Clean-cut Christianity? The new heresy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Qoeleth
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Q

Qoeleth

Guest
At a class in a government school, kids were asked, “What is a Christian?” The FIRST answers were someone who doesn’t swear and doesn’t smoke. Look at Christian youth material- neatly dressed, middle class, smiling, with just the ‘right’ smattering of non-whites. No emos, no punks, no metalheads.

Have we got away from real Christianity? I mean the Christianity of the Desert Fathers and St. Francis? Has Christianity been reduced to middle-class “clean living” and optimism?

Jesus came for the outcasts, the ‘losers’, the rebels.

It worries me greatly…
 
It’s an interesting point, one that could be supported anecdotally by the onslaught of appropriate attire threads at CAF (occurring solely during warm weather months in the North America), of which many attempt to enforce a narrow interpretation of appropriate attire for the American (specifically, the affluent suburban) middle class.
 
I don’t see how the word “heresy” even remotely applies.
 
At a class in a government school, kids were asked, “What is a Christian?” The FIRST answers were someone who doesn’t swear and doesn’t smoke. Look at Christian youth material- neatly dressed, middle class, smiling, with just the ‘right’ smattering of non-whites. No emos, no punks, no metalheads.

Have we got away from real Christianity? I mean the Christianity of the Desert Fathers and St. Francis? Has Christianity been reduced to middle-class “clean living” and optimism?

Jesus came for the outcasts, the ‘losers’, the rebels.

It worries me greatly…
I agree that there is a lot of superficiality in what some Christians believe in what is expected of them.

I believe that individual Christians need to focus on their own sanctification and not allow themselves to become anxious about the rest. A peaceful, caring Christian can touch the hearts of others.
 
So dressing neatly, not smoking, and not using foul language is a “heresy” now? What you reported reflects some surface thoughts of a sample group, not a belief system. If it’s all the same, I’d just as soon not have youth-oriented Christian materials populated by tongue-pierced, stud-wearing goths in the supposed name of the “desert fathers.”
 
At a class in a government school, kids were asked, “What is a Christian?” The FIRST answers were someone who doesn’t swear and doesn’t smoke. Look at Christian youth material- neatly dressed, middle class, smiling, with just the ‘right’ smattering of non-whites. No emos, no punks, no metalheads.

Have we got away from real Christianity? I mean the Christianity of the Desert Fathers and St. Francis? Has Christianity been reduced to middle-class “clean living” and optimism?

Jesus came for the outcasts, the ‘losers’, the rebels.

It worries me greatly…
Well, the response from the students was poor, but the things you describe aren’t necessarily bad.
  1. Most people are considered “middle class”. So it would make sense a lot of Christians are middle class.
  2. Aren’t we as Christians supposed to be joyful (i.e smiling) and not to sin by swearing or doing drugs?
So I don’t see a problem with what you are describing. But maybe you are trying to address people being too lukewarm, which definitely IS a problem.
 
At a class in a government school, kids were asked, “What is a Christian?” The FIRST answers were someone who doesn’t swear and doesn’t smoke. Look at Christian youth material- neatly dressed, middle class, smiling, with just the ‘right’ smattering of non-whites. No emos, no punks, no metalheads.

Have we got away from real Christianity? I mean the Christianity of the Desert Fathers and St. Francis? Has Christianity been reduced to middle-class “clean living” and optimism?

Jesus came for the outcasts, the ‘losers’, the rebels.

It worries me greatly…
I agree. And while a lot of simplistic things have been said about this (by people citing Max Weber, for instance), I think the Reformation should get a lot of the blame.

But even long before that, there’s a “Roman” strand in Christianity that values order and clarity and authority, and there’s a crazy desert ascetic strand, as you note. We need both. The “clean-cut” stuff isn’t bad, but it’s not the essence of Christianity.

Edwin
 
At a class in a government school, kids were asked, “What is a Christian?” The FIRST answers were someone who doesn’t swear and doesn’t smoke. Look at Christian youth material- neatly dressed, middle class, smiling, with just the ‘right’ smattering of non-whites. No emos, no punks, no metalheads.

