A few years ago, Ross Douthat (a columnist for the New York Times) authored a book titled Bad Religion: How We Became a Nation of Heretics. Douthat voices what may well be the perception of many regarding organized religion. In many regards, he has done his homework. Historically, he provides much to back up his contentions as well as conclusions. What may be problematic, however, are the limitations of his presuppositions as well as conclusions which quite possibly are (as is easily the case with anyone) the result of his own perceptions of Christianity. Notice what he stated.
Amid such sweeping challenges to their faith, there were two obvious paths that the Christian
churches could take: accommodation or resistance. The first approach would seek to forge a
new Christianity more consonant with the spirit of the age, one better adapted to the trends that were undercutting orthodoxy. …The second would break decisively with the revolutionary mood in American society and identify Christianity with cultural conservatism.
Both approaches were invoked as solutions to Christianity’s struggles, and both were blamed
for Christianity’s eclipse. With every drop in church attendance, vocations, or donations, accommodationists would blame the forces of reaction for preventing necessary adaptations,
alienating the changing population of a changing country by refusing to change themselves.
Resisters would retort that the collapse of Christian culture was a direct consequence of accommodationists’ surrender to contemporary fashions.
Historically – we have read, heard of, or seen the polarizations to which Douthat alludes. All of us are aware of religious groups who have caved in to the whims of culture as well as those who stand out as “out of touch” with what is considered the “norm”. What Douthat neither acknowledges nor articulates is the existence of at least a third path instead of only the two mentioned above. The third path is one of application. While some groups are quick to accept any and everything new in the name of religion (even to the point of becoming experts in public relations and marketing), others approach Christianity with a rigidity which cannot adapt to changing times. The New Testament church, however, worked well within areas which were surrounded by: hedonistic idolatry, cultures which advocated and practiced slavery, cultures consumed with various forms of prejudice, etc. In each case, the Gospel of Christ provided a way for culture to rise above the problems which permeated it. God’s word can and does relate to each society, each generation, and more than adequately answers those who are critical of its message of hope and salvation and of the way it elevates humanity to a higher ethical standard. Interestingly, the solution to America becoming (or remaining) a nation of heretics includes what Mr. Douthat suggests.
To make any difference in our common life, Christianity must be lived – not as a means to
social cohesion or national renewal, but as an end unto itself. Anyone who seeks a more
perfect union should begin by seeking the perfection of their own soul. Anyone who would
save their country should first look to save themselves. Seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.
May we ever be untiring in our involvement to change the humanistic views of culture back to a focus on faith in and application of the Word of God.
Ross Douthat, Bad Religion: How We Became a Nation of Heretics (Free Press: A Division of Simon & Schuster, Inc. NY: 2012) p. 83.