From Ross's interview on Get Religion:
(2) What is the most important religion story right now that you think the mainstream media just do not get?
It isn't the sort of story that makes for newspaper headlines, so it's no surprise they don't get it, but I think the media's focus on the culture wars -- whether between secularists and believers, or the religious right and the religious left -- has led them to underplay the larger theological context in which its occurring: Namely, the collapse of orthodox Christian belief in the United States, and its replacement by a cluster of competing religious narratives that tend to offer variants -- some socially-liberal, some socially-conservative -- on what Christian Smith has termed "moral therapeutic deism." I think there's still a core of orthodox Christian belief (broadly defined to include Catholic, Orthodox and Reformed traditions), but there isn't enough coverage of the extent to which the "conservative evangelical" who gets her religious teaching from Joel Osteen the Prayer of Jabez and the liberal Protestant who cheers for the consecration of V. Gene Robinson actually share a lot of theological premises, most of which are functionally post-Christian.
What an interesting point. I hope we can see an Atlantic Monthly essay on this topic. Nudge-nudge.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Cannoneo, Ross is quoting another scholar who coined the term. I forget his name, just that this came up in a Theology course I once took, so I've ran into the term before. It's a bit ironic as a descriptor, a rather dry-humoured bit of jargon. The point is that they have a practical theology that can be both Deistic *and* therapeutic. God stands outside reality and doesn't move in our world EXCEPT to get us out of tight places.
He definitely doesn't judge or hold sovereignty over the world. There's no such thing as a vocation, or discerning God's will for us, because you don't think of God as having anything but a general will for peace and love. It's not well-thought out, because it's not a rationally held position, just a reflex.
"Orthodoxy" has clearly taken a backseat to high-cost marketing campaigns geared to a post-Christian society which is open to the concept (I do not dare say searching for) of McChurch (fast, cheap, & easy) with the atmosphere of Starbucks (comfort, community). In this, the "Church" becomes indistinguishable from the culture, a place where everyone can "fit in".
I'm not so sure about the "competing religious narratives that tend to offer variants" that the article mentions. Unless the religion boils down to the choice of having a Cappachino or a Mocha Latte while listening to a rock band sing about Jesus on Sunday morning.
Does it trouble anyone else that the author lumps "conservative evangelicals" with Joel Olsteen? But the author is right: That in the end, all are welcome in McChurch.
Lancelot, you said:
"It is not deistic at all, but rather seeks to "use" God instrumentally, to gain happiness, wealth, success, sex, power, health, beauty, etc. God is your ever active coach and procurer, always working to bring "blessings" to you and your family and friends."
And,
"In orthodox Christianity, God is an end in Himself, indeed the only end, whose sovereignty orders all of our other desires. Indeed, in Christianity we are expected to die to the self formed by worldly attachments in order to live to God in Christ."
Sorry to quote so extensively, but your excellent post bears repeating.
I've often thought that those who bought books like "The Prayer of Jabez" were looking at Christianity as a form of magic or magick and prayer as a form of incantation. And, I'm not sure I believe in God or in Orthodox Christianity, but there sure is a difference between extremes you mentioned.
"Before Jesus Christ can take away our sins, He first has to take away our breath."
Jay, your comment shows the danger inherent in trying to make Christianity "Attractive". The substitution of marketing for the truth of the gospel has resulted not only in a "me" centered Christianity that seriously diminshes both the sovereignty of Christ and the depravity of sin, but also to entire churches full of adherents who lack the most basic knowledge of what Christianity actually teaches.
Knowing that my sins put Jesus on a Cross of suffering and death, may not be attractive, but it has always been enough to take my breath away.
Eileen, thanks for the help in reading more closely. I looked briefly for Christian Smith's original use of the term "moral therapeutic deism" and he appears to be applying it to the results of a survey of teenagers. As in, even church-going teenagers don't know much about theology but when asked say they believe in God and think He helps people when they need it but not much else. Not so earth-shattering, I think.
And even if a lot of adults do believe this way - which upon reflection, I think they do - I don't think that's anything new. The vast majority of adherents to Christian churches have long, long been this way. I think people who think about and feel the meaning of religious ideas rigorously are rare and have "theological sensibilities" created by some particular trauma they went through.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.