Feeling left out of the Revival tent?

Here's a guy whose so upset at those who don't see things his way (especially libertarians) that he's clearly beyond talking to them. And he's beyond preaching to his choir; instead he's resorting to scolding them. And nearly everyone:

.....[T]he [Supreme] Court has defined freedom as the freedom of the solitary individual from any and all community standards and responsibilities that he personally deems offensive, especially when it comes to sex. This is not the freedom for which our fathers fought the Revolutionary War, or the Civil War, or World War I, or World War II, or the Korean War, or the Cold War, or (we hope) for which we are fighting the Iraq War today.

To pervert liberty in the name of a new sexual ethic that has shown itself to be destructive of the very marital and familial bonds that produced the Greatest Generation, bonds they sought to defend with their blood, dishonors our fathers and mothers who bore the burdens and sacrifices of war.

It is time for Christians to work even harder on every front to overturn—to heal—the effects of this tyranny. We can do something in the political world to reverse the rulings of these justices, but we can do more in the culture to reverse the damage their decisions have aided. (For the Supreme Court did not invent sexual disorder.)

But it is difficult to defend marriage and morality in the public square when many of the churches themselves compromise on these matters. Some soul-searching is in order, for we face two hard realities: a backlog of monumental failures and sins still with us, and a seeming paralysis in repenting and doing what is necessary to clean up our own act across the board, on every front.

Are Christians truly pro-life? How many have had or have facilitated abortions? How many have embraced technology (in vitro fertilization) that freezes or discards “excess” human embryos? How many favor embryonic stem-cell research because it might cure them of a disease?

How many use methods of birth control that are abortifacient? How many embrace contraception as a way of life? Is it in any way pro-life to desire to have no children? How many married Christians, under the promise of “birth-free” sexual indulgence, now view sex as simply another recreation to be indulged in? Is there any meaningful difference between their use of sex and that of their unbelieving neighbors, including the person who acts on homosexual inclinations?

Do Christians really support traditional marriage? As a life-long union, till “death do you part”? Haven’t churches slowly redefined marriage already themselves? Why is the divorce rate among Christians the same as that in the rest of society? What message does the widespread acceptance of divorced and remarried clergy (not to mention divorced and remarried bishops) send?

Haven’t Christians readily availed themselves of easy, no-fault divorce? How many Christian children are taught that marriage is a lifelong commitment while they watch their parents move from marriage to marriage? Churches need to take a long, hard look at their marital disciplines as they are practiced, for they seem to assume divorce and remarriage as routine.

Do Christians uphold the dignity of sex itself? How many Christians view pornography on their computers? Watch movies that sexually arouse? Allow their children to watch portrayals of fornication and adultery, all the while assuming their children can “handle it” and will not be affected?

What provisions have been made for dealing with all such past, present, and future sins in a disciplined and ultimately healing way, restoring integrity to the spiritual life of the churches? Are they effective and sufficient?

Of course, the struggle will not be on the field of battle, for our enemies are not flesh and blood, but spirits and principalities that would see men devoured by the ravages of sin. There is no greater tyrant than sin, and the death that comes thereby, that would separate man from the God who made him. The sexual revolution has sucked many poor souls down into the abyss of perdition, sometimes with the churches standing idly or silently by.

There is no renewal or salvation without repentance. Only by cleaning our own houses and healing our members of sexual abuses and disorders can we even hope to see the flourishing of true virtue. Even so, we do not so much aim to save our nation as to save our souls from death.

What bothers me the most about the above is that the author purports to speak for my father, who served in World War II, and who most definitely did not share the author's views.

Is the situation as hopeless as it appears, or is the above essay an aberration?

I mean, with moral conservatives scolding each other for not being "Christian" enough, I think it's fair to ask whether libertarians are even in the same tent.

posted by Eric on 04.05.05 at 12:03 PM





TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/2177






Comments

Eric,
I do think that libertarians/classical liberals are in the same tent as conservative Christians and need each other. I wrote this article about it today. Thought you might like a different perspective.

Dignan   ·  April 5, 2005 02:41 PM

Excellent piece. I think if people would stop shouting and scolding, they might be able to remember what they have in common -- and what brought them together in the first place.

It tries my patience to go out of my way to be polite, to always be willing to compromise, and to be insulted anyway. (To be told what my father fought for goes too far.) I had my fill of ideologues on the left, and now I'm getting my fill of ideologues on the right.

Eric Scheie   ·  April 5, 2005 04:27 PM

Mutual disrespect is the problem. Telling people they are disordered, perverted, or evil is seen as disrespectful. Telling people what their parents (complete strangers) fought for is seen as disrespectful. (Lecturing others about their personal sex lives is the most personal form of disrespect I can think of.) Yet others see homosexuality and birth control as intrinsically disrespectful.

The First Amendment fully recognizes and countenances the right to say all these things, and to be disrespectful to others, and I recognize that the people who say these things are doing so out of a sense of duty.

The problem is that it's unreasonable to expect those who disrespect each other to join together in any cause. Especially when such disrespect is defined as a cause for which our ancestors died.

Is it possible to respect each other in spite of the fact that we so obviously disrespect each other?

Limited respect, perhaps?

Eric Scheie   ·  April 5, 2005 04:44 PM


December 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


Search the Site


E-mail




Classics To Go

Classical Values PDA Link



Archives




Recent Entries



Links



Site Credits