Have we got away from real Christianity? I mean the Christianity of the Desert Fathers and St. Francis? Has Christianity been reduced to middle-class “clean living” and optimism?

Jesus came for the outcasts, the ‘losers’, the rebels.

It worries me greatly…
I agree with you. I’d add that Churches are not for the saints…but the sinners. Just like a hospital is not for the healthy, but the sick.

Couple of things I’d like to point out though…
  1. the first answer is a bit superficial and at the very least, only looking at appearances and NOT spirituality or even the sincerity of the person. So I wouldn’t be too concerned with how Christian Youth material is portrayed, as it is mostly likely presented in a culturally biased and idealized form. - as nearly ALL marketing materials ARE.
  2. I don’t think that ANY serious Catholic believes that ALL Christian Youth look like clean-cut middle class causasian, westernized children in sweaters and dress pants. (or medium length skirts) When a face of Christian Youth or a representation needs to be made… those taking the photos, may choose to use their veiw of a perfect representation, but that doesn’t mean that is LITERALLY what ALL christians MUST look like.
  3. Is there ANY possibility that you may be taking it TOO SERIOUSLY? - I mean, was the point of the brochure, poster, pamplet, etc. to ACTUALLY portray EXACTLY what ALL Christian youth look like? or even supposed to look like? OR were they not even thinking about being demographically and politically accurate?
    I mean… what was the intent of the pictures you saw? - Was it to literally say “This is what you MUST look like to be Christian?” – I doubt it.
Again, it may be that you are misconstruing the reasons behind and assume that Christianity as a whole is closed off to emo, punk, grunge, or other styles or fashions when that is not actually the case.
  1. Could it even be the cultural bias of your specific REGION of the country? – I mean in California… most of the examples of Catholic Youth are Hispanic NOT causasian, nor particularly middle class. So could it be in YOUR region of your country, that the adults WANT children to look like white middleclass, sweater wearing clones of their parents.
    And therefore NOT how ALL of Catholicism expects children to look.
  2. You use the term “Christian” and not specifically “Catholic” – there are THOUSANDS of denominations of Christianity and in my experience the non-Catholic Christian communities are much LESS diverse and tend to be more homogenous or similar in how they look and dress. Could it be that whoever said that or whatever examples they were using were from a narrow sub-sect of Christianity?
These are ALL points you need to consider before feeling like Cathoilcism or Christianity deosn’t include other groups and fashion styles.
You need to question things even DEEPER then you are right now.
Because on the surface, it seems like you are making a lot of assumptions which may not hold true.
 
A Christian is someone who has received Christian Baptism. Conduct has nothing to do with being Christian (though it determines if you are a “good Christian” or a “bad Christian”).
 
Anyone who buys into that is obviously not familiar with the Apostles and the folks that Jesus hung out with in the Gospels.

Fishermen, tax collectors, revolutionaries, publicly known sinners, prostitutes, and the list can go on from there. In fact, Our Lord said, “Amen I say to you, that the publicans and the harlots shall go into the kingdom of God before you.” (Matthew 21:31)
 
At a class in a government school, kids were asked, “What is a Christian?” The FIRST answers were someone who doesn’t swear and doesn’t smoke. Look at Christian youth material- neatly dressed, middle class, smiling, with just the ‘right’ smattering of non-whites. No emos, no punks, no metalheads.

Have we got away from real Christianity? I mean the Christianity of the Desert Fathers and St. Francis? Has Christianity been reduced to middle-class “clean living” and optimism?

Jesus came for the outcasts, the ‘losers’, the rebels.

It worries me greatly…
shouldn’t the answer be a Christian is one who is baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy ghost and believes and follows Jesus Christ as the Son of God.
 
Well, the response from the students was poor, but the things you describe aren’t necessarily bad.
  1. Most people are considered “middle class”. So it would make sense a lot of Christians are middle class.
  2. Aren’t we as Christians supposed to be joyful (i.e smiling) and not to sin by swearing or doing drugs?
So I don’t see a problem with what you are describing. But maybe you are trying to address people being too lukewarm, which definitely IS a problem.
Yes. I don’t see that being ‘joyful’ is the best image. I mean, if kids see athiest bands and culture, which are prepared to express openly the darker side of life too- shouldn’t Christian material also do this. Traditional Christianity, in fact, fully recognises recognises the ‘dark side’ of life. The current emphasis on ‘the bright side’, could well alientate the emotionally disturbed, the depressed, the excluded, the cynical- which, in fact, is a good slab of people, who are in great need of Christianity.
 
Yes. I don’t see that being ‘joyful’ is the best image. I mean, if kids see athiest bands and culture, which are prepared to express openly the darker side of life too- shouldn’t Christian material also do this. Traditional Christianity, in fact, fully recognises recognises the ‘dark side’ of life. The current emphasis on ‘the bright side’, could well alientate the emotionally disturbed, the depressed, the excluded, the cynical- which, in fact, is a good slab of people, who are in great need of Christianity.
But, on the other side maybe those disturbed/depressed/excluded/cynical people will see the Christian’s joy and wonder what it is that makes them so dang happy. Good time for evangelization I say. 😉
 
But, on the other side maybe those disturbed/depressed/excluded/cynical people will see the Christian’s joy and wonder what it is that makes them so dang happy. Good time for evangelization I say. 😉
And supported by St. Peter’s 1st epistle where he says, “15] but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence;”
 
The problem here is the traditionalist movement and the liberal movement. Both are rooted in the Middle Class and up. They portray what I call the Mormon Catholic image. The truth is that if you ask anyone who is not a diocesan priest, but a religious sister, brother or a regular priest, we can tell you that the majority of Catholics are grubby looking, don’t have much by way of clothing, usually belong to minorities who live on the fringes of society, because of their poverty, not because of their morals.

Those of us who minister and live among them are just as unwelcome in the typical middle class Catholic community as they are.

I had the opportunity to attend a funeral of a dear friend at an SSPX chapel. I arrived in a sweaty grey clerical shirt that had stain on it and a hole on the front, with my grey jeans, and my while tab in my pocket instead of in the slot of my clerical shirt. I was bluntly told, “Father, you’re not appropriately dressed.”

First of all, I have a heart condition, leukemia and diabetes. Secondly, I’m a Franciscan of Life. We own three sets of clothes: a habit, a grey pair of jeans and a grey clerical shirt, because grey is our color, and a pair of work jeans and a t-shirt. Other than that we have three sets of underwear that we wear one, have dry one and another is in the wash.

Secondly, we have only one car for 16 of us. We cannot afford another car. Since I am the superior general, I’m not allowed to use the car. The car is for those whom I serve. As the servant of the community, I must walk, hitchhike or take public transportation, if I have the money.

That day, I waited for a bus. It was 90 degree and no bus was coming. Fearing that I would be late and miss my friend’s funeral, I began to walk the five miles. The bus finally passed and I got on for all of two miles. I then had to walk three blocks to the church. By that time, I had angina, my sugar was going crazy and I was sweating like a pig. I took off the tab on my Roman collar and slipped it into my pocket, with the intention of putting it on when I reached the chapel; but I forgot to do so. Don’t forget my clerical shirt with the stains and the hole on the front. It’s previous owner was a cigar smoker.

That was the greeting I received at this very Mormon looking Catholic chapel. I apologized for my appearance and explained that I was a Franciscan Brother of Life. That did not impress the greeter at the door, neither did the fact that I arrived when the Gospel was being read.

Those of us who are poor are not always welcome in certain Catholic circles. Yet, we make up the majority of Catholics around the world. Right now the majority of Catholics are South Americans and Africans. There are not many wealthy people among them. Even in the USA, the tide is turning. The Hispanic and Caribbean immigrants are becoming the dominant Catholic group and they are very poor. They are rarely seen in suburbia.

Is this a heresy? I wouldn’t go that far. Does it have the potential to become heresy? It certainly doe. Any form of rejection of the poor is a rejection of Christ himself.

The majority of white anglo Catholics in the USA don’t see these Catholics in their parishes. These folks can’t live in these communities. They probably don’t see too many Franciscans, Missionaries of the Poor, Little Brothers of the Good Shepherd, Missionaries of Charity or Oblates of Mary Immaculate either. We don’t go into your parishes or communities. That’s not where God wants us to be. We live in different worlds

That’s the problem, that we live in different worlds. The liberal and traditionalist Catholics are predominantly middle class and higher. They are the ones who put out these images of the “clean cut Catholic”, not because they hate the poor, but because they have not lived in poverty.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
 
We’re mixing up a whole bunch of issues here:
  1. Attending church dressed neatly does not equal middle class or rich. All one needs to do is look in the poorer neighborhoods of NYC and see those little black ladies dressed in their nice hats and dresses on the way to church. You can get all those clothes at thrift shops. (By the way, as an aside, Br. Jr, Caribbeans tend to do very well as they are hard workers and will either become more educated than their counterparts and so earn more or work two, three, or four jobs if necessary to have that little house in suburbia. Their children are high achievers.)
  2. Ripped up jeans does not equal poor. You can buy ripped jeans for $500 for a certain look.
  3. Traditionalist (the CAF underdog) does not equal rich. When I look around at my parish and at the local SSPX parish, I don’t see anyone strutting around looking rich. In fact, I see plenty of people who are doing worse than me. It all depends on the neighborhood you live in.
  4. Yes, your conduct should reflect your Christianity.
  5. Christ came for everyone, including the rich man.
  6. Being part of a subculture does not make you non Christian. However, some subcultures tend to be associated with a certain not so good lifestyle and if one is living that type of lifestyle, that lifestyle should change. Keep the purple hair and goth clothes if you want to.
It’s one thing to argue that one should be able to attend church as one wants to dress.

To say that dressing poorly is always associated with poverty is disingenuous.
 
Those of us who are poor are not always welcome in certain Catholic circles. Yet, we make up the majority of Catholics around the world. Right now the majority of Catholics are South Americans and Africans. There are not many wealthy people among them. Even in the USA, the tide is turning. The Hispanic and Caribbean immigrants are becoming the dominant Catholic group and they are very poor. They are rarely seen in suburbia.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, FFV 🙂
I think the hispanics have been sent to America by God to save the American Catholic Church from itself.

-Tim-
 
We’re mixing up a whole bunch of issues here:
  1. Attending church dressed neatly does not equal middle class or rich. All one needs to do is look in the poorer neighborhoods of NYC and see those little black ladies dressed in their nice hats and dresses on the way to church. You can get all those clothes at thrift shops. (By the way, as an aside, Br. Jr, Caribbeans tend to do very well as they are hard workers and will either become more educated than their counterparts and so earn more or work two, three, or four jobs if necessary to have that little house in suburbia. Their children are high achievers.)
  2. Ripped up jeans does not equal poor. You can buy ripped jeans for $500 for a certain look.
  3. Traditionalist (the CAF underdog) does not equal rich. When I look around at my parish and at the local SSPX parish, I don’t see anyone strutting around looking rich. In fact, I see plenty of people who are doing worse than me. It all depends on the neighborhood you live in.
  4. Yes, your conduct should reflect your Christianity.
  5. Christ came for everyone, including the rich man.
  6. Being part of a subculture does not make you non Christian. However, some subcultures tend to be associated with a certain not so good lifestyle and if one is living that type of lifestyle, that lifestyle should change. Keep the purple hair and goth clothes if you want to.
It’s one thing to argue that one should be able to attend church as one wants to dress.

To say that dressing poorly is always associated with poverty is disingenuous.
All completely correct statements.

Ask anyone from the Phillipines if we have poverty here. Be patient. When they finish laughing their butt off, they’ll tell you the truth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top