Nov 13
To Gracy Olmstead and her blogpost that asks whether we can restore civility to America. She suggests public action as a way of increasing public civility. This appeared in the Imaginative Conservative Blog.
Perhaps the most lethal Christian weapon against incivility comes from the parable of the two men praying (see Luke 18: 9-14, https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke+18%3A9-14&version=NIV). For incivility assumes some sort of superiority over another person and nothing destroys the notion of one's own superiority like that parable.
However more needs to be said. That is because the siren call of believing in one's superiority comes in many forms. It comes to us individuals when we compare our own intellect, wealth, physical abilities, beliefs or actions with those of other people. It also comes to us in groups when we compare our race, nationality, religion, or economic class with other groups.
The irony here is that the notion of superiority appeals to those with authoritarian personality types and one of the besetting sins of many of us religiously conservative Christians is to embrace an authoritarian personality type for ourselves. And yet, the notion of all of us being equal because of our sins is a Biblical belief whether one consults the parable of the two men praying or what Paul says in Romans 3:9. At the same time, there are many nonChristians who understand many of their faults sins without our preaching and who favor civility.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Michael De Sapio and his blogpost asking whether we can stop the decline of the West. This appeared in the Imaginative Conservative blog.
Though it might be fun for some to speculate on the decline of the West, most of that speculation reveals more about the source than the object. What is decline? It is the turn toward decadence which, in reality, is a condemnation of turning from the masculine to the feminine -- see 'the turn from hardness and virility to “effeminacy” and “softness".'
What causes decline? According to the article, a possible cause includes 'that it has lost its former spiritual core—based first on Christian and then upon Enlightenment ideals.' Such a statement by itself shows a total, rather than partial, rejection of Post Modernism which is confirmed by what follows that quote. And yet, what was Post Modernism reacting to? For what stage of Western history did not advancement greatly depend on or demonstrate exploitation and conquest? Again, we return to the glorification of the masculine over the feminine. Don't Post Modernists have any valid concerns over the past abuses of people? And how can we be smug when our evidence for the greatness of Western Civilization so heavily depends on what we have accomplished and gained for ourselves at the expense of failing to recognize the dignity of others?
Post Modernism is correct in challenging us to question not just ourselves but our basic beliefs and assumptions about life. The problem with Post Modernism is whether it has provided us with real tools for change. If it has not, then Post Modernism will fall prey to the standards it uses to judge the past. In the meantime, there have always been too many faults with the West to look at the present and recent past and declare that the West is in decline.
No comments:
Post a Comment