Posted on 05/15/2010 7:50:29 AM PDT by markomalley
In these days of Tea Parties and electoral primary politicking, it seems the nation is embarked on a collective soul-search. Pundits, commentators, and historians are scrambling to explain how it was we got to this point: how a nation that has just elected its first African-American president can be more racially divided than ever; how an ostensibly Christian and religious nation could have elected a government so fundamentally at odds with its putative worldview; how a center-right nation could possibly have elected the most radically leftist regime in its history.
For the American people really are fundamentally conservative in their orientation. Leftist politicians and ideologues know this: It’s why activist judges suddenly turn originalist in their Senate confirmation hearings, why Obamacare advocates cynically insist their proposals inculcate “more choice and competition,” and why even the nation’s radically secularist Democratic Party has to feign respect for, and compatibility with, the religious ideals of the nation’s citizenry.
Yet, for all we hear and read about the nation’s fundamental conservatism, what real conservative victories can the political right boast about in recent decades? Sure, Reagan helped topple the Soviet Union, but what since then? For all the much-ballyhooed “takeover” of the Republican Party and the halls of government by the so-called “Christian Right,” the nation isn’t an inch closer to having realized conservative principles than it was in 2000. In 2010, all three branches of government are in the hands of radical leftists, legal abortion and homosexualism are firmly entrenched in law and public life, and even traditional religiosity is at an all-time low.
Who could have seen this coming?
One man did: Alexis de Toqueville, who wrote quite a bit about the cultural and religious predilections of the Americans he studied in the 1830s. His findings were published in his opus Democracy in America, a work that still remains required reading for anyone hoping to understand the American character. De Toqueville had no doubt that the United States was, in some sense, a Christian nation, and his summary observation is worth quoting at length:
Religion in America takes no direct part in the government of society, but it must be regarded as the first of their political institutions; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of it. Indeed, it is in this same point of view that the inhabitants of the United States themselves look upon religious belief. I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion–for who can search the human heart?–but I am certain that they hold it to be indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions This opinion is not peculiar to a class of citizens or to a party, but it belongs to the whole nation and to every rank of society. In the United States, if a politician attacks a sect, this may not prevent the partisans of that very sect from supporting him; but if he attacks all the sects together, everyone abandons him, and he remains alone. While I was in America, a witness who happened to be called at the Sessions of the county of Chester (state of New York) declared that he did not believe in the existence of God or in the immortality of the soul. The judge refused to admit his evidence, on the ground that the witness had destroyed beforehand all the confidence of the court in what he was about to say. The newspapers related the fact without any further comment. The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.
One wonders how Toqueville would have explained the election of a President who routinely goes out of his way to insist Americans are not, or “are no longer,” a Christian people. But arguably the current state of American religiosity would not have surprised de Toqueville, on the contrary he anticipated it. Toqueville considered the democratic spirit, preoccupied with liberty and with equality, to be such that its adherents would waver between religious anarchy and dogmatism, ultimately between unbelief itself and . . .
. . .
. . . Catholic Christianity:
Two things must here be accurately distinguished: equality makes men want to form their own opinions; but, on the other hand, it imbues them with the taste and the idea of unity, simplicity, and impartiality in the power that governs society. Men living in democratic times are therefore very prone to shake off all religious authority; but if they consent to subject themselves to any authority of this kind, they choose at least that it should be single and uniform. . . . I am inclined to believe . . . .that our posterity will tend more and more to a division into only two parts, some relinquishing Christianity entirely and others returning to the Church of Rome.
Toqueville was half-right. On the one hand, he would not have been surprised to find that more and more Americans are identifying themselves as “spiritual, not religious,” a faux religiosity divorced from form and from dogmatic content. But there is one important thing Toqueville seems to have overlooked, or at any rate found irrelevant to his analysis: America in the 1830s was (and today still is, if just barely) not simply a Christian nation, but a Protestant nation. He seems to have underestimated the extent to which fundamental Protestant principles, such as sola Scriptura and “private interpretation” of revelation, have uniquely equipped Protestantism to morph according to the spirit of any age and give any doctrine an air of Biblical, and so Christian, legitimacy.
It tends to be lost on observers just how out of the contemporary Christian mainstream today’s stereotypical Evangelicals are. The secular mind today tends not to distinguish between mainline Protestantism and Evangelicalism. Most people do not realize that today, the denominations which collectively claim the affiliations of most Protestant believers, have in fact embraced and dogmatized radical welfare statism and culture-of-death liberalism. Most Protestants today belong to a denomination that teaches that extramarital sexual relations are not necessarily sinful, that abortion isn’t a sin so long as one undergoes or performs it conscientiously, and that homosexual relations are not necessarily sinful so long as they are “loving and monogamous”.
These are not fringe positions. America’s largest Lutheran denomination has just sanctioned the ordination of openly-gay pastors, the Episcopal Church (once known as “the Republican Party at prayer”) is ordaining partnered homosexuals to its episcopate, and the Church of Sweden, the largest Lutheran national church in the world, has just ordained a partnered lesbian to the See of Stockholm. All these denominations, and more, also support “women’s right to choose” and other leftist moral aberrations, and supposedly on Scriptural grounds.
