Losing their religion: why US churches are on the decline

[archer75]

That’s an interesting point, and one that I’ve been experiencing myself. The only thing that makes sunday service bearable for me is working on the production crew. Otherwise, it’s just a hassle and a boring waste of time.

What does working on the production crew involve, if you don't mind my asking?

 

[archer75]

If you feel like you're on a journey towards God, there's always more distance to go. If you feel like going to church is a static repetition...

 

[Andrewn]

This is just another series of propositions.

Considering the Christian Good News as "just another series of propositions" is exactly what the problem is. How can you convince people that these are truths that are worth living and dying for?

Perhaps this is where to start. And if only 10% are convinced, so be it.

 

[FireDragon76]

I think I understand what you mean about the expression of this relationship differing from culture to culture, but what exactly is the purpose of divorcing Christianity as a loving relationship with God from the means by which we participate in that relationship, so that the former and not the latter are "Christianity itself"? No other relationship works this way. For example, if I'm married and say that my marriage is a loving relationship with my wife, then aren't the things I actually do to manifest/show that love at least just as important as or even possibly more important than mentally understanding or emotionally feeling love towards and from her? Can you even have one without the other? Anyone can say the words "I love you", after all, but as the saying goes, actions speak louder than words.

Yeah, people could go to a yoga studio or walk in nature with a sense of mindfulness and curiosity and get greater participation and connection with reality than what passes for religion in some churches. And nature is remarkably free of nonsense and agendas.

The weakness of classical Protestantism (and to a lesser extent, Roman Catholicism) is a primitive model of the mind that is mostly focused on the conscious, discursive intellect and the narratival self (created by the Default Mode Network in the brain). But we know now that most mental processes are unconscious. All we ordinarily see is the tip of an iceberg of what the mind actually is.

Considering the Christian Good News as "just another series of propositions" is exactly what the problem is. How can you convince people that these are truths that are worth living and dying for?

Maybe you need to step out of your Western, Modernist paradigm of what religion should be? Most of the world is not going to confuse a sales pitch for the opinions of a few 16th century men for transcendent, timeless truths. Not when there are a thousand other even more salient messages competing for their attention.

Martyrs learned the faith through spiritual formation in a community, not by picking up Bibles as individuals to find the "4 Spiritual Laws". Spiritual formation cannot be reduced to merely the propositional.

 

[Andrewn]

Martyrs learned the faith through spiritual formation in a community, not by picking up Bibles as individuals to find the "4 Spiritual Laws". Spiritual formation cannot be reduced to merely the propositional.

This is a good starting point. So, how do we apply this to post-modern people when "when there are a thousand other even more salient messages competing for their attention"?

 

[archer75]

This is a good starting point. So, how do we apply this to post-modern people when "when there are a thousand other even more salient messages competing for their attention"?

Orthodox-centric, but maybe somehow relevant:

I think it was Fr. Alexander Schmemann who said that he thought (Orthodox) monasticism needed a bit of reining in with the various pieces of special clothing and this and that, and that pre-monastery formation should involve being a Christian, living on as little money as possible, giving to the poor and the church, and limiting but not eliminating social activities for ten years (i think he said ten). THEN presenting yourself as a candidate.

Obviously, this is not widely practiced, and more obviously, it's for people who are already Christians and are interested in the monastic life.

But is there some equivalent that could be promoted that could get people, even a few people, into the process of change without getting them sick of boring services?

***

As to churches that have at least some liturgical possibilities, there has to be a way to find sane, doable tasks that someone can do. I'm not sure what this would mean even in an Orthodox context for newcomers. Maybe an Episcopalian can comment?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Yeah, people could go to a yoga studio or walk in nature with a sense of mindfulness and curiosity and get greater participation and connection with reality than what passes for religion in some churches. And nature is remarkably free of nonsense and agendas.

The weakness of classical Protestantism (and to a lesser extent, Roman Catholicism) is a primitive model of the mind that is mostly focused on the conscious, discursive intellect and the narratival self (created by the Default Mode Network in the brain). But we know now that most mental processes are unconscious. All we ordinarily see is the tip of an iceberg of what the mind actually is.




Maybe you need to step out of your Western, Modernist paradigm of what religion should be? Most of the world is not going to confuse a sales pitch for the opinions of a few 16th century men for transcendent, timeless truths. Not when there are a thousand other even more salient messages competing for their attention.

Martyrs learned the faith through spiritual formation in a community, not by picking up Bibles as individuals to find the "4 Spiritual Laws". Spiritual formation cannot be reduced to merely the propositional.

I agree that, epistemologically speaking, spiritual formation cannot be reduced to the merely propositional. But, still, where Christianity is concerned--and since we're on a Christian Forum--I'm going to have to aver that after everything is said and done, it might still come down to how we holistically respond to the question:

Matthew 16:14-16

14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”​

​

15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”​

​

16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”​

 

[iluvatar5150]

What does working on the production crew involve, if you don't mind my asking?

Various forms of media technology, so, depending on the church and the size of its production, it could involve audio, lights, slides/video/other media, camera operation, TD / camera switching, backstage / stage managing, or set design and construction. I work in audio production professionally, so I stick to that, which means I handle setting up and configuring all the microphones/inputs and monitoring for the band and preachers, manage the frequency config for the wireless mics, stage manage the rehearsals, and do the audio mix for the house and the livestream.

 

[dzheremi]

I agree that, epistemologically speaking, spiritual formation cannot be reduced to the merely propositional. But, still, where Christianity is concerned--and since we're on a Christian Forum--I'm going to have to aver that after everything is said and done, it might still come down to how we holistically respond to the question:

Matthew 16:14-16

14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”​

​

15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”​

​

16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”​

And that question and its answer are indeed foundational to the Christian religion, but I'm thinking that perhaps the problem for some forms of Christianity is that they sort of stop there, like "Hey, I believe in the above, so obviously I'm Christian." Well, yes...you have a Christian belief, but so long as we're quoting scripture, we should also keep in mind that "Even the demons believe -- and tremble!" (James 2:19)

Much more instructive to me are things like the communion melody for Lent, during which time we are reminded of our glorious ancestors and what they did with that foundation (to spur us on to follow their example, not just to agree intellectually that this was/is a good thing to do):

Fasting and prayers of the righteous
And cross-bearers kept them living
In the caves, deserts, and mountains
Because of their love For Christ the King.

Does this mean that you need to live in a cave to follow Christianity? No, of course not, but the wider point is that this division between passing on and/or affirming a piece of information (e.g., that Christ is God) and actually having something to do which engages you in your faith that rests intellectually on your belief in that information is perhaps not as salient for everyone across the Christian landscape as it is for certain forms of Protestantism, since 'we' are not hung up on certain things like the faith v. works 'debate' that sours so much of Protestant-RC relations, to give but one example.

 

[FireDragon76]

Orthodox-centric, but maybe somehow relevant:

I think it was Fr. Alexander Schmemann who said that he thought (Orthodox) monasticism needed a bit of reining in with the various pieces of special clothing and this and that, and that pre-monastery formation should involve being a Christian, living on as little money as possible, giving to the poor and the church, and limiting but not eliminating social activities for ten years (i think he said ten). THEN presenting yourself as a candidate.

Obviously, this is not widely practiced, and more obviously, it's for people who are already Christians and are interested in the monastic life.

But is there some equivalent that could be promoted that could get people, even a few people, into the process of change without getting them sick of boring services?

***

As to churches that have at least some liturgical possibilities, there has to be a way to find sane, doable tasks that someone can do. I'm not sure what this would mean even in an Orthodox context for newcomers. Maybe an Episcopalian can comment?

Episcopalians, even Lutherans would have some resources to draw from, certainly.

Episcopalianism has gotten alot of lashings from conservative Evangelicals because of their emphasis on personal moral responsibility (as opposed to moral authoritarianism) and social consciousness, but there are alot of spiritual resources there.

I agree that, epistemologically speaking, spiritual formation cannot be reduced to the merely propositional. But, still, where Christianity is concerned--and since we're on a Christian Forum--I'm going to have to aver that after everything is said and done, it might still come down to how we holistically respond to the question:

Matthew 16:14-16

14 They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.”​

​

15 “But what about you?” he asked. “Who do you say I am?”​

​

16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”​

Peter saw Jesus do incredible things.

What do people see now days out of your typical Protestant? Protest mask mandates? Argue about pronouns, who sleeps with who, and how guilty they should feel about slavery?

 

[archer75]

Various forms of media technology, so, depending on the church and the size of its production, it could involve audio, lights, slides/video/other media, camera operation, TD / camera switching, backstage / stage managing, or set design and construction. I work in audio production professionally, so I stick to that, which means I handle setting up and configuring all the microphones/inputs and monitoring for the band and preachers, manage the frequency config for the wireless mics, stage manage the rehearsals, and do the audio mix for the house and the livestream.

Thanks for explaining. For personal reasons, I admire when people have this kind of skill set.

Much more instructive to me are things like the communion melody for Lent, during which time we are reminded of our glorious ancestors and what they did with that foundation (to spur us on to follow their example, not just to agree intellectually that this was/is a good thing to do):

Fasting and prayers of the righteous
And cross-bearers kept them living
In the caves, deserts, and mountains
Because of their love For Christ the King.

Does this mean that you need to live in a cave to follow Christianity? No, of course not, but the wider point is that this division between passing on and/or affirming a piece of information (e.g., that Christ is God) and actually having something to do which engages you in your faith that rests intellectually on your belief in that information is perhaps not as salient for everyone across the Christian landscape as it is for certain forms of Protestantism, since 'we' are not hung up on certain things like the faith v. works 'debate' that sours so much of Protestant-RC relations, to give but one example.

I am not about to interpret your communion melody for you, but if I heard this, I would be inclined to think it means "[even] in the caves, deserts, and mountains" -- that is, not exclusively there, but even under such conditions, in such isolation. Is that correct, possible, or wrong?

Episcopalians, even Lutherans would have some resources to draw from, certainly.

Episcopalianism has gotten alot of lashings from conservative Evangelicals because of their emphasis on personal moral responsibility (as opposed to moral authoritarianism) and social consciousness, but there are alot of spiritual resources there.

Peter saw Jesus do incredible things.

What do people see now days out of your typical Protestant? Protest mask mandates? Argue about pronouns, who sleeps with who, and how guilty they should feel about slavery?

You just don't see much that's obvious, and it's not just in the past few years (social media on smartphones and all that). Part of it is that Christianity now looks like an institution, an institution that is older than any modern language and seems to transcend even the countries that we all live. The "good" part of that is that it feels like the Church is eternal, but the "bad part" is that it (to many ways of thinking) becomes trivial and is taken for granted. "Christian" in many quarters has become an "identity" that is made to look consistent with whatever actual religion people follow.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with stable practices. But in many quarters, there is no visible charisma, and I mean that word not in any technical religious sense, but simply no sense of any personal fire or drive that even appears to have a Christian spirit.

And another thing. In the US, it seems to me that the external social practices of many preachers / priests / ministers / welcomers borrow too much from our language and manner of aggressively friendly sales, but then the techniques are "sometimes" churchified into a kind of restrained or sober fake friendliness. But we can get fake friendliness anywhere. I'm not knocking anyone in ministry or their motivations, but I have seen this a lot and I just cannot imagine it working.

What is attractive, and what you see little of these days, is people just doing they're thing without advertising actively. We Orthodox march around for a few minutes at night at Easter Vigil. No one notices. I know that the local Anglicans do something like that, sometimes. I assume no one cares. Years ago, I visited a Buddhist temple more than a few times. Their main services were at 6 in the morning, I think. There were very few visitors, no mailing list, no hard sell. I believed that they were doing this stuff regardless of who watched. That was very unusual and attractive.

Our liturgical practices have roots in a different world in which Christianity was much more "embedded" in the local culture. The super-localized liturgies that we have know (ONLY on Sunday, INVISIBLE to anyone who isn't there, and almost impossible to interpret) are just not right for this context. They don't make sense. Orthodox liturgy used to be felt as splendid. I assume the same was true for the RCC for much of its history. It was communal worship. In the age of people having constant splendor contained in their magical pocket devices...splendor itself has become trivial.

We used to have monks weaving baskets and subsisting on very little food. That's attractive. Now those people would be arrested, so I guess that is not an option. Splendor is also attractive. The combination of splendor and sobriety / prayer, can be extremely attractive. If anyone here has seen a lone priest serving in a beautiful setting with one or two laypeople, maybe you will know what I mean. I have seen this in Orthodox and Anglican worship. I'm not an Anglican, but I still think back to that. It is one of the models of worship in my mind.

But the context has changed so much that these things are not working as they used to.

 

[FireDragon76]

Thanks for explaining. For personal reasons, I admire when people have this kind of skill set.

I am not about to interpret your communion melody for you, but if I heard this, I would be inclined to think it means "[even] in the caves, deserts, and mountains" -- that is, not exclusively there, but even under such conditions, in such isolation. Is that correct, possible, or wrong?


You just don't see much that's obvious, and it's not just in the past few years (social media on smartphones and all that). Part of it is that Christianity now looks like an institution, an institution that is older than any modern language and seems to transcend even the countries that we all live. The "good" part of that is that it feels like the Church is eternal, but the "bad part" is that it (to many ways of thinking) becomes trivial and is taken for granted. "Christian" in many quarters has become an "identity" that is made to look consistent with whatever actual religion people follow.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with stable practices. But in many quarters, there is no visible charisma, and I mean that word not in any technical religious sense, but simply no sense of any personal fire or drive that even appears to have a Christian spirit.

And another thing. In the US, it seems to me that the external social practices of many preachers / priests / ministers / welcomers borrow too much from our language and manner of aggressively friendly sales, but then the techniques are "sometimes" churchified into a kind of restrained or sober fake friendliness. But we can get fake friendliness anywhere. I'm not knocking anyone in ministry or their motivations, but I have seen this a lot and I just cannot imagine it working.

What is attractive, and what you see little of these days, is people just doing they're thing without advertising actively. We Orthodox march around for a few minutes at night at Easter Vigil. No one notices. I know that the local Anglicans do something like that, sometimes. I assume no one cares. Years ago, I visited a Buddhist temple more than a few times. Their main services were at 6 in the morning, I think. There were very few visitors, no mailing list, no hard sell. I believed that they were doing this stuff regardless of who watched. That was very unusual and attractive.

"The Buddha was watching". I heard a sermon about that theme during the pandemic, by a Buddhist priest that used to go to peoples houses in Tokyo to read sutras, even if the houses were empty. (I had alot of time on my hands during COVID, and studied alot of religious subjects, particularly about East Asia)

I think you've hit the nail on the head. There's alot of BS that passes for Christianity in America, and too little heartfelt sincerity. Would most pastors preach to an empty building, the way that Buddhist priest would? I think alot of Protestant pastors balk at even preaching to a small church. My former Lutheran pastor talked about the blow to his enthusiasm when he went from a large mega-church congregation near a naval base in Virginia, to a call to a small congregation in Orlando.

Our liturgical practices have roots in a different world in which Christianity was much more "embedded" in the local culture. The super-localized liturgies that we have know (ONLY on Sunday, INVISIBLE to anyone who isn't there, and almost impossible to interpret) are just not right for this context. They don't make sense. Orthodox liturgy used to be felt as splendid. I assume the same was true for the RCC for much of its history. It was communal worship. In the age of people having constant splendor contained in their magical pocket devices...splendor itself has become trivial.

I hadn't thought of that, you make a good point. Clearly, "production values" aren't going to draw people.

We used to have monks weaving baskets and subsisting on very little food. That's attractive. Now those people would be arrested, so I guess that is not an option. Splendor is also attractive. The combination of splendor and sobriety / prayer, can be extremely attractive. If anyone here has seen a lone priest serving in a beautiful setting with one or two laypeople, maybe you will know what I mean. I have seen this in Orthodox and Anglican worship. I'm not an Anglican, but I still think back to that. It is one of the models of worship in my mind.

But the context has changed so much that these things are not working as they used to.

Based on Clare Graves model of human development (known as Spiral Dynamics), it is likely that after postmodernism, the future of world civilization will be oriented towards mysticism - assuming our world survives, anyways. Albeit a mysticism that also appreciates science and reason. Perhaps along the lines of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin or Aurobindo. That's one reason I am following Cynthia Bourgeault, an Episcopal priest who was raised in a Quaker school and lived as a hermit for several years, and teaches about contemplative prayer and mysticism in general. I have also been listening to sermons of Howard Thurman, a Baptist theologian of the mid 20'th century, and I have his 1949 book, Jesus and the Disinherited, on my reading list.

