Skip to main content

Perhaps I'm unkind

Perhaps I'm unkind when I write about the shenanigans of our beloved Federal Liberal party. Perhaps I just loose my mind at the thought of the word 'liberal.' Perhaps I'm being -the horror! - unchristian. Then again, maybe not. Mrs. P at Patum Peperium makes the case for a critical Christendom in a post about Jane Austen:
Jane Austen is thought to be one of the world's best novelists. She is also known to have been a serious Christian. Her Christian morality shaped her novels and brought her characters to life. The two are inseparable. Yet Jane wrote some highly critical even inflammatory descriptions of characters like the one for Dick Musgrove. She described characters and their actions in a manner today (2005) that many wearing purple shirts and pointy hats on Sunday would say were "unChristian". Christians today are not allowed to judge people or their actions. But Jane Austen certainly judged and those judgements did not impinge on her Christian reputation. In fact they enhanced it. What has happened over the last 200 years to cause this?
Mrs. P answers the question to my satisfaction here:
I believe the cult of Sensibility and Romanticism has invaded our everyday life. It has invaded our schools, Colleges, Universities, the Human Resource Departments of most corporations and most of our churches. This is one of the reasons why Christians are required to sound like goofy babies when they speak. Why they can no longer judge people and their actions for fear of sounding unChristian. Romanticism is a demanding mistress. To be a Romantic religious person, you must always feel it - be on fire so to speak. Very tiresome because as everyone knows there are just times when you just don't feel it. Religion is not about emotion or feelings. If it is, it will disappoint you profoundly if you're lucky enough. Jane Austen understood this. This is why she did not like the Evangelical Movement. She saw it as being too dependent on feelings. Jane Austen was guided by the immutable moral standards as defined by Orthodox Christianty. As a result she was capable of great affection, great love, humor and sadness. Her characters were as well. This is why she and her novels have been so beloved for so long. This is also why they are so misunderstood.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist . Many, including The Last Amazon , will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories: Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline." Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations. "My goal is to protect
Post a Comment
Read more

Where credit is due

A good'un from Sawyer Brown . Thank God for You Well I've been called a self-made man Girl don't you believe it's true I know exactly how lucky I am When I'm gettin' this close to you It's high time I'm giving some praise To those that got me where I am today Chorus I got to thank momma for the cookin' Daddy for the whuppin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you A strong heart and a willing hand That's the secret to my success A good woman - I try to be a good man A good job - Lord I know I've been blessed I'm just a part of a greater plan It doesn't matter which part I am Chorus I got to thank momma for the teachin' Daddy for the preachin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you
Post a Comment
Read more

A very limited form of inquiry

Real Clear Politics is carrying commentary on James Q. Wilson's WSJ article on ID (got that?). Wilson, the respected social scientist, gets it mostly right when he says that ID is not science because it can't be tested: So ID is not science. Does this mean that science, in any way, implies the non-existence of God? No. Does this mean that belief in God is irrational and that we should all be "free thinkers"? No. Does this mean that it is impossible to arbitrate between various theories of the existence/non-existence of God and come to some reasonable conclusions? No. Does this mean that we cannot say that humanity is meant to exist? No. In other words, rationality outside of science is quite possible, and has been around for a long time. How do you think humanity invented science in the first place? We surely did not do it scientifically. Science as we know it is the product of millennia of philosophical debate -- from Aristotle to Lakatos. Science depends upon phi
Post a Comment
Read more