None of this should come as a surprise. It is this author’s contention that, contrary to popular belief, Evangelicalism is not conservative. Protestantism is built upon radical rupture with the past, a rejection of all hierarchical authority unaccountable to the whim of the private believer, and a rejection of the authoritative nature of a doctrinal tradition. It just so happens that most Protestants of the last half-millenia have convinced themselves that certain moral imperatives are in fact perspicuously Biblical: their conservatism is coincidental, not principled. Conservative habits do not die hard, but after 500 years it seems most of Protestant Christianity no longer has qualms about taking the Reformation to its logical extreme, rejecting the entire corpus of Christian morality as itself a perversion of the Gospel by the partisans of Popery and Romanism.
What lessons do today’s Protestants have to give us? Divorce and remarriage are Biblical. Contraception is Biblical. Abortion-on-demand is Biblical. Lesbian bishops are Biblical. The original Protestant Reformers, by and large, even argued that polygamy was, in fact, Biblical, and surely it won’t be long before their successors today rediscover that.
Making the secular government sovereign over the internal affairs of the Church? That’s Biblical too! Anarcho-libertarianism? Also Biblical. Newly made-up beliefs about the divinely-sanctioned establishment of the modern state of Israel? Also Biblical.
There is literally no doctrine under the sun, and no moral scruple, that is safe from the unfettered Scriptural kama sutra of the Protestant imagination. Protestant Christianity is not, and arguably never has been, a viable unifying creed, and contains within itself the seeds of its own nihilism. And Evangelicalism is not immune to this. Today’s rising Evangelical stars are not the Franklin Grahams and the James Dobsons, but folks like Jim Wallis, Brian McLaren, the postmodern “Emergent Church” movement (which apparently must be distinguished from its postmodernist sister, the “Emerging Church”), and a new wave of Christian music stars who are out-of-the-closet gays, having recently joined in the discovery that loving, monogamous sodomy isn’t unbiblical after all. (And even if it is, who cares? They’re saved, anyway!)
It’s no accident that a disproportionate number of the conservative intelligentsia, in America and around the world, are Catholic Christians, though in America Evangelicals tend to be, and heroically so, the conservative foot-soldiers. Catholicism, both in America and abroad, is seeing modest growth while Protestantism is imploding. This is not something Catholics and Orthodox Christians should gloat over: Disconnecting Anglo-Americans from their immediate religious history will inflict untold psychological and spiritual harm. From the poetry of Milton to the hymns of the Wesley brothers, from the tireless missionary endeavors of the Church of England in the 19th and early 20th centuries to the passionate Scripture-peddling of the Gideons, from the Book of Common Prayer and Luther’s Catechisms to the King James Bible, there is a rich liturgical, hymnodic, poetic, literary, and even theological patrimony that has been cultivated by the best kind of Protestantism for 500 or so years. Conservative instinct demands that the best of this be preserved, cultivated, and even inculturated, by the non-Protestant churches.
As Protestants continue to vacillate between drift into theological nihilism and conversion to a more originalist and organically conservative Christianity (Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy), Evangelical leadership would do well to consider the future of the Protestant experiment. If reversion to the Mother Church is not a perceived viable option, perhaps a new Reformation is in order, one that can reverently and reflectively reconsider some of the doctrinal presuppositions of that of the 16th century and provide a better basis for doctrinal and philosophical integrity.
THE PROGRESS OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM
IN THE UNITED STATES
AMERICA is the most democratic country in the world, and it is at the same time (according to reports worthy of belief) the country in which the Roman Catholic religion makes most progress. At first sight this is surprising.
Two things must here be accurately distinguished: equality makes men want to form their own opinions; but, on the other hand, it imbues them with the taste and the idea of unity, simplicity, and impartiality in the power that governs society. Men living in democratic times are therefore very prone to shake off all religious authority; but if they consent to subject themselves to any authority of this kind, they choose at least that it should be single and uniform. Religious powers not radiating from a common center are naturally repugnant to their minds; and they almost as readily conceive that there should be no religion as that there should be several.
At the present time, more than in any preceding age, Roman Catholics are seen to lapse into infidelity, and Protestants to be converted to Roman Catholicism. If you consider Catholicism within its own organization, it seems to be losing; if you consider it from outside, it seems to be gaining. Nor is this difficult to explain. The men of our days are naturally little disposed to believe; but as soon as they have any religion, they immediately find in themselves a latent instinct that urges them unconsciously towards Catholicism. Many of the doctrines and practices of the Roman Catholic Church astonish them, but they feel a secret admiration for its discipline, and its great unity attracts them. If Catholicism could at length withdraw itself from the political animosities to which it has given rise, I have hardly any doubt but that the same spirit of the age which appears to be so opposed to it would become so favorable as to admit of its great and sudden advancement.
One of the most ordinary weaknesses of the human intellect is to seek to reconcile contrary principles and to purchase peace at the expense of logic. Thus there have ever been and will ever be men who, after having submitted some portion of their religious belief to the principle of authority, will seek to exempt several other parts of their faith from it and to keep their minds floating at random between liberty and obedience. But I am inclined to believe that the number of these thinkers will be less in democratic than in other ages, and that our posterity will tend more and more to a division into only two parts, some relinquishing Christianity entirely and others returning to the Church of Rome.
I don’t post on Catholic threads, respect all Christian religions.
BUT this entire discourse is about attacking Protestants and painting them with broad brushstrokes.
This unfair rant against protestants will not gain you any converts, I assure you.
I also take issue with the unsupported and rather doubtful statement that “disproportionate number of the conservative intelligentsia, in America and around the world, are Catholic Christians”
Frankly, if I were Catholic, I would be embarrased by this discourse, which, as I said demonstrates the intolerance of Catholics of other Christian religions, but I guess supportive of dictators and Sharia — the Pope met with Saddam Hussein’s foreign minister and told us not to “invade” Iraq.
Catholics should focus on cleaning their own house, before they make such vicious attacks against Protestants.
Mark,
Get a life, join the battle to defeat the godless left, stop constantly trying to divide us.
1. All Protestant Churches (not my choice of words, but yours) are not imploding.
2. All Protestant Churches are not decendants of the Roman Catholic Church. Catholics are Christians, too.
3. Most, as you described, Evangelical Christians Did Not help elect Obozo.
4. Many, unfortunately, in the Catholic faith profess “Liberation Theology”(Marxism in a Christian wrapper, like Obozo) And they voted for Obozo and his Commies.
5. Persecution of Christians in Europe is a major reason that, what is now the United States, was populated. There were oppressive “state” religions there that were much more political than religious.
6. I have many Catholic friends and a few Catholic relatives. No problem.
We are in the same battle my friend, not opponents.
When Protestant churches hold true to their creeds - and the creeds are consistent in the nature of God and Man, the Scriptures, and the means of salvation - then they are strong and growing churches. Compare the LCMS to the ELCA, for example.
We are on the same side for morality and truth and social behavior, and we're the ones getting shot in the back by Catholic writers - not the Catholic authorities.
Interesting article. I agree that most of what is called “evangelical” today is very loose in following the bible...but I would also caution against laying all of the mess that we live in at the feet of the protestant churches. There are plenty of “Catholics” that are in power (Pelosi,Kerry, Biden, etc) that have contributed to the mess. As Christians we need to return to following God and his Word...
1 Timothy 6:11-12 But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
God bless
“. Many, unfortunately, in the Catholic faith profess “Liberation Theology”(Marxism in a Christian wrapper, like Obozo) And they voted for Obozo and his Commies.”
Even many Catholics who don’t profess Liberation Theology voted for Obama — I think more than half Catholics voted for Obama.
As I said in my post - Catholics need to look inward first, before criticizing other Christian faiths.
Given the number of outright liberals claiming Catholicism as their faith in this country and throughout the world ... a better question would be whether Catholicism and conservatism can coexist. Practicing Protestants are far more likely to be conservative than are practicing Catholics.
The most Protestant countries in this world tend to be the freest and most prosperous countries in this world ... led by the United States.
SnakeDoc
You wrote:
“Get a life, join the battle to defeat the godless left, stop constantly trying to divide us.”
What’s wrong with being divided from Protestants on religious issues?
Should we pretend the issues don’t matter?
As evidence of that, please note another item I posted this morning: Liberation Theology and U.S. Catholics -- an exhaustive item that is not AT ALL complimentary to my own church.
And, by the way, I am not terribly interested in converting people on the Internet (I have never met anybody who truly changed their minds as the result of something they read on the 'net). I just post things that I think would be of interest. Just so you know.
In the US:
Christianity: (78.5%)
Protestantism (51.3%)
Roman Catholicism (23.9%)
Mormonism (1.7%)
Jehovah’s Witnesses (0.7%)
Orthodox Church (0.6%)
other Christian (0.3%)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States
You wrote:
“As I said in my post - Catholics need to look inward first, before criticizing other Christian faiths.”
Not your call.
Discussing differences is one thing, viciously attacking other Christian religions with untrue and unfair allegations, as this article does, is quite different.
Nothing, simply believe what you want and leave me alone. We are both answerable to God for our actions and beliefs, not to another man.
I have to agree.
Too many of the liberal churches have worthless shepherds who spend more time preaching social gospel and hate speech against ‘biblical’ Christians AND Israel. These are the same numbskulls that fell for Obama’s lies and voted for him. They will eventually wholeheartedly welcome the antichrist into power too.
Protestants and Catholics alike....a church goer and doctrine-holder does not a true Christian make. IT is MORE important to be a follower of Christ than it is to be called by any denomination and if you have trouble with that...I would worry.
Given that this nation was largely founded by protestants and the governing documents are protestant, I think it will be OK.
Overwhelmingly Roman church countries like Mexico have not faired nearly as well.
Vicious how?
Untrue and unfair how?
And I’m sure you always post that way in threads that attacks Catholic beliefs, right?
If nothing is wrong with it, then why were you complaining?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.