So Christianity is no longer the norm? Going underground will do it good

[yallerdawg]

Young people rejecting religion is not bad news for Christianity: the faith needs to embrace its weirdness and mystery

Source: The Guardian, by Paul Ormerod


It’s quite a statement. “Christianity as a default, as a norm, is gone, and probably gone for good,” said Prof Stephen Bullivant this week, in response to figures showing widespread rejection of Christianity among Europe’s young people. He adds a slender caveat: “Or at least for the next 100 years.”

*****

At the risk of sounding in denial, this may not be entirely bad news for Christianity. Arguably one of the most toxic developments in the history of the faith was its shift from being a radical political and spiritual movement to allowing itself to be co-opted by forces of oppression and militarism. Becoming a default or norm effectively drained it of much of its energy.

*****

And those of an older generation hopeful that spurning religion means rejecting irrationality may be taken aback by a supposed recent renaissance in, of all things, astrology, along with what Lucie Greene of marketing firm J Walter Thompson calls a “reframing of new age practices, very much geared toward a millennial and young Gen X quotient”. One theory is that many young people shun the more arid extremes of rationalism, where everything is numbered and quantified, and all life and culture is squashed and processed into data. Maybe empiricism has had its day. And as the sociologist Linda Woodhead has noted of young Britons with no religion, relatively few describe themselves as atheist.

*****

In the past few decades, some parts of the church that tend to reject the trappings of religion have tried desperately to appear “normal”. But for a generation that prizes authenticity, maybe that’s just a turn-off. Rather than being just a slightly rubbish version of the rest of the world, with slightly rubbish coffee and slightly rubbish music, maybe it needs to embrace its difference, its strangeness, its weirdness, its mystery. Christianity as a norm, gone for good? Maybe that’s good news for everyone.


Read it all at: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/22/christianity-norm-underground-mystery

[MineralMan]

1. Rationalization - The Last Refuge of the Hopeful

I think that's pretty much of a stretch, really. I can't see it happening. More likely, religious belief will just slowly become marginalized, finally dying by attrition.

[ExciteBike66]

2. I disagree!

Human beings are very susceptible to silly fairy tales (like the astrology example). I don't think religion will ever die since it merely fills in some people's need for fairy tales.

[yallerdawg]

3. "Fairy tales." Hmm.

[ExciteBike66]

11. And no religion too....Imagine!

[Mariana]

15. There is a nature or nurture question here.

Is a tendency to believe in silly fairy tales an inherent trait in most human beings? Or is it more of a result of the deliberate indoctrination of children at a very impressionable age, by adults they trust?

I think what we're seeing in Europe is happening because so many of these young people weren't so indoctrinated. They weren't dragged to church week after week early in life. They weren't made to say prayers before they even understood what a prayer is. They didn't have the adults around them telling them for years and years that they had to believe in and worship [deity] or very bad things would happen to them.

It remains to be seen how susceptible this population is to belief in silly fairy tales in general.

[ExciteBike66]

18. That's a good point,

I just assumed the "trait" due to the overwhelming apparent evidence of its existence. I didn't think about whether it was inherent or not.

Perhaps the distinction is that we all have the inherent "capacity" for believing in myths, but the ultimate use of that "capacity" depends upon our upbringing.

[Mariana]

27. I suspect the trait more general than that.

Children are wired to believe what their elders tell them. Natural selection would tend to favor children to do so, I think. They're more likely to survive long enough to reproduce. However, that also makes children extremely susceptible to religious indoctrination.

There was a study a few years ago that showed that children raised to be religious are apparently much more likely to say that nonreligious stories about people with magic powers, for example, are true stories. Now, these were young children in the study, but I suspect the effect persists for many of them. Look how many Christians in the US freaked out about the Harry Potter books because the characters in them practice witchcraft, forbade their children to read them, preached against them in church, got them banned from school libraries, etc. Clearly those adults aren't capable of distinguishing fantasy from reality.

[MineralMan]

16. Astrology or UFO mania, however, makes no demands.

Religion, on the other hand, always is making some demand or another. The others are far easier, really.

[ExciteBike66]

17. Well, if you believe in astrology,

and the stars tell you to get ready for a big event when Saturn aligns with Pluto (or something), isn't it then making demands? And look where belief in UFOs got Fox Mulder?

Tongue in cheek, I assure you!

[MineralMan]

20. LOL! Well, there is that, I suppose.

[guillaumeb]

28. Hopeful?

It sounds like it.

[DetlefK]

4. Seems like we are headed for second Renaissance.

The Renaissance came about when people were disaffected with the medieval Catholic Church and wanted a better understanding of the world. They began to dabble into obscure philosophical and esoteric teachings. Christianity produced occult offspings with astrology, numerology, alchemy...

For a short period of time, science and religion were one. Until the experimental results became undeniable and the researchers began looking for explanations outside of religion. And with that, science (as we know it) was born. Religion and science drifted apart.



Who knows what fruits this new disaffection, this new interest for the obscure, will yield?

[yallerdawg]

6. That's a bit of a fractured historical summation...

with a particular judgmental slant in mind , but you are certainly welcome to your opinion!

[DetlefK]

7. And how exaclty was that fractured and slanted?

[yallerdawg]

8. If you're interested:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance

[DetlefK]

9. No thanks...

I have read two books about the Renaissance and am currently on my third. But thanks for the effort.

[Voltaire2]

12. Third, if you view the enlightenment as

picking up where the renaissance left off.

Or we could be headed for the endarkenment.

[DetlefK]

13. I see the Enlightenment as more of a pruning and streamlining of Renaissance-ideas.

The Renaissance gave birth to a whole bunch of new ideas and philosophies and world-views, and I see it that the Enlightenment came when all these ideas like occult magic and the experimentalism and the numerology and the crude psychology and the human-centric philosophy where combined into other ideas.

For example, science has philosophical roots in Llullism (concept that laws of nature exist) and Hermeticism (concept that man can manipulate nature).

For example, psychology used to be a part of the natural sciences in the Renaissance, because the human body, mind and soul were considered integral parts of how the human (as a whole) interacts with the world and astrological influences. But later on it became a separate scientific discipline.

[guillaumeb]

29. Christianity was the foundation for the Renaissance.

But you are welcome to an ahistorical opinion.

[DetlefK]

31. Occult Christianity. Not mainstream-Chistianity.

Christianity fused with ideas from Ancient Egypt, Chaldea, Persia, the Cabbala, Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome. (That's why the Renaissance is called Renaissance: It was a rebirth of pre-christian ideas.)

Christianity fused with alchemy, astrology, numerology, talismans, magical music, magical images, the concept of emotions carrying magical power, the demiurgic concept of laws of nature, the hermetic concept of man having a divine spark.

Not your boring old only-the-Bible-is-correct Christianity.

[Cartoonist]

5. Very weak argument

For example, the widespread interest in extraordinarily elaborate fandoms is surely evidence that today’s under-30s are quite as ready as their ancestors to commit themselves to imaginary causes and bewildering rituals; there are many who protect the lore of Star Wars and Game of Thrones with all the fervour of a medieval bishop

Fervour? Perhaps, but belief? No!
That's the big difference this author misses. No Star Wars fan believes any of it is real.

[Mariana]

14. "...to commit themselves to imaginary causes ...

Do you think the author really meant to imply that Christianity is an imaginary cause?

[edhopper]

10. That Einstein quots

is about the scientific search, Not God or religion.

[MineralMan]

19. The author at your link talked about "fandom."

Think about it. A generation that grew up on Harry Potter novels and movies based on comic books doesn't need religion to be fans. There is plenty to be a fan about. Plus, the generation knows that all that stuff is fantasy and fiction, and doesn't care. It likes fantasy and fiction.

How is religion going to compete with the "Expelliarmus" magic. Will a holy relic substitute for a horcrux? See, everyone likes a good fantasy, but the bible is not a compelling read, really. And now, for Gen Z, we have virtual reality goggles and much more to capture their love of fantasy and imagination.

A dead guy on a cross who comes back to life is boring when you can have aliens and monsters dancing in 3D right before your eyes.

Special effects in media have overtaken the imagery of demons and devils and angels in the clouds. Religion just can't compete for the imaginations of today's younger generations.

And then there's that "bullying" paragraph, followed by advice that churches should teach love. Of course, if you don't believe, you get to burn in hell for an eternity. Bullying? There's some serious bullying, I think.

Finally, the Einstein quote has literally nothing to do with religion. There's real mystery surrounding us all with puzzles aplenty to solve.

[Lordquinton]

21. That topic was brushed upon here once

When the theists flat out refused to discuss their deity, and the descriptions in the bible were brought up, the responses were "Why are you being so literal?!?" and scoffing that we can't tell the difference between a real and "fictional" character. Needless to say no discussion happened. They were left with advice to never visit a fan fiction group, or any sort of literary criticism.

[yallerdawg]

22. Mystery, brother!

[marylandblue]

23. Did you ever notice that God didn't actually give him an answer?

God pulls rank by talking his own great wisdom and power, but never tells him the rather simple truth. Job was a token in a bet with Satan. The narrator told us, but God never told Job. On the other, science has since found out that the foundations of the earth are laid on gravity.

[yallerdawg]

24. That would be your interpretation.

Many people consider the Book of Job one of the most profound and informative Biblical stories concerning the relationship of man, God and our place in "everything," our relationship with God, the meaning and purpose of suffering.

"Why do bad things happen to good people?" Read Book of Job.

[opiate69]

25. Gob?

[marylandblue]

26. Yes, it is the most sophisticated take on theodicy in the Bible

But it still doesn't have a good answer.

[Lordquinton]

30. ok

complete non-sequitur here, not sure what you're getting at.