I Agree With Daniel Larison

Larison says here that "...[Jonah] Goldberg demonstrates once again that he still has no idea what "crunchy" conservatism is." And he is right because no one really knows what crunchy conservatism is. As Kathleen famously observed here:

"[C]runchy cons" is a cipher, therefore it's anything you want it to be. Great taste and less filling!

Of course, Bubba the Energizer Bunny has pointed out many times that Rod doesn't really know what crunchy conservatism is either. For example.

Jonah's post is sensible and worth reading, as usual. It's also read-able which distinguishes it from writing that blogger Mark Shea might nickname the "IreallyreallyreallyloatheJonahGoldbergandhislittledogtoo" blog.

Daniel Larison also comes to Crunchy Conservatism's defense, typically protesting that I don't know what I'm talking about. Uh huh. I read the book. I participated in endless debates with Rod about it when his original article came out. It seems to me that Larison wants it to mean something other than what Rod has said time again. Maybe this is because Larison thinks that Crunchy Conservatism amounts to a useful marketing tool for his brand of "paleo" conservatism. I don't know, and I'm not going to try to read the mind of someone who's shown such unremitting hostility towards me. But he does simply assert that Crunchy Conservatism is what he says it is — i.e. a reformulated anti-statist paleoconservatism which "abhors" federal interventionism — and I find his assertions otherworldly. I know Rod says some nice things about Russell Kirk and the Agrarians (though his use and abuse of Kirk left a lot of people cold). But that's hardly a compelling presentation of evidence.

Hey, go back and check out that Claremont review, "Soft in the Middle". It's a slam-dunk and it contains great lines such as

One supposes it would surprise Dreher to know that achieving a workable balance between "we" and "I" is one of the defining achievements of Western civilization, an achievement that goes a long way to explain why the East, and not the West, has been historically mired in despotism (see Herodotus, et al.).

Also, while we're on the subject of smack-downs, Kathleen just reminded me of the insightful Mises.org article which came out exactly a year ago entitled "Crunchy Conned". Excerpt:

It never occurs to the author that his crunchy way of living is a consumable good — nay, a luxury good — made possible by the enormous prosperity that permit intellectuals like him to purport to live a high-minded and old-fashioned lifestyle without the problems that once came with pre-capitalist living.

He has fallen for some romantic notion of the past — happy, faithful communities raising their own food and working their own land — without considering the downside: infant mortality, plagues, lack of sanitation, short lives, surgery without anesthesia, and all the rest. The market — that global matrix of exchange that forms its own order out of billions of individual decisions — is his benefactor, and he seems completely unaware of it. A writer like this can make an economist wish that the invisible hand were slightly more visible so that at least its merits could be appreciated.

There are times when his romanticism is overt: as when he favorably cites John Ruskin's claim that the Industrial Revolution "came at the cost of [England's] soul" and ended up "debasing the soul of man by treating people as mere consumers." This line of thinking makes good poetry but has nothing to do with reality. How does a switch from wood fuel to fossil fuel debase the soul?

All good stuff by these "smart guys".But indulge this average American and let me, for the record, explain to everyone what crunchy conservatism means to me. I just thought of this while playing Rockem Sockem Robots the other night. Remember the old commercial saying that "4 out of 5 dentists recommend Trident sugarless gum to their patients who chew gum"? Crunchy Conservatism is embodied by that fifth dentist who flatly refused to be controlled by the corporate interests and all that. We don't really know what this wise prophet standing alone on the mountain peak recommended chewing, if anything, but I believe that whatever it was it is most certainly the key for our very survival, the regaining of our......"lost community soul". (Oooh! That was a good one! Yeah!) What do you think? What does Crunchy Conservatism mean to you?

"I can't believe the news today"

Bono Buys Palm. Truth is stranger than fiction, indeed.


Dude, that red piece of crap you got there better run Palm OS.

My Thoughts Exactly on "Emergentitis"

HT JohnMcG for linking to this great piece by Lydia McGrew. It's short, so I'll just post the whole enchilada here.

Let's Keep the Church Political

Now that I have your attention...

