It’s not something I’m bragging about, but this is surprising. In response to my Times Union blog post on why church gun giveaways do not send a postive message, Breitbart.com sited my blog post.
The headline reads, “Pastor Quotes Daily Kos, Apostle Paul Against AR-15 Giveaway”: Continue Reading…
As I started my daily read of newspapers, I was shocked (well, disappointed) to learn that our region was one of the least religious regions in America. A new Gallup poll found that, “Only 26 percent of those surveyed in this area say they are very religious, which puts the Albany-Schenectady-Troy region in ninth place among the least religious of the 189 areas polled.” Is this a situation when ‘religious’ isn’t religious?
What is frustrating about this statistic is that as you ride through the Albany region is that there are four to six churches per town. In my town, Ballston Spa, New York there are six churches in a one mile radius. That is a tight area with a lot of churches. Those churches represent a range of Christian sects: Baptist, Presbyterian, non-denominational, Methodist, Episcopal, and Catholic. That doesn’t even count smaller non-Christian groups.
With so many churches in this area, you’d think that if you build it, people will come. That was true 50 years ago when returning men from War World II were looking to join a civic community were church attendance was expected.
The trouble with using a term ‘religious’ in a poll is that the word “religious” is seen as a pejorative term. As another Times Union article points out, that if the poll used the word “spiritual” the results may have been different. And, using both terms of “spiritual” and “religious” would most likely yield a higher religious or spiritual affiliations. Case in point, a Rasmussen poll found that 54% of American adults feel at least “somewhat connected” to their local church. In addition, 34% said they are “very connected.” The poll did not ask respondent’s religious affiliation. Church connection is another way to measure religious affiliation.
In 2013, ‘religious’ isn’t religious any more. More accurately, the term ‘religious’ carries many negative connotations. Even the term “religious conservatives” carries a reactive wince to many. How many times do we hear the term, “religious liberals”? Almost never. Many would see that term a contradiction but it is not. Most in the media just drop ‘religious’ .
The word religious is not inherently negative, but we Christians and religious folk alike must turn the tide of the negative sediment. In addition, news outlets and polling groups need to understand that they are using outdated and inaccurate terminology. We continue to be a “religious” nation without using the word “religious”.
I stopped in at the Albany Times Union this week and had lunch with one of the editors there. I have developed some great friendships with a number of reporters and staff. I bumped into Mark McGuire.No not that Mark McQwire but the Times Union’s Mark McGuire. We chatted about sports, college, and life. Then, he showed me this Facebook picture making the rounds:
At first, I thought it was a fake and said, “That has to be a joke. I mean, that’s not real. Who would make something like that?”
What confused me were the phrases “emo’s”, “high fullutent”, and “sport’s nut’s”. Those are typically not the type of people who are persecuted by ugly self-righteous Christians. That just doesn’t make sense. Plus, the incorrect use of the possessive (‘s).
If real, this type of ugly proselytizing is not real evangelism. To use offensive words to persecute folks and then tell them to repent and that they need Jesus is just ugly. Jesus reserved his harshest words not for sinners, but for the religious hypocrites.
This Fred Phelps type of tactic is not about turning people to Jesus but is an attempt to taunt and bring attention to the protestor.
What’s the back story on this? Anyone else seen this picture of Facebook?
My good “in” with the Albany Times Union through my blog has produced several fruitful friendships. One them is Kristi Gustafson Barlette, social media strategist and staff writer, who writes about culture, trends, and relationships. Kristi interviewed me for an article on the benefits of premarital counseling for engaged couples:
Counseling. That one little word often conjures up images of trouble — either for you independently or as a couple. Many people believe turning to a counselor means you are weak or cannot handle life on your own. But, in reality, counseling — especially the premarital variety — can help you better understand yourself and your partner.
“Counselors are not just there to point out the things that are bad; they are also there for reinforcement and to point out what’s good,” says Amy Eisinger, an associate editor with WeddingChannel.com. “It’s not like you are going to discover this earth-shattering issue. Pre-wedding counseling is going to help you strengthen your relationship; it’s not going to break you up.”
…
Rev. Alan Rudnick, minister at the First Baptist Church in Ballston Spa, requires everyone he marries to go through premarital counseling. Couples meet with Rudnick three or four times before the wedding and take an in-depth look at their relationship. He is not a judge, and his church is not a drive-by wedding chapel. Instead, Rudnick establishes relationships with couples — and often with their parents, as well — that can last long after the duo slip bands on one another’s ring finger. “It lets us sit down and make the relationship qualitative, instead of quantitative,” Rudnick says.
Related articles
You must be logged in to post a comment.