
Two articles in the New York Times are about the Catholic Church. One article is about some parishioners who have staged a live-in to save their church, which the local Archdiocese is trying to sell. The other is about lose of Church influence in Spain.
As an atheist I have an anti-religion bias. I don’t know what the “facts” are but it’s my perception that religious doctrine is losing influence in America as well. As example more gay people are coming out and my guess is that most Americans under 25 seeing nothing wrong with being gay. My perception is that where there appears to be a conflict between religious doctrine and science based theory, such as evolution, increasingly young people believe in the science.
My guess is that church attendance overall in the US is down and a growing number of citizens do not use the Bible as a resource.
I am interested in knowing what you think?
1) Is “religion” losing it’s influence on American society?
2) If yes, how do you think the religious organization should react, if at all?
1) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/us/06vigil.html?em - By Abby Goodnough
From the article:
“There are sleeping bags in the sacristy at St. Frances Xavier Cabrini Church and reclining chairs in the vestibule, but no one here gets too relaxed. “Please be ever vigilant!” a sign by the door warns, and the parishioners who have occupied the church since it closed more than four years ago take it as seriously as a commandment.
St. Frances was among dozens of churches that the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Boston decided to close and sell in 2004, not least because of financial turmoil made worse by the abuse scandal in the clergy. But while most churches closed without a fight, parishioners at St. Frances, a brick A-frame on a wooded hill, and at four other churches rebelled.
For 1,533 days, the group at St. Frances has taken turns guarding the building around the clock so that the archdiocese cannot lock them out and put it up for sale. They call it a vigil, but by now it is more of a lifestyle.
“It’s much more of a living 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week faith,” said Margy O’Brien, 78, a parishioner since St. Frances opened in 1960. “My generation of Catholics have paid, prayed and obeyed, but you get to a point where you’ve had it.”
The archdiocese will not provide priests to most of the vigil churches, and it has removed most statues, altar cloths and sacred objects. It changed the locks at St. Frances in October 2004 but unwittingly left a fire door open, an error the parishioners call a miracle.
The archdiocese has not tried to evict the parishioners or shut off the heat and electricity. Three of the five vigil groups have appeals pending with the Vatican, but if the appeals fail, as is likely, Cardinal Sean P.O’Malley, the archbishop of Boston, may run out of patience.
“They can’t go on for infinity,” said Terrence C. Donilon, a spokesman for the archdiocese. “These have to end at some point, but how, I don’t know.”
2) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/06/world/europe/06church.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=catholic%20church&st=cse by Rachel Donadio
From the article”
“The Macías Picavea primary school hardly looks like the seat of revolution. But this unassuming brick building in a sleepy industrial town has become a battleground in an intensifying war between church and state in Spain.
In an unprecedented decision here, a judge ruled in November that the public school must remove the crucifixes from classroom walls, saying they violated the “nonconfessional” nature of the Spanish state.
Although the Roman Catholic Church was not named in the suit, it criticized the ruling as an “unjust” attack on a historical and cultural symbol — and a sign of the Spanish state’s increasingly militant secularism.
If the judge’s ruling was the latest blow to the Catholic Church’s once mighty grip on Spain, the church’s response showed Spain to be a crucible for the future of church-state relations in Europe.
For Pope Benedict XVI, who has staked his three-year-old papacy on keeping Europe Catholic, Spain, with its 90 percent Catholic population and rich history, represents a last hope in an increasingly irreligious continent.
That hope is quickly dimming. Since 2004, the Socialist government of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero has legalized gay marriage and fast-track divorce, and it is seeking to loosen laws on abortion and euthanasia.
But in response, the church and religious Catholics have been pushing back, seeking a greater voice in public life. The result is that the church is in a full-throated war with the government.
As such, Spain represents not only the Catholic Church’s past in Europe, but perhaps also its future: an increasingly secular country with a muscular Catholic opposition, or what Benedict has called a “creative minority,” smaller in number but more ardent in faith.
At stake is the vision of the country: Will Spain join the rest of secular Europe or stand as a final Catholic foothold?
“I’d say that certainly there’s a worry; it would be naïve to deny it,” the Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said of Spain. “It’s a critical point in the church’s confrontation against secularization in Europe and in the Western world.”

