Neo-Calvinism and Cultural Engagement

I am indebted to Gideon Strauss for a sizeable and ever-growing number of things. The most important, however, is the philosophical-theological system known as Neo-Calvinism. It has its origins in aDutch Reformed tradition of which Abraham Kuyper is perhaps the most famous, and is essentially a Reformed Protestant way of thinking about how to apply sound doctrine beyond the church to the rest of life and culture. Derek Melleby has written a good introduction to Neo-Calvinism on his blog, in which he writes, "Neo-Calvinism is not just reformed, it is reformational. Where as reformed theology tends to emphasis the reformation and purity of the Church, reformational theology, while based on solid doctrine, uses this doctrinal basis to be about the reformation of all areas of life."

Click here to read the whole of this post

On Advent

We're in the second week of Advent now, and I think it's appropriate to meditate on the meaning of the season. Advent is a season of anticipation and longing, which has meaning for Christians in the past, present, and future.

The whole of the Old Testament, from God's promise of redemption after the fall, to the covenant he established with Abram and his seed, through all the history of the nation of Israel, is the story of the people of God waiting in eager--sometimes bitter--anticipation of the coming of the Messiah and the establishment of the Kingdom of God. The Israelites tasted this anticipation each time they observed the feasts and celebrations of the covenant, and each time the sacrifice of atonement was offered up on their behalf. Even in the glorious days of David and Solomon, when Israel prospered most, still there was an understanding of a greater King to come, a King who would establish his everlasting kingdom. Psalm 45 is a magnificent Christological song of praise that is full of the tension of anticipating the Lord's Anointed One. As we sing the Psalms in praise today, and as we read the other Old Testament passages anticipating the coming of the Kingdom of God, we do so as they are fulfilled in Christ, the King who initiated His Kingdom through His incarnation, death, and resurrection.

Today, we who have been grafted into God's covenant people know this longing, as well. We know that the Old Testament's Messianic prophecies and promises were fulfilled in Christ, and we know that He has already inaugurated His kingdom, which will have no end. We therefore are a people who always look back to Christ's completed work on our behalf, knowing that he has regenerated us through His Spirit and brought us to new life in Him. We also, however, know that we live in a time when the Kingdom has not yet been consummated, when all the world has not yet been brought under the dominion of the King. Because we live in this already-not yet time when two ages overlap, we feel the tension of longing and anticipation of which the advent season is a type. As Charles Biggs put it, "Christians presently experience joy, but we also experience persecution; we experience strength from the Spirit, but also experience weakness; we have the life of Christ within, but unless Christ returns first, we will die and our bodies return to dust; we have confidence of being renewed, but we still suffer. The overlapping of the present age characterized by sin, death, and devil, and the age to come with the dawn of a new creation, a new age, and we as new creations experience the conflict of these two ages as we live by the Spirit each day of our lives."

Advent is the Church's time of celebrating and focusing on the anticipation of the coming King. As the building liturgical tension mounts, the people of God come more and more to focus on the light about to shine "on the people walking in darkness." (Isaiah 9:2) In these few weeks, we get a taste of what it means to live eschatologically--in the end times, in anticipation of the return of the Lord. We hear the admonition: "Be on guard! Be alert! You do not know when [the Lord's return] will come."

Finally, on Christmas, the tension is resolved: "Christ is born today! The King is come! Glory to God in the highest!" The Word has become flesh, and has dwelt among us. The exultation we feel as we look back to the miracle of the Incarnation points us to the day when we, and the whole world, will again say "The King is come!" In the Advent season, and its Christmas fulfillment, it seems that we perhaps have a means of grace that God uses to keep the imminence of Christ's return fresh for us. We have such short attention spans, and we are so apt to get caught up in daily life, that we forget our duty to "Take heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is." (Mark 13:33) Each year, when we come to Advent and remember the anticipation of the Messiah's birth, we are reminded to anticipate an even greater event--the final, consummating, coming of the King.

I'm ashamed--I haven't posted anything but regurgitation of other folks' thoughts in a while, and not even that for the last two weeks. I hope to get my blogging act back together after finals are over next week.

To a Time Gone By

Arm & Hammer

Pure Baking Soda
The Standard of Purity and Quality for over 150 Years

And in the time of cakes and pies
When the kneaded day would rise
Miraculous as dough in the blue-rimmed heaven,
When every kitchen was a home
Where the Arm & Hammer stayed
And the grateful prayer was made
And the daily bread was given

I believed without a doubt
When the orange box came out
(Its bullseye was the arm of a white John Henry)
That as the mixing bowl grew warm
With the spilling of that sun,
Every day would be well done
And would taste as great as any.

In every kitchen I could think
Of where I’d gone to get a drink,
While searching for a glass I’d find baking soda;
And that was just the way it was
For the hammer in the hand
And the funny ampersand–
That every home must have its quota.

I guess our faith began to fail
As our homemade day grew stale,
So we turned to buying pie in a pre-wrapped package,
Then all the aprons fell away
And in a calendar of weeks
Flour sifters were antiques:
Arm & Hammer lost its magic.

Oh everybody knows its name
And its logo’s still the same
But it’s hardly been beseeched since the old gas oven,
Except as grit for cleaning teeth
Or a box absorbing smells
On refrigerator shelves–
Work that has no use for leaven.

Now in the time of pies and cakes
Made by Hostess and by Drakes,
I spread my Smuckers on a slice of split-top Wonder;
The day of rising bread is gone
When the Hammer & the Arm
Was no quaint, nostalgic charm
But our pure and baking standard.

Mark Stevick

The Lovely Dragon of Choice

Check out this essay by Dr. Anthony Esolen, contributing editor for Touchstone Magazine. In his usual wonderfully elegant, literary style, Dr. Esolen shows us why planning and scheming is not usually a soul-building way to live.

I am a senior in college. Therefore, the most common question I am asked (roughly 87,524 times a day) is "What are you going to do after you graduate?" Now, I have several possibilities. Most of them don't involve anything directly tied to my major (Intelligence and Foreign Policy), which I am quickly growing tired of explaining. I really have no idea what I'm going to be doing after May 14, and I'm not all that worried about it. To be sure, I'm making provisions, like applying to grad schools and various jobs, but I'm not set on any of them, and the lack of a definite plan doesn't bother me, because I know that whatever I do, I am in God's hands, and I will go where He leads me. I have been chosen by Him, and I'm content in His choosing.

Happy St. Crispin's Day

Today is St. Crispin's Day, and the 589th anniversary of the Battle of Agincourt. Well do we remember it with the words of William Shakespeare:

This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day.'
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember'd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

Things I Love

St. Augustine of Hippo once wrote to Laurentius, a young Roman Christian, "For when there is a question as to whether a man is good, one does not ask what he believes, or what he hopes, but what he loves."

In this spirit, and at the prompting of Gideon Strauss, I have made a list of fifty things I love. Some are grand, and some are insignificant. This list is nowhere near exhaustive, and, after the first, is in no particular order.


1. Christ, my Lord.
2. Ethiopia Harrar coffee.
3. Walking a golf course in the cool of the morning.
4. Steve, my father.
5. Singing.
6. The Confessions of Saint Augustine.
7. Taking, and admiring, beautiful pictures.
8. Capitol Hill Baptist Church.
9. Bach’s Cello Suites.
10. OSU vs. Michigan.
11. Cris, my mother.
12. Poetry.
13. Washington, D.C.
14. Shakespeare’s plays.
15. Flying.
16. Emily, Abby, and Stephanie, my sisters.
17. The Dutch and Flemish gallery at the National Gallery of Art.
18. A good pipe.
19. A roaring fire.
20. E-mail.
21. Buying old books.
22. Snow.
23. Well-designed web sites.
24. The Religious Affections, by Jonathan Edwards.
25. Looking good.
26. Playing the piano.
27. Vergil’s Aeneid.
28. Good food and good conversation, especially when combined.
29. Justice.
30. Hiking the Blue Ridge Mountains.
31. Professors of enormous intellect who deign to educate undergrads, with humility.
32. Orthodoxy.
33. La Boheme, by Puccini.
34. Blogging.
35. Wool sweaters.
36. The San Francisco Bay.
37. Calvin’s Institutes.
38. Altoids.
39. Autumn leaves.
40. Riverby Books.
41. Rembrandt’s paintings.
42. Dancing.
43. Johnny Cash’s music.
44. Too much sleep.
45. A well-seasoned, medium-rare ribeye steak.
46. “Woman Holding a Balance,” by Vermeer.
47. General Tso’s Chicken, especially from Lucky China.
48. Singing the Psalms.
49. A cold Coke.
50. Romans 8.

