Monday, July 13, 2020

Excarnation III: Paragraphs to Ponder.



While the effects of an excarnational culture can most easily be seen in the domain of sexuality, it's most pernicious effects lay in other areas. While reading up on the subject, I stumbled across this article by Professor Andrew Sandlin, which I think is worth some thought;
The Bible does not exalt spirit over matter; Jesus is Lord of the invisible and visible world (Col. 1:15–17). Yet ever since pagan Greek ideas of the inferiority of the material world infected Christianity, the church has battled with excarnation. Even as the church prays, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Mt. 6:10), many Christians view the world outside the church — economics, politics, entertainment, education, and architecture — as inescapably “carnal” (fleshly) and unfit for Christian influence. So the church retreats to an excarnated spirituality.
Prayer, interior dialogue, and contemplation of heaven are considered spiritual, while working to re-criminalise abortion, de-legitimize same-sex “marriage,” combat pornography, and reduce government theft programmes in the form of confiscatory taxation are relatively unimportant and, in fact, a diversion from the church’s real, excarnated tasks. Escape from evil within the created order rather than confrontation with and victory over it is the excarnational agenda. Christianity is reduced to a “personal devotional hobby.”

But Advent stares us unflinchingly in the face with the truth that the present world, immaterial and material, is cursed by sin and is to be redeemed by the death and resurrection of our Lord. The most evil being in the universe is pure spirit, but Jesus was born and lived and died and rose from the dead and lives forever in a body. He is profoundly interested in the world, including the material world. He came healing the sick and exorcising demons from tortured bodies. To trust in the Messiah for salvation is to surrender oneself mind, soul, body — our entire self — to him (Rom. 12:1–2)
He is as interested in purging sin from gangsta rap and abortion clinics and fraudulent bond-rating agencies and Bauhaus architecture as he is from Christian hearts and families and churches. The cleansing power of the Gospel does not simply take souls to heaven; it transforms everything it touches.
If I had to define what Caritas is, it would be; a potency, when realised in act, perfects form. Or in other words, Christian love, in act, transforms things into their perfection. Now the important thing to recognise is that it is a transformative power, not simply of the individual but of the world. The excarnational approach neutralises this resulting in a de-Christianisation of the culture. You end up with a world of beautiful churches but terrible public administration: Catholic and Orthodox Europe?

This type of Christianity seeks to avoid the world, not engage it, and hence all the various types of "Benedict Options" out there. Combine it with a Tolstoyan/Pacifist interpretation of the Bible and you've a got a combination that is unable to resist the collapse of Christian civilisation. And yet this was not always the case. I'm currently reading Owen Chadwick's, The Secularisation of the European Mind in the Nineteenth Century: it's a really good book. But I was struck by this passage which is so out of spirit with our times:
To the middle twentieth century, where priests are expected to be of the left and to encourage revolution in South America or southern Africa, this is a more surprising juxtaposition than men of the nineteenth century found it. Here, for example, is a speech made by Archdeacon Christopher Wordsworth, son of a Master of Trinity, nephew of a poet, soon to be Bishop of Lincoln, at a Tory meeting in Reading on t February 1865. He engaged to define Conservatism:
What, gentlemen, is Conservatism? It is the application of Christianity to civil government. And what is English Conservatism? It is the adoption of the principles of the Church of England as the groundwork of legislation.[ED] Gentlemen, I say it with reverence, the most Conservative book in the world is the Bible, and the next most Conservative book in the world is the Book of Common Prayer.
The Church the mainstay of order — that is the conviction common to both sides; both of the revolutionary who wants to overthrow order and therefore the Church, and of the conservative who wane to maintain order and therefore the Church. The religious revival of the nineteenth century, evident in all countries of western Europe, did not depend upon faith in the political usefulness of Churches. They did not even depend only upon the background rattle of ghostly tumbrils on the streets. But this shadow of social ruin was quite important as a religious force. We can the more easily understand it when we remember how in our time Nazi terror forced many western Europeans back to enquire into their moral principles and thereby contributed, for a time, to a revival of religion.
One of the great effects of Reformation was to shift the cultural importance of various elements in society. In the Catholic/Orthodox world, where the clergy was to retain much of it's dominance, society continued to be "weighted" to the spiritual whereas, despite its theology, Protestant society resulted in a more of an engagement in "earthly" affairs. Protestantism was far better at "applied" Christianity.

It's my opinion the while Catholicism has remained relatively ideologically uncorrupted by modernity, its Clericalism and emphasis on "spirituality" has resulted in an impotent Church. Protestantism on the other hand was better able to apply Christianity to the "affairs of the world" and transform it. As it has withered so has the world's ability to resist modernity and as I see it, the Catholic Church is going to have to "protestantise" if we plan to get out of this mess.

26 comments:

Genji said...

Gentlemen, I give you the Uniting Church of Australia! No finer example of the ability of Protestantism to engage with the world and preserve values exists.

(In reference to your concluding prescription).

OK, that was a Low Blow.

But seriously, most of the non Kevin MacDonaldish aspects of Progressive Syphilisational Rot trace themselves via Old School Protestantism with of course the Puritan Strain being the Vanguard --> Unitarianism --> Abominations like Woodrow Wilson -- eventually The Great Clapped Out Yankee Brahminism Voluntary Capitulation to the Clever People from the Pale post WWII... and of course parallels in other parts of the West.

Protestantism seems to me to be just another stepping stone on the road to perdition. I don't blame them or the Unmentionables. Most of history is emergent phenomena.

I'm too unschooled to put a finger on where we went wrong. Some talk about the Reformation. Some point the finger at Aquinas. David Stove thought that Western Thought went bad back in the pre-Socratics IIRC. It's all above my pay grade.

Yes, Dreher and Benedict Option types are just cucked out losers. Nobody gets to sit out what's coming down the pike this time because the Barbarians are Ourselves and we're dealing with some kind of autoimmune disease.

I just don't know. Sorry to sound so black pilled.


Genji said...

As for Roman Catholicism:

Clearly the obsession with sexual continence has driven people away. In Australia, too, the Irish becoming assimilated and deracinated at light speed during the (roughly) 1960s was significant in decay of religious belief and behaviour.

But ultimately the problem with all types of Christianity is Faith. It's hard work and frankly rather unattractive and ridiculous to many people. Just the facts. Vatican II trashed Ritual and I don't need to be an anthropologist to know just how effing retarded that move was.

Religions which emphasise public outward compliance with the Law (Islam) in daily life or compliance with the Law whilst Out-lawyering God (Judaism) are doing just fine.

Any resultant increase in individual or community Faith is an added downstream bonus. Despite the official line, you can't build on a foundation of Faith which seems to be the Post Vatican II delusion. Hell, wasn't Luther anathematised up the wazoo for Sola Fide?

A smart program of Catholic Reconstruction would obviously bring back the Latin Mass, work on having a properly-educated parish clergy -- they are mostly a joke -- the most awful ululating Pentecostal Minister often has a tolerable grasp of Hebrew and the Koine and can converse intelligently on at least some textual matters. Good luck with finding this sort amongst the very iffy often creepy clergy in AU.

I read Father Hunwicke's blog and whilst he's very tactful, the intellectual capacity chasm between his High Church Anglican background and the RC Hierarchy let alone Clergy is obvious.

^^-- Now perhaps this brings us to a good argument for married secular clergy. It ought to be possible to go back whilst going forward.

Could also dump some of the more egregious C19 Mariolotry Inventions perhaps, too.

Educated, non sexually perverted-clergy, Public Ritual in a Dead Language, perhaps a recognition that the Universal Church is best made up of Ethnic Parishes (just look around you to see who actually has active congregations esp. amongst the Orthodox), and a massive dose of the Red or Black Pill re the Nature of Women. How the RC Church let its womenfolk run amok since the 60s is a tale for another day.

Hoyos said...

Genji, you may have stuff right but I feel like we’re leaving God out of the equation.

