Christians Uncaring?

Phototoxin

I have been thinking a lot about things of a religous nature (as I do!) and have thought of a rather negative point which drives me further away from it. Essentially there are many many many horrors existing in our world and the only one I can see making any noise (perhaps more noise = less volume?) is the pro life / anti abortion crowd.
Now keep in mind I'm pro-life (as in to say I think that abortion is morally wrong and destroying a human life) but I wonder is that because if people aren't born they don't inherit original sin and thus do not require sanctification as the RCC (biggest supporters of pro-life movement) teaches that it's inherited at birth.
It's quite a skeptical, jaded, view but rarely do I see Christians doing things for sheer alutrism rather there is some agenda even if its as benign as awareness of Chirsitanity.

I'm also wondering with the view of 'the world' being fallen/evil/whatever that it leads to a rather nihilistic world view in that 'well there's really no point doing stuff as we'll be spending longer in heaven' and if this leads Chirstians to be less active than they should be.

the locust

I dont have much to back this up but I believe the majority of aid organisations to the poor, disease infected etc - are christian run/based efforts.
I also think the whole ethos is that a lot of stuff that 'real' christians do isn't preached from a pulpit like the pharisees - its unseen, shrouded in humility. There are heaps of christian around the world working dumps of countries caring for others rather themselves and will happily die in those places for what they believe they've been called to do.

Phototoxin

the locust wrote: »

I believe the majority of aid organisations to the poor are christian run efforts.
I also think the whole ethos is that a lot of stuff that 'real' christians do isn't preached from a pulpit like the pharisees - its unseen, shrouded in humility

That's what I'm wondering... as I've begun to see Chrisitanity as a form of Judaism essentially.. it has all the same elements just slightly different..

PDN

I see Christians very active in many forms of compassionate ministry. Think of organisations such as Oxfam, Christian Aid, the Samaritans, CAFOD, Tear Fund, Trocaire (sp?), World Vision, the Salvation Army, Dr Barnardos etc.

I was recently at a youth event in England attended by 28,000 young people. It was inspiring to see how passionately involved many of them were in initiatives such as Stop the Traffik - a campaign to halt people trafficking and the sexual exploitation of women.

Phototoxin, i don't want to come across as overly critical, but might I suggest that your unhappiness with the Catholic version of original sin is causing you to be a bit one-eyed in your view of Catholicism and Christianity in general? My impression is that the reason most Catholics (and Christians) are pro-life is simply because they see unborn children as the weakest and most vulnerable of humans, and therefore killing them to be pretty reprehensible.

Phototoxin

True but part of me is still skeptical - religion has caused me so much pain the last few years. It still does.

Húrin

Hey Phototoxin. Perhaps the reason why Christians only seem to make noise about abortion is because they are nearly alone in organising to oppose it. Christians are at work in secular organisations that campaign on other issues.

Fanny Cradock

Phototoxin wrote: »

I have been thinking a lot about things of a religous nature (as I do!) and have thought of a rather negative point which drives me further away from it. Essentially there are many many many horrors existing in our world and the only one I can see making any noise (perhaps more noise = less volume?) is the pro life / anti abortion crowd.
Now keep in mind I'm pro-life (as in to say I think that abortion is morally wrong and destroying a human life) but I wonder is that because if people aren't born they don't inherit original sin and thus do not require sanctification as the RCC (biggest supporters of pro-life movement) teaches that it's inherited at birth.
It's quite a skeptical, jaded, view but rarely do I see Christians doing things for sheer alutrism rather there is some agenda even if its as benign as awareness of Chirsitanity.

I'm also wondering with the view of 'the world' being fallen/evil/whatever that it leads to a rather nihilistic world view in that 'well there's really no point doing stuff as we'll be spending longer in heaven' and if this leads Chirstians to be less active than they should be.

I don't subscribe to Original Sin as the RCC understands it, so I'm not sure that it is a factor in my anti-abortion stance. My objection to abortion - something that has grown stronger in recent years - is three fold. I see probability of intelligent life arising being so the staggering improbable that it constitutes a miracle. On a personal level I have seen people have the hearts ripped out of them after the a still-birth or finding out they can't have children. Finally, there is the unborn child itself.

Sorry, I digress...

My experience of Christians doing good work is that they honestly are trying to make the world a better place. I've spoken and listened to quite a few people who have discussed in humility their work in places like Africa, and it is truly inspiring to hear how they continually face down the odds and devote their live to a cause - often resulting in a tangible cost to them. Furthermore, while they believe they are doing God's work, I don't see them doing anything as irresponsible as operating some food for conversions scheme. Is this true altruism? I believe it is.

I don't believe that I've encountered much in the way of Christian nihilism, but I do believe within Christianity there is an element of disregard given to the Earth and the environment (but generally not people). In a sentence the this disregard can be surmised as follows:"Well, we're only here for a little bit and then we're off to somewhere better". This perspective gives the world the same value as a house scheduled for demolition - there is no harm in putting in the windows and pissing in the corners.

I would strongly recommend you pick up a copy of Surprised by Hope by Bishop N.T. Wright. He gives this idea of the Earth being a way-station a thorough whipping while also successfully highlighting the need to be responsible stewards of the Earth and all who dwell on it. It's very encouraging stuff! If money is a bit short, you can get the thrust of his book from his talks. I believe this one is good (I'm on the precipice of exceeding my download limit so I can't say for sure if it's one if his better talks - the book is your best option, IMO).

prinz

Personally while there are many worthy causes and lobby groups protesting / campaigning against certain wrongs etc... I usually tend to stay clear of things like that myself. I don't feel the need to fight the good fight on some moral crusade by making noise. I prefer doing things on the personal level just normal everyday things, helping people if I think they need help, be it help carrying bags, giving people directions if they seem lost, even chatting to people for no reason other than to be friendly; the person behind the deli counter, at the till in a shop or in the takeaway, even clients of my employers anywhere. The amount of times I've heard 'you're the first person all day to say hello, how are you etc'. Especially with foreign workers here I find the slightest bit of interest in their home country/culture always brings a smile etc. It's the little things, but you'll never see it on the news

studiorat

PDN wrote: »

I see Christians very active in many forms of compassionate ministry. Think of organisations such as Oxfam, Christian Aid, the Samaritans, CAFOD, Tear Fund, Trocaire (sp?), World Vision, the Salvation Army, Dr Barnardos etc.

Oxfam is a Christian group? They say they are a secular group. Maybe they are secretly Christian? I know Oxfam Ireland are secular. But it's not unusual for a christian to hijack a cause to spread their own message.

I would agree with Prinz above and find that just treating people well is certainly a way to make everyday life a bit easier. Unfortunately both of the Christian groups I've worked with in the past two months have tried to duck out without paying. It would seem that spreading the word of God is more important than paying for the services that they request. And this is my main point, some Christians seem to think evangelising is actually more important.

Now, I'd be intrested in what P.Toxin did make of NT Wright. Wright seems to think and has stated that anyone who thinks a secular world is a good idea is some sort of baby killer. And thinks human rights should be secondary to the will of God.

Christians do not have the monopoly on anti-abortion, there are plenty of secular anti-abortion groups. But many Christians just like Wright like to use being anti-theist as equating a pro-abortion stance, it would seem it does two jobs at once, condemming secularism and displaying their morally superiour christian dogma. To me this would just seem to re-enforce the Christian's use of a persecution complex and their leaders use of the politics of fear to keep their congregations going.

Anyway, being anti-abortion is not a purely Christian thing and there are many atheists who are as anti abortion as the christians like to tell us they are. .

