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

Forum Index » Religion

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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?

[/quote]

Those aren't real churches [/quote]

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.[/quote]

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. 
[/quote]

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.   
[/quote]

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. 
[b]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. [/b][/quote]

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.[/quote]

This simply isn’t true.   As this thread shows, there are plenty of churches that specifically market themselves as being LGBTQ “welcoming” and have ordained female ministers — those are the same churches that have generally undergone the dramatic membership declines.  It is not that people can’t find such a church.

On the contrary, the churches that have stuck to more orthodox Christian principles — mainly non-denominational churches but also some smaller Presbyterian and Anglican sects — these have experienced the most growth.  My non-denom church is packed on Sunday morning — easily 3,000-4,000 people across two services.  I drive 40 minutes to get there.  Along the way, I pass by tons of churches like the OP noted.  I always observe mostly empty parking lots.  Just out of pure curiosity, I have gone onto the websites for some of these churches and tried watching their services after they were done, just to compare them to my church.   I can see why the parking lots are mostly empty — the sermons are boring, long on progressive politics and short on Jesus and the cross, the music is bad, the average age in the congregation looks to be 100.   Who really wants to go to that church?  My church is young (I am in my 40s and definitely not young by its standards), vibrant, fresh, engaging, intellectual, and completely focused on Jesus along with some application to your real life.

The reason why people have stopped going to church is multi-faceted and can’t be boiled down to a single reason.  The best book on this subject if anyone really wants to dive into it is “The Great Dechurching.”

But it isn’t that Christianity has become unwelcoming to LGBTQ.  There are plenty of churches that have gone out of their way in the opposite direction. [/quote]

Please. It is true. I worked for the Catholic Church. It may not be the sole reason but it is one of many, and a significant one at that. I attend a left-leaning RCC church which is "young, vibrant, fresh, engaging, intellectual, and focused on Jesus along with application to your real life" and openly accepts gay people. It does make a difference to be involved in a parish that does not weaponize its faith against its adherents. While I am aware of the growth of nondenominational Christian churches, your n should not equal 1 and I'm sure I would find the music at your Church bad. Christian rock/pop is generally pretty boring, because ime it lacks a good melody and dynamics.[/quote]

Good for you.   But the fact that you attend church a Christian church and would presumably identify as a Christian— and found something that works for you and is apparently “gay accepting”  — disproves the entire premise that the person before was making.

My point is that there are plenty of churches that exist along the entire spectrum on sexuality issues.  If you want to find a Christian church that aligns with your view on sexuality, you can.  The reasons for people not going to church are much more complicated.  I tried to reference a very in depth and objective book which looks at this issue and pulls no punches.

My post was mainly in the Protestant context where there is a clear divide amongst churches growing and those that aren’t. And there is the unmistakable trend that the ones growing are the ones that are more orthodox.

The RCC is a bit of a different animal — and I know something about it because I grew up in the RCC before becoming an atheist for a long time.   Whether particular parishes are more conservative or more liberal is usually not as apparent and the RCC is less concerned with how scripture is interpreted than it is with the Eucharist and church tradition.  The homily at any RCC is the least important part of the Mass.   So I agree, my points are not as relevant in that context.  Though — the official RCC teachings on sexuality issues — that sex should be between a man and a woman in the context of marriage, period — have never wavered and likely never will.  And the RCC is even more opposed to any use of contraception than evangelicals are.

Btw, I don’t mind some RCC music — older stuff.   But the contemporary RCC music that is in your typical church on a Sunday — On Eagles Wings, Be Not Afriad, Gift of Finest Wheat — there’s no doubt this music is worse and even cornier than contemporary Christian music.   [/quote]

We will have to continue to agree to disagree:

1. I have done a lot of reading on contemporary religious issues and listen to a lot of podcasts on said topic. I'm very well aware that the reasons people are not attending church are complicated but stand by my IRL experience that acceptance of homosexuality is an issue, even among straight people. I wish the religion thread on dcurbanmom wasn't so often a thread for multi-paragraph mansplaining.
2. I see your point on comparing Protestant Churches.
3. The homily may be less important but it does happen and people listen. Just because the Church has official teachings doesn't make them right. Church doctrine while sometimes claiming to be an eternal truth can be temporal as opposed to spiritual and not necessarily in keeping with the teachings of Jesus Christ. That is the problem with "tradition."
4. While I think On Eagles Wings is insufferable, I love the St. Louis Jesuits et al. Be not afraid, I go before you always. Come follow me and I will give you rest. Come give to us oh, saving lord the bread of life to eat. Contemporary Christian music is 1000x worse and cornier. The Catholic folk songs you think are corny actually have catchy melodies and dynamics!

The future is not pro-life or Orthodox. If it is, then Christianity as it is practiced in the US is really in trouble. The way forward is not backwards.[/quote]

Republican leaders are calling for rolling backwards. Not like they haven’t written it down and spew it daily . Members of Congress no longer want separation of church and state. We are going backwards [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics