Do churches generate a lot of revenue from the LGBT community?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ex Catholics I know (and they are legion) are either atheists now or super conservative and go to "Birdsong Bible Church" where they get a ready made social Group of brand-new family friends who suck them in. Literally no one is switching to "First Methodist" with the pride flag flying. I don't know who the target market is there.

Quite a few at Episcopal and UU congregations

Those aren't churches, more like clubs

How is the Episcopal church not a church? You clearly have some kind of weird belief about what constitutes a church, but if you accept any non catholic church as legitimate then the churches in the Anglican communion are it, way more so than the auditorium mega churches that are cults of personality. And the Episcopal churches are full of former Catholics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ex Catholics I know (and they are legion) are either atheists now or super conservative and go to "Birdsong Bible Church" where they get a ready made social Group of brand-new family friends who suck them in. Literally no one is switching to "First Methodist" with the pride flag flying. I don't know who the target market is there.

Quite a few at Episcopal and UU congregations

Those aren't churches, more like clubs

LOL. "I will define 'church' as narrowly as I must to support my assertion that gay friendly churches are dying. If it's gay friendly and not dying, it's not a church."

Here’s the thing — they are a “church” in some sense of the word, sure.

But any membership organization must have boundaries as to what the members believe or else the organization means nothing. You can’t be a member of Greenpeace and hate the environment. Or be a member of planned parenthood and be pro-life.

The Christian faith is based on a central premise that cannot be changed — that Jesus is the son of God, that he died for our sins, he rose from the grave, and that we are saved through our faith in him. You must believe those four things at a bare minimum or you are not really a Christian.

Unitarians do not believe any of that. So they can call themselves a church but it’s not a Christian church.

Episcolplians allegedly believe all of that. In fact, they were involved in wars and everything else back in the day because they felt the RCC had strayed too far from believing that and added all this other unnecessary stuff to the christian faith.

But in more recent years, the episcolplians have certainly been at the forefront of progressive politics and moving further away from core Christian principles. It’s very much a mixed bag now and varies from church to church.

Hmmm, I think of church as a generic meeting place for a faith community. I see you are equating ‘church’ specifically to a Christian faith community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First off, I am an atheist. Admittedly, I have a cynical view of religion. Also, my vantage point is Bethesda.

I can't help but notice that pretty much every church I see has a flag, placard, or message out front targeting a single demographic: the LGBT community. Not asians, not hispanics, not men, not women, not young, not old - LGBT.

Churches exist for one reason: to propagate themselves. That requires money and customers. So, it must be that singularly advertising to LGBT is a smart business move. Its just a surprising one, given the % of population and, I would think, I general dis-inclination toward religion.

So what is the deal? Smart business move? Meaningless signaling? Something else?

Those aren't real churches

Folks, here is the poster who thinks that Protestant denominations that have been mainstays of religious life in the US since the nation’s founding aren’t “real churches.”

Draw your own conclusions.

Objectively, it isn’t that.
It’s that there is literally a “guidebook” that identifies what God considers sinful behavior. It’s called the Bible. And engaging in homosexual acts is specifically called out as a sin in the word of God—several times. So are many many other sins. And each of us sin on a daily basis. Yet we are all welcome and in fact called by by God to worship Him and to confess our sin, repent of that sin (whatever it may be), and accept that on the cross, Christ took the punishment for OUR sins…all of them…paying the price for us and allowing us to live forever with God in heaven.
One would think that the churches that put out the LGBTQ+ flag are signaling “yes—you are welcome here, too. ALL are welcome to come and worship the Lord and repent of whatever sin is keeping hold of you. Jesus is the answer to setting you free from whatever sin is defining you, including sexual sin and sins of lust or idolatry, regardless of orientation.”
But instead, the message from these churches that put out the LGBT flag seems to be “we promise we will value your self-identification as part of the LGBT community above any Biblical teaching. If you come to this church, we will affirm your desire to keep this area of your life off limits to God and you can hang onto this particular sin because you really really like it and society has decided it’s who you are.”

These are “real” churches, but they have been ideologically captured at the seminary level by folks who are more interested in pleasing society than obeying and submitting to God.

The church also welcomes those who are divorced or having premarital sex or who eat shellfish or who tell lies or who have dishonored their parents, etc. The difference is that they do not celebrate those sins as being who you are. Instead they recognize that we are all sinners worthy of love from God and are invited and called to repent.

