Home

  • The Real Problem with @timkellernyc

    It’s been quite a back and forth between First Things James R. Wood and Tim Keller on the latter’s evangelistic idea and the effect that it has on whether he’s stuck with the Gospel or not. Wood’s basic premise is that Keller’s method is past its sell date due to changes in the culture; Keller’s response is that the Northeast wasn’t a “neutral” culture to Christianity to start with.

    As a South Floridian, I’m very much aware of the hostility of that culture (which in turn was brought there by people from the Northeast) to Evangelical Christianity. It’s been that way long before Keller showed up in New York and will continue in that way for the foreseeable future. On the other hand I think that, while Wood is probably right about the shifts in culture vs. the potential to evangelise same, both are blind to the key point of the whole debate: who are we actually reaching out to?

    When I worked for the Church of God, I spent some time with our church people in the Northeast and specifically in the New York City area. We have some really great people there, but the vast majority of them are not white. By New York standards they’re not wealthy either, but they’ve accomplished more in the short time they’ve been in this country than their Scots-Irish counterparts have done in three centuries. Their success in life was one of the major inspirations for my piece What Working for the Church of God Taught Me About Race, which would, if taken to heart, blow a great deal of the political and ecclesiastical paradigm we’re wrestling with in this country out of the water.

    It’s fair to say that Keller, being the Reformed type that he is, had a “higher” demographic (at least in terms of AGI) than the Churches of God were reaching. The problem with this, however, is exactly the same as the Anglicans are struggling with: the higher you go in this society, the more your parishioners are expected to conform–and will if their careers depend upon it–to what the world’s idea happens to be. If you’re trying to be “winsome,” you will adapt, but sooner or later you’ll either realise that you’re in a no-win game or you’ll cross the line.

    It’s a similar (but not identical problem) I discussed in my piece Squaring the Circle of Anglican/Episcopal Ministry. Ministering to an elevated demographic, Anglican/Episcopal churches have not, IMHO, figured out how to break the cycle of elevation/liberalisation/apostasy, and something tells me that Keller hasn’t either. The obvious solution is for us to focus our efforts on the “poor in spirit,” to use Our Lord’s expressive phrase, but a great deal of Evanglicalism isn’t prepared to do that. (One group that has done so successfully is the Assemblies of God, but the way they vote doesn’t appeal to our elite wannabees.)

    It’s a hard pill to swallow, Tim (and James for that matter,) but the sooner we take the medicine, the better we will feel in the long run.

  • The Wetland Way, Week 2, Sunday: Lunch with the Canon — Chet Aero Marine

    When Serelia became a nation, King Albert—for reasons as mysterious as Constantine—decided to break with the Masonic tradition of Beran and adopt a form of Christianity in Serelia. So bishops and clergy of the Anglican Communion from Verecunda came in and formed the Church of Serelia, with himself as its head. It became and continued […]

    The Wetland Way, Week 2, Sunday: Lunch with the Canon — Chet Aero Marine
  • What Do You Expect? This is Russia!

    My family business‘ adventure with the Russians began in 1987, when I went to Washington to visit, with my first Russian representative, the then Soviet commercial consulate. The two of us met in the same hotel where Ronald Reagan had been shot six year earlier; the consulate was just around the corner. While walking here we discussed the scandal they were having over the Soviets using the consulate as a listening post. His opinion? “What do you expect? This is Russia!”

    That’s the sentiment I’ve had in reflecting on George Weigel’s piece on Fr. Alexander Men and the current state of Russian Orthodoxy:

    In the last decades of the U.S.S.R., Fr. Men became a prominent reformist voice in Russian Orthodoxy, a spiritual adviser to Alexander Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov, and a magnet for conversions to Christ among the Russian intelligentsia. Communism, Men preached, was a “colossal historical pathology” that had “virtually destroyed” Russian culture; the damage it had done “lives on in people’s souls.” To help repair that damage, a post-communist Russian Church had to repent of its degrading cooperation with Soviet power. Out of that repentance, he hoped, would come a Russian Orthodoxy whose Christocentric voice would help build a renewed Russian civil society.

    I don’t think that either Weigel or Men had it quite figured out.

    The first problem is with Orthodoxy itself: it was born in Caesero-Papism and it endured in this state for over a thousand years. The fact that today we find Orthodoxy divided by ethnicity doesn’t change that heritage. As Moscow observed many years ago, it is the “Third Rome,” which has achieved what the first two have lost. Adding to that problem is Orthodoxy’s concept of itself. If you listen to really serious Orthodox people long enough, you come to realise that their idea is that Christ didn’t come to save people as much as he came to start a church, and if you’re outside of that church, you’re outside of Christ. (Thus, the Russian troops burning Bibles in the Ukraine.)

    In the early years, the relationship between the Tsar and the Russian Orthodox Church was more symbiotic. When the Church, for example, decided that they were not “the Joneses” of the Orthodox world and decided that one should cross oneself with three fingers and other practices, people like Avvakum and the Old Believers took it hard from Tsar and Patriarch alike.

    It was Peter the Great who made the ROC a department of the state. He saw the Church as an impediment to the westernisation of the country. His model was none other than the Church of England, which he noted was under the “broad seal” of the monarch. He came back to Russia, the Patriarch died, and he abolished the Patriarchate, replacing it with the Holy Synod. This state of affairs persisted until 1918, when the Tsar was gone and the Patriarch was restored, just in time to be bulldozed by the Bolsheviks.

    Now of course we have the best (or worst) of both worlds; the ROC is ruled by the Patriarch, but the Church is very much a department of the government. Russia’s two attempts at democracy in the last century failed miserably. Democracy just doesn’t happen: it is the result of a long process of change in a country, and neither Russia (or China) were able to get it off of the ground. The fact that Americans, who are in serious danger of losing their own democratic system, are completely incapable of understanding this, and continue to make mistakes pursuant to this error, only show that we have wasted a great deal of time and money raising up the elite that we have.

    The United States has two options: it either needs to understand that certain parts of the world will be under some kind of autocracy, or it needs to be prepared to spend blood and treasure to change things. Given that many of these places have nuclear weapons (we have facilitated Iran in that regards) the results of that campaign are unthinkable. (The fact that we can’t afford such a campaign should also give us pause.)

    Alexander Men was a brave man who gave his life for what he believed in, but the history of his church and his country was against him from the start. My second Russian rep told me that he didn’t think that Russia would change because it was too “Orthodox.” Now everybody knows what he was talking about; the serious question now is what to do about it. Our elites have messed this situation up; we need to look elsewhere for answers.

  • Bishop Rick Stika Keeps His Priests Down

    The cry for relief goes unanswered:

    Priests of the Knoxville diocese asked a papal representative last year for “merciful relief” from the leadership of Bishop Rick Stika. More than six months later, they have received no response to their request, and there has not been any conclusion to a Vatican investigation into Stika’s leadership.

    “Our experience of our appointed bishop varies among us, but the undersigned do share a common awareness that the past twelve years of service under Bishop Stika have been, on the whole, detrimental to priestly fraternity and even to our personal well-being.” 

    This isn’t normal in an episcopal type of church government, even with the mediocre quality of bishops we have these days. I wrote about Stika’s profligate ways last year, both fiscally and otherwise. At the time I noted the following:

    This is a key issue for Ultramontane Roman Catholicism in general.  When bad things happen, there are few places to turn because the famous Catholic penchant for subsidarity isn’t reflected in their own structure.  The result is that bishops and parish priests can become “little Caesars” with limited accountability to those whom they’re supposedly serving–the people of God.

    That’s certainly playing out here. Getting “redress of grievances” in a system like this is difficult at best, especially with the current Occupant of the See of Peter being the “biggest little Caesar” of them all.

    Personal note: I have a friend who is active in the Knights of Columbus. His council (and a few others) still have their own council buildings. The Diocese has expressed an interest in taking this and moving them to diocesan venues, but he and his fellow knights know better. Truly “worthy knights” indeed.

  • The Wetland Way, Week 1, Tuesday: Independence and a Meeting

    It was a fine day to become a nation, and the Drahlan Kingdom wasn’t going to pass up the opportunity after a long war of independence. The sun was …

    The Wetland Way, Week 1, Tuesday: Independence and a Meeting
  • The Supreme Court Looks to Void Roe v. Wade, and My Misjudgment of Brett Kavanaugh

    Nearly fifty years after our nation’s last nervous breakdown, a breakthrough:

    The Supreme Court has voted to strike down the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, according to an initial draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito circulated inside the court and obtained by POLITICO.

    The draft opinion is a full-throated, unflinching repudiation of the 1973 decision which guaranteed federal constitutional protections of abortion rights and a subsequent 1992 decision – Planned Parenthood v. Casey – that largely maintained the right. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes:

    “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” he writes in the document, labeled as the “Opinion of the Court.” “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

    If true, it is the most explosive thing to happen in that time.

    In the meanwhile, we have this:

    A person familiar with the court’s deliberations said that four of the other Republican-appointed justices – Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett – had voted with Alito in the conference held among the justices after hearing oral arguments in December, and that line-up remains unchanged as of this week.

    I had my doubts about Kavanaugh coming through on this:

    But another is an unmistakable conclusion from the last fracas over his social life: Kavanaugh is a party animal.  That in turn leads one to believe that Kavanaugh will never overturn Roe v. Wade outright.  Why?  Party animals, especially preppy ones, need abortion.  At his level in society, such things are not moral issues to be decided but problems to be fixed.  Abortion may be the final option available, but for such things option it is.

    But, as of now, he has.

    This is going to be ugly. But I am pleasantly surprised. It’s worth noting that the justices didn’t find a right to life in our Constitution, but plan to return the matter to the people’s elected representatives, both federal and state. Those elected representative have obtained a fifty year reprieve on the subject, as was the case with contraception. Our elected representatives hate topics like this, but this is what they’re paid to do, and it’s time they do it. Much of what is wrong with this Republic stems from the way the legislative branch has been able to hand off the hard decisions to the judiciary, and this is one less they can slough off.

  • It’s Time for “The Wetland Way” — Chet Aero Marine

    This week I’m starting a blog of the “central” part of the Island Chronicles: The Wetland Way. It’s bracketed between its prequel The Ten Weeks and its immediate sequel At the Inlet. The published version of this–both paper and ebook–are in preparation and I’ll post information about this later. The original narrative started on Shrove […]

    It’s Time for “The Wetland Way” — Chet Aero Marine
  • Hard Currency, Soft Currency and Dollar Hegemony — vulcanhammer.info

    In its dealings with first the Chinese and later with the Soviets, one of the first things Vulcan learned was the difference between hard and soft currency. That was true both in the travel expenses and in the process of selling equipment (and later buying equipment and technology.) Let’s start with the Chinese: this notice […]

    Hard Currency, Soft Currency and Dollar Hegemony — vulcanhammer.info
  • The Baptism of Jesus — The Bossuet Project

    Bossuet’s elevations on the Baptism of Jesus–which began his ministry–are as follows: The baptism of Jesus. 1, First approach of Jesus and Saint John. The baptism of Jesus. 2, Jesus Christ commands John to baptize him. The baptism of Jesus. 3, Jesus Christ is plunged into the Jordan. The baptism of Jesus. 4, Manifestation of Jesus Christ. The baptism […]

    The Baptism of Jesus — The Bossuet Project
  • JD Vance Can’t Handle the Truth. Or Can He?

    He told us this…

    Woven through Hillbilly Elegy, which was published in 2016, is an orthodox conservatism that places the blame for the endemic social problems from which its author escaped at his community’s own doorstep: its habit of worklessness and shirking of responsibility, among other cultural defects. “We talk about the value of hard work but tell ourselves that the reason we’re not working is some perceived unfairness: Obama shut down the coal mines, or all the jobs went to the Chinese,” writes Vance. “These are the lies we tell ourselves to solve the cognitive dissonance — the broken connection between the world we see and the values we preach.”

    But now that he’s running for the U.S. Senate…

    Then he gets to the part of the message with bite: “Our idiot leaders decided to do that to us. And I hate to use that term but sometimes it’s important to be direct about what’s going on… Our leaders have played a very dangerous and, I think, very ugly game with the American people. They’ve decided that they’re going to divide us against each other and distract us with constant appeals to race, to sex, to gender, to everything other than what I really think matters in this country.”

    So which is right? The answer is both.

    I’ve hammered on the deficiencies of the Scots-Irish for a long time, before Hillbilly Elegy came out. Vance is right on these cultural deficiencies. He should know: he had to overcome them to get anywhere in life. Getting an entire culture to get past 350+ years of deep dysfunction isn’t easy, but it’s necessary to start somewhere.

    But he’s also right about the oligarchic nature of American elites and their idea of staying in power. (Just check out our Gini coefficient…) So how to square the two? A simple approach would be to take a class-based approach. But this was shut off by Scots-Irish like Forrest McDonald, who recognised the following:

    Beyond that, an economic view won’t sit well with those who are left behind.  One of the major lacunae of the Beard saga is the South after the Civil War, which just about falls off of the radar screen.  Southerners had to face the hard question, “How did we get left behind?” Instead of focusing on the weaknesses of their own cultures–planter and Scots-Irish together–they changed the subject to things such as states rights, or their problems with the black people, or whatever.  Needless to say those who were on the wrong end of their way liked it even less, which is why we had the civil rights movement sixty years ago and Black Lives Matter today.

    They even managed to get the Scots-Irish written out as a separate ethnic group! The left has turned this on its head and the result is that we fight over identity issues when we should be debating economic ones. (Had fellow Scots-Irish Elizabeth Warren gotten past that, the result in 2020 could have been much different.)

    Personally I’ve been unenthusiastic about Vance’s candidacy. I’ve had enough of the mind games and intellectual slights of hand that the Scots-Irish excel in. The vanguard of conservatism needs to find a new home, and until that happens we’ll stumble from one fiasco to another.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started