Hieronymus
1d ago
Surely we can deadname an influential rationalist court prostitute when her name has so much metaphorical import?
I don't care about "deadnaming." But unless she actually changed her name to Aella, I prefer the social norm that avoids casual and unnecessary doxxing.
Hieronymus
7d ago
Seventy year olds are fully capable of caring about the generations to come. Indeed, financially secure seventy year olds (which presumably describes the elderly in the political class) are among those best suited to think in generational terms. If they don't, that's a deep cultural problem, and electing younger folks may mitigate it but will not solve it.
Hieronymus
9d ago
both my Baptist friends and my Pentecostal cousin are drinking (alcohol) now
This is indeed much more common than it used to be, and I think it’s a spiritually healthier place for the church to be. I have little knowledge of how it’s gone inside the holiness movement, though.
and women in pastoral roles is becoming a commonplace belief and practice
This is sort of true but in a weird way. There used to be more of a middle ground for evangelicals to combine a mostly theologically conservative outlook with gender egalitarianism. But that middle ground has eroded heavily, as the gender egalitarian types usually went liberal in other ways over time, to the point that this has become a kind of unconscious expectation. The delay for public figures to go from supporting women in ministry to deconstructing is now shockingly brief. I know some folks who still try to occupy that middle ground, but few of them are younger than Gen X.
Hieronymus
9d ago
I had a somewhat different experience of the evangelical church growing up than you did, though I can see where you are coming from. I remain in the congregation where I grew up, a Baptist-adjacent Bible church in a blue state.
That tone has severely softened in recent years, as white Catholics have become the standard-bearers of the religious right in many ways, but there's a serious way in which the often harsh, but nevertheless informed critiques of more traditional forms of Christianity within historic Protestantism have been flanderized in evangelical circles to an absolute rejection of the Christianity of non-evangelical forms of faith -- indeed out of ignorance.
I’d say that our attitude toward Rome growing up was guarded, sometimes harsh, but not particularly uninformed; of course I have a deeper understanding of the critique as a middle-aged man than I did as a teenager, but that’s true of many things. We didn’t talk about the Eastern Orthodox much, but there weren’t a lot of them around. Our attitude toward middle- and even high-church Protestants was reasonably positive so long as they were strong on Scripture and held to sola fide.
I agree that the general evangelical attitude toward Rome is much less guarded today than it was. Opinions on Eastern Orthodoxy are pretty mixed, but the most common attitude is to regard them as eccentric Roman Catholics. (I will give you that this one is pretty uninformed.)
That said, evangelicalism has also been characterized by a firmer affirmation of conservative social doctrine than spiritual doctrine (I'm not saying spirituality isn't important to them -- I'm saying their emphasis, especially to people who grow distant, is often perceived to be culture war instead of spiritual development), and so leaving evangelicalism is often associated with leaving social conservatism.
I can’t speak to your experience, but in mine people who leave evangelical Christianity tend to move toward social liberalism first, then when this clashes with evangelical Christianity they abandon evangelicalism. It’s a commonplace that when a young man comes to his pastor and says, “I just can’t accept the truth of Christianity any longer,” the correct response is, “Who is she?” Also common today are people who want to accommodate their friends on LGBT issues and leave their evangelical churches when those hold fast to the biblical teaching.
To those leaving it may look like the church is prioritizing social issues over spiritual things. But striving after obedience to God’s will revealed in Scripture is fundamentally tied up in spiritual things. (“If you love me, you will keep my commandments,” and, “Faith without works is dead.”) You can be socially conservative without being an evangelical Christian, or a Christian at all, but it’s no coincidence that socially liberal churches also have a low view of the Bible.
(There is a smaller cohort that leaves evangelicalism directly for more liturgical churches. This is a different phenomenon, and most of them don’t think that evangelicals’ positions on social issues are too conservative.)
… and I'm simply reflecting on the market failure where the mainline Protestant churches that have already been there for a long time now aren't even considered as an option, and are themselves being out-competed by "woke evangelical" churches the same way the megachurch is out-competing the Bible church on the street corner!
I agree that this demand exists, but in my world it’s less than one might suppose. I expect that most “woke evangelical” churches will fade away in a generation or so as the children of their members abandon any connection to Christianity.
Hieronymus
9d ago
The political project of the last fifty years has skipped the "educate them on how to build a better life" part in favor of simple affirmation, partly out of a woeful misconstrual of what love is and partly because our societies have adopted increasingly hollow ideas of a better life.
That also draws into relief why she felt her religion was either/or — one characteristic of many non-denominationals is a general ignorance of forms of Christianity outside the evangelical orbit, so the concept of an institutional Christianity that is somewhat, well, woke would be unfamiliar.
I'm not sure it's ignorance so much as disinterest. If she's in the process of abandoning Christian conviction anyway, why seek out a woke church instead of the woke secular friends she already has? In my experience exvangelical men and women usually end up atheist, with a minority of women falling into witchcraft instead.
A drift toward wokeness that maintains the form of Christianity is much more likely when it happens at the congregational level and up.
Hieronymus
10d ago
This is my third draft of this comment. I am trying to figure out how to articulate this clearly and with a minimum of snark.
Your first paragraph is a 100% correct critique of 2rafa’s read of Barrett. But I think your second paragraph betrays a tendency common among Roman Catholics to read current practice back into history as always having been the practice of the church, and this is mistaken. Aquinas would not have accepted Catholic social teaching – the body which has evolved since the late 19th century – as it is now. Very few Roman Catholics, and perhaps no popes, before the twentieth century would have accepted the position on the death penalty now given in the Roman catechism.
I think that a great deal of Catholic social teaching as it now exists is the product of Western modernism. At its best it can include some genuinely countercultural Christian teaching. (As a Protestant, I particularly appreciated Rome’s stand against torture when everyone else seemed to be losing his mind.) But it is not above the fray or immune to secular influences, often to its detriment.
Hieronymus
10d ago
I wish that passage were given more weight, but I don't think it's that open-ended. It's most likely a reference to rights established by the English constitution as the authors understood it, with an emphasis on those in the Declaration of Right. It may also include some common-law rights.
If read in that light, I think it would have some radical implications. But it wouldn't establish a compelling interest test for each and every federal law.
Hieronymus
11d ago
Republicans have managed to get elected roughly half the time, so it seems like it's you who's trying to escape all accountability here. If you say they couldn't do anything because of progressive Republicans, well, maybe you should have won more elections.
These two sentences contradict one another.
Man, I think that men who pine for a virgin bride have caught a glimpse of the loveliness in the life you’ve described. I wish someone could explain the rest to them such that they could see the beauty of the whole package. Some secular men would be moved by it; many others would at least respect it. And it would strengthen the spines and zippers of Christian men and women alike.
I’m not the right person to do it. I’m not even sure what form it would take. But it would be a win for truth and beauty, to say nothing of the people involved.
Hieronymus
22d ago
I hadn't seen this, so I wanted to read the statement. I found an ANC statement (not technically the government, I suppose) on reddit. I couldn't find it on the terribly-organized ANC website, but I could confirm its legitimacy by finding a copy on a regional ANC Twitter account.
And wow, it's even worse than you said:
Let it be categorically stated: there are no Afrikaner refugees in South Africa. No section of our society is hounded, persecuted or subject to ethnic victimisation. These claims are a fabrication and a cowardly political construct designed to delegitimise our democracy and insult the sacrifices made by generations who fought for freedom. ...
What the instigators of this falsehood seek is not safety, but impunity from transformation. They flee not from persecution, but from justice, equality and accountability for historic privilege.
The misuse of refugee protections to shield right-wing, anti-transformation elements is a violation of the spirit and letter of international law. ...
I am particularly struck by the phrase "impunity from transformation."
Hieronymus
22d ago
These were public policies made by public health professionals. The public health professionals thought the vaccines reduced infection rates and that's why they set the policy the way they did.
They did believe this, but I also remember discussions about how privileges could incentivize vaccination. I think that was applied as an argument in both directions: It was a reason to allow vaccine passports rather than just keeping things closed altogether, and it was an argument for not loosening things up on those the speaker considered defectors against society.
Fortunately for me, my blue state tended to either open things up or close them rather than using a passport strategy, as I was both vaxxed and stubbornly opposed to proving it on principle.
Hieronymus
22d ago
I am not a libertarian, and I am certainly no ancap. I have some very strong classical liberal leanings, but classical liberalism is not the summum bonum.
The family, as a classic example of natural duty, is one of the great weaknesses of a thoroughgoing, non-agression-principle–centered libertarianism. Libertarianism in its heart of hearts wants to divide the world into free agents and property; children are neither. They are both human and inescapably dependent. It is baked into the order of creation, and no one can will it away. They are not the only example, but they are by far the clearest.
Hieronymus
23d ago
Perhaps I'm misreading you, but voluntary associations and state power aren't all there is. It's true that state power often tries to replace, or even actively attacks, voluntary associations. But it often acts the same way toward natural bonds which impose duty.
I'd argue that child support in 21st-century America is more often an effort to replace natural duty by state power than it is an effort to enforce that duty. But when the state does try to backstop natural (or even long-established social) institutions, it has the option to do so with a much lighter hand than when it tries to replace them.
Hieronymus
25d ago
Last I checked, the highest rate of antidepressant usage by sex and profession was men working with small children, and it was more than twice the next item on the list.
I mean, have you ever tried throwing a toddler over your shoulder and spinning him around while he giggles? It's pretty great.
I can totally see how childcare at daycare scale with daycare constraints would grind me down. I also wonder how much the current rules are the way they are because they're written by and for women. And I'm also curious how much the depression you refer to is increased or decreased by selection effects.
Hieronymus
28d ago
Sounds a bit like human sacrifice and scapegoating doesn't it?
Unironically yes. The Bible depicts it as a sacrifice: though those who killed Jesus didn’t intend it that way, Jesus did. And if you do a quick search, you will find a million sermons with titles like “Christ our Scapegoat,” referencing the literal scapegoat in Leviticus.
Jesus Christ, fully God and fully man, offering himself as a sacrifice to God the Father on behalf of sinners is the mechanism. It’s the core of Christian belief.
Hieronymus
28d ago
I have wondered if we could create a new version of the marriage contract: "Enhanced Marriage," which both parties can opt into that makes it MUCH harder to get divorced AND adds additional legal duties on both sides (and presumably some additional benefits) so that they are tied more strongly together.
There was an attempt at this with covenant marriage, but it doesn't seem to have accomplished much. That said, it'd be interesting to hear from mottizens who live in states where that's an option. It looks like it was watered down to make the law acceptable to the mainstream and undermined by the availability of no-fault divorce in other states.
And, while I can't speak for all social conservatives, I'd be reluctant to support any new version of this so long as Obergefell stands.
The thing is that cooking and washing were compatible with childcare, while teaching and medicine generally are not. Children benefit from stay-at-home moms; I did, anyway. And if your values differ from those of the broader culture, daycare is likely to drag your kids at least part way to that culture.
I know that this isn't practical for all families. But we should try to make it practical for as many families as we can. And for those couples who are on the fence about what to do, we should let them know that it's good for them and their kids.
Edit: Since this discussion started with college, I'd like to add that the liberal arts are valuable for most intelligent people -- the actual liberal arts, not activism in a skinsuit. Making those available in a way that is culturally and economically compatible with housewifery as a life path is a worthwhile goal in itself.
