Liberalism is Not the Church's Biggest Problem
The biggest problem is declining numbers. When the church negotiates its place in society and politics it needs numbers, period. Without numbers no one will pay any attention.
During every generation, however, there were those wringing their hands over the liberals who wanted to relax some rules in order to accommodate changes in the public's thinking. "This is not the real church," they always say.
The real church is out there in the minds of the public. When the public changes, the "real church" must and usually does change.
Capitalism is a topic always at hand to praise. We can use it discussing the future of Christian denominations as well.
The people in the pews pay their hard earned income into the collection plate (or mail it in). They do this because they get something from being a church goer. When they don't like what they see or hear, the money goes elsewhere. Today there is more "church shopping" than ever in history. On top of that, numbers for most denominations are falling.
This means that what is preached from pulpit must more than ever meet with approval from those who sit and listen. In that way, it is not the preacher who writes the sermon. The sermons are written indirectly by those in the pews.
So the hand wringing by conservative people over liberal directions is not the church's biggest problem. The liberal drift may well serve the long-term interests of the faith by preserving support from those more in turn with contemporary society than church hierarchy.
The world population is over 7.6 billion people.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.worldometers.info/world-population/
Watching those counters climb is rather terrifying when you consider how many will be raised to believe their particular faith is meant to have dominion over the earth and to use all available resources to achieve that goal. Will people defy leaders who condemn birth control or will the earth be lost to regressives proudly having 5, 7, 10 or more children, stealing those spaces and resources from future generations?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWhile the rate is not increasing, the population is. The latest United Nations report states that the current world population of 7.6 billion is expected to reach 8.6 billion in 2030, 9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100. The upward trend in population size is expected to continue, even assuming that fertility levels will continue to decline.
DeleteAdditionally, people in developing nations are using resources at an increasing rate when we are already using the equivalent of 1.7 earths.
Earth Overshoot Day marks the date when we (all of humanity) have used more from nature than our planet can renew in the entire year. In 2018, it fell on August 1. That is five months worth of nonrenewable resources we are taking from future generations this year. If the entire world used resources at the rate the US does, Overshoot day would be reached on March 15th. Something will give.
The planet is already overpopulated to a vastly unsustainable extent without considering the effects of climate change or the Anthropocene extinction that is erasing the natural world.
"While the rate is not increasing, the population is....9.8 billion in 2050 and 11.2 billion in 2100."
DeleteThese numbers are not speculative. They are inevitable. Commenter Mark Anthony has been here a long time. When he says "There are other things to consider.." he means we are to take seriously the Catholic ban on birth control and abortion. Somehow that is more important to him than running out of resources.
I think in time the world is going to experience numbers of migration never experienced before. Eight billion people will make climate change all the more difficult to deal with.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMark Anthony "Thomas Malthus lives. remember him. he was to overpopulation disaster fellow in the late 18th century."
DeleteBrilliant logic. Ehrlich and Malthus predicted doom from overpopulation and it did not happen. Therefore, earth can support a population of infinity. There will not, because there cannot, be a shortage of resources or space. I talked to anti abortion people about this and they roll their eyes. "Don't you know the Lord will provide for us?" they ask. The earth is on its way to 10 billion people. Never fear. If it goes to 20 billion or 30 billion "the Lord will provide." Religion will ruin us yet.
Sorry I didn't have time to follow up before the deletions above, several points should have been addressed.
ReplyDeleteA final thought even for those who believe man should have dominion over the earth. Assuming that either a god or science will save humanity in the future is not our right.
This is a moral question about our responsibility to the unborn and the quality of life they will have. Whether conception was 3 months ago or 300 years from now is not relevant.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteMark Anthony--"It's the old problem of crying wolf."
DeleteThis has been you way of approaching important issues since way back. It goes like this. "There are some facts involved in this question. But, let's ignore those and decide by whether we like or dislike the people on one side or the other." So, you dislike those who predicted a population crisis. On this basis you conclude dire population are all wrong. In a post I deleted you went on about how the population was leveling off. What if it starts growing again as the Catholic church teaches it should? That's what rational people are talking about--that population size can ruin us. What to do about it is another question. It would be best if all couples decided to have fewer babies. If the Catholic Church and some Protestant branches would teach that large population numbers would eventually ruin life on the planet we might start getting somewhere without onerous government laws.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteMark Anthony--There you are back to believing the earth can support populations of 20-30 billion. Your church agrees with you.
ReplyDeleteOnce a man survived a car wreck because he was not wearing a seat belt, therefore we should never wear seat belts.
ReplyDeleteA good guy with a gun once stopped a bad guy with a gun, therefore all good guys should have guns.
These are examples of dichotomous or black and white thinking.
Conservative and liberal brains are simply different, this article highlights some interesting points.
https://slate.com/technology/2018/08/why-the-abortion-debate-feels-like-such-a-stalemate.html
Anonymous--I saw that article Slate. I agree generally that overall political and personality traits guide people to their positions of issues like abortion. The article says there has not been much movement for or against abortion rights for several years. That reflects the general political standoff between conservative and liberal camps which have about the same percentages and have not changed either. My thinking, and I've been wrong before, is that as women become a larger part of political and economic life that will shift, at least a little bit, attitudes toward women's rights and abortion rights.
ReplyDelete