The church should have nothing to decide here. It's not their decision!!

diver dan,

So, you think the liberal arm of the Christian Church has failed by being a part of this world and not of it.

The only specific example of this that you give, however, is its softened stance (and sometimes, acceptance) of homosexuality. But I could say the same thing about its rejection of slavery, the acceptance of evolution, and the less-racist stance that it holds nowadays.

Would you consider these, too, to be a sign of its “crumbling moral decline”?

<<If you need further example of its crumbling moral decline, look no further than an embrace of homosexuality … the Catholic Church has been rocked to its core … by pedophilia.>>

Firstly, you have not yet demonstrated that homosexuality, or the acceptance of it, is in any way a sign, or form, of moral decline (or deserving of contempt). Indeed, you have spent much of your time artfully dodging my questions there.

Secondly, while the child sex abuse (not all paedophiles offend) in the Catholic Church is indeed terrible, I see no reason to believe that this is a recent phenomenon. In fact, it was likely worse before it came to the public’s attention, and extends back to the beginnings of the Catholic Church.

More to the point, how is child sex abuse related to the liberal arm of the Christian Church? Are you actually claiming that they are a cause of it?

<<discussion of the radical gay rights movement, and its sinister encroachment of our society, is not the point of this article.>>

So, why did you mention it then

Sorry, diver dan, of course that should be:

So, you think the liberal arm of the Christian Church has failed by being ‘of this world’, rather than just in it.

But since I’m here, I would like to add that I don’t think the liberal arm of the Church is responsible for the decline in religious affiliation, if that’s what you think. I think education is, and that the liberal arm of the Christian Church is a response to this, in order to remain relevant in an increasingly tolerant and educated society.

As I pointed out earlier, Christianity has only progressed when not doing so would mean the end of it, and the more liberal churches understand this. Unfortunately for them, however, I would agree with Dawkins' prediction that this new brand 'sophisticated' theology - which has emerged as a response to, and as the result of, an increasingly educated and tolerant society - is also doomed.

AJP

AJP

I think to carry this on we need to clarify what you and I consider to be the definition of the "church".

I consider the liberal church as meaning established and traditional denominations.
Then there are Christian sects such as Mormon and others.
And finally the loosely connected evangelicals; some of which, at a certain radical point, can be classified as sects.

Of these three definitions, at any given time, some will be either increasing in popularity, or declining in popularity.

Presently, the evangelicals are romping onwards and upwards, while the Liberal church flounders.

This is an important point when discussing the fate of the Christian church.

So you argue that the decline in the Christian church, as expressed in the census, is due to an educated public.
You need to define "educated".

There appears to be an anomaly between the census report and the increasing numbers of evangelical Christians, don't you think. (As an aside issue).

I stand firmly behind my theory of the declining state of the traditional Liberal church, as a direct consequence of accepting defeat in the face of a relentless attack by the gay rights lobby, through its propaganda wing, which has pushed various barrows along the path of time, specifically aimed at destabilising societal moral norms, using as its main armoury, the acceptance as equals of homosexuals, demanding equality and acceptance of their sexual fetishes.

A Christian church which supports immorality, will fail. The Catholic church (and other Liberal branches of course), the flag bearer of The Liberal church, is an abysmal failure as a church of the Christian God, as a direct consequence of homosexuality and its evil influence, through its entire structure!

If that is what you term an educated public response to that particular state of affairs, I agree!

Gone the way of the world?

I branded them as NGO's. they have become schemers and scammers for money!
Another subject outside this one

AJP.
<discussion of the radical gay rights movement, and its sinister encroachment of our society, is not the point of this article.>>

So, why did you mention it then?

Simply because it has supplanted itself as societies new religion.

An appropriate question for the census paper would be:

Are you a gay rights supporter or a Christian? Tick only one box!

Then let's study the census outcome re religion.

diver dan,

Your clarification of what you are referring to when you speak of the Christian Church (i.e. organised Christianity) is close enough to what I understood your view to be, and I don’t think your clarification changes anything.

<<Of these three definitions, at any given time, some will be either increasing in popularity, or declining in popularity.>>

Agreed.

<<Presently, the evangelicals are romping onwards and upwards, while the Liberal church flounders.>>

If you’re just talking about the election of Donald Trump, sure. But the evangelicals in the US have always had immense power and political influence. That power, however, is actually declining. In the US, we see this in the ‘rise of the nones’, the legalisation of same-sex marriage, and the growing and ironic cries of persecution coming from the evangelicals in the US. This decline in power is only happening faster in other Western countries.

I’m not sure of the exact state of the Liberal Church (predominantly the Catholics and the Anglicans), but I don’t think their attendance is growing. I suspect all that sophisticated theology has managed to do is slow the decline in church attendance. The theology of people like Peter Selleck and Karen Armstrong just doesn’t seem to attract new members the way the evangelical churches can (provided the the individual is uneducated). It’s too vague. People in times of strife (and let’s face it, that’s usually when God reveals himself to people) yearn for a personal god whom they feel is looking after them, not some undefinable, apophatic mystery.

<<So you argue that the decline in the Christian church, as expressed in the census, is due to an educated public.>>

Yes, that’s likely one reason, if not the main reason.

<<You need to define "educated".>>

Broadly speaking, we know more now than we used to. We understand that intolerance and discrimination are detrimental to societies (well, most of us do, anyway); we have a better grasp of science, limiting our need explain everything away with “God did it”; our formal education levels are also higher.

Continued…