The U.S. as Post-Christian Nation

Our presidents don't even pretend to give lip service to Christianity anymore. And, no, this isn't a shot at Obama. GWB was probably more religious than Clinton but neither he, his father, nor Reagan were particularly hard-core even in their private lives. The last of our presidents that was was Carter and there's a good argument to be made that his politics overwhelmed or at least overcame his religious views...

This article got me thinking about the subject again. link

This has definitely been a change of values over the last 50-75 years. The question is whether we're better off for it, worse, or just different.

Question: What do you mean by "Christian"? Christianity in the sense of of a poster here who is named "John"? (Love thy neighbor!) Or Christianity in the sense of this creature named "Dayton"? ("Let God sort them out!") These are two completely different things...

I'd like to see the U.S. return to these so-called Christian values, btw. (Johns "Christian values", for example)

I'm not Christian so not really an issue for me.

I don't care what sort of spooks they believe in or don't believe in, so long as they do their job and don't spend my tax dollars worshipping Zeus, Baal, Allah, Yahweh or whoever.

Christianity=cultural homogeneity, and that I do not approve of.

I'm struggling to recall how presidents before the latter half of the 20th Century were particularly Christian.

I think it is absolutely true we are now in the post-christian era here, but I don't think that the behavior of the presidents is a articularly good measure of that.

And when I say post-christian, this is what I mean.

Up until the early 60's, the generic Christian worldview was the defacto assumption of the culture. On any given issue, the vast majority of the people - whether actively practicing Christians or not, would default to the position that was based in the Christian worldview. Probably 90-95% or more.

Since then, that has drifted steadily downward. slowly at first, but at a steeper rate over the last 20 years or so.

In some ways that's not a good thing but in many ways it is. When a worldview is largely unchallanged and unquestioned it picks up unhealthy tendencies - particularly when cultural biases and bigotries are absorbed into the so-called "Christian position"

Take as one example, the position that gays, lesbians, and trans people were in even in the most liberal of locations when Stonewall happened 40 years ago (I include trans because a lot of people don't know how many of those involved in that riot were) as compared to their/our standing now.

But that's not just on sexuality, it can be illustrated in all sorts of ways (legalized gambling for instance)

It's a pretty subjective term, IMO. There are lots of very devout people I know who, if they were absolutely pressed to pass judgement on them, would say neither. But that's the thing. They wouldn't put themselves in a position to judge the relationship of someone with only this kind of relationship. You're right, they are two different kinds of people but that doesn't mean that either one of them are any less "Christian" than they other. My Bible tells me that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. We are not saved by what we do but by who we know. They can both be equally saved. God will sort them out. He will pass final judgment. It's not my job to do that.

I can, though, say that the U.S. does not have the same attitude toward Christianity in even a generic sense that it did in the timeframe that I mentioned in my IP. Sure, I'm not pushing that as some form of idealized religion that we should all be striving to get back to but it is pretty obvious to me that even the pretense of religiosity is not necessary in politics any more.

Why that is, is definitely another post.

Very interesting post from an European point of view... Our media tells us that Christianity is on the rise in the U.S., that the fundamentalists are marching, that the U.S. is turning into a Theocracy. Of course I know that the media is exaggerating, but your viewpoint is new to me.

I used to trust the media to tell us the truth... Hell yes, our TV programm is mostly American, and it doesn't seem very Christian. I should have known better.

However, I still don't know what the "generic Christian worldview" is. It cannot be reduced to prudery, homophobia, or the Calvinistic approach which many American persuasions embrace, right? I need some clarification. What is " mainstream Christianity" in the U.S.? I seem to be victim of a distorted picture transported by the media. Does a "Christian mainstream" in the U.S. even exist?

Edit: Bock, you were faster! Thx!

All decisions to take my money from me and spend it on something I don't personally authorize are opposed to my morals. Maybe I don't like the fact that Obama wants to give himself another victory lap to Oslo? Maybe I'd rather take my money, give it to my church and let them spend it on feeding the local homeless? Now who's made an immoral decision and forced their values on someone?

False. As any sort of Google search of any recent president and God would reveal.

Also false, probably. But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

Now we're going from "don't even pretend to give lip service" to "particularly hard-core even in their private lives."

None of us knows what anybody else really thinks and does in their private lives. Presidents give plenty of lip service to Christianity, though.

This article only talks about Obama not going to a Christmas Eve service.

Regular attendance at church<>good Christianity.

A president's sporadic attendance of church and apparently skipping Christmas Eve services is not a sign of anything larger than that.

It's completely reasonable that a president in general would not want to be a regular churchgoer, and this president in particular, given that his choice of church would put that church under tremendous scrutiny.

It always amazes me at how Christians can act as though the population of America isn't heavily majority Christian, or how they're being oppressed when people say things like "Happy Holidays."

