Stacy Weiner’s Washington Post story story tells how parents who are not believers, are sending their children to church.
In my younger days, I thought that the adults were hypocritical, requiring children to do something that they themselves would not. It was La Rochefoucauld who said
Hypocrisy is the homage vice pays to virtue.
Now I’m inclined to give the adults a little more slack: here is what Weiner has to say:
…many nonreligious parents -- whether they've eschewed belief or practice or both -- find themselves seeking the psychological, spiritual and moral blessings they hope a religious background can bestow on their offspring.
Less-than-devout Americans may be surprised that millions of folks share the same pew. Sixty-four percent don't attend religious services even once a month, according to a 2003 Harris poll, and 21 percent don't believe in God or aren't sure a deity exists. Forty-six percent live in a household where no one belongs to a place of worship, according to the 2001 American Religious Identification Survey, conducted through the City University of New York. And 12 percent don't identify with any faith, the Harris poll found.
But at some point, a number of parents seem to flock to religion. In 2002, for example, the percentage of fathers who attended church at least once a month was nearly twice that of men who had no children, according to data from a major demographic study. At least some parents likely were motivated by a kid-centric quest.
Such parents may seek the sense of community or emotional security they hope religion will provide their kids; they may want a sense of purpose or tradition; and they may be looking for ethical or spiritual influences to mold their children's lives. For some, a religious education simply means giving their kids a better shot at understanding a cultural force that they consider both powerful and pervasive.
Now I’m inclined to say that the parents at least want something better for their children than they have for themselves. There is an admission that we are fallible – sinful – when we tell our children “Do as I say, not as I do.”
My Lutheran/Episcopal father was widowed at the age of 32. True to his promise, he raised my sister and me as Catholics. As I look back, I realized that he managed his grief by staying away from events that saddened him – but wanted the best for us. I imagine that most parents feel the same way.
It isn’t hypocritical to tell your children not to smoke, even if you do.
This isn’t the first time that the liberal Washington Post has written that church is good for children. On I extracted this from one of their stories:
Parents would do better to spend less effort and funds on SAT prep classes, swim practices, etc and simply take their children to church.
Wonders never cease. Of course, that story, like the one that reported
“Teens who regularly eat meals with their families are less likely to do poorly in school, smoke cigarettes or use alcohol or tobacco, suffer depression or consider suicide than those who don't, according to a study in the August issue of the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.”
Was in the health section of the Post. Maybe someday the editors will read their entire paper and gain a more positive outlook on the positive impact of relgion in our society.
The age of miracles is not yet over.
Comments