Religious Decline and Old Tactics - Do modern people find standard appeals unconvincing?

[Berrakh]

Right off the bat I want to say this is not suggesting religion is stupid in case you came in with that idea.
It's merely something I've noticed anecdotally and can easily extrapolate more widely. This doesn't make it right but it's not a point I commonly see discussed.

In the modern age there is a lot more competition for your attention and devotion than ever before. So tactics which might have previously been of no hindrance to religious evangelism now could be. And when I think about how religion's typically sell themselves it's with a sermon of some kind. But sermons are often exhortations at the end of the day and I suspect this rings hollow to many people not looking to be won over. I think this resistance is strongest among smart people or at least the people capable of entertaining themselves as well.

What are your thoughts? Am I way off with this diagnosis, in part or in whole? Is there something of which I am ignorant? Let me know

Edit: I also think any moves to market the faith like a commodity strips the spiritual dimension out sooner or later which also certainly dooms the church in question. Which makes this subject difficult to discuss.

 

[Truman the Jewman]

Is your question whether or not religions in the modern day can still use the same appeals that wooed audiences in the Middle Ages?

If so, then no, I don't believe so. One of the most effective selling points of Christianity and Islam (less so with Judaism, but people don't really "become" Jews) is telling illiterate peasants and literal dirt farmers that as long as they devoted themselves to Christ/Allah/did good works/gave enough tithes to the powers that be they were guaranteed to gain entry to Heaven. When average life is nothing but toiling on land you don't own to feed people that treat you like chattel, paradise seems like a sweet deal.

However, since the Age of Enlightenment I think these appeals have proven less and less effective--now the appeals have to be "we have strayed from the faith and must remain faithful to our ideals." Personally? I think people would rather have their own private spirituality than affiliate with dogmatic religious outfits; at least I do.

Religious groups in the modern day have proven their hypocrisy in multiple ways. Hell, even the Protestant Reformation was a response to the decadence and hypocrisy of the Catholic Church, and that was 500 years ago. Now we have churches where children are regularly abused, proselytizers who bilk the infirm and uninformed of their money, etc.

Why join in with these groups when you can form your own opinions? Most people living in the First World don't need to congregate for survival any longer. It doesn't make any sense to cling to such an antiquated mindset.

 

[Chilson]

The strongest pull of religious service and devotion has always been the social element that brings together people, even back in the age where most people genuinely believed gods were 100% real. The worst thing about excommunication was being EXILED from Christendom and no longer being able to socially interact with anyone.

The issue with modern religions is that the social aspect has been replaced with other "forums" of social connection. Religion still has its place in the social hierarchy, but its little wonder that religion is weakest where other forms of social connection and enjoyment (plays, art, museums, entertainment parks, clubs, sports etc.) are in abundance AKA urban cities.

Social media has expanded this range to practically anywhere with an internet connection, but that is less a genuine equivalent to social connections of the church and more a synthetic replacement that pales in comparison. The simple fact is that organized religion will likely never have as strong a presence in anyone's lives as it did in the last hundred years and will continue to slowly, but surely, decline in importance. It will likely always be there, just as a background element and not a core part of how people define themselves.

I think this is a major reason that spiritualism and other "strange" individualized religious devotions have popped up in the last 60 or so years. These disorganized religions I expect will only become more prevalent.

I am not saying this is a good thing by the way. I am merely stating what I believe will occur. Disorganized spiritualist garbage has already shown itself to be even more harmful than proper organized religions through the even greater prevalence of cults, shitty parenting and infantilization of adults.

I think Religion on a community level has done far more good than the harm the mega structure of macro level religious organization has done to mankind by binding people together and creating a viable moral framework to live by. I am not naïve enough to believe humans are fundamentally "good" creatures and do believe we need such moral restraints on ourselves when we are developing to become productive persons who are not total societal waste.

I also believe we can create these moral frameworks ourselves outside of organized religion by just being raised well and having some humility. Though that is definitely harder done than said.

 

[Berrakh]

Is your question whether or not religions in the modern day can still use the same appeals that wooed audiences in the Middle Ages?

I guess my question is if my diagnosis is accurate or at least on the right track. Editing my post to clarify this.

 

[DerKryptid]

The only ones at threat from proselytical competition are evangelicals and hardcore atheist types who've employed the same methods of apologetics since the turn of the 20th century. Muslims, buddhists, copts and hindus have been quickly catching on to these tactics and are replicating the same "gotcha" dumbassery that only appeals to people with 0 fundamental knowledge of a certain belief system. Orthodox straight chillin letting believers and inquirers come to the Church on their own volition, while catholics have gone off the deep-end and have begun using a mix of woke and tradfag advertising to turn their beliefs into a watered-down system of ethics comparable to the barren-ness and hollowness of protestantism.

 

[Lord of the Large Pants]

Religion probably won't have much success in the west with old style "missionary" tactics, if that's what you're asking. You can't exhort people to repentance when they believe they haven't done anything wrong.

Religions would be better served emphasizing how they can provide structure and ultimate meaning in an increasingly vapid culture.

 

[Berrakh]

The only ones at threat from proselytical competition are evangelicals and hardcore atheist types who've employed the same methods of apologetics since the turn of the 20th century. Muslims, buddhists, copts and hindus have been quickly catching on to these tactics and are replicating the same "gotcha" dumbassery that only appeals to people with 0 fundamental knowledge of a certain belief system. Orthodox straight chillin letting believers and inquirers come to the Church on their own volition, while catholics have gone off the deep-end and have begun using a mix of woke and tradfag advertising to turn their beliefs into a watered-down system of ethics comparable to the barren-ness and hollowness of protestantism.

I have to play devil’s advocate here because I see an easy opening: don’t numbers matter? Obviously no faith should be a slave to numbers but practically they are important and remaining mysteriously unenthusiastic about conversion could be read as its own vanity.

 

[Truman the Jewman]

I have to play devil’s advocate here because I see an easy opening: don’t numbers matter? Obviously no faith should be a slave to numbers but practically they are important and remaining mysteriously unenthusiastic about conversion could be read as its own vanity.

I think I respect the Orthodox the most for being very low-key and old-school, even though they've clearly been politicized as a group in this day and age as well.

If you're going to be a member of a faith that relies on a kike that got nailed to a cross to serve as a catchall Aesop fable for your morals, you might as well do it with a group that stays straight-faced about it rather than an absolute dumpster fire clown-show like the Catholic Church of the modern day.

 

[DerKryptid]

I have to play devil’s advocate here because I see an easy opening: don’t numbers matter? Obviously no faith should be a slave to numbers but practically they are important and remaining mysteriously unenthusiastic about conversion could be read as its own vanity.

Basic knowledge at this point: quantity often comes at the sacrifice of quality. This is not always the case, but one can clearly observe this tradeoff happening in most modern religions. Paganism has long since died; God does not need the prayers of man to stay alive, rather, we need belief in God to facilitate our continued survival. From a pagan framework, no cost is too great for an increased volume of believers, but we are not pagans, and we should not dilute our liturgy and traditions for the sake of numbers.

 

[Queen Elizabeth II]

Religions need to evolve or die.

There is a reason why big cities in Britain and America atheist "Churches" thrive with numbers; people like the social element, people like the community, people like to know there is a support net of people like them.

As much as I would like to think supernatural belief would fade, it can be sustained with the right mix of peer pressure, ignorance or material benefit.

In the hedonistic west you're best off trying the last one. Discounts, job opportunities, social events, day care, medical support trusts, educational establishments; if these can give some sort of edge over their secular counterparts the religion will do fine.

Christianity rose on the back of tending to the sick and the poor, something which the Hellenic state and mystery cults failed at. Unfortunately, love it or hate it the social democratic nanny state is rather good at both of those things and they need to up their game if they want to carry on.

 

[Truman the Jewman]

material benefit.

In the hedonistic west you're best off trying the last one. Discounts, job opportunities, social events, day care, medical support trusts, educational establishments

I find the idea of a modern church giving out GoodRX, AARP-style discount cards and membership programmes to be absolutely hilarious.

I support the notion 100%. We should treat going to church like the incentive of getting a couple bucks off of our VHS rental at Blockbuster, because at least retards will fall for that shit. I would rather that than people congregate in those cringeworthy "atheist" "churches."

 

[Berrakh]

quantity often comes at the sacrifice of quality.

I did say you shouldn’t be a slave to numbers in anticipation of this response. Quantity is a kind of quality as Napoleon said. And I think Paganism (like in Rome) died out because it lost the quantities. But you could easily know better than I about this.

This next bit is general to the whole thread, not to you specifically, I think the needle that has to be threaded (since people talk about discounts) is not sacrificing or cheapening spirituality. Because I do know for a fact that spiritually-bereft or spiritually-compromised churches, that aren’t also a clubhouse for the upper classes, die.

 

[Ishtar]

I agree sort of. Religious appeals today struggle to maintain the balance between spirituality "we have the truth" and community "find friends at Church". Often people are looking for one but are dissatisfied in the other. A church that is welcoming and friendly to all might be dissatisfying and perhaps even offensive to someone who wants a serious spiritual life, and someone who wants real community might find a church that cares less about greeting people and more about evangelizing and theology alienating.

 

[DerKryptid]

I did say you shouldn’t be a slave to numbers in anticipation of this response. Quantity is a kind of quality as Napoleon said. And I think Paganism (like in Rome) died out because it lost the quantities. But you could easily know better than I about this.

Next but is general, not to you specifically, I think the needle that has to be threaded (since people talk about discounts) is not sacrificing or cheapening spirituality. Because I do know for a fact that spiritually-bereft or spiritually-compromised churches, that aren’t also a clubhouse for the upper classes, die.

Paganism also had its shrines and temples destroyed by the state, and it fell into gross deviancy and apathy in the centuries preceeding. Disenchanted pagans found the allure of the vibrant Church more fulfilling that the cesspit that helleno-roman paganism had degenerated into.

This is only a generalization, because many factors contributed to the decline of paganism in Rome, and almost all had an impact on the quality of the religion practicioners were recieving.

 

[Queen Elizabeth II]

I find the idea of a modern church giving out GoodRX, AARP-style discount cards and membership programmes to be absolutely hilarious.

I support the notion 100%. We should treat going to church like the incentive of getting a couple bucks off of our VHS rental at Blockbuster, because at least retards will fall for that shit. I would rather that than people congregate in those cringeworthy "atheist" "churches."

They don't usually advertise it overtly, but some of them do.

For instance, in Europe Christian schools (especially Catholic ones) in the first instance recruit from their local parishes. If one of their congregation chooses to undertake teacher training, unlike their secular counterparts they are guaranteed a job within the parish school provided they remain in good standing with their Church. It's not unheard of, especially in Britain and Italy where faith schools have a great deal of autonomy for teachers to convert to the religion of the school they teach in to secure promotion; very often it is in fact a requirement to advance beyond a certain paygrade. One of my freinds wives recently converted to Catholicism as a requirement of promotion to the position of deputy headteacher. She retains no supernatural belief, but she is willing to follow all the rules in public for the sake of her rank.

That's actually what helps maintain the faith sector in parts of Europe. Nobody actually believes in it, but not infrequently people like Nurses, Doctors, Teachers, Lawyers etc are required by favourable employment terms to follow the rules of their faith influenced employer; who just happens to offer better terms than their secular counterparts.

 

[Ishtar]

Part of the issue is, in pre modern times we had not separated ideas of "relationship with God" and "everyone gets together for communion, and we bond as a community".

As the West became more secular, there was an increasing gap between the supernatural or spiritual aspect of religious practice-i.e. study of theology, prayer, living a holy life, and the communal aspect of religion-eating and drinking together, communal prayer, going to your priest for every problem, and so forth.

The people who were less inclined to religiosity became more free to express their indifference, and those more inclined had to work on their own-hence a sort of de communalized spiritual life, of the spiritual seeker or for lack of a better term theology or religion nerd going about their religious practice alone, disconnected from others.

 

[Truman the Jewman]

She retains no supernatural belief, but she is willing to follow all the rules in public for the sake of her rank.

Nobody actually believes in it, but not infrequently people like Nurses, Doctors, Teachers, Lawyers etc

What's the point of the church if it has no faithful? It might as well be called a fucking guild at that point, or a social club, like a Chinese tong.

Seems a bit sad that the "religion" has to exist basically in name only if that's the case.

 

[Queen Elizabeth II]

What's the point of the church if it has no faithful? It might as well be called a fucking guild at that point, or a social club, like a Chinese tong.

Seems a bit sad that the "religion" has to exist basically in name only if that's the case.

Because you're not trying to "save" the deputy headteacher in that case. You're creating examples for lessers to follow.

As much as she doesn't believe, she is going to stand there and pretend she does. She, as a highly educated young(ish) professional is going in turn to "show" the world that Catholicism is still relevant to the life of an educated female in her early thirties and inspire others to follow in her stead.

Some if not most of these people will actually believe in what the religious institution teaches.

Prophets don't generally believe, they lead and inspire. But they're very useful tools for maintaining membership.

 

[Jarolleon]

The strongest pull of religious service and devotion has always been the social element that brings together people, even back in the age where most people genuinely believed gods were 100% real. The worst thing about excommunication was being EXILED from Christendom and no longer being able to socially interact with anyone.

The issue with modern religions is that the social aspect has been replaced with other "forums" of social connection. Religion still has its place in the social hierarchy, but its little wonder that religion is weakest where other forms of social connection and enjoyment (plays, art, museums, entertainment parks, clubs, sports etc.) are in abundance AKA urban cities.

Social media has expanded this range to practically anywhere with an internet connection, but that is less a genuine equivalent to social connections of the church and more a synthetic replacement that pales in comparison. The simple fact is that organized religion will likely never have as strong a presence in anyone's lives as it did in the last hundred years and will continue to slowly, but surely, decline in importance. It will likely always be there, just as a background element and not a core part of how people define themselves.

I think this is a major reason that spiritualism and other "strange" individualized religious devotions have popped up in the last 60 or so years. These disorganized religions I expect will only become more prevalent.

I am not saying this is a good thing by the way. I am merely stating what I believe will occur. Disorganized spiritualist garbage has already shown itself to be even more harmful than proper organized religions through the even greater prevalence of cults, shitty parenting and infantilization of adults.

I think Religion on a community level has done far more good than the harm the mega structure of macro level religious organization has done to mankind by binding people together and creating a viable moral framework to live by. I am not naïve enough to believe humans are fundamentally "good" creatures and do believe we need such moral restraints on ourselves when we are developing to become productive persons who are not total societal waste.

I also believe we can create these moral frameworks ourselves outside of organized religion by just being raised well and having some humility. Though that is definitely harder done than said.

That is a remarkable shift. De Maistre in 1796 mocked the Revolutionaries for, among other things, being unable to invent festivities that actually appealed to people when they were still in that "replace Christianity" phase. He claimed that religion in general and Catholicism in particular had that unique power to bring people together. It sounds ridiculous in modern times when concerts, conventions and political rallies draw vast crowds but in that era it must have made sense.

Spoiler: The relevant passage

But just let the masters of the world - princes, kings, emperors, powerful majesties, invincible conquerors - let them only try to make the people dance on a certain day each year in a set place. This is not much to ask, but I dare swear that they will not succeed, whereas, if the humblest missionary comes to such a spot, he will make himself obeyed two thousand years after his death. Every year the people meet together around a rustic church in the name of St. John, St. Martin, St. Benedict, and so on; they come filled with boisterous yet innocent cheerfulness; religion sanctifies this joy and the joy embellishes religion: they forget their sorrows; at night, they think of the pleasure to come on the same day next year, and this date is stamped on their memory.

By the side of this picture put that of the French leaders who have been vested with every power by a shameful Revolution and yet cannot organize a simple fete. They pour out gold and call all the arts to their aid, yet the citizen remains at home, listening to the appeal only to laugh at the organizers....

How great is human folly and weakness! Legislators, reflect on this example, for it shows you what you are and what you can do. Do you need anything further to enable you to judge the French system? If its sterility is not clear, nothing is certain in the world.

 

[Cheerlead-in-Chief]

This is gonna be dumb...but my former Pastor is old-fashioned; like Rock and Roll is bad, preaching abstinence while his own grandkids had babies out of welfare (Only two got married before having kids) and will profit off of the local health department and ranting against Ruth Bader Ginsburg prior to her death.

There's a member of the church that sits at the very front pew to literally be a sycophant yelling "PREACH IT PREACHER!", clapping and even high-fiving the Pastor. Well, the last sermon we attended the sycophant was rewarded with a sermon part: The Pastor stating, "I don't want silent people in my pews, I want more like him."

I don't know if this can contribute to religious decline, just an example from life.