At the Intersection of Faith and Culture

At the Intersection of Faith and Culture

We Are All Christians Now

posted by Jack Kerwick

Philadelphia Eagles’ star Riley Cooper is the latest celebrity to have to issue an emotional, and very public, mea culpa for having used that most infamous of racial slurs, “the N-word.” Fortunately for him, it appears that Cooper has been forgiven.

From these public apologies much can be learned—and a thing or two about contemporary American racial politics isn’t even the most of it.

First, from the highest to the lowest, every aspect of our culture remains saturated in a distinctly Christian vision of morality.

The notion that it is gravely immoral to regard people differently, much less treat them badly, on the bases of race, ethnicity, gender, class, and even religion is a part of Christianity’s legacy to the world. And it is the ubiquity of the belief in this idea that accounts for the pressure brought upon Cooper and others to repent of their transgressions.

In other words, if not for the world that Christianity produced, it is not likely that “racism,” “sexism,” “ethnocentrism,” “classism,” “ageism,” “ableism,” “classism,” or any of the other “isms” that are deemed unmitigated evils by our public culture would have ever been conceived, to say nothing of actually observed.

Note, I do not mean to suggest that there’s anything like a straight line that runs from an educated understanding of Christianity to the Politically Correct excesses of our day.  And I know that, consciously speaking, the most zealous of “anti-racists” and their ilk are motivated by an animus toward Christianity—not a devotion to it.

No matter.  The point is that while our PC zeitgeist is doubtless a perversion of Christianity, it is still a perversion of Christianity. If the aforementioned “isms” are unconscionable, it can only be because the differences on which they are based are superficial.  That is, it must be the case that underlying our differences is a common human nature, a fundamental essence from which each and every person derives an inalienable dignity.

It is this belief, and only this belief, that informs not just belief in the awfulness of “racism” and the like.  It is also only this belief that informs the widespread view that there is a “moral law” and “moral rights” of which all members of the human race are in possession.

But here’s the rub: if there is such a thing as human dignity, then human beings are not, and can never be, the bio-chemical accidents of a purposeless, endless evolutionary process. This isn’t to deny evolution, in some sense of this word.  It is to deny the logical tenability of a theory according to which something called “human dignity” can emerge from a universe comprised of nothing but matter in motion.

In fact, as such staunch atheists as Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean Paul Sartre have remarked, the very notion of human nature itself is the offspring of Christianity. The concept of human nature serves the same function as the concept of God: both constrain individuals by specifying in advance limits on what they can do and who they can be.  This similarity is no coincidence, for unless there is a God, an author of human nature, the latter can’t exist.

But, as Sartre wrote, if there is no God, then “everything is permissible [.]” The great existentialist philosopher admitted that he found this view of reality “very distressing,” for he recognized that it entailed that there are “no values or commands” that “legitimize our conduct [.]”  It means that “we are alone [.]”

Nietzsche disdainfully referred to Christianity as the penultimate “slave morality” from which other species of slave morality like “Democracy,” “socialism,” and “liberalism” spun off.  From the perspective of “the slave morality,” the evil man is “the aristocrat, the powerful one, the one who rules [.]”

The slave-morality, on the other hand, affirms just those qualities that promise to alleviate its proponents’ suffering: “sympathy, the kind, helping hand, the warm heart, patience, diligence, humility, and friendliness [.]”  Because these are the characteristics that supply “the only means of supporting the burden of existence,” they are elevated to the stature of universal human excellences.

If there is such a thing as human dignity, it can only be because humans were, as Christians say, made in the image of God.

The verdict is clear: whether we choose to recognize it or not, the fact of the matter is that upon our shared morality is the indelible impress of Christianity.

The latter’s nemeses from yesteryear readily conceded this.

Apparently, their progeny today lack either the honesty or courage of their intellectual ancestors.




Previous Posts

If I Am a Moral Relativist, So is God
Evidently, I am a moral relativist. In a recent article, I applauded a colleague for adapting to our school stage a play—Songs for a New World.  This play, I contended, marked a quite radical departure from the standard Politically Correct line insofar as it resoundingly affirmed “the morali

posted 9:23:32pm Apr. 17, 2014 | read full post »

Affirming Individuality: Reflections on "Songs for a New World"
Legions of Americans have, rightly, written off the entertainment and academic industries (yes, the latter is a colossal industry) as the culture’s two largest bastions of leftist ideology. Sometimes, however, and when we least expect it, the prevailing “Politically Correct” (PC) orthodoxy

posted 5:59:05pm Apr. 15, 2014 | read full post »

Pope Francis: A Socialist By Any Other Name
Pope Francis is once again insisting that he is not a communist, that his abiding concern for “the poor” is grounded in the Gospel of Christ, not the ideology of Marx, Engels, or any other communist. Back in 2010, while still a Cardinal, he felt the need to do the same. Why? It may very

posted 8:48:27pm Apr. 08, 2014 | read full post »

Pope Francis: As Clever a Politician as They Come
Much to the disappointment of this Catholic, Pope Francis balked on a golden opportunity to convey to the world just how fundamentally, how vehemently, the vision of the Church differs from that of President Obama when the two met a couple of weeks back. Why?  Can it be that Francis is the fello

posted 9:30:34pm Apr. 04, 2014 | read full post »

Jeb Bush: Disaster for the GOP
So, the word is that the fat cat GOP donors are eyeing up Jeb Bush as a presidential candidate for 2016. If there’s any truth to this—and, tragically, it appears that there most certainly is—then there is but one conclusion left for any remotely sober person to draw: The Republican Party

posted 10:05:38pm Apr. 01, 2014 | read full post »

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.