It is my contention that Christianity in the West has been all-but defeated by Leftism - and that Leftism is itself a thing which has evolved as an anti-Christian ideology.
This means that modern Leftism has evolved in what was originally a Christian context to damage, subvert, destroy and invert Christianity. Because Leftism evolved in a Christian context, Leftism is pre-adapted to thwart most of the historical strategies of Christianity.
In other words, when considering strategies to promote the future of Christianity, if a strategy has been tried and failed in the past, if a type of Christianity has been defeated by Leftism; then it is unlikely to work in the future.
(So long as the Leftist West stands. If any type of Christianity survives until after the West collapses, then it may well be in a position to exploit and thrive in the very different post-collapse situation.)
In other words, an attempt at straightforward revival of some past type of Christianity which is currently failing is not likely to work as a strategy for Christian revival in the current context.
How can we evaluate success or failure?
Biologically, any potentially successful and robust religious group needs to have a viable demographic structure: above replacement fertility, an age profile less than forty, a sex profile with about half men (or higher).
If a type of Christianity clearly lacks these (i.e. if it has significantly below replacement fertility, and age structure dominated by the elderly, and is composed mostly of women), I suggest that this is a sign that it has been defeated by Leftism, Leftism has the better of it; and we cannot hope realistically for a Christian revival from such denominations or churches.
Spiritually, since we cannot look into Men's souls we are forced to rely upon objective indicators. So, the viable type of Christianity will demonstrate evidence of devoutness - adherence to a demanding lifestyle, high levels of tithing, church service, missionary activity, strength in the face of persecution etc.
Such criteria could serve as a basis, as a beginning at least, for understanding of what might work (best to pursue several lines of strategy), and perhaps what ought to be done - to trigger and build a Christian revival.
Note: I also think that success is more likely from scaling-up a small but successful group, than from trying to reform a large group that is mostly a failure but contains minority pockets of success. At least, this is what happens with other human institutions. When the successful parts of an organization are in a small minority, it can be very difficult or impossible to reform the organization - unless there are first massive, majority 'cuts' to get rid of the negative, destructive influence of the failing majority. On the other hand, small successful institutions and businesses can often be up-scaled ten, a hundredfold within a very short timescale.
5 comments:
Collapse would destroy Leftism. It would eliminate the media, government, and the university system. It would eliminate birth control and feminism, thus solving the "fertile women not breeding" problem (though billions would die, a different kind of demographic problem). It would eliminate democracy and the leaders who need to pander to women and minorities in the name of "equality".
If a type of Christianity clearly lacks these (i.e. if it has significantly below replacement fertility, and age structure dominated by the elderly, and is composed mostly of women), I suggest that this is a sign that it has been defeated by Leftism, Leftism has the better of it; and we cannot hope realistically for a Christian revival from such denominations or churches.
The Orthodox Church in the USSR was dominated by the elderly and women, and yet it has revived in Russia, right?
@JP - Yes, That was what I said - or intended to say. But I am talking about a revival *this side* of collapse, civil war and mass human extinction.
JP, I once heard a Baptist preacher share an observation about church life that I have always remembered -- I think that it is true and that it explains the survival of the Orthodox Church in Soviet Russia. He said that women will keep the ark afloat, but they cannot make it sail. To switch images, pious women can keep the flame of the gospel alive in a certain community, but the active participation of righteous men (or, more accurately, men in the process of becoming righteous) is needed for that flame to grow -- and to set the world on fire (in the good Saint Dominic sort of way, of course!).
SSPXers, Mormons, JWs, pentecostals, possibly 7th Day Adventists?
Your point about good departments in bad corporations is well taken, but Catholicism and Orthodoxy both have a structure that in theory would let good parts keep chugging along fairly successfully even if the whole is mostly bad. National churches for the Orthodox and ordinariates and personal prelatures and orders and so on for the Catholics. Probably the key point for those would be to stop seeing themselves as fundamentally on a team with the whole, but instead as the team.
@Adam - Agreed.
I think Orthodoxy is fine, but it is Eastern not Western, and has shown no significant sign of becoming Western.
I hope you are correct about Roman Catholicism - I really do. But I don't yet see it.
What I see is a delayed recapitulation of the incremental apostasy of Anglicanism (don't forget this *was*, on paper still is, the third largest Christian denomination after RCC and EO)) where the best and perhaps only hope of remaining even partially Christian is schism of the non Western Anglican churches - which does not really help the West.
Post a Comment