All On the Table
As 2017 begins, we should perhaps think of 2016 as a television show and, as such, see what it has set up for the next season. The list would probably be too larger and way too nuanced to fit effectively in one post. But there is one theme that I believe will have immediate and lasting ramifications for 2017 and it is this: everything is on the table.
The idea of permanence has been jettisoned. Sometimes that isn't a bad thing. Yet it appears we are entering into a time in which everything is being both questioned and accepted. Laws are not made for endurance, they are made for a term to be overturned, repealed, or set up for something else later. In politics, in religion, in almost all facets of public life, all is up for grabs.
In particular, I have seen that most clearly in the Christian faith.
Every religious tradition has its sub-groups. Typically in Christianity we cite different denominations as a means of demarcation. However with the rise of "independent" churches, the lines have become far more blurred. What once was clear differences based on theology, biblical interpretation, ritual, and hierarchy/structure were apparent through names like Southern Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian Church of America, United Methodist, Roman Catholic, Church of God of Prophecy, United Church of Christ and so on. Now churches tend to tamp down their denominational affiliation with names like "Community Congregation," "The Vine," "The Church of [insert city name here]." "The Truth" and so on.
More than that, though, are the independent churches that fit into particular themes but not specifically aligning with any established denomination. Snake handling, tongue speaking, or much newer, the prosperity gospel movement. With thematic statements defining the theology, as well as styles of worship, it all gets fuzzy and "Christian" begins to mean both less and less as well as whatever any group says it means.
So for Christianity to be represented by, say, Wayne T. Jackson, in many ways de-legitimizes the claims of someone like Pope Francis. And when the Pope has authority to declare who is or is not a Christian, as he did of Trump, de-legitimizing him is important. However, in so doing, anyone now has the authority to claim the mantle of the true Christian. Politicize that and you have being Christian as being defined by your political party. Does being a Christian mean being a Republican? Does it mean specific views on gun ownership or whatever else? Do you have to be against Obamacare to be a true believer in Jesus? It all goes on the table.
Perhaps it has been heading this way for a long time with the Christian faith. Certainly other faiths have their share of divisions. Christianity is apparently suffering from diffusion as is Islam which seems, for better or worse - actually worse, to have become only identified by the extremists that hide behind the name of Islam while having little ties to what many Muslims would call the true faith.
But, as Pilate asked, "What is truth?"
Enter the brave new world of the news. Is it real or isn't it? Who seems to care? As such the befuddling disillusion of Christianity can be seen as we move from names such as Martin Luther King, William Coffin, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Hans Kung to Creflo Dollar, Benny Hinn, Joel Osteen and Paula White. It is also the same with the news. From the 30 minute evening news to the evolution of the 24 hour news channel, news has become less and less about news and reporting as it has become spinning the story to fit a particular ideological or political point of view. Fox news is on the right, MSNBC is on the left. But they don't actually report so much as they do comment. The comments then become the news and the news itself doesn't matter. But even CNN, Fox, and MSNBC are losing out to the fringe.
When people legitimately believe that a child-sex ring is in a pizza place and is frequented by Hilary Clinton, or that Sandy Hook is a hoax, or that the moon landings were faked (as even the recent movie Interstellar articulated), truth has become a lost commodity.
Fake news is usually pretty obvious. Remember the Weekly World News? The black and white tabloid at the check out of many a grocery story that ran headlines like "Hole to Hell found in Siberia" or "FBI Catches Bat Child"? They were greatly entertaining, but not true.
So how have we gotten to the point where those kinds of headlines are apparently as true as a Frontline Report on global warming? It's hard to say. Jerry Adler in his essay, "Fake News, Faith and Reason" says this, "Brain-imaging studies show that doubt requires more mental effort than belief. Credulousness is the default setting of most people, most of the time." In other words, it is easier to "just believe." Doubt takes effort and thought. And we seem to be entering a time in which we want to do the least amount possible. As such, the road with the less effort will become the road most taken.
How have so many things gotten back on the table? It just takes too much effort to keep the table clear, it seems. Adler closed his essay well, and I will quote him to conclude:
"Maybe it is time to reawaken our capacity for doubt, now when misinformation is more readily available and arguably more dangerous than ever before in history. Faith has a place in the lives of many people. But, per Augustine, it can no more stand alone than pure reason; a Christian must call on both to be strong in the world. That's still good advice."
The idea of permanence has been jettisoned. Sometimes that isn't a bad thing. Yet it appears we are entering into a time in which everything is being both questioned and accepted. Laws are not made for endurance, they are made for a term to be overturned, repealed, or set up for something else later. In politics, in religion, in almost all facets of public life, all is up for grabs.
In particular, I have seen that most clearly in the Christian faith.
Every religious tradition has its sub-groups. Typically in Christianity we cite different denominations as a means of demarcation. However with the rise of "independent" churches, the lines have become far more blurred. What once was clear differences based on theology, biblical interpretation, ritual, and hierarchy/structure were apparent through names like Southern Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian Church of America, United Methodist, Roman Catholic, Church of God of Prophecy, United Church of Christ and so on. Now churches tend to tamp down their denominational affiliation with names like "Community Congregation," "The Vine," "The Church of [insert city name here]." "The Truth" and so on.
More than that, though, are the independent churches that fit into particular themes but not specifically aligning with any established denomination. Snake handling, tongue speaking, or much newer, the prosperity gospel movement. With thematic statements defining the theology, as well as styles of worship, it all gets fuzzy and "Christian" begins to mean both less and less as well as whatever any group says it means.
So for Christianity to be represented by, say, Wayne T. Jackson, in many ways de-legitimizes the claims of someone like Pope Francis. And when the Pope has authority to declare who is or is not a Christian, as he did of Trump, de-legitimizing him is important. However, in so doing, anyone now has the authority to claim the mantle of the true Christian. Politicize that and you have being Christian as being defined by your political party. Does being a Christian mean being a Republican? Does it mean specific views on gun ownership or whatever else? Do you have to be against Obamacare to be a true believer in Jesus? It all goes on the table.
Perhaps it has been heading this way for a long time with the Christian faith. Certainly other faiths have their share of divisions. Christianity is apparently suffering from diffusion as is Islam which seems, for better or worse - actually worse, to have become only identified by the extremists that hide behind the name of Islam while having little ties to what many Muslims would call the true faith.
But, as Pilate asked, "What is truth?"
Enter the brave new world of the news. Is it real or isn't it? Who seems to care? As such the befuddling disillusion of Christianity can be seen as we move from names such as Martin Luther King, William Coffin, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Hans Kung to Creflo Dollar, Benny Hinn, Joel Osteen and Paula White. It is also the same with the news. From the 30 minute evening news to the evolution of the 24 hour news channel, news has become less and less about news and reporting as it has become spinning the story to fit a particular ideological or political point of view. Fox news is on the right, MSNBC is on the left. But they don't actually report so much as they do comment. The comments then become the news and the news itself doesn't matter. But even CNN, Fox, and MSNBC are losing out to the fringe.
When people legitimately believe that a child-sex ring is in a pizza place and is frequented by Hilary Clinton, or that Sandy Hook is a hoax, or that the moon landings were faked (as even the recent movie Interstellar articulated), truth has become a lost commodity.
Fake news is usually pretty obvious. Remember the Weekly World News? The black and white tabloid at the check out of many a grocery story that ran headlines like "Hole to Hell found in Siberia" or "FBI Catches Bat Child"? They were greatly entertaining, but not true.
So how have we gotten to the point where those kinds of headlines are apparently as true as a Frontline Report on global warming? It's hard to say. Jerry Adler in his essay, "Fake News, Faith and Reason" says this, "Brain-imaging studies show that doubt requires more mental effort than belief. Credulousness is the default setting of most people, most of the time." In other words, it is easier to "just believe." Doubt takes effort and thought. And we seem to be entering a time in which we want to do the least amount possible. As such, the road with the less effort will become the road most taken.
How have so many things gotten back on the table? It just takes too much effort to keep the table clear, it seems. Adler closed his essay well, and I will quote him to conclude:
"Maybe it is time to reawaken our capacity for doubt, now when misinformation is more readily available and arguably more dangerous than ever before in history. Faith has a place in the lives of many people. But, per Augustine, it can no more stand alone than pure reason; a Christian must call on both to be strong in the world. That's still good advice."
Comments
Post a Comment