Midcentury Christian Renaissance: a model for today?
Ahh, where to begin in my exploration of Bad Religion? Perhaps in introducing a comparison between Ross Douthat’s text and James Davison Hunter’s To Change the World. Hunter introduced us to ways American Christians engage the world from the left (“relevance to the culture”), right (“defensive against”) and neo-Anabaptist.[1] Whereas Hunter introduces three (really, two) paradigms that he believes fall short, and offers an alternative, positive model for Christian engagement in our world, Douthat approaches the world through the “Christian right” paradigm of Christianity maintaining a defensive position against the culture. He quickly dismisses the “secular left”—notice there is not even a suggestion that there might be a “Christian left.”[2]
What Douthat gets right, I believe, is his identification of the current state of America: “America has indeed become less traditionally Christian across the last half century, just as religious conservatives insist, with unhappy consequences for our national life. But certain kinds of religious faith are as influential as ever, just as secular critics and the new atheists contend.”[3] Douthat believes the root problem of this state lies in traditional Christian teachings that have been warped by both the “Christian right” and “secular left”… bad religion.
That said, Douthat approaches the current state of America from such a different foundation from me that I found it difficult to appreciate much of what he said at all. Shortly after this book came out, Douthat was interviewed by Christianity Today. In that interview, Douthat argues that, “we agree that America is uniquely favored by God” and “there are biblical passages that suggest a link between a nation’s morality, a nation’s religious beliefs, and its historical fate.” Douthat likens America, not to “King David’s Israel,” but to the “pagan nations” such as Babylon or Assyria, who, the prophets said, were the instruments of God. My problem with that is the assumption that a nation can be “Christian” or “pagan,” leaving room for a theocracy. Especially, as Benedict Anderson suggests, our modern nation states are relatively new social constructs, to liken America to the ancient nations is a false comparison.
Douthat’s solutions for how Christians can respond to the state of American religion are, for the most part, troublesome.
Midcentury Christian Renaissance?
One serious concern (among many) I have is Douthat’s premise that Christian religion in America was “idyllic” until the 1950s, when everything began falling apart.[5] That is naïve, and misses the nuances of that time, as he harkens back to a non-existent nostalgic past, which he terms the “midcentury Christian renaissance.”[6] For instance, while he adds a romantic caveat that Christians fought against Jim Crow laws with priests and ministers marching for human rights, he misses the reality that the majority of white Christians and churches were not interested in participating, except as antagonists, fearful of accommodating the rights of black and brown people.[7] Likewise, Douthat infers that the ordination of women was a byproduct of churches accommodating the culture.[8] We’ve slid down a slippery slope into heretical theology since the 1950s. So he suggests examining American Christianity of the 1950s as a model for today: “We don’t need to imagine what a Christian politics less corrupted by ideology and partisanship would look like. We only need to remember what was possible not all that long ago.”[9]
I don’t know about you, but I’m not really interested in returning to 1950s Christianity. While Christianity may have been a common language spoken by many/most Americans, it was also a cultural Christendom that sought to maintain the status quo, isolated from other contexts. I appreciate a living faith that isn’t dominate or assumed, that isn’t afraid of those who are different, and that doesn’t seek to circle the wagons to preserve our identity.
Benedict Option
Douthat also suggests one way to renew American Christianity is to embrace the Benedict Option, 
which I introduced in my post last week, as well. Coined by Rod Dreher,[10] the Benedict Option suggests that Christians separate themselves from the wider culture into communities (following the monastic model) for a period of purification.[11] Like Hunter, Dreher believes geographical proximity is important. But Dreher believes its importance lies in the value of a close-knit Christian community to pray and worship close together and stay distinct from the culture, whereas Hunter would argue that those Christians gathered into a community are meant to engage with and be fully present to that place, rather than separating from it. I resonate much more with Hunter’s model of the “Jeremiah Option” to seek the welfare of the city and pray for the place where I live.
Confessional
Another posture of renewed American Christianity is for churches to be both ecumenical and confessional. What sets one part of the church as distinct from another? I actually appreciated Douthat’s suggestion that “a conversation has to reach conclusions in order to actually stand for something; a community has to define itself theologically in order to be able to sustain itself across generations.”[12] Our cohort would be a fine case of this: we have amazing conversations that spur each of us to think critically and refine how we understand our faith and relationship to the church and the world. Yet in the midst of that, we each also maintain our confessional foundations as Baptists, Presbyterians, Assembly of God, etc. And one of the delightful realities is that by maintaining our own confessional foundations, we enrich one another.
It seems to me that Douthat misses the opportunity to reflect on God’s sovereignty in this place and time. He is so concerned with pointing out potential heretics that have diverted from his idea of orthodox faith that he fails to see the possibility of God at work in the world, he fails to imagine the big picture of God at work in history.
Finally, although Bad Religion was published in 2012, the pronouns throughout the text are consistently masculine. I am willing to overlook that tendency in texts published decades ago, but in today’s context, masculine pronouns are no longer gender neutral and inclusive language is the norm. I found his resistance to inclusive language extremely distracting and irritating.
[1] See my post from last week on why I don’t believe this is a third insufficient paradigm, but rather, parallel to Hunter’s theology of faithful presence.
[2] cf. Ross Douthat, Bad Religion, (New York: Free Press, 2012), 3, etc.
[3] Ibid, 3.
[5]http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/books/inbadreligionrossdouthatcriticizesuschristianity.html
[6] Douthat, 292.
[7] Ibid, 24; cf. 286.
[8] Ibid, 90-91.
[9] Ibid, 286.
[10] Dreher happens to be an acquaintance of Douthat’s (he’s mentioned appreciatively in the Acknowledgements of Bad Religion).
[11] Ibid, 280; cf http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2017/march/benedict-options-vision-for-christian-village.html
[12] Ibid, 287.
About the Author
Katy Drage Lines
In God’s good Kingdom, some minister like trees, long-standing, rooted in a community. They embody words of Wendell Berry, “stay years if you would know the genius of the place.” Others, however, are called to go. Katy is one of those pilgrims. A global nomad, Katy grew up as a fifth generation Colorado native, attended college & seminary and was ordained in Tennessee, married a guy from Pennsylvania, ministered for ten years in Kenya, worked as a children’s pastor in a small church in Kentucky, and served college students in a university library in Orange County, California. She recently moved to the heart of America, Indianapolis, and has joined the Englewood Christian Church community, serving with them as Pastor of Spiritual Formation. She & her husband Kip, have two delightful boys, a college junior and high school junior.8 responses to “Midcentury Christian Renaissance: a model for today?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yes, Katy, I resonate with the irritability you expressed in reading this book, as he struggled to offer a balanced, integrated perspective on religion and the sovereignty of God. I wish he put as much passion into talking about creating good religion as he did in defining and describing bad religion. That would have been a fascinating read. Maybe he’ll write a sequel.
Enjoy your trip to Israel…can’t wait to hear about it. Make sure to message before you and Kristin leave so you both can be in our prayers.
Thanks Katy. I too struggle with the broad brush with which Douthat seems to paint the “religious” state of America. America remains rather diverse and unique in its religious expression, especially with those who consider themselves to be evangelical. I’m glad you mentioned the “benedict option” in your post. I find the concept interesting. I first became aware of the concept within evangelical circles when I read “The Celtic Way of Evangelism” by George Hunter. Although for G. Hunter the application is more toward becoming an opened welcoming faith community, not one that is closed off or separated from the world. It’s an interesting concept for me. Enjoyed your post.
Thanks Jim. FWIW– my husband studied with George Hunter and he is a fascinating man… used to work out and evangelize at Muscle Beach in L.A! His text on “the Celtic Way…” is quite influential and Kip has used it in his classroom. I hadn’t thought about the connection to his text until now– thanks for the reference!
Thank you, Katy. There is a very good reason why we are not going back to June Cleaver.
After WWII some women were glad to stop riveting bolts on warships and go home and have kids. The returning soldiers needed jobs so it worked out for a time. But our nation got over a crisis and now let’s move on.
What do you think? Which way does it go? We have been discussing culture and religion all semester. Does one have dominance over the other or is it a “dance”?
I like the image of a dance.
Good piece as always Katy.
“Do not say, “Why were the old days better than these?” For it is not wise to ask such questions.” (Ecclesiastes 7:10)
I do think Douthat did, in fact, offer several caveats about the good old days, and he also wrote of the sovereignty of God in a small way towards the end of the book, but this was certainly heavy on fairly critical diagnosis and light on remedy.
“I resonate much more with Hunter’s model of the ‘Jeremiah Option’ to seek the welfare of the city and pray for the place where I live.”
I completely agree with this, Katy. I am not at all impressed by Dreher’s Benedict Option. The time for withdrawal is long since passed and the time for engagement and care for our communities is crucial.
Katy!!!!Wow!!! Loved this post. When I read about the “great 1950’s” I couldn’t help but think about the current American presidents platform of “Making America Great Again!” Like what? Let’s be real and honest about what he failed to acknowledge in his book which was the racial amd systematic inequality and hatred that was very prominent in the Christian church culture during that time period. It is always troubling for me when anyone’s solution resides in reliving our past.