Olympianism vs. Christianity
In its rejection of the American über-Olympian’s support for the 2016 Chicago games, the International Olympic Committee signaled an opportunity for the resurgence of Western Christian culture.
In his book A Country I Do Not Recognize, Robert Bork cites a June 2003 New Criterion article by Kenneth Minogue titled “Christophobia and the West.” Minogue identifies the three types of religious quests for meaning sought after by intellectual elites: progress, communism, and what he calls “Olympianism.”
He argues that as the United States and the world’s standard of living progressed through American technological advancements, American intellectual elites—or progressives—increasingly became hostile toward Christianity in favor of secularism based in scientific rationalism. “Christians might be believers in progress,” Minogue wrote, “but progressives were likely to find Christianity an optional extra, if not an actual impediment to the advance of reason. . . .” Progressivism eventually gave way to communism as the preferred elitist belief system, but as Soviet communism collapsed, the elites adopted Olympianism.
Like secular progressivism and communism, Olympianism, Minogue says, “is a project of the intellectual elite that believes that it enjoys superior enlightenment and that its business is to spread this benefit to those living on the lower slope of humanity.” He defines the belief system, or religion, “as a vision of human betterment to be achieved on a global scale by forging the peoples of the world into a single community based on the universal enjoyment of appropriate rights. Olympianism is the cast of mind dedicated to this end, which is believed to correspond to the triumph of reason and community over superstition and hatred” (i.e., Christianity).
Both Minogue and Bork state that the end game of Olympianism is a secular global community governed by world laws. Minogue argues that these Olympians attack Western Christian culture because only Christianity can stand in the way of the Olympians, while Bork adds that Olympians attack the constitutional foundations of the United States via the U.S. Supreme Court in their quest for globalism. Strategy: promote global governance by undermining the foundations of Western culture: Christian values and the U.S. Constitution.
President Obama is the personification of Olympianism—the über-Olympian. Taking the baton from a 20th century Olympian U.S. Supreme Court, Obama is sprinting toward the transformation of American society into a “country we do not recognize” (a paraphrase of Justice Antonin Scalia in Board of County Commissioners, Wabaunsee, Kansas v. Umbehr, 1996), while seeking a broader role for the world community in the affairs of U.S. law. We should take notice that the International Olympic Committee rejected President Obama. Certainly some on the IOC must have recognized the significance herein of saying no to him. If Chicago’s bid would have succeeded, the political Olympians would have been ecstatic about the implied acceptance of the Obama-Olympianism agenda.
In essence, the religious contest between Olympianism and Western Christian culture is not over. Western Christians will prevail by grappling with Olympianism at its root. Minogue wrote, “Olympianism burrowed like a parasite into the most powerful institution in of the emerging knowledge economy—the universities.” I suggest that we Christians humble ourselves, pray, and vigorously support Christian education in all its forms. Moreover, we should support beachheads established at secular universities like Professor Robert George’s James Madison Program at Princeton. And we must understand, as Minogue teaches, that the Olympians proselytize through the media. Likewise, Christians should continue to bulk up in this field.
The über-Olympian lost with the IOC, but the contest is not over. Let’s get in the game.














Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top20 Comments to “Olympianism vs. Christianity”
Secular gnosticism will fail even as religious gnosticism fails. Truth will triumph at the end of all things. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life. MARANATHA!
Blessings
Roger
Report comment to moderator
I have not read the article by Kenneth Minogue, but if this synopsis is true to Minogue’s intent, I find his ideas unhelpful and silly. Firstly, I think Christians (especially those reading books by Robert Bork!) would balk at the idea that “intellectual elites” are all about communism and secular progress. Aren’t Christians constantly talking about “taking back” philosophy and intellectualism? To lump all “intellectual elites” into a category of “them” denies any serious Christian thinker the validity they need to bring Christianity back from the anti-intellectual precipice on which it teeters.
Secondly, conjuring up a worldview called “Olympianism” just to knock it down is a waste of time. The Olympics is and always has been about putting aside wartime politcs for the benefit of a few days of neighborly sport. If conspiracy theorists want to tremble at the theoretical attack on Christianity by “Olympians” (by which I assume he means the IOC…certainly not the athletes…again, these nebulous ‘elites’) that’s fine, but I don’t see any real meaning coming from it.
Finally, who here is assuming that “superstition and hatred” automatically means Christianity (last sentence paragraph 4)? It’s not in quotes…if this is Mr. Wishing’s conjecture it runs an irresponsibly high risk of twisting Minogue’s words to mean something completely unintended and wrong.
This seems to be another fake dragon story conjured up by Christians who love to be victims. Instead of coming up with one more worlview to fear, lets focus our resources and efforts on loving God and loving our neighbors. The Olympics seems like a great place to start.
Report comment to moderator
Eliza,
I don’t think the article intends to portray the IOC as the “Olympians attacking Christianity” – the IOC rejected the “Olympians” bid and ideology. That’s what is meant in the article.
Secondly, “superstition and hatred” is almost always a charge leveled against Christians because we adhere to the belief that ONLY Jesus is the truth, the light, and the way. He himself warned that if the world hated him, it would also hate his (true) followers. This is not the same thing as saying that the accusation is accurate because true Christians love and pray for those who persecute them, yet we get labeled as “haters” for NOT conforming to society’s “norms”.
Finally, keep in mind that intellectuals without absolute truth still strive to create an “ideal” world where “reason” prevails. Believe it or not, socialism/communism are ideal vehicles for promoting whatever ideology they think will create this human-engineered utopia. Democracy as was intended by the founding fathers of this country (not the one we have now where law is arbitrarily MADE by courts) and Christianity are both obstacles to this “utopia”.
The good news is that we are both free to disagree about this – the bad news is that we don’t know how long this will be the case.
Report comment to moderator
Difference of opinion.
Report comment to moderator
Wow. Look what happens when you exchange but a few key words:
As our national leaders demonstrably believe it is America’s God-ordained role to deliver democracy to the benighted nations of the world (by military force if necessary), since a) democracy is superior, and b) democratic nations do not attack each other (i.e., us), somebody please explain to me why my version of things as stated above is not true.
It never ceases to amaze me how “conservative” elites berate liberal elites for having only slightly differing ideas.
Report comment to moderator
JOEHDZ: I don’t think the article intends to portray the IOC as the “Olympians attacking Christianity” – the IOC rejected the “Olympians” bid and ideology. That’s what is meant in the article.
I couldn’t make no sense out of Wishing’s suggestion that the Olympics through the IOC fended off a hostile takeover by “Olympianism.”
By the way, the reason “Olympianism” is capitalized is not because it’s the name of a religion, but because Mt. Olympus is a proper name.
Report comment to moderator
When America lost, LEE WISHING and his Christian conservatives won.
Report comment to moderator
It never ceases to amaze me how “conservative” elites berate liberal elites for having only slightly differing ideas.
All too true.
Report comment to moderator
“an opportunity for the resurgence of Western Christian culture.”
This is rather utterly strange, though I give props to Wishing for the nice dig at the President, evidently the leaders of the anti Western Christian culture coalition: a birther in a three-piece suit.
As Pope said, “sometimes Homer sleeps.” a poor column.
Report comment to moderator
While I understand the rejection of liberal “elitist” ideals, I can’t see how ‘“a vision of human betterment to be achieved on a global scale by forging the peoples of the world into a single community based on the universal enjoyment of appropriate rights.”‘ is contrary to Christianity. Obviously the ‘”triumph of reason and community over superstition and hatred”’ could be taken the wrong way, but isn’t the church SUPPOSED to be a community of people forged together? It may be a different basis, but I can’t quite get the standard globalism = antichrist that many Christians seem to have…
Report comment to moderator
Let me play Christ’s advocate.
Elite Evangelicals instinctively and infallibly hate anything that opposes the ideal of kingship. Look at the names they give their colleges and seminaries, “King’s” and “Regent.” The motto of Wheaton College is, “For Christ and his Kingdom.” This sort of language is curious in a country in which authority derives from the people.
The fact is, people of a particular personality type love hierarchy and tradition, mistrust difference, and strive for social dominance. These people in our culture are right-wing Christians, and some of them are very smart. When Jesus comes again to rule the earth as King, they’ll be regents.
Traditional liberal notions of equality, progress, rationalism (in place of faith), and international co-operation are very much at odds with the “foundations” of Western culture, if those foundations are the pre-liberal history of Europe.
Report comment to moderator
This draws a false dichotomy. Yes, what the author calls “Olympianism” is not Christianity. But that hardly means that provincialism/localism/agrarianism is necessarily virtuous. If it were, Somalia would be one of the world’s most “Christian” countries.
Report comment to moderator
Not Somalia. Ethiopia.
Report comment to moderator
Wishing’s intriguing piece spawned a surprising amount of misunderstanding, in spite of the clear title “Olympianism vs. Christianity.” Nonetheless, I found Kenneth Minogue’s ideas scintillating. Progressivism, communism, and now “Olympianism” are on a collision course with the essence of Christianity because of how they answer that age-old question, “Who’s in charge here?” The Christian says “God,” and in the democracy which the Founding Fathers had in mind, this answer alone will make the system work. But in a democracy in which “Olympians” honestly answer “me,” the resulting social chaos naturally leads to repression. STrangely, this repression is often portrayed as liberation, as in “The People’s Republic…”
Report comment to moderator
What is God’s purpose for human beings on earth?
If Jesus is going to return, he is long overdue.
Why this myth has such hold on humans is mystifying to me.
There are many other religions. This indicates that humans are capable of creating religious beliefs.
Either, all the others are creations and Christianity is the “true one,” or they are all creations.
Humans don’t want to accept mortality.
Humans don’t want to accept that life has no intrinsic meaing.
That it’s unpleasant and disappointing does not mean that it is a false idea. Nothing says the universe has to be constucted to please you.
Report comment to moderator
Interesting article…
You said a mouth full!
Report comment to moderator
Random Name, there is indeed intrinsic meaning “out there.” In fact, the universe vibrates with it, as does your post, and the thoughts in your head. The only place where intrinsic meaning is doubted is in the human soul…the crux of creation–human choice! But I totally agree that if humans are the bottom line reality, we have reason to despair. Fortunately, we aren’t. The universe is not constructed to please us. It’s about Christ! Here is glory! Thus Olympianism will end on the ashheap of human history, like every other misguided human yearning. But Christ, the root of every good, lives on.
Report comment to moderator
Random Name, please allow me to respond to your questions.
What is God’s purpose for human beings on earth?
To glorify Him.
If Jesus is going to return, he is long overdue.
I’m not going to tell God his business, but I tend to feel the same way.
Why this myth has such hold on humans is mystifying to me.
From St. Augustine, 4th Cent. A.D. “Thou hast made me for Thyself, O Lord, and my heart is restless ’till it finds its rest in Thee.”
There are many other religions. This indicates that humans are capable of creating religious beliefs.
True
Either, all the others are creations and Christianity is the “true one,” or they are all creations.
Christianity is the true one. All others are dead ends.
Humans don’t want to accept mortality.
We don’t have much choice. We fear the unknown. I think it’s immortality, what comes afterward, that gives us pause.
Humans don’t want to accept that life has no intrinsic meaing.
Oh, but it does. Why don’t we all kill ourselves then?
That it’s unpleasant and disappointing does not mean that it is a false idea. Nothing says the universe has to be constucted to please you.
Well, originally the earth was constructed as a very pleasant place but we destroyed it very quickly. Since then we have had to accommodate ourselves to multiplying effects of sin. I don’t know about the greater universe.
Report comment to moderator
It’s of thread, but do you think members of the Olympic committee saw the news about the gangs and the teenager being beat to death on the streets of Chicago while he was going to school.
Hmm. maybe Chicago lost this on its own.
Report comment to moderator
Obama is not necessarily an Olympiad.
The Olympiads are white elites that believe that the foundations of western culture are bad and must be destroyed and that people should be introduced to new enlightened ways of thinking, such as atheism, socialism, no distinction at all between the sexes or heteros and gays, the unnecessary and foolish nature of marriage, the desirableness of abortion, and other ways of thinking.
Black people or other non white people who do not like America or western culture do not think like the white elites that hate western culture or America. The non whites are not against religion. If they are muslim, then they are against non Islamic religions. Their rejection of Christianity is not a rejection all religion. They are religious. Socially, they are conservative and against atheism and abortion and gay marriage.
They regard the terrorism problem as being caused by the Christians and jews who they regard as being unfair to muslims. They are very resentful of the wealth of the west and the fact that their culture has not had the same power. They use the language of western liberals to describe their supposed oppression. However, in their own lands, they are not against any kind of oppression and, in fact, they do not accept the concept as applied to themselves. In their own nations, there is no or little call for freedom or reform. They are not disturbed by what goes on in Iran or China or Venezuela. They do not believe they are required to have free elections or free speech or religious toleration of anything of the sort. Those few in those cultures that do believe in such things are in a very weak position. Most of their fellow citizens do not support them.
They believe that they should rule the world and insist that they have no power as the world is now and that whites have all the power. They are enemies of each other, but united in the detestation of the west.
I believe Obama’s message to the world is closer to the non white view that wants black people or Chinese or muslims to occupy the place in the world that whites do now. It is not a secular progressive view. It is an anti christian view, not anti all religions.
Some of that group may say they support communism. But it is not an atheistic communism. Rather, it is a hostility to private ownership and to business and a feeling that if non whites ruled the world everyone would share everything equally or someone in charge would decide who gets what based on need or virtue. That may be the only idea that the non whites have in common with the white Olympiads.
When Obama goes abroad and bows to the Saudis and the Japanese, but not to the Norwegian or British queen, that is a meaningful gesture to many around the world. When he apologizes for America and shows open disdain for the British, that is also understood. I am rejecting the white man and showing my support for my people is the message that people receive. When he shows extraordinary concern for the prisoners at Gitmo, for instance, everyone knows what he means. It is not the same feeling as felt by the white Olympiads, rather, it is a show of unity for his people. This at least is how Obama is understood.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!