We are thinking ahead for our monthly feature topics and thought we would use this forum to sound out some ideas. This is just one possible topic.
Why do some people consider religion to be a business? Is this being cynical? What do you think?
Regards
Susan Prior (editor of On Line Opinion)

In a word, yes, Susan. A good idea, but...

I think it should be put into world context, such as including the other not-for-profit "businesses" - NGOs, political parties, charities, etc.

The focus I feel, should be placed on the question of the organisation's sincerity of purpose versus it's pecuniary interests. Like, is the business there to support the cause or is the cause there to support the business?

And why just pick on religion? What about the other "enterprises" of altruism, such as Amnesty, Red Cross, Green Peace, etc. And, by consideration, are those organisations not really para-religions of a sort, but of a different colour?

Good thoughts Maximus... widen the scope a bit.

Susan... this is an important topic for sure.. even the narrow 'Religion is a business' one.

If you have seen 'Leap of Faith' with Steve Martin ... it kinda says it all. But the real value of such a movie, was at the end, where he knowingly and shamelessly prays for healing he know cannot come (because to him it is just a business) and.. amazingly..the boy is healed.. causing him to leave the business and re-think his whole life because he now KNOWS...that God will sometimes work even in spite of characters like himself.

The scriptures teach very clearly regarding false prophets:

"By their FRUIT you shall know them"

Any preacher who roles up in his latest ROLLS or similiar such toy, should be immediately scrutinized with the sharpest of scriptural razors.
Any person who advertises 'Miracle Rally' should be immediately consigned to the 'business' side of things, in the worst possible understanding of it.

But then, there are those like Sadu Sundar Singh, who'm God used wonderfully in healing.

The point of the genuinely spectacular/miraculous is to point people to Christ, and if it points people to the offering bowl or to a personality cult... SUSPECT !

Jesus demonstrated the inbreaking of the Kingdom of God.. but wherever he went, there were SOME people who wanted to 'franchise' Him... and use Him, and benefit from Him.

I've seen revivals hijacked by strong minded and skilful traditonal leaders who sought to steer the movement in such a way as to enhance their own position and consolidate their prestige. Sad... but true.

Religion can be a business in the West and in less westernized societies.

Look at Bennie Hinz, Oral Roberts, Kenneth Copeland.

Contrast their style and specially the content with that of Charles Swindoll, James Dobson. There is a noticable and important difference.

Religion is a business. All through Australian history the established churches have held vast assets that are not subject to tax. Most of Glebe was sold in 1974 when the landlord decided to sell their stock of slum housing. The vendor was the Anglican Church.

Nowadays the federal government expects that charitable institutions like churches will provide a social safety net for individuals denied government assistance for housing and income support.

About a third of all Victorian school children are educated in private schools operated by religious authorities. There is a decline in students attending government schools and an increase in enrolments at religious schools.

Although we supposedly live in a secular society its becoming clear that strident religious groups are very successfully lobbying the federal government to implement policies that will mould Australian society to reflect their world view.

I think it would make a worthy discussion topic.

I think it is a valid topic. The likelihood though is that it will quickly descend into another "mine is bigger than yours" argument. Or even "mine is the one-and-only", which tends to limit opportunities for constructive offerings.

Nevertheless, it is important enough, and is certain to generate some heat. To some people the very concept of "business" - of any kind - is anathema, which should add an extra dimension or two...

I think its a valid topic, because religion can be clearly shown
to be a business!

Think of the US bible belt, all the past scandals, where hundreds
of millions were involved. All those tv evangelists, people sending
money to them in huge amounts.

Recently when Opus Dei hit the news, there were many quotes that
they are worth 2.6 Billion $ and thats just a small offshoot cult
of the Catholic Church. What the Vatican itself, with all its
pomp and splendor, the Vatican Bank etc, is worth, is anyones guess.

I'm told that even the Singsong evangalists in Sydney generate
huge turnover each year.

Mother Teresa generated hundreds of millions of $ of donations.
Christopher Hitchins did an investigation, it seems that money
was never accounted for, some landed in the Vatican Bank, some
used for other purposes.

The debate should be, why should religions not be publicly
accountable for funds donated to them by the believing public?