One thing I’ve learned despite all the chest thumping is people aren’t as afraid of hard work as we seem led to believe. Heathens will work like hell, literally and figuratively. What people won’t do is work at something they can’t see the benefit of. I might even posit that it’s a perversion of the work ethic to work hard for it’s own sake but that’s a tangent.

CS Lewis posited that the best evangelism would be a speaker who addressed intellectual concerns, followed by a preacher giving the plain come to Jesus gospel. He said he has seen it done to great effect. He also said apologists run the risk of having their faith rest on their personal intellects, I would say like a philosophy more than a religion. When it comes to applied Christianity among conservatives the temptation is similar, trying to get the faith to rely on our own strength.

There is no “system” without God’s blessing that works. The problems following V2 didn’t fall out if a clear blue sky after the council. The problems started long before.

If we aren’t personally engaging with God there is no collection of tactics that can supply the deficit. The corruption and failure we’re experiencing has to be a result of human beings using their free will to disengage from God on a personal basis.

Faith isn’t hard, Jesus said His yoke was easy. What it is is an affront to pride. A man can be a proud ascetic as well as a proud hedonist. What they both have in common is a reliance on their own view of things as opposed to God. Excarnation is a great term for the perennial heresy of Gnosticism.

When a man personally tries to walk with God, day by day, I believe God will lead him to the men and methods that best suit his time on earth. There are old revolutionary war battle flags in America inscribed with the words “an appeal to heaven”. It was known by these men that their efforts were useless without Divine assistance but that by no means meant they were to do nothing in the meantime. These were battle flags after all.

Genji said...

Hoyos:

Your first sentence hits the nail on the head. This probably says more about me than about the bigger societal issues, I'll happily admit.

Much food for thought (for me at least) in the body of your text.

I like your ending, too.

Anonymous said...

I do not know what is a solution but I know one thing. Ritual in Dead Language is not. That was one of the chief reasons why religion turned into meaningless folklore in cradle communities. You can have Tridentine Mass in vernacular. But I am not even sure of the need for that. I have seen Novus Ordo performed ad orientem, in traditional vestments, and with due reverence, and it is much superior to Latin Mass. And while current liturgical abuses are truly awful, pre-Vatican II days also had their own liturgical abuses. You had a market in Low Masses, where you paid to have masses said for a specific purpose e.g. you want your son to find a wife so you pay a priest to say a few masses. It reduced the liturgy into a good-luck charm.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Genji

Very blackpilled!

But seriously, most of the non Kevin MacDonaldish aspects of Progressive Syphilisational Rot trace themselves via Old School Protestantism with of course the Puritan Strain being the Vanguard

To a certain degree that's true. But not all Protestantisms are alike. See to me, the standard Protestantism-> Liberalism trope is incomplete without a consideration of Grace. My current working theory is that certain strands and historical forms of it did enjoy God's grace and were legitimate Christian expressions, unable to be achieved in Catholicism due to clerical inertia. The unmooring of it from the Papacy meant that it would develop into forms which were not in God's grace and hence the degeneracy.

Yes, Dreher and Benedict Option types are just cucked out losers. Nobody gets to sit out what's coming down the pike this time because the Barbarians are Ourselves and we're dealing with some kind of autoimmune disease

This.

@Hoyos

There is no “system” without God’s blessing that works. The problems following V2 didn’t fall out if a clear blue sky after the council. The problems started long before.

Absolutely correct. Many of the assumptions of Church reform operate as if what God wants doesn't matter. Are we sure he wants a Latin mass, when his son spoke in Aramaic?

A man can be a proud ascetic as well as a proud hedonist. What they both have in common is a reliance on their own view of things as opposed to God. Excarnation is a great term for the perennial heresy of Gnosticism.

Yes.

The corruption and failure we’re experiencing has to be a result of human beings using their free will to disengage from God on a personal basis.

See, even here the picture here is complicated. Taylor briefly mentions "providential secularism." Sometimes I wonder, if given the state of clerical thinking at the moment, God is protecting people from them. It's something I've been mulling over.

@Anon

I have seen Novus Ordo performed ad orientem, in traditional vestments, and with due reverence, and it is much superior to Latin Mass.

I'm not sure if its superior but I've had the same experience. I always worry about the Latin Mass guys: are they coming for the star or the show?

Genji said...

@Anon & @GenialHost

My problem with Novus Ordo is that language matters. I’ll grant that one could argue with Latin. What one should *not* have though is utterly vulgar cheapened usages which drive away all but the most saccharine people. This is something I’ve picked up from Father Hunwicke’s blog. It’s not for nothing that the Ordinariate to which he belongs made a deal to keep the Anglican High Church Liturgy when they came over to Rome. Language matters. It needs to be a trifle hieratic and there needs also to be a modicum of majesty and timelessness in it.

I could be wrong of course, but I believe that the Common Folk instinctively get this and are on some level repelled when it ain’t so. Liturgical Innovation could possibly be an example of one of those things so damaging if not plain dysgenic that one has to be an Intellectual for it to grok.

Granted some of the Latin Mass Brigade are nutters about other stuff :P

John Rockwell said...

@Genji

Eastern Orthodox Liturgies are each in the language of the Nation they minister to. Yet Majesty and Timelessness isn't damaged by it.

The manner in which they do so is what made the difference.

I believe the split between the East and West due to Filioque controversy may be due to Divine Providence.

Just like genetic diversity allows for greater resistance to disease.

Good practices therefore can be preserved.

Genji said...

@John Rockwell

But have these Eastern Orthodox Liturgical texts been modernised to the max? I think not. I have a hard time imagining the (random pick here) Serbian Orthodox liturgy literary style not harkening back to the Field of Blackbirds and the happy days before? Precisely what in the modern English vernacular Mass gives one even the dimmest hint of the prosody of the Book of Common Prayer, KJV, Milton, etc?

The translators of the KJV deliberately chose a mode of expression that was not the common speech. They (and of course Tyndale before them) knew just what they were about.

Now Voltaire did once make a witty quip that God showed his divine genius through the inspired notion of having much of the NT come out in Bad Greek... but I don't think it's for us humans to be so presumptive.

I'm not schooled in these matters, but believe from casual reading of far more learned writers that there is solid textual evidence that the Early Church went out of its way to construct its liturgies based on modes of Jewish worship which certainly were *not* a la mode at the time. Also read that there is evidence that hymns (for example) were composed in long-established pagan modes. I mean it's obvious that this would be the case when one thinks about it. Nobody sat down and held a conference on creating a new Religion and Liturgy. (They made up for that later with plenty of bun fights and anathemas;) Regardless of the argument about the veracity and divine inspiration of it all, the worldly-plane truth is that Early Christianity was syncretic cult and a 'heresy' amongst heresies which grew like Topsy. It's the one which survived. Until recently, anyway.

You may well be right about the Filioque. I'd put my money on the monks of Athos or Meteora before I'd wager my clapped out wellies on Rod Dreher.

John Rockwell said...

My answer already has the answer:

"Eastern Orthodox Liturgies are each in the language of the Nation they minister to. Yet Majesty and Timelessness isn't damaged by it.

The manner in which they do so is what made the difference."

You cited the ways that it was done that ensured the majesty and timelessness of liturgy even in the language of the Nations were employed outside of Latin. So it can be done.

John Rockwell said...

@Genji

"You may well be right about the Filioque. I'd put my money on the monks of Athos or Meteora before I'd wager my clapped out wellies on Rod Dreher."

His fruits don't speak of a Holy Spirit doing His work in his heart.

Genji said...

@John Rockwell

I think we’re on the same page. The various National Orthodox Churches worship in their own languages. And if it’s not exactly Byzantine Greek or Old Church Slavonic, their present-day liturgical languages have evolved more or less *organically* in parallel with secular languages. Critically they have not engaged in self-conscious modernization in the name of an ersatz deity called Relevance.

Anonymous said...

Trilingual Heresy has had a long history in the Church, even though Latin itself was in the beginning vernacular. Originally Koine (Old Greek) was used, but again not because it was particularly holy, but because it was lingua franca of the Classical Antiquity. Indeed insistence upon using the holy tongues and languages of the angels ultimately leads to Pentecostal gibberish. Of course, all languages have formal, dignified forms that are proper for letters, worship, etc.


http://adoremus.org/2009/09/15/Pope-Benedict-XVI-Saints-Cyril-and-Methodius/

John Rockwell said...

@Genji

And if it can be done in the right spirit. Then Liturgy can be done in English. Here is a sampling of the English Orthodox Chant:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMsuYkzEE4o

And the English Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8MUi27Ff2s

Anonymous said...

The problems with Novus Ordo vs TLM debates is that the big-brained centrist third option, a "TLM in the vernacular" with some additional changes only exists in within the Ordinariate and outside of the Church (i.e. high-church Protestants and Western Rite Orthodoxy). As liberal as the Novus Ordo metrics are, a Catholic priest can't actually celebrate such a mass unless approval comes from the top. This is the obvious way to go and could even preserve some of the post-Vatican II music from things like folk masses--at its worst hippie garbage but at its best perfectly acceptable.

Example of how the synthesis could work: In the TLM, the priest and the altar server say the confiteior in latin in a low voice with certain body gestures facing the altar, one after the other. In the NO, if the confitieor is said at all (depends what mood Father is in I guess), its said audibly facing the congregation and everyone can join in. Instead, the priest and altar server can keep the same gestures and orientation, but say the confiteior in Vernacular, at the same time, with everyone joining in. As a layman whose not a liturgy expert I don't see whats so hard about doing this, or having the priest chant the readings in the vernacular rather than having a layperson boringly recite them (like you're at school), or etc.

Ingemar said...

I've been a fan of yours for many years Doc, but one thing that you and many dissident Rightists miss the mark on is this:

Christians will eventually lose the world.

Yes, it's true that the world would be better if they followed Catholic teachings rather than if they didn't. Yes, the excarnation of the Faith was a disaster. Yes, it would be nice if marital love was based on more than legal obligation or coercion.

But the truth of the matter is that although the Catholic Church became the institution on which the sun did not set, it still was destroyed. Why?

I think it's because Catholics took for granted that the Church would always be there; did no Jesus promise the gates of Hell would not prevail against Peter? Yet He didn't promise the size, scope and reach of the Church wouldn't be rolled back; in fact He did promise that the state of the Church would deteriorate to such an extent that if He did not return sooner, there would be no faith left in the world.

The Right is futilely trying to concoct naturalistic means by which they can shore their numbers against the invading globalist Left, yet the latter have all the various and sundry means of temptations to nullify those advantages; what good is a large, white family if the children are addicted to media and attend public schools, which plant the seeds of wanting to live like a reprobate, decoupling sexual pleasure from procreation? Or worse, convincing sons that they are actually girls?

Christianity, when taken to its harshest extremes, is not fun. It is a path of self-mortification and the harsh fact of the matter is that many will necessarily abandon it for something that makes more sense to them. Jesus whittled His following from several hundred to twelve after the Bread of Life discourse. And today we are experiencing another winnowing, but this time due to the postconciliar Church abandoning her perennial teachings. Vatican II was a looting operation, plain and simple, and the enemies of Christ are wearing the church buildings as a skin suit. Who needs the faithful when George Soros and the CCP can supply all material needs better?

Anonymous said...

@Genji: In the US, we is that we already have ethnic parishes to a large degree. Many dioceses will explicitly have non-territorial ethnic parishes for recent immigrant groups like Vietnamese, Koreans, or Nigerians, like they did for Poles and Slovaks in the old days. Plus, the people who attend the Spanish (or whatever) mass in a non-ethnic parish will de facto operate as an parish-within-a-parish, seeing their white co-parishioners mostly on Easter and Christmas.

Separating white Catholics like in the old days makes no sense because the huge amount a intermixing: pure-blood Italian or Irish or Polish hardly exists by the Generation X cohort, and everyone is monolingual. So the average Catholic parish is basically a white ethnic parish.

The diocese of Pittsburgh is actually starting a Black (as in African-American, not recent immigrant) non-territoral ethnic parish, which might catch on as part of the whole re-introducing segregation from the left/safety space thing.

Anonymous said...

@Ingemar:

I think one thing to keep in mind is that a lot of the political right isn't looking for a revival of Christian traditions or a solution to some deep spiritual malaise that society is suffering from--they are perfectly fine with a secular, consumerist society as long as there is (1) a high enough standard of living, (2) weird social movements like LGBTQ and radical feminism are kept in check (no fault divorce, boobs on tv, and living with your gf for 3 years before getting engaged are fine though), (3) there's a high enough degree of homogeneity, and (4) there's low enough crime rates. Some version of this attitude is probably the majority in both the mainstream (Boomercons) and the fringes of the right (racist liberals).

Not to go too far off topic, but you see a lot of this in the 80s nostalgia on the right, as well with the minority of right-wing anime fans (the left-wing of Western anime fandom is mostly trans by this point). In both cases, there is a yearning for a consumerist/secular society that is capable of producing entertaining, apolitical to right-wing, pulp media. This is more common then 50s or Victorian/Edwardian nostalgia (all of which are versions of Christian modernity that ultimately failed).

Anonymous said...

>all of which are versions of Christian modernity that ultimately failed

But did not Christian pre-modernity fail as well? I would say that big problem for the Right is nostalgia period. No matter for what era, 80s, 50s, Victorian, Old West, Early Modern, Medieval, Classical Antiquity, whatever... the Right is fond of looking at sanitized, idealized and romanticized reconstruction of the past, rather than at the actual past. This is probably one of the reasons why the Right is unable to formulate a coherent defense against the Leftist onslaught, they are too busy REEEEEEing about how everything used to be better before (exactly what era this before constitutes depends on the brand of rightist in question). But things were like that even before the advent of Christianity, just see what those pagan homos that Christians do like said:

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond words... When I was young, we were taught to be discreet and respectful of elders, but the present youth are exceedingly disrespectful and impatient of restraint." (Hesiod, 8th century BC)

"The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all restraint. They talk as if they alone knew everything and what passes for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for girls, they are forward, immodest and unwomanly in speech, behaviour and dress." (Socrates, 5th century BC)

"What is happening to our young people? They disrespect their elders, they disobey their parents. They ignore the law. They riot in the streets inflamed with wild notions. Their morals are decaying. What is to become of them?" (Plato, 4th century BC)


You can also find quotes of the Church Fathers through the ages where they complain how the End Must Be Nigh for clergy of the day is immoral, princes rapacious and masses frivolous. Methinks you can change technology level and ruling religion, but people remain the same. If anything, in many ways the past was far more permissive of many things we think today beyond the pale, stuff that the Left is just now starting to bring back thus regressing back centuries of actual social progress (like euthanasia, incest, pedophilia, bestiality, post-birth abortion, and so on).

MK said...

G: Yes, Dreher and Benedict Option types are just cucked out losers. Nobody gets to sit out what's coming down the pike this time because the Barbarians are Ourselves and we're dealing with some kind of autoimmune disease.

I think you are projecting here.

Sure, no fan of Dreher here but he is right about a few things, like the BO. Many of us have been doing some version of the BO since 1970 at least. And nobody is "sitting it out". Rather, we just not engaging the culture "head on" because that's loony; real Christians are in no position to "take over" the culture anytime soon. Hell, we can't even get control of the Church this generation. Rather, today is the time for having large families, homeschooling, and building for the future. In fact, I think today is our greatest hour, and it's never been easier to live a good Christian family life.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Anon

The problems with Novus Ordo vs TLM debates is that the big-brained centrist third option, a "TLM in the vernacular" with some additional changes only exists in within the Ordinariate and outside of the Church

I'm very sympathetic to this third approach, though I'm not sure how it would work with peoples outside the European context.


Christians will eventually lose the world.

Nope, we'll win.

Christianity, when taken to its harshest extremes, is not fun.

