4.11.2004
Society's to Blame - Or not
This is from a recent post of mine to Postmodern Theology at Yahoo! Groups dot com.
I still feel that the tendency among modern historians to treat religion and culture as separate entities rather than mutually reinforcing segments of what makes us human is unfortunate. The trouble is, it is an infectious idea that causes the kind of discussion we are having on Jesus and Paul. Let me elaborate.
We have no problem identifying the religious foundation of the Indian caste system and freely discuss their mutually reinforcing roles. Religion perpetuates social structures and social structures enforce religious beliefs. It's a give and take. We look at the Aztec religion and its human sacrifice as a religious tenet that had political and social consequences. About all we know of Egypt is the multitude of gods they worshipped, their elaborate funeral customs and how deeply their religious structure influenced their society.
But then we come the Christianity and it becomes a whole 'nother ball game. First off, just try and find a dispassionate discussion about Christianity anywhere in Academia today. I imagine there are some who can view Christianity with the same intellectual honesty as other world religions but those who do are so rare that they are exceptional in that regard. I'm reminded here of Robert Fogle's "The Fourth Great Awakening" which ties economic and social movements, most notably egalitarianism, to evangelical religious revivals. Most everyone else is content to blame Christianity for the evils of the world without giving it credit for the societal good that it has accomplished.
Because here's the rub. Any time someone says anything about Christianity, there are some in the reading public who take things personally. If the audience cannot be dispassionate about the topic, then I'm afraid it's hard for the academics to be dispassionate as well. You're a seminarian, John. When was the last time someone took a dispassionate view of the social underpinnings of Christianity and the impact of Christianity on society? I guaran-dog-tee that it ain't happening in the SBC. Since some of my best buddies who are profs at SBC seminaries (that's what happens when you get old - you find your peers become "esteemed" professors when you remember how they used to act in school), I know this through first-hand experience.
Now, since the academics and the audience both feel passionately about the subject, it is difficult to have an honest discussion about the roles and influences of culture and religion. We thank you John, for your Celtic ancestors providing us with a host of "Christian" holidays. Pope Gregory X and others helped reinforce the idea that we take whatever religion was going around, sanctify it to the Lord and make it a Christian holiday. So now we are celebrating Easter Sunday, which non-coincidentally coincides with the first full moon after the vernal equinox which is why this Sunday isn't celebrated on a certain date. This is just one example among many where the culture has contributed to Christianity.
By the same token, Christianity and marked Western culture with a definite fingerprint. Art, architecture, music, ethics, philosophy, and so forth are all influenced by Christianity. Even atheists and agnostics define themselves as being anti-Christian or non-Christian. Reminds me of the atheist child who asked her mother, "Mommy, does God know that we don't believe in him?"
Which brings us to the last example John used. I feel that in Western society Christianity has so permeated the culture and the culture has so influence our Western expression of Christianity that most lines are blurred. Yes, churches give out receipts every January so folks can deduct their charitable contributions from their 1040 form. But does that negate the contribution? I could say that helping the needy reduces my tax burden by providing direct assistance rather than incurring a bureaucratic government overhead cost so that it is to my advantage to help the poor through a faith-based charity rather than a government program. But is that the reason I help out at the soup kitchen?
Here's why I think it is less clear than we would like to make it. I work for one of the largest philanthropic humanitarian organizations in the country. We are most assuredly a non-sectarian organization. Yet I have found more professing Christians in my organization than in any other place I have ever worked. But we are not exclusively Christian; we also have a large number of devout people of many religious persuasions. So working daily in a milieu that is friendly, tolerant and respectful of all religious faiths - including agnosticism - I never cease to be amazed by the "Christian" ethic that permeates the organization. So I don't think religious impulses, behavior, motivations, etc. are confined to the sacred while the secular is devoid of such. Instead, I feel that they are mutually reinforcing and supporting. Many non-Christians incorporate Christian ethics because of the culture. Many Christians adopt non-Christian elements into their faith because of the culture.
This is from a recent post of mine to Postmodern Theology at Yahoo! Groups dot com.
I still feel that the tendency among modern historians to treat religion and culture as separate entities rather than mutually reinforcing segments of what makes us human is unfortunate. The trouble is, it is an infectious idea that causes the kind of discussion we are having on Jesus and Paul. Let me elaborate.
We have no problem identifying the religious foundation of the Indian caste system and freely discuss their mutually reinforcing roles. Religion perpetuates social structures and social structures enforce religious beliefs. It's a give and take. We look at the Aztec religion and its human sacrifice as a religious tenet that had political and social consequences. About all we know of Egypt is the multitude of gods they worshipped, their elaborate funeral customs and how deeply their religious structure influenced their society.
But then we come the Christianity and it becomes a whole 'nother ball game. First off, just try and find a dispassionate discussion about Christianity anywhere in Academia today. I imagine there are some who can view Christianity with the same intellectual honesty as other world religions but those who do are so rare that they are exceptional in that regard. I'm reminded here of Robert Fogle's "The Fourth Great Awakening" which ties economic and social movements, most notably egalitarianism, to evangelical religious revivals. Most everyone else is content to blame Christianity for the evils of the world without giving it credit for the societal good that it has accomplished.
Because here's the rub. Any time someone says anything about Christianity, there are some in the reading public who take things personally. If the audience cannot be dispassionate about the topic, then I'm afraid it's hard for the academics to be dispassionate as well. You're a seminarian, John. When was the last time someone took a dispassionate view of the social underpinnings of Christianity and the impact of Christianity on society? I guaran-dog-tee that it ain't happening in the SBC. Since some of my best buddies who are profs at SBC seminaries (that's what happens when you get old - you find your peers become "esteemed" professors when you remember how they used to act in school), I know this through first-hand experience.
Now, since the academics and the audience both feel passionately about the subject, it is difficult to have an honest discussion about the roles and influences of culture and religion. We thank you John, for your Celtic ancestors providing us with a host of "Christian" holidays. Pope Gregory X and others helped reinforce the idea that we take whatever religion was going around, sanctify it to the Lord and make it a Christian holiday. So now we are celebrating Easter Sunday, which non-coincidentally coincides with the first full moon after the vernal equinox which is why this Sunday isn't celebrated on a certain date. This is just one example among many where the culture has contributed to Christianity.
By the same token, Christianity and marked Western culture with a definite fingerprint. Art, architecture, music, ethics, philosophy, and so forth are all influenced by Christianity. Even atheists and agnostics define themselves as being anti-Christian or non-Christian. Reminds me of the atheist child who asked her mother, "Mommy, does God know that we don't believe in him?"
Which brings us to the last example John used. I feel that in Western society Christianity has so permeated the culture and the culture has so influence our Western expression of Christianity that most lines are blurred. Yes, churches give out receipts every January so folks can deduct their charitable contributions from their 1040 form. But does that negate the contribution? I could say that helping the needy reduces my tax burden by providing direct assistance rather than incurring a bureaucratic government overhead cost so that it is to my advantage to help the poor through a faith-based charity rather than a government program. But is that the reason I help out at the soup kitchen?
Here's why I think it is less clear than we would like to make it. I work for one of the largest philanthropic humanitarian organizations in the country. We are most assuredly a non-sectarian organization. Yet I have found more professing Christians in my organization than in any other place I have ever worked. But we are not exclusively Christian; we also have a large number of devout people of many religious persuasions. So working daily in a milieu that is friendly, tolerant and respectful of all religious faiths - including agnosticism - I never cease to be amazed by the "Christian" ethic that permeates the organization. So I don't think religious impulses, behavior, motivations, etc. are confined to the sacred while the secular is devoid of such. Instead, I feel that they are mutually reinforcing and supporting. Many non-Christians incorporate Christian ethics because of the culture. Many Christians adopt non-Christian elements into their faith because of the culture.
