Brought Up Born Again
19 April 2007
Some thoughts after writing sections of a paper on eschatological discourse in the Bible, Talmuds, and Qur’an all night…
Class discussion today was interesting, to say the least. Topic was American fundamentalism, and we came at the topic from two directions. One, politics and the media, and Two, the role of education in “the culture wars” over “family values.” Combination of things that came up got me thinking about a whole bunch of related topics.
First of all, I should just say that while I realize all to well the baggage that “born again” carries with it, as a symbol or metaphor it’s pretty darn good, and it’s a shame that this element of what Jesus was getting at is tarnished by so much judgmentalism and hypocrisy and especially of the triteness it connotes these days.
David James Duncan recently wrote that he was raised a chosen person, although it was not of his choosing. That’s an equally fitting description of so many Gen X and Y’ers who were like me, being born and brought up born again. I’m all for preserving and passing on the family and community faith. Of course. And in the context of today’s class, several students, God bless ‘em, realized that for kids like this, the culture wars (such as they are today) aren’t being fought on fair turf. They’re being fought precisely on those kids who are being brought up born again. Born again/evangelical parents are not out in the trenches to fight for what they think is “the Christian worldview” (which is just as well, because I can’t even find THE Christian worldview, but that’s a post for another day). They’re putting their kids in the trenches; just look at Ron Luce’s Battle Cry. But it’s also evident in the educational process. We have “Christian Colleges,” like the one I went to way back when, a very typical, “this-is-your-father’s-evangelicalism-style” Christian college in Massachusetts. We have “Christian schools”, high schools and elementary schools, middle schools and preschools, out the wazoo. And they’re all evangelical schools, designed by and for evangelical parents and born again students. (And yes, I’m labelling here, knowing perfectly well that Parochial School are also Christian schools, but the “Christian School” label has been so coopted by Protestant Evangelicals with their heads up their … never mind.) And homeschool coops and individual homeschool families are pretty much radical vanguard of getting bona-fide Christian (read: evangelical) education that will ensure that our kids come to think the same way we do, or at least think the way we want them to think about our religion and our values.
Then I had one of those moments. How come we don’t have any “mainline” or “progressive” or (heaven forbid!) “liberal” Christian institutions of learning? There are Catholic ones. There are Evangelical ones. There are colleges and universities (perhaps most of them, in fact) that were founded by and affiliated with mainline denominations (like Methodists or Presbyterians) but who are no longer connected with their denominational ancestry. What is the deal here? For those of us who are uncomfortable with Evangelical hegemony over the role Christianity (and religion in general) could or should play in our society, why are there no other options for Protestants, or Jews, or Muslims, or whatever?
I have some thoughts, but I’m interested in hearing others’. Start things off; I’m going to bed, but will check in tomorrow and probably write a follow-up or two.
Entry Filed under: Christianity, Education, Evangelicalism, Fundamentalism, Homeschooling, Mumblings..., Religion. .
5 Comments Add your own
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed
1.
redlibrarian | 20 April 2007 at 10:48 am
I agree with the “Evangelical trenches” idea. We wall students into “Christian” schools, groups, sports, colleges, and camps. The result is they know all the positives of Evangelicalism and negatives of “the world” but fall apart when they confront the positives of “the world” and the negatives of Evangelicalism. Their beliefs are like a tree that has grown with a strong wind; it leans one way, and is strong that way, but a contrary wind easily blows it over. Thus the high level of kids that grow up Evangelical but throw it away when they first truly interact non-evangelicals.
2.
Ken | 20 April 2007 at 11:17 am
I was brought up liberal protestant, meaning that theology did not begin with the Bible, but with human experience, and meaning that mission was aimed at betterment of the human condition, of society, and at freedom and equality, rather than at evangelism. My impression is that most of us no longer believe in God or religion, if we ever did, and if we do it is likely to be the kind of religion that Bellah describes as Sheilaism (Habits of the Heart, pages 221 and 235.)
My impression is that many people who now participate in liberal protestantism (e.g., Presbyterian, Episcopalean, Congregationalist) began their lives in evangelicalism. They have fled evangelicalism but still seek church (or cannot bring themselves to let it go.) People who began their lives like me are usually not there.
I think that public schools are very close to being liberal protestant schools, even if they don’t pray or sing hymns.
I have the impression that in evangelicalism, the world is seen as more dangerous than it is seen in liberal protestantism.
I am anxious to read more about your background and how you came to the place you are now. I hear an existential narrative in some of what you write, as in Faith in Fakes. I hear the communitarian narrative in some of what you write – which is one way that I have noticed in my readings that progressive evangelicals express ecclesiology, sin (individualism) and redemption (community.) But my understanding is that Robert Bellah is liberal protestant in his past as well as present. Others, like Rodney Clapp, I think, have an evangelical background. I have a few friends who grew up as evangelicals but now avoid church, religion and God-talk in general, except that some of the old narratives (they cite: fear of going to hell, resorting to prayer) return whenever life turns ugly. They feel great anger when they talk about evangelicalism and their past.
I am also anxious to hear more about your impressions of contemporary liberal protestantism.
3.
pastorofdisaster | 21 April 2007 at 2:46 pm
It has been interesting coming from an “evangelical” background and trying to fit into the “liberal” church world. I have been startled by how many things that the evangelical world has coopted. You are correct that there are no institutions that are primarily liberal. Most moderate, mainline organizations or denominations have suffered from years of negative assertions by Evangelicals. They have labeled the moderates as secularists, liberal and outside orthodoxy. So, I think that many have been afraid to identify themselves in the mainline church as outright liberals. When someone else is doing the defining it means you lose control of your own story. Just ask the early church “heresies.”
4.
Benedict | 29 April 2007 at 5:36 pm
Ken:
Due to some rather interesting recent developments in the life of yours truly, you’ll be seeing some material that probably reveals more of my own story, which I have been less than eager to be explicit about for a variety of reasons, not least of which is PastorOfDisaster’s observation that if I yield it completely it will be pigeonholed and defined by someone else and I’ll lose my own already tenuous hold on it. Nevertheless, expect some answers to your thoughts in you comment in the next few days.
5.
hypocritical4u | 3 November 2009 at 2:16 pm
Discourse requires subjectivity acknowledging itself as such, rather than as something more. I recommend the following post: http://deligentia.wordpress.com/2009/11/03/objective-vs-subjective-a-matter-of-biblical-hyperbole/