Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The rise of new Christianity (The Passion annunciates orthodox Christianity's central doctrine)
THE AGE (AUSTRALIAN) ^ | April 12, 2004 | Angela Shanahan

Posted on 04/21/2004 6:02:37 AM PDT by Liz

This will come to be seen as the century in which religion replaced ideology, writes Angela Shanahan.

At no other time of the year does the great divide in Australia between the secular majority and diminishing Christian minority seem so apparent as at Easter.

Those who say Christianity is dead or dying might, on the face of it, have a point. There is widespread disillusionment with the established church, and secularism encourages a view of religion that would exculpate its influence from the public domain.

To make matters worse there is a shrinking demographic in Christianity's traditional European strongholds. And a new liberalism has taken hold in Europe and North America that wants to diminish the authority of the hierarchy and erode traditional doctrine on issues such as life, family, and sexuality.

But while this is the case in the old Christian world, think about this. In the Philippines the annual rate of baptisms is higher than the totals for Italy, France, Spain and Poland combined. Of the 18 million Catholic baptisms recorded in 1998, 8 million took place in Central and South America, 3 million in Africa and almost 3 million in Asia.

The coming dominance of new Christianity is the theme of a ground-breaking book by American historian of religion Philip Jenkins, The Next Christendom: The Coming of Global Christianity.

Jenkins argues that "the 21st century will almost certainly be regarded by future historians as the century in which religion replaced ideology as the prime animating and destructive force in human affairs".

His argument is not theological. He analyses sociological trends. Within 25 years the population of Christians will be 2.6 billion, making it the world's largest religion, and most of these will be in the developing world. The growing numbers of Christians in Africa, projected at 228 million by 2025, has probably the deepest political significance because it is there that the dividing lines are drawn between Islam and Christianity - both of which seem to be polarising towards fundamentalism.

The perception that Christianity is dead is a peculiarly Western-dominated line of thought.

The liberal Catholic writer James Carroll has complained that world Christianity is falling increasingly under the sway of what he deems "fundamentalism". True, where Christianity is flourishing it is not of the new touchy-feely character that wants to marginalise religion to the outskirts of discussion about society and tolerates a watering down of doctrine to vague do-goodism. No, conservativism flourishes in the Christianity of the developing world - and reformers obviously do not like this fact.

But Jenkins compares the new Christianity with that of the early church - mystical, puritanical and prophetic and with its own martyrs, most recently in Africa. So from a more positive point of view, in the developing world the anti-authoritarian excess in the West that followed Vatican II has been corrected, and ancient elements of Catholic tradition and practice such as the Marian emphasis are revived. There is also a rejection of Western notions of "private" sexual morality, which in the developing world, riddled by AIDS, are seen for what they are.

Already we have seen the fallout from this divide in the Anglican Church over the vexed question of the ordination of practising homosexuals. The Anglican church in Nigeria - the single largest Anglican church - has all but come to schism with Canterbury.

Whether one would use the dreaded F-word - fundamentalism - or the term "new orthodoxy", analogous to a counter-reformation, to describe new-world Christianity depends on which side of the global fence you sit.

The perception that religion in general and Christianity in particular is dead is a peculiarly Western-dominated line of thought. It not only ignores the major demographic trends in Africa and Latin America, it forgets the historical view of the church itself, which has always operated as a world entity, not a European one. Closer to home, this perception also ignores a growing Christian movement in the West among young people who, having been brought up with no faith, are finding it.

When the film The Passion of the Christ was released at the start of Lent this year there was a general perception that a religious film produced by an eccentric and seemingly reactionary Catholic like Mel Gibson was in some ways an exotic curiosity. Many critics, particularly reform-minded Catholics, regarded it as a throwback to a different, pre-Vatican II version of religion.

But contrary to expectations, the film has been hugely popular among the young. This is partly because it vividly dramatises the Passion. But the Jesus of this film is not the fashionable Jesus of my youth, the counter-culturalist, as portrayed in Pasolini's famous film The Gospel According to Matthew. No, it is the suffering Jesus to whose suffering we join our own.

Whatever one's opinion of the artistic merit of the film, it's greatest achievement at Easter 2004 is to bring within the orbit of popular culture an annunciation of the central doctrine of orthodox Christianity: Jesus is the divine redeemer whose suffering and death was the point of his life and the Gospels.

It does that in no uncertain terms - and the young of today want certainty.

Angela Shanahan is a Canberra writer.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last
Whatever one's opinion of the artistic merit of (The Passion) film, it's greatest achievement....is to bring within the orbit of popular culture an annunciation of the central doctrine of orthodox Christianity: Jesus is the divine redeemer whose suffering and death was the point of his life and the Gospels. It does that in no uncertain terms - and the young of today want certainty.
1 posted on 04/21/2004 6:02:37 AM PDT by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Liz
The name of the Lord is a mighty strong tower. The righteous run therein and are safe.

Jesus died for our sins so that we might have life.
2 posted on 04/21/2004 6:26:14 AM PDT by shineon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer; Salvation; Canticle_of_Deborah; sandyeggo; american colleen; Polycarp IV; Desdemona; ...
Defenders of the Faith Ping!!

Discussion, thoughts, opinions?
3 posted on 04/21/2004 6:33:38 AM PDT by StAthanasiustheGreat (Vocatus Atque Non Vocatus Deus Aderit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Liz
I saw "orthodox" in the title, and scanned the article to find out how "Orthodox Christian" doctrine is any different from "mere Christian" doctrine. Hm. Then I saw that "orthodox" was lowercase, not meant to refer to the branch of Christianity, but to "orthodox" Christianity (as opposed to "heretical" Christianity).

Nice article. It is good seeing the key doctrine of our faith vividly portrayed.
4 posted on 04/21/2004 6:39:40 AM PDT by Theo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
I am a Christian however I will not be seeing Mel's film. I dislike any film with violence. They make me physically ill. I am very glad the film is doing so well at the box office and that many people find meaning in it. Having made the decision not to view it it is interesting the reaction I have received from my Christan friends, the majority of whom have seen the film multiple times. There is this very strong pressure on me to go with them. When I say no and give my reason in their minds my salvation suddenly become suspect. One person really got into it with me. Finally I said "We are talking about a movie. When did viewing a certain movie become the test to determine if someone is saved or not?" That brought them up a little short.

I very much dislike trend in religion. It sort of like if you are not wearing a WWJD bracelet or know the secret handshake of the week you're not "saved enough" I feel no desire to see this film because I have read the book and that's all I need.Reading the book and doing what it says is the whole point of the faith. I don't need to see someone whipped and nailed to a cross to get the idea. There are no doubt many that do. It is good that the film is out because is it helpful for them.
5 posted on 04/21/2004 6:53:54 AM PDT by foolscap
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
SPOTREP - RELIGION
6 posted on 04/21/2004 7:15:03 AM PDT by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bear_in_RoseBear
Pingpingping!
7 posted on 04/21/2004 7:21:00 AM PDT by Rose in RoseBear (HHD [... interesting observation...])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
A very informative and encouraging article. Thank you, Liz.
8 posted on 04/21/2004 7:29:56 AM PDT by mtntop3 ("Those who must know before they believe will never come to full knowledge.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: foolscap
I have seen the movie twice. The first time I saw it, I could only think of how wrong the critics were. I saw it a second time when I had some time to kill on a business trip, but mostly to get the spiritual feel for the movie.

It is a great movie. But none of it was any different than what I had expected. I knew that Christ had suffered/died for my sins. And I had a good understanding of the brutality of the whole ordeal.

Therefore, I was not shocked or brought to tears by the movie. However, the movie did provide a great visualisation of the events, which in turn gave me a deeper appreciation of the Passion during Palm Sunday mass.

Its a significant movie for humanity in general, because it has refocused our attention to Jesus as the Savior, instead of Jesus the Really Nice Guy. However, certain individuals may not need the movie because they already recognize that Jesus is our Savior and have the deep appreciation that it deserves.