This is an excellent post.

I would add —

Sexuality is one area where for 2,000 years — from Jesus giving the Sermon on the Mount until very recently — all three major parts of Christianity — the RCC, mainline Protestants, and Evangelicals — agreed that sex was to be between a man and a woman in the covenant relationship of a marriage, period. This was one area where there was basically no daylight amongst Christians.

And then in the last 40 years or so — so a very small period of time across the broad spectrum of world history — mainline Protestant churches have attempted to redefine this core part of Christianity because of societal pressure. Nevermind that aspects of Christianity have ALWAYS been offensive in every culture and age. Back in the days of the Romans, people could not understand why these silly Christians opposed rape, all kinds of other horrific misgony, and literally throwing babies into trash cans when you didn’t like that a girl popped out. Christians believed these very counter-cultural things at the time because that’s what the Bible says.

But these mainline Protestant churches have unilaterally decided on very flimsy theological grounds that it’s OK to ignore certain teachings now because they aren’t fashionable. They don’t want Christianity that is true to the Bible and counter-cultural — they want a Christianity that fits into their larger political view.

I absolutely believe that this is part of the reason why these churches are on the decline while evangelical churches everywhere and even RCC churches in some places continue to grow.

If it makes you happy to believe these congregations are in decline, that's fine. It's not my experience, given the growth at my church, but I also don't care that you think that and maybe it bears put natuonally, I don't know.
It is, however, a little silly to believe that LGBT and ally members are a big constituency that chuches want to attract, yet also the reason for severe membership decline.

To the contrary, being hostile towards LGBTQ+ is contributing to membership decline, because GenX and younger are much more accepting and are turned off by the hierarchy's homophobia. Lack of ordained women's roles in the Church is another issue causing young people to abandon the faith.

To this poster — why do you only pick on Christian churches? What about Muslims? Muslim mosques in the United States do not perform gay marriages. Many other religions generally don’t perform gay marriages or have female ordained ministers either — Hindus, Buddhists, Skihs, all Orthodox Jews, even some conservative Jews. Are you saying that all of these minority religions are horrible bigots too and should change their religions just to meet your US, western cultural preferences? How is that not you simply trying to impose your western culture on other people from a different culture — which is also a big no-no in modern day liberalism?

In my experience, many ultra left progressives bend over backwards to defend people practicing non-Christian religions — they would never give a male Sikh at work wearing a head turban a hard time, or a woman wearing a hijab. But they are actively hostile towards Christians who practice religion that has the same views on social isssues as these non-Christian religions. So it really comes down to — we just don’t like Christians who practice their religion.

You're missing a word in there because these people also love the "vibrancy" of black Baptists and Latino Catholics. The people they loathe are the people they could possibly be mistaken for.

That’s a very good point. And then what do you do when you come to my mega church and 40 percent of the congregation is not white? And several of the pastors are black and hispanic, therefore not meeting some predefined mold of what people from different races should look like or act?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First off, I am an atheist. Admittedly, I have a cynical view of religion. Also, my vantage point is Bethesda.

I can't help but notice that pretty much every church I see has a flag, placard, or message out front targeting a single demographic: the LGBT community. Not asians, not hispanics, not men, not women, not young, not old - LGBT.

Churches exist for one reason: to propagate themselves. That requires money and customers. So, it must be that singularly advertising to LGBT is a smart business move. Its just a surprising one, given the % of population and, I would think, I general dis-inclination toward religion.

So what is the deal? Smart business move? Meaningless signaling? Something else?

Those aren't real churches

Folks, here is the poster who thinks that Protestant denominations that have been mainstays of religious life in the US since the nation’s founding aren’t “real churches.”

Draw your own conclusions.

Objectively, it isn’t that.
It’s that there is literally a “guidebook” that identifies what God considers sinful behavior. It’s called the Bible. And engaging in homosexual acts is specifically called out as a sin in the word of God—several times. So are many many other sins. And each of us sin on a daily basis. Yet we are all welcome and in fact called by by God to worship Him and to confess our sin, repent of that sin (whatever it may be), and accept that on the cross, Christ took the punishment for OUR sins…all of them…paying the price for us and allowing us to live forever with God in heaven.
One would think that the churches that put out the LGBTQ+ flag are signaling “yes—you are welcome here, too. ALL are welcome to come and worship the Lord and repent of whatever sin is keeping hold of you. Jesus is the answer to setting you free from whatever sin is defining you, including sexual sin and sins of lust or idolatry, regardless of orientation.”
But instead, the message from these churches that put out the LGBT flag seems to be “we promise we will value your self-identification as part of the LGBT community above any Biblical teaching. If you come to this church, we will affirm your desire to keep this area of your life off limits to God and you can hang onto this particular sin because you really really like it and society has decided it’s who you are.”

These are “real” churches, but they have been ideologically captured at the seminary level by folks who are more interested in pleasing society than obeying and submitting to God.

The church also welcomes those who are divorced or having premarital sex or who eat shellfish or who tell lies or who have dishonored their parents, etc. The difference is that they do not celebrate those sins as being who you are. Instead they recognize that we are all sinners worthy of love from God and are invited and called to repent.

This is an excellent post.

I would add —

Sexuality is one area where for 2,000 years — from Jesus giving the Sermon on the Mount until very recently — all three major parts of Christianity — the RCC, mainline Protestants, and Evangelicals — agreed that sex was to be between a man and a woman in the covenant relationship of a marriage, period. This was one area where there was basically no daylight amongst Christians.

And then in the last 40 years or so — so a very small period of time across the broad spectrum of world history — mainline Protestant churches have attempted to redefine this core part of Christianity because of societal pressure. Nevermind that aspects of Christianity have ALWAYS been offensive in every culture and age. Back in the days of the Romans, people could not understand why these silly Christians opposed rape, all kinds of other horrific misgony, and literally throwing babies into trash cans when you didn’t like that a girl popped out. Christians believed these very counter-cultural things at the time because that’s what the Bible says.

But these mainline Protestant churches have unilaterally decided on very flimsy theological grounds that it’s OK to ignore certain teachings now because they aren’t fashionable. They don’t want Christianity that is true to the Bible and counter-cultural — they want a Christianity that fits into their larger political view.

I absolutely believe that this is part of the reason why these churches are on the decline while evangelical churches everywhere and even RCC churches in some places continue to grow.

If it makes you happy to believe these congregations are in decline, that's fine. It's not my experience, given the growth at my church, but I also don't care that you think that and maybe it bears put natuonally, I don't know.
It is, however, a little silly to believe that LGBT and ally members are a big constituency that chuches want to attract, yet also the reason for severe membership decline.

To the contrary, being hostile towards LGBTQ+ is contributing to membership decline, because GenX and younger are much more accepting and are turned off by the hierarchy's homophobia. Lack of ordained women's roles in the Church is another issue causing young people to abandon the faith.

To this poster — why do you only pick on Christian churches? What about Muslims? Muslim mosques in the United States do not perform gay marriages. Many other religions generally don’t perform gay marriages or have female ordained ministers either — Hindus, Buddhists, Skihs, all Orthodox Jews, even some conservative Jews. Are you saying that all of these minority religions are horrible bigots too and should change their religions just to meet your US, western cultural preferences? How is that not you simply trying to impose your western culture on other people from a different culture — which is also a big no-no in modern day liberalism?

In my experience, many ultra left progressives bend over backwards to defend people practicing non-Christian religions — they would never give a male Sikh at work wearing a head turban a hard time, or a woman wearing a hijab. But they are actively hostile towards Christians who practice religion that has the same views on social isssues as these non-Christian religions. So it really comes down to — we just don’t like Christians who practice their religion.

You're missing a word in there because these people also love the "vibrancy" of black Baptists and Latino Catholics. The people they loathe are the people they could possibly be mistaken for.

That’s a very good point. And then what do you do when you come to my mega church and 40 percent of the congregation is not white? And several of the pastors are black and hispanic, therefore not meeting some predefined mold of what people from different races should look like or act?

What you do when coming to your megachurch is realize that in a few years, it will be in decline too, because not enough young people will see the point in becoming members of your megachurch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand the mega church. To that PP, how do you all get your know each other?
Do you do community outreach events?

My smaller Episcopal church ( approx 80-90 congregants at the service I attend does a lot in our community and helping others. That’s a big part of why we attend in addition to thrm being lgbt welcoming.

Good question. This is a major issue. I will say — when I first started going to a megachurch, I hadn’t attended church in a VERY long time and I wasn’t even sure what I believed. A personal crisis had brought me to the auditorium seats (it’s not really a pew after all). I would have described myself as an atheist or agnostic. In that initial context, the lack of intimacy in a megachurch was OK, I could just kind of blend in with the wallpaper. Nobody was running up to me afterwards and trying to figure out who this newcomer was. That’s the way I wanted it.

But after attending for a few months, I started to feel like I was sitting in the middle of the ocean and not being able to drink any water. There were people everywhere and I knew nobody. That started to feel very strange, especially since I felt like I was getting more and more into the theology and Jesus.

My church has small groups that meet during the week — it is one half Bible study where we go over the sermon from the prior week but also one-half support group where we simply talk about the good, bad, and ugly things going on in our lives. We are also in frequent touch during the week and we do service projects together. I ended up joining one a few months in and it made a huge difference. I could have that “small church” feeling with my group during the week but still the mega-church feeling on Sunday. It has been the best of both worlds.

I can’t even describe how close I am with my small group — they really have become a second family.

I have also taken multiple foreign missionary trips. The people I met on those trips have also become very good friends and people that I see on Sundays. But my contact with them can be more sporadic at times. The more regular contact is with my small group that meets every week.

I should also add — my church is very welcoming to newcomers. There is a newcomers reception after every service, every service begins with a big welcome from the pastor to anyone new, people walking around with lanyards saying “talk to me if you are new” all that jazz. I just didn’t avail myself of it.

I’m the PP you answered, thank you for sharing that with me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ex Catholics I know (and they are legion) are either atheists now or super conservative and go to "Birdsong Bible Church" where they get a ready made social Group of brand-new family friends who suck them in. Literally no one is switching to "First Methodist" with the pride flag flying. I don't know who the target market is there.

Quite a few at Episcopal and UU congregations

Those aren't churches, more like clubs

LOL. "I will define 'church' as narrowly as I must to support my assertion that gay friendly churches are dying. If it's gay friendly and not dying, it's not a church."

Here’s the thing — they are a “church” in some sense of the word, sure.

But any membership organization must have boundaries as to what the members believe or else the organization means nothing. You can’t be a member of Greenpeace and hate the environment. Or be a member of planned parenthood and be pro-life.

The Christian faith is based on a central premise that cannot be changed — that Jesus is the son of God, that he died for our sins, he rose from the grave, and that we are saved through our faith in him. You must believe those four things at a bare minimum or you are not really a Christian.

Unitarians do not believe any of that. So they can call themselves a church but it’s not a Christian church.

Episcolplians allegedly believe all of that. In fact, they were involved in wars and everything else back in the day because they felt the RCC had strayed too far from believing that and added all this other unnecessary stuff to the christian faith.

But in more recent years, the episcolplians have certainly been at the forefront of progressive politics and moving further away from core Christian principles. It’s very much a mixed bag now and varies from church to church.

Episcopalians clearly believe the core Christian premises that you outline. You being mad about the other stuff they believe doesn't change that they are Christians. Which means that's a gay-friendly Christian church absorbing ex-Catholics. An easy Google search will tell you that Episcopalian church attendance (not membership) sharply increased 2021-2023.

As for non-Christian faiths - if a gay-friendly religious organization is growing, then saying they aren't Christian doesn't support your point that gay-friendliness causes decline.

There are a lot of factors contributing to overall decline in religious service attendance in the U.S. and you haven't at all demonstrated that it's to do with gay-friendliness and not, say, youth soccer game scheduling or people having to work more hours now to make ends meet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ex Catholics I know (and they are legion) are either atheists now or super conservative and go to "Birdsong Bible Church" where they get a ready made social Group of brand-new family friends who suck them in. Literally no one is switching to "First Methodist" with the pride flag flying. I don't know who the target market is there.

Quite a few at Episcopal and UU congregations

Those aren't churches, more like clubs

LOL. "I will define 'church' as narrowly as I must to support my assertion that gay friendly churches are dying. If it's gay friendly and not dying, it's not a church."

Here’s the thing — they are a “church” in some sense of the word, sure.

But any membership organization must have boundaries as to what the members believe or else the organization means nothing. You can’t be a member of Greenpeace and hate the environment. Or be a member of planned parenthood and be pro-life.

The Christian faith is based on a central premise that cannot be changed — that Jesus is the son of God, that he died for our sins, he rose from the grave, and that we are saved through our faith in him. You must believe those four things at a bare minimum or you are not really a Christian.

Unitarians do not believe any of that. So they can call themselves a church but it’s not a Christian church.

Episcolplians allegedly believe all of that. In fact, they were involved in wars and everything else back in the day because they felt the RCC had strayed too far from believing that and added all this other unnecessary stuff to the christian faith.

But in more recent years, the episcolplians have certainly been at the forefront of progressive politics and moving further away from core Christian principles. It’s very much a mixed bag now and varies from church to church.

Episcopalians clearly believe the core Christian premises that you outline. You being mad about the other stuff they believe doesn't change that they are Christians. Which means that's a gay-friendly Christian church absorbing ex-Catholics. An easy Google search will tell you that Episcopalian church attendance (not membership) sharply increased 2021-2023.

That same simple google search will point out that is because of the pandemic, and also tell you this:

The Episcopal Church has experienced fluctuating attendance trends in recent years. In 2023, average Sunday worship attendance rose to nearly 411,000, up from 373,000 in 2022 and 312,000 in 2021, marking a recovery from pandemic-related lows. However, this level remains below pre-pandemic figures, such as the 518,000 average attendance reported in 2019 and 634,348 in 2014. The 2023 data reflects only in-person attendance, with about 62% of congregations offering hybrid worship models that include online participation, though online numbers are not included in the official statistics.

Long-term trends show a steady decline in both membership and attendance. From a peak of 724,789 average Sunday attendees in 2009, attendance dropped significantly over the following decade. By 2021, average Sunday attendance had fallen to 292,851, a decline attributed in part to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing denominational challenges. Despite a recent rebound, the overall pattern suggests continued long-term decline, with the Hartford Institute for Religion Research noting that the 2023 attendance aligns closely with projected trends based on pre-pandemic data.

In addition, structural changes within the church reflect broader challenges: the number of congregations decreased from 7,067 in 2010 to 6,754 in 2023, and the proportion of congregations with fewer than 100 attendees has increased, with nearly a third reporting 25 or fewer attendees on average Sundays. Starting in 2024, new parochial report forms will include metrics for online worship, non-Sunday services, and outreach participation to better capture the full scope of congregational engagement beyond traditional in-person attendance counts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ex Catholics I know (and they are legion) are either atheists now or super conservative and go to "Birdsong Bible Church" where they get a ready made social Group of brand-new family friends who suck them in. Literally no one is switching to "First Methodist" with the pride flag flying. I don't know who the target market is there.

Quite a few at Episcopal and UU congregations

Those aren't churches, more like clubs

LOL. "I will define 'church' as narrowly as I must to support my assertion that gay friendly churches are dying. If it's gay friendly and not dying, it's not a church."

Here’s the thing — they are a “church” in some sense of the word, sure.

But any membership organization must have boundaries as to what the members believe or else the organization means nothing. You can’t be a member of Greenpeace and hate the environment. Or be a member of planned parenthood and be pro-life.

The Christian faith is based on a central premise that cannot be changed — that Jesus is the son of God, that he died for our sins, he rose from the grave, and that we are saved through our faith in him. You must believe those four things at a bare minimum or you are not really a Christian.

Unitarians do not believe any of that. So they can call themselves a church but it’s not a Christian church.

Episcolplians allegedly believe all of that. In fact, they were involved in wars and everything else back in the day because they felt the RCC had strayed too far from believing that and added all this other unnecessary stuff to the christian faith.

But in more recent years, the episcolplians have certainly been at the forefront of progressive politics and moving further away from core Christian principles. It’s very much a mixed bag now and varies from church to church.

Episcopalians clearly believe the core Christian premises that you outline. You being mad about the other stuff they believe doesn't change that they are Christians. Which means that's a gay-friendly Christian church absorbing ex-Catholics. An easy Google search will tell you that Episcopalian church attendance (not membership) sharply increased 2021-2023.

That same simple google search will point out that is because of the pandemic, and also tell you this:

The Episcopal Church has experienced fluctuating attendance trends in recent years. In 2023, average Sunday worship attendance rose to nearly 411,000, up from 373,000 in 2022 and 312,000 in 2021, marking a recovery from pandemic-related lows. However, this level remains below pre-pandemic figures, such as the 518,000 average attendance reported in 2019 and 634,348 in 2014. The 2023 data reflects only in-person attendance, with about 62% of congregations offering hybrid worship models that include online participation, though online numbers are not included in the official statistics.

Long-term trends show a steady decline in both membership and attendance. From a peak of 724,789 average Sunday attendees in 2009, attendance dropped significantly over the following decade. By 2021, average Sunday attendance had fallen to 292,851, a decline attributed in part to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing denominational challenges. Despite a recent rebound, the overall pattern suggests continued long-term decline, with the Hartford Institute for Religion Research noting that the 2023 attendance aligns closely with projected trends based on pre-pandemic data.

In addition, structural changes within the church reflect broader challenges: the number of congregations decreased from 7,067 in 2010 to 6,754 in 2023, and the proportion of congregations with fewer than 100 attendees has increased, with nearly a third reporting 25 or fewer attendees on average Sundays. Starting in 2024, new parochial report forms will include metrics for online worship, non-Sunday services, and outreach participation to better capture the full scope of congregational engagement beyond traditional in-person attendance counts

Nothing there in support of your premise. People stopped attending during covid and then came back or were replaced in similar numbers (Plus hybrid attendees, which at my non-Episcopalian church represent about a fifth of attendance). Pepple came back because they find the church compelling.

And again, this is a Christian church, something that two posts ago you wanted to dispute because it didn't fit your narrative.

The question at the top of the thread was "do LGBT members make money for the church" and nobody thinks the answer is yes. I don't because I see the demographics at my own gay-friendly church, and you don't because you're convinced we're in decline as a result. Either way, that points to the flags being a sincere expression of welcome. Which is good.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ex Catholics I know (and they are legion) are either atheists now or super conservative and go to "Birdsong Bible Church" where they get a ready made social Group of brand-new family friends who suck them in. Literally no one is switching to "First Methodist" with the pride flag flying. I don't know who the target market is there.

Quite a few at Episcopal and UU congregations

Those aren't churches, more like clubs

LOL. "I will define 'church' as narrowly as I must to support my assertion that gay friendly churches are dying. If it's gay friendly and not dying, it's not a church."

Here’s the thing — they are a “church” in some sense of the word, sure.

But any membership organization must have boundaries as to what the members believe or else the organization means nothing. You can’t be a member of Greenpeace and hate the environment. Or be a member of planned parenthood and be pro-life.

The Christian faith is based on a central premise that cannot be changed — that Jesus is the son of God, that he died for our sins, he rose from the grave, and that we are saved through our faith in him. You must believe those four things at a bare minimum or you are not really a Christian.

Unitarians do not believe any of that. So they can call themselves a church but it’s not a Christian church.

Episcolplians allegedly believe all of that. In fact, they were involved in wars and everything else back in the day because they felt the RCC had strayed too far from believing that and added all this other unnecessary stuff to the christian faith.

But in more recent years, the episcolplians have certainly been at the forefront of progressive politics and moving further away from core Christian principles. It’s very much a mixed bag now and varies from church to church.

Episcopalians clearly believe the core Christian premises that you outline. You being mad about the other stuff they believe doesn't change that they are Christians. Which means that's a gay-friendly Christian church absorbing ex-Catholics. An easy Google search will tell you that Episcopalian church attendance (not membership) sharply increased 2021-2023.

That same simple google search will point out that is because of the pandemic, and also tell you this:

The Episcopal Church has experienced fluctuating attendance trends in recent years. In 2023, average Sunday worship attendance rose to nearly 411,000, up from 373,000 in 2022 and 312,000 in 2021, marking a recovery from pandemic-related lows. However, this level remains below pre-pandemic figures, such as the 518,000 average attendance reported in 2019 and 634,348 in 2014. The 2023 data reflects only in-person attendance, with about 62% of congregations offering hybrid worship models that include online participation, though online numbers are not included in the official statistics.

Long-term trends show a steady decline in both membership and attendance. From a peak of 724,789 average Sunday attendees in 2009, attendance dropped significantly over the following decade. By 2021, average Sunday attendance had fallen to 292,851, a decline attributed in part to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and ongoing denominational challenges. Despite a recent rebound, the overall pattern suggests continued long-term decline, with the Hartford Institute for Religion Research noting that the 2023 attendance aligns closely with projected trends based on pre-pandemic data.

