No I don't and no it doesn't. Context, as always, matters.

Except that I didn't claim that. I claimed that the disgusting get out of jail free card that Christians are offered but not Jews was also a major factor.

Uhhhhhhh... sure you did.

It’s high status among people within that tribe, but church participation is trending down, so among a significant percentage of Westerners, there is little to no admiration for holding a position within a church.

Admiration is a key concept for value transmission. The people who will have the most influence on future values are the people who are the most admired among the most people and are speaking truthfully about morality. Unlike the past, individuals are going to dominate institutions in this battle and it won’t be close.

To clarify, the reason why I think this is because I see the next stage of morality involving the necessity of holding competing values simultaneously as well as values that are right at one stage in a person’s life but obstacles later on. That requires a flexibility and dynamic that is difficult at best, and more likely impossible, for institutions.

To participate is to take action with trust for a shared purpose.

Religions are facing that dogmatic de-individualization of trust which comes from expecting participation and making consequence for defying the expectation. What happens when we question “in God we trust”? What about when one reserves their trust for those who rely upon such messages?

For de-individualized trust, I reserve my trust. Religiously at an apt opportunity to do so.

Is that participating?

Oops. It was the other thread.

This reminds me of an old Mike Epps special where he has this joke about coming out of jail with his head held high talking about how he got his GED, started working out, and got his life together. Then his grandma smacks him and says you didnt have to go to jail to get a GED and the YMCA is only 3 blocks away.

Although funny, I think its an interesting point. Are those values a result of religion, or did man put those values into religion? I think left on their own man kind would come to value much the same things without having religion to guide them. Imo religion gets to much credit, people are generally good and mostly value the same things, unless something gets in the way of that.... Like Ohhh lets say.... Religion

It seems these values are taught within the religion, but what about people who worship a different god but have the same values?? Seemingly the god you worship shouldn't matter and you should come together based on your values, but many times the opposite happens. To me a reasonable conclusion would be forget the God, and come together as a group/communuty. This is why I do all my work with community's , organizations , and programs instead of the church or any religious group. Values, Morals, community, etc etc is not exclusive to religion yet somehow people think religion is the only place to find these things

This isn't true outside of the few developed countries that are still religious, right?

Japan isn't very religious, and Shinto priests hold high status in their society. So at least one counterexample to your claim. But, yes, I'm mostly talking about the US.

I would submit that all priestcraft, broadly defined*, is, if not given high status; is always given deference by societies and individuals. It is rare that anyone takes on these bamboozlers in a direct fashion. And the consequences for doing so is almost always dire. Voltaire is an example from not to long ago and Salman Rushdie is a current example.

* From primitive tribal Shamanism to the Oracle at Delphi to the current rat-brained Archbishop of Canterbury to all the Charlatan Popes (which includes most of them) to all the idiot Imans.

Where I live the church has very little status among the majority. In fact I'd say a priest gets linked to pedophilia nowadays. Hardly something we want to pass on to future generations.

My guess is that this is a misunderstanding. It's true that in some places religion and churches are viewed negatively. But that does't mean that the clergy or lay leaders are low status or themselves viewed negatively. For instance, many people have a low opinion of politics and even of politicians as a whole, but being a politician is a high status job and politicians are almost always high status. Similarly for lawyers and bankers/finance. My experience in everywhere I've lived in the US is that Catholic priests and other clergy are given a bit of deference in public settings, even in secular settings.

However, I don't want to lose my earlier point, which was more neutral about whether being a lay leader is given to those with higher status or whether it confers significant additional status as well.

I don't think I could find fault with someone joining/supporting an organization because that organization has some goals/attributes that one likes.

Also being part of the conversation about values seems to be a nice thing to do.

I doubt that joining a church would be any more effective in creating change in that church (or broader society) than a vegan getting a job at Taco Bell (even as an assistant manager) would be effective in changing the menu at the restaurant (or the eating habits of broader society).

1) Vegans who work at restaurants that prominently serve cruelty-free meat are probably moving society marginally towards their own values, arguably more so than with a vegan-food-only restaurant. If your personal values are too far from a specific religion, then obviously you will not be very effective, eg if you are a liberal, then probably Southern Baptists are a bad fit, but a mainline Protestant church might be okay.

2) My argument for religious participation is a relative one. That is, I'm arguing that because religions are better than other institutions at pushing their values to the future, that changes made to religious institutions have a greater impact on the future than changes made to other social institutions. Thus, unless you think our ability to change broader society through religious participation is zero, the relative point still stands and is disanalogous to your Taco Bell example.

3) Corporations typically have hierarchical and disciplined authority structures for decision-making. Some religions do as well, but at least in the US, Protestant churches and preachers are often quite independent and there is a lot of regional variation in theology, practice, and values. My own experience in Christian churches is that the deacons and elders often have a large impact on the character of a church, not infrequently being more powerful than the preacher. So I don't agree that "assistant manager" position equivalents for religion don't have an impact on their church culture. Yes, they probably won't convince everyone to become atheists (although they are well-placed to do so). But they can make marginal changes, eg on gender issues or theological ones.