My Right Reason blog colleague Dan Bonevac has a post on the "emergent church" and "church growth" movements in evangelicalism and their goal to move evangelicals to the left in political activism. To my mind this is numinously evident from overwhelming evidence, one prominent bit of which is Rick Warren's switcheroo from listing abortion as a "non-negotiable issue" in 2004 to his appearing recently with none other than Barak Obama to oppose AIDS. (Was someone in favor of AIDS?) His response when challenged is given by a commentator in Dan's thread: "Left wing, right wing. I want the whole bird!" This, to my mind, more or less defines "shallow," but apparently not everyone agrees.

What bothers me most of all as I've been googling things like "abortion" and "Brian McLaren" (guru of "emergentism") is the pretense that these folks are trying to make the evangelical church apolitical. Right. Crusading about global warming and hollering about the terrible "dominance of the religious right" on evangelical churches is so apolitical.

A couple of weeks ago I had a close Catholic friend visit. She went to Mass at our local parish, St. Monica's (on Mother's Day, which was especially appropriate) and came home mentioning how pro-life of a parish it is, how there was a special prayer at the end for an end to abortion and so forth. I guess Mr. McLaren and his friends would also deplore this as the "dominance of the religious right" at St. Monica's.

Let's admit: In the present social context, when emergentists and their ilk tell us that they want to "shift the focus away from politics in the church," here's a translation: "Let's not talk in religious gatherings about abortion, because it makes lefties uncomfortable. But rallies about poverty, AIDS, and global warming are wonderful. That's speaking prophetically to the present age."

Glad to have that little misunderstanding cleared up.

I couldn't have explained it better myself. The only thing I have to say to Mrs. McGrew is that every left-winger knows that the so-called religious right is in favor of AIDS and that Pat Robertson concocted it in his sercet lab.

Of Chariots and Planters

Sister Mary Martha speculates about the "bodies of the saints" which experienced a sort of "pre-resurrection" on Good Friday and are mentioned in Matthew 27:52-53.

But those people were not raised bodily into heaven. We actually don't know who they were or what became of them except that since they weren't raised bodily into heaven they must have died. Again.

It's okay. Funerals weren't so expensive back then.

I've always imagined that they got to go and say a few words to the relatives or whoever and then went back to being dead later that day, so as not to be any trouble to anyone. If it were me, that's what I would have done, at least. They'd definitely want to get back to being dead, since the Gates of Heaven were finally open. I'm sure that's what they came back to tell everyone.

So only Mary and Jesus and maybe Elijah, if he didn't burn up in the atmosphere. They can use his chariot as a planter.

That last line encapsulates what I love about nuns, especially Sister Mary Martha. Spiritual and practical. And funny.

Beckwith on Hewitt on Romney

This is for Dianonymous who thinks Mr. Beckwith is a "hunk". Maybe she'll vote for Romney for the same reason? Speaking of looks, Hugh looks like my dad. Well, I'm jealous of both of them for keeping their hair, which doesn't seem fair at all in my dad's case since I'm a blood relative of his.

Here's F.B.'s review. I have the book; haven't read it yet. Liked this part of the review, where he talks about how

...Hewitt addresses what I call the Creedal Mistake.

This mistake occurs when a Christian citizen believes that the planks of his creed are the best standard by which to judge the suitability of a political candidate. For example, suppose a Presbyterian votes for one of Romney’s primary opponents solely on the basis of the governor’s rejection of the Nicene Creed. An elder who did this would not truly understand the purpose of creeds: to provide church members and the world at large a summary of beliefs that one must embrace in order to be considered an orthodox member of that body. Creeds are not meant to measure the qualifications of a political candidate in a liberal democracy. Not only does the formulation of Christendom’s most important creeds predate the existence of liberal democracies, their subject matter bears no relation to assessing those attributes that we consider essential to the leadership of a political regime. In practice, most Christians already fully grasp this truth.

He uses the example of Carter and Reagan to hammer this home. He goes on to bemoan Hewitt's negligence in dealing with Kennedy's "concession" back during his run. This may be due to the fact that Hewitt left the Catholic Church for Evangelical Protestantism and is personally comfortable with what Kennedy did.

Many Protestant Christians at the time were concerned that Kennedy’s commitment as a Catholic to the teaching of the Church’s Magisterium on a variety of social, moral, and political issues would serve as his guide for U.S. domestic and foreign policy. In order to assuage Protestant fears, on September 12, 1960, Kennedy addressed the Greater Houston Ministerial Association and assured the attendees that nothing of his Catholic faith would play any role in his judgments as occupant of the White House.

Kennedy’s speech reads like a complete acquiescence to American mainline Protestant notions of privatized faith and anti-clericalism, as well as its stereotypical, outdated, and uncharitable ideas about the Catholic hierarchy and the teachings of the Catholic Church. Kennedy could have argued that his Catholicism informs him of certain theological and moral doctrines that will make him a thoughtful and principled president. He could have consulted and mined from the works of Catholic scholars who were able defenders of liberal democracy and the natural law that grounds it. But he did not. Kennedy’s speech was a terrible concession. For it played to his audience’s anti-Catholic prejudices while saying that his religious beliefs are so trivial that he would govern exactly the same if they were absent.

I'm just speculating, of course. I really like to listen to Hugh Hewitt, but he does irritate me with what I call his "denominational indifference" regarding Catholicism. He made a big deal about going to an Easter Vigil Mass and his Presbyterian Easter service and how he was getting the "best of both worlds", you know, the neat-o, quaint, ancient Catholic liturgy plus the updated, superior music and singing of the nice, happy Protestants. As you can tell, I'm paraphrasing, but that was the gist.

Well, the Mormon Tabernacle Choir blows us all away music-wise -- what does that prove?

Atheist donates $27 million to New York Archdiocese

Hey, that'll help. Excerpt:

While he is not religious, Mr Wilson indicated a deep respect for the Catholic faith. "Let's face it," he told a reporter, "without the Roman Catholic Church there would be no Western civilization."

Mr Wilson, who is retired and in his 80s, according to the archdiocese, is one of the nation's major philanthropists, ABC 7 says.

According to Business Week, he has also contributed millions to environmental and wildlife conservation causes, the New York Public Library and the city's arts institutions.

He reportedly made his money on Wall Street by turning a $15,000 investment into $225 million.

Say a prayer for the good man. God wants our love and devotion, not just our money, but $27 million is a good start.

Puts me in mind of what Christ said, "The queen of the south shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because she came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon, and behold a greater than Solomon here." So don't forget to pony up when they pass the plate, Jack.

Kitlers

This is so wrong. And so funny. My pick for the best is #4 because of the "hairdo".

Funniest is the hate mail page. I'm so jealous. My faves:

I think u should die u stupid geek that is so mean to the cats its not funny its just plain mean I feel so sorry for the cats close this site down or die
- Dominic from Philip Morant School in Essex

I myself think this site is a disgrace.:( Hitler killed everything living thing there was and he would kill these cute cats if he was still here. Thank you.
- Rockell

Wow, Dominic wants people to die. Sign him up for the Kitty SS.

Sieg meow.

The Holy Angels

We're all thankful that John McG emerged unscathed from a nasty bus accident in St. Louis where he lives. John is a reader here and is very witty. I first discovered his blog during the Knights of Malta hype back in January from this post and I've been checking his stuff out ever since. Just one more plug for his style of comedy writing: "Alternative Vocation" is a must read.

I've been in many accidents in my life and near misses, totaled two cars, etc. Somewhat surprisingly, none involved alcohol. The good that has come out of it for me is a greater devotion to the God's Holy Angels. I say this prayer every morning and every night:

Angel of God, my Guardian dear,
To whom His love commits me here,
Every this day (night) be at my side,
To light and guard, to rule and guide.

Some might think of this as a "children's prayer", which, of course it is. To the Holy Angels I would guess that we're all a bunch of kids since they "always see the face of my Father". Besides, I have a priest-friend who is very scholarly and possesses two master's degrees in Hebrew and Greek, but he told me he says the this prayer every morning and every night. You could also pray the prayer in Latin, which is the official language spoken in Heaven, our true home and that of the Holy Angels:

Angele Dei, qui custos es mei,
Me tibi commissum pietate superna;
Hodie (Hac nocte) illumina, custodi, rege, et guberna. Amen.