9 posted on 04/21/2004 7:33:49 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Liz
[ This will come to be seen as the century in which religion replaced ideology, writes Angela Shanahan. ]

Pity if true. Since Christ came to make religion, all religion, obsolete, and did.

10 posted on 04/21/2004 7:42:10 AM PDT by hosepipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
Christ came to make religion, all religion, obsolete, and did.

Amen.

11 posted on 04/21/2004 8:03:01 AM PDT by LTCJ (Gridlock '05 - the Lesser of Three Evils.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Liz
But contrary to expectations, the film has been hugely popular among the young. This is partly because it vividly dramatises the Passion.

Anyone who survived junior high can understand Christ's Passion.

12 posted on 04/21/2004 8:08:17 AM PDT by Aquinasfan (Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: foolscap
Reading the book and doing what it says is the whole point of the faith.
Although I have seen the film four times and consider it a remarkable contribution to religious art, I can certainly appreciate others' reluctance to see it. I do, however, question the formulation that the point of Christian faith is to 'read the Bible and do what it says.'

Scripture doesn't exist for itself or by itself. It is intrinsically linked to the Incarnation, to the eternal Son of God's becoming man, to His taking on flesh to redeem man. Jesus is the Logos, the Word, and Scripture only finds its force because it is linked to the Word. Jesus is the Truth He reveals. Were it not for the intrinsic link between the divine person and the written word, Christians would have no use whatsoever for Scripture.

This is not to say that revelation is unimportant or nonessential to our life in Christ -- revelation does indeed affirm and promulgate the importance of God's having become man in history -- just that there must be that link between the divine Person who became man and revelation. The focus of Christian faith is, first and foremost, the person of the Christ.

13 posted on 04/21/2004 8:10:30 AM PDT by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: foolscap
Whether or not you have seen the "passion" should have nothing to do with someone else's opinion of your rightness with God or not.

Its whether you are washed in His blood that was shed 2000 years ago that makes you righteous. Not anything you could do.

But I would consider what the Bible says about the last days, before, or after the rapture because you might see some pretty violent stuff.

A movie could never prepare you, but the Word of God can.
14 posted on 04/21/2004 8:31:41 AM PDT by Delphinium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Liz; american colleen; sinkspur; Lady In Blue; Salvation; Polycarp IV; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; ...

Jesus is the divine redeemer whose suffering and death was the point of his life and the Gospels.

Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list


15 posted on 04/21/2004 8:40:05 AM PDT by NYer (O Promise of God from age to age. O Flower of the Gospel!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Ping for later reading.
16 posted on 04/21/2004 9:02:21 AM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: hosepipe
Since Christ came to make religion, all religion, obsolete, and did.

I don't remember reading that in the Bible. Can you give me a citation?

While you're doing that, maybe you could also explain why James 1:27 says, "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

17 posted on 04/21/2004 9:13:31 AM PDT by Campion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Liz
Great article! Thanks for posting.
18 posted on 04/21/2004 9:16:09 AM PDT by Between the Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
Thanks for the great post. The dividing line between supporters of Gibson's "Passion" and its enemies is the same line that defines those who favor orthodox Christianity and those who do not.
19 posted on 04/21/2004 9:44:13 AM PDT by Thorin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Campion
[ I don't remember reading that in the Bible. Can you give me a citation? While you're doing that, maybe you could also explain why James 1:27 says, "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." ]

1) "I am the way , the truth, and the life, no man comes to the father but through me"- Jesus
Religion is obsolete, all religion. Your religion OR Jesus you can't have both.
Jesus eliminated the middle man. PURE Genius I would say. And the reason they HAD to martyr him, could'nt have that getting around..

2) That quote exposes and ravishes religion, in case you did'nt notice. Not a good start you seeing a dis on religion as being passage for it. One wonder what else you have missed.

Another question.. What would a real genuine God almighty even need with a religion, any religion, even yours ? If he needed a religion, he would'nt BE GOD..p> Clergy needs religions, God don't. Thats why theres so many..

20 posted on 04/21/2004 9:53:39 AM PDT by hosepipe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-42 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson