Sunday, August 13, 2006

On the impotence of liberal religion
Blunt (don’t say I didn’t warn you!) but for the most part true. Remember how Beavis and Butt-head looked at Mr Van Driessen the hippy teacher? That’s how the secular world that needs to be re-evangelised, especially the kids, looks at this kind of church:
...though Breyer misses the point, her experience with the prisoners reveals where liberal Christianity ultimately ends up: impotent and ignored...

“They want answers, not questions,” Breyer writes. “[T]he more contradictions I point out in the Bible, the more the inmates decide there is no point in wasting their time with a religion that lacks answers.”

Smart cookies, those crooks, who intuitively grasp the worthlessness of Breyer’s baptized sophistries to their broken lives.
Parts of the Bible aren’t literal, and the church doesn’t claim they are, but that’s not the point.

As humorist P.J. O’Rourke (funny man; met him once) wrote, when times are tough spirituality is out and religion in.

Rod Dreher also understands the perhaps unconscious class difference of liberal religion:
Purely as a matter of sociology, I can see the appeal of Islam, especially by comparison to the degrading nihilism on offer in the West's public square. The upper and middle classes are shielded to a certain extent from life's hard realities by their wealth...

The poor, for whom Christ suffered and died, cannot afford the fashionable falsehoods proclaimed by the world’s Chloe Breyers. That’s why the poor want little or nothing to do with that counterfeit faith.
People with the best intentions can fail, ending up patronising. The great Anglo-Catholic architect Ralph Adams Cram remembered as an idealistic student (a university man, he was almost by definition privileged) he and his friends tried to put the Gospel into action by setting up a ‘Church of the Carpenter’ especially to appeal to the working class, which most notably it did not!

What’s funny is authentic, old-school Catholicism, which historically has appealed to the masses, is today both looked down upon by the middles and uppers as prole-feed and its praxis — chant, vesture, architecture and so on — slated as élitist!

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment