The final fracture in Western culture I want to discuss in this short series on Christian humanism is the divide over cultural identity.
Like censorship of public discourse and the degradation of the arts, the ideological divide in Western culture appears, at first glance, to be more insignificant than it really is.
After all, in a democratic culture everyone is free to think, believe, and worship as he chooses; and thereby, each is, not only free but encouraged to create his own identity. Laissez faire laissez vivre!
However, hidden beneath the surface, at the very foundation, is a shift in thought about the relationship between culture and politics. Historically, politics flowed out of the culture; whereas the current division is characterized by culture being forged from political activity.
This means, traditionally, it was the shared mythos, language, and spiritual experiences in religion and art which shaped the political conversation in the West.
Today, however, political policy and its accompanying rhetoric has become a force of its own, informed not by art and religion, but by the modernist belief that there is no transcendent order—or at least it cannot be known—so man must construct his own form of order.
In this way, culture becomes a political construct created by ideology, not a shared vision for human flourishing organically cultivated from the imagination of a people with a shared identity.
Additionally, one may note that the fracture of “ideological division” shares some similarities with the fracture discussed previously, that of the censorship of public discourse. In some ways they are similar. Censorship of public discourse and the ideological disparity between identities both relate to the political aspect of the culture.
Where they differ has to do with their nature—one reflects the problem with the spirit of the culture’s political scene and the other reflects the problem with the content of the same.
The censorship of public discourse has more to do with the spirit of the political scene. Think of it as the current temperament of the fractured culture.
The ideological divide concerns itself more with the content of the fractured culture. Think of it as the subject over which the culture is being divided, politically.
In other words, their similarity shows the culture is divided over its identity and few can have a rational productive conversation about the differences because there is a lack of emotional and rational intelligence to do so civilly and effectively. Nevertheless, back to the primary point.
On the one side of the ideological divide is the progressive element which thinks of the culture in terms of collectivism, moral libertarianism, outcome equality, and a state- or politically-constructed culture. Their modus operandi is revolution.
On the other side of the divide is the conservative element which thinks of culture in terms of natural law, individual liberty, equality of opportunity, and an imaginatively-informed culture. Their modus operandi is conservation.
Gregory Wolfe’s assessment of the division is judicious, striking directly at the heart of the matter. He writes,
The progressives are, by and large, secularists who believe that the old Judeo-Christian moral codes are far too restrictive; they actively campaign for new definitions of sexuality, the family, and the traditional ideas about birth and death—the “life” issues. Traditionalists, clinging to what they see as perennial truths of their religious and cultural heritage, wage a rear-guard action against innovation wrought by the progressives. Issues such as abortion and euthanasia, homosexuality and the family, school prayer and other church and state conflicts lie at the heart of the culture wars. The stakes are extremely high and the struggle is fierce and bloody—and likely to become even more intense.
As Wolfe notes well, the stakes are extremely high and the conflict is extremely intense.
The most unfortunate fact of the matter is that in their “will to power” a distinct utopian view of culture, both sides have increasingly elevated their ideologies above their vision for humanity; and, in doing so, have nearly rent the social fabric of the culture in two.
Standing with the ominous seam ripper and the degraded fabric stainer are two strong men, each yanking opposite corners of the cultural fabric in a zero-sum combat to have it all to himself.
Finally, the simple and simultaneously extremely difficult solution is forthcoming in the next post. Be sure to subscribe to stay up with this series.
Leave a Reply