Here's a condensed list of some of the Christian Pro Choice Groups BTW.
(I've removed the Jewish groups)
American Baptist Churches-USA ,
American Ethical Union,
American Friends (Quaker) Service Committee,
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ),
Episcopal Church (USA),
Presbyterian Church (USA),
Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice,
Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints,
Unitarian Universalist Association,
United Church of Christ,
United Methodist Church,
United Synagogue for Conservative Judaism.

And Religious groups other than denominations:

Catholics for Free Choice,
Episcopal Women's Caucus,
Evagelicals for Choice,
Jewish Women International,
Lutheran Women's Caucus,
North American Federation of Temple Youth
Unitarian Universalist Women's Federation,
Women of Reform Judaism,
Women's American ORT,
Women's Caucus Church of the Brethren,
Women's League for Conservative Judaism.

So Abortion isn't really a religious issue, since both sides secular and religious both have conflicting points of view.

But as usual the propaganda machine that is the christian pulpits or particularly Mr. Wright will not tell their congregation that there are arguments on both sides. Only that they are right and infalliable and all others are wrong. Thereby using peoples fears and concerns to further the cause of Christanity.

Fanny Cradock

studiorat wrote: »

But it's not unusual for a christian to hijack a cause to spread their own message.

Careful! I'm going to direct you to the charter and suggest that you refrain from generalising.

studiorat wrote: »

Now my point, I'd be intrested in what P.Toxin did make of NT Wright. Wright seems to think anyone who thinks a secular world is a good idea is some sort of baby killer.

I've never seen him make such an assertion. Indeed, in the book I mentioned he goes as far as to suggest that theocracies have always ended in disaster.

studiorat wrote: »

Christians do not have the monopoly on anti-abortion, there are plenty of secular anti-abortion groups. But many Christians just like Wright like to use being anti-theist as equating a pro-abortion stance, it would seem it does two jobs at once, condemming secularism and displaying their morally superiour christian dogma. To me this would just seem to re-enforce the Christian's use of a persecution complex and their leaders use of the politics of fear to keep their congregations going.

Again, I'm not familiar with Wright expressing particularly negative views with regards to non-believers and abortion.

studiorat wrote: »

Anyway, being anti-abortion is not a purely Christian thing and there are many atheists who are as anti abortion as the christians like to tell us they are. .

Do you actually have a point? No one here has claimed that non-Christians aren't anti-abortion. This is very bizarre stuff, studiorat.

studiorat wrote: »

But as usual the propaganda machine that is the christian pulpits or particularly Mr. Wright will not tell their congregation that there are arguments on both sides. Only that they are right and infalliable and all others are wrong. Thereby using peoples fears and concerns to further the cause of Christanity.

Wright has gone on record saying that he thinks global debt and the systems that drive them are the primary moral issue, not abortion. I'm not aware of him particularly being pro-active in matters relating to abortion. Does he have an opinion on the issue? Yes! Does he express it? Yes! Does he have to inform presumably intelligent people that there exist other opinions than the anti-abortion perspective? Eh... no! When he has spoken of abortion, has also approached the matter in quite a more reasoned manner than you would have us believe. Read here for more on his opinions.

As for him using people’s fears, that is rather a sensational statement. You seem to be making a habit of them in this post. Again, one would imagine that his congregation are quite able to think for themselves. Indeed, robin has already reminded us that personal stance on matters like abortion is not necessarily defined by denominational membership. And if you have ever heard him speak then I think it’s rather scandalous to suggest he manipulators people in such a way. All in all, I’ve found Wright to preach an overwhelmingly positive message – predominately on Pauline matters.

Fanny Cradock

Just two quick points.

First, while it is highly possible that my memory may be faulty, I don't believe that the book in question once mentions abortion. Indeed, I've just had a look through the index and abortion doesn't appear. It's not really part of the topic.

Second, if you want to criticise Wright then be my guest. He is hardly above it. Amongst others, D.A Carson has already voiced concerns about some finer theological points. However, if you insist on doing so, I would appreciate it if you do it in another thread.

kelly1

Phototoxin wrote: »

....but I wonder is that because if people aren't born they don't inherit original sin and thus do not require sanctification as the RCC (biggest supporters of pro-life movement) teaches that it's inherited at birth.

That's news to me. Can you quote an RCC source for this? I would have thought original sin would be inherited at conception.

Phototoxin wrote: »

It's quite a skeptical, jaded, view but rarely do I see Christians doing things for sheer alutrism rather there is some agenda even if its as benign as awareness of Chirsitanity.

Certainly sounds jaded! What about groups like Trocaire, SVP, Br. Kevin's "soup kitchen", Fr. Peter McVerry, Franciscan Friars in Moyross etc.

Phototoxin wrote: »

I'm also wondering with the view of 'the world' being fallen/evil/whatever that it leads to a rather nihilistic world view in that 'well there's really no point doing stuff as we'll be spending longer in heaven' and if this leads Chirstians to be less active than they should be.

We, as Christians are called to be a light to the world and this means trying to bring peace and harmony to the lives of those around us. We must rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep. We must fight against the darkness. In the life of a follower of Jesus, there is no room for complacency.

God bless,
Noel.

PDN

studiorat wrote: »

Oxfam is a Christian group? They say they are a secular group. Maybe they are secretly Christian? I know Oxfam Ireland are secular. But it's not unusual for a christian to hijack a cause to spread their own message.

Who mentioned that Oxfam was a Christian group? I cited Oxfam as an example of Christians being active in compassionate ministry. One of the founding members of Oxfam was Canon Theodore Richard Milford. Others were Quakers. Another was Professor Gilbert Murray - a prominent humanist.

But, hey, your misrepresentation of my position is very minor compared to your unrecognisable characterisation of, and untruths about, NT Wright.

studiorat

PDN! A chara, since you mentioned Oxfam with so many other blatantly Christian organisations I thought I'd clairfy a point, to avoid confusion y'understand.

I've also included the statement by Wright I was refering to. Not my only issue with the man. Personally I think he comes over as some sort of Eckhart Tolle for Christians. Probably just the popularity of his books though...

Anyway's Mr.Wright's statement went as follows, from the pulpit BTW not in one of his "spiritual guides".

secular utopianism is based on a belief in an unstoppable human ability to make a better world, while at the same time it believes that we have the right to kill unborn children and surplus old people, and to play games with the humanity of those in between

When asked to substantiate this claim with some proof he was unable to, quelle suprise!! Sheer pulpit politics though.
For the record though I believe any pursuit of a utopia is a sterile past-time.


Moving on, it was the good Hurin who attracted my attention stating that

"Perhaps the reason why Christians only seem to make noise about abortion is because they are nearly alone in organising to oppose it."

Un-true I believe.

FC seemed to miss that point "Bizzarrely" enough. And stated pretty obviously that no-one did say non-christians are not anti-abortion or some such. It was Hurins point I was addressing.

To relate to the OP though I really do feel that Phototoxin's point quoted below is very accurate...

Phototoxin wrote: »

... rarely do I see Christians doing things for sheer alutrism rather there is some agenda even if its as benign as awareness of Chirsitanity.

I have absolutely no qualms about blatantly religious groups helping people in practical ways. What I do have issue with is precisely why they are doing this and how they often try to convert people when they are at their most vunerable. When I see the likes of the outreach work by Victory for instance I wonder exactly what the motivation is behind this work. Is it to save lives or to save souls? (especially their own in some cases)

Having discussed this at length with friends who do similar in secular fields, they tell me they don't care as long as the work gets done. However having witnessed attitudes of some "Christian" workers towards their clients I really do wonder what some of their motivations are.

not Victory workers btw

As a complete aside, re: FC's point about Christian nihilism and attitudes towards the enviornment. I believe the whole "subdue the plants and animals" thing in the bible is responsible for this point of view. Interestingly enough I have read arguments in the past that without this belief that maybe the industrial reveloution would not have taken place how and where it did.

BrianCalgary

Phototoxin wrote: »

It's quite a skeptical, jaded, view but rarely do I see Christians doing things for sheer alutrism rather there is some agenda even if its as benign as awareness of Chirsitanity.

I am involved in a group that goes to Guatemala twice a year from calgay in order to build houses and provide food, clothing, medical and school supplies for the children an dther families. The mission also runs two schools in Guatemala so that children may get an education.

The people that go are by and large Christian and I have never heard one of them preach to the people that they are helping.

All done out of love and caring. within our own city we have groups like: Inn from the Cold where homeless families are fed and given a warm bed in churches around the city (funny how only Christian churches and organisations get involved in this service); the Mustard Seed which feeds and houses the homeless at their facility downtown, the volunteers are Christian groups, I'm sure the Mustard Seed would take other groups if they so desired, but they don't desire).

There are two off the top of my head. Christians acting for the purpose of serving others less fortuanate.

PDN

studiorat wrote: »

PDN! A chara, since you mentioned Oxfam with so many other blatantly Christian organisations I thought I'd clairfy a point, to avoid confusion y'understand.

I must say that is the first time I've heard Dr Barnardo's and the Samaritans described as "blatantly Christian".

Anyway's Mr.Wright's statement went as follows, from the pulpit BTW not in one of his "spiritual guides".

I was on the verge of warning you for trolling with your Tolle comment, but on second thoughts, anyone who misinterprets "secular utopianism" as meaning "anyone who thinks a secular world is a good idea" is probably genuinely confused.

studiorat

PDN wrote: »

I must say that is the first time I've heard Dr Barnardo's and the Samaritans described as "blatantly Christian".

Tom Barnardo was Missionary and an Evangelical. And according to it's site...

Barnardo's derives its inspiration and values from the Christian faith.

The Samaritans were founded by a priest as far as I know, the name should give you a clue.

PDN wrote: »

I was on the verge of warning you for trolling with your Tolle comment, but on second thoughts, anyone who misinterprets "secular utopianism" as meaning "anyone who thinks a secular world is a good idea" is probably genuinely confused.

At the risk of going off topic, you'll have to elaborate on the second statement, I think you are being a bit too smart there or maybe you just missed Mr Wrights sarcasm in using the "utopianism" phrase in the first place. Heaven forbid a man of the cloth would get an auld dig in.

There's no difference in Tolle and Wright in my opinion. They are both professional spiritualists.

Fanny Cradock

I really don't care what your opinions on Tolle are, take 'em to the Spirituality forum and see how long they tolerate the demeaning overtones of your posts. Incidentally, I find that your interaction with people on this forum has become progressively more hostile over time. Please attempt to reel in whatever anger it is that fuels and infuses your posts.

PDN wrote: »

I was on the verge of warning you for trolling with your Tolle comment, but on second thoughts, anyone who misinterprets "secular utopianism" as meaning "anyone who thinks a secular world is a good idea" is probably genuinely confused.

And I thought that Wright was supposed to have said "anyone who thinks a secular world is a good idea is some sort of baby killer"! Oh dear, all this misrepresentation and and straw man is beginning to get out of hand.

SR wrote: »

As a complete aside, re: FC's point about Christian nihilism and attitudes towards the enviornment. I believe the whole "subdue the plants and animals" thing in the bible is responsible for this point of view. Interestingly enough I have read arguments in the past that without this belief that maybe the industrial reveloution would not have taken place how and where it did.

Or maybe, just maybe, it's how people choose to interpret a particular passage! Still, even allowing for this correction, I think it's an oversimplification of a rather complex and specific Christian eschatological perspective. But maybe non-believers and believers who don't share this perspective could make strange bedfellows in attempting to change opinions on the environment.

I know that some people found it mightly amusing, but well done to the RCC for actually making some attempts to address the issues of environmental damage.