Replies

Now, it seems to me that should be a matter of grave concern to “the community at large”, that both Kevmo and spirited should be sternly scolded for not only intemperate language, but unacceptable ideology. — BJK

YIKES!!!! "Unacceptable ideology???" What is going on here?

The Framers were not "ideologues."

Among other things, the Framers — faced with the weighty challenge of how to make a free government work — banked the fires of zealotry and political millenarianism in favor of latitudinarian faith and a quasi-Augustinian understanding of the two cities. They humbly bowed before the inscrutable mystery of history and the human condition with its suffering and imperfection and accepted watchful waiting for fulfillment of a Providential destiny know only to God — whose "kingdom is not of this world" (John 18:36). But in addition to understanding government as necessary coercive restraint on the sinful creature ... they reflected a faith that political practice in perfecting the image of God in every man through just domination was itself a blessed vocation and the calling of free men: It was stewardship in imitation of God's care for His freely created and sustained world, one enabled solely by grace bestowed on individuals and a favored community. They embraced freedom of conscience as quintessential liberty for a citizenry of free men and women, as had John Milton long before who exclaimed in Areopagitica: "Give me liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties." [Which when you come to think of it is pretty silly; one cannot execute liberty of conscience when one is dead. So LIFE must come "first" among the God-granted human liberties.] And, for better or worse, they followed Milton (as well as Roger Williams and John Locke) in heeding his plea "to leave the church to itself" and "not suffer the two powers, the ecclesiastical and the civil, which are so totally distinct, to commit whoredom together." The correlate was religious toleration within limits, as necessary for the existence of a flourishing civil society whose free operations minimized tampering with religious institutions or dogmas. Yet the historically affirmed vocation of a special people under God still could be pursued through active devotion to public good, liberty, and justice solidly grounded in Judeo-Chrisatian transcendentalism. Citizens were at the same time self-consciously pilgrims, aware that this world was not their home. It is this ever-present living tension with the divine Ground above all else, perhaps, that has made the United States so nearly immune politically to the ideological maladies that have characterized much of the modern world, such as fascism and Marxism and, lately, fanatical jihadism.

Like all of politics, the Founders' solutions were compromises, offensive to utopians and all other flaming idealists. But this may be no detraction from their work, since despite all national vicissitudes, we still strive to keep our republic — under the world's oldest existing Constitution.... — Ellis Sandoz, Give Me Liberty: Studies in Constitutionalism and Philosophy, South Bend: St. Augustine Press, 2013, p. 32 f.

If we are in search of ideologues, I imagine we will find none among the Framers. Their genius was Godly and practical at the same time: They all stood on the same ground of Being; that is to say, on the Creator God and the liberties and commensurate/corresponding duties He imposes on every human person equally, regardless of "station" in life. This was their idea of the public good, the prescription for the flourishing of individuals and society itself, and the fulfillment of divine Justice as much as possible in this world.

Now it seems to me the problem spirited irish and BroJoeK have been having on this thread is that the two do not stand on the same Ground of Being. What to BJK is a party game, a divertissement, an exercise in word-play is to spirited irish finally a matter of life and death. BJK senses spirited's alarm and passion regarding the cultural destruction and deformation that seems inexorably to be destroying our free society and thinks it's funny. So he has been working overtime to depict spirited as an object of ridicule.

Doesn't seem very "Christian" to me — though BJK occasionally murmurs that he is really a Christian himself.

For my part, I see very clearly the reasons for spirited's alarm. I share her concerns.

The so-called "Cartesian split" is no longer merely a hypothetical tinker-toy for the mind to play with: It has become the main presupposition of a despiritualized, unthinking populace utterly ignorant of human history and culture — theological, philosophical, religious, social — and the judicious common sense experience of living individual persons, then and now.

So of course spirited is worried. BJK, to you I say: Keep on dreaming. One can be a "star" in one's own dream world.

Though I don't see what good that sort of thing does for the maintenance of a free society governed by the Rule of Law, not by the Rule of Men.

Just some thoughts. I wish you both — and all the pingees — a HAPPY, HEALTHY, AND PROSPEROUS NEW YEAR!!!

betty boop: "Now it seems to me the problem spirited irish and BroJoeK have been having on this thread is that the two do not stand on the same Ground of Being.
What to BJK is a party game, a divertissement, an exercise in word-play is to spirited irish finally a matter of life and death."

BJK response: As always when you try to get inside my head, Ms boop, you get wrong -- most often exactly the opposite of truth.
In this case, I am here defending, amongst others, our Founders' religious beliefs against Ms irish's charge of "Damnable Heresy" and Kevmo's of being "God Damned Heretics".
If you think that is mere "divertissement" then you clearly don't yet "grasp" what's going on here.

Your frequent claims to the contrary notwithstanding, my own views correspond closely with those of most "top tier" founders, including Franklin, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison & Hamilton.
Yes, others had more traditional religious views, notably John Jay, but Ms irish's charge of "Damnable Heresy" she lays specifically at Enlightenment Age thinkers -- and that necessarily includes our Founders.

betty boop: "So he has been working overtime to depict spirited as an object of ridicule."

So now Ms irish, the charger of "Damnable Heresy", is the object of ridicule?
No, boop, she is the originator or ridicule.
If anything, she is only receiving back, in the mildest possible form, what she first dished out.

betty boop: "Doesn't seem very "Christian" to me..."

So calling yours truly, BroJoeK a "God Damned Heretic": that's 100% Christian, while reporting how ridiculous that is: that's not?
So who, pray tell us, has the most warped idea of what exactly "Christian" means?

betty boop: "For my part, I see very clearly the reasons for spirited's alarm.
I share her concerns."

Sure, in effect, you and Ms irish are reporting a multi-alarm fire, but when you throw in the Enlightenment Age thinking of our Founders, then you are giving the Fire Department the fire's wrong address.

Metaphorically, your alarm is putting out a fire that's not there, while the real fire burns-on unhindered.