Pope warns: West seems 'tired' of faith

Donatello

(CWN) As he celebrated the Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday, April 21, Pope Benedict XVI asked whether Western society has lost interest in the Christian faith that shaped its culture.

The people of the Western world—of what was once known as Christendom—now seem to be “to a large extent a people of unbelief and distance from God,” the Pope said. “Is t perhaps the case that the West, the heartlands of Christianity, are tired of their faith?”

Despite the weakness of the West today, the Pope said, Christians can take courage from “shining examples of faith.” He mentioned in particular Pope John Paul II, whose beatification will take place on May 1. But the late Pope is not alone, he said, calling attention to all the saints. “Even today there are people who through their faith and love give hope to the world,” he said.

One of the comments below that story reads:

Pope Benedict asks are the people of the Western Church tired and have they lost interest in the faith? The answer is undoubtedly yes and it’s because for the most part the shepherds have allowed the flock to wander away, persuaded by flash and glitter of other fields. They do not teach the “faith”. They teach attendance if they teach anything at all. The shepherd can go though all the motions he wants if the sheep don’t understand, they wont stay. The Church needs teachers who believe what they teach and preachers who believe what they preach. Look around you, do you see the tiredness.

Jarndyce

I don't think it's a case of the West being 'tired' of their faith. Rather, it's more the case that they realise that the faith of which they were expected to inherit is nonsensical fairytale-like rubbish and therefore they reject it rather than grow tired of it.

What I am tired of is that vile little scrote talking as though he has any real authority or credibility.

alex73

Jarndyce wrote: »

I don't think it's a case of the West being 'tired' of their faith. Rather, it's more the case that they realise that the faith of which they were expected to inherit is nonsensical fairytale-like rubbish and therefore they reject it rather than grow tired of it.

What I am tired of is that vile little scrote talking as though he has any real authority or credibility.

Thats your opinion,,, When I went to look into the "fairy-tale" to really understand my faith I found it very real and very living. But the catholic Church has serious issues, Many priests and Bishops did not serve it well, but the bad example of some does not mean the central truths of my faith are any less real. Christ did rise of the dead and that fact alone has us talking 2000 years later, he does exist. If we want to listen to him, that's our free choice. There were those who rejected him 2000 years ago, and there are those who reject him today.

Jarndyce

alex73 wrote: »

Thats your opinion,,, When I went to look into the "fairy-tale" to really understand my faith I found it very real and very living. But the catholic Church has serious issues, Many priests and Bishops did not serve it well, but the bad example of some does not mean the central truths of my faith are any less real. Christ did rise of the dead and that fact alone has us talking 2000 years later, he does exist. If we want to listen to him, that's our free choice. There were those who rejected him 2000 years ago, and there are those who reject him today.

Indeed there were. The difference, however, is that your Church put those people to gruesome deaths up until as recently as a couple of hundred years ago.

You say you found your faith very real and very living. I have no doubt that you sincerely believe that. However, that has no bearing on the truth of the subject of your belief.

hinault

Donatello wrote: »

(CWN) As he celebrated the Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday, April 21, Pope Benedict XVI asked whether Western society has lost interest in the Christian faith that shaped its culture.

The people of the Western world—of what was once known as Christendom—now seem to be “to a large extent a people of unbelief and distance from God,” the Pope said. “Is t perhaps the case that the West, the heartlands of Christianity, are tired of their faith?”

Despite the weakness of the West today, the Pope said, Christians can take courage from “shining examples of faith.” He mentioned in particular Pope John Paul II, whose beatification will take place on May 1. But the late Pope is not alone, he said, calling attention to all the saints. “Even today there are people who through their faith and love give hope to the world,” he said.

One of the comments below that story reads:

There are 2.2 billion Christians throughout the world.
I don't have a breakdown of the numbers in Western society.

But history shows us that Christianity and adherence to it has ebbed and flowed throughout time.
Ireland re-evangelised Europe in the 6th and 7th centuries - when Christendom became dormant throughout Europe.
Christianity flourished from those Irish missionaries once again.

We could well be going through a time when Christianity is ebbing but it will flow again for sure.

alex73

Jarndyce wrote: »

Indeed there were. The difference, however, is that your Church put those people to gruesome deaths up until as recently as a couple of hundred years ago.

You say you found your faith very real and very living. I have no doubt that you sincerely believe that. However, that has no bearing on the truth of the subject of your belief.

What happened a couple of hundreds years ago (by all faiths no just Christian) is not because Christ said... Go out and teach the Good news and kill those who don't believe. I mean do we say Germany today should not exist or be respected because of WWII?

Look at the central message of Christ and how the apostles worked after his death.

Keylem

Wasn't this the case throughout the Old Testament? God made a covenant, man broke it, reconciled with God, broke it again, etc. History repeats itself over and over. Faith has always been blowing hot and cold, eventually society will get 'tired' of the world and it's wiles and return to the faith agan.

Irish_Elect_Eng

Perhaps it would have been more accurate to say that the educated people of the world have grown tired of their church, I know many people of faith that do not attend their church any more as it has little to offer them. In many ways they do not want to be associated with the failings and trappings of the church, while they retain their basic faith in a Christian God.

It seemed to me that the Pope was pointing at the flock and saying "bad sheep" rather than pointing at both the flock and the Shepard's and saying "we are all failing" If the Church is serious about renewal,it is about time that they started, just like any organisational change, the message must come from the top and it must be clear and sincere.

alex73

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

Perhaps it would have been more accurate to say that the educated people of the world have grown tired of their church, I know many people of faith that do not attend their church any more as it has little to offer them. In many ways they do not want to be associated with the failings and trappings of the church, while they retain their basic faith in a Christian God.

It seemed to me that the Pope was pointing at the flock and saying "bad sheep" rather than pointing at both the flock and the Shepard's and saying "we are all failing" If the Church is serious about renewal,it is about time that they started, just like any organisational change, the message must come from the top and it must be clear and sincere.

Educated you mean what?? The problem is that too many people are not educated in their faith. They take exception with a part of faith (say church's moral teaching) and reject all that faith has to offer. Many well educated people are also very religious. I meet people with Atheist/Agnostic opinions all the time who know practically nothing about Christ, have never read the bible, and yet are quick to say the Church and its teachings are a Fairytale (Church being religion in general).

Jarndyce

Approximately 95% of the National Academy of Sciences are atheist. What is your explanation for these blasphemous heathens?

I believe that it generally follows from proper education and rational thinking that one won't be inclined to believe in bronze age superstition. There are always exceptions of course, such as Francis Collins. Similarly, you will find scientists working on Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme who believe in djinns and the like. But generally speaking, education and rationality result in an emancipation from superstition.

alex73

Jarndyce wrote: »

Approximately 95% of the National Academy of Sciences are atheist. What is your explanation for these blasphemous heathens?

I believe that it generally follows from proper education and rational thinking that one won't be inclined to believe in bronze age superstition. There are always exceptions of course, such as Francis Collins. Similarly, you will find scientists working on Pakistan's nuclear weapons programme who believe in djinns and the like. But generally speaking, education and rationality result in an emancipation from superstition.

Ireland does not have a National Academy of Sciences.

antiskeptic

Jarndyce wrote: »

Approximately 95% of the National Academy of Sciences are atheist. What is your explanation for these blasphemous heathens?

That NAS represents an elite (with an obvious question being raised as to how one becomes a member of that elite). A more representitive sample of what scientists believe might be extracted from Nature's 1998 (iirc) survey of 1000 American scientists in which ca. 40% said they believed in a hereafter. You can bet of the rest, the majority would be agnostics leaving but a small percentage of atheists.

What's your explanation for so many believing / fence sitting scientists?

Jarndyce

antiskeptic wrote: »

That NAS represents an elite (with an obvious question being raised as to how one becomes a member of that elite). A more representitive sample of what scientists believe might be extracted from Nature's 1998 (iirc) survey of 1000 American scientists in which ca. 40% said they believed in a hereafter. You can bet of the rest, the majority would be agnostics leaving but a small percentage of atheists.

What's your explanation for so many believing / fence sitting scientists?

Firstly, I never said that Ireland has a National Academy of Sciences and I'm quite confused as to why you even made that comment.

As for your point in relation to the 'obvious question being raised as to how one becomes a member of that elite', I should first say (flippant though it may be) that this skepticism is amusing in light of your username! Your username does however explain your ignorance of how these eminent scientists attain such distinguished positions, for it suggests (if it suggests anything) that you are not scientifically minded.

In relation to the Nature survey, indeed it says that at least 60% of randomly selected US scientists expressed doubt or disbelief. Bear in mind however that 95% of the American population are religious. In light of that, I find a figure of 60% of 'lesser' scientists (as opposed to distinguished members of NAS) to still be rather impressive, wouldn't you?? A figure of 40% who may be deistic/theistic is not in the least surprising when one considers the fact that these people have grown up, almost invariably, if not in religious families, then in religious societies. I would be interested to see a poll taken from Swedish scientists.

I believe the following is a reasonable formula:

Lack of childhood/societal indoctrination + healthy education of the sciences and critical thinking and reasoning etc = Irreligiosity

That is not a hard-and-fast formula, but I believe there is little doubt that it holds true in the vast majority of cases. Human minds are of course weak, and the gullible will always be open to be influenced by absurd persuasions.

Zombrex

alex73 wrote: »

I meet people with Atheist/Agnostic opinions all the time who know practically nothing about Christ, have never read the bible, and yet are quick to say the Church and its teachings are a Fairytale (Church being religion in general).

Can you point out the bit in the Bible or the life of Christ that demonstrates that they are not?

If not then what in the Bible that they are ignorant of would change this persons mind?

For example I don't know the ins and outs of the Odin story from the Viking myths. I do know they are fairytales. Why would Christianity be any different or than it happens to be the particular religion you subscribe to?

This is the point that religions, particularly the RCC, fail to grasp. Blaming people for not believing your story is rather counter productive if someone is genuinely concerned about the dwindling numbers of their organisation.

alex73 wrote: »

What happened a couple of hundreds years ago (by all faiths no just Christian) is not because Christ said... Go out and teach the Good news and kill those who don't believe. I mean do we say Germany today should not exist or be respected because of WWII?

Look at the central message of Christ and how the apostles worked after his death.

The central message of Christ is that he was God.

A lot of people don't believe that, saying that the standards for accepting such a claim are too low to take it seriously. Anyone can claim to be God, doesn't mean they are.

The Church dismisses them as close minded, selfish and wicked, rather than addressing the actual point.

It should not then come as a surprise to the Church that people turn away from them. As long as the Church continues to blame everyone else for this and refuses to acknowledge the central problem with the justification for believe, this will continue.

We aren't living 400 years ago when most people couldn't even read let alone be educated to 3rd level standards. The idea that people will just suddenly stop caring about standards of knowledge and justification for why people believe what they believe, allowing a resurgence of religion, is naive at best.

alex73

Jarndyce wrote: »

Firstly, I never said that Ireland has a National Academy of Sciences and I'm quite confused as to why you even made that comment.

Well this is Boards.ie! (not boards.com)

Jarndyce

alex73 wrote: »

Well this is Boards.ie! (not boards.com)

What a fatuous remark. Pathetic, really.

alex73

Jarndyce wrote: »

What a fatuous remark. Pathetic, really.

Why? We are on boards.ie and you make unfounded claims that 95% of Educated scientists are atheist or people who don't believe. Lets me honest, even Einstein one of the most gifted minds of the last century was not so dumb as to reject God. ... Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.

Zillah

antiskeptic wrote: »

That NAS represents an elite (with an obvious question being raised as to how one becomes a member of that elite)

Members are admitted due to a history of excellence in original research. Them being an 'elite' is more representative of the relationship between education and religion (that is, the more educated someone is, the less likely they are to be religious).

alex73 wrote: »

Why? We are on boards.ie and you make unfounded claims that 95% of Educated scientists are atheist or people who don't believe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_academy_of_science

Lets me honest, even Einstein one of the most gifted minds of the last century was not so dumb as to reject God.

1 - Einstein was not a believer in a personal God. He used the word God to describe his fascination and wonder for the grandeur of nature. He said "I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one" and "I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly."

2 - Individuals don't matter, his point was about the general correspondence between education and belief in God.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind

Religion has absolutely nothing to offer science. This might be a catchy phrase people like to trot out but it has nothing to do with reality.

Jarndyce

@ Zillah: I was just about to reply with a virtually identical post! Cheers

Zillah

You are welcome.

In relation to the original post about the Pope...well, I do feel a bit sorry for him. He is overseeing the death of his religion in the Western World, there are only so many ways to spin that. Priests are dying at ten times the rate they are being ordained, attendance has never been lower. People are educated enough to find their claims dubious, wealthy and jaded enough to resist the emotional blackmail, and shocked and horrified enough by the sex scandals for them to dismiss the Church as a moral authority entirely.

I don't think Christianity is any way likely to die out completely in the next couple of hundred years, but the days of it being a relevant force in society are numbered. If my parents' generation managed to do such a terrible job of indoctrinating my generation, just imagine what the next one is going to be like.

So long fellas, it's been wild.

Robert ninja

Wow, so the pope finally realises people ARE sick of it. It's very obvious that people are sick of ponces like him who think they're morally superior because they wear a twat-hat and shuffle active pedophiles like a deck of cards.

Fanny Cradock

Robert ninja and Jarndyce please tone it down.

CMpunked

I don't think the west is becoming tired of faith at all.
I think the west is becoming tired of the RCC.

Irish_Elect_Eng

alex73 wrote: »

Educated you mean what?? The problem is that too many people are not educated in their faith. They take exception with a part of faith (say church's moral teaching) and reject all that faith has to offer. Many well educated people are also very religious. I meet people with Atheist/Agnostic opinions all the time who know practically nothing about Christ, have never read the bible, and yet are quick to say the Church and its teachings are a Fairytale (Church being religion in general).

By educated I meant, people that have a sufficient level of education and are capable of free thought, both spiritual people and those that take another road. That is to say those people that have thought about their choices and made an informed decision to either believe in the teachings of a religion or not.

It is a folly of most organised religions, my own included, to believe that there are masses of people out there that would believe if only someone would tell them about their particular religion.

StudentDad

I don't think people in the western world are tired of their faith per se. I think it has more to do with the fact that people in general are sick of the hypocrisy and corruption evident in the RC church.

SD

Raze_them_all

Well If someone wnated me to believe in something that happened 2,000 years ago without any proof I'd be tired of it aswell.

Handsome Bob

The RCC as an institution and hierarchy is, in my opinion, rotten to the core. This is why people have become disillusioned, it has nothing to do with faith. Combine this with an inability to appeal to modern society in relation to numerous issues and one can see why the west may be 'tired'.

Donatello

Peter Kreeft has an excellent article entitled, 'What I Learned From A Muslim About Eucharistic Adoration'.

The central problem of the Church today is that most of the generation now becoming adults -- the generation educated by CCD texts full of deadly platitudes -- simply do not know Jesus Christ. They are not merely unaware of right doctrine about Him (though that's tragically missing too) but of Christ Himself, His real presence. Nothing less than Christ could have Christianized the world, nothing less than Christlessness has de-Christianized it, and nothing less than Christ can re-Christianize it. What happens when Christ's real presence is known? Read the Gospels and find out. The Gospels are not mere historical records; they continue, they happen, for the One they present is not dead and gone and past but alive and here and now.

[...]

How do we get this joy back? Not by any gimmicks or human contrivance, but by recognizing the real presence and responding with adoration. And the primary place of the real presence is the Eucharist.

It's a great article and he makes the point that we need to really get to know Jesus Christ, especially in the Eucharist. Read it here.

CerebralCortex

antiskeptic wrote: »

That NAS represents an elite (with an obvious question being raised as to how one becomes a member of that elite). A more representitive sample of what scientists believe might be extracted from Nature's 1998 (iirc) survey of 1000 American scientists in which ca. 40% said they believed in a hereafter. You can bet of the rest, the majority would be agnostics leaving but a small percentage of atheists.

What's your explanation for so many believing / fence sitting scientists?

Seeing as we're throwing numbers around, here are some facts from a favourite philosopher of mine.

Elexis

Jarndyce wrote: »

Firstly, I never said that Ireland has a National Academy of Sciences and I'm quite confused as to why you even made that comment.

As for your point in relation to the 'obvious question being raised as to how one becomes a member of that elite', I should first say (flippant though it may be) that this skepticism is amusing in light of your username! Your username does however explain your ignorance of how these eminent scientists attain such distinguished positions, for it suggests (if it suggests anything) that you are not scientifically minded.

In relation to the Nature survey, indeed it says that at least 60% of randomly selected US scientists expressed doubt or disbelief. Bear in mind however that 95% of the American population are religious. In light of that, I find a figure of 60% of 'lesser' scientists (as opposed to distinguished members of NAS) to still be rather impressive, wouldn't you?? A figure of 40% who may be deistic/theistic is not in the least surprising when one considers the fact that these people have grown up, almost invariably, if not in religious families, then in religious societies. I would be interested to see a poll taken from Swedish scientists.

I believe the following is a reasonable formula:

Lack of childhood/societal indoctrination + healthy education of the sciences and critical thinking and reasoning etc = Irreligiosity

That is not a hard-and-fast formula, but I believe there is little doubt that it holds true in the vast majority of cases. Human minds are of course weak, and the gullible will always be open to be influenced by absurd persuasions.

Why do you write in such a confrontational style Jarndyce? What are you hoping to achieve by making people defensive? Your piece on Antiskeptic's username and your insulting of religion in general is not conducive to constructive debate. Why not just deal with the facts instead of getting people's backs up. That sure would be the scientific thing to do.

If 60 percent of scientists "expressed doubt or disbelief" that doesn't stop them from being religious per se. Many, if not most, religious people express doubt throughout their lives. I might be a Christian but if I was included in that survey, I could be part of the 60 percent category. You are being too eager, not only to insult people's personal choices in religion, but also to discount the fact that science and religion are not all incompatible.

CerebralCortex

Elexis wrote: »

I might be a Christian but if I was included in that survey, I could be part of the 60 percent category...

You don't see the contradiction there.

Elexis wrote: »

...science and religion are not all incompatible.

Yes they are. Science is the antithesis of religion in terms of understanding and knowledge.