It may surprise many but all my talk about the ‘ecumenism’ and ‘Muscular Christianity’ is not actually new, these are things that have emerged within the body before; and I am often (certainly with my ecumenism) accused of things, that are more appropriate to what I would like to term the ‘old ecumenism’. So forgive me I pray if I write a slightly self indulgent article; to explore the contrasts and some of the similarities; between the ‘old and new’ in terms of ecumenism and a muscular Christianity.
So lets start by talking about the old ecumenism; which has found its form today in what is called the ‘world council of churches’. This group had its origins in the 1910 world missionary conference; which was born in response to the late missionary surge of the Catholic Church; and the recognised need of vast unreached people groups; brought home to western protestants, because of the colonial empires. This group, which embodied more than a 100 churches (all protestant; most reformed) voted in 1938 to form the World Council of Churches; groups which had emerged between 1910 and 1938 like ‘Life and Work’ and ‘Faith and Order’; groups dedicated to exploring ways that Christians can live, work and worship together; were absorbed into the world council of Churches. The WCC gave birth to a university of sorts in Switzerland, which specialises in the study of ecumenism and ecumenical exploration. Also the Commission of the Churches in International Affairs; a body which supposedly speaks into international concerns with a collective voice of the churches. Naturally the Council got involved in the politics of the day – providing a forum for east west discussion during the cold war; it opposed apartheid in South Africa; and played a role in cultivating ‘evangelism’ and ‘alms’ work around the world. The WCC of churches has hundreds of affiliated Churches, mostly Protestant; but with many Orthodox churches as well. The RCC has cordial relations with the WCC, often sending delegates to its meetings.
The world council of churches approach is leadership based; and very sadly, like much of the Church, as we have often opined on this blog are more formed by the Enlightenment; that by the Apostles teachings. The limitations of the WCC broadly reflect that of the wider body of Christ; in their acceptance of and commitment to Liberalism; and the religion of Humanity; and this permeates the group and all of its activities. The focus today of the WCC is for some examples; on the following:
Church and ecumenical relations: this is a series of meetings, papers and statements trying to explore Christian unity and offering common Christian positions on matters of common concern. Studying the and Praying together. Empowering women particularly across Africa to church leadership. They seek ‘combat’ climate change, social injustice and scourge of war; through ‘walking together’ on a ‘pilgrimage of peace’. They seek to speak up for ‘indiginous’ people across the world.
Nearly all of its ‘activity’ is ‘educational’ and reflective; it would not be unfair; to call it a giant talking shop and an echo chamber; whose concerns; are those framed with the progressive liberal mainstream.
Is that what I mean by the ‘new ecumenism’; no, certainly not! The new ecumenical movement; is a lay movement; very few Church leaders subscribe to it; but many lay Christians – those in the pew – agree with it. It is not an institution, rather a movement; and its concerns are based on the following matrix.
What threatens Christian values and beliefs in society; whether Liberal Progressive militancy; or the militancy intrinsic to Islam; with incumbent oppression of Christians; or the threats of Marxist or ethno-nationalist ideology. The new ecumenism – recognises that the Church has real enemies; who seek to harm the Church and hamper her work; and calls Christians to unite; from a purely practical position; in the face of such enemies, to overcome them. It seeks to stand up against cultural or political projects that are directly opposed to Christians values and beliefs, like abortion, or trans ideology; or a liberal framing of multi-culturalism; or xenophobia or racism! The new ecumenist; is not concerned with institutional unity; but rather, unity on the field of battle in the culture war!
The new ecumenism emphasises activism over discussion; we are not concerned with an endless cycle of discussions; but rather principled political activism connected to the axiom of overcoming the enemies of the Church; and the Christianisation of society. We do not deny that their are real differences between us; and we do not pretend that their are real issues to debate and discuss; but we find such discussions on say our understanding of the sacraments; as of secondary importance to either; the concern of preventing the spread of Sharia law, or reversing, the cult of self’s grip over culture today; and those doctrines that unite us as Christians.
The new ecumenist does not seek dogmatic unity; but accepts the reality of differences between us; valuing, more instead all that unites, over all that divides, and works with charity and compassion; and love to cover the distance; between brethren on these matters, whilst not breaking ranks with one another in the face of common threats. Thus we do not seek a reconciled view on say the sacraments; we hold our differences, in tension with our love for one as is, whilst seeking to encourage one another in being disciples of Christ; and any such discussions as occur between us, is done with the belief; that such issues of difference are not salvific issues.
We require nothing more for our doctrinal unity, than belief in the plain reading of the Nicene Creed; with or without the filioque; and with whatever understanding of baptism is held by the one reading it. It would be fair to say our unity is the ‘simple Christianity’ of Dr William Lane Craig and C.S Lewis. We vehemently reject those that seek to pit Christian against Christian; as profoundly poor in judgement at best; and at worst; disciple of Satan; the accuser of the brethren! We seek deliberately to emphasis all that is in common, or can be held in common with some creative tension. We are happy to work together in common cause outside of the formal structures of our denominations; in ‘secular’ groupings whether, they be purely relational or institutional.
We reject – hijacking of the World Council of Churches, to the Liberal Progressive agenda; and instead – fix our eyes on a vision of society; that could broadly be termed: a new Christendom; ours is a unity based on the desire to see a Christian nation and confederacy of nations working together to embody in law, culture; economics, arts and society; Christian values, beliefs and practices; borrowing from the history of the Church in local cultures; to help make such things real. We reject consciously the religion of humanity, and the cult of self; and its influence; on the old ecumenism.
So what then of Muscular Christianity; what was the old Muscular Christianity; if I can now speak of the new Muscular Christianity. I should point out here, that when I started speaking of ‘muscular Christianity’ I had no idea that others had framed it before; and my intellectual project; and anything that forms out of it; is in no way the fruit of the old Muscular Christianity. We simply share a phrase in common; and have synergy in some aspects; quite accidentally. The old and new share no relationship.
The Old Muscular Christianity – emerged as a protestant movement around the 1850s; it emphasised patriotism, physical athleticism, self discipline and self sacrifice. It was a protestant spirituality; one could think of it as update on the code of chivalry, for the modern man; now the time of the knight was over! It flourished in the Victorian Public School system; and was about spiritual formation; coupled with physical formation; to produce the kind of man – suited to how Victorian England saw itself. Theodore Roosevelt, was said to have been raised in a home that consciously practice this spiritual formation; and authors like: Charles Kingsley and Ralph Connor and Thomas Hughes; have been associated with it. It built upon – and took probably too literally the Apostles Paul’s reference – the Athlete pummelling the body to be fit to run the race and win crown; however, it embraced the Renaissances humanism; and gave value to the aesthetics of pagan Roman culture; and the idea of the ‘ideal’ physical frame. The school of thought was simple; physcial discipline, leads to spiritual discipline; and physical sports, especially team sports – was a way of cultivating Christian discipline and practice and values. It was an attempt to frame a masculine spirituality; within the framework of a modern liberal nation state.
The new muscular Christianity contrasts, in that – it is more about ideological purposes – the establishment of a new Christendom; the defeat of the enemies of the Church; more than a spirituality of formation of what it is to be a Christian man. We owe more to Francis Schaeffer, R J Rushdoony; and Gustavo Gutierrez; and Catholic Integralism; than any author of the old muscular Christianity. It is true, that because we believe that we should confront the enemies of the Church – on whatever field they choose to bring the battle to us – that we do appeal also to a masculine spirituality; and that does seek to combine martial disciplines; and physical fitness to clear ideological goals. We seek to embody a Christianity, unfiltered by the Enlightenment; our patriotism – is to mother church alone; the people of GOD; the body of Christ; wherever she is in the world! We do believe that men should be formed – in virtue, and physique, but not because we esteem the physical form; but out of necessity of being able to defend the faith and the Church. We emphasise holy suffering, more than any ideal of the body. We emphasise; mental astuteness and being deeply rooted in the faith through knowledge over being physically active – but we do encourage the latter as much as possible.
The Church is a body of people – not an institution; and as such; it needs to mould itself to the needs that it faces from age to age. The collapse and death of all the Christendoms of the world; has meant that the people of GOD have no state protector or backer; we have increased hostility and no haven; and as such; we must work together to re-establish the connection between the Christian faith and the state (preferably multiple states at the same time) or some other model of social governance. The persecution of Christians requires greater solidarity amongst Christians of all denominations; and a much more spiritually and physically robust formation of the Christian man. Therefore, we seek a modernised revival of the chivalric code; not as in the past; to warrior brutes, into gentile knights of the cross; but to turn weak and cowardly Christians into gentile warriors of the cross. We want the Church to be known by all; as the group in society; who does not start trouble; but with whom, you should not seek to start trouble – as it would be too costly to do so!
So in closing – I invite you to embody these two ideals – a new ecumenism, with a new muscular Christianity; and work for a new Christendom!