Not necessarily. There are many other reasons why a culture would stagnate than religion. In fact, as the U.S. becomes less and less religiously oriented, people are going to have to find new reasons for why cultural stagnation occurs. New reasons for their dissatisfactions, if you will.

Why not?

I liked my culture(s) before they were made less rich and unique by middle eastern imports.

Carter and Adams, that's about it from off the top of my head.

Of course, Adams really wasn't a Christian if you want to split hairs.

Well bless your heart, but I'm not a Christian, Jan.

J.

Thank you for admitting it. You're only about.... 7 years too late.

No, this was recent. Before that, I was rather devout and very sincere as a Christian.

J.

I don't really think it counts as "Post-Christian" when polls consistently show that the American population would be exceedingly unlikely to elect a non-Christian no matter what their values.

That's true. For example, if a Presidential candidate were to say they were atheist, it would be an instant death knell for their candidacy.

J.

I used to think a Christian mainstream did exist. But if it ever did, I'm sure it doesn't any more. There are some general things that I think most "Christians" still believe but, in a lot of ways, they're becoming less religious and more societal in nature. I belong to a pretty well-known denomination, for instance, and when you see the advertising that it does, you'd often have a hard time telling the difference between it and any other charitable organization without us giving you the name. It's one of my gripes but that's only tangentially related to this thread.

I think you're purposely misunderstanding my terms, then. It would be political death for a candidate to come out with a very strict set of strong Biblically-based Christian values, too. The fact that most Americans don't hold themselves to particularly strong Christian values means that they aren't about to hold their leaders to them, either. My proposition is that this country isn't even pretending to hold our leaders to that standard anymore.

Outside of appearances, I doubt they ever really did.

J.

Paranoid much?

First paragraph - it's called an extrapolation. Lip service from a president who doesn't even believe who wants to gain political brownie points is one thing. Having a secular political maintaining neutrality in their public life is fine. That's why I made the distinction between the two.

Second - true. Nobody does know what anyone else really thinks but we all do make those judgments, don't we? And we do have to do this on some level given our political system. That was somewhat of an exaggeration on my part. Over the years, though, you have to admit, the level of lip service our leaders has given to religion has gotten lower.

Again - paranoid much? I admitted up front that this article got me thinking about the subject. NOT that the article was all about the subject.

And here's a good theological point for you about Christianity. Regular church attendance is promoted by Christianity. Want the verse? But again, Mr. Paranoid, the last several presidents didn't make regular attendance a priority.

Raoul, just how would you describe yourself religiously? I have to admit I don't have a scorecard but I thought you were at least more spiritual than average if not actually religious. Forgive me if I'm wrong and that offends you. Your last remark here, though, looks like you're trying to find a persecution complex on my part. If not, then, again, you have to define your terms for me. "majority Christian" surely means something different practically speaking for you than what I'm thinking here. And certainly, my pointing out this belief of mine doesn't have to mean that I'm feeling oppressed, does it?

Could very well be true. Goes to your definition of 'post-Christian.' Another good point to make to Raoul, in fact. Have we never been as Christian a nation as the media (or politicians of any party) have found it convenient to portray us?

Or, is the very fact that it's being so openly recognized and accepted the very definition of 'post-Christian?'

I think we, as a nation, have been whatever we've had to be for something to be politically convenient, including some of our founders.


J.

I don't think it's just the Christian culture that's declining, I think honestly, probably since the 20th century we've been slowly headed toward the next dark age. If you look at any discription of how people lived in the late Roman Empire and compare it to us today, we're not to far from where they were.

this:
http://www.darkage.fsnet.co.uk/WorldContradictions.htm

probably goes into way more detail than you're really interested in, but I think this is a good snapshot of where we were and where we'll end up if nothing changes. For example the debt/production ratio both public and private is pretty worrysome. People not seeing themselves as necesarily part of a bigger society -- a sort of me first, last, and only attitude, and the decline of a standard culture (judeo/christian or not) is another trend that I can't imagine helping things. We're a nation coming apart at the seems.

http://www.darkage.fsnet.co.uk/CharacteristicFeatures.htm

I say we're in serious decline. Hopefully it can be reversed, but I have my doubts.

I'm not purposefully misunderstanding anything, I am pretty purposefully saying however that just because they might not be doing things you specifically want it doesn't necessarily mean that they personally are not displaying "strong Christian values".

OK. You're not purposely misunderstanding. Fine. There must be some other reason you don't get this concept.

Oh, I totally get the concept.

I just think that you are turning into a grumpy old man thinking about how much different things were in the old days when if you could actually go back 50+ years and meet some of the men you are talking about you would be very surprised.

You haven't been a "Christian" for quite some time, John. Although up until recently you have been playing at being one. Although I do not doubt by any measure that the beliefs that you had were sincere, and I never doubted your knowledge of scripture.