A Fleet or Two Ships Passing in the Night

Last updated on: August 29, 2018 at 5:06 pm by D. G. Hart

A Fleet or Two Ships Passing in the Night 2018-08-29T17:06:57-04:00 D. G. Hart

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

David French at National Review argues that Protestants have a stake in the sex scandal now roiling the Roman Catholic Church because all Christians are in this together:

The Church is like a navy, a collection of ships united in purpose and in destination. Each denomination is like a different ship in that navy, and while each crew is primarily tasked with the health and well-being of its own vessel, it’s also deeply invested in the strength of the fleet. Each vessel is more vulnerable as the fleet weakens. Each vessel is stronger surrounded by its protective armada.

If the analogy holds, then one of the mightiest battleships in the fleet, the Catholic Church, is taking torpedoes left and right. It’s now rocked by allegations of wrongdoing that go all the way to the Vatican, to the pope himself. . . .

None of us has the luxury of believing “our” institutions are safe or that “our side” of the Christian divide has adequately guarded itself against the demonic spirit that stalks the land.

Ships in the Christian armada are ablaze. We must not simply sail on and leave them to their fate.

I wish French would acknowledge how distant this view is from the sixteenth century. With celebrations of the 500th anniversary of the Reformation not that distant — it was last year, after all — bringing up the differences that produced Protestantism does not seem all that irrelevant. Would Luther have looked at Rome as “united in purpose and destination” with Lutherans, or would Pope Leo X have regarded Luther as an ally in battles against sin and infidelity? I doubt it. Perhaps times have changed sufficiently that the differences of the sixteenth-century don’t matter any more, though it’s hard to believe why Christians would not think sin, salvation, grace, and judgment vary according to time and place. In which case, shouldn’t French as a Protestant be more forthright about Protestant-Roman Catholic differences?

Some Roman Catholics are increasingly aware of those differences and Kevin Gallagher is one of them. He wrote recently against the fusionism (Roman Catholicism and American socio-economic norms) that dominated post-Vatican II Roman Catholicism:

The hoped-for “Catholic moment” at least presumed a culture in which the Church and ordinary American life might be easily combined, and in which the Church’s greatest moments of tension with American life could be understood as a kind of “loyal opposition.” At least for a couple of generations in the middle of the twentieth century, this is the role the Church played. And although becoming part of the establishment incurs certain costs, there is no doubt that this gave the Church a degree of cultural prestige and influence that nudged politics in a more Catholic direction.

The Church has now completely lost this role. Although it continues to do charitable works on an immense scale and its bishops are never reticent on political questions, Catholics today, and especially young Catholics, live in a heightened tension with the world around them. In media, at law, in HR trainings, in advertisements, Catholic distance from mainstream culture is growing in a way that makes fusionist attempts merely to supplement American culture unrealistic. Young Catholics now live in a context in which their deepest ideals and aspirations are no longer merely unusual, but oppositional. These signs were there to be seen well before the Obama years, and opponents of the fusionist synthesis pointed them out from the 1960s onward.

Gallagher is indeed representative a recent anti-liberal turn among Roman Catholic intellectuals. These believers want to be more Roman Catholic than American and even believe that cooperating in American mainstream society has eroded religious faithfulness.

What this means for David French is that he is looking at the American church scene from the vantage of the old Roman Catholic fusionists when faith and Americanism was compatible and even evangelical and Roman Catholics cooperated together. The fusionists looked to build bridges to mainstream American institutions and with non-Roman Catholic Christians. According to Gallagher:

[The fusionists] were confident that “pelvic orthodoxy,” combined with market-oriented but “compassionate” economic policy, would secure a Republican future. A faith in the “ordinary” citizen prompted hope for referenda on gay marriage; opinion polls seemed to suggest a larger public rethinking of abortion; and the Bush-era “faith-based initiatives” promised a model in which church, state, and private enterprise might cooperate harmoniously for the good of all. With sectarian squabbles muted, Catholics and Evangelicals would have the ideas and the votes to effect lasting political change. Catholics told themselves, and believed, that they were no longer a reactionary rearguard, but were on the cusp of triumph. A Catholic-inspired conservative politics appeared to have momentum and, more than that, it deserved to have momentum. These trends were not just happy turns of fate; they were signs that the political philosophy cobbled together by Catholics and conservatives was correct and illuminating and destined to win. The leaders of this movement may not have been the “Theocons” of Linker’s title, but they fancied themselves essential contributors to the intellectual project of holding together the American regime in a way that might preserve Catholics and the Church from the threats of secular liberalism. And it was no downside that in the process they might come to hold crucial positions of state.

That outlook explains French’s notion about Rome’s relationship to other churches. But the National Review writer does not seem to be aware that the big ship in the fleet may have already left the harbor.

Image

Evangelicals and Catholics Together

fusionism

Kevin Gallagher

sex scandal

Previous Post

August 24, 2018

Second-Class Christians

Next Post

August 30, 2018 Does Religion Drive Politics or Vice Versa?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category 2016 Presidential Election 2020 Presidential Election Apocalypse Bible in American Life Biblical authority Books and culture Calvinism Church Life Civil Religion Culture Wars Doctrine evangelicalism Gullibility Heaven and Hell Intellectual life Jesus Ministry modernity moralism Nationalism New Testament Old Testament Otherworldiness Otherworldliness Paul Peter Piety Popular culture Protestantism Psalms Puritans Race Roman Catholicism sacred/secular distinction Sex Shameless Self Promotion Sports Ten Commandments U.S. politics Uncategorized vulgarity worship

Select a Month January 2022 October 2021 August 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz