This past Sunday I visited the Redlands United Church of Christ as my second congregation visit. I am always nervous before entering religious settings, but I immediately felt comfortable and welcome at this church. The service was led by a female pastor- which in my admittedly limited religious experience I have never encountered before. She talked about the Transgender Day of Visibility as well as about toxic masculinity versus divine masculinity.  After the scripture reading, she referenced the story by having different songs played that she said would have been the theme songs for different characters. Also accompanying the talk about the Scripture, a painting by Rembrandt was projected onto the walls and there was some time spent analyzing. Media was again incorporated with the playing of Gillette’s commercial on toxic masculinity. I thought that all of the media/ technological incorporations in the service were well suited and helpful supplements. They were engaging and entertaining. What was striking to me was that I was only there to observe for a class, yet the service made me emotional and entertained me. Although I’m not religious, I feel I was able to get something out of attending and would not be opposed to returning. My own experience at this church made me think about how personal the experience of attending church is for every person. How many other people in the pews that day were not sure of their belief in God but attended anyways because they could get something else out of it? This goes to support the idea that the number of people in the pews does not tell you much about American religiosity.

This past week, I read the piece entitled “Making Religion Irrelevant” which discussed religious change in response to social and theological changes. The author argues that religious decline is a result of the common belief that religious conservatism is becoming a stronger force in the modern world, but yet religion has not disappeared instead certain types of religion have risen in popularity. Specifically traditional, conservative and reactionary religions have increased in popularity. This is not an attempted revival of a traditional way of life, but a response to dissatisfaction with modern morals and attitudes. Which brings the question is the rise of traditionalist religions directly related to modernity? Is this increase a critique of neoliberalism? The author also discusses how media portrayal of religion, including church scandals and the like, has reduced the influence of religious social voice. Its interesting to think about how the social impact of religion has declined over the years and what the resulting impact of this may be.

For class this week we finished up our jigsaw readings and my final one was by Ebaugh named “Reproducing Ethnicity”. The article discussed ways that immigrants can still find homes in America through their congregations, even though they are no longer in their homeland. Many ethnic congregations fuse important cultural events with their religion. For example, they wear outfits to church from their homeland, or design congregations similar to the ones found back at home. I thought it was very intriguing that people tried to copy places of worship so closely and replicate it back in the United States. It is a great way to help people feel more at home and find people with similar values in a place that is so unfamiliar to them. It also effects religion by creating different sub types of large religions such as Buddhism and Catholicism. This expands and creates different versions of religion for many types of people. By immigrant congregations accepting their ethnically diverse holidays, it helps promote and support different ethnicity’s cultures and reaffirms their place in the United States. Ethnic congregations also allow people to feel attached to their homeland by talking about things that are currently happening there and throwing events where they can meet new people who are of the same ethnicity. I think this article reaffirms McGuire’s chapter in “Religion of the Modern World”. Although these people might say they are Catholic or Buddhist on a survey, one cannot automatically assume they know all of their beliefs or worship practices. This is because so many people have varying ways of reaffirming their beliefs and different ways of practicing their religion.

This week, I read the jigsaw article From Community to Heart by Caitlin Killian. She conducted interviews with first- and second-generation French Muslims from North Africa. She observed the differences in attitudes regarding the secularization in France. Not only is religion expected to be private, but religious symbols, including the wearing of the headscarf, were banned from public institutions in 2003. A majority of those interviewed accommodated to expected private practice in France, even if they did not agree with the ban. They have adapted their religion in order to make it more compatible with their secular society.

Killian mentions the terms “positive” versus “negative secularism”. She suggests these terms as a way of explaining the difference between secularization, or separation of church and state, in the United States and France. While the United States government, according to the Constitution, cannot favor any specific religion and must allow freedom of religious expression, the French government has banned public religious expression altogether. In this way, French society has adopted positive secularism, while American society has adopted negative secularism.

Despite the ban on religious symbolism in the public sphere, the French culture is still centered around Catholicism, and the Christian calendar is observed. Younger, second-generation Muslims have taken notice of this and view it as a sign of discrimination against their culture and religious expression. While the covering of the head is an important aspect of Muslim faith, wearing the cross is not essential to Christian belief. Therefor, not adorning a cross won’t make someone look any less of a Christian, while not wearing a headscarf may leave a Muslim woman vulnerable to accusations of not being a good Muslim. This has posed a dilemma for some French Muslims- should they be a good French citizen at the expense of their religious identity, or should they be a good Muslim with the risk of being shunned by the larger society?

In the article, “Rejecting Asylum Claim, U.K. Quotes Bible to Say Christianity Is Not ‘Peaceful.” by Anna Schaverien from the New York Times, it is described how the U.K.’s Home Office rejected and asylum seeker by an Irania national who said he converted to Christianity because it was a “peaceful” religion.

Home Office responded to the asylum seeker’s claim by arguing that Christianity was hardly “peaceful” and used verse from the books of Leviticus, Exodus, and Revelation to prove it. An asylum seeker is someone who left their home country as a political refugee and is seeking protection under another. Immigration advocates were appalled and enraged by Home Office’s harsh methods which does not seem to be the first instance in which something like this has occurred.

Furthermore, the article describes how it wasn’t clear whether the man made his conversion to Christianity a basis for his claim or if the Home Office scrutinized this part of his life. The Home Office did not deny that this statement was an official document but have tried to distance themselves from the decision because of the backlash they received.

This case is a stunning example of the opposing side of secularization where the government has actually used religion as means of justification for their decision. It is interesting to recognize how other countries are still using religion integrally in their government system and how society is reacting to those decisions.

Here is the link to the article to read more!

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/21/world/europe/britain-asylum-seeker-christianity.html?rref=collection%2Ftimestopic%2FReligion%20and%20Belief&action=click&contentCollection=timestopics&region=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=collection

In the article “Organized Religion in a Voluntaristic Society” by Nancy Ammerman, she talks about Robert Wuthnow’s idea of the issues in the world are so daunting that some tend to do nothing at all. She then talks about how churches with more community service aspects tend to get more followers. Through the church followers are then able to feel that they are able to take on the more daunting realities of our world and 1) get involved and 2) gain the feeling of making a difference. I found being assigned this reading funny in some odd way, because this is also the opening week of Sense and Sensibility that is being put on by our theatre department. Now the play itself might not have ties to this idea but the process and intent of the actors are exactly the same as those who join churches for the volunteering aspect. Most actors and participants of theatre, definitely do not go into this field for the pay, but they participate because they also see the issues of our current world and want to take on these problems. The idea of faith is not limited to just religion. Theatre doers, religious or non religious volunteers, rely and actively practice faith, in the sense that what they are doing really is helping. This pushes me to agree with Ammerman’s argument against Robert Putnam’s view on the state of voluntary organizations in the US. If we try to be too narrow in our research we will always be painting a “gloom and doom” picture for society. If we use a wider scope for our research you will see how many people as a whole are using volunteerism and theatre as a way to improve the world, we have to look at movements or volunteer projects at a much lager scale and relate them to separate events that are pushing for the same thing.

This week my friends and I attended a bible study where we all just get together and talk about God and what he can do for us. The lesson we highlighted was about how we need to live life to the fulest in the moment because tomorrow is not a given. A lesson on Tim Tebow and how after being in a plane ride with a dying man and praying for 2 hours with that family really made him realize this in full effect. This is something I found very interesting especially with the murder of Nippsey Hustle yesterday. You never know when something crazy is going to happen to you like it did to Nipsy. The fact that he was shot in his hometown outside of his own store while he was with fans shows how nobody is safe anywhere. God gives and God takes from us what we deserve and dont deserve so we have to be grateful for everything we have and our life especially. Bad things happen to good people and its unexplainable  why it happens. Only God knows why these things happen to us and we have to trust in him that its part of the plan and we can come back from setbacks stronger then before. Witghout stebacks, everything in our life would just be smooth sailing but we wouldnt really learn anything about ourselves. The only way one can learn and get better at somethiing is if they end up making a mistake. Mistakes are apart of life and nobody is perfect like we always trive to be. God has a plan for us and we have to trust that plan in order to grow stronger in a relationship with him.

The article that my group read for class last week on Thursday was “Gospel Hour,” which we presented to the class. It was about a gay bar in Atlanta where performers in drag would put on gospel songs with choir from a local church. This blend of evangelical Christianity with the LGBT community was an interesting instance of highly individualized religion, and an example of spirituality. Something that I found interesting was that not only did the participants of the service claim  that Christianity was often hostile and derogatory towards members of the LGBT community, but that LGBT people who were Christian felt that they could not openly discuss their faith within their own community. This was surprising to me because as an outsider to both of these communities, I expected that the LGBT community would be more inclusive, especially members within the deeply religious South. However, it does make sense, because of the rhetoric used by many conservative Evangelicals with their interpretations of the Bible. It seems as though both groups’ overall disdain and animosity towards one another are the driving force behind this amalgamation of two countercultures. It allows both groups to express their religiosity without fear of judgment or negative reaction from their peers.

Some observers at first reacted negatively towards the Gospel Hour, claiming it was sacrilegious or anti Christian. However, when they are claiming it to be that, it seems that they are actually denouncing all forms of personalizing religion, thus, implying that adapting religion and applying it to individualized or personalized situations, is wrong. Obviously that is the job of priests and rabbis already, to help bring religion into the lives of the members of their congregations, so it seems hypocritical to claim that just because they happen to not relate to the performance.

This week I read the article about “fluffy bunny syndrome”. The article talked about how active members of pagan religions often get annoyed with people who commoditize the religion and do not take it as seriously as other pagans. They do this by selling trinkets and influencing popular culture in a way that misrepresents the religion. For example, fluffy bunnies might sell “love potions” or air a TV show about witches. Some of the pagans were accepting of the “fluffy bunnies” because it introduced others to the religion and helped spread awareness of pagan practices.

After reading this article, I wondered if other religions have issues with “fluffy bunnies”. I have seen Christian knick knacks all over the place in various shops and online. I wonder if some Christians have issues with people making money off of religious symbols. I also remember visiting Spanish missions as a child and I recall that there were gift shops that sold expensive rosaries and ornate Bibles. Are these expensive symbols seen as a sign of deep devotion or as a scam? I can see pagan religions having more issues with commoditization because the religion is less accepted and known about by society. It is easier to skew the public’s perception of what paganism is if it is not widely practiced. When people see Christian products in a store, it is not likely that they will change their perception of the religion because they are already exposed to it. I think that if one is going to sell a product with religious influences, they should make sure they accurately represent the beliefs of those who practice the religion.

The article on “Religion and Spirituality” were describes to be different concepts although they are similar in the way that they correspond to each other depending on similar aspects. One example is a life changing experience from an individual where they were drawn spiritually and then that will eventually lead to religion. The term for someone being considered religious is based on the amount of church attendance. A social experiment was made where a large number of participants from various religions including: first Baptist, Pentecostals, evangelicals etc who varied from different age groups and ethnicities to a survey. This survey consisted of 5 questions that consisted on asking the participant what their definition of religion and spirituality are followed by statements that they believe match their definition best. The third questions was to distinguish whether they consider themselves to be more religious or spiritual followed by an explanation that supports their claim. These surveys were split into categories that included church attendance, education, age, demographics, ect. The article then concluded that religion and spirituality very distinctly different concepts spirituality being the highest dependent on the results from the surveys taken by the participants. Which I found interesting because I though that in order to be spiritual you needed to follow a religion or philosophy, but in fact gaining spirituality comes first then the individual can decide on a religion to follow.