And I think the "harshest extremes" have a lot to answer for. I think one of the big reasons Christianity has failed is because it has been refashioned into an ascetic-self nullifying religion contrary to to its intention. I actually think we're in the middle of deep heresy at the moment which has resulted in a withdrawal of Grace. Kumbayah Christianity and "Traditional" Christianity are Left and Right variants of this heresy.

In my mind V2 was necessary, the problem is that its implementation was completely screwed up and there are a variety of reasons for this. But the fact that the Traditionalists--who were in charge up to this point--could not implement it successfully says a lot about their mental flexibility and depth of faith.

One of the really interesting parallels which highlights this the change in operational structure in the German Army. Pre WW2, the German Army was a lot like the Catholic Church, very traditional in its structure. Industrialisation meant that the way war was going to be fought was going to change. Blitzkrieg tactics involved handing far more control to the local level with more "freedom" for the local commanders. The Trads in the German Army were aghast at this concept fearing dissolution of the whole army, and yet they were proven spectacularly wrong.


@Anon

The diocese of Pittsburgh is actually starting a Black (as in African-American, not recent immigrant) non-territoral ethnic parish,

It's a good idea but probably not in the current American context.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Anon

I think one thing to keep in mind is that a lot of the political right isn't looking for a revival of Christian traditions or a solution to some deep spiritual malaise that society is suffering from--they are perfectly fine with a secular, consumerist society

Yep, most of the political right want a return to early 1960's whiteopia, not realising that state of affairs was unstable, to due to the cultural undercurrents that had produced. Not wanting to sound like a knob, but the early 1960's were a manifestation of a Hegelian "equilibrium" between the waning cultural capital of the West and a rising modernism. It was a happy "equilibrium" which came crashing down in the 70's because the old ideas ran out of steam and were replaced by the new ones.

I would say that big problem for the Right is nostalgia period. No matter for what era, 80s, 50s, Victorian, Old West, Early Modern, Medieval, Classical Antiquity, whatever... the Right is fond of looking at sanitized, idealized and romanticized reconstruction of the past, rather than at the actual past. This is probably one of the reasons why the Right is unable to formulate a coherent defense against the Leftist onslaught,

Standing applause.

@MK

Rather, today is the time for having large families, homeschooling, and building for the future. In fact, I think today is our greatest hour, and it's never been easier to live a good Christian family life.

Many of us see what's coming down the pipeline and don't share your optimism.

Ingemar said...

Yes, Christians will win--but in the same sense that Noah "won" after the Flood. The greater part of humanity was wiped out.

In the very near term, I predict an even greater exodus from the institutional Church (apropos of the recent fire in the Nantes cathedral). Partly because of the generations-long exodus already under way, partly because of Bergoglio's refusal to see Islam as the enemy combined with his disinterest in--even hostility to--seeking converts and his order to shut down all the churches due to Virus. Let's not even get into his willful protection of homopredator prelates.

Today the postconciliar Church and the traditional resistance are essentially separate religions running on parallel tracks. The former sees itself as an NGO with vestments and a means of transferring and laundering a dragon's den of wealth. The latter is forced into the catacombs due to the lack of support, even hostility, from official leadership as well as being targeted by all enemies.

Roland said...

I saw this and remembered your discussions on similar topics

https://www.vision.org/the-original-view-of-original-sin-1140?fbclid=IwAR09c1RkrA2GD14jKQLH1hUnQTI5rizZHqtk5YPDKXQGnEBJUAkjb5_s4S0

The Social Pathologist said...

@Roland

Thanks for the link.

MK said...

SP: Many of us see what's coming down the pipeline and don't share your optimism.

I'm laughing at this comment! I'm not "optimistic" for the future at all. What I'm saying is that "this" is our finest hour, the easy years, the good times, the time we are supposed to be storing grain away for the terrible famine to come.

And when our progeny (what little we have, heh) looks back to 2020, they will rightfully curse our laxity, sloth, our self-pity, our self-indugence. Because they will likely have real problems...problems that we will have midwifed. The West is just too spoiled to live.