When two worldviews collide.

[stevevw]

In discussing some of the moral issues facing society such as gender, sex, race, Rights, identity politics ect relating to how we as a society should structure ourselves I have found that a polarisation is happening between two broad worldviews. On the one side the Left which I think is more likely to be athiest or more pluralistic about belief and on the other is the Right which are more conservative and traditional and more likely to be Christain. Though I think there is degrees of variance where some will also be open to opposing views to some degree.

But it seems things have become more polarised is recent times deue to society moving away from a Christain worldview to a secular one. In the past there was more middle ground and basically people I think were more traditional had belief and progressives were seen as out of step. I think today the Left has gained a lot of ground mainly due to a reaction to percieved past injustices by traditionalist or Christains and being more open to alternative ideas.

In the past Western societies were based on Christain values but in the last few decades God and Christainity has been rejected and in its place the State has become the arbitor of societal morals and infringed more on peoples private lives. Of course a lot has happened in that time with social media which I think has had a profound impact on thinking undermining truth and has given individuals and groups much power to push their views and influence governments and society.

But the result of all this is that there is a growing division between the Christian Worldview and the Secular Worldview to the point that they clash even violently like people want to destroy Christains aned opposing views and it seems the State is actively siding with the a secular position with the help of certain lobbyist. They have been actively dismantaling Christainity and taking God completely out of the picture in our institutions and public life generally, I should say its not always just Christains but also traditionalist and others who believe in the Truths that the West was built upon such as Enlightement and Democracy. Many on the Left also seem to support some sort of Marxism so this polarisation seems to be political and religious.

I guess our present situation is also the result of Postmodernism the idea of tearing down the old truths and archetypes of the West and society has become more individualistic and relative. Its a complex combination of factors but the thing that stands out for me is that there seems to be a showdown brewing between Christain and traditionalist and the Secularist and the Left and I think the Left is winning at the moment. I can see this continuing where Christainity is pushed to the fringes.

So we are at a point for the first time in a long time in our history where societies efforts to rid themselves of God and Christainity will see secularist and non believers outnumbering Christains and completely rejecting God from society.

But is this new World completely devoid of belief or is society replacing God and Christainity with some new religion, a secular religion which has been able to grow disguised as something else like some new utopia that promises to do away with injustice and inequality and bring people true happiness. I think so as it seems that peoples reaction to Christainity and God today isn't just about a new way but is tied to their identity and debates are often full of feelings even to the point of wanting to destroy others who disagree,

So I think this is a fight for Truth and there can only be one Truth. But today truth has lost all meaning and personal truth has become the only truth. But I think the Truth as in the one Truth we all know is real will shine through in the end, but its going to be a fight in the meantime where many false ideas will seem to win out and may fool many.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

In discussing some of the moral issues facing society such as gender, sex, race, Rights, identity polityics ect relating to how we as a society should structure ourselves I have found that a polarisation is happening between two broad worldviews. On the one side the Left which I think is more likely to be athiest or more pluralistic about belief and on the other is the Right which are more conservative and traditional and more likely to be Christain. Though I think there is degrees of variance where some will also be open to opposing views to some degree.

But it seems things have become more polarised is recent times deue to society moving away from a Christain worldview to a secular one. In the past there was more middle ground and basically people I think were more traditional had belief and progressives were seen as out of step. I think today the Left has gained a lot of ground mainly due to a reaction to percieved past injustices by traditionalist or Christains and being more open to alternative ideas.

In the past Western societies were based on Christain values but in the last few decades God and Christainity has been rejected and in its place the State has become the arbitor of societal morals and infringed more on peoples private lives. Of course a lot has happened in that time with social media which I think has had a profound impact on thinking undermining truth and has given individuals and groups much power to push their views and influence governments and society.

But the result of all this is that there is a growing division between the Christian Worldview and the Secular Worldview to the point that they clash even violently like people want to destroy Christains aned opposing views and it seems the State is actively siding with the a secular position with the help of certain lobbyist. They have been actively dismantaling Christainity and taking God completely out of the picture in our institutions and public life generally, I should say its not always just Christains but also traditionalist and others who believe in the Truths that the West was built upon such as Enlightement and Democracy. Many on the Left also seem to support some sort of Marxism so this polarisation seems to be political and religious.

I guess our present situation is also the result of Postmodernism the idea of tearing down the old truths and archetypes of the West and society has become more individualistic and relative. Its a complex combination of factors but the thing that stands out for me is that there seems to be a showdown brewing between Christain and traditionalist and the Secularist and the Left and I think the Left is winning at the moment. I can see this continuing where Christainity is pushed to the fringes.

So we are at a point for the first time in a long time in our history where societies efforts to rid themselves of God and Christainity will see secularist and non believers outnumbering Christains and completely rejecting God from society.

But is this new World completely devoid of belief or is society replacing God and Christainity with some new religion, a secular religion which has been able to grow disguised as something else like some new utopia that promises to do away with injustice and inequality and bring people true happiness. I think so as it seems that peoples reaction to Christainity and God today isn't just about a new way but is tied to their identity and debates are often full of feelings even to the point of wanting to destroy others who disagree,

So I think this is a fight for Truth and there can only be one Truth. But today truth has lost all meaning and personal truth has become the only truth. But I think the Truth as in the one Truth we all know is real will shine through in the end, but its going to be a fight in the meantime where many false ideas will seem to win out andee may fool many.

