la politesse

Some ramblings after wine and cheese [more cheese than wine, I argue, but my remarks will speak for themselves about the balance]. I am, at least by reputation and web-logging affiliation, a liberalist. Perish the thought. In what sense? Ideology is the province of the deluded, I only believe in Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour. The State will only kill, that's what it does, to keep order. The only telos of man is the eschaton, the final restoration to God, and history is only the great boredom before the second coming [hat tip to St. Augustine via Gabriel]. Ideologically, I can only call liberalism [which is broad and encompasses most of modernism, Republicist and Democrist] a satanic rebellion against the authority of God. The only sense in which I can be considered liberal is the practical: in that I think the "liberal" treatment of a variety of social problems - poverty, education, health care - to be more viable than the prevailing conservative ones and that on a variety of social issues - divorce, for one - it is simply not prudent to legislate against the prevailing social norms. CS Lewis is my political model, I suppose: not publicly taking any stand, noting that as long as a Christian supports the ends a Christian may/must support, one can legitimately believe in a variety of different means - Fascism, Democracy, Monarchism, etc - and be a Christian. And that, in, par example, the matter of divorce, it may not be prudent to insist on regulating as a norm the Christian law in a society which cannot accept it.

BUT I AM DISTURBED by the trends of modern liberalists: it seems more and more that Leftivism, even if one agrees economically and can accomodate, to some degree, the marital demands of the Left, is incapable of tolerating the Christian. The Leftivist demands not only civil recognition of marital rights, but approbation of an entire theological interpretation of the purpose of human sexuality - or perhaps anti-theology is the more appropriate word. In the name of pragmatism, "what works" to "prevent AIDS" and "teenage pregnancy" and "promote a realistic worldview" or whatever, one must have limitless approbation for abortion, contraception, pre-marital sex, and all the rest of the treatment of the body as an instrument at the disposal of a mind to do whatever the mind wills with no risk of soiling the mind as such, mens sana in sano corpere [pay no attention to the literal meaning, it's a polemic, it really means reducing the body to an instrument at the command of the mind which is the true self, and this is the siren call of the liberalist, guard yourself well!] is the counterpart of anima sans in corpore morbo, both equally gnostic, both equally satanically deluded, both equally foreign to Christian life, as both deny the sacral nature of the human body which our great God and Savior Jesus Christ did assume and save. Good God if I did it all again I'd major in Gender Studies and look at what it means to have a Christian theology of the body - ain't that a kick in the head to 'em all. And so but like yeah, the moment one dissents in the slightest, suggesting perhaps something is immoral, that perhaps Planned Parenthood is not all lollipops-and-iced-cream, one gets impaled by the Left, and the moment one suggests that perhaps abstinence is possible if not desirable, it'll be a golden stake.

Now, don't get me wrong, I think the strawmen the Liberalists erect against "abstinence only" sex-ed are quite right - if one refuses to educate about sex in the way those flammable unreal men indicate, only bad things will happen. But is that what anybody is advocating? Yes, perhaps some idiots are. There's a reason I will never identify with the Right. But my point is that any questioning of the liberalist party line ends in crucifixion: middle ground is impossible, it's either recreational abortion or the hated celibacy for them, it seems.

RE: LA POLITESSE. RSVP veut dire répondre s'il vous plaît. If one says one will come, one must come. And after one comes, one sends a "thank you" note the next day. In these last days, some do not send the "thank you", and this is a portent of the end. We do not speak of those who say they will come and do not, or those who do not respond to say they are not coming, for that is beyond the scope of la politesse even in these last days.