While the formal separation of church and state is a vital element of America's constitutional order, the success of our long-running experiment in self-government has always depended on a healthy interdependence between republican freedom and religious faith.
I enjoyed this. But apart from a brief reference to (largely imagined) Scandinavia, no discussion of why the US has been so different in this respect. The other Anglo countries have made the transition from near-universal Christian affiliation, with a substantial political role for churches, to near-complete secularism, and have done so pretty painlessly. In Australia our last PM was a member of a US-style megachurch (Hillsong) but this was more of an oddity than anything.
It's a great question! As far as I understand, church attendance in the UK, Australia, and Canada started dropping precipitously in the 1960s and 70s; in the US we had a little slide then, with drops in mainline denominations partially counteracted by a big surge in evangelical churches. That evangelical boom didn't happen in the rest of the Anglo world, at least not like in the US. We've been on different paths for a while now--but unclear to me why.
One thing that strikes me is that church in the US is (or was) a central part of community life in a way that was never true in Australia. Sport (playing rather than watching on TV) fills much of that niche. I moved to a new city recently, and got an instant social circle by joining a triathlon club.
As an icebreaker in Australia, "what sport do you play" is common whereas "what church do you go to" would be both intrusive and absurd.
I was thinking the same thing. And I am also curious if those western European nations have seen the same breakdown of 'community', social norms and general connection between people that the US has seen.
Brink and Jonathan - such a great conversation. So insightful. Brink I know Bruce Posner would love to be a part of this. Can you add him on? Thank you.
"A church that expects a lot of its people ritually and behaviorally but more latitudinarian on the belief side"
The problem with "Thick Christianity" is that it is just christian religion, it has cause and effect wrong and as a pretend Christianity, followers would not return to the core messages of Christianity.
1. If you don't really believe why would your fear God? It's much easier to fear the shunning from your Mormon/Jehovah's Witness etc organisation. If other fears surpass the fear of your thicchristiancult you just leave and address those fears from outside of the religion.
2. Imitating Jesus is impossible and trying is unnecessary if you don't believe
3. Similarly with forgiveness. The only reason to forgive when you don't believe is if you really want to make it work with your current tribe. Usually that's not worth it - especially when, as you say Jonathan, another (better looking) tribe is waiting for you on your phone.
True Christianity should have the same results of regular attendance, sense of community, service, and behaviours but has to result from a very specific belief first.
I do agree that sharp Christianity is a problem and it's been quite a shock for me - a recent immigrant to the US - to see such political ties in the church. But I don't think Thick Christianity is the answer. I would like to point out that Christianity is not at all for separation of church and state and definitely not pro liberal democracy at least in the long term. The vision is a new earth with Jesus as king.
I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that for a lot of these aspects of cultural nostalgia, you really can't have your cake and eat it too. For church to have the strong aspects of community people want, it likely needs to have the binding of real faith (at least for some of the community) and, more importantly, it needs the force of social censure.
I don't know that you can have strong church communities without ALSO having church busybodies and attempts to ban Harry Potter in school and social shunning of people who stray from accepted norms. I don't know that you can have a strong, outside-based neighborhood community without ALSO giving up air conditioning and having a tiny house.
I think that this is the zone of battle for the synthesis required in the dialectic of our time (thesis = Christianity-based community in US, antithesis = individual-centered liberalism and secularism, synthesis = ???). And the fact that I don't see an easy answer does not mean it doesn't exist. But I think we are often shortsighted to think you can get the good without the bad in some of these things. And maybe we'll decide the good is important enough that it is "worth" the bad...
Good discussion. You both express a great longing for the stability that Christianity seems to have provided democracy. But this is somewhat like me wanting the Seattle Mariners to win a World Series. I want them to, but I don't buy their tickets or subscribe to their TV stream. I'm on the outside, as it were, listening to the radio. Either or both of you could choose to participate in a Christian congregation. I learned this when in my twenties. A woman of my parents' generation, who was very much an active member of the church I attended, felt compelled to whisper to me "I don't believe in the virgin birth." That was a great gift to me. I realized she was certainly not alone in finding value in Christian ritual and community, without feeling she had to swallow every detail of dogma as literal truth. 50 years later I find myself in a similar place. Christian worship and community points me to the ineffable mysteries and conflicts of human existence. The stories are sacred literature, not literal histories. A couple years ago a friend started up a men's Bible study in the woods. There is no leader, except to the extent that my friend says when its time to start and stop. We read the text, interrupt it, and interrogate it and each other. We don't feel we have to come to agreement on the "right" answer. We bring in our personal struggles, our lives, our stories. There are lots of people like you around. You just need to find them.
I enjoyed this. But apart from a brief reference to (largely imagined) Scandinavia, no discussion of why the US has been so different in this respect. The other Anglo countries have made the transition from near-universal Christian affiliation, with a substantial political role for churches, to near-complete secularism, and have done so pretty painlessly. In Australia our last PM was a member of a US-style megachurch (Hillsong) but this was more of an oddity than anything.
It's a great question! As far as I understand, church attendance in the UK, Australia, and Canada started dropping precipitously in the 1960s and 70s; in the US we had a little slide then, with drops in mainline denominations partially counteracted by a big surge in evangelical churches. That evangelical boom didn't happen in the rest of the Anglo world, at least not like in the US. We've been on different paths for a while now--but unclear to me why.
One thing that strikes me is that church in the US is (or was) a central part of community life in a way that was never true in Australia. Sport (playing rather than watching on TV) fills much of that niche. I moved to a new city recently, and got an instant social circle by joining a triathlon club.
As an icebreaker in Australia, "what sport do you play" is common whereas "what church do you go to" would be both intrusive and absurd.
I was thinking the same thing. And I am also curious if those western European nations have seen the same breakdown of 'community', social norms and general connection between people that the US has seen.
Brink and Jonathan - such a great conversation. So insightful. Brink I know Bruce Posner would love to be a part of this. Can you add him on? Thank you.
I can't add him but he can subscribe or just visit the site anytime -- it's free!
This was an excellent discussion and very useful analysis from both Brink and Jonathan.
"A church that expects a lot of its people ritually and behaviorally but more latitudinarian on the belief side"
The problem with "Thick Christianity" is that it is just christian religion, it has cause and effect wrong and as a pretend Christianity, followers would not return to the core messages of Christianity.
1. If you don't really believe why would your fear God? It's much easier to fear the shunning from your Mormon/Jehovah's Witness etc organisation. If other fears surpass the fear of your thicchristiancult you just leave and address those fears from outside of the religion.
2. Imitating Jesus is impossible and trying is unnecessary if you don't believe
3. Similarly with forgiveness. The only reason to forgive when you don't believe is if you really want to make it work with your current tribe. Usually that's not worth it - especially when, as you say Jonathan, another (better looking) tribe is waiting for you on your phone.
True Christianity should have the same results of regular attendance, sense of community, service, and behaviours but has to result from a very specific belief first.
I do agree that sharp Christianity is a problem and it's been quite a shock for me - a recent immigrant to the US - to see such political ties in the church. But I don't think Thick Christianity is the answer. I would like to point out that Christianity is not at all for separation of church and state and definitely not pro liberal democracy at least in the long term. The vision is a new earth with Jesus as king.
I'm increasingly coming to the conclusion that for a lot of these aspects of cultural nostalgia, you really can't have your cake and eat it too. For church to have the strong aspects of community people want, it likely needs to have the binding of real faith (at least for some of the community) and, more importantly, it needs the force of social censure.
I don't know that you can have strong church communities without ALSO having church busybodies and attempts to ban Harry Potter in school and social shunning of people who stray from accepted norms. I don't know that you can have a strong, outside-based neighborhood community without ALSO giving up air conditioning and having a tiny house.
I think that this is the zone of battle for the synthesis required in the dialectic of our time (thesis = Christianity-based community in US, antithesis = individual-centered liberalism and secularism, synthesis = ???). And the fact that I don't see an easy answer does not mean it doesn't exist. But I think we are often shortsighted to think you can get the good without the bad in some of these things. And maybe we'll decide the good is important enough that it is "worth" the bad...
Good discussion. You both express a great longing for the stability that Christianity seems to have provided democracy. But this is somewhat like me wanting the Seattle Mariners to win a World Series. I want them to, but I don't buy their tickets or subscribe to their TV stream. I'm on the outside, as it were, listening to the radio. Either or both of you could choose to participate in a Christian congregation. I learned this when in my twenties. A woman of my parents' generation, who was very much an active member of the church I attended, felt compelled to whisper to me "I don't believe in the virgin birth." That was a great gift to me. I realized she was certainly not alone in finding value in Christian ritual and community, without feeling she had to swallow every detail of dogma as literal truth. 50 years later I find myself in a similar place. Christian worship and community points me to the ineffable mysteries and conflicts of human existence. The stories are sacred literature, not literal histories. A couple years ago a friend started up a men's Bible study in the woods. There is no leader, except to the extent that my friend says when its time to start and stop. We read the text, interrupt it, and interrogate it and each other. We don't feel we have to come to agreement on the "right" answer. We bring in our personal struggles, our lives, our stories. There are lots of people like you around. You just need to find them.
I wonder if there will come a day when MAGA is behind us… will those Baptists and churchgoers in red hats say, “What were we thinking?”