Meeting People Where They Are

Jünger's thoughts on what theologians and the Church must recognize about people as they are today.

Theologians of today must be prepared to deal with people as they are today—above all with people who do not live in sheltered reserves or other lower pressure zones. A man stands before them who has emptied his chalice of suffering and doubt, a man formed far more by nihilism than by the church—ignoring for the moment how much nihilism is concealed in the church itself. Typically, this person will be little developed ethically or spiritually, however eloquent he may be in convincing platitudes. He will be alert, intelligent, active, skeptical, inartistic, a natural-born debaser of higher types and ideas, an insurance fanatic, someone set on his own advantage, and easily manipulated by the catchphrases of propaganda whose often abrupt turnabouts he will hardly perceive; he will gush with humanitarian theory, yet be equally inclined to awful violence beyond all legal limits or international law whenever a neighbor or fellow human being does not fit into his system. At the same time he will feel haunted by malevolent forces, which penetrate even into his dreams, have a low capacity to enjoy himself, and have forgotten the meaning of a real festival. On the other hand, it must be added that he enjoys the advantages of a peaceful age of technological comfort: that the average life expectancy has significantly risen; that the basic tenets of theoretical equality are universally recognized; and that, in some places at least, there are models to be studied of lifestyles that, in their comfort for all levels of society, their individual freedoms, and automatized perfection, have perhaps never existed before. It is not unthinkable that this lifestyle will spread after the titanic era of technology has run its course. Just the same, man is suffering a loss, and this loss explains the manifest grayness and hopelessness of his existence, which in some cities and even in whole lands so overshadows life that the last smiles have been extinguished and people seem trapped in Kafkaesque underworlds.

- The Forest Passage (1951)

Jünger’s prescience is on full display in this paragraph written some 72 years ago. These days, the Christian churches often speak of “meeting people where they’re at.” This is usually taken to mean that the Church ought to make first contact, and that it ought to do so even if an individual or a community is far from holiness or faith. A recent document from the Vatican seems to hone in on this pastoral approach, as it lays down guidelines for how a priest is to approach a couple in an “irregular situation” seeking a blessing.

However, the Vatican and other Christian churches, by my estimation, seem entirely unaware of exactly where the average person is at, nevermind the culture as a whole. Frankly, the Church seems out of touch, incapable of speaking with authority on the present moment. At times, it even seems to be more friendly with the world than with the average orthodox believer. (Another Jünger comment is timely here: “When all institutions have become equivocal or even disreputable, and when open prayers are heard even in churches not for the persecuted but for the persecutors, at this point moral responsibility passes into the hands of individuals, or, more accurately, into the hands of any still unbroken individuals”).

So where are we as a culture? What is the state of the average person today? The paragraph pulled from The Forest Passage spells it out perfectly.

First, people today are “formed far more by nihilism than by the church.” Speak to any pastor or religious educator who deals regularly with young people: today’s youth are incredibly ignorant when it comes to Christian history and the Scriptures. I personally have met not a few people who were unaware of basic Old Testament figures like Moses, David, or Elijah. Even the figure of Jesus has been reduced to that of a kind and hippie-esque moral teacher in the popular imagination. The average person today is uneducated on the Christian faith and certainly has a paltry grasp of things like “salvation,” "grace,” and “sin.” No, today’s individual is a nihilist and is more likely to view the world as being ultimately meaningless. Today’s individual is far closer to the sentiment “God is dead” than “God is real.” The influence of the Church has waned even among its own members. One only needs to look at the number of Catholics who dissent on transubstantiation, birth control, abortion, and so-called gay marriage to understand this.

Typically, this person will be little developed ethically or spiritually, however eloquent he may be in convincing platitudes.

People today are very quick to spout off some nonsense about being a heckin wholesome human bean, but if one were to press them on why such compassionate morality is correct, they would either crumble or give some poorly thought-out platitude about obligations to others or love, without the slightest idea of the implications behind either of those concepts. Some today, mostly young women, are even reverting to occult and pagan practices, though these practices are about as shallow as the rest of the best-sellers in Barnes and Noble.

He will be alert, intelligent, active, skeptical, inartistic, a natural-born debaser of higher types and ideas, an insurance fanatic, someone set on his own advantage, and easily manipulated by the catchphrases of propaganda whose often abrupt turnabouts he will hardly perceive; he will gush with humanitarian theory, yet be equally inclined to awful violence beyond all legal limits or international law whenever a neighbor or fellow human being does not fit into his system.

One development I believe Vatican II was entirely correct to adopt was a more “positive” type of explanation of the faith in catechesis and evangelization. Vatican II rightly pointed out that we live in an age where people are more educated, literate (debatable), always keeping up with the latest news and world events, active in social life, and skeptical of authority. The old methods just weren’t going to cut it. Again, I applaud Vatican II on this point. However, Vatican II and the Church today are far too optimistic about how modern man would use these traits. In the ecstasy of the 60s it appeared as if we would continue our march of progress and build this near-utopian society of equality and wealth and the like. How has that turned out? The promised racial reconciliation has failed miserably. Economic disparity continues and the economy stagnates. Our reach for the stars was cut short. Technological progress has accelerated, but overall quality of life does not seem to have grown at quite the same pace. Wars rage and ideological divisions continue. The truth is that modern people are easily persuaded and speak far more humanitarian language than their actions would warrant. A person today will simultaneously opine on the evils of oppression while also calling for their ideological opponents to be disposed of by any means necessary. Being kind and compassionate and patient with others only really applies to one’s ideological allies. From without the camp, all is fair game, including State persecution.

At the same time he will feel haunted by malevolent forces, which penetrate even into his dreams, have a low capacity to enjoy himself, and have forgotten the meaning of a real festival.

What does this mean, especially the first part about malevolent forces? This is quite esoteric, but consider the rise of psychiatric episodes, the fixation on aliens and the supernatural, the rise of occult practices, magic stones, belief in auras, and the nebulous but very influential idea of “vibes.” Everything can be evaluated by the “vibe” it gives off, and I do not believe people are being entirely ironic or facetious in using this term. Next, consider Jünger’s comment about how people today have a low capacity for personal enjoyment and leisure. At first glance, this assertion seems easy to dismiss. But I would ask you to ponder it more deeply. The gym is not a place of enjoyment, but of work, refinement, content creation, and mating rituals. The movies aren’t quite like they used to be, dancing is either entirely sexual or completely atomized, and the smartphone does not allow for any real time off from obligations to others or to the economy. What Jünger means by the forgetting of real festival is that our culture is incapable of having communal moments of pure merriment, either driven by some transcendent idea (a religious festival) or simply by good circumstances, like a bountiful harvest or the changing of seasons. Our leisure activities must be compartmentalized, labeled, scheduled, accounted for, and serve some purpose. Moreover, in the wake of the pandemic measures, social life has been hollowed out and the alienation processes already taking place beforehand were accelerated.

On the other hand, it must be added that he enjoys the advantages of a peaceful age of technological comfort: that the average life expectancy has significantly risen; that the basic tenets of theoretical equality are universally recognized; and that, in some places at least, there are models to be studied of lifestyles that, in their comfort for all levels of society, their individual freedoms, and automatized perfection, have perhaps never existed before.

This is the easiest part of the section to understand, and probably universally recognized by all today. The question, then, becomes about the consequences of this for our souls, our culture, our governments, our economies, our local communities, our church, and so on. Such an endeavor would require a far lengthier essay than what I could possibly present here, though I may yet attempt it. Ernst Jünger offers many thoughts on this, as does his brother Friedrich-Georg. We can get an idea of what fruits he sees from our technological comfort, though, in the following comment:

Just the same, man is suffering a loss, and this loss explains the manifest grayness and hopelessness of his existence, which in some cities and even in whole lands so overshadows life that the last smiles have been extinguished and people seem trapped in Kafkaesque underworlds.

Such a conclusion is not unique. Many before and after Jünger have recognized the ways in which technology has actually impoverished us and negatively affected our lives, especially immaterially. Yes, our material wealth is greater than at any other point in history, and our technology provides us an unprecedented level of comfort and freedom. Nevertheless, our happiness is on an obvious decline, illustrated most vividly by the rise in suicides, legalized euthanasia, and widespread drug abuse. We are comfortably depressed, our existentialism occurring alongside our incredible wealth and safety.

Now, we go back to the beginning of this whole discussion. Jünger says all this in the context of theology. Isn’t that curious? Well, perhaps if you are not Christian. A Christian will immediately recognize that these problems actually fall outside the realm of philosophy at the end of the day. A Christian understands that many of these problems—perhaps all of them—are intimately related to the human soul; they take place in the context of our fallen, sinful nature. Of course, our fallen state manifests itself in diverse manners throughout history. However, it seems especially poignant today, and this is likely, no, certainly due to the collapse of Christian morality and social relevance. As Christianity wanes, so will ancient sins manifest themselves more strongly than they have in the past thousand years. Polygamy, sodomy, child sacrifice, violence, feuds, race hatred, and even witchcraft; all on the rise.

Therefore, when the Church says it wishes to “meet people where they’re at,” does it actually realize where we are at? Does it recognize the dire situation humanity finds itself in? Does it see the depravity of our ways, the total collapse of basic Christian morality, and the ways in which egalitarianism and liberal democracy have given way to authoritarianism? Does it recognize that the Cultural Revolution, far from ushering in an era of humanitarian progress and social harmony, has resulted in hatred and division among the sexes, the races, the classes, and the ideologies?

Frankly, I do not believe the Church has quite woken up to where we are at, and this is part of the reason why I find much of what the Church has to say to be rather uninspiring, irrelevant, unhelpful, and even harmful. As long as the Church continues to live in this fantasyland wherein the message of Gaudium et Spes was actually received and taken to heart (or ever even possible, to be frank), or where environmental concerns rank higher than moral concerns for the Church, it will fade into obscurity and will sound like a clanging cymbal. Theologians and Church leaders must recognize that the traits of modern man which were presented in such an optimistic and hopeful manner in the 1960s have turned out to be rather monstrous and destructive.

I have heard it said that the Church must interpret the signs of the times. I agree. It just isn’t doing this, or at least isn’t doing it well. The signs of the times indicate that Christianity is in a bad way, that abominable sins are rising, that the Gospel is under attack, that people are unhappy and depressed, that people lack meaning, that democracy has failed its mission, that egalitarianism doesn’t work as promised, and that a lax, “pastoral” approach to the world just isn’t working. The world doesn’t need a weak, happy clappy kumbaya church that can’t accept its 1960s hopes have not and will not come to fruition. The world needs a Church that is committed to proclaiming the Gospel, calling people to repentance, giving them meaning and purpose, and strengthening them spiritually with the sacraments and orthodox teaching.