I haven’t heard the Russell Moore interview yet; but I will listen to it today. I’m wondering if Dr Moore & Charlie touch on the interview Moore gave the NYT “Anglican” blogger (sorry, my bias. The reverend lady may be a professed Anglican but she represents a schismatic faction that isn’t recognized by the Anglican Communion, our offici…
I haven’t heard the Russell Moore interview yet; but I will listen to it today. I’m wondering if Dr Moore & Charlie touch on the interview Moore gave the NYT “Anglican” blogger (sorry, my bias. The reverend lady may be a professed Anglican but she represents a schismatic faction that isn’t recognized by the Anglican Communion, our official group.) In the interview Dr Moore justified Evangelical paranoia by stating that Evangelicals are exercised because “people” want to do away with organized religion, a ridiculous comment doing a lot of heavy lifting. No-one with any real political power in any party in the US is suggesting getting rid of organized religion. And a major religious coalition getting their knickers in a twist because Secular Bob on the platform formerly known as Twitter needs to grow up.
I think I read that interview. I have to say, reading comments on NYT does give the impression there are a lot of people with disdain for organized religion and would welcome any diminishing of their power/influence. Maybe I notice, because I’m one of them.
I think South Park put it well in one of their episodes involving Mormonism. The kid who was telling one of the main characters about Mormonism didn't really care much about the fact that the founding of Mormonism was a scam - but more how it helped his family to be a family and to live good charitable lives. That is religion at its best.
If you are of a mainline denomination you might think that the Book of Mormon was written by a human with an agenda without divine inspiration. Some of us feel that way about the Old and New Testaments and the Koran (among other "Holy" books).
At the end of the day, under the American Constitution, what religion you are shouldn't matter any more to government than what color socks you wear. But there are those who believe in certain religions that would make it so that it does matter. I am sure that is where any "disdain" you feel comes from.
Yes we agree, I think. I feel disdain for people who feel morally superior to others, based in their religious teachings or even just their religious identity (most self-identified Christians I know couldn’t tell me where they go to church, because they don’t), and I also feel disdain for people who expect others to adhere to their religious beliefs in the secular world.
I think most religions start with sincere beliefs favoring goodness. But the message is inevitably hijacked for power agendas. People have a powerful need to explore spirituality; I think of it like sex - keep it to yourself and do it in private.
Now my brain is trying to figure out how to pronounce cilantrotacy. I'd propose cilantromacy instead, but that sounds like someone trying to do dark magic with cilantro.
If somebody has time to be active in the NYT comments section, I would propose that they don't have enough to do and it's a safe assumption that they have no power/influence.
Sure, but -- forgive me -- yours is one opinion among hundred millions in this country. And there’s no-one carrying water for you in Congress or the WH, where the current incumbent is particularly devout and very public about it.
Christians’ rewards are in the afterlife. We’re not supposed to care about popularity contests in the temporal world. But if indeed the popularity contests matter, then maybe Evangelicals like Dr Moore need to evaluate why people are turning away from their rigid, sexist, misogynistic, at-times-hateful beliefs that split families. The answer probably isn’t “be more biblical.”
Yes, what you describe is reminiscent of many minority perspectives that are nonetheless governing our public life. Most people want gun control, more reproductive rights, national basic healthcare, help with childcare expenses, help with elder care, etc. Regardless of popular support, it’s clear we will never have those things. Religion likewise has an invisible cloak of impunity and immunity from scrutiny regarding their public influence; politics from the pulpit is supposed to be taboo under our tax laws, but it goes on with obvious awareness of impunity.
I don’t know anyone advocating state coercion to shut down religion. But I do question, for example, the favorable treatment regarding taxation, in some of these mega money machines using the cloak or religiosity to avoid paying for the commons that they enjoy.
As do I. I have no problem with a nonprofit tax exemption for one church building and pastor's home but these millions of acres and monster campuses that take and take and take public services without paying one dime of property or income tax has gone beyond acceptable imho.
It’s a minefield. I’ve never seen the numbers -- so I could be wrong -- but I’m betting there are far more small churches/non-profits that take in less than $300,000 annually than there are mega churches. Most mainline Protestant churches are probably at the $300k level. And in my state, we pay property taxes.
That seems likely, that the mega churches awash in money are unrepresentative of the majority of congregations. But they do seem to have an outsize influence on the culture wars, etc.
I hadn’t considered property taxes. I wonder how many states send property tax bills to churches. Good point.
I haven’t heard the Russell Moore interview yet; but I will listen to it today. I’m wondering if Dr Moore & Charlie touch on the interview Moore gave the NYT “Anglican” blogger (sorry, my bias. The reverend lady may be a professed Anglican but she represents a schismatic faction that isn’t recognized by the Anglican Communion, our official group.) In the interview Dr Moore justified Evangelical paranoia by stating that Evangelicals are exercised because “people” want to do away with organized religion, a ridiculous comment doing a lot of heavy lifting. No-one with any real political power in any party in the US is suggesting getting rid of organized religion. And a major religious coalition getting their knickers in a twist because Secular Bob on the platform formerly known as Twitter needs to grow up.
I think I read that interview. I have to say, reading comments on NYT does give the impression there are a lot of people with disdain for organized religion and would welcome any diminishing of their power/influence. Maybe I notice, because I’m one of them.
Disdain. No. Disregard. Maybe.
I think South Park put it well in one of their episodes involving Mormonism. The kid who was telling one of the main characters about Mormonism didn't really care much about the fact that the founding of Mormonism was a scam - but more how it helped his family to be a family and to live good charitable lives. That is religion at its best.
If you are of a mainline denomination you might think that the Book of Mormon was written by a human with an agenda without divine inspiration. Some of us feel that way about the Old and New Testaments and the Koran (among other "Holy" books).
At the end of the day, under the American Constitution, what religion you are shouldn't matter any more to government than what color socks you wear. But there are those who believe in certain religions that would make it so that it does matter. I am sure that is where any "disdain" you feel comes from.
Yes we agree, I think. I feel disdain for people who feel morally superior to others, based in their religious teachings or even just their religious identity (most self-identified Christians I know couldn’t tell me where they go to church, because they don’t), and I also feel disdain for people who expect others to adhere to their religious beliefs in the secular world.
I think most religions start with sincere beliefs favoring goodness. But the message is inevitably hijacked for power agendas. People have a powerful need to explore spirituality; I think of it like sex - keep it to yourself and do it in private.
And some people also believe that cilantro tastes good. That doesn't mean they're in favor of instituting some cilantroctacy, or eliminating oregano.
I've been playing too much D&D because I read that as cilantromancy. Now I'm off to summon a burrito.
I roll to disbelieve.
Critical miss. You take 2d8 picante damage.
Too much D&D or too many burritos?
[Insert pic of, "Why not both?"]
Now my brain is trying to figure out how to pronounce cilantrotacy. I'd propose cilantromacy instead, but that sounds like someone trying to do dark magic with cilantro.
I’d vote for a basilocracy, myself. We may have to rumble.
Nothing beats a chilliocracy 🌶️.
It was supposed to be "cilantrocracy," but Swype doesn't seem to think the second "c" belongs, there. A sign they're in on the conspiracy?
If somebody has time to be active in the NYT comments section, I would propose that they don't have enough to do and it's a safe assumption that they have no power/influence.
One could make the same suggestion about the comments section here, I suppose.
I'm active in both - I like the ability to have a rational discourse about the items that are presented.
I'm not sure what power/influence has to do with discussing ideas and articles.
Thanks for saying what I was thinking. I wasn’t sure I understood the message.
Sure, but -- forgive me -- yours is one opinion among hundred millions in this country. And there’s no-one carrying water for you in Congress or the WH, where the current incumbent is particularly devout and very public about it.
Christians’ rewards are in the afterlife. We’re not supposed to care about popularity contests in the temporal world. But if indeed the popularity contests matter, then maybe Evangelicals like Dr Moore need to evaluate why people are turning away from their rigid, sexist, misogynistic, at-times-hateful beliefs that split families. The answer probably isn’t “be more biblical.”
Yes, what you describe is reminiscent of many minority perspectives that are nonetheless governing our public life. Most people want gun control, more reproductive rights, national basic healthcare, help with childcare expenses, help with elder care, etc. Regardless of popular support, it’s clear we will never have those things. Religion likewise has an invisible cloak of impunity and immunity from scrutiny regarding their public influence; politics from the pulpit is supposed to be taboo under our tax laws, but it goes on with obvious awareness of impunity.
Right but welcoming the diminution of organized religion is different than advocating for state coercion to accomplish that objective.
Well, “do away with organized religion,” “get rid of organized religion” imply a degree of state coercion, given that religious freedom is protected.
Convincing people to turn away from organized religion doesn’t seem to imply any sort of state coercion.
I don’t know anyone advocating state coercion to shut down religion. But I do question, for example, the favorable treatment regarding taxation, in some of these mega money machines using the cloak or religiosity to avoid paying for the commons that they enjoy.
As do I. I have no problem with a nonprofit tax exemption for one church building and pastor's home but these millions of acres and monster campuses that take and take and take public services without paying one dime of property or income tax has gone beyond acceptable imho.
It’s a minefield. I’ve never seen the numbers -- so I could be wrong -- but I’m betting there are far more small churches/non-profits that take in less than $300,000 annually than there are mega churches. Most mainline Protestant churches are probably at the $300k level. And in my state, we pay property taxes.
Which state is that? A quick search is turning up the general trend that Churches are immune from property taxes.
Maryland. Payable to my county. I’m sure we’re assessed at a lower rate, since I got my property tax bill for my home, which is considerably more.
this link has some details. Specifically around page 11.
https://dat.maryland.gov/Documents/File07_Exemption_Overview_9_29_14.pdf
Sounds like Maryland is much more strict on exemptions, but that some do exist.
That seems likely, that the mega churches awash in money are unrepresentative of the majority of congregations. But they do seem to have an outsize influence on the culture wars, etc.
I hadn’t considered property taxes. I wonder how many states send property tax bills to churches. Good point.