Reflection for the weekend

For those who despair that things will ever get better and wait anxiously for someone, somewhere, to provide the necessary leadership out of the morass:

"Do your little bit of good where you are; it’s those little bits of good put together that overwhelm the world." - Desmond Tutu

Joining A Religion

The other side of the Pew research was to ask why people switched to what they are now. Again, let me share the top reasons for this:
** Catholic – Unaffiliated
42% just do not believe in God or religious teachings
** Catholic – Protestant
81% enjoy religious services & style of worship
62% felt called by God
** Protestant – Unaffiliated
39% just do not believe in God or religious teachings
** Protestant – Different Protestant
85% enjoy religious services & style of worship
50% felt called by God

Interestingly, at least to me, were the results of those folks who had not been brought up in a religious environment and had now joined a religious community. When the formerly unaffiliated were asked why: 74% said that they enjoy the religious services and style of worship. Further, of those raised unaffiliated - 54%are now in a religion [39% Protes; 6% Cath; 9% Other]; 51% attend services weekly; and 63% state they have strong faith.

In this age of debunking religion, it is amazing that people who had no religious involvement would make the switch to a person of faith.

I would encourage you to see the full results of the research at Pew Forum for Religion and Public Life, but, again, what do you think?

Leaving A Religion

At the end of April, the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life generated a lot comments when a new study detailing why people left their childhood religion - that is the one in which they were raised - and became unaffiliated or had switched to another religious tradition.

Most of headlines of the stories dealing with this study trumpeted the fact that many adults had switched religious affiliation. Frankly, as many people have commented, that is not really news. People have been switching religious traditions for quite a while. Those who have may or may not switch back to their childhood faith; we will not know.

Of interest to me in the report, however, are the reasons given for such switches. Let me share with you the top reasons in the categories:
** Catholic to Unaffiliated
71% just gradually drifted away
65% stopped believing in the religious teachings
56% unhappy with church's stand on abortion or homosexuality
** Catholic to Protestant
71% felt spiritual needs were not being met
70% found a religion they liked more
54% just gradually drifted away
50% stopped believing in the teachings
** Protestant to Unaffiliated
71% just gradually drifted away
50% stopped believing in the religious teachings
** Protestant to Different Protestant Faith
58% found religion they liked more
51% felt their spiritual needs were not being met

As I look at these reasons, there seems to be less active investigation of one's faith and more passive drifting expressed. One can ask, perhaps legitimately, how strong one's religious faith was if that person could just drift away and become nothing or anything else.

While I will look at additional findings from this study, I wonder, if you are one of those who are now involved in another religion, why did you change?

Is Religion Slipping Away?

The news has been filled with the results of surveys dealing with the religious life of the American people. Robert Putnam of Harvard University has looked specifically at the religious life of young adults.

Typically, in America, those who state that they have no religious affiliation, the "nones", ranges around 5-10%. From Putnam's study, however, the non-affiliate number is between 30-40%. That is a significant increase from the norm.

What do you think about this? What has happened on the American religious scene that has resulted in such a large segment of younger folks giving such a response? Is this a prelude to the final decline and fall of religious faith in America? Or, is it a good thing since it may indicate that people are thinking more seriously and taking more seriously their religious commitment?

Celebrity Ministers

At least since the First Great Awakening in this country with George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards holding forth, there have been ministers with celebrity status. It seems, though, that, from the advent of radio and television, the level of celebrity and the numbers of ministers having or seeking such celebrity has mushroomed.

I was reminded of this as I read about the recent Joel Osteen preaching engagement in New York City, held at the new Yankee Stadium. The event was even billed to focus attention on the message and the minister - An Evening of Hope With Joel and Victoria. Evidently, no one in New York needed to be told exactly who Joel and Victoria are. 40,000+ people paid $15 each to hear the wildly successful author and minister proclaim his message of hope. TBN - Trinity Broadcasting Network - filmed the evening and will get a lot of mileage for themselves from broadcasting it.

I wonder what people like Martin Luther would think about the "cult of celebrity" that has grown up around some ministers. I came across a quote from Luther, as he was defending his ministerial work, that may shed some light on what Luther's response would be:
And although I know and daily hear many people, who think slightingly of my poverty, and say that I write only little pamphlets and German sermons for the unlearned laity, this shall not disturb me. Would to God I had in all my life, with all the ability I have, helped one layman to be better! I would be satisfied, thank God, and be quite willing then to let all my little books perish.

The desire to help just one person be better defines true celebrity, I think. What think you?

Whom Would God Say To Torture?

Another layer of religious consideration has been added to the debate on torture. The folks at Pew released the results of a poll taken during mid-April looking at people's opinions on the appropriateness of torture and linking those opinions with religious affiliation and church attendance. You notice, I am sure, that those who go to church more frequently and those who identify themselves as evangelicals are more likely to say torture can be justified.

I am not an expert on interrogation. Many of the experts I have read, though, say that torture is not an effective way to gain credible information - despite how it is shown on TV and in movies. The one being tortured talks; it is just that the tortured tend to say anything to make it stop, not necessarily the truth.

When I saw this Pew report, I wondered about the reasons used by these folks to back up their opinion. Why did 49% of the general population and 62% of the white evangelical Protestants and 54% of those who attend church at least weekly say torture can be justified? Why did 55% of those who are unaffiliated and 53% of those who rarely attend services say torture most likely cannot be justified?

What do you think - either about the use of torture or about the response of the religious folks to it?

The Market Value of a Minister

Riverside Church in New York has been embroiled in controversy and been the object of additional interest over the last few weeks after the details of the compensation package for their new minister were made public. The new minister will receive approximately $600,000 in total compensation from the church.

Some within that church, and many outside of it, say that no minister should make such a large sum. Pointing to the poverty of Jesus and the early disciples and the call of the gospel to minister to those in need rather than storing up treasures for yourself on earth, these critics suggest that the church is wrong to pay this.

As a minister, I would not begrudge a good salary to anyone serving a church. That said, I have never been offered nor received anything close to this amount. In fact, the monthly housing allowance he will receive is about what my annual compensation was in the first church I served as minister.

This controversy does provide a way of reflecting on this: What is a "fair market value" for a minister? How does a church determine this? In other fields, the value of a CEO or an athlete is based on how much value that person provides for the company or the team. How could that be ascertained for a minister?

In conversations with churches in different parts of the country through the years, I have heard various rationales for determining the compensation level for the minister - who might have been me should the conversations continued. Some churches have been intentional that the minister would make less than the median income of the church - to make sure the pastor is appropriately humble. Others have based the minister's pay on other criteria, such as: the average teacher's salary or the school superintendent's salary or the amount paid to the circuit judges.

What do you think the worth of a minister is? How should that be compensated?