Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
“No Religion, Too” – John Lennon
First and foremost, one must remember that to achieve the revolutionary goals of Marx and Engels, there can be no alliance except to the state. Christianity, Islam, the Jewish faith, Buddhism, Hindi, all major religions, promote alliance to a philosophy or an entity that is not the state, and represent a potential threat to the state and are thus, contemptuous. The church was banned in the Soviet Empire; revolutionaries murdered clergy and forced Christianity underground. Churches were closed and priests were hunted down and executed during the Mexican socialist takeover. The church was exiled in Cuba and currently faces much difficulty and enmity in Venezuela. The Chinese have effectively banned not only religion, but anything that even remotely resembles religion like the infamous crackdown on the practice of Falun Gong. For the Left there can be no quarter, no safe spaces, no organizational philosophy and no church to rival the state.
Of course Leftism, as espoused in the US in its rarified progressive form among the academy, the media, the Democrat Left and certain elites, would never openly contend that religion is its adversary. (Obama’s depiction of heartland Americans “clutching their guns and their bibles” was an unusual slip of candor.) In fact, progressive liberals are at best only marginally aware that the statist nirvana they seek is really the same overarching state falsely conceived, prophesied and promised by radical atheists Marx and Engels. For the reflexive progressive Left in the US, religion is simply in need of sufficient reform to become sympatico with the correct progressive worldview, that is, it needs to move to the Left. Hard. Only the few true communists and socialist know that this must eventually lead to the effective dissolution of religious affiliation, but no one will ever admit this fact. It is the outcome that shall not be named. Rather, it is accepted that traditional religious dissolution is simply a part of the natural evolution, the progression, to a socialist or statist world where rational secularism naturally replaces irrational faith.
The Catholic Church, as powerful and enduring as it would seem to be, is hardly exempt from this cycle of dissolution. The erosion of the size and influence of the Catholic Church with the advance of democratic -socialist governance in Western Europe threatens the very viability of the faith. Despite theological opposition to abortion and contraception, reproductive rates in western countries are well below sustaining rates. Contraception and abortion are generally free in Europe (though they may be time restricted or require waiting periods.) The Church is losing its congregation and influence in what should be its stronghold, its own backyard. Its congregants are dying off and are not being replaced. In the meantime, post WW2 generations have embraced secularism, relegating the Church to a status of cultural anachronism and impotence.
European secularism is simply a part of socialism; that is it represents the acceptance that there is no power, law or authority other than the state. Secularism has virtually taken over in Western Europe. The secular state requires no weekly attendance, no tithes (just taxes and then disproportionately on the corporate and the rich), no moral indignation, no confession and no final judgement. The only sins are crimes and they are only punished if successfully prosecuted. All the old venal and carnal Christian sins are barely sins at all! This, the progressives tell us, is freedom! But it is not. First and foremost, it requires acknowledgment of the supremacy of the state; from it comes all authority, all ownership and all power.
Only the state can protect and free citizen from the preening moral judgements of religious moralists and zealots. The democratic socialists in Western Europe may have not banned religion, but that does not mean that they hold organized religion in less contempt than a fully communist China or Cuba. It has simply supplanted religious faith by demanding the supremacy of secular law, claiming this to be a kind of supra-moral redemption freeing Europeans from the religious idea of sin and obligation.
Though the US is far more religious than Europe, it is not exempt from a similar erosion. The Left has used the courts in a largely successful movement to strip all religious reference from public life. Left leaning courts have upheld the idea that any expression of religion in public buildings or institutions constitutes a “state sponsorship” of religion. This misguided reasoning has hijacked the US Constitution’s prohibition against the establishment of a state religion (ala Britain’s Anglican Church) even to the point of banning the Ten Commandments from displays in schools and courthouses.
Secularism is on full display among US progressives and with this movement comes all of the vulgarity and Orwellian language expected when secularists are freed of any notion of religious moral certitude. Although no pregnant woman ever referred to an unborn baby as a fetus, in secular America, an unborn child in the language of the Left is nothing more than a parasite or a byproduct to be sold. Marriage, once a religious sacrament between a man and woman, is now just a celebrated party and a flimsy contract among two adults of any sex. Euthanasia is just another choice, not self-murder. In the US, the progressive Left is using the secular state to erode traditional religious moral belief, and hence to place itself above and in opposition to religious moral teaching.
The question then arises, why would mainstream Christian faiths embrace a political movement that opposes their teaching? The answer to that is simple; they are deluded and deceived. Facing loss of congregants in a progressive world where religion has been rendered, if not a moral anachronism, then at best irrelevant, they are tricked into joining with the Left in their various progressive causes in hopes of gaining reciprocal support. Yet, despite this their numbers wane and their churches close.
There is nothing wrong with a Church’s identification of injustice, with the establishment of a religious movement against injustice or with a Church’s leadership on moral and ethical questions, on sin; these endeavors are what freedom of religion and expression are all about. Progressives embrace an anti-war state, not because of a sudden pacifist conversion, but because they see the military as both a political opponent and as a diversion of public resources they would rather spend elsewhere. Unwitting clergy from nearly all religions and denominations, reflexively pacifist, join in the anti-war movement unaware of the underlying progressive (and dangerously naïve) motive.
On the other hand, the civil rights cause, which was initially a religious-led movement, was later conveniently hijacked, corrupted and taken over by progressives. Social Justice, the current progressive iteration of the civil rights movement, is a misnomer; it is now simply the age old idea of generational guilt; that is reparation paid to those who blame hereditary mistreatment for their inability to thrive. The objective here is to force the state to enhance the current system of reparation beyond minority preference, affirmative action, progressive taxation and a guilt-free, gratitude-exempt, welfare state. “Social Justice” is not really a progressive cause per se, however it is embraced generally by the Left as it supports their notion of state control of wealth and economic outcome in a general sense. In it they find compliant political allies.
In fact, all “victimhood” movements – feminist, gay rights, transgender rights, have evolved as politically correct offshoots of the progressive hijacking of the black civil rights movement in America. One can only wonder how Martin Luther King, Jr. or Roy Wilkins would react to “Black Lives Matter” or the current media cacophony over transgender rights. Left turning clergy in the US willingly join these new crusades hoping to catch some of the excitement and moral certitude of the original civil rights leaders. In doing this, they only alienate themselves and their denominations from the many who see these spin-off movements as political, irrational and self-serving.
Open borders represents yet another tenet of the progressive left. However, progressives see open borders as the means to ballot dominance. Progressives believe that these new immigrant voters will be easy to convert to secularist Americans. They come from socialist states. They are natural Democrats and ready for the better, less corrupt form of US socialism. Progressives find close allies in their open border recruitment effort in religious leaders ready to embrace any idea to help the poor. Lost in this discussion is the abject failure of the migrants’ native countries with their socialist, Left leaning and corrupt governments.
Then there is “climate change.” Climate change is not really a Left-Right issue; it is a progressive rallying cry of wolf magnified and adopted by the modern progressive left. It presents a political short-cut, a quick chance for the state to consolidate its authority over money and commerce, the prime directive of statism and socialism generally. Money is the true source of power through which all progressive goals are accomplished. When Left leaning religious denominations and clergy join progressives in the call for state action on climate change, they have truly embraced the whole progressive agenda. The science of this debate is highly questionable and the proposed solutions, spurious. And as for its theological implications, they are are nothing if not all progressive politics.
Recent progressive tolerance, even support, for Islam is an interesting dynamic. There is no religion more in opposition to the progressive movement, more adversarial, and yet progressives are reluctant to pose any kind of resistance to what would be staunch opposition if the same accommodations were requested of Christians or Jews. Prayer rooms and special accommodations are offered to Muslim students in public schools. Public washing stations are provided for Muslims in government facilities. No complaints arise when the tenets of Islam are taught in public schools. Progressives seem frozen by a misguided sense of political correctness when it comes to Islam, an inability to assume that Muslims actually embrace Islamic theology, or that making this assumption somehow makes them prejudiced. This is an absurd blind spot among progressives.
On the other hand, the progressives Left, especially in Europe but also in the US (especially in the Academy) shows nothing but antipathy toward Israel and Jews generally. This anti-Semitic streak exists even though Jews, especially in the US, are generally strong supporters of progressive politics and generally identify as liberal progressives. Much of this antipathy may just be old-fashioned Jew hating, but Israel’s pugnacious insistence on its existence as a singular Jewish state is a direct affront to the Left’s idea of multiculturalism, open borders and world governance.
When mainstream religious leaders and denominations join with and support progressives, they are embracing an enemy committed to their destruction. Like many fellow travelers before them, many unwitting religious leaders and their affiliations have joined with progressives and become them, fully embracing the idea that men, in the form of the state, can enforce a poverty, sin and conflict free world without tyranny. They see this egalitarian world, the world of John Lennon’s “Imagine” as a religious ideal, except they seem to have ignored the telling verse “and no religion too.” The fact that they cannot see that they are facilitating their own demise is maddening. Utopia, that is heaven on earth, is the stuff of fools. As many times as men attempt such an enterprise, it fails, people suffer and in the process, human progress ends. We will never get it right. You would think that any believer in original sin would get that. They don’t.
Published in Religion & Philosophy
Because of a lack of depth of understanding, increasingly our citizens embrace unsound philosophies in everything from politics to religion. Increasingly, many of our churches embrace practices that are antithetical to the doctrines that used to be integral to their professions of faith. Not only does this change what it means to be a practitioner of faith, it also causes these religions to become completely meaningless, because their tenets are being replaced by an idealism that is much more preposterous than the beliefs deemed so mockable.
Excellent post.
As I read, among other things I was reminded of John Kasich’s cant in the last election cycle, to the effect that a Christian has to support the ever-expanding welfare state and all it entails, or forget about being able to face St Peter.
Well, almost, but there are exceptions, such as the thief on the cross. The idea for Catholics, Orthodox, traditionalist Anglicans and Lutherans is that the Holy Spirit works through Baptism to build faith in the baptized. The Holy Spirit being G-d, He can work in other ways as well.
Yes. Baptists teach the Age of Accountability. This is a doctrinal innovation that is unique to Arminian churches (Baptists and other groups influenced by Jacob Arminius).
Original Sin is worth a separate post. I will add it to the list. Give me a couple of months.
I think Jesus would say that our current systems of delivery of healthcare services are all defective. I do not think that He would find His flock to be adequately devoted to helping the poor and sick. I also think He would be unhappy to find that we had offloaded so much charitable works onto the government. Making care for the poor and sick into a government function lets too many Christians off the hook for these tasks that serve to build our character and make us better suited for the work that He intends for us to do in eternity.
I am interested in learning what you mean. This sounds both disparaging and ambiguous to me.
That’s why I love Ricochet. Where else can we find such erudition?
And that is the reason he never had a chance. He is an idiot. There are three things that the State can never spend too much on: poverty, health and education.
“Universalist Christian” thought should be differentiated from the description of Catholicism as universal. The terms don’t share a meaning…Though the word “catholic” does, indeed, mean “universal” – outside the specific theological context @mjbubba refers to above.
Sigh, 29 and 36 are not considered “grownups”
They were certainly considered grown back then.
There’s much that rings true in this post, but I would quibble (or more) on a couple points.
First, to answer why ostensible Christians (and most Jews) are taken in by their enemies on the Left, I don’t agree that they’re duped and deceived. I’ve met and studied beside these people in the (parish hall) basement of the church. They are almost all exceedingly bright people who are very high functioning in life. I give them more credit for their moral agency on these matters.
I think there are insidious temptations at work here. First, there is self-justification, as if their goodness isn’t a reflection of the creator God, but something homegrown within them. And, boy howdy, do they feel good about themselves for holding these positions. They’re their own yardstick for measuring righteousness.
And, second, social status is a major driver of human behavior/belief, and the Left has made opposition to leftism extremely socially costly. People who inhabit strongly socialist circles are under enormous pressure to assimilate. I think of it as The Borg.
I also disagree that their tolerance of Islam is a “blind spot.” They know Muslims are throwing gays off buildings and stoning women who are raped. They have the sense that Islam is the source of a hostile alien culture. For the leftists who are True Believers, Islam is an ally in the fight to take down the (Judeo-Christian) West. For the lefty liberal, I’d say they’ve learned to cope with the cognitive dissonance.
Just as a thought experiment, imagine (ahem) if orthodox conservative Christians and Jews were raptured off the planet (I don’t believe in The Rapture, btw. Another modernist innovation). The Left and Islam would almost assuredly be at each other’s throats. No, the Left/Muslim alignment is a pragmatic matter for them. Sort of like the Allies including Stalin.
Other than that, I mostly agree with your post @dougkimball, and that’s why I advocate every right-of-center westerner get his tuchas back in the pew! Even if you’re not inclined to belief, being there is an act of loyalty to ordered liberty. And, you never know, something might rub off on you.
I had some difficulty with those conclusions myself, thinking them to be too simplistic. I could have dug deeper, but I was not writing a book and the essay was already pretty wonky and long, so I didn’t. You are right to call me out on those points. However, my point goes back to my own experience of the leftward surge through my childhood congregational church back in the 70’s. When our conservative church joined in the UCC merger, political activism became the mantra among the new folk singer clergy, a usurpation of the glory days of Civil Rights. The born again concept swept through the more modest Protestantism as a way to identify the “true” Christians. Vatican II reforms like the sign of the peace swept through every major protestant denomination creating an intra-worship hug fest. It wasn’t enough to simply go to church to worship and pray. You had to demonstrate your Christianity and act. What started as anti-war, pro Civil rights church activism had morphed into a full on public acceptance of the entire Left wing agenda as it evolved with secular law.
Keep in mind, less than 10 years ago Obama supported traditional marriage, as did Hillary, as this was still a position supported by nearly all faiths. Every secular win for the Left becomes a steady drumbeat for the media; the feckless and compliant in the clergy adopt these positions or face being labelled bigoted, misogynistic, war mongering, stingy, rich loving and homophobic. No one dares oppose these positions lest they be labelled themselves. It becomes a cold war of sorts; who can be the most pure, the most empathetic, the most progressive idealist. Every new Leftist bugaboo becomes part of the new ideal.
There is a scene in the series “Silicon Valley” where the Erlich character, at a major conference dinner for entrepreneurs and venture capitalists, receives his strange “special” order. It comes in an elaborate box. He explains: “I’m a pescapescatorian.” The others at his table look confused, so he explains: “I only eat fish that only eat other fish.” The others immediately raise their arms and tell the server, “We want what he’s having.”
JM, considered: yes; comported themselves as such, not so much…That would take Sean’s arrival, at which they were 35 and 42, respectively.
We need to make distinctions between the old dead religious mainline church types and Christians who happen to be “progressives”. I think that they are wrong, but I don’t pretend to know their hearts; I hear about the same amount of self-righteous stuff from both sides- John MacArthur or Brian McLaren.
There are lots of wonderful evangelical Christians who are misguided leftists- e.g., Greg Boyd in St Paul, Minnesota (who is a great Evangelical pastor, in spite of being a devout pacifist). Rendering to Caesar requires allegiance to God, not obeisance to a particular political point of view. Two of the best books on politics in recent years were about how the Right compromised its faith by getting too involved in The Religious Right as a political movement. Ralph Reed discovered the consequences of selling out to power, money, and influence instead of keeping eyes focused on Jesus. Bill Hybels is a lefty, but it is pretty clear that he is a dedicated Christian; so is Rick Warren.
I disagree completely with NT Wright, Tony Campolo and Shane Claiborne about virtually every possible issue; Claiborne in particular gets overtly political on the opposite side. That does not make them in any way equivalent to the mainline “religious” denominations where leftism is the first goal and Jesus is sort of a counterculture socialist and pacifist philosopher invoked to support arguments.