15 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 7, 2009 at 2:34 am
alece
good thoughts. i don’t know that i can answer your questions, but i’ll say what’s come to mind. i know a lot of people—a lot of God-honoring Christians—who are tired of corporate Christianity. i have been wounded deeply by pastors and church leaders; i have been behind-the-scenes enough to see more than i’d ever wanted to see. so i understand people’s sense of being DONE with all of that.
i do have hope, though, that church can be done right. not perfectly, but right. i haven’t experienced it for myself yet, but i know it’s possible.
January 7, 2009 at 8:07 am
Indian Lake Papa
I have grown up in the church, have been a part of church denominationalism, have seen the best – & the worst. Over 60 years, several States, several denominations. Luke 10:25 – 37 (The story Of the Good Samaritan) has been the churches weakest area. We are to serve others – Christ wants us off our butt’s and doing – the church that does that will survive, those that don’t won’t. What’s interesting about the scripture above – is the first sentence – the guy asking the question was an “expert” in the scripture/law! Too many “experts” are missing what Christ has asked us to do – serve others.
I love my church – because it is serving others. As long as I can be a part of that kind of a church – it will survive – and lead us into the future. Christ emphasized forgiveness of sin, but was always quick to stress love & service.
January 7, 2009 at 1:03 pm
edfromct
Alece, the direction a church takes will depend on the support of it’s members. If a church’s message does not resonate with the public it’s influence will fade. That is of course a different thing then the one to one relationship the faithful have with their God.
A very tradition bound church like the Catholic Church seems to be having problems in part because it’s message may not be resonating with the young. It’s young people who will determine how successfully church doctrine influences a society.
January 7, 2009 at 1:16 pm
edfromct
Papa, you have it exactly right when you talk about the need for a Church to “serve” if it is going to be successful in spreading it’s doctrine. Society will judge all of it’s institutions the same. If they are perceived to “add value” than their influence grows. If not their influence fades.
Based on everything I have read the vast majority of Americans believe in God. Religion is not very likely to go away in the US. It’s also my perception that in their daily lives fewer Americans look to their God’s guidance, or use of the Bible as a resource. To me the influence of Church doctrine is in decline in the US, as it is in Europe.
January 7, 2009 at 7:50 pm
Indian Lake Papa
I Just had to pass this along – I got this tonight: Atheists belong to a non-prophet organization. KInd of goes along with this post – if you stretch it a little!
January 7, 2009 at 9:07 pm
edfromct
Papa, that is a funny line.
In America atheists, and some theists, value a “profit” more than a “prophet”.
I feel sorry for the immigrants who try to learn our very confusing English language.
January 7, 2009 at 9:17 pm
Indian Lake Papa
LOL ! your right on the profit !!
January 11, 2009 at 8:17 pm
lovewillbringustogether
Re: Point 2 of your article.
How exactly does 90% of Spain constitute a ‘creative minority’?
Why would a government make decisions that go directly against the ‘belief’ of 90% of it’s population?
As shown in the stats above, what percentage of Christians follow Christ, i wonder? Particularly when His Father’s Scripture (the Word of God) in some way impinges on personal ‘freedoms’ (“i wants” as opposed to what His Will commands me to do).
Truly loving someone does NOT mean you empower them to continue in committing sin against Him. Forgiveness does not mean ‘approval’ of an UnGodly lifestyle.
Having said that, According to the Bible God tried initially letting us live with a single ‘law’ – we broke it almost immediately. We received punishment and banishment from Eden as a result. We were then given many ‘god-given’ laws and ordinances through God and religion and proceeded to break every single one of them and the vast majority of us were not taught how to avoid sin by following them ( or actually mostly paying lip-service to them while doing just what we want to).
So God chose one more way – and man sentenced Him to be nailed to a cross and have been turning their backs upon Him ever since – even those, like the 90% of Spanish ‘Catholics’, who call themselves by His Name.
I’m not saying every single one of them is a total hypocrite, but surely most of them fail to live their ENTIRE life according to His Will and help assist the rest of the population do likewise.
When we have laws, we, as humans, have a long and unbroken record of breaking them by reason of our God-Given free will.
