The Overview (Sunday, July 4)
How big of a problem is QAnon for the church? Why is polarization a threat to religious freedom? And what would discovering aliens mean for Christianity?
Next semester I’ll be teaching a colloquium course for my university’s Honors Scholars Program. These courses are meant to give Honors students an opportunity to take a class on something they won’t find elsewhere in our curriculum. My class is titled “Misinformation and Conspiracy Theories.”
As a political scientist, the study of misinformation and the spread of conspiracy theories fascinates me. In an age where accurate information has never been easier to come by, why is it that people today are as susceptible to false thinking as they were in the past — if not more so? And what implications does misinformation and conspiracy thinking have for our system of government and politics?
But beyond that, as a Christian, I’ve been thinking a lot about the implications of misinformation and conspiracy theories for the church and our faith. We’ve all seen the images of a Christian presence at the Capitol on January 6, and while I don’t think Christianity was the driving force behind that terrible day, it certainly wasn’t absent, either.
Which brings me to QAnon’s influence in Christian communities.1 Research has shown that Christians are far more susceptible to this bizarre and dangerous belief system than those without a religious tradition. Yet Southern Seminary’s Andrew Walker (whose writing frequently appears in this newsletter) is skeptical:
Of course, this pastor’s account of things in his church does not good data make. Consider this response from political scientist Ryan Burge, another newsletter regular:
As a social scientist, I’m inclined to go with data over anecdotes. But my experience also provides an alternative to Walker’s criticism of “the narrative.” No, my pastor has never preached conspiracy theories from the pulpit, nor have I heard him say anything remotely resembling QAnon in the many, many conversations we’ve had. But I did have a conversation with a man in church leadership (not in my church, but a reformed congregation in my community) in December 2020 that really concerned me. Out of nowhere, really, he described the discredited #ItalyGate conspiracy theory in hushed, certain tones, as if Any Day Now the evidentiary dam would burst and Donald Trump would be reinstated as president.
This was shocking to me. I know this man to be of good character and sound theology. He has a beautiful family and a great, professional job. We are close to the same age, and he graduated from the university where I now teach. And yet here he was, sharing a conspiracy theory about the 2020 presidential election, a theory that could be disproved with the slightest bit of investigation and critical thinking. As far as I’m concerned, if it can happen to him, it can happen to anyone.
Why is this important? Earlier this year I wrote about the allure of misinformation and conspiracy theories as a way to dismiss the results of the 2020 election. For Christians, such thinking poses a serious challenge to our witness to the world:
Christians should be leading the way in losing well. Rejecting nonsense and embracing truth, however dispiriting, is essential to our witness to a skeptical world. If Christians are broadcasting conspiracy theories about elections, what credibility do we have when telling the world of the Good News of a resurrected Savior?
Andrew Walker is right in that 99.99 percent of Christian churches aren’t preaching The Gospel According to Q on Sunday mornings. I understand his desire to defend pastors and congregations from being lumped in with this dangerous belief system. But the fact that so many of our brothers and sisters are flirting with (or, worse, adopting) these ideas is deeply troubling. It is also an indictment on the church’s shepherding of not only people’s hearts and souls, but also their minds. Pray that we all are encouraged to do better.
With that, here’s a special Sunday, July 4 edition of The Overview:
1) In concluding its term last week, the Supreme Court took three important actions pertaining to religious freedom:
First, the Court declined to hear an appeal from Alliance Defending Freedom on behalf of Barronelle Stutzman, a florist who declined to provide custom floral arrangements for a same-sex wedding. And while ADF expressed disappointment with the decision not to review the state supreme court’s judgment, it was hopeful “that the Supreme Court will eventually join [different lower] courts in affirming the constitutionally protected freedom of creative professionals.”
Second, the Court agreed to hear Carson v. Makin, a case involving Maine’s policy prohibiting students from using state tuition assistance at religious colleges and universities. Last year, the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled for Maine, saying that the policy was constitutionally legitimate. First Liberty Institute, a Christian legal organization in Texas, is representing the Carson, Gillis, and Nelson families in opposing the policy, alongside the libertarian group Institute for Justice.
Third, the Court GVRd—granted, vacated, and remanded—a lower court ruling involving the Amish. Basically, a county in Minnesota told an Amish community there they must adopt certain septic systems for disposing gray water; the Amish maintained that adopting this technology would violate their religious beliefs. In agreeing with the Court’s quick judgment for the Amish, Justice Gorsuch concluded, “In this country, neither the Amish nor anyone else should have to choose between their farms and their faith.”
2) In case you missed it, last month I wrote a review for Christianity Today of two lengthy books about same-sex marriage in the United States. An excerpt:
Read together, these two books serve an important purpose. By methodically and deliberately telling the story of same-sex marriage over the last several decades, they highlight the interplay of law, politics, and culture in a way that transcends any one issue. Yes, these books are substantively about same-sex marriage, but their accounts emphasize the complexity and breadth of this process. In the years ahead under the Obergefell precedent, while related cultural conflicts take shape, this is a lesson conservative Christians would do well to remember.
3) Kelsey Dallas of the Deseret News covered the Religious Liberty Summit at the University of Notre Dame, highlighting the relationship between polarization and religious freedom. The meeting included scholars, practitioners, and activists, including author Asma Uddin, whom I’ve covered in this newsletter before. Dallas said that many speakers talked about the need to break down barriers between people of different faiths, saying that when one religious group makes gains in religious freedom, everybody wins. Polarization, inasmuch as it keeps people divided, is therefore a threat to robust religious freedom.
4) Finally, in keeping with the theme of conspiracy theories, I wanted to highlight a recent article from David French about aliens. Rather than summarize it, I’ll leave it to you to read it (and you really should). But here’s a taste of what French thinks the discovery of aliens would mean for humanity:
The mixture of awe and fear would likely be overpowering. Combine it with the likelihood that there would be bitter divisions on earth in our response to discovery of alien life, and the world would enter a period of turmoil that we’d find difficult to imagine. In that circumstance, the challenge to our faith might come less from the extraterrestrials and more from a familiar source—the sin and venality of our fellow humans.
It’s quite a thing to ponder, isn’t it? So while you watch tonight’s sky for fireworks in celebrating our nation’s 245th birthday, consider what may lie just a few million light years beyond, and what that would mean for our deepest beliefs about the origin of life, the creation of the universe, and the redemptive work of Jesus.