Prayer vs false values posing as ideas

Tucker Carlson at a gala gathering on the Friday before his ousting from Fox News

How quickly formerly exhilarating ideas stumble and fade! One example most recently has been New Atheism, with its momentum all but stalled. 

Upon us still is the attempted overthrow of moral safeguards for the individual and society as the spirit of the Enlightenment's rationalism ebbs, evidenced by the capitulation of the health and science community to the newly entrenched Critical Theory activists, and by the loss of the mutual tolerance and freedom that Liberalism championed, all based on Christian principles. To the degree those principles are ignored, rational, respectful discourse is made impossible (see more below). 

Note that the Marxist “Critical Theory” in the narrow sense designates several generations of German philosophers and social theorists in the Western European Marxist tradition. "Since the 1970s, critical theory has been immensely influential in the study of history, law, literature, and the social sciences" (Source; see also here). Key to understanding the Critical Race Theory and the Transgender Ideology that is dominant among the Western elite is the materialism and subjectivism of this age, in which everyone can espouse a "truth" of their own making, but in doing so increase the domination of others and the decrease of freedom. 

 But Truth will win out:

Truth contains within itself the ability to resist and to blossom in the light of day, even if [truth’s opponents] try very diligently and carefully to hide it. Those who proclaim the truth do not need to be numerous. Falsehood is what requires a lot of people, because it always needs to be renewed and fed. Our duty as Christians is to abide in the truth, even if it costs us dearly. ‒ Jerzy Popiełuszko, a priest killed by Poland's former Communist regime.

 And this view has drawn this comment:

What especially strikes me is the true observation that falsehood cannot stand on its own. It requires bands of flunkies. This gives it a ridiculous aspect it is important to remember. We mustn’t trifle with falsehood; but it is good to recognise its absurdity. What we can laugh at heartily has no power over us.

The comment is by Erik Varden, aged 48, a Norwegian Trappist monk, bishop of Trondheim, and writer on spiritual and cultural matters. For 10 years he studied theology and philosophy at Cambridge University, where he gained a doctorate.

A typical post on Varden's website (in English) follows:

POST-SECULARISM

21 April 2023

In a column in this morning’s Aftenposten, the Swedish scholar Joel Halldorf asks why Swedes connect more readily than Norwegians with the spiritual dimension of contemporary literature. He writes:

We [Swedes] were long considered the world’s most secularised country. Over some years, however, there has been a steady movement towards faith and religiosity, especially in the world of culture. The trend has often been remarked on in the media. It indicates that we have passed from a stage of secular rupture to a post-secular stage. This doesn’t mean that all Swedes are about to return to Christianity; but materialistic atheism is not longer regarded as the obvious final stop on humanity’s religious journey. Atheism is no longer the norm; the norm is openness to a many-faceted religious search.

This is well observed. Materialistic atheism does come across, now, as rather moth-eaten and old-fashioned. But we Norwegians tend to lag behind a little.

Where is the respectful discourse?

That the key pillar for building healthy relationships within and between societies is constructed from what amounts to a checklist of Christian principles is realised in this statement:  

New Atheists failed to realize that religion, especially Christianity, was the proverbial branch upon which they were sitting. For example, the freedom of expression depends on a number of assumptions, that there is objective truth, that it can be discovered, that it is accessible to people regardless of race or class, that belief should be free instead of coerced, that people have innate value, and that because of this value they should not be silenced. Every one of these ideas assumes the kind of world described in the Bible and mediated across centuries of Christian thought. Not one of these assumptions can be grounded in a purposeless world that is the product of only natural causes and processes.  

Notice, too, how Tucker Carlson, in the speech  that apparently led to his sacking from Fox News, stressed that neither mainstream political and social leaders, and certainly not those dedicated to performative activism, are looking to achieve the common good but are committed only to their own "truth". The corporate domain is likewise corrupted, with virtue signalling and the marketing of whatever is fashionable are employed as welcome means to swell profits.

The emotional harm and public disorder that is the inevitable consequence of the disregard for Truth in the form of well-based solutions to human problems are, in Tucker Carlson's word, "evil", which he described as “a manifestation of some larger force acting upon us”.   It's worth staying with his speech to grasp the horror he feels at the unwillingness of many players on the public stage to address reality. The horror arises as the hand of the devil provokes disorder and confusion.

 I don’t think we’re watching a debate over how to get to the best outcome. [...] There is no way to assess, say, the transgender movement with that mind-set.

Policy papers don’t [count] at all. If you have people who are saying, “I have an idea. Let’s castrate the next generation. Let’s sexually mutilate children.” I’m sorry, that’s not a political debate. That’s nothing to do with politics. What’s the outcome we’re desiring here? An androgynous population? Are we arguing for that? I don’t think anyone could defend that as a positive outcome, but the weight of the government and a lot of corporate interests are behind that.

[And] if you’re telling me that abortion is a positive good, what are you saying? Well, you’re arguing for child sacrifice, obviously.

Well, what’s the point of child sacrifice? Well, there’s no policy goal entwined with that. No, that’s a theological phenomenon.

And that’s kind of the point I’m making. None of this makes sense in conventional political terms. When people, or crowds of people, or the largest crowd of people at all, which is the federal government, the largest human organization in human history, decide that the goal is to destroy things, destruction for its own sake, “Hey, let’s tear it down,” what you’re watching is not a political movement. It’s evil.

I’ll put it in nonpolitical or rather non-specific theological terms, and just say, if you want to know what’s evil and what’s good, what are the characteristics of those? 

I think the Athenians would’ve agreed with this. This is not necessarily just a Christian notion, this is kind of a, I would say, widely agreed-upon understanding of good and evil. What are its products? What do these two conditions produce?

 [G]ood is characterized by order, calmness, tranquility, peace, whatever you want to call it, lack of conflict, cleanliness. Cleanliness is next to godliness. It’s true. It is.

And evil is characterized by their opposites. Violence, hate, disorder, division, disorganization, and filth. So, if you are all in on the things that produce the latter basket of outcomes, what you’re really advocating for is evil. That’s just true. I’m not calling for religious war. Far from it. I’m merely calling for an acknowledgement of what we’re watching.

Those of us who were in our mid-50s are caught in the past in the way that we think about this. One side’s like, “No, no, I’ve got this idea, and we’ve got this idea, and let’s have a debate about our ideas.”

They don’t want a debate. Those ideas won’t produce outcomes that any rational person would want under any circumstances. Those are manifestations of some larger force acting upon us. It’s just so obvious. It’s completely obvious.

Avoiding the hell self-will creates 

Carlson does recommend two remedies, the first being to recognise that the ideologies trumpeted all around us are not to be examined as to their actual value to the common good. The cult that would deliver the world from oppression proscribes free debate since it is not based on rational or scientific foundations. 

And I think two things: One, we should say that and stop engaging in these totally fraudulent debates, where we are using the terms that we used in 1991 when I started at [The Heritage Foundation], as if maybe I could just win the debate if I marshaled more facts.

I’ve tried. That doesn’t work. And two, maybe we should all take just 10 minutes a day to say a prayer about it. I’m serious. Why not?

And I’m saying that to you not as some kind of evangelist, I’m literally saying that to you as an Episcopalian, the Samaritans of our time. I’m coming to you from the most humble and lowly theological position you can. I’m literally an Episcopalian. And even I have concluded it might be worth taking just 10 minutes out of your busy schedule to say a prayer for the future, and I hope you will.

That call for everyone to pray for protection against the evil that the devil has sown in the world was the way Carlson ended his address to the members of society's aristocracy gathered at the Heritage Foundation's celebration near Washington D.C. , the centre of the most powerful nation in the world, and the most culturally influential nation in the world.

Ω Leave a comment and, if you like this blog, read the same posts at my Peace and Truth newsletter on Substack, where you can subscribe for free and be notified when a new post is published.