This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
In my circles on twitter, the Mystical Christianity conversation is cropping up again. It tends to come around every few months, at least for the past year I've been on the site.
Tyler Alterman writes a long post on it that is mostly summed up here:
Now to broaden this outside of just Christianity, I'm curious what the Motte thinks of symbolism as a whole? I will admit my own path back to religion came via a symbolic pathway, although I believe it goes far deeper than this.
That being said, from my short time here it seems like most of the Christians on this site aren't that into symbolism, and tend to be more "rationalist" and materialist in their worldview. Again, might have a mistaken impression.
I know this is a rationalist offshoot forum so not sure I expect a ton of mystical/symbolic discussion, but I'm kind of surprised by how little there is given how many professed religious folks there are here. And I do think from a Culture War angle, that materialism is definitely losing steam (especially amongst the right) as we see more and more cracks form in the edifice of Expert Scientific Opinion(tm).
On a deeper note, the symbolic worldview is all about seeing the world through the language of God (or meaning if you prefer), in a way that helps people bind together and understand events in the same way. Right now we are in "darkness" symbolically because, well, nobody can interpret events the same way! I personally think a return to the symbolic is inevitable given how confused everything is at the moment, although the transition may not be smooth or easy.
I truly truly do not understand why these people don't just go be Catholic.
It's ancient, and mysterious (it's 2000 years old)
It has nearly unlimited "aura"; home to the most beautiful buildings and art on earth
There is unlimited amounts of "mysticism" if that's what you're looking for. Most churches hold something called "adoration" where they open the tabernacle and allow people to sit and pray in what they (we) consider the true presence of the body of Christ.
Continuing on the mysticism, there are things like The Rosary, and holy water.
If you want to try and get "Buddhism but Christian", you're in luck. We have prayer beads (the rosary), mantras (prayers), monks, ancient philosophy and meditation.
I don't even know how to properly address the "science" question that people seem to want to throw at religious people as a Catholic. There is nothing in Catholicism which is incompatible with wanting to pursue science and we Catholics would consider scientific inquiry a good thing. The big bang, evolution, whatever els, etc. these things are all not just "allowed" within the doctrine, but encouraged.
I think there's a weird thing happening where the new atheists did a good job of attacking the absurd claims of evangelical protestantism, but somehow lumped the Catholics in with them. I think people are waking up to this, but the contrarianism that led them to atheism to begin with doesn't let them just return to the obvious answer (the Catholic church). I think that's basically also why you see some of these people gravitating towards the Eastern Orthodox church. They can't just go be OG Christians, you see, they have to find this other offshoot thing so that they can maintain some sense that they were always right, and that the "real" church was hidden or something.
Just go be Catholic. It's annoying how obvious the answer to all of this is. There's nothing clever or surprising, it really just was the most obvious thing all along.
You actually don't?
I did briefly consider becoming Catholic, went to Mass for a while, went to some events read a lot, and so on, so I'll bite.
The face of Catholicism probably varies pretty widely by region, some of the churches I visited included:
These are all reasons to hang out with Catholics and visit historic missions, which I certainly still do. I would consider sending my kids to Catholic school (my husband did).
None of them are reasons to actually become Catholic if you don't believe its teachings, which is very, very common. I don't like the rosary, but if I did I wouldn't let not being Catholic stop me from saying it.
A very very common story is:
“I kindof like the architecture” -> “I guess I’ll send my kids to Catholic school since they’re good schools” -> “praying the rosary is kindof nice” -> “confession is cathartic” -> “I believe in one god, the father almighty, the maker of heaven and earth”
The positive feelings you are experiencing in these places are you interacting with grace. That’s good, keep following the things that feel good in that way, and if there are things you don’t like, don’t do them.
I'm Orthodox, because of their Liturgy. Husband, who grew up Catholic, is heading more my direction. But the children are unbaptized, because we are not good at making it through the (profound! beautiful! sublime! long!) Liturgy. Unfortunately.
Go get those kids baptized! Use it as an excuse to throw a huge party.
I keep seeing photos of Pope Leo and the patriarch of Constantinople together. I really pray that there is something unifying coming soon. Lots of the EO stuff is beautiful, and in my mind these are the same church, just different forms of the mass. EO occupies a similar space in my mind to the TLM.
Yes. But we have to make it to church enough first. Which is a struggle.
I strongly believe the “gung ho liturgy go hard fasting is hard everyone must follow rules originally followed by monks” energy of Orthodoxy, which attracts the competitive male converts to it, is also the greatest problem for the Orthodox Church. The “standard” practice is incredibly high — and in service of an incredibly high goal, total union with God. Literally to “have everything that God has.”
I often feel like the Orthodox Church sets up people to fail. All the models of faith that the Orthodox Church offers in modern times are very hard to approach, and many are claimed to literally work miracles. The impression I get is that the goal for the laity is to be a monk. Even the supposed basics involve going vegan for half the year.
And yes, I know the objection: ask your priest! The rules can be changed! Economia!
Gee, thanks. I always wanted to be a charity case, a special exception, because I don’t want to be moaning on the floor of the parish hall on Easter Sunday because I was finally able to eat a cheeseburger. This also understandably raises questions of moral inconsistency and clerical power.
My earlier post about the Orthodox Church, the AAQC one — I guess what I was trying to get across in that rambling diversion was that it’s really hard for me, and people I love, to imagine actually living an Orthodox lifestyle.
Every ex-orthodox rant post I’ve ever read boils down to that — the demands of the Orthodox faith are incredibly high. Perhaps that’s what God asks of people. But perhaps not.
I believe the Western approach, of mandating a low minimum and permitting more intense asceticism as spiritual directors and the Spirit himself guides, is a more human and fruitful approach. It sets up people to succeed, not to fail. And it remains open to sanctity in lay life, in a way I think E. Orthodoxy struggles to do.
Just some disorganized thoughts. But my general posture towards Orthodoxy is this — they can have all the theological points they want, but I have to find the way where I can actually follow Christ. And I’m not convinced the Eastern Orthodox Church is that place.
Personally, it's less about theological points than about Beauty. Catholics built plenty of beautiful churches in the past, but the Orthodox are still building them, even though there are a lot fewer members, and so it might only be one per city. That one will generally be beautiful. They will cover it in mosaics and iconography, swing huge chandeliers on feast days, embed eagles into the tiles, have a beautiful dome with Christ looking down. Many of the churches in America are new and aren't fully finished yet, but are as beautiful as the parish is able to make them. The chanting is as beautiful as the choir members are able to make it, depending on local skill levels. They do generally work pretty hard at it, and still care about the beauty in a way that Catholics used to, but often don't anymore, even when they've inherited grand and storied cathedrals. They're one of very, very few groups that are still making everything as beautiful as they're able to in Current Year, which is almost as important as theology. Of course Dostoyevsky, coming from an Orthodox tradition, would say "beauty will save the world."
I grew up Evangelical, and joined the Orthodox Church in college, when there was a Greek mission inhabiting a lovely old Catholic Church within walking distance of my dorm. I like standing silently, and liked learning to cook tofu and lentils from my charming Greek Godmother, and it was all very lovely. It continued to be lovely when I moved for a Great Books program, and found a church within walking distance, with a wonderful, experienced priest who I could listen to for hours, and did. I went to Matins, Vespers, Paraklesis, book clubs, and anything else that was happening there. And then I was in the Republic of Georgia, which has wonderful old churches and a lot of energy from rebuilding after communism, and also a very beautiful chant tradition.
The small children in Georgia came and went, I think, though I didn't watch them closely. They looked like they spent a lot of time playing in the courtyard (and there were courtyards for them to play in). I think that Orthodoxy does have room for families that walk up the hill to the church who's names day it is to light a candle and have a party. They would spread feasts (Supras) during fasting periods, and some of the people wouldn't eat some of the things, especially the women, but it wasn't that big a deal, they would still cook roast chicken for whoever wanted it. But Americans aren't like that, and ultimately my husband and I are American, and feel miserable coming and going from the church service to the children's room and back as necessary.
So every once in a while I post here about how I don't know what to do. The plan has been Just Do It for about five years now, and maybe one of these years it will take. My husband is more willing to go to an Orthodox Church with me than any other kind of church, was enthusiastic about naming the children after saints, having icons in the house, and playing Russian chants on the speakers. He's not at all enthusiastic about standing still and getting small children to be still for three hours, and would probably be happy as an alter server (or any role, really, other than getting the children to be still) if only we could Just Do It long enough to get there.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link