It would have disabled him from doing what he did; and he might have ended up condemning the world, rather than saving it. Only on the cross was it permissible for him to grasp something of the whole truth, of which the Nicean Creed grasps perhaps a glimmer. Just as no theory of War measures up to the reality as experienced by the soldier, whether he be general or private; so no theory of religion measures up to reality as experienced by those who try to live by its faith. The irreligious mock because theory is so inadequate; but it is equally inadequate for the religious. Only those who live by the Rule Book find it adequate, by the gospel of Political Correctness, by the gospel of Health and Safety, grasping at anything that denies the human spirit its initiative and ability to mature. Jesus had quite a lot to say about them in Mathew chapter 23. He wanted people to have abundant life.
And surely society or the state should have abundant life too; and be a place in which people are honest, trust each other, give value for money, do a hard day’s work? The state is not a collection of individuals; it is a loosely knit team. Indeed in my opinion, the state consists of the integration of the thoughts and beliefs of all the individuals of which it is composed; and these are all interrelated to some degree by the forces of public opinion. Even if power is concentrated in a relatively small minority, no dictator or oligarchy can defy for long the wishes of all the people, or in the end they get rid of them as power disintegrates. If this is correct, then the citizen’s thoughts and beliefs, which must of course include his or her religious thoughts and beliefs, must reach an accommodation with the prevalent views of society, so as to keep alive the living traditions on which that society is based. Otherwise a sect or church which refuses to reach any accommodation with the views of society simply becomes a monastery or ghetto, sponging on the state but taking no part in its life. Nor is it any good being self-conscious about the living traditions of your society; they must be spontaneous and almost second nature. For this reason, political correctness cannot change society; it can only destroy part of society, to the detriment of the whole. So my conclusion is that it is no longer satisfying, if it ever was, to pursue salvation for the individual. You need salvation for society as well, because only in a coherent society can an individual achieve his own coherence. Even if it strips the ecclesiastical establishment of all their power, ultimately religion must reach an accommodation with the state, in the sense that religious truth, so far as it exists, must permeate the thinking of both the state and its institutions, like all truth.