Hieronymus
30d ago
No one is denying the relevance of Christianity’s Jewish roots. The Old Testament is important, and Jesus as the Jewish Messiah is a central doctrine of Christianity. But gentiles were included from a very early date.
I want to riff on hydroacetylene’s examples, keeping in mind that the Battle of Milvian Bridge, when Constantine began to move toward Christianity, happened in 312.
Acts 10–11 covers the Jewish church’s acceptance of gentile converts, and Acts 15 relates the decision not to impose the Mosaic law on them. Even if you do not accept Acts as history, it demonstrates the presence of gentile converts who did not practice the Jewish law at the time the book was written. It may be from the 60s, because it doesn’t include Paul’s death, but I think that some liberal scholars have it as late as the early second century.
The Didache is a super interesting document of early Christian teaching and practice. It has a ton of Jewish influence, but it also takes pains to distinguish Christians from non-Christian Jews (ch. 8) and to include gentiles (14:3). Its date is hotly disputed; it is most likely from the first century, but at the latest from the middle of the second.
The church fathers cover a long span of time, but they begin in the late first century. The earliest group is called the apostolic fathers (as distinct from the apostles themselves), and they take it as a given that the church includes gentiles.
Hieronymus
1mo ago
The classical liberal chamber of my heart grew three sizes today. A move that simultaneously targets overregulation, the illegibility of the administrative state, and strict liability? I hope that the president can find a way to parlay this into lasting change.
Hieronymus
1mo ago
Sure. But then, all people would be the same in that regard. Love has to single out a particular person (or a particular thing) in contradistinction to others.
Fair enough. I think that's a pretty base level definitional difference with Christianity.
When I looked into liberation theology, what I found was a group of people using gospel language but assigning the terms Marxist definitions. It wasn’t that they denied the resurrection but that they rendered it irrelevant, something one could take or leave. If that’s not representative, I’ll be pleasantly surprised; I considered reading Gutiérrez, but by that point I wasn’t particularly inspired to look deeper.
I will have to check out your link.
Edit: Do you know of a link to the words of the people’s mass you linked? My Spanish isn’t great, and I will do a better job muddling through text than audio.
Hieronymus
1mo ago
It means that love of neighbor follows from love of God, but the former doesn’t subsume the latter.
Let me give an example that I read a zillion years ago in the New Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. I may get the details wrong, and I haven’t confirmed the thoroughness of the book’s sources, but it works just as well as a thought experiment anyway:
A woman was in the custody of the Soviet secret police. These sometimes took a perverse joy in breaking people they weren’t going to let leave alive anyway, and they had decided to break her faith. When maiming her legs didn’t do it, they brought in her children and threatened to shoot them if she did not deny Christ. She refused, and the secret police shot her children in front of her.
If love of God is the higher good, she did the right thing. It’s not that she didn’t love her children enough; it’s that she loved God more than that.
Hieronymus
1mo ago
These are not evangelical theologies---and it's fine to dislike them for that reason…
The gulf here is much wider than that. If Jesus Christ was not raised from the dead, then confessional Lutheranism, or Roman Catholicism, or Eastern Orthodoxy falls apart. Liberation theology and the social gospel movement keep on trucking.
… but they obviously incorporate the supernatural.
Only in the sense that they try to “use the stairs of heaven as a shortcut to the nearest chemist's shop,” in Lewis’ inimitable phrase.
I've been unironically praying for that – except that I presume, given her childhood faith, she is already baptized.
I have two reasons in particular to wish her well. One is that, like most, I know people who have made the normie-tier mistakes of which she has made the epic-tier versions, and I pray for their repentance. The other is that when she is talking about her (sometimes very difficult) evangelical childhood, she makes an honest effort to be fair as she understands fairness.
If she repented of her sin, then reconciled to her father such that they forgave one another, I think that would justify making the world endure a little cringeposting for a while. I'm not holding my breath, but I am praying from time to time.
More options
Context Copy link