In Sunday’s NYT column, Ross Douthat uses Christmas as a jumping-off point to argue that: (a) Christianity is more pervasive in our lives, and our values, then we realize; and (b) you can’t ultimately accept Christian ethics without embracing its dogmas and metaphysics. Is he right?
On (a), yes; it’s an argument I’ve made many times before. You need to be leery of the notion that Christianity, with its emphasis on the value of each human life, is a buffer against totalitarianism, however; after all, Orthodox Russia and Protestant/Catholic Germany both turned into totalitarian states. In addition, while religious ideas of equality inspired the Abolitionists and the Civil Rights Movement, the conservative opponents of both were committed Christians, too. Finally, of course, there is the overwhelming evangelical support for Trump. Being a Christian does not, by itself, put you on the right side of history, or even any debate about equality.
On (b), no, partly because different Christian groupings have wildly different ideas about both dogma and metaphysics. Are we talking about the side which believes in an infallible pope, transubstantiation, and the power of saints, or the side that doesn’t? There is no single orthodox position accepted by both.
Christmas is a perfect example of how ideas can become unmoored from their origins and still work. For most people, Christmas has lost its religious significance; it is now a day, like Chinese New Year, to escape the tyranny of commonplace concerns and to reconnect with family and the past. It works just fine that way. It’s still going strong, and will for the foreseeable future.
Merry Christmas!