Bad Religion by Ross Douthat

I received Bad Religion by Ross Douthat as a gift. It was on the list of books I keep that someone, somewhere recommended. I have no idea where I got this recommendation, but I'm so glad I did. It's an excellent book on the history of American Christianity. Its real value is in putting the current moment into perspective.

As American Christians, it's very easy to believe that how we "do" Christianity here is not only how it's always been done, but how it should be done. Yet neither is true.

Douthat begins in the so-called "golden years" of American Christianity in the mid-twentieth century. This was a time of growing acceptance of orthodox Christianity in all realms of society–spiritual, economic, and political. Yet even at this time, cracks existed. 

"True golden ages do not exist. Martin Luther King was a Christian hero, but he was also a reckless adulterer whose academic work was partially ghostwritten. The neo-orthodox theologians did a brilliant job of making the Christian intellectual framework intelligible to a secular audience, but they also frequently seemed to purposefully dance around some of the most important–and necessarily controversial–issues of Christian faith. (Martin Gardner's 1971 novel-of-ideas, The Flight of Peter Fromm, The Flight of Peter Fromm, features a young seminarian driven mad by Reinhold Niebuhr's evasiveness on supernatural questions...) (p. 51)

But by the late 1960s a remarkable thing occurred. Churches stopped growing. Americans continued to grow religiously, but not in the orthodox tradition. "Heretics carried the day completely." (p. 64) A New Age spirituality gripped the nation. Somehow Christianity lost its reputation for transcendence and became out of fashion. 

How would the Church respond? Would it seek to accommodate and synchronize with the spirit of the times or would it double-down on the basic tenets of the faith? Both. 

"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 latter would follow William F. Buckley's maxim and stand athwart religious history yelling "Stop!" The first approach would attempt to sustain Christianity's midcentury reconciliation with Western liberalism by adapting itself to the changing cultural circumstances. The second would break decisively with the revolutionary mood in American society and identify Christianity with cultural conservatism." (p. 81)

It's easy to imagine where this ended up. The liberal faction did a great job of embracing and modeling the love of Christ. It just set aside the judgment for sin embodied in Christ. In the process of all love and acceptance and no need for devotion or self-sacrifice, the Church made itself irrelevant. Who needs church when one could just accept everyone for what they were and sleep in on Sundays? On the other end was a resistance movement dedicated to fighting the excesses of the liberal establishment. The mainline churches lost members in droves while more conservative off-shoots and "para-church" organizations rapidly gained ground. Unfortunately with no oversight or hierarchal structure to hold them accountable, these groups easily strayed from orthodoxy as well. The evangelical movement became conflated with conservative politics. Young people, who did not want to identify with the Republican Party, yet desiring to retain a form of faith, departed into a more cafeteria-style religion, clinging to the attractive parts and discarding the uncomfortable.  

For some, the discovery of "lost gospels" provided a new and interesting take on Jesus. Many could claim access to secret or hidden knowledge. The Divinci Code perfectly embodied the desire to forge a new brand of Christianity that could withstand the disdain many felt for the strictures of orthodoxy and its call for repentance. Mainline churches were irrelevant. Evangelical churches were too judgmental. The "lost gospels" provided an opportunity to forge your own Jesus. This appealed to the high-brow and intellectuals among believers.

But for the other half of America, something else was needed to tap into a different deeply felt need. Enter "Pray and Grow Rich." Joel Osteen and his Best Life Now perfectly filled a need for those feeling left behind in a culture increasingly exposed to "the risks and shocks of commerce and competition" (p. 202). As an added benefit, it could appeal to the rich by justifying their gain–God was blessing them for their righteous living. This transactional religion could also boast of melding perfectly with the American Dream. Work hard, "invest" in the cause, sit back and wait for the returns. 

Once again the pendulum swung. Reacting to the brash materialism and commercialism of the prosperity gospel, Americans decided to turn to self-discovery and a connection with the transcendent that had no rules or rituals. It had one god–the god within. This god dwells within your being and coincidentally agrees with you in every respect. Gone are the hierarchies, and the rules, and the calls to sacrifice yourself for the Kingdom of God. The god within only demands that you stay true to your authentic self. As Elizabeth Gilbert modeled for us in her best-seller Pray, Eat, Love, we must search for that voice within ourselves that speaks in the most authentic us-ness possible. The god is there, waiting to be discovered. If that involves leaving a spouse (as she did), so be it. "You do you" replaces "Do unto others..." Unfortunately "I as god" tends to lead to isolation and unhappiness. Who knew? (Jesus. Jesus knew.) Cue rise of the therapeutic culture.

As it will, reactions to this heretical form of Christianity took the religion in the opposite direction. Beginning with the Tea Party and continuing to MAGA country, Christians intertwined patriotism and an infallible narrative with the gospel itself. Jesus didn't mean for you to be rich, a la the prosperity gospel, Jesus meant for you to be a Republican and 'Merica. While America has beautiful, biblical values upon which it was founded, America, and American politicians, can never be the Savior. America is simultaneously experiencing a fear of the Apocalypse (if the the wrong people are elected), and a rabid embrace of a messianic figure who can save us from destruction. Both positions cause harm to Christianity and the country in general. 

While it is true that America has been a force for good and that it has always been an experiment that can fail, the true Hope lies in the gospel message of Christianity. Douthat states:

In our nation's better moments, Christianity has been intimately involved in American politics while standing somewhat apart from partisanship, summoning the country to reform without falling victim to the conceit that political reform is religion's only purpose. At their most robustand independent, our churches and religious leaders have reminded us that America is only almost chosen, and that paradise isn't possible on earth. In our finer hours, orthodoxy's universalism has been potent enough to temper nationalism in both its apocalyptic and messianic manifestations.

But we do not inhabit such an hour today.

In the end, Douthat doesn't really have a good answer for all this back-and-forth. Obviously he advocates a return to orthodoxy. He wants an embrace of the sacramental and beautiful. He calls the church to return to her mission of drawing the world to God through Christ and His death and resurrection. He mentions the Emergent Church movement as a possible source of renewal. Unfortunately since the book has been written, that segment of Christianity has proven liable to pastor-worship and heresy. 

Personally, I think the solution lies in small, gospel-centered, worship-driven churches. Churches that ask much and offer much in return. A church focused on Jesus and his call to be perfect while offering a radical form of grace and forgiveness. A church that loves all, embraces all, welcomes all, but seeks to pull all up out of the natural fallen state of humanity into a glorious life of ongoing sanctification. The Church must strip away all the accruements that hinder the simplicity of the gospel message: You are a sinner in need of a Savior. You cannot save yourself. Jesus loves you so much that He willingly and at great cost took on that role. Surrender to Him and His call to be perfect is your only option. Welcome to the family. You are loved. 

Anything that replaces or amends that message is heresy. It will not lead to Jesus. It will lead to Bad Religion.