I haven't come up with a good way to explain my current thoughts on using formal language to define theological beliefs, so I will have to return to this in the near future (perhaps after some good conversation on the issue, anyone?) In the meantime enjoy the following thought experiment.
In the Year 2101 AD (give or take a few years)-
In the pursuit of its war on world terrorism, the United States discovered that, in addition to the Islamic states it had already fought, its onetime allies of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan had become central hubs for muslim terrorists. Pouring all of its resources into the conflict, as the country had not done since the Civil War, the United States succeeded in wresting civil government from the hands of Islam throughout the near eastern world. Victory was declared, and the influence of Islam over world events was reduced to a level unseen since the 10th century.
However, this was not the conquest of the West over Islam nor the last Crusade, as the US faced a heavy price. With the death toll of the war so high, great restrictions on freedoms central to the nation's charter, and the productive capacity of the US strained to support military activity, the US lost its once prestigious place as "the world's only superpower." On top of this, the eventual disassociation of most of the mainline Christian denominations from their world communions (for failure of US Churches to uphold the Christian tradition) further weakened the US's world influence.
By removing Pakistan from the world stage, the US opened the way for leaps of economic growth in India, which has now passed the US as one of the world's main economic players, and the most prosperous democracy in the world. Likewise, by staying out of the conflict Japan was able to rise beside India, building itself a reputation as the center for technological innovation in the world.
Perhaps more surprising is China, which after finally negotiating the reincorporation of Taiwan Province, made several surprising moves. As the US became more aggressive against world terrorism and North Korea became more and more ready to enter the conflict, China abruptly invaded their onetime ally, taking the country almost overnight. Even more surprising, they immediately began negotiations to cede control of the entire peninsula to South Korea, claiming that they wished to see the Korean people "reunited even as we are." China had already demonstrated that a market economy could exist without democracy, but they had now shown a depth of international diplomacy which garnered the respect of world leaders and foreign investors in remarkable new ways. Growing at a rate which accomodated higher population growth, the "one child" policy was relinquished, and China has taken its place beside India and Japan as the so-called Tier 1 nations of the world, and placing the center of the world economy decisively on the continent of Asia.
A surprising up-and-comer in the world was Brazil, which utilized its geography and physical isolation to rise in world prominence, becoming the most influential nation to still consider itself Christian (primarily Roman Catholic). So the Tier 2 economic powers are Brazil, the European Union, the US, and Russia (which after all never really leaves world politics, does it?)
But where, you might wonder, are all the Christians? There are certainly Christians among every nation, tribe, and tongue, but amid the poor and humble nations of Africa, Christianity has found peoples who can identify with its message of brokenness and redemption from slavery. Although Roman Catholics still flock to the Vatican, now Anglican, Presbyterian, and Congregationalist missionaries from Ethiopia, Sudan, South Africa, and other nations pour into the wealthier nations crying out that resources and riches will bring neither happiness nor salvation (and that there is a difference between the two).
So this is the world. English is the Lingua Franca, but the most powerful nation status is divided between India, China, and Japan, with the US, EU, Russia, and Brazil tied for second place. World Islam is a relevant (but stagnant) minority in the world and a weak voice even in the middle east, while Christianity has only found a thriving home in the chorus of poorest nations in the world.
How would you feel about a world like this? If you knew your grandchildren were going to raise their children in this world, what would you do? Is this world a Eutopia, a Dystopia, or a Utopia?
HOW I FEEL WHEN I’M TWO WEEKS OUT FROM QUALS
9 years ago
5 comments:
What distinction are you making between "Eutopia" and "Utopia"?
in common usage 'Utopia' means 'no place' in the sense of 'fantastically wonderful and hence nonexistent.' Eutopia by contrast would mean 'good place' - or so I assume, anyhow.
What makes you think that Christian denominations in the US would be marginalised and cut off from other groups? I don't see how 'failure to uphold' follows from your premises. Also, (though you will no doubt be able to correct me) I always thought wars were good for economies - at any rate successful wars. WWI and II certainly didn't damage us too badly...
Well, it's not really a logical argument with premises, it's basically a "what if all this happened" situation. It is, however, somewhat based on recent developments in the world Anglican communion, which basically told the American Episcopalian Church to be more conservative or risk damaging their relationship.
And no, broadly speaking wars are bad for any nation. WWI wasn't so bad for the US because we hardly fought in it (as evidenced by both duration of involvement and the low casualty counts compared to every other nation involved).
WWII came on the heels of the Depression, in which much of the country's productive capacity was idle, so the boost in war production did not reduce home production very much and it gave people something to rally behind (the economy wasn't the only thing depressed in the 30's). Oh yeah, and there was no combat within the continental US.
It could be argued that Korea, Vietnam, and the current Middle Eastern war divert huge amounts of resources that might better serve here, and these wars are not actually that big.
But you have both avoided the question, namely, how would you react?
That's because I can't honestly say it sounds particularly different. Except for a few people I've met in Italy, I can't say I've any significant contact with the global church, and the community of faith necessarily transcends denominational and national lines anyways, so that doesn't seem to big a deal. Perhaps the politicians would quit pretending to hold prayer breakfasts, but I don't think that would bother me too much.
As for the nouveau geopolitics... props to Brazil. Call me a willful ignoramus if you like, and it is an interesting situation, but I really think it sounds pretty irrelevant to my life. Naturally I will be upset if people I know - or I myself - wind up dead or injured, and I suppose that Chevre might become a little more expensive and my taxes might increase; but at the end of the day I've never really had any faith in America, and so I don't think I would be disillusioned to see her fall a bit. It's a pleasant country, but not quite il paradiso terrestriale. (That would be Sicily.)
I should doubtless prefer to live tranquilly and without being shot at very often. If life in America becomes very inconvenient that's unfortunate, but I fancy I'll be quite content with Dante and an occasional stiff drink.
Interesting speculation just the same. You should write a novel.
"...but at the end of the day I've never really had any faith in America, and so I don't think I would be disillusioned to see her fall a bit."
I'm with you here, Joel...
Post a Comment