The mainstream media seems to be overwhelmingly comprised of secularists. Why does the mainstream media so often explicitly and implicitly mock faith, especially Christian faith?
The only way to understand the secular media mentality is to understand the secular mentality.
There is a great divide between the primarily secular humanistic viewpoint and that of any religious view. Secularism and religion will almost always be at odds with one another (unless they intersect in a religion like Unitarianism) because the presuppositions are fundamentally different.
The picture is also a lot more complicated than the American attention deficit culture is willing to examine or even put up with. Those of the mainstream media with a secular mindset tend to gravely oversimplify religion, whatever that religion may be.
Here are some presuppositions of that secular mindset as they seem. I will lay them out here, but I wish to clarify that this is not at all what I personally believe (and for the highly impressionable, I don’t recommend putting any of the secularist’s ideas into personal practice).
1. Evolution and a materialistic mindset tend to be the underlying framework for secularism.*
2. The overwhelming principle here is that since we all come from a single-celled or other simple organism way back, and this totally by chance, so that any kind of religion—unless it involves worshipping the achievements of mankind, or glorifying nature—is patently false.
3. Hence, there is not any reason to study or understand any kind of religion, because it is all a waste of time.
4. From there, it should follow that it doesn’t matter what you do, because anything goes. There is nothing that a person could do that would really be seen as wrong in this mindset. That is why “tolerance” should abound above all characteristics, according to this mindset. (If you want to cheat on your spouse this mindset says go ahead. In fact, this mindset continues, why get married anyway, because it’s meaningless. And if you want to have a relationship with an animal—can you say, revolting?—then it shouldn’t matter.) Here there will be a tendency not at all to care what people do. It’s their business (but watch out for rule #6!).
5. It is somewhat of an offense to this mindset to be religious, because what most religion generally holds valuable shouldn’t exist. (Secularism allows an exception: if your religion accepts these rules, then your religion can be tolerated.)
6. However, it is an even greater offense that one should belong to a religion with a moral code that interferes with rule #4.
[*Evolution is passed off as “science” but it is really a kind of philosophical or pseudo-theological framework. In reality, there are many scientists who reject Evolution (in the present and in past history). But that’s another topic which I have discussed in various other columns.]
The intention here is not to belittle secularists who believe these things, but to explain their thinking. This also explains why the mainstream media always tends to get up in arms when anyone objects to homosexual “marriage”, when someone makes a derogatory remark about homosexuals, or when anyone objects to the practice of abortion.
For most of American culture though, not just any religion, but truly Christianity has had a profound influence on the history of the United States (whether or not secularists like this). There are thousands of religions, and thousands of “denominations” within various religions, but it is Christianity that secularism really has a beef with, because Christianity—except when Christians compromise—breaks all of secularism’s cardinal rules.
Christian theology is much more complex than the secular dogmas I have described above. It won’t be possible to lay out every nuance and detail, so I’ll try and describe the most basic principles.
Christianity holds that:
1. God is the Creator of all things, including the things of the universe, and of course, humans.
2. Sin came into the world when the first man and woman sinned.
3. God has laid out a code by which all humans are to live by. To go against that code—a code epitomized by the Ten Commandments—is to sin.
4. Because man could not fully live up to that code, it was required that all people needed a Redeemer.
5. That Redeemer came into human flesh to pay the price for all sin by dying on a cross.
6. While the Redeemer was laid in a tomb, He did not stay there, but was resurrected.
7. The Redeemer, who Christians understand to be Jesus Christ, has died for all—yes, even the secularists—however, He desires that all should come to knowledge of Him and be saved.
8. There will come a day when Christ will return to judge the living and the dead, so that those who have believed will enter into heaven and those who have not will face eternal punishment.
“Sin”, “right and wrong”, “good and evil” are important concepts to understanding Christianity. To the secularist, these things don’t necessarily exist. This is probably the most fundamental reason the two are always at odds.
This understanding of the life as we know it is completely offensive to the secularist. However, there will be some secularists who may completely disagree with the Christian viewpoint, but at least have a respect for those who hold it. These will be secularists who have constructed some sort of morality for themselves. They might even agree that in practice many of the Ten Commandments hold universal principles which men should follow whether or not they believe. To this kind of secularist, following such a code might even be seen as following a code of chivalry or a code of honor. They carry it out by principle.
Unfortunately though, such a secular moral construct is a pseudo-morality, for if one doesn’t believe in God, there would be no foundation even for the principles of the Ten-Commandments. This is where American society completely goes astray, for it becomes increasingly easy, even acceptable to break the “traditional” rules, because secularism says it doesn’t really matter in the first place.
On the other side there are Christians who fudge on things and compromise by saying, “Well, we were created, but God did it through Evolution.” Those who hold to this understanding don’t understand the nature of either Evolution or Christianity. The secularists who hold to an evolutionary mindset might outwardly call such Christians “progressive” but inwardly will probably secretly (or not so secretly) tend to think this person is an idiot by being religious in the first place.
The Christian can be reasonably secure not compromising on the Evolution issue at all, because there is much evidence to suggest that Evolution is patently false itself.
In the end, to the secular mindset, Christianity is often the greatest threat to “American” culture. Unfortunately, this is perhaps also to be expected, because there are in many respects two facets to American culture, based on the idea of a separation of the church and the state. This is not to say that the two are mutually exclusive in that you can’t pray in a public school, but over the past two-hundred years, there has been a tradition of secularists tolerating Christianity going about its business, even if those who were secularists did not believe (in fact, many of them believed in some sort of creator, but did not believe as Christians do). Two hundred years ago the idea of Evolution had not been invented, though most if not all the grains of thought were there. Evolution carried to its further extent threw any toleration for religion, especially Christianity out the window. Carried to its furthest extent the ideas of Evolution have brought forth the most despicable social doctrines and menaces (though according to this mindset “wrong” is a non-existent term when Evolution is applied and followed as a framework for one’s actions). –Cal Samuel August
Mary Grabar in her “Letter to a Stupid Atheist” has a pretty biting critique for the secular viewpoint. I am a Christian, and while I generally do not think it persuasive to call an atheist names—she is doing it to make a rhetorical point—her article’s critique of the secular viewpoint is well worth reading. Check it out:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/MaryGrabar/2007/02/18/letter_to_a_stupid_atheist
Hey,
I just thought you’d like to know that your editorial per The Capitol News, entitled: “A Collision Course With History” has more comments posted to it than any other content in the Editorial category on The Capitol News Web site. Currently, there are eight posts to your Opinion piece. You should check it out and possibly post yourself. I’m sure the “locals” would love it.
Here’s hoping I see you on-line, Cal.
Santiago