Re: Harvard's intellectual culture discourages identification with Christianity

During most of the history of the Republic our society was influenced by a kind of "cultural Protestantism" (Katherine Albanese), which remains in a paler form in the "civic religion" of America. The more conservative evangelicals and fundamentalist use this historical fact to claim that America is (or once was) a "Christian nation"; but the kind of Christian nation they want to install bears little resemblance to the cultural Protestantism of the 19th and early 20th century. The leaders of this movement (Fallwell, Dobson, Robertson, etc.) want a triumphalist political Protestantism that will determine the political, social, and moral future of the Republic. In my view this goal belies and betrays the heart of the evangelical respect for the separation of church and state.

Harvard is not the problem, nor any other secular university.

Bob
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Rich Blinne
  To: Janice Matchett
  Cc: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:22 PM
  Subject: Re: Harvard's intellectual culture discourages identification with Christianity

  On 4/17/06, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:

    Then there's this little item I posted this morning -- See if you can find the "take home quote" within the article:

    Barone: Will Democrats Win Control of the House in November?
    Creator's Syndicate ^ | April 17, 2006 | Michael Barone
    Posted on 04/17/2006 6:44:17 AM EDT by RWR8189
    68 posted on 04/17/2006 9:21:10 AM EDT by Matchett-PI
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1616342/posts?page=68#68

    ~ Janice

  I take it that you like Ike. :-)

  To quote Michael Barone:

    We have a highly polarized politics that divides us along cultural lines. Those cultural divisions tend to be more important to voters than their ratings of presidents' and parties' performance. The polarization is exacerbated by the fact that Bill Clinton and George W. Bush both happen to have personal characteristics -- I don't have to spell them out, do I? -- that people on the other side of the cultural divide absolutely loathe.

  According to Eisenhower freedom is not entrusted to the timid. But, does history entrust freedom to the obnoxious? Did Jesus teach us to hate our enemy? Or to quote another former President and Jesus again:

    A house divided against itself cannot stand.

  What is truly disturbing is that at least during the Eisenhower Administration there was a watered down common ground sometimes called ceremonial deism which Eisenhower used to combat "godless communism". Even if most Americans were not explicitly Christian at least we spoke something close to the same language.

  The Harvard study is not at all actionable by the Democrats. The political divide mentioned by Barone above makes religious rapprochement with voters like myself impossible. The bitter secularists won't allow it to happen. Unfortunately, the divide works in the other direction also. That is, many Democrats view the Gospel as merely a recasting of the virtues of Republicanism and thus reject it. Barone is a much better political scientist than Morris so oh goody we will win the next election. I guess I just gave away my political affiliation. :-) Nevertheless, it is small comfort to me when my neighbors are perishing.
Received on Mon Apr 17 17:48:21 2006