In defense of religion

by Markham on 2 September 2010

It’s Thursday, and that means it’s time for a life insurance post!  Here’s hoping I get around to that, but first, it’s education time.  This is an age of popular iconoclasm; and if you’re like me, a few words in defense of Christianity (and religion in general) are refreshing, so let’s get to it.  Here’s a popular sentiment of the sort which I would see discredity:

One has only to point to the early dark ages for evidence that Christianity was a decaying influence.  The Western Roman Empire descended into an intellectual, cultural, and ethical morass, whereas the Byzantines were better off and the Muslims downright upright.

I do not challenge recorded history but rather the assertion that today’s college-graduated iconoclasts are even passably familiar with recorded history.

The decline of American higher education

Yes, they have certificates from top universities, but in spite of the advancing leaps of the information age, the rigors required to obtain such certificates have declined sharply.  Although one of the U.S.’s top exports is higher education, we had better not pride ourselves too highly on it; predating the information age by a couple of decades came a social push for the majority of Americans to seek higher education.  College loans became more accessible—so accessible, in fact, that the number of graduates coming out of colleges overwhelmed the market of education-requiring jobs, leaving many with loans that they couldn’t pay off.

In response to the increased demand for college education, we got a lot of new colleges and universities.  It’s no surprise that we’d see an increase in educational institutions as our nation’s wealth increased, but the numbers are a little steep between 1970 and 1990.  We went from 2,558 institutions of higher learning to 3,559.[1] That’s an increase of 40% in 20 years!  That rate equates roughly to an increase of 50% in one generation (25 yrs).

Has the quality of our educational experience likewise improved 50%?  I didn’t go to school before the 70’s, but I have researched American pedagogy and classroom culture, and my conclusion is: no.

So, formally educated Americans can tell you who Richard Dawkins is.  They can tell you that the Crusades were something violent that somehow involved Christians a long time ago.  But they can’t tell you who Alexius Comnenus or Pope Urban II was, and that should be a red flag.

Spain wasn’t the only place of peaceful coexistence

For those of you interested in the foregoing names, here are the details off the top of my head (not having re-researched): The Greek empire had had a lousy turnover of emperors in recent decades.  (The last handful had had reigns averaging less than ten years, if memory serves.)  The Greek military forces were depleted due to recent conflicts with the Seljuks.  Alexius Comnenus (Alexios Komnenos), the latest Greek emperor, appealed to the Western powers to help solidify his authority in the East.

Theretofore, the papacy had enjoyed only a minimal degree of political power, and Pope Urban II saw an opportunity to assert the Latin church as a universal authority over all of the kingdoms of the West.  No, he didn’t immediately appeal to all of the kingdoms of the west but rather only to the Franks (being a Frenchman, himself).  This was the start of the First Crusade.  The Crusaders took the Holy Land and established what is known as the Kingdom of Jerusalem (whose first or second king was Fulk V of the Plantagenet line, the great-great-great grandfather of Richard the Lionheart and his brother Prince John of Anjou, prominent characters in the legends of Robin Hood).

Modern politics has opened the minds of some to the fact that Spain provided a place of peaceful religious coexistence whilst under Moorish rule during the dark ages.  However, the Kingdom of Jerusalem, though vied over on-and-off by foreign armies for the next… well, even until present day, being the coveted land it is—anyway, when held by the Christians and not at war, it was a place of peaceful coexistence for the three religions “of the book” (as our Moslem brethren might say).

Christianity vs. Christendom

Defining Christianity by the bloody events of the Crusades and the sometimes concomitant persecution of the Jews is similar to defining Islam by the acts of the Muslim terrorists.  When the formally-educated are compelled to distinguish between Christianity and Christendom, the case for maligning the former is diaphanous at best.  …Yeah, I guess I didn’t really address that point, but now that your interest is piqued, go out and do some research.  I have to get working on the ISU site.


[1] http://www2.census.gov/prod2/statcomp/documents/1994-03.pdf page 32/144

Delicious

{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }

That Intern Guy September 2, 2010 at 2:04 pm

>>insert clever comment here< <

Jonathan September 2, 2010 at 6:11 pm

I’m jealous of That Intern Guy. He gave a far better comment than I could.

Neat article.

Edwin September 2, 2010 at 8:18 pm

Very good article! I have personally found and agree with the history revisionist line of thought in this aspect. Voltair, Mozart, Weishaupt, etc. were only the products of the Religious (specifically the 3 religions that spawned from Abraham)hating groups that they joined. Those groups were administered over by brothers of the self appointed Rosy Cross, who ardently showed their desire for the destruction of the aforementioned religions. With many of the worlds greatest leaders and intellectuals being adepts, students, and apprentices to such men of the same or similar groups, is there any wonder for the modern day religious animosity felt within the children and followers of Abraham?

Luther September 3, 2010 at 10:18 am

The increase of schools of higher education needs to be offset by the increase in population generally. In the 1970–1990 time it increased only 13.7%; I get the same number if I look at only the age 18–24 population, though they changed how they report the numbers in that time so I might be a bit off.

Markham September 3, 2010 at 12:44 pm

Ack! A crucial point. I suppose that those people attending college during the 70s would be the end of the baby boomers, so we’d expect a substantial population increase at that point.

That Intern Guy September 3, 2010 at 4:44 pm

@Jonathan, thanks for the compliment.

I was tempted to travel back to 1982 to preemptively quote somebody from the future, but sadly, Fry’s hasn’t gotten back to me on a replacement part that I need. So, nowadays, I’m stuck leaving my own comments.

Richard Hughes September 3, 2010 at 11:12 pm

Defending Christianity is one thing. Redefining it is another. Religion, all religion, begins with a seek, a prophet, a poet. But it ends up with a policeman – a Savarola or a Benedict.

Leave a Comment