Christians are commanded to spread the "Good News" in the secular world. If His fruits are quenched by hate then His " good news" turns into bad and nothing can be harvested for His Kingdom. We are to put on the " full armor of God" but His armor is wrapped in love, His Holy Spirit. Christians ( not all) need to go back to their first love then they will be equipped with His Gospel and begin to heal the gap of division with truth and righteousness.
Blessings.

 

[timothyu]

Right back to the fall in the Garden where self interest reigns supreme.

A Failure to Comprehend

Mankind operates on the principle of 'self', mainly self interest. The concept of Jesus' Gospel of the Kingdom was the complete opposite, that being 'others'. Even today that counter-culture of other is scoffed at, and those who promote it suffer...

www.christianforums.com

 

[Whyayeman]

I think secularism has gained ground in recent years. I don't blame social media because the decline in religion long predates the internet. But it is not a war between left and right. The moral framework of secularism - certainly in the UK, anyway, is not that different. I have worked with observant Christians and radical atheists, often in the same work teams. If there had been issues between colleagues it would have been obvious and projects would have suffered. That has never been my experience.

Most of the atheists I know have been brought up in the Christian traditions. In my experience atheists possess an understanding of moral good and wickedness in exactly the same measure as their religious colleagues.

 

[Kylie]

In discussing some of the moral issues facing society such as gender, sex, race, Rights, identity politics ect relating to how we as a society should structure ourselves I have found that a polarisation is happening between two broad worldviews. On the one side the Left which I think is more likely to be athiest or more pluralistic about belief and on the other is the Right which are more conservative and traditional and more likely to be Christain. Though I think there is degrees of variance where some will also be open to opposing views to some degree.

But it seems things have become more polarised is recent times deue to society moving away from a Christain worldview to a secular one. In the past there was more middle ground and basically people I think were more traditional had belief and progressives were seen as out of step. I think today the Left has gained a lot of ground mainly due to a reaction to percieved past injustices by traditionalist or Christains and being more open to alternative ideas.

In the past Western societies were based on Christain values but in the last few decades God and Christainity has been rejected and in its place the State has become the arbitor of societal morals and infringed more on peoples private lives. Of course a lot has happened in that time with social media which I think has had a profound impact on thinking undermining truth and has given individuals and groups much power to push their views and influence governments and society.

But the result of all this is that there is a growing division between the Christian Worldview and the Secular Worldview to the point that they clash even violently like people want to destroy Christains aned opposing views and it seems the State is actively siding with the a secular position with the help of certain lobbyist. They have been actively dismantaling Christainity and taking God completely out of the picture in our institutions and public life generally, I should say its not always just Christains but also traditionalist and others who believe in the Truths that the West was built upon such as Enlightement and Democracy. Many on the Left also seem to support some sort of Marxism so this polarisation seems to be political and religious.

I guess our present situation is also the result of Postmodernism the idea of tearing down the old truths and archetypes of the West and society has become more individualistic and relative. Its a complex combination of factors but the thing that stands out for me is that there seems to be a showdown brewing between Christain and traditionalist and the Secularist and the Left and I think the Left is winning at the moment. I can see this continuing where Christainity is pushed to the fringes.

So we are at a point for the first time in a long time in our history where societies efforts to rid themselves of God and Christainity will see secularist and non believers outnumbering Christains and completely rejecting God from society.

But is this new World completely devoid of belief or is society replacing God and Christainity with some new religion, a secular religion which has been able to grow disguised as something else like some new utopia that promises to do away with injustice and inequality and bring people true happiness. I think so as it seems that peoples reaction to Christainity and God today isn't just about a new way but is tied to their identity and debates are often full of feelings even to the point of wanting to destroy others who disagree,

So I think this is a fight for Truth and there can only be one Truth. But today truth has lost all meaning and personal truth has become the only truth. But I think the Truth as in the one Truth we all know is real will shine through in the end, but its going to be a fight in the meantime where many false ideas will seem to win out and may fool many.

I disagree with much of what you said here. For example, I don't think western society has based on a Christian worldview. I think it's more likely that Christianity adopted a worldview that was shared by many in society and presented itself as the source of that worldview, even though you can find proponents of such a worldview around long before Christianity.

But to answer what seems to be the main point of your post, I think it's more the fact that people are seeing that there are many different people with many different cultures and there is not necessarily any one right way to live a life. People are seeing that there are many different ways to be Human, and someone is not necessarily wrong just because they live differently to you. For example, we are moving away from a Christian-centric culture because we see that not everyone is a Christian and that it's harmful to exclude people based on their faith (as it only serves to promote an "us vs. them" attitude).

And remember, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from being a Christian. We are just learning that it is wrong to force others to be a Christian if they don't wish to be a Christian.

 

[stevevw]

I disagree with much of what you said here. For example, I don't think western society has based on a Christian worldview. I think it's more likely that Christianity adopted a worldview that was shared by many in society and presented itself as the source of that worldview, even though you can find proponents of such a worldview around long before Christianity.

I think Christainity has a unique way of seeing the world different from secular society. Even from when it was established it offereed a different view as opposed to the Romans who for many years persecuted Christains. But I was thinking more in the 20th century. The values of many nations especially in the West were established on the Christainity.

Christainities hold has lasted a long time and even as recent as the 1950's most of society held to Christain values. Its only been in recent times that these values have come under attack to the point of being over ridden by secular ideas. As Christain values and beliefs are erroded and taken out of mainstream society we have seen the rise of many moving away from a belief in God and therefore more conflicts are happening between those who hold to Christain Truths and those who hold to secular worldviews.

But to answer what seems to be the main point of your post, I think it's more the fact that people are seeing that there are many different people with many different cultures and there is not necessarily any one right way to live a life.

I am not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that there is more than one way to live morally.

People are seeing that there are many different ways to be Human, and someone is not necessarily wrong just because they live differently to you.

Once again what do you mean by there are many different ways to be human. I think being yourself and being moral are not the same thing. I think the Christain view that all are the same under Christ is Gods Truth. The secular worldview divides society into identity groups which goes against Gods Truth that the individual is utmost. I don't think modern secular society is achieving inclusion and equality but promoting the opposite by being consumed by pointing out differences.

For example, we are moving away from a Christian-centric culture because we see that not everyone is a Christian and that it's harmful to exclude people based on their faith (as it only serves to promote an "us vs. them" attitude).

But isn't that exactly what Christ said, that we should not be conformed to this world and that when we do stand on Gods word we will be persecuted and when percecuted we should rejoice.

I think the Church got political in the past and tried to control things and went away from Gods word. I think we now realize that Christainity cannot be pushed on people and they must come freely and willingly to God. But Gods Word and Truth has remained the same. We may have forgotten it at times but it hasn't changed ande this needs to be told to others and lived by which as far as I know is different to how this world sees things.

I think we are moving away from a Christain based society because that is the natural state for humans to reject God. But I am not sure what you mean when you say we exclude people based on faith. Are you saying that all faiths are the same and that we cannot point out that certain beliefs are wrong and actually cause harm. I don't think being inclusive means allowing anything.

And remember, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from being a Christian. We are just learning that it is wrong to force others to be a Christian if they don't wish to be a Christian.

Actually modern day secular society is doing exactly that. It may have been in the past that the Church tried to force people to con form to their beliefs. Now we have a new religion based on certain ideologies about the world which is being forced onto anyone who disagrees including Christains. So I am not sure the modern secular worldview has got it right as there seems to me more division in society than ever before.

 

[Kylie]

I think Christainity has a unique way of seeing the world different from secular society. Even from when it was established it offereed a different view as opposed to the Romans who for many years persecuted Christains. But I was thinking more in the 20th century. The values of many nations especially in the West were established on the Christainity.

Christainities hold has lasted a long time and even as recent as the 1950's most of society held to Christain values. Its only been in recent times that these values have come under attack to the point of being over ridden by secular ideas. As Christain values and beliefs are erroded and taken out of mainstream society we have seen the rise of many moving away from a belief in God and therefore more conflicts are happening between those who hold to Christain Truths and those who hold to secular worldviews.

I think you missed my point.

Christians often say that Christianity provided humanity with the concepts of don't kill, steal, treat other people badly, and looking after each other. I disagree with that. I think it's far more likely that those ideas were around long before Christianity and Christianity merely adopted them. And then, with the spread of Christianity, it was able to claim that it had invented those concepts.

I am not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying that there is more than one way to live morally.

Yes. Some people would say that giving up everything you own to help others is the only way to live morally. Others would not. Some would say that the death penalty could never be moral. Some would say that the death penalty for certain crimes is quite moral.

Once again what do you mean by there are many different ways to be human. I think being yourself and being moral are not the same thing. I think the Christain view that all are the same under Christ is Gods Truth. The secular worldview divides society into identity groups which goes against Gods Truth that the individual is utmost. I don't think modern secular society is achieving inclusion and equality but promoting the opposite by being consumed by pointing out differences.

Since I am an atheist, I don't care what other people claim is God's truth.

But isn't that exactly what Christ said, that we should not be conformed to this world and that when we do stand on Gods word we will be persecuted and when percecuted we should rejoice.

I think the Church got political in the past and tried to control things and went away from Gods word. I think we now realize that Christainity cannot be pushed on people and they must come freely and willingly to God. But Gods Word and Truth has remained the same. We may have forgotten it at times but it hasn't changed ande this needs to be told to others and lived by which as far as I know is different to how this world sees things.

I think we are moving away from a Christain based society because that is the natural state for humans to reject God. But I am not sure what you mean when you say we exclude people based on faith. Are you saying that all faiths are the same and that we cannot point out that certain beliefs are wrong and actually cause harm. I don't think being inclusive means allowing anything.

You seem determined to look at everything through the lens of your faith. You must understand that other people do not do that.

Actually modern day secular society is doing exactly that. It may have been in the past that the Church tried to force people to con form to their beliefs. Now we have a new religion based on certain ideologies about the world which is being forced onto anyone who disagrees including Christains. So I am not sure the modern secular worldview has got it right as there seems to me more division in society than ever before.

This just is not true. Are people trying to make it illegal to be Christian?

Remember, telling people that they can't push their faith onto others is not the same thing as telling them that they can't hold that faith themselves.

"You aren't allowed to be a Christian" = religious persecution.

"You aren't allowed to force others to be Christian" = not religious persecution.

 

[Paidiske]

In discussing some of the moral issues facing society such as gender, sex, race, Rights, identity politics ect relating to how we as a society should structure ourselves I have found that a polarisation is happening between two broad worldviews. On the one side the Left which I think is more likely to be athiest or more pluralistic about belief and on the other is the Right which are more conservative and traditional and more likely to be Christain. Though I think there is degrees of variance where some will also be open to opposing views to some degree.

But it seems things have become more polarised is recent times deue to society moving away from a Christain worldview to a secular one. In the past there was more middle ground and basically people I think were more traditional had belief and progressives were seen as out of step. I think today the Left has gained a lot of ground mainly due to a reaction to percieved past injustices by traditionalist or Christains and being more open to alternative ideas.

In the past Western societies were based on Christain values but in the last few decades God and Christainity has been rejected and in its place the State has become the arbitor of societal morals and infringed more on peoples private lives. Of course a lot has happened in that time with social media which I think has had a profound impact on thinking undermining truth and has given individuals and groups much power to push their views and influence governments and society.

But the result of all this is that there is a growing division between the Christian Worldview and the Secular Worldview to the point that they clash even violently like people want to destroy Christains aned opposing views and it seems the State is actively siding with the a secular position with the help of certain lobbyist. They have been actively dismantaling Christainity and taking God completely out of the picture in our institutions and public life generally, I should say its not always just Christains but also traditionalist and others who believe in the Truths that the West was built upon such as Enlightement and Democracy. Many on the Left also seem to support some sort of Marxism so this polarisation seems to be political and religious.

I guess our present situation is also the result of Postmodernism the idea of tearing down the old truths and archetypes of the West and society has become more individualistic and relative. Its a complex combination of factors but the thing that stands out for me is that there seems to be a showdown brewing between Christain and traditionalist and the Secularist and the Left and I think the Left is winning at the moment. I can see this continuing where Christainity is pushed to the fringes.

So we are at a point for the first time in a long time in our history where societies efforts to rid themselves of God and Christainity will see secularist and non believers outnumbering Christains and completely rejecting God from society.

But is this new World completely devoid of belief or is society replacing God and Christainity with some new religion, a secular religion which has been able to grow disguised as something else like some new utopia that promises to do away with injustice and inequality and bring people true happiness. I think so as it seems that peoples reaction to Christainity and God today isn't just about a new way but is tied to their identity and debates are often full of feelings even to the point of wanting to destroy others who disagree,

So I think this is a fight for Truth and there can only be one Truth. But today truth has lost all meaning and personal truth has become the only truth. But I think the Truth as in the one Truth we all know is real will shine through in the end, but its going to be a fight in the meantime where many false ideas will seem to win out and may fool many.

I think there's been a shift at both extremes. The extreme Christian/traditional/conservative positions held by some now, would be unrecognisable to mainstream Christians of times past. And in fact, are fairly unrecognisable to many Christians today (a lack of recognition which is mutual, which is why many more moderate/progressive/liberal Christians are viewed with suspicion, or as not real Christians, by the more conservative folks; somewhat ironically, as unless trends shift, it's the more moderate/progressive/liberal end of Christianity which is likely to be more effective in mission).

I suspect that this is driven, in part at least, by growing pluralism and a reaction on all sides to a loss of common identity, and each "side" feeling threatened by not being the social default. So the distrust, the rejection of the "other," the self-referential discourse "bubbles," and so on, only reinforce all of that and push it further along.

I don't think the secular "end" of society is actually rejecting God, by the way, but from what I can see they are (with good reason) rejecting religious institutions driven by theologies of power, control and authority. Such institutions will, I think, continue to wither unless they can learn a gentler, humbler way of being.

I think healing will be found in genuine mutual respect, dialogue (which means appreciative listening as well as talking!), and willingness to embrace diversity as a genuine gift. That is hard; it is hard intellectually and it is hard emotionally. It will take a great deal of grace. But wisdom is vindicated by all her children.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I think there's been a shift at both extremes. The extreme Christian/traditional/conservative positions held by some now, would be unrecognisable to mainstream Christians of times past. And in fact, are fairly unrecognisable to many Christians today (a lack of recognition which is mutual, which is why many more moderate/progressive/liberal Christians are viewed with suspicion, or as not real Christians, by the more conservative folks; somewhat ironically, as unless trends shift, it's the more moderate/progressive/liberal end of Christianity which is likely to be more effective in mission).

I suspect that this is driven, in part at least, by growing pluralism and a reaction on all sides to a loss of common identity, and each "side" feeling threatened by not being the social default. So the distrust, the rejection of the "other," the self-referential discourse "bubbles," and so on, only reinforce all of that and push it further along.

I don't think the secular "end" of society is actually rejecting God, by the way, but from what I can see they are (with good reason) rejecting religious institutions driven by theologies of power, control and authority. Such institutions will, I think, continue to wither unless they can learn a gentler, humbler way of being.

I think healing will be found in genuine mutual respect, dialogue (which means appreciative listening as well as talking!), and willingness to embrace diversity as a genuine gift. That is hard; it is hard intellectually and it is hard emotionally. It will take a great deal of grace. But wisdom is vindicated by all her children.

Why do religious institutions need to let go of all power and authority? If religion is to not have power and authority, those things will not cease to exist, rather they will be held by the non-religious.

 

[Monowhite]

They can be as secular as they want. There's nothing stopping those on the left from finding the light. And there's nothing stopping those on the right to lose the light. HE above IS THE LIGHT. Not only is he the light, he casts the light and sweeps out those in the shadows.
Our petty politics struggle is nothing more than a joke, a fragment of time, a tiny slice of the apple in the great cosmos.
Have faith.

EDIT: I'm not suggesting anyone in the left is by default atheist, nor am I suggesting everyone on the right is a good person. My point is... We are humans. Unite, redeem and find whatever truths you wish to find in both the physical and the metaphysical.
The best thing anyone can do on earth is to become with the earth and by that I mean let's engage ourselves in harbouring our anchor point with the heaven above. Your silly left/right wing nonsense is immaterial. You'll be judged regardless.
Instead of fighting. Go plant some seeds. Instead of fighting, go wander a brook or a meadow. You'll soon find the truth.
Stop putting your faith and future in the misdeeds of mankind.
Embrace nature.

 

[Paidiske]

Why do religious institutions need to let go of all power and authority? If religion is to not have power and authority, those things will not cease to exist, rather they will be held by the non-religious.

I didn't say we have to let go of all power and authority; but that we need to not be driven by (theologies of) power, control and authority. The key word there is probably control.

As long as people of faith seek to domineer those around us, we harm our witness to the Christ who emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, and humbled himself even to the point of death on a cross, for the sake of love. We cannot credibly preach that Christ while attempting to use whatever power we have to control others.

 

[Monowhite]

I didn't suggest you lose any power or authority. All I suggest is that you realise we are beyond such schisms.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I didn't say we have to let go of all power and authority; but that we need to not be driven by (theologies of) power, control and authority. The key word there is probably control.

As long as people of faith seek to domineer those around us, we harm our witness to the Christ who emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, and humbled himself even to the point of death on a cross, for the sake of love. We cannot credibly preach that Christ while attempting to use whatever power we have to control others.

If you don't have the drive towards power and control in some capacity, you will be inevitably dominated by those who will. For instance, if you in your job as a priestess didn't exert power and control over your local Church and there was a stronger will that was ready and willing to do so, you may find yourself gradually displaced within the hierarchy.

The need for power is inescapable and as Christians we are not called to surrender power and control to others. That's perhaps what you would like, but we've seen the results and it is the decline of Christianity.

 

[Paidiske]

If you don't have the drive towards power and control in some capacity, you will be inevitably dominated by those who will. For instance, if you in your job as a priestess didn't exert power and control over your local Church and there was a stronger will that was ready and willing to do so, you may find yourself gradually displaced within the hierarchy.

The need for power is inescapable and as Christians we are not called to surrender power and control to others. That's perhaps what you would like, but we've seen the results and it is the decline of Christianity.

First up, priestess is a slur, implying paganism and invalidity of orders (and a term CF generally treats as a flame when used of Christian clergy). The term for a woman who's a priest, is priest. Please do people the courtesy of not using slurs in place of the correct term for their role.

Second, nope, ministry is not about exerting power and control. Christian leadership is not about domineering. It is about inspiring, encouraging, equipping and enabling. Manipulation, coercion, bullying, or other power-and-control tactics are deeply unethical in the way that they disrespect the dignity of the person so treated. This is not how Christ leads, and it is not how Christians are to lead; inside the church, or outside of it.

That does not mean not having power! Power, as in, the ability to do things, to effect change, and so on, is real and necessary. But in Christian communities, it cannot be power-over, but needs to be power-with. It also does not mean that I make no decisions in my own right, or even that I don't maintain the church's boundaries on some matters (I say, deeply aware of having to call the police to remove someone who was engaging in threatening behaviour, earlier this week). But there is a vast difference between using the authority given by the church, to maintain the safety of its members, and controlling others more generally.

Whether or not Christianity declines is not something we are to seek to control by our own power. We are to be faithful in mission, in prayer, and in worship, and leave the results to God. But I can say this; attempts to domineer, to control, to exert power in culture wars and the like, are doing far more to stoke secular hostility and accelerate any decline in Christianity, than any attempt to be a community marked by gentleness, humility and service.

 

[Daniel Marsh]

In discussing some of the moral issues facing society such as gender, sex, race, Rights, identity politics ect relating to how we as a society should structure ourselves I have found that a polarisation is happening between two broad worldviews. On the one side the Left which I think is more likely to be athiest or more pluralistic about belief and on the other is the Right which are more conservative and traditional and more likely to be Christain. Though I think there is degrees of variance where some will also be open to opposing views to some degree.

But it seems things have become more polarised is recent times deue to society moving away from a Christain worldview to a secular one. In the past there was more middle ground and basically people I think were more traditional had belief and progressives were seen as out of step. I think today the Left has gained a lot of ground mainly due to a reaction to percieved past injustices by traditionalist or Christains and being more open to alternative ideas.

In the past Western societies were based on Christain values but in the last few decades God and Christainity has been rejected and in its place the State has become the arbitor of societal morals and infringed more on peoples private lives. Of course a lot has happened in that time with social media which I think has had a profound impact on thinking undermining truth and has given individuals and groups much power to push their views and influence governments and society.

But the result of all this is that there is a growing division between the Christian Worldview and the Secular Worldview to the point that they clash even violently like people want to destroy Christains aned opposing views and it seems the State is actively siding with the a secular position with the help of certain lobbyist. They have been actively dismantaling Christainity and taking God completely out of the picture in our institutions and public life generally, I should say its not always just Christains but also traditionalist and others who believe in the Truths that the West was built upon such as Enlightement and Democracy. Many on the Left also seem to support some sort of Marxism so this polarisation seems to be political and religious.

I guess our present situation is also the result of Postmodernism the idea of tearing down the old truths and archetypes of the West and society has become more individualistic and relative. Its a complex combination of factors but the thing that stands out for me is that there seems to be a showdown brewing between Christain and traditionalist and the Secularist and the Left and I think the Left is winning at the moment. I can see this continuing where Christainity is pushed to the fringes.

So we are at a point for the first time in a long time in our history where societies efforts to rid themselves of God and Christainity will see secularist and non believers outnumbering Christains and completely rejecting God from society.

But is this new World completely devoid of belief or is society replacing God and Christainity with some new religion, a secular religion which has been able to grow disguised as something else like some new utopia that promises to do away with injustice and inequality and bring people true happiness. I think so as it seems that peoples reaction to Christainity and God today isn't just about a new way but is tied to their identity and debates are often full of feelings even to the point of wanting to destroy others who disagree,

So I think this is a fight for Truth and there can only be one Truth. But today truth has lost all meaning and personal truth has become the only truth. But I think the Truth as in the one Truth we all know is real will shine through in the end, but its going to be a fight in the meantime where many false ideas will seem to win out and may fool many.

way too long

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

First up, priestess is a slur, implying paganism and invalidity of orders (and a term CF generally treats as a flame when used of Christian clergy). The term for a woman who's a priest, is priest. Please do people the courtesy of not using slurs in place of the correct term for their role.

Second, nope, ministry is not about exerting power and control. Christian leadership is not about domineering. It is about inspiring, encouraging, equipping and enabling. Manipulation, coercion, bullying, or other power-and-control tactics are deeply unethical in the way that they disrespect the dignity of the person so treated. This is not how Christ leads, and it is not how Christians are to lead; inside the church, or outside of it.

That does not mean not having power! Power, as in, the ability to do things, to effect change, and so on, is real and necessary. But in Christian communities, it cannot be power-over, but needs to be power-with. It also does not mean that I make no decisions in my own right, or even that I don't maintain the church's boundaries on some matters (I say, deeply aware of having to call the police to remove someone who was engaging in threatening behaviour, earlier this week). But there is a vast difference between using the authority given by the church, to maintain the safety of its members, and controlling others more generally.

Whether or not Christianity declines is not something we are to seek to control by our own power. We are to be faithful in mission, in prayer, and in worship, and leave the results to God. But I can say this; attempts to domineer, to control, to exert power in culture wars and the like, are doing far more to stoke secular hostility and accelerate any decline in Christianity, than any attempt to be a community marked by gentleness, humility and service.

I don't consider it a slur but will respect that you consider it as such. I cannot call you a priest though.

In terms of power and control, you are merely describing a different mechanism of power and control. Not actually denying the reality. There are of course times when Churches have to be direct. For instance, if a Church has a prominent non-Christian Bishop and doesn't directly expel him from the Church but relies on your tactics they will fail. Namely because they have demonstrated they are willing to uphold a standard (of an actual Christian Bishop). They let the standard of the Church falter due to a lack of action. Such leadership is ineffective and results in a corruption of the institution away from it's core purpose. There is nothing wrong with being direct, especially in the matter of Church leadership and you only hamstring yourself and allow for internal corruption by refusing direct means of control.

As for the distinction between power over or power with. Power is always over or it is not actual power. Parents exercise authority over children, not with children. The Church exercises spiritual authority over the laity, not with them.

As to the Idea of trying to have an impact on teh culture, it's just the opposite. When Christianity was culturally enforced throughout history that is when Christianity was at it's strongest. Your prescription leads only to decline and death because you don't believe Christiantiy has the moral authority to use power to begin with. Others may use power, and righteously at that, but Christians and Christianity? Nope, thus the others will win.

 

[Paidiske]

In terms of power and control, you are merely describing a different mechanism of power and control.