Our Big problem is we listen to our personal ‘god’ of our ego’s wishes than to His instruction many many times. Our pride will insist upon denying this truth within us. We all only believe what we WANT to believe.
<B
January 11, 2009 at 11:49 pm
edfromct
“When we have laws, we, as humans, have a long and unbroken record of breaking them by reason of our God-Given free will.”
“Our Big problem is we listen to our personal ‘god’ of our ego’s wishes than to His instruction many many times. Our pride will insist upon denying this truth within us. We all only believe what we WANT to believe.”
Love, your are right that so many of the laws of the societies we create reflect the human ego, the wants of the majority, or whoever issue the laws, not what is morally right or wrong.
“Our pride will insist upon denying this truth within us. We all only believe what we WANT to believe.”
Are we born with a sense of right or wrong? This is a question I struggle with. I can see self interest behind our decisions. What I haven’t decided is whether self interest is behind many, most or all of our/my decisions.
If I did believe in God, and his guidance, then that would be the driving force behind the moral decisions I made in life, not laws created by men. In that case the bible would be my primary resource.
For myself I make my own judgements about what is morally right or wrong, understanding that when my judgement differs from society’s I can expect consequences.
I will guess that my moral code is something that comes from my experiences in life, and that what is in my long range self interest has a large part in the decision process.
January 13, 2009 at 12:41 am
lovewillbringustogether
“Are we born with a sense of right or wrong?”
Great Question – one with more than a few ‘levels’ to be explored and better understood. (There may be a blogpost or six there
)
Every single one of us is lead by our genetic makeup (each unique human genome pattern) to ‘naturally’ favour some things over others. Some things are inherently ‘right’ for us while others are not and get labelled ‘wrong’ (perhaps just on a personal basis, not as an entire societal group ‘choice’)
Then there are the right and wrongs of our ‘tribe’ and our ‘culture’ and, less frequently in these days of the rapidly ’shrinking’ world, our ‘race’. Where we are more comfortable with things we have grown up with over generations than ‘foreign’ or different to the norm things ( like religion and skin/hair/eye colour for example) and place some things as being ‘right’ for ‘us’ ( as a grouping) and some things ‘wrong’.
It would be nice to believe that for ALL humans there is one absolute set of ‘rights’ and ‘wrongs’ – or so many of us might think – Things that could unite every single one of us on the planet to form the basis for mutual peace and understanding, but either God or Human Society has contrived that this not be so – things that we could have agreed upon are interlinked intrinsically with so many other things we hold to and take as ‘gospel’, that it is all but impossible to find some ‘common ground’. Despite the best efforts of some (predominantly quite religious humans) in the past.
There can be no doubt that our parents greatly affect our own understanding of right and wrong. Sometimes we adopt theirs unquestioningly – sometimes we do the opposite of what they may have done because we personally did not feel like we ‘gained’ anything positive from their preferred methods of upholding right and wrong in our upbringing.
i believe that, from what i see of modern society, many parents who felt ‘restricted’ as children through tough parental discipline now are raising undisciplined monsters who only have an appreciation of self – the ‘me generation’ and who care little to nothing for the rights of others in society. Where is the right and wrong in that i wonder?
i know there are some parents who still successfully raise ‘good’ kids, but there are some very clear cases where in trying to not be like their parents ‘new’ parents have completely lost all concept of what it takes to raise a child into a caring society as a person who knows ‘right’ from ‘wrong’ and this can only be a bad thing for our collective futures.
i could go on but might have to save it for a post somewhere?
and i did not even start on the moral question!
let alone the similarities and differences in the moral basis of God vs Humanism
Sheesh.
<B
January 14, 2009 at 1:15 am
edfromct
1) Love I agree with you on parenting issue:
“i believe that, from what i see of modern society, many parents who felt ‘restricted’ as children through tough parental discipline now are raising undisciplined monsters who only have an appreciation of self – the ‘me generation’ and who care little to nothing for the rights of others in society”
2)”Every single one of us is lead by our genetic makeup (each unique human genome pattern) to ‘naturally’ favour some things over others. Some things are inherently ‘right’ for us while others are not and get labelled ‘wrong’ (perhaps just on a personal basis, not as an entire societal group ‘choice’)”
Speaking strictly in terms of what is hardwired into our genes is there anything more then the instinct to survive and reproduce?
My first thought is say yes, but then I have to ask where does our personality come from? For example do some people’s genes give them a predisposition for depression, or having a positive outlook on life, or are these things that we pick up by observing and interacting with parents, and the environment we are raised in?
What does the bible say, if anything, about where our personalities come from? Does our soul have a personality?
My guess is that some survival behaviors are hardwired into our genes. I will guess not so much right or wrong but more like what will increase our chances to survive and pass on our genes. Our sense of right or wrong may come more from our experinces in life and the people we interact with.
Perhaps survival is instinctive and our moral code learned.
January 15, 2009 at 10:10 pm
lovewillbringustogether
Ed – ’strictly (minimalist) speaking’? then ‘No’ with a ‘but…’
Our hardwiring (genome) is dedicated to our survival and it’s ongoing continuation through reproduction. This however pervades every single aspect of our lives ( including our ‘moral’ development and leads into our understandings on ‘right and wrong’, both personal and societal)
Our genes have a significant part to play in every desire and ‘like’ we have whether they be ‘innate or ‘learned’. The influences of our genes may be very subtle or in some cases (as in our sex) not so subtle.
I’m probably the wrong one to ask about what the bible has to say about our personality’s however i believe our ’soul’ ( direct connection to God) influences our moral growth and it’s basis in all of us and in some people perhaps even moreso than our genes and/or parent’s beliefs do.
Certainly there is interaction and intellectual ‘learning’ ( developing of certain ‘habits’/thoughts/beliefs) with the entire environment we are raised and continue to live in, however our genes influence the directions all these grow from.
Jane Elliott’s blue eyes/brown eyes experiment proves very nicely how our morals are affected by our environment/predominant societal influence. and the link is worth investigating as a ’simple’ way our genes can determine our prejudices. http://www.janeelliott.com/
i would not hazard a specific guess as to which – if either – genes or environment – have the stronger influence in an, or in all, individuals.
<B
January 16, 2009 at 4:01 pm
edfromct
Love, Thanks for the link to the Jane Elliott site. I went to the “video” page but saw the prices was $295 so I will pass on that. There is another page with 26 statements which can be associated with racism. I can say growing up in the 1950′ the people in my family believed in most of the those statements.
My guess is that our surivial instinct will make us wary of any who acts, or looks, different from ourselves. We will prefer to be part of groups where the members look, or act, like we do. It’s as we interact more with someone from another race, or culture, we see that we are more similar than different, we learn we can help each other.
I think everyone should spend one year in a culture where they are the minority.
In the US racial intergration was forced on Americans. Now some 40 years later we view, at least most Americans do, racial segregation as being immoral.
I think it is safe to say that we are the product of both our genes and our environment. We need to better understand how each shapes our lives.
March 17, 2009 at 8:55 pm
lovewillbringustogether
I noted with interest That Pope Benedict has now announced on two occasions he has made a mistake – the most recent one allowing a bishop that had been excommunicated back into the church – despite his expressed personal belief that the Jewish Holocaust under Hitler did not happen as History records it.
I wonder how he (The Papa) as God’s representative here on earth to his flock of some one billion Catholics who is supposed to be infalliable in His intepretation of God’s Will for them – was able to make not one but two errors of judgement in his job?
Would that not be reason to sack Him? Just how fallible can the infallible one be?
I fully realise that none of us humans is perfect in our own life, but when someone claims to have Divine Authority ‘mistakes’ do not come with the Job Description as i understand it.
<B
March 17, 2009 at 9:21 pm
edfromct
Love, It appears that many Catholic priest, in both North & South America, don’t subscribe to Papal infallibility either. In particular many ordained Priest in Latin America wear the label “rebel” proudly.
In your own country I have recently read about Father Peter Kennedy, of St Mary’s Catholic Church, South Brisbane, who was “sacked” by his archbishop, “over matters of conduct and liturgy”. Father Kennedy’s congregation support him.
I suspect the only Catholic’s who still believe in Papal infalliblity are found in Rome.