When the waves of heretical theological Liberalism crashed upon Protestant denominations in the early twentieth century, members of said denominations tended to respond in one of three ways: Compromise, Capitulation, or Consecration.
Compromise. Many Christians made peace with heretical views, often in the name of relevance and a superficial unity. Many thought they could preserve the core of Christianity by ceding certain doctrines to their "scientific" opponents (i.e. miracles, the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus, and the authority of Scripture). This approach had two key flaws: One, the doctrines most objectionable to the modern mind are the doctrines most crucial to the Christian faith. After ceding such doctrines, there is no more Christianity. Two, opposing worldviews will leave no intellectual rock un-turned. There will be no relenting until every truth claim of Christianity is wiped away, leaving only experience, which is really nothing.
Capitulation. Many Christians not only fled from heretical views, but they fled from everything that might allow for their propagation, including the academy, science laboratory, public school system, and culture at large. Like the monasticism of prior centuries, these Christians thought that the surrounding culture was intrinsically evil and could only be escaped through an isolated counter-culture. As Luther rightfully noted about monastics of his age, however, every person who goes into a monastery brings the devil with them. We will always be linked and heavily influence by our culture, and always bound to the whole of man with our common depravity. These folks also lost confidence in God's Word as God's truth in their practice, even if they still held to it in their doctrine. Ultimately, Christianity can adequately confront and overcome all other worldviews. These critiques aside, these folks were preferable to those who compromised because they still held to the Christian faith.
Consecration. Some Christians continued to graciously and valiantly slug it out in the academy. They worked to vindicate the Christian faith in the face of hostile worldviews and expose their faulty foundations. They were stubborn in their defense of the truth and winsome in their propagation of it.
(For more on these approaches and the theological battles of the time, see J. Gresham Machen's Christianity and Liberalism, and his article "Christianity and Culture," which can be found online.)
With these categories in mind, what are the prevailing worldviews and obstacles with which Christians must entangle themselves today?
Naturalism. This worldview has a fundamental faith commitment to the supremacy of the natural realm and the impossibility of the supernatural. Such an a priori commitment (philosophical term for a belief that precedes any argumentation and is a foundational belief without any other foundation) will immediately put their worldview in contention with the claims of Christianity, which accepts God's rule and involvement in history as revealed in Scripture as its own a priori commitment. The first goal of the Christian in engaging naturalism is to reveal that such a worldview is not a result of following the evidence, but that the evidence follows from the worldview and is inherently skewed.
Scientism. The modern scientific enterprise makes two audacious claims: One, all truth can be measured through "scientific" means, i.e. through the empirical (truth through senses) scientific method. This view, of course, presupposes naturalism as it asserts that the natural order is the beginning and end of the scientific method. Two, the physical sciences is exalted over all other disciplines in the pursuit of truth. When we talk "facts" nowadays, we are not speaking of theological presuppositions (theology used to be considered the "queen of the sciences"), nor are we speaking of logical conclusions of philosophical syllogism (if a is true, and b is true, than c must be true). That the small sliver of the intellectual universe occupied by the physical sciences could run roughshod over the rest of the academy is startling. The first goal of the Christian in engaging scientism is to reveal its naturalism presuppositions and question the audacious claims of the physical sciences to dominate the field of knowledge and truth.
Historicism. Infused within the cultural DNA of America is a tendency to exalt the pragmatic (what's presently useful) over the rich resources of history. It is presumed that history is always progressing and that the new is always better than the old. C.S. Lewis correctly labeled this mentality as "chronological snobbery." The problem with this mentality is that history is an equal opportunity employer as it pertains to truth, thus, as Chesterton would argue, there should be a "democracy of the dead" that gets a vote on matters of truth. In addition, the whole of Christian truth is rooted on the plane of history, including the historical life, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus Christ. The first goal of the Christian in engaging historicism is to show the value of history in providing and illuminating truth.
Experientialism. As the idolatrous truth claims of twentieth century modernism continue to be washed away by the absolute skepticism of postmodernism, a great chasm of rootless experientialism has been left in its wake. Logic takes no ground on a terrain that is governed by irrational, inward experiences that are prided as ultimate. The problem for Christians is that this experientialism largely started within the Christian camp. As Enlightenment philosophers (namely, Kant) divorced religious truth claims from the field of facts and history, and Liberalism subsequently ravaged the Church, many Christian retreated into Kant's refuge of experientialism. The problem with experientialism, inside or outside of the Church, is that it contains to truth. Experience might derive from truth, but it can never be the basis of truth. Christians must fundamentally rely upon the objective truth claims of Scripture, not their experience, as their testimony to the Gospel of God's grace. They should also question the ultimate nature experience and point out that the logical conclusions of this worldview (complete anarchy) reveal its illogical roots.
Monopolization of education. While parents are nominally entrusted with the responsibility of raising children, the reality is that the State raises our children. They spend at least six hours a day (not including homework) imbibing naturalism, scientism, historicism, and experientialism at school, and usually considerably less time imbibing the values and worldview of their parents, who often know better. The intellect must be sharpened by competing ideas and worldviews. An educational monopoly does not allow for such competition, and it also inevitably reaches toward the lowest common denominator and stunts creativity and brilliance. In other words, the public school system, which is entrusted with the responsibility of nurturing intellectual infancy into maturity, instead becomes the graveyard where the intellect comes to die.
This is not an argument against public education, per se. In fact, if the intellect requires competition in order to grow, then Christian students would likely gain benefit from attending public schools and enjoy charitable sparring with those who think very differently from them. But public education should not be used as an intellectual daycare. Christian parents must help form their child's worldview, by God's grace, and teach them how to engage the worldview of others. This could take the form of catechesis in the Church, early homeschooling, or teaching children to critically analyze what they are learning in other places, preferably through the daily use of the Aristotelian teaching style (which constantly questions responses and requires critical thinking). In any case, Christian parents must work to counter the educational monopoly.
Those are some of my thoughts, and though they might not encompass the many hostile worldviews, philosophies, or movements with regard to the Christian faith, they hopefully provide a starting point for helpful thinking on how to consecrate the culture around us. We are told in Scripture to "take every thought captive," and to "give a reason for the hope we have." Let us joyfully go forth to do so, in the power of the Spirit who opens hearts and minds and firmly rooted in grace of Jesus Christ in which we now stand.
