This was interesting; I'd long sensed a difference between the conservative/fundamentalist Christianity I grew up in and the Christianity of some of my teachers who were more influenced by the likes of Lewis and Tolkein. Fundamentalists seem to take "be in the world, but not of the world" in the most literal of senses (i.e. don't live in a commune in the desert, but only consume Christian books/music/movies/culture). I'm curious--was abortion the only issue that drove the split of Christianity into it's 'separate but equal' public? I'm far too young to have experienced this firsthand, and as I understand it homosexuality only really became a public issue in the 80s and 90s.
Not sure exactly what you mean by this. Regarding abortion, I'd say not. It was definitely important to what you might call the traditional Christian intellectual, but so were homosexuality (sometimes), the rise in what I might charmingly call 'free love' -- and most crucially, arguments about what marriage should be.Christianity into it's 'separate but equal' public?
The article talks about this--basically, the shift from mainstream US culture containing writing/music/art from people who are Christian to the development of Christian publishing houses, bands, movies, etc. I can see this; my parents' church harps on about divorce rates and has excommunicated at least one person for 'living in sin', which did somehow involve divorce... In addition, a lot of people find that being feminist and being pro-life, or being feminist and opposing divorce, are mutually exclusive and thus it would be easy for anyone wanting to hold the latter positions (pro-life, anti-divorce) to be forced out of the liberal cultural conversation. Once that happens, I suppose most people end up feeling more welcome amongst traditionalist/conservative groups, and that slight selective pressure compounds over the years into the weird social mess we have today. (I'm not sure what my point is here other than trying to understand how Christianity got to where it is.)Not sure exactly what you mean by this.
most crucially, arguments about what marriage should be
Sort of, yeah. And the parable of Richard John Neuhaus illustrates that intelligent Christians had to choose -- buy into liberal orthodoxy regarding abortion, etc, (even while disagreeing completely with subcamps, e.g., atheists) or lose their voice entirely. That combined with other important factors is probably the answer behind the decline referenced in the title.In addition, a lot of people find that being feminist and being pro-life, or being feminist and opposing divorce, are mutually exclusive and thus it would be easy for anyone wanting to hold the latter positions (pro-life, anti-divorce) to be forced out of the liberal cultural conversation. Once that happens, I suppose most people end up feeling more welcome amongst traditionalist/conservative groups, and that slight selective pressure compounds over the years into the weird social mess we have today.