Christendom Tamed by Peter Toon
Christendom Tamed
Peter Toon on Postmodernity & Asceticism
Why do we refer to a lengthy period of Western European history, from the early
Middle Ages through the Reformation, as “Christendom”? Not because
every person in that period, or even the majority of people, were living virtuous
lives, obeying the commandments of Christ Jesus.
We call it Christendom for several reasons. (The word means “the Christian
jurisdiction” or “the place where Christianity prevails.”)
First, everyone was baptized in the Name of the Holy Trinity. Second, history
was universally seen as beginning with the Creation and then the Fall, as centering
upon the Incarnation, and as ending with the Second Coming of Christ Jesus and
the Final Judgment. Third, the Christian Festivals, including the weekly Lord’s
Day (Sunday), gave meaning to the days and weeks and months of the year. Public
worship was central to life.
Fourth, the laws of the nations upheld the truth and priority of the Christian
faith and the Church. Fifth, people lived with a sense that all their life was
watched by, guided by, and to be judged by God the Creator, Redeemer, and Judge.
Everything they did was a preparation for death and entry into the next life.
And sixth, virtually all education and charity was initiated by and controlled
by the Church. The Church determined the dominant worldview.
A Very Different World
Today we live in a very different situation. Our society no longer enjoys
the same unity and belief in God that characterized the world of Christendom,
or even the world of modernity that replaced it. Today the key terms are multicultural,
multiethnic, pluralistic, and so on. Though individuals may believe in
a deity or deities if they choose, a nation-state does not publicly confess
faith in God and order its laws according to his will. Religion, worship, and
morality are considered private activities, marginal to the public business
of running the country.
All this means that, today, God is not the One to whom history, nature, conscience,
and culture point. The once supreme, transcendent God is now at best the immanent
God, for moderns believe that the center of the universe is the human being,
the climax of biological evolution, who may (must!) look for deity in the center
of his or her being. And meaning is no longer sought in the confession of God
and a Christian universe but discovered by autonomous persons. This means not
merely that “man is the measure of all things,” but that human beings
rejoice in and see meaning in their subjectivism and permissiveness as autonomous
inward-looking beings.
This is the world of postmodernity. What have the churches done as the West
has moved into postmodernity? Almost all have moved with the flow and accommodated
their teaching of the faith and their worship to the dominant assumptions of
society. Others have resisted on this or that front and sought to preserve the
faith intact.
However, what seems to be true is that all of us, and all churches in the West,
have been more deeply affected by modernity and then postmodernity than most
of their members ever realize or could in fact realize. And this most certainly
includes those who believe themselves to be orthodox, whether Catholic or Protestant.
This may be illustrated by what they believe, teach, and confess as the Christian
faith, Christian morality, and Christian living. If we take Christian living
as an example, what seems to have happened as Christendom collapsed and first
modernity and then postmodernity arrived, is that the churches have dramatically
reduced their commitment to asceticism, the mortification of the sinful self.
The churches have called for much less ascetical discipline than was the norm
and expectation in the Middle Ages, when Christendom thrived, or even in the
seventeenth century, when it was coming to an end under the impact of modernity.
As the dominant culture has moved away from confessing God as Lord, the churches
have taught (in effect if not in intent) that he demands less and less of us.
Lost Nerve
It seems that the churches in the West have lost their nerve. They do not
want to ask too much of their members for fear of losing them. In response to
postmodernity, they have each devised a story and form of Christian living designed
to give them an edge in the active competition of the supermarket of religions,
and for most of the time this means that the demands upon Christians are much
more in conformity with the world and therefore much less onerous.
The rules for fasting in the Catholic Church are a simple example. Once, the
worshiper was expected to fast from rising until taking Communion, which could
mean hours of abstinence and real feelings of hunger. Now the period of fasting
is virtually no time at all, so that it may include only the time taken up by
driving to church and the service itself, a time when most people would not
be eating anyway. Lenten fasting, once designed to make people feel a little
of the Lord’s suffering, has also been reduced to an easily attainable
rule that disrupts peoples’ lives and curbs their appetites as little
as possible.
Most contemporary Protestants seem to pay only lip service to fasting. It is
not a regular discipline but either a mode of self-help (teaching people to
control their appetites so they can be thinner) or a technique to get God’s
attention for special needs (as when organizations ask people to fast on a particular
day for the budget).
Likewise, the teaching of the duty of daily self-examination, with the confession
of one’s sins and seeking of God’s pardon, so as to open up one’s
soul for God’s penetrating light, has diminished dramatically in all jurisdictions
of the Church. Many popular devotionals no longer include any element of confession
and no guide to self-examination.
Further, the spiritual life is rarely seen as allowing the Holy Spirit to rule
and guide one’s heart, mind, and will by the use of demanding gospel disciplines,
but as cultivating an inner journey into the depths of one’s own soul
to find one’s own spirit and feel its connection with an affirming and
encouraging God. The latter journey is pleasant and soothing, while the former
is demanding and painful because there is always sin to be discovered and mortified.
In Christendom, freedom was seen as liberation from one’s selfish and
disordered passions in order to love God and neighbor. Now freedom is usually
seen as liberation from this-worldly oppressors by using one’s (unsanctified)
passions. For example, even conservative people will proclaim liberation not
from one’s bondage to sin but from “low self-esteem,” the
answer to which is the assertion of their will against the wills of others.
The worship of Almighty God—often called “celebration”—is
now placed at the same level as every other activity. No one looks up or kneels
or bows. All look at each other, for God is to be found primarily in other people.
The highlight of many services seems to be the passing of the peace.
People wear jeans at home and at the ballpark and they wear jeans to engage
in worship. They save their best clothing for dinner parties and other this-worldly
activities. In many churches, the only people who dress up for worship are those
in the choir, who put on a special uniform to present worship as a form of theater
and a show: They give a musical presentation to the congregation, which is casually
dressed for the performance. Apparently now to be casual is to be spiritual.
Accommodated Religion
Of course there are always notable exceptions, but in general where religion
still thrives in the West (particularly in the competitive religious supermarket
of the United States) it has accommodated itself to a large degree to the individualism,
subjectivity, personal autonomy, permissiveness, casualness, materialism, and
pragmatism of what we call postmodernity.
It is very different from the religion of Christendom. It is very different
indeed from the religion of the Protestants and Catholics of the seventeenth
century, for whom God was the very center and substance of all life and things
and possibilities. And it is very different even from the religion that was
found in the height of modernity in the mid-nineteenth century, which still
looked to God and believed he was leading them forward, and which still had
a sense of public duty and responsibility as well as personal discipline.
We cannot return to Christendom. We cannot return to modernity. We live in a
postmodern society and cannot escape. But for Christians that condition only
defines the world in which we must live out our faith. It does not (as liberal
Christians believe) determine for us what that faith is. If postmodernity is
blind to the truth, we can still learn from earlier times what in fact is the
truth of godliness and how we can be God-fearing people.
We can, for example, try to worship with rites not affected by postmodernity.
One advantage in using a classic or traditional Liturgy—such as the Book
of Common Prayer (in the 1662 or 1928 version), the Tridentine Mass, or the
Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom—is that it offers the worshiper a content
and language so different from the religion of the day that it may shock him
into questioning the modern values. They are to postmodernity a sign of contradiction.
In these Liturgies—much more so than in the contemporary Liturgies—is
found the substance that inspired people in Christendom to love God and that
caused them to lift up their eyes unto the Lord of all being. Of course to use
one of these Liturgies means much more than merely admiring it: To use it means
adopting its doctrine and discipline and entering fully into its presentation
of the worship of the Holy Trinity, who is just as much the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Spirit today as in the days of Christendom.
Peter Toon is Vice President of the Prayer Book Society
(www.episcopalian.org/pbs1928/index.htm).
|