Freedom of speech / religion

[frankcor]

Sometimes I have to write to keep my head from exploding:

www.uticaod.com/viewpoints/x1416197146/Your-views-Letters-to-the-Editor

This was in response to a guest column. The OD doesn't post the syndicated columns on their web site so here's a link to the original author's blog:

www.firstamendmentcenter.org/commentary.aspx?id=21333

[dgriffin]

Hmmmm. Touchy subject. But that's the definition of a controversy. You're right to see the irony in a free-speech organization applauding the court's decision to ban kinds of public prayer.

But my stance has always been separatist. I don't like the mixture of any public institutions and any kind of religion. It leaves open the door to regulation. If we say, OK, let's be reasonable, a little bit here and there, like a bended knee, then we potentially allow the government to step in and say "only 41 degrees of bend, 42 degrees is a misdemeanor."

I've accepted that our society at one time had a mostly Christian influence and manger scenes bothered very few, and that today the opposite seems to be true. Societies change, and never to my liking. I can argue that the American public, who are overwhelmingly conservative, are having their values supplanted by a minority of liberal philistines. The truth of that doesn't bring voters to the gates to defeat the Huns.

So, here we are. If we just separated the sports and religion, we could get on with it and play a better football game, and then go home and go about our daily lives ACTING like a spiritual people instead of looking for ways to advertise it at a football game.

IMHO, of course.

[concerned]

We will see more and more of this challenge as the Christian Fundamentalist Moverment continues to gain more and more members. Many people are moving toward this new Christian religion denomination and leaving behind mainline Protestant denominations. Many Catholic people are also moving into this new Christian denomination. I am not sure why but I think a lot of it is because they want a stricter interpretation of scripture but do not want to be told what they have to believe. For many of them divine relevation of scripture is still open plus they get this feel good approach to religion. The I am saved by Jesus is the main concept rather than baptism is our entrance into Christ and his church.
This movement is almost like repeating the history of the church from the original split in England and then the continual spliting up into other various sects based on there interpretation of scripture and tradition. Each saying that they hold the Truth. These fundamentalist Christian's even do not move toward religious unity.

[dgriffin]

Concerned, from the experiences of acquaintances, I would add that many are embracing what you refer to as new denominations because they feel the experience is more immediate to their needs. Many of the new churches preach and utilize scripture and support each other in a manner that some feel helps people to live their daily lives. This would be the Church as Family, as opposed to the Church as Institution. The "new" churches often have activities that involve young families while encouraging cross generation communication. In fact, off the top of my head, the only places I hear of these days where younger and older couples are encouraged to interact are in the churches ... some of them.

I seem to not be able to get off the mailing list of my local diocese's monthly newspaper, and I look through it every great once in a while. I won't pick on the "church of my heritage," but I'm always left with the feeling that all the mainline denominations are more concerned with their hierarchy and structure, rather than their flocks.

I do see a place for the Church as Institution, and without it the world would be in worse trouble.