In addition, structural changes within the church reflect broader challenges: the number of congregations decreased from 7,067 in 2010 to 6,754 in 2023, and the proportion of congregations with fewer than 100 attendees has increased, with nearly a third reporting 25 or fewer attendees on average Sundays. Starting in 2024, new parochial report forms will include metrics for online worship, non-Sunday services, and outreach participation to better capture the full scope of congregational engagement beyond traditional in-person attendance counts

Nothing there in support of your premise. People stopped attending during covid and then came back or were replaced in similar numbers (Plus hybrid attendees, which at my non-Episcopalian church represent about a fifth of attendance). Pepple came back because they find the church compelling.

And again, this is a Christian church, something that two posts ago you wanted to dispute because it didn't fit your narrative.

The question at the top of the thread was "do LGBT members make money for the church" and nobody thinks the answer is yes. I don't because I see the demographics at my own gay-friendly church, and you don't because you're convinced we're in decline as a result. Either way, that points to the flags being a sincere expression of welcome. Which is good.

Watch your replies, I think it is the prior poster you are meaning to rebut - it's pretty clear that the post you are responding to actually supports YOUR position, hence the bolded parts highlighting "long term decline". Apologies from me for not adding DP , that was my bad.

[Anonymous]

Churches make money the money goes to the leaders.

LGBTQ doesn't make the church more or less revenue at all.

Churches are grifts nothing more nothing less.

Some do reach out to the community given the Catholic Church has billions in revenue and uses it for what to protect Pedos?

Revenue is why churches exist. There has never been a church that has existed to not make money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First off, I am an atheist. Admittedly, I have a cynical view of religion. Also, my vantage point is Bethesda.

I can't help but notice that pretty much every church I see has a flag, placard, or message out front targeting a single demographic: the LGBT community. Not asians, not hispanics, not men, not women, not young, not old - LGBT.

Churches exist for one reason: to propagate themselves. That requires money and customers. So, it must be that singularly advertising to LGBT is a smart business move. Its just a surprising one, given the % of population and, I would think, I general dis-inclination toward religion.

So what is the deal? Smart business move? Meaningless signaling? Something else?

Those aren't real churches

Folks, here is the poster who thinks that Protestant denominations that have been mainstays of religious life in the US since the nation’s founding aren’t “real churches.”

Draw your own conclusions.

Objectively, it isn’t that.
It’s that there is literally a “guidebook” that identifies what God considers sinful behavior. It’s called the Bible. And engaging in homosexual acts is specifically called out as a sin in the word of God—several times. So are many many other sins. And each of us sin on a daily basis. Yet we are all welcome and in fact called by by God to worship Him and to confess our sin, repent of that sin (whatever it may be), and accept that on the cross, Christ took the punishment for OUR sins…all of them…paying the price for us and allowing us to live forever with God in heaven.
One would think that the churches that put out the LGBTQ+ flag are signaling “yes—you are welcome here, too. ALL are welcome to come and worship the Lord and repent of whatever sin is keeping hold of you. Jesus is the answer to setting you free from whatever sin is defining you, including sexual sin and sins of lust or idolatry, regardless of orientation.”
But instead, the message from these churches that put out the LGBT flag seems to be “we promise we will value your self-identification as part of the LGBT community above any Biblical teaching. If you come to this church, we will affirm your desire to keep this area of your life off limits to God and you can hang onto this particular sin because you really really like it and society has decided it’s who you are.”

These are “real” churches, but they have been ideologically captured at the seminary level by folks who are more interested in pleasing society than obeying and submitting to God.

The church also welcomes those who are divorced or having premarital sex or who eat shellfish or who tell lies or who have dishonored their parents, etc. The difference is that they do not celebrate those sins as being who you are. Instead they recognize that we are all sinners worthy of love from God and are invited and called to repent.

This is an excellent post.

I would add —

Sexuality is one area where for 2,000 years — from Jesus giving the Sermon on the Mount until very recently — all three major parts of Christianity — the RCC, mainline Protestants, and Evangelicals — agreed that sex was to be between a man and a woman in the covenant relationship of a marriage, period. This was one area where there was basically no daylight amongst Christians.

And then in the last 40 years or so — so a very small period of time across the broad spectrum of world history — mainline Protestant churches have attempted to redefine this core part of Christianity because of societal pressure. Nevermind that aspects of Christianity have ALWAYS been offensive in every culture and age. Back in the days of the Romans, people could not understand why these silly Christians opposed rape, all kinds of other horrific misgony, and literally throwing babies into trash cans when you didn’t like that a girl popped out. Christians believed these very counter-cultural things at the time because that’s what the Bible says.

But these mainline Protestant churches have unilaterally decided on very flimsy theological grounds that it’s OK to ignore certain teachings now because they aren’t fashionable. They don’t want Christianity that is true to the Bible and counter-cultural — they want a Christianity that fits into their larger political view.

I absolutely believe that this is part of the reason why these churches are on the decline while evangelical churches everywhere and even RCC churches in some places continue to grow.

If it makes you happy to believe these congregations are in decline, that's fine. It's not my experience, given the growth at my church, but I also don't care that you think that and maybe it bears put natuonally, I don't know.
It is, however, a little silly to believe that LGBT and ally members are a big constituency that chuches want to attract, yet also the reason for severe membership decline.

To the contrary, being hostile towards LGBTQ+ is contributing to membership decline, because GenX and younger are much more accepting and are turned off by the hierarchy's homophobia. Lack of ordained women's roles in the Church is another issue causing young people to abandon the faith.

Gay man from the second page chiming in. It's been interesting reading all the posts and seeing the prejudices and stereotypes coming through. As a PP(s) pointed out, the more liberal the mainline denominations became, the faster their membership fell. The Episcopalian church has gone full on pro LGBTQ and with no shortage of female clergy and bishops, it is already a heavily female led church, and yet that hasn't prevented a near catastrophic decline in attendance and membership. Many churches are surviving off endowments, ironically from past donors who'd be shocked and aghast at what the churches have become.

Is it a chicken or egg situation? Is there a causal effect here? Is it more that the progressive wing of America shuns any religion, no matter how progressive the church or synagogue becomes? Probably. Meanwhile those religious institutions keep becoming too progressive for those who are still interested in religion.

I find the history of theology and Christianity fascinating and I do understand why, under modern cultural influences, the mainline denominations felt they had no choice but to turn leftwards in the name of moral righteousness. A core (and early) tenet of Christianity was that the last will be first, aka the poor and dispossessed. Hence the huge traditional emphasis on helping the poor and deprived. In the 20th century, that morphed into the quest to fight every ism that could be found, eventually taking us to LGBTQ as the last frontier, in a sense.

There's no denying LGBTQ is a fashionable cause. And the skeptical snark in me recognizes it's because it's a safe and clean and friendly cause. Well dressed, charming gay men in your congregation? How wonderful! Gives you a nice warm vibe that you're being inclusive and of course God loves everyone. Meanwhile the actual poor and dispossessed continue to be poor and dispossessed and largely ignored. No one is really interested in poor whites in Appalachia or even poor urban blacks. There was a brief exception with St. George Floyd, but eventually people figured out he really was a drug addled scumbag, which is why BLM quietly faded away discreetly.

This hypocrisy isn't new. Even in the 19th century Dickens was commenting on the proclivity of middle class churches favoring rescuing the souls of poor babies in Africa via missionaries and donations, while genuinely poor people continued to live overlooked and ignored in their communities. Poor people are never tasteful and no one wants to spend time around them.

LGBTQ being the latest cause celebre for educated white women these days is amusing. But it's also valid to ask questions about what it really means. It's one thing to welcome same sex couples, it's something else to enable all the queer and trans identities because isn't that really defying your true self, which would be sinning? And that would be a key reason behind the collapse in meaningful moral authority of the churches. And all this "be kind" mantra ignores that while you're to love the sinner but hate the sin, you're also supposed to help the sinner reform and stop sinning.

Yeah, yeah, I know you'll probably ask but aren't I gay. I am. But I don't deny my body and claim to be something I am biologically not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Churches make money the money goes to the leaders.

LGBTQ doesn't make the church more or less revenue at all.

Churches are grifts nothing more nothing less.

Some do reach out to the community given the Catholic Church has billions in revenue and uses it for what to protect Pedos?

Revenue is why churches exist. There has never been a church that has existed to not make money.

Revenue and faith -- assuming the people who give $$ also have faith in God, otherwise, they wouldn't go to church.

Yes, all churches have to make money - to pay the clergy and maintain the building. They are a business as well as a faith community.