The Low church, its appeals, and its perils
Tackling a dangerous tendency harming Christianity
Having seen and gone to some Low church services in the past, whether with Baptists, the Reformed, or even Evangelicals, I cannot understand how someone with a Catholic or otherwise High Church background can find any appeal here. On average, of course, the people involved are very personable and affable, no doubt appealing to cafeteria Catholic types. However, something more dangerous lies beneath the surface. Unless otherwise stated, Protestants referred to in this article are Low Church ones.
Among the differences noticeable between these services and the Holy Mass is the personalist and subjectivist leanings involved. A lot of the chanting and singing are similar to what Collins calls interaction rituals, or what Leese calls exegetical bonding. Spandrell describes this phenomenon in simple terms1:
Get people together in a small room, make them read a book aloud in rhythmic extacy, make them sing some songs, denounce some scapegoat, lynch him together, and then get a communal drink while singing again. Wow, that was refreshing. Everybody likes partying, and communal high-pressure sessions are a staple of all religions, specially new sects. And that is because high-pressure rituals create belief. Some people can get themselves to belief with total sincerity just because they find it in their interest. But most people aren’t that evil, they need direct, concentrated social pressure to get themselves to believe in something. And that’s what rituals are for. Even if you had some doubts about the God-hood of Mao Zedong, after having a quick self-examination session with everybody shouting slogans for 2 hours straight, suddenly your brain has gone blank and all you know is that You Love Big Brother.
While this explanation comes from a different field and subject, it can be argued that it is relevant in being able to explain the specific appeal of these denominations (even those of the dumbed-down, megachurch variety) to the general public. In terms of the scapegoat being the repository of ire and scorn of a broader mass of people, while not in any way affirming the attendant notion of the scapegoat as a a false but convenient patsy, it is instructive to see how this manifests:
For the Maoist, the scapegoat is externalized, given the form of the nefarious kulak or landlord, and whose lynching is an actual physical process that often lead to torture and death for those unfortunate.
For the Catholic, the scapegoat is usually sin or the devil, and the emphasis on such commonly blends the two together, wherein sin becomes an external actor that your average man is duped or weak enough to fall prey to. The invocation to reject Satan and all of his works, the constant reminders to avoid temptation or the occasion of sin, and the institutional seriousness with which demonic possession is treated by the Church, all of these greatly contribute to an impression of sin as an external problem or agent impinging upon the rather unlucky and blameless man.
For the Protestant, the scapegoat is the self. Fire and brimstone preachers were never that common or popular in other parts of the world as they were in back in the day in America, and the devil as an external enemy does not figure as much in Protestant circles than as a personal failing (except for determined Charismatics or End Times boomer-heavy denominations, but young people are usually not defecting en masse to these groups anyway). The emphasis is subtle, but the Protestant ordeal of sin renders it as part of a subjectified narrative, wherein the sinful man is usually expected to come out of it as 'born again', after having made the prayer of acceptance of Jesus as your Lord and Savior. This approach de-emphasizes sin as less of a perennial opponent that seeks to imperil your soul at every turn, than as a problem of imperfect or defective assent on the part of the Christian. The born again man is supposed to have turned their life around in their acceptance of Christ, and so the only reason for sin to have made its way into their life is that the earlier acceptance had been faulty or insufficient. This, then, becomes reinternalized as part of the subjective narrative and would simply need yet another affirmation, or to the subject, what would now be a true and full acceptance of Christ.
The difference between the externalized and internalized process is how it affects those participating in it. Without active or energetic pressure, the externalized orientation is much more easily prone to dwindling and slumping, especially as the enemy can be reasoned or bargained with, or compartmentalized out of sight and out of mind. The internalized orientation is less prone to such slackening due to the narrower field that demands focus, namely, the self and the focus on one's actions and thoughts and makes it much easier to be circumspect and be attentive on such matters.
With active and energetic pressure, the situation is similarly different. Energetic externalized orientation is observable mostly in politics, barring some minor charismatic sects for Christians, wherein the previously mentioned Maoist example for deviationists, landlords, and the bourgeoisie is evident. Energetic internalized orientation is the preserve of Low Church Protestantism, from the intense (and often adapted or derived from popular culture) singing, chanting, and other worship practices (humorously derided at times for their content as effectively turning Jesus as your cool bro/best friend/boyfriend/daddy, sometimes all of which at once), the prevalent inclusion of born again narratives from converts, sermons that frequently focus on how the Scripture applies to 'you' (usually on the benefits of being born again, practical Prosperity Gospel types, or the rare fire and brimstone message), and most importantly, a tight-knit community of fellow motivated Christians to whom one is expected to influence or be influenced by in terms of Godly living. The environment is also an important factor here, given how these Protestants seem willing to hold services anywhere. The subjective orientation encourages a lack of uniformity in lieu of spontaneity, hence the utter lack and disregard of Low Church types for liturgy of any kind. Music and preaching caters to this dynamic, hence the laughable and sometimes deplorable material coming out from those in support of this, with sermons being indistinguishable from self-help and pop psychology interspersed with Scripture and music ripped straight from modern pop-country.
Contrast this with the relatively staid and solemn worship of Catholics (again, barring some minor charismatic communities) and High Church Protestants (of which some have been integrating certain Low Church practices, and whose doctrines are not part of the scope of this article). Indeed, Protestant renunciations of sins are more public and festive events that culminate in the acceptance prayer and are combined with celebratory prayers and singing by the congregation, to whom the born again Protestant is behooved to act in utmost propriety, or at least present themselves as such. In contrast, the Sacrament of Penance, or confession, to Catholics is a practice that is well-known for its mandate of secrecy and privacy, as well as for its less observably stringent requirements of invoking select prayers and the broad mandate of absolution to 'sin no more', entirely up to the actions and conscience of the penitent and without any implicit accountability on the part of others except for God Himself. All in all, this rather dampens the appeal of Catholicism and High Church types to those well-ensconced or are interested in the high-energy and high-pressure friendliness offered by the popular Protestant groups.
This does not come without its own drawbacks, which have their own potential political implications, which are rather pervasive culturally and not just confined to their own specific sects. This is in relation to the Protestant trope of the 'personal relationship' with Christ and the consequent divestment of the Christian from liturgy and the Sacraments. Having been subject to this exegetical bonding, in an environment where self-direction has become the new norm, makes orthodoxy and orthopraxy much less important when all you need is that personal bond between you and Christ. Not even the pastor has a strong authoritative position in this situation, and serves only as a guide, with whom disagreements with interpreting Scripture are possible and allowable, even if only limited (not that such disagreement would still be substantial given that his own priors are probably still informing the questioner's understanding of Protestant teaching, except in cases of open breaks and the formation of new breakaway sects).
While in the past, Protestants were able to weather this storm by explicit denominational allegiance, where being Baptist or Reformed effectively led you to commit to your pastor or church's teachings on various issues, the rise of non-denominational Churches, generic Christian messaging on modern social media, and the long-term effects of Church hopping encouraged by Protestantism itself, the Protestants are now effectively the victims of their own success as the subjective process itself continues to be replicated and retooled consistently within their own movement while also slowly divesting themselves of any of the divisive doctrinal (and increasingly political) issues that may drive away potential converts. The modern Protestant attitude of having a relationship with God independent of any (institutional) religion, usually underpinned by a skepticism or cynicism over the actions of individual pastors or church leaders, is but an inevitable development in this situation.
In this stage, pastors would do well to downplay their own role in the organization in lieu of emphasizing the situation of the believers themselves (what God can be/do for them once they have accepted Him), and simply focus on maintaining a stable feedback loop of the energetic internalized orientation from among their followers. Hewing closely to the social and cultural mainstream to minimize the loss of followers, pastors can indirectly influence these adherents towards a race to signal their propriety and love for God, such as in open weeping or in dramatic displays of repentance and acceptance, or with more practical gestures of community outreach and generosity. It is important to note here that this process would tend to follow the path of least resistance, avoiding any potential topics that may cause external scrutiny or criticism. By emphasizing a seemingly back-to-basics approach to Christianity, and eschewing these controversial ideals as the outgrowth of man-made doctrines (a now generalized criticism ironically hearkening back to Reformation charges against Catholicism), church leaders can institute their own form of internally-oriented Chrstianity tailored for the broadest mass appeal while also open to co-optation or cooperation with progressive subversion.
This tendency, which we could call Tactical Universalism, focuses on the sins and failings of man which are broadly consistent with historic Christianity, human experience, alongside the prevailing zeitgeist, while also utilizing the staunchly effective practices of energetic internalized orientation to reach others and make converts. The tendency is tactical, in terms of it being selective in its application and not holding any broader consistency aside from the calculated balance between mass appeal and tentative connections with actual Christianity, while it is universalist due to its eschewing of exclusivity or appearance thereof with respect to other strands of the Protestantism that it emerged from.
By de-emphasizing singular pastors and personalities, the tendency leaves open the possibility of developing institutions to be more resilient and with less explicit points of failure. By de-emphasizing singular churches or denominations, it makes it possible to affect both individuals and groups by not posing an explicit challenge of changing affiliation (a Christianity with 'no labels' as some could claim), with the added bonus of its propaganda being able to enter and permeate even established denominations given its broad, generic appeal of its innocuous and non-exclusivist messaging. In speaking quietly or meekly on controversial political issues, usually those held in explicit teaching and strong conviction by other denominations (such as abortion, euthanasia, gay marriage, economic issues, or war and peace), it can garner adherents from those undecided or leaning in a liberal direction.
In speaking strongly then, usually moving towards liberal Christianity for established denominations or non-denominationalism for individuals, the tendency can garner adherents from those following a similar line of thinking or by the influence of sympathetic figures in the establishment leading people to such groups. The net effect here is the diminution of traditional, historic, and institutional Christianity in favor of a loose and easily manipulable manifestation that can easily devolve even further towards full Unitarian Universalism in practice absent a definitive or delimiting theory or canon.
Denominational Churches are also affected in terms of internal competition, wherein the constraints of the broader cultural environment could drive people towards Tactical Universalism and push for its enactment within the confines of the Church, usually in the form of renouncing what would be deemed as discriminatory or non-inclusive practices or teachings, such that even if direct adherents of such are scarce, moderate factions would emerge within the Church to begin moving it in such a direction, whether driven by the aforementioned environment or by the direct influence or inspiration of those sympathetic to such tendencies (such as liberalized Christians or agreeable non-believers).
The seemingly harmless appeals and practices of the Low Church will end up an avenue for Christianity’s further subversion, and the disaffected faithful’s misleading. This does not mean that Catholicism or other mainstream denominations are free from these kinds of problems. Indeed, they even partake in such errors sometimes, whether for the ‘need’ to ‘modernize’ or to ‘reach out’ in ‘culturally relevant’ ways to their own flock, not to mention problems with corruption and other institutionally specific problems beyond this article’s scopes. The discerning Christian should heed these problems act accordingly if one seeks to uphold the line of traditional, historic, and apostolic Christianity, and also to stop harm to their own souls and others’.
https://bioleninism.wordpress.com/2015/02/19/explaining-the-cultural-revolution-signalling-arms-races-as-bad-fiat-currency/
 | A guest post by
|