A Protestant Vision for Middle Earth

As a refreshing contrast to the sickly, modern, pseudo-Christian culture outlined in the last article to which I linked, I recommend to you a little book called Angels in the Architecture: A Protestant Vision for Middle Earth, by Douglas Jones and Douglas Wilson.

Therein, the authors propose a vision for how one lives out the Gospel, and they call it "Protestant medievalism". It's a broad vision, and one whose main feature is that it is unabashedly and fiercely anti-modern. Not postmodern, which is simply a reaction to modernity and so can't escape the modernist project--it's non-modern. They note that the Middle Ages, from Augustine to the Renaissance, though a much-maligned period by moderns, was in fact a remarkable period of Christian piety and faithfulness, with a concern for truth, beauty, and goodness that has not been seen since. Jones and Wilson propose a cultural return to medievalism, led by Christians informed by the doctrinal advances of the Reformation. This medievalism they flesh out in several ways--renewed understanding of the beauty of God's holiness, a culture of celebration that manifests itself in feasting and lovemaking, a transformed love for the Church, wife, children, education, agrarian virtues, and much, much more.

I recommend this book to you because it is the most worthwhile reading I've found in a long time, and because it squarely addresses many of the topics I've thought about and discussed with other PHC students recently: beauty and aesthetics, laughter, poetry, and the Gospel as the only possible means of real social change. This book has, among other things, changed my view of the Church and possibly put me on the road away from being a Baptist (I think); sharpened my antipathy toward modernity; killed any desire I once had for political power; given me true hope for cultural renewal; and, I hope, made me a more joyful person. Not bad for 160 pages.

If this sounds interesting, read the foreword and introduction here. It's worth your time.

"Christian" culture

Check out this story by Walter Kirn on today's pop Christian culture. It's devastating, incisive--and brilliant. Kirn accurately describes the content--or lack thereof--of the Christian pop culture today, and cunningly lampoons it. I, for one, am glad that the power of the Gospel does not depend on this hogwash to save, and can even reach men's hearts despite the off-putting effect this stuff has. Hat tip to David Cooper for the link.

Want Gmail?

Check out Google's new email program, Gmail. It's pretty cool--an innovative new interface, new way of archiving mail, and, best of all, 1000 MB of storage space, so you never have to delete an email again. It's in beta right now and you can only get an account by invitation. Some folks are actually selling these invitations on Ebay. I have five new account invitations available right now, and I'll gladly give them, free, to whomever asks. Email me and I'll send you an invitation.

Review of Taming the Prince

Harvey Mansfield, professor of Government at Harvard, is one of the nation's foremost Straussian political philosophers. Among his many excellent works is Taming the Prince: The Ambivalence of Modern Executive Power. My review of the book is here. I commend it to you, with the caveat that I understand the audacity of trying to critique the work of a man whose mind is many times greater than mine.

Liberalism's Dying Credibility

Victor Davis Hanson of National Review has a masterful piece on the problems with the national liberal establishment and its waning credibility.

Money quote:
"If we wonder why CBS is in trouble, why no one trusts the universities or the U.N., or why the Democrats may soon lose the Senate, the House, the presidency, and the Supreme Court, the answer has a lot to do with arrogant hypocrisy — the idea that how one lives need have nothing to do with what one professes, that idealistic rhetoric can provide psychological cover for privilege and preference, and that rules need not apply for those self-proclaimed as smarter and nicer than the rest of us. But none of us — none — get a pass simply because we claim that we are more moral, educated, or sophisticated than most."


In their new book, The Right Nation: Conservative Power In America, Economist writers John Mickelthwait and Adrian Wooldridge show how America is a mostly conservative nation, and how that conservatism is unique in the world. It promises to be an excellet read--I had the pleasure of hearing Mr. Wooldridge deliver a lecture on the book this week for the Alexis De Tocqueville Society at Patrick Henry College.

Police State?

The Boston Globe did a story today on Massachusett's new GPS tracking system for sex offenders on probation or parole. The subjects will wear an electronic bracelet that the state's system will use to monitor their movements and alert law enforcement officers when the subject enters an "exclusion zone," like a school or playground. This raises an interesting question: how to balance privacy with the need to protect the public? The GPS system is just the latest step in an evolving debate on methods of tracking registered sex offenders. Already their information is available to the public in most states, often on a web site. State officials argue that the importance of protecting the public from this most dangerous class of criminals outweighs any interest in privacy that the sex offenders may have. Critics, on the other hand, worry that this is a step down the road to a pervasive police state, and that it opens the door a little wider to the subjugation of liberty to security.

The Windhover

To Christ our Lord

I CAUGHT this morning morning’s minion, king-
  dom of daylight’s dauphin, dapple-dawn-drawn Falcon, in his riding
  Of the rolling level underneath him steady air, and striding
High there, how he rung upon the rein of a wimpling wing
In his ecstasy! then off, off forth on swing,
  As a skate’s heel sweeps smooth on a bow-bend: the hurl and gliding
  Rebuffed the big wind. My heart in hiding
Stirred for a bird,—the achieve of; the mastery of the thing!

Brute beauty and valour and act, oh, air, pride, plume, here
  Buckle! AND the fire that breaks from thee then, a billion
Times told lovelier, more dangerous, O my chevalier!

  No wonder of it: shéer plód makes plough down sillion
Shine, and blue-bleak embers, ah my dear,
  Fall, gall themselves, and gash gold-vermillion.

Gerard Manley Hopkins

Civil Religion vs. Biblical Christianity

In light of this fall's political races, and considerable socio-political angst in the Christian right of late, I decided to write a post on the relation of faith and politics. For more on the topic, check out the latest issue of Modern Reformation.

Europe vs. The World

Here's an interesting article by National Review's Victor Davis Hanson on Europe--its fractionalization, France and Spain's anti-U.S. bellicosity, and the general crisis point that Europe is at regarding its place in the world. I don't know enough on the subject to make an intelligent judgment on his opinions, but it's an interesting article and it seems to make sense.

On Manly Men

Just listened to an Intercollegiate Studies Institute lecture by Harvey C. Mansfield on the topic "Is Manliness A Virtue?" Mansfield is Professor of Government at Harvard, the author or editor of a number of books, including an excellent edition of Alexis de Tocqueville's Democracy in America. The lecture was an excellent treatment of the social and intellectual meanings of manliness, and its place in society. Well worth a listen. Find it, as well as other excellent ISI lectures, here.

Review: The Village

My review of M. Night Shyamalan's newest film, The Village, is up. Find it in the sidebar or here.

Summer Readings

Some of the books of which I've read all or a substantial part this summer:

Modern Times by Paul Johnson
Church and People, 1450-1660 : The Triumph of the Laity in the English Church by Claire Cross
Papists, Protestants, and Puritans, 1559-1714 by Diana Newton
Theology of the Reformers by Timothy George
Divine Sovereignty: Four Views edited by James Beilby and Paul Eddy
The Meaning of the Millenium: Four Views edited by Robert Clouse
Don't Waste Your Life by John Piper
The American Way: Religion and Family in the Shaping of the American Ideal by Allan Carlson
He Is There and He Is Not Silent by Francis Schaeffer
Virtually Normal: An Argument About Homosexuality by Andrew Sullivan
Inside Delta Force by Eric Haney

The Iliad by Homer
Out of the Silent Planet, Perelandra, and That Hideous Strength by C.S. Lewis
Dune and Dune: Messiah by Frank Herbert
Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder
Without Remorse by Tom Clancy
Getting It Right by William F. Buckley, Jr.

Most of them are worth reading, if you have the time and inclination.

The Iraq War--update

Here's a comment by a friend on one of my earlier posts. I appreciate his concerns, and share some of them, but I also think some of them are mis-founded. Here's my response.

Useful Education

Here's an exceptional essay that incorporates many of the thoughts I've had recently on the value of education. The best section:

Of further concern to the groom’s critics was the fact that it appeared his education would be wasted; that it would not be put “to use.” But in what sense can education be used? Is it not the same as saying that love should be used or hope should be used? Education can be used no more than the sun can be “used” by a plant in its growth. The sun is a natural and integral part of the flourishing of a plant. It is not “used” to grow a plant—it is not imaginable that a plant could flourish without it. It is the same with human flourishing. Education is as essential as the sun. It may be formal or it may be informal, either way it is essential. Education is not money; a commodity that can be exchanged in the market place. Education is an integral part of life—it is an aspect of being human. To demand that education be used is on par with demanding that people be used, and that demand is not uncommon in our age.

Passion-ate Bloopers

If you think The Passion of the Christ was "one of the greatest evangelical opportunities of all time" or felt that seeing it was itself a religious experience, you may be offended by this. If, on the other hand you were skeptical (like me) of the film as anything more than a product of Hollywood, you'll likely find it hilarious.

The Conservative Way

Found a delightful website you should check out: The New Pantagruel, an ecumenical journal run by some young old-school conservatives. A refreshing breather from breathless (and often senseless) neocons.

There is, I'm convinced, a way carefully to navigate between the Scylla of a stringent neocon social agenda and the Charybdis of liberal permissiveness and moral bankruptcy. Conservative policy needs to be informed by the traditional Christian moral standard, but when anti-homosexual or anti-abortion or pro-ten-commandments-in-the-courthouse policy becomes the sum total of our political agenda, we descend into strident moralism that repels, rather than persuades.

The many branches of conservatism--classic Reagan cons, southern conservatives, libertarians, Catholic traditionalists, neocons--were once united in an all-consuming struggle against Communism. That war is gone now, and the fissures inside the conservative movement are getting deeper. It remains to be seen whether the various factions will be able to unite on some sort of common set of goals and strategy, or whether they'll split permanently.

I'm a summer teen camp counselor this week, so blogging will be light.  I'm busy preparing devotions and "missions" for 80 "spies."

Joe Wilson and The War's Justification

My take on the ongoing Joe Wilson/Valerie Plame/Niger uranium flap, and a hindsight look at the Bush Administration's reasons for going to war: Read it here.

Film Review: King Arthur

My review of King Arthur is up. Check it out here.

Condiment Campaigning

This reminds me of the day, around the beginning of the war in Iraq, when I went to our school's cafeteria and found the "French's" label cut off of all the mustard. Is there no aspect of our lives untouched by politics these days?

John Kerry Shows His Stuff

This speech is why I'm going to vote for George W. Bush. (If you need help, see Andrew Sullivan's critique.)

President Bush may not be a true conservative in some important areas, but Kerry is undeniably and unabashedly an extreme liberal. So is Edwards. Electing Kerry would be bad for the country--bad for prosperity, bad for security, bad for liberty.

The blog, it is a-changin'

I have the same trouble with HTML, it seems, as I always had with math: forget one little bitty symbol and everything gets screwed way up. Momma always said I'm not a detail person. Guess she was right.

Anyway, now that I've spent nearly an hour working on figuring out how to do things with the sidebar, I should be adding more stuff there soon. For now, though, here's something: Check out Third Millenium, a Reformed theology website. I find the Q&A section most interesting, but there's a fair amount of other good stuff there, too.

Dune Review

Just finished Frank Herbert's Dune and Dune Messiah, as well as a prequel to the series called The Butlerian Jihad, co-written by Herbert's son Brian and Kevin J. Anderson.

Dune was excellent. Herbert did a wonderful job establishing an epic story. The book is set in an enormously well-conceived and elaborate universe, a rarity for sci-fi books. It also displays surprising strengths, including well-written characters and a fascinating plot.

Messiah was disappointing. Mostly a collection of half-baked philosophical diatribes, the characters who were so engaging in the first book were flat and incomprehensible in this one. The book also suffers from a frustrating lack of plot, with a conspiracy among incomprehensible characters that isn't explained or developed. More than anything else, the book is plagued by overuse of surprising, exciting, innovative elements from Dune that make them dense and commonplace in Messiah. I feel something of an obligation to read the rest of this series which is so legendary in the science fiction world, but after reading Messiah I'm not sure I want to.

The Butlerian Jihad, unsurprisingly, is substantially different from Herbert's works. Disappointingly, they're far less literary in style than Dune, and they feel like many other modern sci-fi stories (Incidentally, the only other book of Anderson's which I've read, the Star Wars novel Darksaber, is among the worst books I've ever read.) This makes it a quick read, but an interesting one nonetheless. Particularly interesting is the story of a sentient robot trying to figure out what makes humans human, and emulate it. It's worth a quick read, particularly if you've read Dune and want to know more about the foundations of many of the facets of its universe.

Back to my regularly scheduled reading...

Marxism-Leninism?

I'm reading Paul Johnson's Modern Times at the moment, as part of my campaign to read through ISI's fifty best books of the century list. The editors at ISI called it "the most personal, yet the most objective, history of our time." I agree.

One thing of note: I've found it fascinating to read Johnson's account of how different Lenin's philosophy really was from that of Marx. One often hears the term "Marxism-Leninsm" used to describe the political dogma of the former Soviet Union, making it easy to assume that Marxism and Leninism are virtually the same thing. Not so. What made Lenin's thought--and his belief in a revolution in Russia--distinct from Marx's philosophy was the absence of a proletariat. In the early 20th century, Russia was not yet industrialized to the point of creating a large working class, which Marx thought was the key to revolution. Lenin, however, believed this could be overcome through the leadership of a "vanguard," an intellectual elite. Lenin believed himself to be the center of this vanguard, its originator and driving force. The result, as history has seen, was catastrophic. A few men, and ultimately a succession of individuals, held the power in Russia, not the proletariat.

No posts in over a month. Shameful. You'd think I'd have been been prolific, what with lots of hours to burn sitting at the desk on security duty. No, my laziness wins again.

A new prohibitionism?

Just finished Andrew Sullivan's book, Virtually Normal: An Argument About Homosexuality. I found it, like all of Sullivan's work, clear, insightful, and thought-provoking. Therein, he outlines four basic political positions on homosexuality, incisively critiquing the strengths and weaknesses of each.

Sullivan shows that prohibitionism, the category into which most conservative Christians fall, is seriously flawed--at least as it's usually stated. Prohibitionists agree on one fundamental point: homosexual behavior is morally wrong and socially unacceptable. From this, they reason that it should be proscribed both in the public square and the private sphere. There are two distinct positions within the prohibitionist camp, however.
The first holds that homosexual action is simpy a behavioral aberration, a voluntary perversion of the natural order. All humans, they believe, are by nature heterosexual, and so homosexual behavior is morally wrong at least because it's a betrayal of nature. This sort of prohibitionist does not believe that anyone is fundamentally or naturally a homosexual--whether because of genetics or their emotional-mental structure. Homosexual behavior is at some level voluntary, and condemnable.

The second position--notably the stance of the Catholic Church--holds that a fundamental homosexual orientation is a reality for some. They can be naturally and involuntarily attracted, both emotionally and sexually, to members of the same sex. Because this orientation is involuntary, it's not sinful and should not be condemned. Homosexual behavior, however, is sinful, because it is voluntary.

Each of these positions has serious flaws. The first fails to account for the personal experience of most homosexuals. For some, homosexual attraction and behavior may actually be a choice. For most, however, the attraction to members of the same sex is as deeply emotional and sexual as is the inclination of straight folk to members of the opposite sex. It is an integral part of their personhood.

The second position also has a host of associated problems. It takes no genius to realize the extraordinary tensions caused by telling people their orientation is all right, but the normal, inevitable output of that orientation is wrong. It dooms homosexuals to a life of miserable, conflicted celibacy, without the opportunity to emotionally and spiritually bond with another person as spouses do (or should).

There is a third prohibitionist position, however, which avoids these pitfalls and maintains Scripture's position of the sinfulness of homosexuality. It recognizes the possibility that many people, perhaps most homosexuals, are deeply and fundamentally oriented toward their own sex. It also says, though, that even this orientation, though unchosen, is sinful. The Catholic Church, and many evangelicals, have a theologically distorted view of the nature of sin. Sin is the natural, unchosen human condition, but this doesn't negate man's free agency or his moral responsibility for sin. This orientation manifests itself differently for different people--an inclination to materialism, to pride, to idolatry, or to homosexuality. There is thus no moral distinction between the homosexual act and the homosexual condition. They're both sinful, even though they are both somewhat natural.

There are two definitions of "normal," when it comes to human thought and action The first is what men, free of controlling external influences, naturally are inclined to. The second is what man in his unfallen state would be inclined to, perfectly displaying the way God created humans. This second sense is what mainline prohibitionists mean when they talk about the normalcy of heterosexuality--God created men to be emotionally and sexually drawn to women, and vice versa. God also created humans to be perfectly loving towards Himself and their fellow men, but that orientation is perverted as well.

In conjunction with a clear explanation of the Gospel, this new understanding of homosexuality, and the prohibitionist politics to which it gives rise, are capable of being clear, Biblically accurate, and even compassionate. Christians must make clear to homosexuals that though their behavior and homosexual orientation are sinful, they're no more sinful than our own particular sins. All are a manifestation of the deeper problem of our sinful nature. All, in turn, can be redeemed and changed by the power of the Gospel. Prohibitionists must get a handle on this message, for homosexuality is a tremendous force in modern culture. The message must be publicized, but compassionately. It must be communicated, but without patronizing homosexuals and in a way that honors their humanity and the richness of their experience.

The beginning of history?

The concept of history's end was made popular by Francis Fukuyama a few years ago with the publication of his book, The End of History and the Last Man. A few days ago, a different thought occurred to me: the start of history. Or, more accurately, the re-starting of history.

I had the chance to hear an interesting lecture in Washington a few days ago. The speaker mentioned the current debate and controversy surrounding the Iraq war, and said she'd like to speak about the "bigger picture" of the Middle East situation and America's role in foreign affairs. Immediately, she launched into a detailed explanation of the Bush Administration's understanding of and purpose in the struggle against terrorism and Islamic extremism, beginning with the events of September 11.

This was nothing unusual per se, but the juxtaposition of her sentences triggered a thought: "Did history re-start on September 11?" Ever since then, you see, discussion in America of foreign affairs, and much of domestic affairs, has been oriented to and from 9/11. Almost every conversation assumes 9/11 as the starting point, the baseline of consideration. America is now overwhelmingly shaped and defined by the war on terror which was jumpstarted by the events of that day. To listen to most journalists, pundits, and commentators, today's international situation can be explained by the events of the last three years.

This seems a rather odd state of affairs. Certainly 9/11 was a significant event. It brought precipitously to boil a problem--Islamic extremist terrorism--that had been simmering for years. It was one of the clearest indicators that old ways of looking at international affairs had to change. I can't help thinking, though, that Americans treat September 11 as more of a breaking point than it should be. If we have to deal with new threats, we must still remember that these threats rise out of conflicts hundreds of years old. After 9/11, we still live in the same world as before, with more or less the same international players, and pretty much the same alignments. We must analyze the current Middle East crisis in light of its place in history, and not as a completely new occurrence. History hasn't yet ended, and it hasn't re-started either.

Primus Nomen

Ah, the first post. Many a journal, and many a blog, have started here and gone little further. Hopefully mine will be an exception--hopefully it won't meet the same fate as my previous journal attempts. Perhaps the fact it's public will help me keep going.

On the recent scandal over the horrific mistreatment of prisoners by US troops in Iraq: Though I love, respect, and support the President on most issues, I have to disagree with him here--the depraved character displayed by the soldiers at Abu Ghraib is in fact shared by most of the rest of the US military. I think most US soldiers are capable of this kind of atrocity, at least on some level. So are Iraqis. So are the British. So are the Spanish, and the Italians, and the Portugese, and the Japanese, and all of the other coalition members. The bottom line is that everyone is naturally susceptible to evil like this. By God's common grace, most of us are socially conditioned so that it's unconscionable and revolting. Given the stresses and trials of the Iraq war front, however, it's not particularly unsurprising that soldiers' natural inclination to evil should manifest itself in some way.

Let me be clear what I'm not saying. I'm not saying the troops' abuses are excusable. I'm not saying that those responsible for these things should not be identified and punished accordingly. I'm not saying Iraq is no better under American monsters than under the former monstrous regime. Few people with common sense and a moral orientation will fail to see the lie there.

What I am saying is simply this: evil is unsurprising. It's the normal inclination of the world. Whether it manifests itself in prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib or terrorists flying planes into buildings, we can be angered, saddened, disgusted, and terrified, but we really shouldn't be surprised. Nor should we delude ourselves by thinking it's the exception, that the rest of the US or the world is basically good.

Isn't that a cheery beginning? Email me and I'll tell you the other side of the coin--the good news.