Luxury Beliefs and the Reformed Church
What is a Belief Worth When it Costs Nothing?
“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others,” as penned by George Orwell, expresses the fundamental lie behind egalitarianism. Egalitarianism is, in turn, the foundation of all leftist societies. Whether communist, socialist, or liberal democratic, the basic assumption is that all are equal. This egalitarian tenet is inculcated into the members of a society through legal and social norms such that it becomes an unanalyzed premise behind all judgments. The filter through which everything is sifted is the egalitarian premise.
This instinctual filter not only colors all positive judgements made within an egalitarian society, but it also blinds one to the underlying realities of all societies. What Orwell was highlighting is the reality of an upper and lower class, even within egalitarian societies. For the regular member of an egalitarian society, this reality is hidden behind the egalitarian premise. “All are equal” precludes the acceptance of an elite, upper class within the society, even natural hierarchy. Reality, however, is as God ordained it, not as propaganda repaints it. There are superiors, inferiors, and equals (Westminster Larger Catechism Q. 126).
The egalitarian pigment has whitewashed the American Church as well. Since the 1960s, America has been a leftist egalitarian society. The egalitarian premise has been painted onto all areas of society through the pedagogy of the state. The state’s method of teaching is the system of laws and punishments leveraged to reward the compliant and punish the non-conformist. But compliance and non-conformity imply some standard to which compliance is expected and non-conformity rebels. In modern America, this standard is the leftist-egalitarian premise: “All are equal.” The Church also has a catechism as well as a system of rewards and punishments by which she inculcates conformity to her standard. Just as in American society today, the standard is (quite baldly) “All are equal,” in the American Church, the standard has become the same.
This is not a unique insight on my part. Chris Caldwell’s Age of Entitlement outlines this shift quite well. What is less analyzed is the effect this has had on the American Church. On paper, the standard of the American Church is the Bible. One must press further, however, to learn the real standard. “What does the bible teach?” The answer to this question gets us to the real standard of the American Church. Doctrinally, the American Church is no different than the Church throughout history. We must distinguish, here, between doctrinal standards and practice. The ethical standard is revealed through what is enforced. A society is determined by what it rewards and what it punishes, in both church and state.
The ethic of a society is determined by its elite because they control the levers of punishment and reward. What they reward and punish is what they seek to conform the lower classes to. This is true in the Church as in the State. Note carefully, however, that the elite are distinct from the highest institution of society. They are not the same thing. On paper, a General Assembly, for example, is the highest expression of institutional authority in a Presbyterian church. But who guides the Assembly? The elite. On paper, the congregational voting controls a Baptist Church. But who controls the congregation? The elite of that congregation.
To the Presbyterian mind, this is where the blindness outlined above comes into play. Anyone in the Presbyterian church can appeal to the General Assembly and be heard, so we are told. Practically, this is often not the case. For, the elite of Presbyterianism have inculcated an ethos of nonconfrontation and conformity. Those who are compliant with the direction of the elders, whether those elders have good biblical reasons for their directives or not, are rewarded. Those who question the elders are punished. This is true all the way up the ladder of Presbyterianism. Hence Orwell, “Some are more equal than others.” Some are elite and some are not.
Though recognized only obliquely, there is an elite in the American Church, distinct from the institutions themselves. Who belongs to the elite in the church? There are signs. And these signs have been helpfully identified by Rob Henderson in his theory of luxury beliefs.
Henderson’s Theory of Luxury Beliefs
Henderson defines luxury beliefs this way, “Gradually, I developed the concept of ‘luxury beliefs’, which are ideas and opinions that confer status on the upper class at very little cost, while often inflicting costs on the lower classes.” He expounds his definition based on his observations of his peers while at Yale.
My classmate’s promotion of one ideal (“monogamy is outdated”) while living by another (“I plan to get married”) was echoed by other students in different ways. Some would, for instance, tell me about the admiration they had for the military, or how trade schools were just as respectable as college, or how college was not necessary to be successful. But when I asked them if they would encourage their own children to enlist or become a plumber or an electrician rather than apply to college, they would demur or change the subject.
Later, I would connect my observations to stories I read about tech tycoons, another affluent group, who encourage people to use addictive devices while simultaneously enforcing rigid rules at home about technology use. For example, Steve Jobs prohibited his children from using iPads. Parents in Silicon Valley reportedly tell their nannies to closely monitor how much their children use their smartphones. Don’t get high on your own supply, I guess. Many affluent people now promote lifestyles that are harmful to the less fortunate. Meanwhile, they are not only insulated from the fallout; they often profit from it.”
Another psychological insight into church judgments: “A psychology study in 2020 revealed that “Upper-class individuals cared more about status and valued it more highly than working-class individuals … Furthermore, compared with lower-status individuals, high-status individuals were more likely to engage in behaviour aimed at protecting or enhancing their status.”
The first element to a luxury belief is the social expense associated with it. Paradoxically, for a belief to be luxurious, it must be relatively cheap for one to hold. This is at root in the many stances that the church, across various denominations, has taken recently in the realm of “social justice.”
The second element of a luxury belief is that it serves as a signal to other elites on the part of the elite or aspiring elites that they are part of the elite. It is a status symbol. During my school days, Starter Jackets were popular. If you had one, it signaled that you were cool. I persuaded my mother to get me one. It was a huge, obnoxious Miami Hurricanes Starter Jacket. The Hurricanes meant nothing to me. All that mattered was that I had a Starter Jacket, and I was signaling to the other cool kids that I was one of them. The same dynamic is at play in the church. Statements on “social justice,” whether touching race or gender, function as elite status symbols. The question is not whether such a statement is accurate or biblical or clarifying. It matters only that it signals to elite society that the statement-maker is also elite, that he is acceptable in “polite” society because he holds to luxury beliefs.
The final element of a luxury belief is that it disagrees with actions. It does not accurately reflect the preferences of the one holding it. The preferences are displayed in the choices and actions taken, not in the letter of the luxury belief put forth. Recall Henderson’s female friend. She thought monogamy was outdated. But she wanted to be a wife. Others had respect for the military but would never send their sons to enlist. Thus, the luxury belief is at odds with actual choices. Time will tell what choices these denominations make in light of their statements on race or gender. Perhaps I am wrong in calling it a luxury belief, and they will prove by their actions that this is a genuine belief, extending themselves beyond performative noise.
A More Costly Luxury Belief
There are other beliefs that fall into this category as well, far more serious than hasty statements on race or gender. All American Presbyterians, for example, profess adherence to the Westminster Confession of Faith. Is this a genuine belief or a luxury belief? Recall the three elements: relatively cheap, status symbol, and out of accord with actual choices. In many cases, sadly, adherence to the Westminster Standards is a luxury belief in the American Presbyterian Church. We take them in reverse order.
Among Presbyterians, Westminster is the high-water mark of Reformed theology. The culture from which this document came was far different, however, than ours. The ethic of Westminster is exhaustive, as detailed in the Larger Catechism’s exposition of the Law. The theology of Westminster is rigorous and scholastic, as recent scholarship has shown. The epistemology of Westminster is Aristotelian and realist, as the references to the light and law of nature evince. The doctrine of Good Works in Westminster is central to the Christian life, as WLC 32, 45, 76, 91, WCF Chapter 16, and many other places display. Sabbath keeping is central to the religious life, according to Westminster. It is required of Presbyterian ministers and elders to vow adherence to these standards. What do we see in the lives and ministries of American Presbyterians? Not a preference for Westminsterian practice. American Presbyterians display a preference for broad evangelical practice and baptistic forms of worship. Why then vow adherence to Westminster? It is a signal that American Presbyterians are part of the ecclesiastical and societal elite. Confessional adherence serves as a status symbol, but it is cheap and prideful (Romans 12:16) insofar as adherence functions in this way, and does not dictate action.
Most do not understand the standards, and those who do debate endlessly the intricacies of it. In this way, it costs very little societally and ecclesiastically to adhere to Westminster. For the regular man, we might imagine them reacting as Gallio did to the accusations of the Jews, “But if it is a question of words and names and your own law, look to it yourselves; for I do not want to be a judge of such matters” (Acts 18:15). Infra or Supra? Christmas, Easter, or other Christian holidays? Psalms or no Psalms in worship? These questions have no meaning to ordinary American Christians and hence will evoke no costly reaction from them. Most Americans do not care about Westminster, and hence adherence costs little, and the criteria for “adherence” are low.
Going Forward
American Christianity is on the precipice. The election of Donald Trump, like the ascension of Cyrus (Isaiah 45:1), has given us a period of regrouping and rebuilding. What Henderson’s theory of luxury beliefs helps us to see is where our values really are. Do we seek status or truth? Do we hold the beliefs we hold because they are true convictions or because they are cheap ways to signal to others that we belong among the elite? Aaron Renn’s Negative World thesis is correct. The times have changed and will continue to change. The negative world will not reward luxury Christian beliefs. That was a feature of the Positive and Neutral Worlds. In the negative world, the only beliefs that will profit are those held with the courage that arises from conviction and action—they are expensive. Luxury beliefs, by definition, are held without serious conviction and hence produce no courage. It is time to trim the fat and gird our beliefs for battle, for battle is upon us, believe it or not.
Image Credit: Unsplash