Interesting read
The Christian Science Monitor carries an oped by some evangelical I've never heard of saying that the evangelical movement is near collapse. I'm not endorsing the piece, but there were alot of bits in there that I found thought provoking.
On the "social issue" politics: "We fell for the trap of believing in a cause more than a faith."
On the fundie colleges, "Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism. Evangelicalism has used its educational system primarily to staff its own needs and talk to itself."
Interesting read.
On the "social issue" politics: "We fell for the trap of believing in a cause more than a faith."
On the fundie colleges, "Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism. Evangelicalism has used its educational system primarily to staff its own needs and talk to itself."
Interesting read.
posted by mikevotes at
8:17 AM
9 Comments:
Thanks for that link. It was an interesting read.
What I took away from the article was a different take than you did, though. This idea that evangelicals are the only ones who do anything "good", and the hand-wringing over how all of that "good" will disappear is weak.
Most of the "good works" that the majority of evangelicals do boils down to simple proselytising.
As for the issues you saw in the article, they were spot on. Fundamentalists have been used, and people think less of them for it. There is no longer immense political force backing them up, and "the money has dried up".
I have heard a dozen people over the past five years tell me of job interviews in which they were asked about their "relationship with Jesus". It's no secret that evangelical employers have used job loss as an "inducement" to join their church.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 8:52 AM
I haven't read the article yet, but I will.
I found this snip interesting:
"Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism. "
I read this as frustration that reason and pragmatism continue to trump superstition and blind ideology. What is secularism if not man's rational ability to solve problems and better his condition? In it's best form, secularism values all mankind and not just the chosen clique of right-thinking believers.
One man's tragedy is another man's triumph, I suppose.
By
-epm, at 8:58 AM
Todd, good point. I just assumed the guys perspective and filtered alot of that perspective out.
On the other hand, I'm not so sure they're "over."
I view modern fundamentalism very similarly to the way I view country music. It's never going to completely go away because there's a core of "fans" out there, and it will periodically surface and sink in its cultural visibility from time to time. Just got to ride out the times when its visible and listen to something else, you know?
....
EPM, I see it as a frustration in their dream that they could create a competing scholarship. It fails, of course, for the reasons you say.
It is a futile effort, but think about all that money and effort they've thrown away on it.
By
mikevotes, at 10:32 AM
I'm a former evangelical, now Catholic, for many of the reasons outlined in the article.
My take is that the culture has influenced evangelicals much more than they have influenced the culture. Given their theology, this makes perfect sense. The political activism is completely inconsistent with their core beliefs about the world. It was always going to be a temporary phenomenon. Spencer thinks that is a good thing, and I agree with him.
As for reason vs faith - in the Catholic view there is no conflict. If what we believe is true, it should be able to withstand scrutiny. There is no need to withdraw into intellectual ghettos for fear that we might learn too much. Maybe this is Spencer foresees more evangelicals turning toward Rome.
By
Patrick, at 11:44 AM
I definitely have to say that I am commenting from outside the sphere.
To me, there has been a cultural/generational shift probably most notable in some of the megachurches towards kind of a self-help/enrichment theology.
To me, the place where I kinda got off respecting this evangelical bus is when they started preaching more what god can do for me than what I can do for god.
That's a really broad brush and only selectively applicable, but your Rick Warren's, your Joel Osteen's, etc, the new generational face of this version of evangelicalism are all about that, and to me, that's wrong.
Again, outside my sphere, but that's kinda where I sit.
By
mikevotes, at 1:14 PM
Mike, that's very interesting. I think the Warren and Osteen people would say that their therapeutic/self-help agenda is designed precisely to attract people like you. Yet you see it as a turn-off.
If your reaction is typical of non-religious folks, it helps explain why the evangelical churches are failing to attract many converts.
I think most of them would be surprised to hear you say this... and in fact they're NOT hearing you say it because they don't read left-of-center blogs. You're not part of the tribe and therefore need not be listened to.
By
Patrick, at 1:38 PM
Well, I don't think I'm exactly their target group.
If you read the stuff that Warren and OSteen put out, they claim they're looking for those who believe but have not found a church that serves them or have drifted away from churches. (ie. they're trying to get people to go to their churches, not really trying to convert, you know?)
By
mikevotes, at 2:37 PM
Mike wrote:
On the other hand, I'm not so sure they're "over."
I don't think they "over", either. They just aren't ascendant.
By
Todd Dugdale , at 3:02 PM
Yeah. They're just stalling. It's too big a movement with too big a core to permanently fall away.
(Plus, there are lots of motivations for lots of people to keep it around and going, both political, and for some, economic.).
By
mikevotes, at 4:19 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home