cryptoGnosticism Part I

I am going to take the opportunity here to continue a discussion in which I was involved on the blog of my friend Jeff Cagle. Jeff has been involved with another blogger in a discussion concerning Catholicism, Calvinism, and Gnosticism. The discussion began ( I have been but a microscopic part of it) when it was suggested that Presbyterians cannot escape a Gnostic mentality if they reject the magisterial authority of Rome. I really was not involved in that larger discussion. I became involved when Jeff said that "'Gnostic mentality' is entirely out of place as a description of Presbyterians. Whatever faults we may have, Gnosticism isn't one." I generally support Jeff in the larger discussion, but I felt that this statement might not entirely be true. Whereas I don't believe that Presbyterians are gnostic in their rejection of Rome, I did suggest that there is a subconscious gnostic mentality that seems to be present in Presbyterian thought and action. Jeff, who did not grow up in the PCA, asked more about what he called "cryptoGnosticism." I said that despite having memorized many aspects of Calvinistic theology, such as TULIP or some questions from the WSC, I did not at all realize the impetus to cultural and historical involvement present in Calvinism and emphasized by the Dutch. I suggested that rather I was taught to distrust my body, the earth, and its inhabitants. Jeff asked how this inconsistency might have evolved. In particular, he asked if I thought it might be as a result of Revivalism, as a reaction against something, or another reason. I told him I would try to answer on my own blog, so here I go. I imagine that this cannot be properly answered without a more formal academic examination. I do not meant to go about answering his questions as anything close to that. Rather, I want to share primarily with him my initial thoughts on the matter in hopes of provoking some more conversation. I mean to answer this in parts. one more thought before I begin, I can only speak for the reformed Presbyterian movement, particularly the Presbyterian Church in America. I simply do not have enough exposure to other Presbyterian groups to be able to make the claims about them.

Part I will deal with the question of Revivalism. As far as Revivalism goes, I want to deal more with Finney and G.A. II and sidestep Whitefield, Edwards, and GAI. It is possible that the revivalism of Edwards and Whitefield was not as different from Finney as has been handed down. Because of its place in history though, I don't think that the 1st GA was as formative in the development of contemporary American society.

I believe that Finney as well as other preachers of the 2nd GA. had a tremendous shaping force on American thought and action. In his essay "What a Revival of Religion Is" Finney argues that the emotion must be aroused in order to elicit a conversion. He says

They must be so excited that they will break over these counteracting influences, before they will obey God... The will is, in a sense, enslaved by the carnal and worldly desires. Hence it is necessary to awaken men to a sense of guilt and danger, and thus produce an excitement of counter feeling and desire which will break the power of carnal and worldly desire and leave the will free to obey God.

This message came along at an interesting time in history (the 2nd G.A.. was approximately the first 30 years of the 19th Century). The United States was in the early stages of its own Industrial Revolution. The next century would see political freedoms and civil liberties come to a majority of Americans. The population was exploding. The end of the war of 1812 brought the US its first true sense of national unity. The presidencies of Jefferson and Jackson brought decision making closer to the common man than ever before. Needless to say, it was a very transitional time. The fact that his message was so widely received (as many as 1/3 of Americans professed a conversion during this time) at the dawn of this time period certainly left a mark. For example, the social reforms that followed the movement helped lead to the abolitionist movement which at least in part helped end slavery. I would argue that as a result of this, American Christianity was being democratized along with society.

The fact that this movement came at a crossroads with American industrialization is also noteworthy. American society was completely transformed by industrialism. Two ways in which this is true had a strong impact on American Christianity. The first is the development of the consumer-based economy in a free society. This inevitably gave rise to marketing. Christianity had to compete for people's time, money, and affections with other products and services. Churches also had to compete with one another. Whereas in the past this may have led to a church emphasizing its uniqueness, today differences are downplayed. The emergence of enormous "non-denominational" churches, as well as the benign label of "church" used by the denominationally-affiliated, are evidence of this. As attendance dropped at a church I used to attend, they hired a strategic planning firm to help chart a course for the future. I think that meant they wanted to put butts in the seats. Finney's fingerprints are all over this.

The second way is the rapid development of technology. Particularly relevant to Christianity is communications technology. This makes it possible to communicate quickly with an enormous audience. This development ties in essentially with the fast pace of contemporary American society. Now the competition for time, money, and affection is joined by that for our attention. If Finney would have had satellite t.v. and internet, it would have been that much easier for him to "awaken" and "excite." Given the methods of today's mass-marketers, his words sound almost prophetic.

So what does this have to do with Presbyterians and Gnosticism? Finneyan revivalism replaced a rational,discipled-centered conversion experience with an emotionally manipulated high. The progress of American history extended this type of sales pitch to many other social entities, such as politics and consumerism. Faith shaped marketing and marketing shaped faith. As globalized culture replaces much of regional culture, something similar is happening to Christianity. Churches need to be stream-lined and accessible if they want to survive. This does not explain how cryptoGnosticism has developed specifically within the Presbyterian movement though. That is because it is not because of Finney alone. It merely is one step in the process.

This is all very jumbled and sloppy. I feel honestly like it is academically irresponsible. I would rather sit down and write these thoughts out in a more appropriate fashion. I mostly am just trying to answer Jeff off the top of my head. In part II I will discuss how the influence of Finney and the rest of the 2nd G.A. set Presbyterians up for the development of gross inconsistencies within its ranks.