www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Waning Influence of Churches

Perhaps this is somewhat dated, but last month National Public Radio broadcast a report regarding the war with Iraq and the waning influence of churches on public opinion. Specifically, the report centered around how both Catholic and Protestant church leaders are preaching against way, but that people are making up their minds on their own and not based upon what the church says.

On the Catholic side of things, the report cited Humanae Vitae as the root of such "indefference" to the Church's stance and included a sound bite from a priest teching at Norte Dame who postured that Humanae Vitae made Catholics realize that the pope may not always be right.

Now, as I humbly understand it, we in the Byzantine tradition oftentimes pride ourselves on the church not defining specific dogmas if they are not necessary to continue on our Spiritual Journey (for example, the distinction between "mortal" and "venial" sins). Does this and, more importantly, should this general reluctance to speak also spill into the realm of the physical world as well?

Yours,

kl

Glory to Jesus Christ!

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "the realm of the physical world"? Don't take this the wrong way, but it smacks a bit of Gnosticism -- I would avoid using the phrase, especially in company predisposed to viewing Christians as Gnostics.

That said, I have always understood our vocation as Christians to encompass not just personally growing in likeness to God but doing what we can to restore the entire creation, including our families, parishes, hometowns, schools, nations, bowling leagues, etc., etc.

If you meant to suggest that it might be better for the Church to keep silent on political and social issues, I fear I must diasgree strongly. Withdrawal from, rather than prophetic engagement with, this world is certainly not scriptural and certainly not patristic. According to Chrysostom, �it was not for the subversion of the commonwealth that Christ introduced His laws, but for the better ordering of it" (Hom. on Rom. XXIII.

In Christ,
Theophilos

You will please note that I did not take a position, merely put the question out there. Having said that , your points are very well taken.

Yours,

kl

kl:

The radio broadcast is an interesting point. My professional association took an informal poll about four years ago and asked us what we were hearing from families during the course of our work.

The question posed was "what is your religious affiliation or preference?" The survey results came back to us as 50% saying "no" or "none" in answer to the question and an additional 10% saying "no opinion." This last may or may not have had the courage to answer as the first group, but that is mere speculation.

The advice for us was that we should be careful of injecting our own spiritual assumptions on the process of our work, since it seems that we are increasingly serving a population that finds formal religion either irrelevant or offensive.

I just recently received a professional journal that had an editorial written in the same vein. The author had visited some firms and found a number of Catholic families opting for funeral service but omitting all religious services. I find that fascinating and quite an adjustment to make.

I do a large amount of advanced funeral planning in the course of my work. The future seems to hold a lot more of that and I am at a loss to explain to my clergy colleagues why this is happening. What does one tell a clergy member when one is asked why their parishioner asked for no funeral service either in churhc or elsewhere?

BOB

This is certainly a fascinating observation, albeit a somewhat disheartening one.

I think that there are two major forces influencing this current phenomenon. One is the "spiritual" aspect and the other is the "sociological" one.

In terms of society, there are folks who are joiners. They seek out and truly enjoy being a part of a group. Whether Masons, KofC, American Legion, country clubs or churches, being identified as part of a group is important to them and the interaction with other like-minded folks gives them pleasure. This is oftentimes best seen in ethnic groups, and especially in ethnic churches.

But increasing numbers of Americans appear to be non-joiners, and their lives are focused on their own homes. Rather than go to the "hall" (church or social), folks go to Blockbuster and park in front of their 'home theaters' or videogames (and get fat). Therefore, there is less 'socialization' in US society. Professional sports gives people the illusion that they are part of a 'society' (of fans), but it is ephemeral.

The 'spiritual' aspect is quite critical. People go for the least complex. What is "apparent" is "true". So, TV programs like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Smallville, Mysteries, "The Other Side" (that 'psychic' guy), etc. provide an outlet for the non-physical realm. They draw on classic western mythology/history/theology (vampires, etc.) and give the impression that this is 'true'. Standard Christian theology, on the other hand, can become 'too complicated' for many folks, and they don't want to bother. And so organized religion is seen as irrelevant or too cumbersome.

Combine these two phenomena, the "spirituality of the thoughtless", and the "non-joinerism", and faith communities in contemporary N.America have a real challenge.

I sometimes find it amusing when we get caught up in the jots and tittles of liturgicism, or quandaries of canon law, apparently blind to the realities of the masses of folks out there who desperately want a simple message about God and His Love, and who get a dumpster load of platitudes or archaic theologizing from 'organized religion'.

We have GOT to find a way to get the simple Gospel message out; and to find ways to reach the immovable 'non-joiners'.

Blessings!

Dear Dr. John,

You are ofcourse right. In the Soviet Union about 15-20 years ago, the Orthodox Patriarch of Moscow (I don't remember if it was Aleksi or not), invited the great American Evangelical preacher, Billy Graham to speak in the Orthodox Cathedral in order to convert people to Christianity. Billy Graham's simple message wins over more hearts to Jesus than any one else in modern Christianity ever has, and the Patriarch, in his (then) wisdom, took advantage of that. The beauty of Billy Graham, and I suppose the reason he has been pastor to just about every modern day president except Bill Clinton, is that he always tells people, after accepting Christ as Lord and Savior, that they should then start attending their own churches. He,himself, prefers the formality of the Episcoplalian church. The other beauty of his approach, I just heard Father Trigilio mention on EWTN yesterday, is that he preaches to everyone as if they are all at a sixth grade mentality...
This brings me to one of my biggest complaints and observations in my own Orthodox church...we tend to sometimes sermonize, catechise, and write books on more of a Master's or Doctorate level of understanding. That is fine for many of us, but leaves many others in our churches in lukewarm spiritual waters.
Sorry for my rambling...just some thoughts, in my humble opinion.

In Christ,
Alice

Dear Alice,

Amazing! Billy Graham preaching in a Russian Orthodox Cathedral.

Thank you for telling us.

Sincerely,

Paul

Dear Alice,

Yes, Dr. Graham actually belongs to more than just one denomination . . .

The problem in Russia is that priests were forbidden to deliver their own sermons and had to read prepared sermons that carefully monitored what was being said.

This is being remedied now . . .

Alex

Dear Bob,

One of our underground Ukrainian Catholic priests once visited us and said something interesting to a group of other priests living in Canada.

He said that if they didn't preach the "Truth of God in His Word," the people will go in search of it in another place . . .

I was once told by a friend that he believed in secularism and in the great secular institutions as embodied by the monuments of Washington . . .

I later found out that all these "secular monuments" weren't "secular" at all, but had been consecrated in accordance with Masonic rites . . .

Even the American dollar has Masonic symbols on the back.

So much for "separation of church and state."

But ultimately, we look for the mystical and for the beyond.

And that priest was right - people will look for it wherever they think it can be found.

Alex