogenization has been going on for hundreds of years now (e.g. look at all the languages that have died out) and Christianity has the a big advantage in being one of the biggies. It's kind of like the English of religions.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
completely agree. I am just saying that the question of "will [X] survive", in a long enough time frame the answer will be no.

Will the majority of americans be christian in 10 years? yes. 100? prob. 1000? No.

the trend is just heading downward (85% in 1990, 80% in 2000. 78% in 2010).

I dont think these have to do with the scandals. I dont think large portions of people think that the religion itself is a problem, just bad apples. As Jim Lotto pointed out, his problem isnt the religion its the pope who is the issue.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [mv2005] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The demise of western Christianity is trumpeted from the media but its fake news from my viewpoint. Yes, the established groups like Methodist, Baptist, etc are seeing a drop in membership, but the non-affiliated churches are growing even faster than the more known churches are shrinking. Just in our area there are at least 3 churches that can be described as mega-churches (2,000 or more people per week), and another satellite location for a mega-church located in a city about 100 miles away is opening in our area soon. That church has more than 10,000 people per week and the local satellite will probably add another 1,000 to 1,500 to that if the local news is correct.

We have lived in 7 different states over the last 20 years and each location had large, vibrant independent churches, many with satellite campuses, while the more established denominations were slowly passing away.

The church we belong to has 5 locations (3 locations took over from a Methodist, a Presbyterian, a Baptist church that faded away), and the main campus is an entire High School that was closed when a new High School was built. The main area of the church is what used to be the gym, with seating on the floor and in tiers up to the walls on the sides and back of the space. It is nearly full in both services on Sunday morning, as are the satellite campuses. Our church would be the 4th mega-church in our city, but the church doesn't focus as much on that as the media does.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [vecchia capra] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
vecchia capra wrote:
The demise of western Christianity is trumpeted from the media but its fake news from my viewpoint. Yes, the established groups like Methodist, Baptist, etc are seeing a drop in membership, but the non-affiliated churches are growing even faster than the more known churches are shrinking.

Well there may be a big shift going on within Christian sects but I'm pretty sure there has been an overall drop in the population as a whole?
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ThisIsIt wrote:
vecchia capra wrote:
The demise of western Christianity is trumpeted from the media but its fake news from my viewpoint. Yes, the established groups like Methodist, Baptist, etc are seeing a drop in membership, but the non-affiliated churches are growing even faster than the more known churches are shrinking.


Well there may be a big shift going on within Christian sects but I'm pretty sure there has been an overall drop in the population as a whole?

There may be a drop in the total number of people going to church nationwide, but I believe that's because people who used to go because they were "supposed to" due to family/society expectations no longer have that motivation. Those that go now attend because they believe in the message and want to be there. And the number of those people is increasing while the former declines.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
len wrote:
ajthomas wrote:

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...


You had me sort of until the last sentence. The prevailing culture is individualistic. Liberalism has done some great things such as advance the interests of women get rid of slavery etc. But the emphasis on the individual is breaking down institutions. I don't see the church as being helpful being part of that.


Could it be that the rise of individualism occurred because of the Church's exodus from Cultural relevance?
I think people want to be a part of something bigger than themselves. Rooting for the local sports team - most certainly a collective experience - has thrived in the last 120 years.

It is a thought worth considering.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There certainly is no lack of opportunities to be doing good. Local Catholic church sponsers Syrian refugees. Tiny congregation.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
len wrote:
ajthomas wrote:

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...


You had me sort of until the last sentence. The prevailing culture is individualistic. Liberalism has done some great things such as advance the interests of women get rid of slavery etc. But the emphasis on the individual is breaking down institutions. I don't see the church as being helpful being part of that.


Could it be that the rise of individualism occurred because of the Church's exodus from Cultural relevance? I think people want to be a part of something bigger than themselves. Rooting for the local sports team - most certainly a collective experience - has thrived in the last 120 years.

I think people want community. But rooting for the local sports team is a rather thin form of community. It gives a sense of belonging but imposes no obligations on the fan. Another thin community is the Lavender room. A more thick form of community would be something like an Amish community. They help each other out and have a shared set of rules that help them live life in a way that they chose. But you are obligated to help out at the barn raising and follow the rules.

The argument that is compelling to me is that Liberalism is telling people that the freedom of the individual is paramount. As such people don't want to be part of voluntary associations that impose rules and obligations that limit their freedom. Those voluntary association impart values and are a place where people learn to get along. But they look to the State to provide pensions, healthcare, employment insurance and a host of other things. The State in turn becomes larger and more distant and less responsive to the electorate. And more authoritarian and intrusive. Then the people become more angry with their gov't and trust it less. Which is kind of where we are right now.

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [len] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
len wrote:
ajthomas wrote:
len wrote:
ajthomas wrote:

In the next decade the Church is going to have to decide to be Culturally relevant again. I believe it can be a powerful counterpart to liberalism because I do believe that Moral guidance can come from the Church. But only a Church that wants to be a part of Culture, not reject culture...


You had me sort of until the last sentence. The prevailing culture is individualistic. Liberalism has done some great things such as advance the interests of women get rid of slavery etc. But the emphasis on the individual is breaking down institutions. I don't see the church as being helpful being part of that.


Could it be that the rise of individualism occurred because of the Church's exodus from Cultural relevance? I think people want to be a part of something bigger than themselves. Rooting for the local sports team - most certainly a collective experience - has thrived in the last 120 years.


I think people want community. But rooting for the local sports team is a rather thin form of community. It gives a sense of belonging but imposes no obligations on the fan. Another thin community is the Lavender room. A more thick form of community would be something like an Amish community. They help each other out and have a shared set of rules that help them live life in a way that they chose. But you are obligated to help out at the barn raising and follow the rules.

The argument that is compelling to me is that Liberalism is telling people that the freedom of the individual is paramount. As such people don't want to be part of voluntary associations that impose rules and obligations that limit their freedom. Those voluntary association impart values and are a place where people learn to get along. But they look to the State to provide pensions, healthcare, employment insurance and a host of other things. The State in turn becomes larger and more distant and less responsive to the electorate. And more authoritarian and intrusive. Then the people become more angry with their gov't and trust it less. Which is kind of where we are right now.

Seems like one aspect that is growing are these Mega Churches. I have no idea but I've always kind of assumed what they do is allow you to check the box of "goes to church" without the community aspect since you'd be kind of anonymous within the masses.
Quote Reply
Re: Will western Christianty survive? [ThisIsIt] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
With the mega churches, there is typically something for everyone. The mega churches are also pretty good at helping out with people with kids. This helps getting people indoctrinated at a young age, while also assisting with the community.

1) you have toddlers - day care separated by age. You can make friends with parents classes.

2) elementary school ages - Sunday school/youth sports leagues.

3) high school / college - Bible study, and weekend activities

4) adults - bible study/book clubs/weekend night activities/gyms
Quote Reply