Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Steve Crumbaugh's avatar

As one who grew up in an evangelical church, earned an M.Div. from an evangelical seminary, left the ministry, but have not abandoned my faith, I have a somewhat different view of things than most might. What is conveniently referred to as Protestantism includes a very wide and rich variety of expressions of faith. I am uncomfortable with the manner in which they are often lumped together as if they can be adequately characterized by simply not being in the Catholic or Orthodox traditions. Luther's revolt against Rome was as much political as religious, or he would not have enjoyed the protection of powerful rulers such as Fredrick III, and would not have ignited the revolt against Rome. To ignore the others who evolved religious traditions that are in many ways reactions against practices, policies, and traditions of the Roman Catholic church, such as Calvinists and Anabaptists, is giving Luther more credit than he deserves. The Episcopalians (Anglicans) were created for political reasons by Henry VIII ostensibly for reasons less lofty than Luther's. Yet all these groups, from the Orthodox and the various forms of Catholics (Roman Catholics are not the only Catholics), to the Protestants - Liturgical, Baptistic, Evangelical, Pentecostal, and others - all share core beliefs that Lewis described as Mere Christianity. Hell, though a (non-standardized) shared belief, is not a core belief, even among all the Evangelicals.

I feel as though discussions of the impact of Protestantism, particularly critical analyses, often use an idealized alternate possible history (where Luther and Calvin never created their churches and new religious traditions) for evaluation. Would there really not have been a rise of individualism? No Enlightenment? (And therefore no basis for the American Revolution and Constitution?) Is this not magnifying issues one may not appreciate while ignoring the rest of the complex web of religious and social developments that are, at least peripherally, connected to the Reformation and the subsequent rise of Protestantism? Is this as unjust as using the Roman Church's treatment of Galileo as proof that it is anti-science while ignoring the scientific contributions of Roman Catholics such as Augustinian Friar Mendel and Jesuit scholars?

There are valid criticisms of evangelicalism, not the least of which is preaching "cheap grace", what I call "transactional salvation", the recent rise in some circles of the "gospel of prosperity", and entertainment-focused megachurches (sometimes referred to irreverently as "Six Flags Over Jesus"). In the same vein one could criticize Roman Catholics for "magical theology" which can invalidate baptisms because the word "we" was substituted for "I" in the ritual (the wrong magic words were used). A case could be made that the Orthodox and Catholic churches promote a mild form of idolatry in the devotion and prayers offered to icons, saints, and Mary. (I confess to being something of an iconoclast.) Personally I find Orthodox worship impressive and moving, but also something of a spiritual spectator sport and ultimately unsatisfying for a constant spiritual diet.

I have friends who have abandoned corporate worship, and some have rejected the faith in which they had grown up. Most of them feel betrayed by a local congregation or a denominational body. Most have a legitimate basis for feelings of betrayal. (I know that is a harsh word, but the stories I have been told justify its use.) The interesting fact is that, though most were Evangelicals (because numbers), they include former Roman Catholics and Orthodox as well. The most common thread is that they were made to feel unwelcome, or shamed for asking the wrong questions, or were the victims of malicious gossip. Yes, even the former Orthodox. I am glad you have found a home in a congregation where you feel welcomed and can explore and grow in knowledge and faith - where there are no thought police or confusion regarding the distinction between sin and some social convention peculiar to certain classes within middle America.

I feel every tradition and church within Christianity has strengths and weaknesses. Some congregations are nurturing while others are toxic, and probably most are somewhere in-between. I try to take Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and Protestants the way I take anyone else - one at a time and prayerfully, understanding that we are all in the process of becoming who we will be. Some people just require more patience than others.

Alexander von Sternberg's avatar

I personally have no issue with the trajectory of individualism and think that it has brought us to a place that, while perhaps spiritually unfulfilling for some (many?), has become materially and especially intellectually fulfilling for more. While I obviously can't speak for everyone, I think it's clear that many people (myself included) have found deep fulfillment that could perhaps be described as spiritual simply from intellectual pursuits (maybe they're the same, at least for some?). Individualism and collectivism both have their benefits and drawbacks, and I think what's happening lately, largely thanks to internet-driven atomization among other things, is that fewer people can accept the trade-offs that come with individualism. I personally believe they haven't considered the trade-offs from collectivism, especially since they have never lived them, and I think they're more motivated by an avoidance or fear of trade-offs in general, but that's neither here nor there. Individualism's trade-offs are being questioned, and that's the reality with which we must cope.

That all being said, Elijah's absolutely speaking my language with regard to the historical trajectory of the individualistic ethos and what has happened in the United States in particular, which is derived from the Enlightenment values that only exist thanks to the individualism and questioning of authority AS a value, encouraged by the Reformation. Where I might part company with him, or at least have a different interpretation, is that I think the Protestant faith hasn't gone anywhere, and has instead taken on an increasingly secular aesthetic. It feels passe to talk about social justice/antiracism/"wokeness" being a religion now, but if I'm right to characterize the late 2010s-2020 or 2021 as the most recent explosion of revivalism--a new Great Awakening--then I think what we're seeing now with those not retreating into the toxic socialist-nihilist-Third Worldist mush of left wing populism, is the same kind of settling that always followed American revivalist explosions. The specific concerns of those revivals has always changed, but the character never did except with the seemingly secular aesthetic (which honestly isn't all that new; the revivals of the late 19th century were very secular in many ways).

But again, Elijah's point is sound; the individualism at the core of Protestantism is what brought us to where we are; politically, socially, spiritually. Perhaps the best way to put it is that we would do well to recognize this heritage, even us atheists.

23 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?