Institutional and Cultural Response To Disintegration

My offering here is a modified distillation of this,

http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=08-03-017-f

Institutions and cultures crumble when they no longer share a set belief system. Denominations fold, and cultures go into civil unrest when a people’s belief system is no longer widely and uniformly embraced. When shared belief system’s among a people are shattered one can look for significant balkanization.

However, when the balkanization is underway the Institutions or cultures will try to stave of the inevitable coming crumbling by,

1.) Denial.

This usually entails crying for unity and the attempt to change the subject whenever the conversation turns to the friction of belief systems.

2.) Centralization

The thinking by the elites figures the way to make sure the crack up doesn’t happen is by drawing all societal or institutional roles to the center. The edifice is crumbling and only by the control of the elites can the edifice be kept safe.

3.) Homogenization

This means, as it pertains to Institutions, that only company men are advanced in the bureaucratic structure. What this means is that the worst of men are put in leadership positions because the company men are the men who are the most timid and are those who refuse to deal with the problem because their interest is not in solving the belief system dissolution but their interest is in the Institution itself.

Naturally, what this reinforces in the failing Institution and culture is the merit of never saying anything that can be construed as controversial to the Institution. In our culture and for our Institutions what this means is the rise of the timid liberal who wants to avoid the Liberal “extremes” but who avoids even more any notion of Biblical Conservatism because he knows the wind is blowing in the direction of the Liberal extreme.

4.) Frenetic Activity

Failing Institutions and culture suddenly get a case of the “busies.” New programs, new vision statements, new projects are introduced. This is all done in order to distract from the reality that the edifice is coming down. It is the Germans partying while the Soviet Tanks are getting to roll into Berlin. It is sound and fury meaning nothing.

5.) Social Ostracization

The final phase is to throw out the ones who are seen to be the threat to the Institution or culture that is failing. Such Institutions and cultures tell themselves that if they can just get rid of the ones who are stalling “progress” (the new name for the changed belief system) then everything will be alright.

And things may get better for a season but usually this Ostracization ends up hurting the Institution or culture in the long run because those who are the ones Ostracized are often the best and brightest.

Consider these as you consider the death of the West.

Subscript — Also notice how dying Institutions and Cultures end up being incredibly strong mechanisms for conformity to bureaucratically prescribed norms.

Author: jetbrane

I am a Pastor of a small Church in Mid-Michigan who delights in my family, my congregation and my calling. I am postmillennial in my eschatology. Paedo-Calvinist Covenantal in my Christianity Reformed in my Soteriology Presuppositional in my apologetics Familialist in my family theology Agrarian in my regional community social order belief Christianity creates culture and so Christendom in my national social order belief Mythic-Poetic / Grammatical Historical in my Hermeneutic Pre-modern, Medieval, & Feudal before Enlightenment, modernity, & postmodern Reconstructionist / Theonomic in my Worldview One part paleo-conservative / one part micro Libertarian in my politics Systematic and Biblical theology need one another but Systematics has pride of place Some of my favorite authors, Augustine, Turretin, Calvin, Tolkien, Chesterton, Nock, Tozer, Dabney, Bavinck, Wodehouse, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Schaeffer, C. Van Til, H. Van Til, G. H. Clark, C. Dawson, H. Berman, R. Nash, C. G. Singer, R. Kipling, G. North, J. Edwards, S. Foote, F. Hayek, O. Guiness, J. Witte, M. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Mencken, Lasch, Postman, Gatto, T. Boston, Thomas Brooks, Terry Brooks, C. Hodge, J. Calhoun, Llyod-Jones, T. Sowell, A. McClaren, M. Muggeridge, C. F. H. Henry, F. Swarz, M. Henry, G. Marten, P. Schaff, T. S. Elliott, K. Van Hoozer, K. Gentry, etc. My passion is to write in such a way that the Lord Christ might be pleased. It is my hope that people will be challenged to reconsider what are considered the givens of the current culture. Your biggest help to me dear reader will be to often remind me that God is Sovereign and that all that is, is because it pleases him.

2 thoughts on “Institutional and Cultural Response To Disintegration”

  1. Good thoughts. Salt without savour comes to mind. You can’t “salt” it again. Nobody puts new wine into old wineskins, etc…

    The mainstream reformed churches (NAPARC) seem to really believe in their brand of progressive conservatism. (Though they would probably take offence at being called progressive.) Serious reactionary conservatism itself would be a change of direction from the existing institutional core. (At least that is my perception.) Some of these denominations are far from crumbling, and they want no trouble from “radicals” — it seems a hard turn to the right would be just as likely to crack the foundations as the apparently inevitable leftward drift. In such an environment, what’s a “radical” conservative to do?

    But perhaps the crack-up is coming sooner than they want us to think…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *