creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion General Opinion
Michael Barone
Michael Barone
13 May 2013
Did Clinton and Obama Believe Their Benghazi Baloney?

What were Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton thinking? Why did they keep pitching the line that the 9/11/12 … Read More.

9 May 2013
College Bubble Bursts After Decades of Extravagance

Markets work. But sometimes they take time. That's the uncomfortable lesson that proprietors of America's … Read More.

6 May 2013
Fewer Border Crossings, E-Verify System Justify Bill

Many loud voices in the debate over immigration have been insisting that effective border enforcement must … Read More.

Cardinals Would Be Wise to Ignore Journalists' Advice

Comment

Cardinals Would Be Wise to Ignore Journalists' Advice

The College of Cardinals met in conclave on Tuesday to begin the process of electing a new pope. The cardinals have been getting plenty of advice from American journalists.

The Catholic Church, they say, should open up the priesthood to women and allow priests to marry.

It should abandon its ban on contraception and endorse same-sex marriage. It should stop being so dogmatic about its dogmas.

As a non-Catholic, I don't presume to offer any advice. The church has managed to exist for nearly 2,000 without my counsel. But I do have some observations.

The journalists' advice is based on the premise that the church will lose members if it continues to adhere to what these journalists think are outmoded rules. And it risks antagonizing moderates who may admire its ritual and share some of its beliefs but want it to be more in line with contemporary thinking.

This resembles the advice journalists give to conservative (but not usually to liberal) politicians. You have to modify your beliefs to attract voters in the middle of the ideological spectrum.

Sometimes that advice is good; sometimes not. The assumptions behind it were validated by the defeat of Barry Goldwater but refuted by the victories of Ronald Reagan.

In the religious sphere, however, history soundly refutes the idea that watering down your beliefs strengthens your appeal and attracts new converts.

Sociologists Roger Finke and Rodney Stark tell the story in their book "The Churching of America 1776-1990: Winners and Losers in Our Religious Economy."

As they note, Americans inherited a free market in religion from our colonial beginnings.

The religious settlement following Britain's Glorious Revolution of 1688-89 maintained an established church, funded by taxpayers, but allowed for free religious practice by other Protestants and by Catholics and Jews, as well.

The religious marketplace was especially free in the North American colonies, whose founders included Anglicans, Calvinist Puritans, Roman Catholics and Dutch Reformers.

The Founding Fathers took note of this diversity. In the Constitution, they specified that there be no religious test for public office. In the Bill of Rights, they barred Congress from passing any law regarding an establishment of religion.

Note that they didn't bar states from having taxpayer-funded established churches.

Massachusetts had one until 1833.

But churches and clergymen (and clergywomen) were free to compete for Americans' allegiance. And they did so vigorously, with interesting results.

One is that church membership rose enormously, from surprisingly low levels in the colonial period.

Another is the rapid rise of new denominations. In the 19th century Methodists and Baptists — Finke and Stark call them "the upstart Protestants" — outnumbered previously more numerous Anglicans, Congregationalists and Presbyterians.

The Catholic Church grew not only among previously Catholic immigrants but also by making converts. Black Americans formed their own churches, which have thrived to this day.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Assemblies of God, both American creations, have attracted millions of followers here and around the world.

The 20th century saw the rise of evangelical and Pentecostal churches. Recent decades have seen huge rises in membership among such churches and continuing decline in the rolls of mainline Protestant denominations.

Surveying this history, Finke and Stark conclude that "religious organizations can thrive only to the extent that they have a theology that can comfort souls and motivate sacrifice."

Churches that make strong demands, in doctrine and in service, tend to grow. Churches that water down doctrine tend to decline.

"Theological refinement," Finke and Stark write, speaking of watered-down faiths, "results in organizational bankruptcy."

It should not be hard to understand why this is so. Many people seek structure and community. A church that makes strong demands and requires strong commitment can provide them.

Harvard sociologist Robert Putnam notes that churchgoers have more social connectedness in their communities. American Enterprise Institute President Arthur Brooks shows that religious people contribute far more, in time as well as money, to charity.

The journalists advising the Catholic cardinals, some of them former Catholics, think a church that is closer to secularism will attract people like them.

But in a country that doesn't penalize nonbelievers and imposes little stigma on them, the easier alternative is to stay home on Sunday or go out for brunch.

I'll watch with interest as the cardinals choose a new pope — who, I suspect, will not be looking for my advice.

Michael Barone, senior political analyst for The Washington Examiner (www.washingtonexaminer.com), is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel contributor and a co-author of The Almanac of American Politics. To find out more about Michael Barone, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2013 THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM



Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
Sir;... You cannot expect a feudal organization to be open to democracy... Neither should you let churches govern you by proxy... If you want to let churches exist against the current of knowledge and science, you do so at your peril; and if you do so much, they do not need more rights than their member share with them... That is; the churches should keep open books, like citizens must, and pay taxes... If they are not charities, they should not be treated as such... If they are clubs of deceit and counterevolution they should be sold off... If they hold opinions against the common will and against democracy they should be fined, or dispersed...
If they want only to freely worship God they should be encouraged... If they want to stand for slavery, injustice or immorality they should be proscribed...You should try to understand what the first Christians were punished for... They refused to make an offering of even a pinch of incense for the genius of the Emperor, which is something of an offense against public spirit (morality) taken by those people as treason, for all believed that one guiding spirit resulted in their individual welfare... Today the chuches, one and all stand against this society, and think they are above any need or desire for unity... They reject unity or equality among themselves and reject unity as well with us...
They think they are better than us, that we have only those rights we can defend, and that their rights are God given... I demure... I object... If these people want to vote then let them state the public good as something we can all agree on apart from eternal salvation... If their good is only eternal salvation then we should get out of their way and they should get out of our way in achieving a more temporal good... In the government of today too much given to ideological good instead of practial good... It is too much guided by the churches whose view of good is muddy at best, and purely evil at worst... We cannot expect God has ever saved a people from practical stupidity, for no such society can be shown... Instead; many societies have been destroyed by their inability to face the facts, to adapt to the future, and to push progress forward on their own terms...
The Catholic Church is the worlds last feudal government, and one in which I was born a serf and will die a serf...They cannot listen, and neither can they learn, and in this they are no different from the followers they have found... You must consider for a moment the picture of Jesus holding a lamb... Lambs are inclined to wander, and when found their foot would be smashed with a rock, and so would be carried for a time to food and to water... This was no act of kindness, and keeping the people mired in the magic and mystery of religion is not kindness for them or for us because these slave of Christ are enemies of life and of humanity...
No one should ever expect change from the church... The words of Christ were revolutionary, and he was executed as a revolutionary...No sooner than Jesus had torn down the form and formality of Ancient Judaism; St. Paul built up a new form, and for that he is honored...The Christian is Christ all the same no matter where he finds himself in prayer, and he sees his God and his purpose through all pomp and ceremony, through all form and formality, and he does the will of God as goodness to others...
Who needs a church??? Who needs a church can be answered by the question who needs politics... No one can be stopped from doing good with a law, and no one can be made good with a law; so what is the point of religion in politics... It has only the purpose of feeding on human credibility for profit and power...
Charity is not a monetary relationship, nor is liberality a political position... You can allow every freedom while resisting every tyranny... You can be charitable simply by demanding that people be charitable as the price of reduced taxation... How much people give in the support of political hierachies and physical structures has nothing to do with religious freedom, and should not count to their advantage... Why should anyone carry the chuches... No one broke their foot...
Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #1
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Thu Mar 14, 2013 7:50 AM
Sir;... I should remind you that the church of England, as obnoxious as that was to people in this land when the country began resulted from a worse sort of obnoxious link between government and church following the English Revolution of the Roundheads driven primarily by the Puritans... They were extremely zeolous, and tried very hard to stamp out the practice of Christmas celebration among the people, and generally made themselves stinkers...Freedom of religion in this land was clearly meant to be freedom from religion, and all sects wanted freedom from the collusion of other churches in politics... They need not worry for the moment; but the churches together are certainly making popular government impossible for everyone else...
Where I grew up, my second home at least, the churches own the politcal theatre, and state government too is an extension of their power...The individual person has nothing like the corersive power of churches in government at his dispossal... He has not the corrosive power of the churches on civil morality either...To think that the churches have any possitive interest in the welfare of our society is daffy... They have lorded over our destruction as a society...
Thanks...Sweeney
Comment: #2
Posted by: James A, Sweeney
Thu Mar 14, 2013 8:02 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Michael Barone
May. `13
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Betsy McCaughey
Betsy McCaugheyUpdated 15 May 2013
Ben Shapiro
Ben ShapiroUpdated 15 May 2013
Joseph Farah
Joseph FarahUpdated 15 May 2013

12 Apr 2010 Obamacare Will Be at Center of High Court Hearing

9 Apr 2012 Can Romney Show Voters That Obama Is Out of Date?

22 Oct 2007 We're Not in 2006 Anymore