Thriving Churches Are Those That Have Not Redefined Marriage

[Sleeper Cell]

Somehow I think if the situation were reversed conservatives would be the ones leaving, but who knows. 

 

There is nothing inherently liberal about environmentalism, but you don't see a lot of conservative environmentalists. Probably because the movement has already been associated with liberalism. 

 

If you only knew what I have been up to -- especially in the last year or so.

 

“There is nothing inherently liberal about environmentalism.“  I have been making that same argument for decades.   

 

As a self-described “right wing environmentalist,” (or to be more precise, an advocate of “right wing environmentalism“) I must confess that you may have a point, at least to some extent. But much of the problem may have to do with the fact that the left wing has successfully marginalized right wing environmental groups ranging from hunter’s groups to the boy scouts.  Or, for that matter, marginalized  the contributions made by non left wingers (e.g., the national park system was created by Teddy Roosevelt -- an avid hunter -- and the EPA by Richard Nixon).  

 

One does not have to care about the death of a snail darter, oppose nuclear power or fossil fuels, or even believe in man-made global warming in order to be an environmentalist. Two people can have major differences in their understandings of Christianity and still both be Christians.  The same is true of environmentalism.   Unfortunately, many environmentalists don't believe it.  

[Sleeper Cell]

Good points. 

 

Although at this point growth within churches in the US might be primarily cannibalistic (ie poaching members of other denominations) or based on birth rate. The fastest growing group of all is people without a particular religious affiliation. There can be no sustained growth without young people to replace the old, and young people are the ones rejecting organized religion. They're also the group most sympathetic to gay rights issues. 

 

Hard to disagree, except I think that immigration is also a significant source of US church growth.  So maybe the churches that will ultimately grow the most will be those to which the immigrants belonged before they arrived and those which are the most successful in proselytizing them and (even more importantly) assimilating them into their communities. 

 

However, even with immigration, the fastest growing group of all are -- as you point out -- those without a formal religious affiliation.  So I suppose the question becomes how many will return to organized religion as they get older, and to which churches?  

[why me]

 

Hard to disagree, except I think that immigration is also a significant source of US church growth.  So maybe the churches that will ultimately grow the most will be those to which the immigrants belonged before they arrived and those which are the most successful in proselytizing them and (even more importantly) assimilating them into their communities. 

 

However, even with immigration, the fastest growing group of all are -- as you point out -- those without a formal religious affiliation.  So I suppose the question becomes how many will return to organized religion as they get older, and to which churches?  

 

Many immigrants belong to the catholic church or to islam. Or they are penecostals. All rather conservative churches in one way or another. The catholic church in europe is growing due to immigration.

[carbon dioxide]

Good points. 

 

Although at this point growth within churches in the US might be primarily cannibalistic (ie poaching members of other denominations) or based on birth rate. The fastest growing group of all is people without a particular religious affiliation. There can be no sustained growth without young people to replace the old, and young people are the ones rejecting organized religion. They're also the group most sympathetic to gay rights issues. 

Young people tend to change their views when they get older.  Older people tend to be more religious.  Probably because they are closer to natural life span so they better start thinking about the other side as it is fast approaching.  A religion that changes to cater to the younger crowd will find itself having to constantly change to keep up with the most recent fad or trend that young people get themselves involved with.

[Gray]

 

If you only knew what I have been up to -- especially in the last year or so.

 

“There is nothing inherently liberal about environmentalism.“  I have been making that same argument for decades.   

 

As a self-described “right wing environmentalist,” (or to be more precise, an advocate of “right wing environmentalism“) I must confess that you may have a point, at least to some extent. But much of the problem may have to do with the fact that the left wing has successfully marginalized right wing environmental groups ranging from hunter’s groups to the boy scouts.  Or, for that matter, marginalized  the contributions made by non left wingers (e.g., the national park system was created by Teddy Roosevelt -- an avid hunter -- and the EPA by Richard Nixon).  

 

One does not have to care about the death of a snail darter, oppose nuclear power or fossil fuels, or even believe in man-made global warming in order to be an environmentalist. Two people can have major differences in their understandings of Christianity and still both be Christians.  The same is true of environmentalism.   Unfortunately, many environmentalists don't believe it.  

 

 

Fantastic! 

 

 

 

Hard to disagree, except I think that immigration is also a significant source of US church growth.  So maybe the churches that will ultimately grow the most will be those to which the immigrants belonged before they arrived and those which are the most successful in proselytizing them and (even more importantly) assimilating them into their communities. 

 

However, even with immigration, the fastest growing group of all are -- as you point out -- those without a formal religious affiliation.  So I suppose the question becomes how many will return to organized religion as they get older, and to which churches?  

 

Another good point. I wonder what the drop out rate is among children of immigrants vs other youth. 

 

I don't think it's a given that current downward trends in religious affiliation will continue with no change, but that's certainly been the case in Europe. 

 

There could be a sea change in the religious landscape that convinces the "nones" to someday return, but I'm not sure what it would be

[Gray]

Young people tend to change their views when they get older.  Older people tend to be more religious.  Probably because they are closer to natural life span so they better start thinking about the other side as it is fast approaching.  A religion that changes to cater to the younger crowd will find itself having to constantly change to keep up with the most recent fad or trend that young people get themselves involved with.

 

Well, the adults alive today were much more active in religion in their youth than young people are today. 

 

In any case, all religions constantly evolve. If they don't they either die out or they form isolated communities that remain quite static.