I don't think I agree. One way respects the agency and freedom of others, and the other does not.

For instance, if a Church has a prominent non-Christian Bishop and doesn't directly expel him from the Church but relies on your tactics they will fail.

This is not what I'm talking about. When someone is authorised by the church to hold a particular role, and exercise a particular function, the church has every right to hold that person accountable, and remove them from office if need be. However, that is understood and agreed to by the person who takes on that role; it is an accountability voluntarily entered into.

As for the distinction between power over or power with. Power is always over or it is not actual power.

I have seen this argument before, but I do not agree. Power, at its most basic level, is the ability to do something or undertake some action. The power to compel another is only one type of power, but one which comes with significant ethical limitations.

Parents exercise authority over children, not with children.

But as children mature, parents more and more act in an advisory and resourcing capacity, rather than one which seeks to micro-manage every moment of a child's life.

The Church exercises spiritual authority over the laity, not with them.

I disagree; but then I am used to a synodical form of church governance in which the voices of the laity are just as important as those of the clergy (and rightly so!). And even in doctrinal matters, the laity's reception and living out (or not) of what the clergy try to impart - what our Catholic brothers and sisters call the sensus fidei fidelium - is important. The church can't just impose from on high; it's the laity who bring the faith to life on the ground.

When Christianity was culturally enforced throughout history that is when Christianity was at it's strongest.

But perhaps, not when it was at its most authentic. Cultural dominance is not the aim. And now we are dealing with the aftermath, and the backlash!

Your prescription leads only to decline and death because you don't believe Christiantiy has the moral authority to use power to begin with.

I think there are very strong ethical boundaries around our use of power.

Others may use power, and righteously at that, but Christians and Christianity? Nope, thus the others will win.

This view ignores eschatology. We know the end of the story. We know that in the end, Christ is all in all. We know that the reign of God will exclude every other claim on human loyalty. We don't have to establish it by force; Christ sits on the throne of heaven, and will reign there through eternity. There is nothing left to win or lose. With that firmly in view, we don't need to enforce petty controls on our neighbours now.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

I don't think I agree. One way respects the agency and freedom of others, and the other does not.

If that agency conflicts with your interests and you refuse to do anything for your interests then that is not a beneficial tactic.

This is not what I'm talking about. When someone is authorised by the church to hold a particular role, and exercise a particular function, the church has every right to hold that person accountable, and remove them from office if need be. However, that is understood and agreed to by the person who takes on that role; it is an accountability voluntarily entered into.

That would be a direct use of power and not the gentle correction you have called for previously. Why do you not respect the agency and freedom of someone to dissent from official Church teaching and tolerate them? What justifies the use of the Church being so direct in excommunicating or removing someone from their office? To me it's fairly obvious but your principles are in conflict.

I have seen this argument before, but I do not agree. Power, at its most basic level, is the ability to do something or undertake some action. The power to compel another is only one type of power, but one which comes with significant ethical limitations.

Except the power to compel exists all around us and we are never free and autonomous individuals. From the moment we are born we are raised in systems of compulsion which make us do certain things, things which our own will we might not like to do at the time but are nevertheless considered necessary. It's only a matter of what you consider necessary. You probably consider civil society necessary, religion (Christianity especially) is not necessary).

But as children mature, parents more and more act in an advisory and resourcing capacity, rather than one which seeks to micro-manage every moment of a child's life.

Yet you still don't escape from power because as you grow you are subject to other forces besides your parents. You are never a completely free autonomous individual.

I disagree; but then I am used to a synodical form of church governance in which the voices of the laity are just as important as those of the clergy (and rightly so!). And even in doctrinal matters, the laity's reception and living out (or not) of what the clergy try to impart - what our Catholic brothers and sisters call the sensus fidei fidelium - is important. The church can't just impose from on high; it's the laity who bring the faith to life on the ground.

The Church has imposed from on high throughout most of it's history and it's what kept it together. Do you think it a coincidence that when you democratized the Church it started to falter? Anglicanism especially?

But perhaps, not when it was at its most authentic. Cultural dominance is not the aim. And now we are dealing with the aftermath, and the backlash!

How was it not at it's most authentic and most faithful? As for backlash, that only exists because we allowed the enemies of Christianity to gain power.

I think there are very strong ethical boundaries around our use of power.

Only for Christians and not for others.

This view ignores eschatology. We know the end of the story. We know that in the end, Christ is all in all. We know that the reign of God will exclude every other claim on human loyalty. We don't have to establish it by force; Christ sits on the throne of heaven, and will reign there through eternity. There is nothing left to win or lose. With that firmly in view, we don't need to enforce petty controls on our neighbours now.

Never said we have to establish anything by force, but I am not against a change in regime which is more beneficial. I certainty will not resign myself to the idea that we ought simply accept Christianity dying and leave it at that. We should have the attitude of the early Christians, fiercely opposed to the current status quo.

 

[Paidiske]

If that agency conflicts with your interests and you refuse to do anything for your interests then that is not a beneficial tactic.

My point is that my (our?) interests are not the only, or always the most important, thing.

That would be a direct use of power and not the gentle correction you have called for previously.

But it would be a use of power to which the person on the receiving end has consented, which makes a massive difference.

Why do you not respect the agency and freedom of someone to dissent from official Church teaching and tolerate them? What justifies the use of the Church being so direct in excommunicating or removing someone from their office? To me it's fairly obvious but your principles are in conflict.

Not at all. Holding an office or performing a function in the church is a situation where the person in that office or role consents to be governed by the church. It is not something imposed against their will. Should I no longer wish to be obedient to my bishop (for example) I am free to resign my licence, or indeed my orders; but I will not then be able to function as a priest, and fair enough!

You probably consider civil society necessary, religion (Christianity especially) is not necessary).

I consider civil society to be a matter of mutual obligation. I have rights which the state may not infringe, but at the same time, I have an obligation to live according to the laws of the country in which I am a citizen or resident. Should I choose not to do so, I am free to leave, but I am not free to decide to take from the state and benefit from its protections without being willing to contribute to its common life in at least that minimal way.

You are never a completely free autonomous individual.

Perhaps. I am not arguing that there is no power; I am arguing for a Christian ethic of power.

Do you think it a coincidence that when you democratized the Church it started to falter? Anglicanism especially?

From where I'm sitting, I'm in a much healthier church than those where power is concentrated in the hands of the few, so I'm not seeing it as a bad thing.

How was it not at it's most authentic and most faithful?

Because it used that power to dominate, abuse, and dehumanise others. Which is not in any sense Christian.

As for backlash, that only exists because we allowed the enemies of Christianity to gain power.

It exists because our behaviour earned it. It is quite right that we should be taken to task for our misdeeds.

Only for Christians and not for others.

Well, for everyone, ideally; but certainly the current social fragmentation and polarisation noted in the OP, is a situation not helped by churches' misuse of power.

I certainty will not resign myself to the idea that we ought simply accept Christianity dying and leave it at that.

Christianity is not dying. It will not die. That is my point. Particular cultural expressions, institutions, or the like might die, but Christianity will be renewed until Christ returns.

We should have the attitude of the early Christians, fiercely opposed to the current status quo.

So fiercely opposed that they went willingly to martyrdom, which is not a path of control or dominance.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

My point is that my (our?) interests are not the only, or always the most important, thing.

As Christians they might not be the ultimate or most important thing. Yet they are important and I find the neglect Christians put on Christian interests to be disturbing.

But it would be a use of power to which the person on the receiving end has consented, which makes a massive difference.

Not necessarily. What if the person refuses to be excommunicated or hasn't consented to it? Then what? You have two wills diametrically opposed and by necessity only one can win out. It would be my hope the Church excommunicates teh non-Christian Bishop regardless of how he or his allies feel. That is a responsible use of power that preserves the institution and what the Church stands for.

Not at all. Holding an office or performing a function in the church is a situation where the person in that office or role consents to be governed by the church. It is not something imposed against their will. Should I no longer wish to be obedient to my bishop (for example) I am free to resign my licence, or indeed my orders; but I will not then be able to function as a priest, and fair enough!

Except when you are disobedient and think you have not broken your vows. In which case you have not consented and have to be removed by force. This has been required many times throughout Church history and it is ultimately necessary.

I consider civil society to be a matter of mutual obligation. I have rights which the state may not infringe, but at the same time, I have an obligation to live according to the laws of the country in which I am a citizen or resident. Should I choose not to do so, I am free to leave, but I am not free to decide to take from the state and benefit from its protections without being willing to contribute to its common life in at least that minimal way.

Except you, like most people, will not leave said society. Nor are you obligated to accept the status quo of said society and can seek to change it to something which benefits you.

Perhaps. I am not arguing that there is no power; I am arguing for a Christian ethic of power.

A Christian ethic of power cannot ignore the reality of power itself. We cannot pretend to be above the influence of others or beyond seeking power. To do so is to render one subject to others and to entrust yourself to those who don't have you interests. A Christian who seeks power is not automatically bad.

From where I'm sitting, I'm in a much healthier church than those where power is concentrated in the hands of the few, so I'm not seeing it as a bad thing.

The Anglican Church is a dying Church, there is nothing healthy about it. You might like it, you might be fond of it as an institution, but the current form it exists in, it's a decaying institution.

Because it used that power to dominate, abuse, and dehumanise others. Which is not in any sense Christian.

Power may dominate but it doesn't necessarily dehumanize others.

It exists because our behaviour earned it. It is quite right that we should be taken to task for our misdeeds.

Are Christians specially culpable for being bad or something or misusing power? As far as I can see almost every regime in human history has misused power. Be it the Khanate of Ghenghis or the American Global Empire.

Christianity is not dying. It will not die. That is my point. Particular cultural expressions, institutions, or the like might die, but Christianity will be renewed until Christ returns.

No Christianity won't die. Anglicanism might (at least the liberal variant) but I firmly believe Christianity proper will survive. It cannot do so under the assumptions of your worldview though which concedes legitimacy to the current prevailing order.

So fiercely opposed that they went willingly to martyrdom, which is not a path of control or dominance.

Didn't you support locking down the Churches during Covid?