 

[dzheremi]

I am not about to interpret your communion melody for you, but if I heard this, I would be inclined to think it means "[even] in the caves, deserts, and mountains" -- that is, not exclusively there, but even under such conditions, in such isolation. Is that correct, possible, or wrong?

I would not interpret it that way, but only because I know it is one small part of a much larger body of texts (there are different communion melodies for different days of the week, and different weeks of the Great Fast). It sort of goes through all these 'ranks' of the Church's people -- the monks are like this, the martyrs are like this, these people are like this, etc. -- with the unifying theme of each one being united with every other out of our love for Christ, even though they're each doing different 'things'/fulfilling different roles. Because the overall setting/theme is one where we are encouraging each other to fast (since it's a part of the liturgy during the Great Fast) to attain these great heights. So I chose this particular portion because it makes explicit the connection between they feel and what they do, which is what I feel is sometimes not as emphasized in many forms of western Christianity, be it out of fear of preaching 'works righteousness' or some other thing.

This ties in with the observations in this thread about church being boring because there's not really anything to do, since that is really not possible in the more liturgical churches due to the structure of their worship and the overall approach to the faith. Like everyone is or at one point has been at least a layperson, so obviously that is the part they play, and it involves the responses, the prayers, the physical actions, etc. You know, all the stuff you already do, and we do as well, and traditional Catholics and Anglicans do, etc., each in their own way. If that's not the experience someone is having in church, I would say humbly that that experience is out there. Maybe it won't be in the OO Church like it is for me, or the EO like it is for you, but the fact that these exist as viable options in the west nowadays should at least inform this topic in some fashion, since 'we' still do all of these things. We have not moved on to other ways of being, in terms of our practice of our religion. I'm just as western as anyone in terms of my cultural influences and background or whatever, but I'm saying that one of the reasons that I think Eastern/'Oriental' Christianity works for me in particular is precisely in how different it remains from everyday life in the West. I may not be able to report to some emperor in Kiev that I did not know whether I was in heaven or on earth during a Byzantine liturgy, bot you know since you've been to a Coptic Orthodox church before, there's no mistaking it for whatever worship service that people are disaffected with in various forms of western Christianity. Yes, even though 'we' in the COC in particular stupidly borrowed their big projection screens. (In their defense...ugh...the liturgy is extremely 'chaotic' and hard to follow if you're used to the staid worship of a mainline or RC parish, so having it in slide presentation form at least helps make sure everyone is at least on the same page as things buzz by in three or four languages faster than you can find them in the liturgy book with which you are not familiar as a visitor or even just someone who can't read Coptic or Greek letters, as is the case with many Copts.)

Speaking of fasting, I'm rambling because I'm hungry. Hahaha. Sorry. Hopefully that made at least a little sense. I think everyone has the very understandable desire to want their worship to be transformative and unlike anything else they can find in this world, and the fact that some church bores people tells me that they're not all reaching that goal. I just hope that everyone can....mayyyybe through prayer and fasting.

 

[lismore]

That’s an interesting point, and one that I’ve been experiencing myself. The only thing that makes sunday service bearable for me is working on the production crew. Otherwise, it’s just a hassle and a boring waste of time.

Matthew 13: 45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking beautiful pearls, 46 who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had and bought it"

The Lord Jesus told this parable explaining what it is like when someone finds the Kingdom of God. Far from being a hassle and a boring waste of time it is something you would give up everything you possess in order to have. Some churches can be tough going, but the experience above should be normative in a functioning church. God Bless

 

[GenemZ]

Losing their religion: why US churches are on the decline

As the US adjusts to an increasingly non-religious population, thousands of churches are closing each year – probably accelerated by Covid

www.yahoo.com

I'm sure this is nothing new to many of you but their claim of thousands a year seems a bit exaggerated but they are spot on the money with younger generations just not even bothering with attending and it seems to be having quite an effect. Will those laws in the USA pursuaded by Christianity all fall in the coming years as the old timers die off in the government? I seem to think it will happen. Disturbing trends are spreading across the country. Ministry has long since been seen as a global outreach program but I feel they need to look closer inside our borders now too as so many walk away or turn the other shoulder in these "minister's" own backyards.

Before God can raise up a true revival He must let "religion" die.

It was religion that dragged Jesus to the Cross.

Satan seeps in and over time and finds ways to transform established churches, churches that began well, into dead none breathing entities. Organizations that hold a claim to their past glory according to their founding years.

 

[archer75]

This ties in with the observations in this thread about church being boring because there's not really anything to do, since that is really not possible in the more liturgical churches due to the structure of their worship and the overall approach to the faith. Like everyone is or at one point has been at least a layperson, so obviously that is the part they play, and it involves the responses, the prayers, the physical actions, etc. You know, all the stuff you already do, and we do as well, and traditional Catholics and Anglicans do, etc., each in their own way. If that's not the experience someone is having in church, I would say humbly that that experience is out there. Maybe it won't be in the OO Church like it is for me, or the EO like it is for you, but the fact that these exist as viable options in the west nowadays should at least inform this topic in some fashion, since 'we' still do all of these things. We have not moved on to other ways of being, in terms of our practice of our religion. I'm just as western as anyone in terms of my cultural influences and background or whatever, but I'm saying that one of the reasons that I think Eastern/'Oriental' Christianity works for me in particular is precisely in how different it remains from everyday life in the West. I may not be able to report to some emperor in Kiev that I did not know whether I was in heaven or on earth during a Byzantine liturgy, bot you know since you've been to a Coptic Orthodox church before, there's no mistaking it for whatever worship service that people are disaffected with in various forms of western Christianity. Yes, even though 'we' in the COC in particular stupidly borrowed their big projection screens. (In their defense...ugh...the liturgy is extremely 'chaotic' and hard to follow if you're used to the staid worship of a mainline or RC parish, so having it in slide presentation form at least helps make sure everyone is at least on the same page as things buzz by in three or four languages faster than you can find them in the liturgy book with which you are not familiar as a visitor or even just someone who can't read Coptic or Greek letters, as is the case with many Copts.)

Speaking of fasting, I'm rambling because I'm hungry. Hahaha. Sorry. Hopefully that made at least a little sense. I think everyone has the very understandable desire to want their worship to be transformative and unlike anything else they can find in this world, and the fact that some church bores people tells me that they're not all reaching that goal. I just hope that everyone can....mayyyybe through prayer and fasting.

Thanks for the interpretation. I found the text online, and now I see what you mean.

Yeah, indeed, you in your hungry rambling said some of what I meant better that I did. I'm as Western and modern as they come, I know what a telephone is, I know who Spiderman is, and yet a relatively mobile and "participatory" (at least to the limit of my abilities) liturgy really "works" for me. It makes sense to me (although I don't know even our liturgy as well as I would like), and as you said, it remains different from everyday life in "the West" (and, I expect, in much of the "East").

You in the OO communion are not so numerous in the US, I understand, and we EO are...I think a little more numerous, but still barely visible next to the RCC and Anglicans and various Protestants. And yet, there are plenty of converts like us who continue to wear the same clothes and know what a parking ticket is, as modern people do, who can do these things, and so we know that these are indeed viable forms of worship for Westerners.

So yeah, not everyone in TEC is gonna wanna get permission to serve the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (hey, he's a saint for you guys, too, right?) or...I'm afraid I don't know what your go-to Liturgy is called, but they're not going to want to do that, either. (do we have any Byzantine Lutherans around here? We should tag those guys in)

I suspect that this notion has come up a little bit before this thread. I suspect that something like this was behind the much-maligned "folk masses" in the RCC in the 1960s-70s and behind the super-"contemporary" worship (rock-like musical arrangements -- not knocking anything, just mentioning the phenomenon) that I think we have all seen or been to. An attempt to cure the "boringness" of "going to church." I have different ideas about what is a more viable cure, but then, I'm not in authority and no one's asking me.

But I know it's a problem. There are churches around here that were built for 150 attendees on a Sunday and now they're lucky to have 5 or 10. I'm not saying a "cure" needs to be effected to make everyone "go to church" so that I can feel good, but it does seem to me that the attempts at cures are, in many instances, making the symptoms worse.

And the EO are not immune to this, despite the coolness of our liturgy. There are parishes that serve in a language few of those present readily understand, and so encourage a "visitors at a museum" vibe. I have heard, I think, of such concerns among the OO, too. The beauty of the forms of worship does not guarantee that anyone is going to be "engaged" by that beauty.

(Unfortunately, I never made it to a Coptic liturgy. The one service I went to (and yeah, NO mistaking it for what many people expect from church in the US)...I forget. Saturday evening. I forget what you call it. Vespers and Midnight Praises? Your response still holds, of course, just felt compelled to clarify. I meant "generally liturgical, the clergy and laity together in communal worship.")

 

[iluvatar5150]

Matthew 13: 45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking beautiful pearls, 46 who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had and bought it"

The Lord Jesus told this parable explaining what it is like when someone finds the Kingdom of God. Far from being a hassle and a boring waste of time it is something you would give up everything you possess in order to have. Some churches can be tough going, but the experience above should be normative in a functioning church. God Bless

It’s specifically the western, evangelical style of sunday morning service that I don’t like. Community group or other similar meetings that are heavy on community and dialog are fine. But wrangling a toddler just to stick her in the nursery so I can listen to 20 minutes of music I don’t like and a 40 minute lecture I don’t care about, just so I can wrangle a toddler back home to eat lunch and into a nap is not my idea of the sort of “rest” one is supposed to pursue on the sabbath.

While I’m not a big fan of the whole of liturgical ceremony, either, I at least like the music.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

And that question and its answer are indeed foundational to the Christian religion, but I'm thinking that perhaps the problem for some forms of Christianity is that they sort of stop there, like "Hey, I believe in the above, so obviously I'm Christian." Well, yes...you have a Christian belief, but so long as we're quoting scripture, we should also keep in mind that "Even the demons believe -- and tremble!" (James 2:19)

Much more instructive to me are things like the communion melody for Lent, during which time we are reminded of our glorious ancestors and what they did with that foundation (to spur us on to follow their example, not just to agree intellectually that this was/is a good thing to do):

Fasting and prayers of the righteous
And cross-bearers kept them living
In the caves, deserts, and mountains
Because of their love For Christ the King.

Does this mean that you need to live in a cave to follow Christianity? No, of course not, but the wider point is that this division between passing on and/or affirming a piece of information (e.g., that Christ is God) and actually having something to do which engages you in your faith that rests intellectually on your belief in that information is perhaps not as salient for everyone across the Christian landscape as it is for certain forms of Protestantism, since 'we' are not hung up on certain things like the faith v. works 'debate' that sours so much of Protestant-RC relations, to give but one example.

And how is it that what I've posted prior above (in response to FireDragon) has now been summarily intercepted and scrutinized without an apparent shred of Hermeneutics which someone like of Jens Zimmermann or Christian Smith or Merold Westphal or Myron Bradley Penner would have no problem applying to what I've posted?

Does it make any difference to you in your 'Orthodox' perception that I've honed in on the moment of revelation that transpired between Peter and Jesus (and the Father)? Sure, we all know that demons believe too, but my example was specifically the one referring to Peter (or those which, in one form or another, may be similar to his). Or, do you just assume that I, for whatever reason, couldn't possible be more nuanced and/or precise in what I reference and as to why I reference what I do?

Did you see the overall context of not only the passage I excerpted from, but also the general context of the dialogue I was having with FD? I would have thought your response would be more fitting as a post to him rather than to me.

By yeah. We want to have a faith that is 'more than' just a set of beliefs. So, in that, I agree with you.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Since Jesus said He will continue to build "His Church" and the gates of hell will not prevail against it .. I guess the religion that is declining was built by someone else.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Episcopalians, even Lutherans would have some resources to draw from, certainly.

Episcopalianism has gotten alot of lashings from conservative Evangelicals because of their emphasis on personal moral responsibility (as opposed to moral authoritarianism) and social consciousness, but there are alot of spiritual resources there.




Peter saw Jesus do incredible things.

What do people see now days out of your typical Protestant? Protest mask mandates? Argue about pronouns, who sleeps with who, and how guilty they should feel about slavery?

I take Christianity on an individual basis, not a denominational basis. I think that's one difference between me and you in this generic level of assessment about Protestants. Sure, we can all go to Pew Research and to various professional journals for the latest "stats" on this or that trend we'll find among Protestant groups (or any others for that matter), but in the shape of your question, it almost feels like you're more than willing to just lump all Protestants together.

Existentially, I lump no person together. And where generalities are noted by 'professional stats,' then we can generally speak about those generalities in a general way with general spirituality.