Bourgeois Christianity is a defective way of understanding and living the Gospel, present in some contemporary societies such as ours. What does it consist of? Like other relevant concepts, bourgeois is a polysemic expression. In its most common sense, it serves to refer to a member of the well-to-do social class , who has a liberal profession or - in Marxist terminology - is the owner of the means of production. In another frequent sense, it describes the attitude of someone who avoids demands and tries to lead a comfortable, gentrified life. In this way it is sometimes used in religious contexts to reproach those who live a Christianity that excludes the cross. However, none of these meanings is relevant to what we are trying to explain here.

A bourgeois Christian is defined by two characteristic traits. First, he conceives religion in an individualistic way and, second, he has forgotten the strong sense of mission statement present in the Church since its origins. It could be said that it is a selfish faith, since its main concern is to save one's own soul. Moreover, and this is perhaps the most distinctive feature, its main desire is to achieve security and stability. In this way, the creative impetus of one who conceives life as a response to a call is nullified. The spiritual horizon of such a person is predictable, even boring.

Using Ortega y Gasset's concepts, we could speak of a Christianity with a mass mentality, which does not wish to leave vulgarity behind - the sociological average - nor aspire to the noble existence of those who place their talents at the service of a higher ideal. Conformism and assimilation reign. As with Ortega's mass-man, bourgeois Christianity is not an exclusive phenomenon of a social class , it can occur in people of different conditions. Paradoxically, this mentality is sometimes found among those who respect the main commandments, participate in pious acts and give alms, that is, those who seem to lead a demanding Christian life.

The core topic to explain this phenomenon is found in religious sociology, since the culture of each historical moment shapes the way in which people incarnate their faith. Culture and religion form a binomial that is difficult to separate. Even in post-Christian societies such as Spain's, the influence that religion continues to exert is undeniable. At the same time, as in every binomial, there is also influence in the other direction. Because of its historical character, the Christian religion is not impervious to the dominant values of each era.

It was Benedict XVI who most clearly denounced such a drift from the message of Jesus. As he maintains in Spe Salvi, Christianity has come to be thought of as something "strictly individualistic" or a "selfish search for salvation" due to the influence of certain ideas proper to modern societies. Specifically, it would be the result of having privatized the Christian notion of hope. The attempt to solve the world's problems "as if God did not exist" caused religion to be confined to the sphere of conscience, the home and the temple, as Charles Taylor has explained in The Secular Age.

It is true that this historical evolution brought positive effects such as the separation of Church and State and the consecration of conscience staff as an inviolable sphere. However, it also had negative consequences. Believers forgot the social dimension of their faith, as Henri de Lubac warned in Catholicism. Social Aspects of Dogma. Moreover, moralistic attitudes arose, reducing religion to the ethical (i.e., to the purely natural), thus betraying the essence of Christianity, to use the well-known expression of Romano Guardini.

What is lacking in a bourgeois Christian is an interest in transforming reality. Although faith is not identified with any concrete political structure or social organization, neither does it ignore the destiny of the world. It is in our hands to try to open hearts - our own and those of others - so that God can act in them. This is the specific contribution of Christians to society: to share the joy of the Gospel, the law of charity and a hopeful vision of the future.

In our country, the Christian contribution, which would benefit everyone, is missing. This status is due more to the inaction or indifference of believers than to rampant secularism. It is, in all probability, the main consequence of bourgeois Christianity. In a society of deep religious roots and with such an extensive network of educational institutions of Catholic statement of core values -many of them of first level- it is surprising the scarce public presence (in culture, Economics or politics) of the evangelical message. The numbers do not add up. There has been a clear neglect of functions: those who were in a position to lead have not wanted to or have not known how to do so. They may have confused professional triumph with the glitter of performance and efficiency, instead of measuring it in terms of fruitfulness and contribution to the common good. Beyond the indispensable, generous and praiseworthy activity of organizations such as Caritas in caring for the marginalized, where is the Christian response to the "culture of the "buck" of our economic system, the desperate search for meaning of so many young people or the growing civic fracture that lacerates, day by day, the social fabric?

"Even among Catholics who seem responsible and pious, there is often the error of thinking that they are only obliged to fulfill their family and religious duties, and they hardly want to hear about civic duties. So said a contemporary Spaniard, Josemaría Escrivá. In fact, one might add, these civic duties are identified, in the best of cases, with paying taxes and complying with the laws, that is, with what is proper to a respectable person, a good bourgeois. In his diagnosis, this contemporary saint concluded that in most cases the problem is not one of ill will, but of lack of training. There has been a deficient transmission of the faith in the family, the parish and the school. Therefore, the solution lies, as for almost all important issues, in the Education.

An expression that a friend of mine often uses summarizes well what has been said here: he who believes, creates. The believer creates family, creates culture, creates community. Everything that is alive is fruitful. On the other hand, a bourgeois faith is sterile. It is not necessarily a question of creating something new (Structures, institutions or parties), but of realizing in another way - with a sense of mission statement- the ordinary, in particular work, since it is where we usually live together with other citizens and could become the place par excellence of social participation. Professions - in all their forms: from the most reputable to the most humble - possess an extraordinary transforming power when they are carried out with a service mentality and not merely as a means to obtain sustenance, satisfaction staff or success.