Christian Number-Crunching
Feb 9, 2011
George Weigel
For 27 years, the International Bulletin of Missionary Research has published an annual “Status of Global Mission” report, which attempts to quantify the world Christian reality, comparing Christianity’s circumstances to those of other faiths, and assaying how Christianity’s various expressions are faring when measured against the recent (and not-so-recent) past. The report is unfailingly interesting, sometimes jarring, and occasionally provocative.
The provocation in the 2011 report involves martyrdom. For purposes of research, the report defines “martyrs” as “believers in Christ who have lost their lives, prematurely, in situations of witness, as a result of human hostility.” The report estimates that there were, on average, 270 new Christian martyrs every 24 hours over the past decade, such that “the number of martyrs [in the period 2000-2010] was approximately 1 million.” Compare this to an estimated 34,000 Christian martyrs in 1900.
As for the interesting, try the aggregate numbers. According to the report, there will be, by mid-2011, 2,306,609,000 Christians of all kinds in the world, representing 33 percent of world population—a slight percentage rise from mid-2000 (32.7 percent), but a slight percentage drop since 1900 (34.5 percent). Of those 2.3 billion Christians, some 1.5 billion are regular church attendees, who worship in 5,171,000 congregations or “worship centers,” up from 400,000 in 1900 and 3.5 million in 2000.
These 2.3 billion Christians can be divided into six “ecclesiastical megablocks”: 1,160,880,000 Catholics; 426,450,000 Protestants; 271,316,000 Orthodox; 87,520,000 Anglicans; 378,281,000 “Independents” (i.e., those separated from or unaffiliated with historic denominational Christianity); and 35,539,000 “marginal Christians” (i.e., those professing off-brand Trinitarian theology, dubious Christology, or a supplementary written revelation beyond the Bible).
Compared to the world’s 2.3 billion Christians, there are 1.6 billion Muslims, 951 million Hindus, 468 million Buddhists, 458 million Chinese folk-religionists, and 137 million atheists, whose numbers have actually dropped over the past decade, despite the caterwauling of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, and Co. One cluster of comparative growth statistics is striking: As of mid-2011, there will be an average of 80,000 new Christians per day (of whom 31,000 will be Catholics) and 79,000 new Muslims per day, but 300 fewer atheists every 24 hours.
Africa has been the most stunning area of Christian growth over the past century. There were 8.7 million African Christians in 1900 (primarily in Egypt, Ethiopia and South Africa); there are 475 million African Christians today and their numbers are projected to reach 670 million by 2025. Another astonishing growth spurt, measured typologically, has been among Pentecostals and charismatics: 981,000 in 1900; 612,472,000 in 2011, with an average of 37,000 new adherents every day—the fastest growth in two millennia of Christian history.
As for the quest for Christian unity: There were 1,600 Christian denominations in 1900; there were 18,800 in 1970; and there are 42,000 today.
Other impressive numbers: $545 billion is given to Christian causes annually, which comes out to $1.5 billion per day. There are some 600 million computers in Christian use, up from 1,000 in 1970. 71,425,000 Bibles will be distributed this year, and some 2 billion people will tune in at least once a month to Christian radio or television. 7.1 million books about Christianity will be published this year, compared to 1.8 million in 1970.
The big lesson of the 2011 Status of Global Mission report can be borrowed from Mark Twain’s famous crack about his alleged death: Reports of Christianity’s demise have been greatly exaggerated. Christianity may be waning in Western Europe, but it’s on an impressive growth curve in other parts of the world, including that toughest of regions for Christian evangelism, Asia. Indeed, the continuing growth of Christianity as compared to the decline of atheism (in absolute numbers, and considering atheists as a percentage of total world population) suggests the possibility that the vitriolic character of the New Atheism—displayed in all its crudity prior to Pope Benedict’s September 2010 visit to Great Britain—may have something to do with the shrewder atheists’ fear that they’re losing, and the clock is running.
That’s something you’re unlikely to hear reported in the mainstream media. The numbers are there, however, and the numbers are suggestive.
George Weigel is Distinguished Senior Fellow of the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C.
Comments:
2.9.2011 | 11:30am
Sergio Méndez says:
I wonder how many of those 2.3 billion of christians are anything else than "practical atheists". In other words, how many are just nominaly christians, even if they live as if God does not existed and/or they don´t follow the doctrine of their churches at all. In other words, I will like to see the methodology of the survey. Conservatives usually like to play that card when they talk about the "decadence" od the west or how the secular society is a "post christian" one, but when the numbers suits their interests, the whole discourse changes dramatically...
2.9.2011 | 11:55am
bill bannon says:
Asia is a tough nut for Christianity and the mixture of imperialism with Catholicism in the 19th century didn't help. France represented Catholicism in Chinese treaties but in the 2nd opium war, allied with Britain, France simultaneously opened all provinces to missionaries by force and forced the opium trade of Britain on the Chinese....religion and drug dealing combined. She demanded for Catholic bishops the use of the sedan chair previously reserved for the Mandarin and legal extraterritoriality for Catholics and extra rice for Catholics during shortages for led to the phrase "rice Christians" used by those who were left out and hungry. When the Boxer Rebellion came, Chinese lay Catholics were killed in large numbers. Catholics on the net rather hearken way back to Matteo Ricci and a more innocent
time.
Aside from the imperialism memory in Asia, you are faced with intelligent not primitive peoples and you have the odd fact that Catholicism is not but should be working on a definite position paper on whether it believes or does not believe
literally in some of the early Genesis accounts. This is the elephant in the living room for non primitive Asia. Is Christianity asking them to believe in a literal ark, a literal worldwide flood? Africa may not question such things...Asia will. Is Catholicism working on an answer at the CDF? Are mssionaries unified in their answer? At Ricci's time, the Jesuits had one answer in one part of China on the ancestral rights...and Franciscans in another part were concemning the ancestral rites. Are we doing that stereo thing again on Noah's ark?
time.
Aside from the imperialism memory in Asia, you are faced with intelligent not primitive peoples and you have the odd fact that Catholicism is not but should be working on a definite position paper on whether it believes or does not believe
literally in some of the early Genesis accounts. This is the elephant in the living room for non primitive Asia. Is Christianity asking them to believe in a literal ark, a literal worldwide flood? Africa may not question such things...Asia will. Is Catholicism working on an answer at the CDF? Are mssionaries unified in their answer? At Ricci's time, the Jesuits had one answer in one part of China on the ancestral rights...and Franciscans in another part were concemning the ancestral rites. Are we doing that stereo thing again on Noah's ark?
2.9.2011 | 12:06pm
Ranger says:
It should be noted that the vast majority of the declining atheists (and the majority of atheists in the world today) are nominal, or at least completely different from a western definition of the term. The bulk come from state statistics in China and the former states of the Soviet Union.
As I've traveled China talking to people, I've found that many people will say they don't believe in God and are atheists, but they have in mind the Christian God specifically. When you actually talk to them about what they "do" believe, they often believe in spirits, demons, the afterlife and an entire supernatural realm that would be foreign to the western atheist.
I have also found that in Asia there are very few nominal Christians, as in the West. In such pluralistic nations as Singapore the people have to choose what they believe and are pretty serious about it. It's very different from the West. Most of my friends living in Africa have a similar view as well.
Discerning between who is nominal and who is authentic can be difficult. 1.5 billion Christians are regular church goers, yet some could be nominal. On the other side, I know lots of Christians who are pretty serious about their faith, yet not serious about church attendance. Without being able to individually interview each one, or at least large swaths of the groups, it's really hard to tell what the numbers mean.
As I've traveled China talking to people, I've found that many people will say they don't believe in God and are atheists, but they have in mind the Christian God specifically. When you actually talk to them about what they "do" believe, they often believe in spirits, demons, the afterlife and an entire supernatural realm that would be foreign to the western atheist.
I have also found that in Asia there are very few nominal Christians, as in the West. In such pluralistic nations as Singapore the people have to choose what they believe and are pretty serious about it. It's very different from the West. Most of my friends living in Africa have a similar view as well.
Discerning between who is nominal and who is authentic can be difficult. 1.5 billion Christians are regular church goers, yet some could be nominal. On the other side, I know lots of Christians who are pretty serious about their faith, yet not serious about church attendance. Without being able to individually interview each one, or at least large swaths of the groups, it's really hard to tell what the numbers mean.
2.9.2011 | 2:36pm
Mike Melendez says:
Sergio Mendez writes, "I wonder how many of those 2.3 billion of christians are anything else than "practical atheists". In other words, how many are just nominaly christians, even if they live as if God does not existed and/or they don´t follow the doctrine of their churches at all."
I think you mean "practical Deists". They believe there is a God, but He doesn't really matter in the day-to-day. That's a bit different than an atheist. I remember a teacher one of my sons had in Junior High, who claimed there were more atheists than any religion in the world. His methodology, however, was suspect. If people did not have a specific known name for their beliefs, he claimed they were atheists. For example, those 378M "Independent" Christians become atheists by his counting. At least the animists in China, e.g., claim that they are atheists.
I think you mean "practical Deists". They believe there is a God, but He doesn't really matter in the day-to-day. That's a bit different than an atheist. I remember a teacher one of my sons had in Junior High, who claimed there were more atheists than any religion in the world. His methodology, however, was suspect. If people did not have a specific known name for their beliefs, he claimed they were atheists. For example, those 378M "Independent" Christians become atheists by his counting. At least the animists in China, e.g., claim that they are atheists.
2.9.2011 | 2:50pm
Stephen M. Barr says:
Dear Bill Bannon,
Actually, both Catholicism and non-Catholic Christianity are growing faster in Asia than anywhere else, except Africa. In almost every country in Asia, Catholicism is growing significantly faster than the general population (except, obviously, the Philippines, where Catholics are a large majority). For example, in South Korea --- hardly a "primitive" country --- the number of Catholics is growing by over 2% per year, while the total population of the country is constant. Since 1980, the percentage of South Korea that is Catholic has increased from 3% to over 10%. In China, Christianity of all stripes is growing rapidly.
The expression "rice Christians" is generally understood to mean people who converted (or feigned conversion) to Christianity in the hopes of obtaining material benefits from the rich and powerful Europeans.
As far as literal interpretations of Genesis, the Catholic Church needs no position paper, for the simple reason that she has never taught a "literal" interpretation of Genesis in the sense you mean it. St. Augustine, for example,
famously had a distinctly non-literal interpretation of Genesis. Pope Pius XII sixty years ago enthusiastically embraced scientific evidence that the universe is billions of years old in a famous speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. It is well-known that the Catholic Church never condemned the theory of evolution, and there are numerous statements at every level from the popes on down that show that she accepts science's findings on matters of origins. No Catholic is required by the Church to believe that the flood covered the entire earth. These are really non-issues for Catholics. If you are Catholic, as seems to be the case, I am surprised you don't know these things.
Actually, both Catholicism and non-Catholic Christianity are growing faster in Asia than anywhere else, except Africa. In almost every country in Asia, Catholicism is growing significantly faster than the general population (except, obviously, the Philippines, where Catholics are a large majority). For example, in South Korea --- hardly a "primitive" country --- the number of Catholics is growing by over 2% per year, while the total population of the country is constant. Since 1980, the percentage of South Korea that is Catholic has increased from 3% to over 10%. In China, Christianity of all stripes is growing rapidly.
The expression "rice Christians" is generally understood to mean people who converted (or feigned conversion) to Christianity in the hopes of obtaining material benefits from the rich and powerful Europeans.
As far as literal interpretations of Genesis, the Catholic Church needs no position paper, for the simple reason that she has never taught a "literal" interpretation of Genesis in the sense you mean it. St. Augustine, for example,
famously had a distinctly non-literal interpretation of Genesis. Pope Pius XII sixty years ago enthusiastically embraced scientific evidence that the universe is billions of years old in a famous speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. It is well-known that the Catholic Church never condemned the theory of evolution, and there are numerous statements at every level from the popes on down that show that she accepts science's findings on matters of origins. No Catholic is required by the Church to believe that the flood covered the entire earth. These are really non-issues for Catholics. If you are Catholic, as seems to be the case, I am surprised you don't know these things.
2.9.2011 | 3:11pm
Athos says:
"The number of martyrs [in the period 2000-2010] was approximately 1 million.” Compare this to an estimated 34,000 Christian martyrs in 1900"
Does that mean there were 34,000 Christian martyrs in the year 1900, or in the decade 1900-1910? (Not sure how to compare 1 million in a decade to 34,000 in a year, other than multiplying by ten)
Does that mean there were 34,000 Christian martyrs in the year 1900, or in the decade 1900-1910? (Not sure how to compare 1 million in a decade to 34,000 in a year, other than multiplying by ten)
2.9.2011 | 3:38pm
Sherry Weddell says:
Sergio:
The little one page summary that Weigel is quoting is the top most layer of a staggering amount of research compiled originally in the World Christian Encyclopedia (Oxford University Press) and now online at the World Christian Database, a high level scholarly database hosted by the Center for Global Christianity. The dead tree WC Encyclopedia comprises 1600 13 x 17 inches pages (8 point type) in two volumes. (I recommend a magnifying glass when doing serious research there.)
The scholars behind this work are drilling down to a level of depth, complexity, and nuance that that is unique in the world. For instance, they track things like “double affiliation” (Catholics who simultaneously also call themselves something else – like evangelical, independent, Hindu, Muslim, agnostic, etc. depending upon the unique social and political pressures of the culture in which they live.) Even a quick perusal of the online data that Weigel quoted would immediately show you that it distinguishes between “all Christians” (2.92 billion), affiliated Christians (those who are formal members of some Christian group – 2.17 billion), and church attendees (1.5 billion).
Bill Bannon:
The situation in Asia has changed exponentially for Christian in the last half of the 20th century. The 20th century was Africa’s Christian moment but Asia was close behind and Asia will be the fastest area of Christian growth in the first half of the 21st century. Roughly 6.5 million Asians converted to Christianity in one year – 2010 – alone. The epicenter of Asian growth is in east Asia (China) and southeast Asia (where Christians will make up a quarter of the population by 2050.)
Christians made up only 2.4% of Asians in 1910 but made up 8.5% of all Asians a century later and are expected to grow to 11.3% of all Asians by 2050. This 370% growth will mean that Christian Asians will soon outnumber Asian Buddhists.
The trauma of 40 years of state sponsored atheists has pretty much overwhelmed any lingering impact of the association of 19th century imperialism with Christianity. Post-atheist religion is on the rebound in China, Christianity most of all. By 2050, China will be the second largest Christian nation on earth with 225 million Christians, right behind the US, and with nearly 6 times as many Christians as Italy. In China, the number of Christians will have been growing three times faster than the population for the past 140 years.
The little one page summary that Weigel is quoting is the top most layer of a staggering amount of research compiled originally in the World Christian Encyclopedia (Oxford University Press) and now online at the World Christian Database, a high level scholarly database hosted by the Center for Global Christianity. The dead tree WC Encyclopedia comprises 1600 13 x 17 inches pages (8 point type) in two volumes. (I recommend a magnifying glass when doing serious research there.)
The scholars behind this work are drilling down to a level of depth, complexity, and nuance that that is unique in the world. For instance, they track things like “double affiliation” (Catholics who simultaneously also call themselves something else – like evangelical, independent, Hindu, Muslim, agnostic, etc. depending upon the unique social and political pressures of the culture in which they live.) Even a quick perusal of the online data that Weigel quoted would immediately show you that it distinguishes between “all Christians” (2.92 billion), affiliated Christians (those who are formal members of some Christian group – 2.17 billion), and church attendees (1.5 billion).
Bill Bannon:
The situation in Asia has changed exponentially for Christian in the last half of the 20th century. The 20th century was Africa’s Christian moment but Asia was close behind and Asia will be the fastest area of Christian growth in the first half of the 21st century. Roughly 6.5 million Asians converted to Christianity in one year – 2010 – alone. The epicenter of Asian growth is in east Asia (China) and southeast Asia (where Christians will make up a quarter of the population by 2050.)
Christians made up only 2.4% of Asians in 1910 but made up 8.5% of all Asians a century later and are expected to grow to 11.3% of all Asians by 2050. This 370% growth will mean that Christian Asians will soon outnumber Asian Buddhists.
The trauma of 40 years of state sponsored atheists has pretty much overwhelmed any lingering impact of the association of 19th century imperialism with Christianity. Post-atheist religion is on the rebound in China, Christianity most of all. By 2050, China will be the second largest Christian nation on earth with 225 million Christians, right behind the US, and with nearly 6 times as many Christians as Italy. In China, the number of Christians will have been growing three times faster than the population for the past 140 years.
2.9.2011 | 3:51pm
Corey says:
Another great resource for those interested in world Christianity is the Southern Baptist Church's International Mission Board. Their focus is, as you might expect, on evangelical Christianity, but they've done some very helpful research and represented it in a number of ways. See here if interested: http://public.imb.org/globalresearch/Pages/default.aspx
2.9.2011 | 3:58pm
bill bannon says:
Stephen
You gave actual numerical figures on South Korea only.....you switched to a general hope statement when talking on China.....and you were totally silent on Japan.
On Genesis, are you saying our missionaries are definitely explicitly teaching that such things as an Ark and a Flood are definitely poetic. I'm not interested in whether they secretly link themselves to Augustine and Pius XII's view which views may not be known by all that many Catholics since about 30% of Catholics do not even seem to know about the real prescence of Christ in the Eucharist. I am interested in whether the on the ground missionaries all A.) are on the same page as to the literal versus poetic and B.) are they making that same page explicit during conversions. You are pretending that the more hidden areas of high level discussion are identical to the laity level. Were that the case, one would hear in many Catholic sermons in the West that the Ark and the Flood are definitely poetic....beyond question. One does not.
You gave actual numerical figures on South Korea only.....you switched to a general hope statement when talking on China.....and you were totally silent on Japan.
On Genesis, are you saying our missionaries are definitely explicitly teaching that such things as an Ark and a Flood are definitely poetic. I'm not interested in whether they secretly link themselves to Augustine and Pius XII's view which views may not be known by all that many Catholics since about 30% of Catholics do not even seem to know about the real prescence of Christ in the Eucharist. I am interested in whether the on the ground missionaries all A.) are on the same page as to the literal versus poetic and B.) are they making that same page explicit during conversions. You are pretending that the more hidden areas of high level discussion are identical to the laity level. Were that the case, one would hear in many Catholic sermons in the West that the Ark and the Flood are definitely poetic....beyond question. One does not.
2.9.2011 | 4:53pm
Mr M Savage says:
Dear Mr. Stephen M. Barr,
If I may interject in your comment to Mr Bannon: rather, it surprises myself that you do not know that it is Church doctrine that the Bible 'contains no error' (read Councils of Florence, Trent, Vatican, as well as Leo XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus etc., etc.,).
Likewise, it teaches that the bible should be taken literally, though it comes literally through various means: directly, indirectly or allegorically.
Creation and the lineage from Adam to Christ, (then from St Peter to Pope Benedict XVI), is wholely easier to prove than the shifting sands of evolution.
If I may interject in your comment to Mr Bannon: rather, it surprises myself that you do not know that it is Church doctrine that the Bible 'contains no error' (read Councils of Florence, Trent, Vatican, as well as Leo XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus etc., etc.,).
Likewise, it teaches that the bible should be taken literally, though it comes literally through various means: directly, indirectly or allegorically.
Creation and the lineage from Adam to Christ, (then from St Peter to Pope Benedict XVI), is wholely easier to prove than the shifting sands of evolution.
2.9.2011 | 6:36pm
bill bannon says:
Sherry
Projections are wonderful but non debatable because they haven't happened yet.
Are the Catholic figures I'm reading for Japan as .5% and for China less than 1% incorrect? If so is there a non Catholic source you can refer me to since Catholic media has this verge syndrome that I don't trust.....remember how the Motu Proprio meant we were on the verge of a return of many many people to the Latin Mass....and then we were on the verge at some blogs of the return of many people to NFP. Oy....with the verge theories. Especially if you know of quality of convert demographics in a library. Weigel's above piece presumes numbers are everything...meanwhile we read of African priests with unofficial wives and we read of the abuse of nuns there also by priests and that makes one doubtful whether any Catholic stats attempt to discern quality of conversions when talking about non Western figures. Are Chinese converts mixing Catholicism with folk religion elements as Catholicism is mixed with spiritism in Brazil, santeria in Cuba, voodoo in Haiti. We don't know it seems. China always had secret societies....is that part of the draw of the underground Church for some? Or maybe....there is no study of third world conversions that deals with quality. Your writings are interesting on US Catholics precisely because you go into quality of belief not just numbers. But as soon as it's the non Western world, numbers are celebrated for their own sake.
Projections are wonderful but non debatable because they haven't happened yet.
Are the Catholic figures I'm reading for Japan as .5% and for China less than 1% incorrect? If so is there a non Catholic source you can refer me to since Catholic media has this verge syndrome that I don't trust.....remember how the Motu Proprio meant we were on the verge of a return of many many people to the Latin Mass....and then we were on the verge at some blogs of the return of many people to NFP. Oy....with the verge theories. Especially if you know of quality of convert demographics in a library. Weigel's above piece presumes numbers are everything...meanwhile we read of African priests with unofficial wives and we read of the abuse of nuns there also by priests and that makes one doubtful whether any Catholic stats attempt to discern quality of conversions when talking about non Western figures. Are Chinese converts mixing Catholicism with folk religion elements as Catholicism is mixed with spiritism in Brazil, santeria in Cuba, voodoo in Haiti. We don't know it seems. China always had secret societies....is that part of the draw of the underground Church for some? Or maybe....there is no study of third world conversions that deals with quality. Your writings are interesting on US Catholics precisely because you go into quality of belief not just numbers. But as soon as it's the non Western world, numbers are celebrated for their own sake.
2.9.2011 | 6:42pm
Sherry Weddell says:
Here’s a sample of 17 Asian nations whose Christian population has grown significantly over the past centuries. It isn’t an exhaustive list – just indicative.
The first number is the percentage of Christians in a nation in 1910, the second the percentage in 2010. Source: the Atlas of Global Christianity (Edinburgh University Press, 2010)
Japan: 1.0% (1910) 2.3% (2010)
China: 0.4% (1910) 8.6% (2010
Mongolia: 0.1% (1910) 1.7% (2010)
N. Korea 0.4% (1910) 2.0% (2010)
S. Korea 0.5% (1910) 41.4% (2010
Taiwan 0.3% (1910) 6.0% (2010)
India 1.7% (1910) 4.8% (2010)
Bhutan 0.0% (1910) 1.3% (20101
Nepal 0.0% (1910) 3.1% (2010)
Pakistan 0.4% (1910) 2.3% (2010)
Kazakhstan 4.9% (1910) 13.4% (2010)
Indonesia 1.4% (1910) 12.4% (2010)
Brunei 0.5% (1910) 15.3% (2010)
Laos 0.6% (1910) 3.1% (2010)
Malaysia 1.5% (1910) 9.1% (2010)
Myanmar 2.2% (1910) 8.0% (2010)
Singapore 4.0% (1910) 16.1% (2010)
The first number is the percentage of Christians in a nation in 1910, the second the percentage in 2010. Source: the Atlas of Global Christianity (Edinburgh University Press, 2010)
Japan: 1.0% (1910) 2.3% (2010)
China: 0.4% (1910) 8.6% (2010
Mongolia: 0.1% (1910) 1.7% (2010)
N. Korea 0.4% (1910) 2.0% (2010)
S. Korea 0.5% (1910) 41.4% (2010
Taiwan 0.3% (1910) 6.0% (2010)
India 1.7% (1910) 4.8% (2010)
Bhutan 0.0% (1910) 1.3% (20101
Nepal 0.0% (1910) 3.1% (2010)
Pakistan 0.4% (1910) 2.3% (2010)
Kazakhstan 4.9% (1910) 13.4% (2010)
Indonesia 1.4% (1910) 12.4% (2010)
Brunei 0.5% (1910) 15.3% (2010)
Laos 0.6% (1910) 3.1% (2010)
Malaysia 1.5% (1910) 9.1% (2010)
Myanmar 2.2% (1910) 8.0% (2010)
Singapore 4.0% (1910) 16.1% (2010)
2.9.2011 | 7:31pm
Vincent Torley says:
Dr. Barr,
I have to agree with Bill Bannon's comments on Genesis. The same Pius XII whom you cite also insisted in his encyclical "Humani Generis" that Catholics were obliged to believe in a literal Adam and Eve - which apparently flies in the face of recent genetic research indicating that the human population has never been less than 10,000 in our evolutionary history. The new Catechism also refers to Adam and Eve, although it does not explicitly say Catholics are bound to believe in an original couple. Rome has been dallying for too long on this one. Catholics need direction on this question.
In the Mass, the priest refers to "the sacrifice of your servant Abel." Are Catholics bound to believe Abel even existed? And was the pastoralist Abel the son of Adam, as the Bible apparently states? If so, the human race is no more than 12,000 years old. Yet sapient human beings have existed since the time of Homo ergaster/erectus, 2 million years ago.
As for the Flood, the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia states that even if it was not geographically universal, Catholics are still bound to believe that it wiped out all human beings except Noah and his family. For 2,000 years Catholics have believed this (including Aquinas and Augustine) and no statement from Rome in the last 100 years has clearly indicated that they are not. This is another question on which Catholics need direction.
I have to agree with Bill Bannon's comments on Genesis. The same Pius XII whom you cite also insisted in his encyclical "Humani Generis" that Catholics were obliged to believe in a literal Adam and Eve - which apparently flies in the face of recent genetic research indicating that the human population has never been less than 10,000 in our evolutionary history. The new Catechism also refers to Adam and Eve, although it does not explicitly say Catholics are bound to believe in an original couple. Rome has been dallying for too long on this one. Catholics need direction on this question.
In the Mass, the priest refers to "the sacrifice of your servant Abel." Are Catholics bound to believe Abel even existed? And was the pastoralist Abel the son of Adam, as the Bible apparently states? If so, the human race is no more than 12,000 years old. Yet sapient human beings have existed since the time of Homo ergaster/erectus, 2 million years ago.
As for the Flood, the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia states that even if it was not geographically universal, Catholics are still bound to believe that it wiped out all human beings except Noah and his family. For 2,000 years Catholics have believed this (including Aquinas and Augustine) and no statement from Rome in the last 100 years has clearly indicated that they are not. This is another question on which Catholics need direction.
2.9.2011 | 7:35pm
tioedong says:
I'm glad someone noted that Asia has many Christians, and the many converts in Africa.
As to the discussion about if these are "nominal" believers, this presumes the Protestant "born again" scenerio, or an intellectual approach to faith. Asking a Filipino if he is Catholic or not would be like asking if he had a mother and father. the relationship with God is similar to that of the family: Jesus is kuya, God is our father, and Mama Mary is our mother, and even our sins don't mean we aren't part of his family.
Finally, Mr. Medez ignores that most Americans outside the media and upper west side of Manhattan do believe. Just because one doesn't preach in the face of someone doesn't prove belief. For example, most of the 300 firefighters/police who died in the WTC attacks while trying to rescue folks were Catholic. Do we measure their faith by their church attendance, or by their actions that echo the willingness to imitate Christ by laying their life down for another?
As to the discussion about if these are "nominal" believers, this presumes the Protestant "born again" scenerio, or an intellectual approach to faith. Asking a Filipino if he is Catholic or not would be like asking if he had a mother and father. the relationship with God is similar to that of the family: Jesus is kuya, God is our father, and Mama Mary is our mother, and even our sins don't mean we aren't part of his family.
Finally, Mr. Medez ignores that most Americans outside the media and upper west side of Manhattan do believe. Just because one doesn't preach in the face of someone doesn't prove belief. For example, most of the 300 firefighters/police who died in the WTC attacks while trying to rescue folks were Catholic. Do we measure their faith by their church attendance, or by their actions that echo the willingness to imitate Christ by laying their life down for another?
2.9.2011 | 7:48pm
Don Roberto says:
Without faith, man has no anchor, no compass, and no destination. It is tragic that billions drift over the void from which we were made, with flawed or broken compasses, and imaginary or wrong destinations; however, I believe there are very, very few true atheists (those who seek to return to the void).
God, has shown us the Way (Jesus). May we not decline His offer of salvation!
†
God, has shown us the Way (Jesus). May we not decline His offer of salvation!
†
2.9.2011 | 9:36pm
Sergio Méndez says:
Sherry:
Point taken. But what I will demand is a more specific survey on believers. Church attendence is only a variable (as another reader pointed, many christians who do not go to church are still deeply religious and commited to their faith). I think to measure the true levels of believers and adepts to one religion is very complicated (more in a global scale!), and many of the profesing christians (even many church-goers) actually live as practical atheists. Others belong to forms of christianity that are heretical (that is mainly the case of pentecostals, which if I recall, are not trinitarians).
Finally, and I know this is hardly an argument and could be easely misunderstood with a form of ad hominem, as an atheist let me be suspicious of a survey conducted by an instution with a name like"Bulletin of Missionary Research", that even takes into account the "martyrs" of christianity (are martyrs of other religions included?).
P.D: Do you know if there is a website with the full contents of the report?
Point taken. But what I will demand is a more specific survey on believers. Church attendence is only a variable (as another reader pointed, many christians who do not go to church are still deeply religious and commited to their faith). I think to measure the true levels of believers and adepts to one religion is very complicated (more in a global scale!), and many of the profesing christians (even many church-goers) actually live as practical atheists. Others belong to forms of christianity that are heretical (that is mainly the case of pentecostals, which if I recall, are not trinitarians).
Finally, and I know this is hardly an argument and could be easely misunderstood with a form of ad hominem, as an atheist let me be suspicious of a survey conducted by an instution with a name like"Bulletin of Missionary Research", that even takes into account the "martyrs" of christianity (are martyrs of other religions included?).
P.D: Do you know if there is a website with the full contents of the report?
2.9.2011 | 10:08pm
edmond says:
I still value the catechism taught to me in the first grade, particularly about Adam
and Eve. At that age and still today I see no need to force fit that truth into a
scientific excuse or explanation at best. Converts to be on the whole, couldn't give a
careless moment for the great flood or creation to be couched in scientific
theories, that is one way of losing the conversion. The philosophical arguments on
the whole are sadly always bereft of faith, which is the key and only ingredient to genuine conversion. Even the account of conversion of St. Augustine who most revere here will show you that. Try explaining summa theologica to a native head hunter from southeast asia, see how a conversion can go bad, really bad, specially for you.
and Eve. At that age and still today I see no need to force fit that truth into a
scientific excuse or explanation at best. Converts to be on the whole, couldn't give a
careless moment for the great flood or creation to be couched in scientific
theories, that is one way of losing the conversion. The philosophical arguments on
the whole are sadly always bereft of faith, which is the key and only ingredient to genuine conversion. Even the account of conversion of St. Augustine who most revere here will show you that. Try explaining summa theologica to a native head hunter from southeast asia, see how a conversion can go bad, really bad, specially for you.
2.9.2011 | 11:52pm
Sergio Méndez says:
Tieoedong, you say:
"Just because one doesn't preach in the face of someone doesn't prove belief. For example, most of the 300 firefighters/police who died in the WTC attacks while trying to rescue folks were Catholic. Do we measure their faith by their church attendance, or by their actions that echo the willingness to imitate Christ by laying their life down for another?"
I guess many americans (and people in western secular societies) are indeed religious. My question is that if they can be considered "christian" just cause they claim so. As most people in this website should know, being christian demands more than just simple faith or good actions. It requires compromise and knowledge of a set of doctrines, making a serious effort to live by those beliefs and a compromise in the religious life in comunity (say, church attendence for example). Many of the so called self proclaimed christians I know do not live by any of those demands, God for them is just an abstract idea or in the best of cases, just something to grap on when things are going badly in their lifes.
By the way, I do not live in Manhantan but in a third world catholic countr (Colombia)y, where belief in God and supernatural are very strong. And even here I see a lot of the attitudes I am commenting.
"Just because one doesn't preach in the face of someone doesn't prove belief. For example, most of the 300 firefighters/police who died in the WTC attacks while trying to rescue folks were Catholic. Do we measure their faith by their church attendance, or by their actions that echo the willingness to imitate Christ by laying their life down for another?"
I guess many americans (and people in western secular societies) are indeed religious. My question is that if they can be considered "christian" just cause they claim so. As most people in this website should know, being christian demands more than just simple faith or good actions. It requires compromise and knowledge of a set of doctrines, making a serious effort to live by those beliefs and a compromise in the religious life in comunity (say, church attendence for example). Many of the so called self proclaimed christians I know do not live by any of those demands, God for them is just an abstract idea or in the best of cases, just something to grap on when things are going badly in their lifes.
By the way, I do not live in Manhantan but in a third world catholic countr (Colombia)y, where belief in God and supernatural are very strong. And even here I see a lot of the attitudes I am commenting.
2.9.2011 | 11:54pm
Sherry Weddell says:
Projections are wonderful but non debatable because they haven't happened yet.
Are the Catholic figures I'm reading for Japan as .5% and for China less than 1% incorrect?
Bill:
I need to correct a figure I gave before. There were 4.5 million converts to Christianity in Asia in 2010 NOT 6.5 million. I made a mistake copying.
First of all, we must distinguish between Catholic and Christian when discussing these questions. One of my greatest frustration is the strange reluctance to do in Asia what we do everywhere else in the world: acknowledge that Christianity does not equal Catholicism.
Most of the growth in Asia over the past 50 years has been non-Catholic, specifically the various heirs of the Reformation. The dramatic Catholic growth over the past 100 years has been in eastern and middle Africa (which grew from 0.6% Catholic in 1910 to 44.4% Catholic in 2010).
Catholics made up 1.3% of Asia’s population in 1910 and now represent 3.3% (154% growth) so they have grown faster than the population but not nearly as fast as the various forms of Protestant/Independent Christianity. Slightly more than 1/3 (38.8%) of Asian Christians are Catholics and 62.2% are something else.
Eastern Asia (which includes powerhouses like China and South Korea) is 9% Christian as a whole but only 1.3% Catholic. The 20th century was the century of Protestant growth in Asia. 74% of all Chinese Christians are “independents”, for instance.
As I wrote in a series on global Christianity at the end of 2010, (http://www.siena.org/December-2010/christian-mission-a-bust.html) in 1910, Catholics did made up 54% of all Christians in the whole of Asia, 85% of all Christians in southeast Asia, and 50% of all Christians in east Asia. Catholics had been the dominant form of Christianity in Asia for over 300 years. Simultaneously, Catholics had also been a tiny minority who had suffered heroically for the faith. A people can build a strong sense of self in 300 years that is not easily shifted by changes in the world about them.
But in the last half of the 20th century, the world did change. The explosion of Protestant missions and indigenous Christian groups in Asia changed everything. Today, Catholics only make up 38.8% of all Christians in Asia, 68% of Christians in southeast Asia, and a mere 14.4% in east Asia where Independent Christians are now the dominant group. Over 50% of Asian Christians are now renewalists. In 2010 alone, there were 4.5 million Asian converts to Christianity, easily outstripping the numbers becoming Christian in Africa.
All of the major sources are non-Catholic. The World Christian Encyclopedia and the Atlas of Global Christianity (2010) are in print as well as on DVD. The World Christian Database is online and updated regularly but is subscription only and quite pricy since it is designed for scholars, libraries, and institutional use. (It is more than I can afford) http://worldchristiandatabase.org/wcd/
Are the Catholic figures I'm reading for Japan as .5% and for China less than 1% incorrect?
Bill:
I need to correct a figure I gave before. There were 4.5 million converts to Christianity in Asia in 2010 NOT 6.5 million. I made a mistake copying.
First of all, we must distinguish between Catholic and Christian when discussing these questions. One of my greatest frustration is the strange reluctance to do in Asia what we do everywhere else in the world: acknowledge that Christianity does not equal Catholicism.
Most of the growth in Asia over the past 50 years has been non-Catholic, specifically the various heirs of the Reformation. The dramatic Catholic growth over the past 100 years has been in eastern and middle Africa (which grew from 0.6% Catholic in 1910 to 44.4% Catholic in 2010).
Catholics made up 1.3% of Asia’s population in 1910 and now represent 3.3% (154% growth) so they have grown faster than the population but not nearly as fast as the various forms of Protestant/Independent Christianity. Slightly more than 1/3 (38.8%) of Asian Christians are Catholics and 62.2% are something else.
Eastern Asia (which includes powerhouses like China and South Korea) is 9% Christian as a whole but only 1.3% Catholic. The 20th century was the century of Protestant growth in Asia. 74% of all Chinese Christians are “independents”, for instance.
As I wrote in a series on global Christianity at the end of 2010, (http://www.siena.org/December-2010/christian-mission-a-bust.html) in 1910, Catholics did made up 54% of all Christians in the whole of Asia, 85% of all Christians in southeast Asia, and 50% of all Christians in east Asia. Catholics had been the dominant form of Christianity in Asia for over 300 years. Simultaneously, Catholics had also been a tiny minority who had suffered heroically for the faith. A people can build a strong sense of self in 300 years that is not easily shifted by changes in the world about them.
But in the last half of the 20th century, the world did change. The explosion of Protestant missions and indigenous Christian groups in Asia changed everything. Today, Catholics only make up 38.8% of all Christians in Asia, 68% of Christians in southeast Asia, and a mere 14.4% in east Asia where Independent Christians are now the dominant group. Over 50% of Asian Christians are now renewalists. In 2010 alone, there were 4.5 million Asian converts to Christianity, easily outstripping the numbers becoming Christian in Africa.
All of the major sources are non-Catholic. The World Christian Encyclopedia and the Atlas of Global Christianity (2010) are in print as well as on DVD. The World Christian Database is online and updated regularly but is subscription only and quite pricy since it is designed for scholars, libraries, and institutional use. (It is more than I can afford) http://worldchristiandatabase.org/wcd/
2.10.2011 | 12:01am
Sherry Weddell says:
Sergio:
Yes, faith is very complicated and measuring it on a global scale is very complicated which is why the World Christian Encyclopedia goes into such depth. I can't begin to convey the content of 1600 pages in a combox. I recommend that you find a copy in the reference section of your local library and spend a couple hours perusing it.
And bring a magnifying glass :-}
Let's face it, just who do you think would spend 30 years compiling such information but people passionately interested in global Christianity and it's missionary mandate? Of course, Oxford University Press isn't known for it's stupidity and David Barrett, who was the force behind the World Christian Encyclopedia, has a top notch reputation as a scholar and statistician. (He is now retired and others have taken over.)
If you discount Barrett as a scholar because he is also believing Christian, I can't help you. No one else has done the work at this level and for this long.
Yes, faith is very complicated and measuring it on a global scale is very complicated which is why the World Christian Encyclopedia goes into such depth. I can't begin to convey the content of 1600 pages in a combox. I recommend that you find a copy in the reference section of your local library and spend a couple hours perusing it.
And bring a magnifying glass :-}
Let's face it, just who do you think would spend 30 years compiling such information but people passionately interested in global Christianity and it's missionary mandate? Of course, Oxford University Press isn't known for it's stupidity and David Barrett, who was the force behind the World Christian Encyclopedia, has a top notch reputation as a scholar and statistician. (He is now retired and others have taken over.)
If you discount Barrett as a scholar because he is also believing Christian, I can't help you. No one else has done the work at this level and for this long.
2.10.2011 | 12:03am
bill bannon says:
The reactions in this thread proved my point that we are not, even here in the West, on the same page on Genesis (how much is history/ how much is poetry). Ergo...we must be converting largely the worker, farmer classes in these countries but are certainly not converting intellectuals....St. Paul approached all levels. Rome should be working toward a position paper for very well read Chinese if they are going to be included. Some of their physical sciences people hold the earth to be over 4 billion years old.....not 10,000 or 6,000 etc. We don't see headlines here either about 4% of MIT professors converting to the Church....as we see such headlines about Anglicans fleeing their Church for ours. In short, are we writing off the well read in all countries by not working at Rome on the problems presented to the Bible by geology and physics....putting evolution aside. Geology challenged the Bible prior to evolution doing so. Are we converting largely the non readers of each country with no organ at Rome working on the complex biblical problems with a view to also converting the very intellectual people of such countries?
2.10.2011 | 12:04am
Stephen M. Barr says:
Dear Vincent Torley,
You have a point. Perhaps greater guidance from the magisterium would be helpful on some of these issues. A step in that direction was a document of the International Theological Commission written in 2004 and entitled "Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God" (hereinafter denoted CAS). This document contains a sophisticated exploration of the issues surrounding human origins. Though it has no binding authority, the commission that wrote it is an official Church commission that exists to advise the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and that was acting in this case at the behest and under the direction of then-Cardinal Ratzinger.
Here is what CAS says in section 64 about human origins:
"According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the “Big Bang” and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5-4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution."
Now, you seem to see, Vincent, a clear contradiction between the doctrine that there was an original pair of humans ("Adam and Eve") and the scientific conclusion that the human population was never smaller than a few thousand. But there is not necessarily a contradiction. The genetic information tells us that at the beginnings of homo sapiens there was an interbreeding population that numbered in the thousands. At the physical level the members of that population were similar enough that they could interbreed to produce fertile offspring, which by a common biological definition means they were members of the same species. However, what makes a creature a human being in the theological sense is not merely genetic similarity but also the presence of a "spiritual soul", i.e. the powers of intellect and will, rationality and freedom. It is quite conceivable that as the proto-human population (consisting of thousands) developed there came a point at which God conferred upon a single pair of them (or conceivably on a larger number) the gift of a spiritual nature. This idea has been suggested by a number of Catholic and non-Catholic-Christian thinkers, including C.S. Lewis. It seems to be also the idea in the minds of the International Theological Commission in section 70 of CAS:
"Catholic theology affirms that that the emergence of the first members of the human species (whether as individuals or in populations) represents an event that is not susceptible of a purely natural explanation and which can appropriately be attributed to divine intervention. Acting indirectly through causal chains operating from the beginning of cosmic history, God prepared the way for what Pope John Paul II has called “an ontological leap...the moment of transition to the spiritual.” While science can study these causal chains, it falls to theology to locate this account of the special creation of the human soul within the overarching plan of the triune God to share the communion of trinitarian life with human persons who are created out of nothing in the image and likeness of God, and who, in his name and according to his plan, exercise a creative stewardship and sovereignty over the physical universe."
So, the evolution of the human body was a gradual process occurring in a sizable population, whereas the "transition to the spiritual" was sudden, required a special act of creation of the spiritual soul (which happened not only in the first human beings, indeed, but also in every human child who is conceived), and occurred in a much smaller number, quite possibly in only two to begin with.
In any event, the scientific account of cosmology and of biological evolution have been almost universally taught Catholic schools for generations in this country and throughout the world with the full knowledge of the bishops and popes, who have raised no objection to it. There are explicit statements of popes, including JPII and BXVI to the effect that evolution does not contradict the faith. There has never been a statement of any pope since Darwin condemning evolution.
It is widely (and correctly) understood both in the scientific community and among educated people generally that the Catholic Church accepts the findings of modern cosmology and biology. It is also widely understood that in the view of the Catholic Church much in the book of Genesis is not to be taken as a scientific account. This was explicitly stated, in fact, by Pope Leo XIII in Providentissimus Deus (1893):
"To understand how just is the rule here formulated we must remember, first, that the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost "Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable unto salvation."(53) Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers-as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us - `went by what sensibly appeared,"(54) or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to.
19. The unshrinking defence of the Holy Scripture, however, does not require that we should equally uphold all the opinions which each of the Fathers or the more recent interpreters have put forth in explaining it; for it may be that, in commenting on passages where physical matters occur, they have sometimes expressed the ideas of their own times, and thus made statements which in these days have been abandoned as incorrect. Hence, in their interpretations, we must carefully note what they lay down as belonging to faith, or as intimately connected with faith-what they are unanimous in. For "in those things which do not come under the obligation of faith, the Saints were at liberty to hold divergent opinions, just as we ourselves are,"(55) according to the saying of St. Thomas. And in another place he says most admirably: "When philosophers are agreed upon a point, and it is not contrary to our faith, it is safer, in my opinion, neither to lay down such a point as a dogma of faith, even though it is perhaps so presented by the philosophers, nor to reject it as against faith, lest we thus give to the wise of this world an occasion of despising our faith."(56)"
So there is not as much confusion and uncertainty about the Catholic Church's positions on these questions as you may think. I admit, however, that there are certain tricky questions upon which the laity could use more guidance. But the document CAS and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are very helpful guides in these matters.
You have a point. Perhaps greater guidance from the magisterium would be helpful on some of these issues. A step in that direction was a document of the International Theological Commission written in 2004 and entitled "Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God" (hereinafter denoted CAS). This document contains a sophisticated exploration of the issues surrounding human origins. Though it has no binding authority, the commission that wrote it is an official Church commission that exists to advise the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith and that was acting in this case at the behest and under the direction of then-Cardinal Ratzinger.
Here is what CAS says in section 64 about human origins:
"According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the “Big Bang” and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5-4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution."
Now, you seem to see, Vincent, a clear contradiction between the doctrine that there was an original pair of humans ("Adam and Eve") and the scientific conclusion that the human population was never smaller than a few thousand. But there is not necessarily a contradiction. The genetic information tells us that at the beginnings of homo sapiens there was an interbreeding population that numbered in the thousands. At the physical level the members of that population were similar enough that they could interbreed to produce fertile offspring, which by a common biological definition means they were members of the same species. However, what makes a creature a human being in the theological sense is not merely genetic similarity but also the presence of a "spiritual soul", i.e. the powers of intellect and will, rationality and freedom. It is quite conceivable that as the proto-human population (consisting of thousands) developed there came a point at which God conferred upon a single pair of them (or conceivably on a larger number) the gift of a spiritual nature. This idea has been suggested by a number of Catholic and non-Catholic-Christian thinkers, including C.S. Lewis. It seems to be also the idea in the minds of the International Theological Commission in section 70 of CAS:
"Catholic theology affirms that that the emergence of the first members of the human species (whether as individuals or in populations) represents an event that is not susceptible of a purely natural explanation and which can appropriately be attributed to divine intervention. Acting indirectly through causal chains operating from the beginning of cosmic history, God prepared the way for what Pope John Paul II has called “an ontological leap...the moment of transition to the spiritual.” While science can study these causal chains, it falls to theology to locate this account of the special creation of the human soul within the overarching plan of the triune God to share the communion of trinitarian life with human persons who are created out of nothing in the image and likeness of God, and who, in his name and according to his plan, exercise a creative stewardship and sovereignty over the physical universe."
So, the evolution of the human body was a gradual process occurring in a sizable population, whereas the "transition to the spiritual" was sudden, required a special act of creation of the spiritual soul (which happened not only in the first human beings, indeed, but also in every human child who is conceived), and occurred in a much smaller number, quite possibly in only two to begin with.
In any event, the scientific account of cosmology and of biological evolution have been almost universally taught Catholic schools for generations in this country and throughout the world with the full knowledge of the bishops and popes, who have raised no objection to it. There are explicit statements of popes, including JPII and BXVI to the effect that evolution does not contradict the faith. There has never been a statement of any pope since Darwin condemning evolution.
It is widely (and correctly) understood both in the scientific community and among educated people generally that the Catholic Church accepts the findings of modern cosmology and biology. It is also widely understood that in the view of the Catholic Church much in the book of Genesis is not to be taken as a scientific account. This was explicitly stated, in fact, by Pope Leo XIII in Providentissimus Deus (1893):
"To understand how just is the rule here formulated we must remember, first, that the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost "Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable unto salvation."(53) Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers-as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us - `went by what sensibly appeared,"(54) or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to.
19. The unshrinking defence of the Holy Scripture, however, does not require that we should equally uphold all the opinions which each of the Fathers or the more recent interpreters have put forth in explaining it; for it may be that, in commenting on passages where physical matters occur, they have sometimes expressed the ideas of their own times, and thus made statements which in these days have been abandoned as incorrect. Hence, in their interpretations, we must carefully note what they lay down as belonging to faith, or as intimately connected with faith-what they are unanimous in. For "in those things which do not come under the obligation of faith, the Saints were at liberty to hold divergent opinions, just as we ourselves are,"(55) according to the saying of St. Thomas. And in another place he says most admirably: "When philosophers are agreed upon a point, and it is not contrary to our faith, it is safer, in my opinion, neither to lay down such a point as a dogma of faith, even though it is perhaps so presented by the philosophers, nor to reject it as against faith, lest we thus give to the wise of this world an occasion of despising our faith."(56)"
So there is not as much confusion and uncertainty about the Catholic Church's positions on these questions as you may think. I admit, however, that there are certain tricky questions upon which the laity could use more guidance. But the document CAS and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are very helpful guides in these matters.
2.10.2011 | 1:29am
bill bannon says:
Sherry and Stephen...thanks for your work. Sherry, I'm copying your last post to my ipad notes. Very good data. The independents is a surprise. Half my family thru my wife are very intelligent Chinese... well educated people. Mission to them is a slow motion dance. I see mistakes from Rome. Benedict's letter saying the Church does not seek to overthrow governments....while we collectively applaud John Paul overthrowing communism in Poland and Weigel's Witness to Hope linking John Paul to the overthrow of Marcos off their coast. Chinese intelligence must Rome is daft. Popes from lack of internal challenge....think the whole world agrees with whatever they say....even if it is contradicted by our own books.
2.10.2011 | 6:22am
Bob Burford says:
We still have a misson. Matthew 28 : 17-20.
The battle is still being waged but we know how it ends.
The battle is still being waged but we know how it ends.
2.10.2011 | 9:38am
Nick says:
In reply to discussion on the Flood, Genesis, and recent genetic research, etc (Vince Torley). I don’t believe Catholics need direction on this question. I remember a friendly criticism from an Orthodox friend of mine, “you Catholics tend to quantify things too much.” Let’s remember our faith is a mystery and we as Catholic Christians need to be able to have faith and believe in an environment of incomplete information and unknowns. Such is the foundation of miracles and orthodox mysticism.
Second, we need to be very careful in quoting sources as the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia. The Catholic Encyclopedia may be a great collection of reliable information but it is not authoritative or infallible concerning things of the faith. Also, concerning “Humani Generis” and Pope Pius XII’s, “famous speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences,” (Supported and further elaborated on by his predecessors). This is a complex subject and a few lines quote here and there in a blog format does not do the topic justice and can lead to misinterpretations.
As a former scientist I am quite comfortable in accepting the Church’s teaching on evolution. I see no conflict with faith and science and I understand the recent models and theories on our origin resulting from genetic research. I can also accept, as an exercise in faith, the theological principle that we are all descendant from a common ancestor. I firmly believe in the theme repeatedly put forward by Pope Pope John Paul II, and others, that there can be no contradiction between faith and reason. I look forward to future discoveries and scientific theories and know that in the end faith and reason will be harmonized.
Second, we need to be very careful in quoting sources as the 1913 Catholic Encyclopedia. The Catholic Encyclopedia may be a great collection of reliable information but it is not authoritative or infallible concerning things of the faith. Also, concerning “Humani Generis” and Pope Pius XII’s, “famous speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences,” (Supported and further elaborated on by his predecessors). This is a complex subject and a few lines quote here and there in a blog format does not do the topic justice and can lead to misinterpretations.
As a former scientist I am quite comfortable in accepting the Church’s teaching on evolution. I see no conflict with faith and science and I understand the recent models and theories on our origin resulting from genetic research. I can also accept, as an exercise in faith, the theological principle that we are all descendant from a common ancestor. I firmly believe in the theme repeatedly put forward by Pope Pope John Paul II, and others, that there can be no contradiction between faith and reason. I look forward to future discoveries and scientific theories and know that in the end faith and reason will be harmonized.
2.10.2011 | 10:52am
Stephen M Barr says:
I am very skeptical of the source that Sherry Weddell cites. This source says that South Korea is about 40% Christian. However the 1995 South Korean Census (they, like the U.S. do a census every ten years) gave the percentage of Christians as 29.2%. That latter figure is almost certainly very accurate. One has to assume that the government Census figures are the most reliable data we have. Moreover, the figure of 30% agrees with other studies. As far as China goes, one hears all sorts of staggering figures, such as 100 million Chinese Christians. However, a few years ago there were two careful surveys carried out by evangelical researchers, and they came to almost identical conclusions: about 40 million Protestants and 14 million Catholics, for a total of about 4% of the Chinese population. These seem to be the only actual scientific surveys that have been carried out. Most of the claims of huge numbers seem to be based on guesses or people's impressions. The evangelical researchers who conducted one of the Chinese studies criticized his fellow evangelicals for tending to inflate statistics.
This is not to deny that Christianity is growing very rapidly in Asia. It is.
This is not to deny that Christianity is growing very rapidly in Asia. It is.
2.10.2011 | 12:38pm
bill bannon says:
Stephen,
I saved your work on the Theological Commission's work. I'll actually use it in conversation with Chinese here. Thanks again. The biblical problems don't end with Genesis. If Jonah and the whale are part of a short story and metaphoric, why does Christ say the men of Niniveh will rise at the judgement and condemn His generation since they repented at the preaching of Jonah and a greater than Jonah has been sent to them. How could people from a fictional tale rise at the judgement? Or are certain books sporadically history and sporadically metaphoric or hyperbole. Many problems. Did the Red Sea part or was it a windswept sand bar ("Understanding the Old Testament"/ Anderson) in the Reed Sea.
I think Protestantism's lead in China could be partly fed by freedom on birth control questions in a one child state policy country where a second pregnancy can mean dire consequences and total poverty through fine debt...and the lead could be fed by the abscence of a foreign remote ruler (Pope) in Protestantism.
I saved your work on the Theological Commission's work. I'll actually use it in conversation with Chinese here. Thanks again. The biblical problems don't end with Genesis. If Jonah and the whale are part of a short story and metaphoric, why does Christ say the men of Niniveh will rise at the judgement and condemn His generation since they repented at the preaching of Jonah and a greater than Jonah has been sent to them. How could people from a fictional tale rise at the judgement? Or are certain books sporadically history and sporadically metaphoric or hyperbole. Many problems. Did the Red Sea part or was it a windswept sand bar ("Understanding the Old Testament"/ Anderson) in the Reed Sea.
I think Protestantism's lead in China could be partly fed by freedom on birth control questions in a one child state policy country where a second pregnancy can mean dire consequences and total poverty through fine debt...and the lead could be fed by the abscence of a foreign remote ruler (Pope) in Protestantism.
2.10.2011 | 2:43pm
Sherry Weddell says:
Stephen:
Todd Johnson, who co-edited the Atlas of Global Christianity (another massive scholarly effort to show the state of global Christianity as of 2010) is also co-editor of the second edition of the World Christian Encyclopedia and editor or the World Christian Database. While there certainly are exaggerated estimates in parts of the evangelical world, the World Christian Encyclopedia folks are not given to wild guesses. They could be wrong like anyone else, but even their best guesses are based upon a formidable statistical knowledge and have a carefully thought out method behind them. Simply blowing them off as “inflated” really isn’t the thoughtful alternative. Careful research into their methodology is.
The figures the AGC gives are as of 2010, not 1995. The religious landscape is changing so fast in parts of Asia that 15 years is an eternity. It are changing so fast that I would hesitate to use figures that were only 10 years old because there is a good chance that they are hopelessly outdated already. 1995 is *so* 20th century and that really does matter here.
As for China, in 2006, the most senior religious official in China was reported by the Xinhua News Agency as revealing that the number of Christians in China had reached 130 million.
Ye Xiaowen, the director of the Religious Affairs Bureau, an arm of the Chinese government, made the statement at two closed meetings held at Beijing University and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. His figure included approximately 20 million Catholics. Ye is the same man who, in June 1997, described all unregistered house church groups as “evil, illegal organizations that undermine social order. Ironically, such a high figure as 130 million must include a very large component of members of the very groups he so strongly condemned.
When you talk about a Chinese figure of 40 million, I take it you are referring to Werner Bürklin’s 2007 study of registered churches. Burklin also acknowleged in a 2005 book that he can’t speak for unregistered house churches which is the primary methodological problems with his approach since the majority of Chinese Christians do not belong to registered churches. Burklin also made the astonishing statement: “In my many years of ministry in China I have yet to find a Christian who has been incarcerated because of his or her beliefs. To put it mildly, he seems to be seriously out of touch with some very important segments of the Christian population in China. Serious China scholars think his figures do represent the reality of the Three Self Movement in China but hardly that of Chinese Christianity as a whole.
Even the Chinese government’s public figures are much higher than 40 million. In 2009, the national China Daily newspaper stated there are at least 50 million
house church Christians in China, in addition to the official number of 21
million registered believers who attend Three-Self churches.
For a very thoughtful survey of the recent estimates of the number of Christians in China, look at Paul Hattaway’s How Many Christians Are There in China? http://www.asiaharvest.org/pages/Christians%20in%20China/How%20Many%20Christians%20are%20There%20in%20China.pdf
Todd Johnson, who co-edited the Atlas of Global Christianity (another massive scholarly effort to show the state of global Christianity as of 2010) is also co-editor of the second edition of the World Christian Encyclopedia and editor or the World Christian Database. While there certainly are exaggerated estimates in parts of the evangelical world, the World Christian Encyclopedia folks are not given to wild guesses. They could be wrong like anyone else, but even their best guesses are based upon a formidable statistical knowledge and have a carefully thought out method behind them. Simply blowing them off as “inflated” really isn’t the thoughtful alternative. Careful research into their methodology is.
The figures the AGC gives are as of 2010, not 1995. The religious landscape is changing so fast in parts of Asia that 15 years is an eternity. It are changing so fast that I would hesitate to use figures that were only 10 years old because there is a good chance that they are hopelessly outdated already. 1995 is *so* 20th century and that really does matter here.
As for China, in 2006, the most senior religious official in China was reported by the Xinhua News Agency as revealing that the number of Christians in China had reached 130 million.
Ye Xiaowen, the director of the Religious Affairs Bureau, an arm of the Chinese government, made the statement at two closed meetings held at Beijing University and the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. His figure included approximately 20 million Catholics. Ye is the same man who, in June 1997, described all unregistered house church groups as “evil, illegal organizations that undermine social order. Ironically, such a high figure as 130 million must include a very large component of members of the very groups he so strongly condemned.
When you talk about a Chinese figure of 40 million, I take it you are referring to Werner Bürklin’s 2007 study of registered churches. Burklin also acknowleged in a 2005 book that he can’t speak for unregistered house churches which is the primary methodological problems with his approach since the majority of Chinese Christians do not belong to registered churches. Burklin also made the astonishing statement: “In my many years of ministry in China I have yet to find a Christian who has been incarcerated because of his or her beliefs. To put it mildly, he seems to be seriously out of touch with some very important segments of the Christian population in China. Serious China scholars think his figures do represent the reality of the Three Self Movement in China but hardly that of Chinese Christianity as a whole.
Even the Chinese government’s public figures are much higher than 40 million. In 2009, the national China Daily newspaper stated there are at least 50 million
house church Christians in China, in addition to the official number of 21
million registered believers who attend Three-Self churches.
For a very thoughtful survey of the recent estimates of the number of Christians in China, look at Paul Hattaway’s How Many Christians Are There in China? http://www.asiaharvest.org/pages/Christians%20in%20China/How%20Many%20Christians%20are%20There%20in%20China.pdf
2.10.2011 | 4:37pm
Stephen M. Barr says:
dear Sherry,
You note that things have changed since 1995. They sure have, but in fact
I made a typo: I meant that the 2005 Korean census (not 1995, as I typed) Here are the South Korean Census figure for both years:
1995: Cath = 6.6%, Prot = 19.7%, Total Christian = 26.3%
2005: Cath = 10.9%,Prot = 18.3%, Total Christian = 29.2%
As noted by various independent sources, the number of Protestants in South Korea leveled off in the 1990s and has been DECLINING since then. This has been discussed both in scholarly articles and in reports in the media.
I mentioned only South Korea and China. But other countries suggest that your source is inflated also. The Indian Census of 2000 showed that 2.3% of the Indian population was Christian. If the Census is not TOTALLY off --- and it is hard to see how it could be --- it seems highly unlikely that the current percentage is 4.8%. The Catholic percentage in India has been stable at about 1.6 or 1.7%. that means that in 2000 all other Christians were 0.6%. Now we are to believe that it has increased to 3.1%, i.e. a jump by a factor of 5 in a decade?
As for China, there were two studies. Their method was to randomly ask individual people in all parts of China about their beliefs. They found no reticence to talk. In fact, most Christians they asked were eager to tell them about their faith. The point is that two studies conducted independently by evangelical Christian scholars came to virtually identical conclusions. There don't seem to have been any other studies conducted that actually went out and asked people. The very fact that estimates of the numbers of Christians in China are all over the map from 50 million to 150 million means that they are mostly just guesses. The surveys I mentioned may be flawed in some way, but they at least had a well-defined methodology and were not based on "this person thinks the number is this", which is what one mostly hears..
One could go country by country, but there seems to be something wrong with the numbers from your source. Certainly for Korea.
You note that things have changed since 1995. They sure have, but in fact
I made a typo: I meant that the 2005 Korean census (not 1995, as I typed) Here are the South Korean Census figure for both years:
1995: Cath = 6.6%, Prot = 19.7%, Total Christian = 26.3%
2005: Cath = 10.9%,Prot = 18.3%, Total Christian = 29.2%
As noted by various independent sources, the number of Protestants in South Korea leveled off in the 1990s and has been DECLINING since then. This has been discussed both in scholarly articles and in reports in the media.
I mentioned only South Korea and China. But other countries suggest that your source is inflated also. The Indian Census of 2000 showed that 2.3% of the Indian population was Christian. If the Census is not TOTALLY off --- and it is hard to see how it could be --- it seems highly unlikely that the current percentage is 4.8%. The Catholic percentage in India has been stable at about 1.6 or 1.7%. that means that in 2000 all other Christians were 0.6%. Now we are to believe that it has increased to 3.1%, i.e. a jump by a factor of 5 in a decade?
As for China, there were two studies. Their method was to randomly ask individual people in all parts of China about their beliefs. They found no reticence to talk. In fact, most Christians they asked were eager to tell them about their faith. The point is that two studies conducted independently by evangelical Christian scholars came to virtually identical conclusions. There don't seem to have been any other studies conducted that actually went out and asked people. The very fact that estimates of the numbers of Christians in China are all over the map from 50 million to 150 million means that they are mostly just guesses. The surveys I mentioned may be flawed in some way, but they at least had a well-defined methodology and were not based on "this person thinks the number is this", which is what one mostly hears..
One could go country by country, but there seems to be something wrong with the numbers from your source. Certainly for Korea.
2.10.2011 | 6:32pm
Sherry Weddell says:
Stephen:
Are you naive enough to insist that government census in a place like India where there are tremendous economic penalties for leaving a scheduled caste and becoming registered as a Christian with the government doesn't affect what people tell the government?
Yes, yes, yes, the official census in many (not all) Asian nations are seriously off because religious freedom as we know in the west does not exist and people avoid registering any religious change. The scholars behind the WCE etc know this.
They are focusing their work on actual personal belief and practice in all of its complexity, not state figures without looking at the local context. If you insist upon regarding actual practice rather than governmental figures as "inflation", be my guest. But you'd be missing the real story.
No serious China scholar of Christianity as a whole accepts the 40 million figure. Even the Chinese government's (a not exactly pro-Christianity group) estimates are 2 - 3 times higher.
The World Christian Encyclopedia goes into all these dynamics in great detail - including the presence of millions of non-baptized "followers of Jesus" in Hindu settings and Muslim settings, the complexities of "double affiliation" in many settings, "unregistered" practitioners of the Christian faith, communities of "radio" Christians who gather around radio broadcasts and innumerable other complexities that most westerners know nothing about.
All I can say again is that you should spent the necessary hours reviewing the work and complexity and methodology of the foremost scholars in the topic in the world. To not do so, gives the impression of having an agenda.
That's my last word on the topic. I have work to do.
Are you naive enough to insist that government census in a place like India where there are tremendous economic penalties for leaving a scheduled caste and becoming registered as a Christian with the government doesn't affect what people tell the government?
Yes, yes, yes, the official census in many (not all) Asian nations are seriously off because religious freedom as we know in the west does not exist and people avoid registering any religious change. The scholars behind the WCE etc know this.
They are focusing their work on actual personal belief and practice in all of its complexity, not state figures without looking at the local context. If you insist upon regarding actual practice rather than governmental figures as "inflation", be my guest. But you'd be missing the real story.
No serious China scholar of Christianity as a whole accepts the 40 million figure. Even the Chinese government's (a not exactly pro-Christianity group) estimates are 2 - 3 times higher.
The World Christian Encyclopedia goes into all these dynamics in great detail - including the presence of millions of non-baptized "followers of Jesus" in Hindu settings and Muslim settings, the complexities of "double affiliation" in many settings, "unregistered" practitioners of the Christian faith, communities of "radio" Christians who gather around radio broadcasts and innumerable other complexities that most westerners know nothing about.
All I can say again is that you should spent the necessary hours reviewing the work and complexity and methodology of the foremost scholars in the topic in the world. To not do so, gives the impression of having an agenda.
That's my last word on the topic. I have work to do.
2.11.2011 | 9:55am
Stephen M. Barr says:
Dear Sherry,
Some final comments, since I too am busy. You have a good point about India. The discrepancies on Korea are harder to explain. I never said that the number of Christians in China was 40 million! I said that two studies show that the number of PROTESTANTS in China is 40 million. Catholics are Christians too. As I mentioned, the same studies show 14 million Catholics. So the two studies I cited show about 54 million Christians in China. You say that even the Chinese government reports 50 m house Christians plus 21 m in the officially registered churches. That adds up to 71. Not too far off the 54 m that the two studies I mentioned give. In fact, only different by about 25%. I have no "agenda". As a scientist I just like numbers to be very solid before I accept them. I would love it if 10% of India were Christian or even 30%! I have a good physicist friend from Korea --- a Christian --- who told me way back in 1979 that 10 m South Koreans (30% at that time) were Christian. I looked into it and found that he was off by a factor of about 2. Since then, I have seen lots of other claims that turned out to be exaggerated. I guess, as someone who works with numbers, that kind of playing with numbers rankles me. So I now approach these things with some skepticism. Maybe the people you quote are reliable. Could be, but I still have some doubts.
You have a point about India. The discrepancy on Korea is a bit harder to explain.
Some final comments, since I too am busy. You have a good point about India. The discrepancies on Korea are harder to explain. I never said that the number of Christians in China was 40 million! I said that two studies show that the number of PROTESTANTS in China is 40 million. Catholics are Christians too. As I mentioned, the same studies show 14 million Catholics. So the two studies I cited show about 54 million Christians in China. You say that even the Chinese government reports 50 m house Christians plus 21 m in the officially registered churches. That adds up to 71. Not too far off the 54 m that the two studies I mentioned give. In fact, only different by about 25%. I have no "agenda". As a scientist I just like numbers to be very solid before I accept them. I would love it if 10% of India were Christian or even 30%! I have a good physicist friend from Korea --- a Christian --- who told me way back in 1979 that 10 m South Koreans (30% at that time) were Christian. I looked into it and found that he was off by a factor of about 2. Since then, I have seen lots of other claims that turned out to be exaggerated. I guess, as someone who works with numbers, that kind of playing with numbers rankles me. So I now approach these things with some skepticism. Maybe the people you quote are reliable. Could be, but I still have some doubts.
You have a point about India. The discrepancy on Korea is a bit harder to explain.
2.11.2011 | 12:20pm
Joey says:
Is the IBMR really reliable and objective? Aren't they a highly interested party?
Indeed, manifest problems with the data on S. Korea and so forth, suggest a critical review of ALL data and results.
If you say for example that 33% - 1/3 - of the entire world population is Christian? Wouldn't that pretty much count just about the entire population of those nations, in which the majority were ONCE Christian. But without taking into account the growing agnosticism of Europe, etc.?
Problems with the data on S. Korea and so forth, suggest a critical review of ALL data and results. While the first indications are not good, regarding the accuracy of your data.
Indeed, manifest problems with the data on S. Korea and so forth, suggest a critical review of ALL data and results.
If you say for example that 33% - 1/3 - of the entire world population is Christian? Wouldn't that pretty much count just about the entire population of those nations, in which the majority were ONCE Christian. But without taking into account the growing agnosticism of Europe, etc.?
Problems with the data on S. Korea and so forth, suggest a critical review of ALL data and results. While the first indications are not good, regarding the accuracy of your data.
2.11.2011 | 5:14pm
sherry Weddell says:
Joey:
The 33% figure is not the total population of western countries. It represents the combination of the staggering growth in the global south *and* the decline in the west which just about cancel each other out.
It does, in fact, represent a slight decline in Christian percentage which stood about 34.2% in 1910. We dropped a little over the course of the 20th century due to decline in the west but growth in Africa and Asia made up for that and as of the last decade, the overall percentage of the Christian population is growing again slowly.
And yes, they are tracking, in great detail, the rise of agnosticism around the world. In fact, I wrote several detailed articles on just that topic on our blog: "The New World of Unbelief" http://www.siena.org/December-2010/religious-change-the-new-world-of-unbelief.html and
The Whole World Turned Upside Down http://www.siena.org/December-2010/religious-change-the-whole-world-turned-upside-down.html
Decline in the West: http://www.siena.org/December-2010/christianity-decline-in-the-west.html
I can't tell you how bizarre it is to hear people who are clearly unfamiliar with the research behind these sources, raise issues like the rise of western agnosticism with an air that implies that no one has noticed or thought of it before.
When sources like the Atlas of Global Christianity has whole separate sections on Agnosticism and atheism as new "21st century faiths." as I have pointed out in my blog posts. And carefully track the development of both agnosticism and atheism as new 21st century faiths in every single section on every part of the world.
also Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Chinese folk religions, African folk religions, and Shintoism, Bahai (faster growing faith in the world), marginal Christians like JW's, Mormons, and dozens of other faiths.
But to know that, you'd have to have actually read the research.
The 33% figure is not the total population of western countries. It represents the combination of the staggering growth in the global south *and* the decline in the west which just about cancel each other out.
It does, in fact, represent a slight decline in Christian percentage which stood about 34.2% in 1910. We dropped a little over the course of the 20th century due to decline in the west but growth in Africa and Asia made up for that and as of the last decade, the overall percentage of the Christian population is growing again slowly.
And yes, they are tracking, in great detail, the rise of agnosticism around the world. In fact, I wrote several detailed articles on just that topic on our blog: "The New World of Unbelief" http://www.siena.org/December-2010/religious-change-the-new-world-of-unbelief.html and
The Whole World Turned Upside Down http://www.siena.org/December-2010/religious-change-the-whole-world-turned-upside-down.html
Decline in the West: http://www.siena.org/December-2010/christianity-decline-in-the-west.html
I can't tell you how bizarre it is to hear people who are clearly unfamiliar with the research behind these sources, raise issues like the rise of western agnosticism with an air that implies that no one has noticed or thought of it before.
When sources like the Atlas of Global Christianity has whole separate sections on Agnosticism and atheism as new "21st century faiths." as I have pointed out in my blog posts. And carefully track the development of both agnosticism and atheism as new 21st century faiths in every single section on every part of the world.
also Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Chinese folk religions, African folk religions, and Shintoism, Bahai (faster growing faith in the world), marginal Christians like JW's, Mormons, and dozens of other faiths.
But to know that, you'd have to have actually read the research.
3.2.2011 | 9:05am
Ed says:
"And carefully track the development of both agnosticism and atheism as new 21st century faiths in every single section on every part of the world."
Calling atheism a "faith" is like calling health a disease. Christianity is a dead religion and is disappearing faster than the snow in Greenland. LOL!
Calling atheism a "faith" is like calling health a disease. Christianity is a dead religion and is disappearing faster than the snow in Greenland. LOL!
3.8.2011 | 6:55pm
Gertrudis Forgue says:
Sergio Mendez writes, "I wonder how many of those 2.3 billion of christians are anything else than "practical atheists". In other words, how many are just nominaly christians, even if they live as if God does not existed and/or they dont follow the doctrine of their churches at all." As I've traveled China talking to people, I've found that many people will say they don't believe in God and are atheists, but they have in mind the Christian God specifically. When you actually talk to them about what they "do" believe, they often believe in spirits, demons, the afterlife and an entire supernatural realm that would be foreign to the western atheist.
3.18.2011 | 2:45am
Bevans Carleen says:
If I may interject in your comment to Mr Bannon: rather, it surprises myself that you do not know that it is Church doctrine that the Bible 'contains no error' (read Councils of Florence, Trent, Vatican, as well as Leo XIII, Encyclical Providentissimus Deus etc., etc.,). I am very skeptical of the source that Sherry Weddell cites. This source says that South Korea is about 40% Christian. However the 1995 South Korean Census (they, like the U.S. do a census every ten years) gave the percentage of Christians as 29.2%. That latter figure is almost certainly very accurate. One has to assume that the government Census figures are the most reliable data we have. Moreover, the figure of 30% agrees with other studies. As far as China goes, one hears all sorts of staggering figures, such as 100 million Chinese Christians. However, a few years ago there were two careful surveys carried out by evangelical researchers, and they came to almost identical conclusions: about 40 million Protestants and 14 million Catholics, for a total of about 4% of the Chinese population. These seem to be the only actual scientific surveys that have been carried out. Most of the claims of huge numbers seem to be based on guesses or people's impressions. The evangelical researchers who conducted one of the Chinese studies criticized his fellow evangelicals for tending to inflate statistics.
2.19.2012 | 11:02am
Doug says:
I find these figures wildly inaccurate for atheists, it is about one tenth of the figure to be found in any other poll on the internet. The majority of government polls would put this figure at around 1 billion, almost on a par with Muslims. For those sceptical of statistics, certainly in the UK one has only to look at the dwindling church attendance particularly among young people to know the truth. Religion is in decline, the human race seems at last to be growing out of it although I doubt it will ever entirely disappear. It clearly fills a void for some.
7.3.2012 | 3:09pm
Darren says:
Dear Doug. I paraphrase one of Richard Dawkin's last conversations with his now late friend, Christopher Hitchens: "So Chris, what if we do win and destroy Christianity, only for it to be replaced by Islam?" No answer was given by Mr Hitchens. If you are in the UK, I think you'll find your hinted opinion of the nation's shift from lame & outdated Christianity to the new revolution of atheism very brief. How long until the UK has a Muslim PM? 20 years...? Have a travel around the world Doug - atheism is a very young western religion! Outside the West, no one knows Richard Dawkins or Chris Hitchens...and they couldn't care less about discussions on there being no god (or God) nor the "famous" books they have written. They believe there is a god (God) wholeheartedly.
Dear Bill Bannon. Regarding your question on whether the Red Sea parted or was windswept, that question has been asked often. If you've ever seen a large and deep body of water shifted by wind to the point where it can be walked on, then the amount of wind required to shift that amount of water would be powerful enough to rip your skin from your bones. I don't know what actually happened because I wasn't there. But the Old Book seems to talk about it a lot. Maybe it is just a poem repeated often throughout the pages...perhaps not!
Dr Stephen Barr. We must beware in assuming that we are smarter now than those of old. Assuming we now have all the answers and those "back there" didn't. We're not smarter. We may have all these fancy gadgets and we may be discovering great new scientific breakthroughs every day, but those following us can't even spell!!! Are we getting smarter...or stupid-er?
Dear Bill Bannon. Regarding your question on whether the Red Sea parted or was windswept, that question has been asked often. If you've ever seen a large and deep body of water shifted by wind to the point where it can be walked on, then the amount of wind required to shift that amount of water would be powerful enough to rip your skin from your bones. I don't know what actually happened because I wasn't there. But the Old Book seems to talk about it a lot. Maybe it is just a poem repeated often throughout the pages...perhaps not!
Dr Stephen Barr. We must beware in assuming that we are smarter now than those of old. Assuming we now have all the answers and those "back there" didn't. We're not smarter. We may have all these fancy gadgets and we may be discovering great new scientific breakthroughs every day, but those following us can't even spell!!! Are we getting smarter...or stupid-er?
5.15.2013 | 12:11pm
Sampson says:
I recently payed a cheap moving trucks company in Chicago to move a few new christian neighbors into my neighborhood. I think Christianity in the world is growing, the budding generation is more spiritually aware. Darren you are brilliant thank you for your comments I was listening to 1Peter2 this morning and couldn't help but marvel at the truths expressed by a servant of the Lord on politics and how they apply today. The Gospel is true it brings peace, to forsake natural right, and common sense would be to forsake God and that can only be done at a personal level, like in "Ed"s case.
