www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Byzcath Survey

All that does is give you bigger standard deviations and confidence intervals.

Both of which tend to undermine the validity of the survey. Nonetheless, we are now close to sixty, which for a forum of this size is useful. The main problem is the survey is self-selecting, so we don't get a representative sample. We know, for instance, that there are non-Chalcedonians who participate in the forum, but the last time I checked, nobody had identified themselves as such. We have members from Asia and Europe, but not very many of those had taken the survey yet.

There are also some interesting contradictions in the results that indicate either confusion or failure to read the questions carefully. The issue of primacy, for instance, is addressed in two ways, one question regarding the nature of the papacy, the other the ultimate source of authority in the Church. Seventeen respondents identified the Pope as infallible, but only thirteen identified the Pope as the ultimate source of authority in the Church. Either there is some fine hairsplitting here that I do not understand, there are some people who believe that the Pope is the infallible fount of doctrine with regard to faith and morals, but not, somehow, the ultimate authority in the Church. There are several other examples of apparent cognitive dissonance in the survey findings.

That aside, if you get anything close to 100 responses, it may be possible to draw some interesting conclusions concerning attitudes among members of the various Churches, or at least, members of those Churches with enough interest in the Christian East to read this forum.

I think we can start drawing some conclusions from this year's survey.

First, this is best response ever. In just two days, there have been 64 responses. Usually, there are about 35 - 45 responses in two days (as I recall).

Next, there are no surprises about the demographics of respondents. They (We) are overwhelmingly white, middle aged, male conservatives from the United States. 62 % were raised as some form of Catholic; and 62% expect to be some form of Catholic in five years time. In the meantime, there is a shift of people: Roman Catholics going Eastern (Eastern Catholic or Eastern Orthodox), while "others " are becoming Catholic or Orthodox. It's like watching a wave pass through a body of water that keeps the same height before and after. Byzcath, then attracts people who are in the process of checking out the Eastern Church as well as some who are already Eastern Christians. Finally, there are a remarkable number of people who are considering a religious vocation or already involved in one, God be praised!

In terms of beliefs, there are also no surprises. Almost all respondents believe in the basics of Christianity: the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Most lean toward the Eastern interpretation of issues in which the Eastern and the Western Churches disagree. Nevertheless, there is a hardcore third of papal loyalists here too. The same trend is true regarding moral issues. The overwhelming majority have traditional, conservative views of morals. The only notable divide is over gay marriage. Most respondents are against it religiously; but about half think it is inevitable in the wider secular society, while slightly more than half feel that they the government should ban it anyway. In short, the people attracted to Byzcath are conservative theologically and morally; and they lean heavily toward the Eastern interpretation of such issues.

The only surprise is in behaviors. No, it is not surprising that people here report going to church services frequently, frequently studying, frequently praying.

Instead, the surprise is in (the lack of) fasting. Of course, fasting rules do not apply to people who are very young and very old, ill, infirm, traveling, or who are otherwise burdened with a significant hardship and who receive the blessing (or order) of their priests. That said, the rest of us in the Eastern Church (and those who are following Eastern Tradition) are supposed to be fasting for about half the year. Yet, only 37 people out of 64 respondents (58%) reported fasting *at all* -- and that is before Communion. (I failed to ask how long people fast before Communion; that would have been interesting . . .) Furthermore, only 30 out of 64 --that's 46%, folks-- fast during Great Lent. Yet, 79% of respondents report that they are *currently* Eastern Christians (Eastern Catholic or Orthodox); and fasting during Great Lent is, uhm, required. Likewise, only 29 out of 64 respondents -- 45% -- report fasting on Wednesdays and Fridays. The percentage of people who fast at other times is remarkably less . . . And *what* we fast from is interesting too. 75% of respondents fast from meat. Less than half fast from anything else. Five people had the honesty (or the sense of humor) to report that they don't fast or "chicken doesn't count as meat."

In short, in this survey of some of *the most* religious Eastern Catholics and Orthodox:
-- we might be getting an A+ in theology, moral views, and attending services;
-- but we are flunking in personal asceticism: with less than half of us fasting more than a token. And that means less than half of us are getting the spiritual and other benefits of fasting.

-- John

Perhaps I can 'sticky' the poll for a while to get more responses.

What happens with threads and polls is that they fall quickly when other threads are answered, and then people lose interest...

Let's see what a week of this being 'sticky' will bring.

Alice, Moderator

When I read the questions it seemed that harmon3110 was a person that questioned a lot of Church Teachings. If I had to guess harmon3110 supports legalized abortion and would support homosexual marriage.

I think that faithfully adhering to Church Teachings is not conservative but Catholic. But it is interesting and telling to find that this is considered to be conservative. Might we then conclude that one who rejects standard Church Teachings is a liberal?

The question is meaningless. To choose that homosexual marriage is “unacceptable for the Church, but inevitable in secular society” is not to support it. One can support natural morality and yet see that evil is gaining in power in our society. That we may not be able to stop it at this point. Using "total nonsense" in a poll question tells us a lot about what the writer of the question believes in. There is no divide here and it is wrong to pretend that there is.

Some of the questions are interesting but some of them are worthless as they are misleading and biased.

Hmmm...I don't know...I kind of liked the "total nonsense" option, and opted to answer with that one!

It was light spirited, realistic (the kind of thing you might say with your friends, or the kind of thing my grandparents would surely think and say if they were to be resurrected today), down to earth, and humorous in its old fashioned type of sarcasm...

Sometimes we have to 'loosen up' a little bit...since the legality of this 'nonsense' (because besides it being immoral, it is pure nonsense) is slowly overtaking every state in the nation and will become the law of the land soon...if we can't roll our eyes a little, , the only other option for our eyes would be to cry.

If you believe that marriage is meant to be between a man and a woman, as I do, then it makes sense to think of homosexual marriage as nothing but pure, unadulterated, nonsense...but a nonsense that is spelling out the moral demise of Western societies as we have known them in the past two thousand years.

--Alice

Thanks John for taking the time to post the survey again this year and to analyze it for us.

If you have time, some other surveys might be interesting...

It adds a little 'spice' to the forum!

Regards,
Alice

If the poll was intended to be "light spirited" then it was a lot of work for nothing. I suspect John Harmon was serious. Even with the small sampling size interesting information can be gathered and analysis done.

It might have been possible to better phrase some of the questions. The one on abortion, for example, does not really give clear choices for the first two response. My expectation was that the choices would move from a solidly Catholic response to a solidly non-Catholic response.

I would have written the first two as follows:

1. Abortion is a great evil, and together with all taking of innocent human life is the greatest threat we face.

2. Abortion is a great evil, but ranks equally with other threats to human life.

Number 1 is solidly Catholic while number 2 is not solidly Catholic.

There is potential in these surveys. Maybe next time the questions can be posted and fine-tuned?

I saw the choices as being just what was written: Abortion is a great evil, vs. Abortion is the greatest evil. I did not see former as in any way condoning abortion. For example, if abortion is murder, then all murder must be weighted equally. That, at least, was the canonical perspective, since the canonical penalties for abortion were identical to those for murder.

Granted, the question might have been posed differently, if the idea was to feel out those who believe that abortion ranks on par with poverty, ignorance, racism, etc.--but it did not say that as written, hence I responded chose "Abortion is a great evil" over "Abortion is the greatest", because the latter is not true. On the other hand, the question was useful in identifying those who do think abortion is the greatest evil, so I would have included that as one of the choices, perhaps together with those that John indicated, above.

Ah, John, I did not say that the whole poll was meant to be 'light spirited'.

I was not referring to abortion or any other question in the poll.

I think you may have misread my post and what exactly I was responding to?

I responded to Helen about the one specific response option to homosexual marriage which said 'I think it is total nonsense'. I can just imagine so many of my grandparent's generation, now passed on, saying exactly that old fashioned term if they were to come back to life...that is why I chuckled when I read it.

That is the only thing I was referring to when I said 'light spirited'. That was all.

I made no commentary on any other aspect or subject of the poll.

Best Regards,
Alice

The problem with all polls is actually constructing them so you get the answers you want.

I have always found that questions sometimes need drafting more than once, and then tried out on helpful friends before the final wording is organised.

the results are however interesting and I look forward to the one next year

Thanks for the feedback, everyone; and thank you for the kind words Alice and Anhelyna and Stuart.

Administrator John, thank you for your suggestion about the abortion question, and thank you for the compliment about the usefulness of the data.

Helen, it seems that you are pretty new here (looking at your profile), so you probably don't know that I am one of the few liberals who participates at this forum. That said, the goal of my survey was not to question Church teachings.

Rather, the goal of this survey is to discover the background, views, and practices of people who participate here. After all, this website is a ministry; and all who participate here are co-ministers; and it helps to know where people are coming from and what they think and what they do: in order to better direct this ministry, to better help people to follow Christ.

Finally, I think it is interesting that the lack of fasting is the elephant in the room that isn't getting much attention. I think I will start a thread on this . . .

If anyone has further comments or suggestions, please feel free to post them !

Be well, everybody, and thanks again for participating and for your feedback !

-- John

A discussion of Fasting would need to include how the faithful have been taught about Fasting. ISTM that in the silly season after Vatican II the bishops essentially threw away the idea of Fasting by reducing obligatory Fasting to almost nothing (which sends a strong message that it is not important). And since a whole generation was raised without Fasting they simply do not know about it, or the value of it.

A larger discussion on Fasting would be interesting. I think the Church as a whole needs to re-evaluate how we Fast. Right now it is very possible to keep the letter of the Fast and gain weight during the Great Fast!

Well said, Administrator ! Please copy and post this over at the fasting thread I started this morning, to help get the discussion there going.

-- John

It would be good to discuss fasting, its purpose, and the applicability of the traditional rules to our place and time. It seems to me one could eat very elaborately indeed within the letter of the rules but without coming anywhere close to the spirit of curbing the passions. Or, as Vladyka Vsevolod once said, "It is hard for me to tell a teenage boy that eating lobster of Friday is OK, but a tuna fish sandwich is sinful".