This is a comment from Mangan’s and it comes in the context of Dalrocks’ argument that over the last 40 years the conservatives have accomodated women’s wishes (particularly their daughter’s wishes) without any condemnation until we have ended up in a situation where men are walking away.
Commentator Dan said
There is a solution, and it is as radical as feminism. That solution is hard religious orthodoxy to the point of fundamentalism.
I am in a religious marriage and I would have to call myself thoroughly happy. I went to an Ivy League University and graduated with honors. I am a fairly successful federal employee. We will soon have four kids so far and she is just thirty. There are no plans yet to stop having kids. My tribe is increasing. My parents delightedly help with every bone in their body. They love the grandkids.
My wife is much better looking at me, is college educated and can answer many more jeopardy questions than me.
And so it will be in the world. Nature bats last and she bats 1.000. Demographics is destiny. Liberal ‘mainline’ Christian denominations were 2/3 of American Christianity
a century ago, and that is now down to 1/3, with more fundamentalist Churches making up the difference. In Israel the Ultra Orthodox are shooting upward from a fringe to the group that politically owns the country.
Men can take control of this. Just don’t be afraid to be single for a while. Work your butt off to get degrees and a good job and otherwise become desirable and then make traditional-mindedness a core criterion. Don’t dabble with dating anybody who is not a good candidate your traditional wife. And tell her your plans for her to be your stay-at-home-while-the-kids-are-small motherly wife clear early. If it scares her away or freaks her out, good. She won’t waste your time or your money.
Well Dan is correct. For the young Christian man… only marry a woman who is prepared to live a traditional life, and be in a church where being a traditional wife is actively supported, divorce is shunned, and putting down husbands is also shunned.
However… you have to isolate yourselves from the poison. And here I don’t mean HBO (close to porn) or romantic novesl (porn) or Porn porn. I mean the whispers. The romantic comedies about finding oneself, The idea that you can get fat, go pagan, and you will be swept off your feet by a younger, tighter Romeo. You have to shut your roaming eye.
And this message needs to be taken on board by women. Men know that. They agree to cleave to her and her alone. While they guard their eyes, women have to guard their ears. From the co worker who puts down men. From the stories of divorce being justified. From the rationalisation that the kids will do OK.
You both need to be fundamentalist, Liberalism is dying out. You must take a religious beleif to confront and beat ideologies of this world and the religions that will oppress and destroy you for your faith. A lax beleif is as lethal as bringing a knife to a gun fight.
The demographic writing is on the wall. We need to be more like the Amish or the Hasidim than the current Archbishop of Canterbury.
You both need to be fundamentalist, Liberalism is dying out. You must take a religious beleif to confront and beat ideologies of this world and the religions that will oppress and destroy you for your faith. A lax belief is as lethal as bringing a knife to a gun fight.
Fundamentalism doesn’t make people more decent. In fact, I find it breeds hate and contempt. Fundies were the people who shamed me for suffering an illness, and for having a non-Christian father. [Although American fundies are an amusing breed of crazy that has Science textbooks claiming the Devil buried dinosaur bones in the ground - New Zealand fundies might be different]
& surely God must have intended more for me, than just giving birth to babies and having men buy me things. My father buys me things now; I appreciate how he indulges me, but there’s no meaning in my life. I’m sick of trad-cons telling women they can’t dream, or have achievements outside of the home. Getting a degree in Astronomy wouldn’t mean I want to neglect my future husband, or children. The problem with feminism isn’t that it’s allowed women to make achievements – it’s that it teaches women to neglect their families and consider their achievements more important. My family would always be the most important thing to me; nothing could ever change that.
& when I have [or adopt] children, I do not plan to introduce them to religion until they are older. I’ll raise them to be good, kind, compassionate, moral people; you don’t need God to do that. I just think Christianity is too complex of a concept to fully explain to a five year old. I want my kids to be genuine Christians – I want them to understand their beliefs when they pray. [The worst part of my religious education was praying solely because adults told me to - not because I wanted to, or even knew what I was doing]
….I’m sure I’ll probably get flamed for what I just said.
*I decided to clear this up because I’ll probably get flamed [Christians always jump to the worst conclusions about me]: When I said I want to get a degree in Astronomy, I meant I just want to earn a degree in Astronomy – for self improvement. I don’t want to use the degree to get a job and focus on making money.
I like being spoiled – it’s kinda the meaning of my handle [Oh Butterfly, Oh Flower is a Japanese idiom for "indulged daughter"]. It’s an arrangement I have no problem with. However there must be more to life, than just sitting around having men provide me with luxuries.
I realize motherhood is special, and maybe that will change these feelings of mine.
BF,
One of the things you will have to do going forward is try to read pro-Christian, pro-Traditional writings without assuming that the judgmental mean-spirited people you have encountered negate the truth of the message.
Second, you’re going to need to realize that zeal for solid Biblical truth does not necessarily mean that you must be a SAHM. And not permanently. The man referenced in this article by Chris made a decision with his wife to be open to many children. That usually means mom has to stay home because the cost of childcare with many young children is cost prohibitive. Even if the couple didn’t object to using child care, only a very well to do couple could afford quality childcare for multiple children.
Additionally, you have a health condition which would most likely prohibit you from having multiple children. Well, okay then. This doesn’t apply to you does it? You really must learn to glean what you can from what a person writes online and disregard what doesn’t apply to you.
The truth is that traditionalism coupled with true Christian love and mercy for your fellow man is a better bet going forward than the alternative. The results are in and the “social-free-for-all-autonomy-for-everyone-darned-the-consequnces” experiment has failed miserably. It is instructive that only the communities that have shunned the experiment are thriving. Does this mean that they are perfect? NO! There are no perfect people and there never will be.
But truth wins out. Sometimes it just takes us a while to see it.
My charge to you is to stop looking for perfect people. And stop judging every one who calls themselves a Christian by the bad experiences you’ve encountered. You are far too young to possibly have encountered all that Christianity has to offer, dear.
I just had another thought BF, as your comments have lingered with me thes past couple of hours.
You often refer to a marriage where the husband is the primary provider in the most materialistic manner. You go on about wanting a man to “buy me things.”
Seriously, is that what you think this is about? Let em tell you something. Most people who choose this life out of love of faith and family don’t do it for monetary reasons. In fact in most instances, the budget is very tight but conviction keeps them on the path.
Christmas is coming and yes, my husband will buy me something. He will buy me a little something on our anniversary, and again on my birthday. Two or three times a years besides that we’ll get away for a quiet dinner. But him “buying me things” is not what this is about. He has a very solid idea of how he wants his family to be ordered and function and I give him what he desires because that is my duty. We don’t have a lot of disposable income left over for him to “buy me things.”
Further, most women in the SAHM role would often work outside the home in order to be able to buy themselves a little more but the conviction to be in the home making it a haven for their husbands and a safe place to nurture and raise their children cause them to stay put.
You seem to think that every woman who is at home is a materialistic shrew working her husband into an early grave. You never even consider that there are men (like mine) who insist that it be this way.
I’ve seen families downsize to a smaller home and give up a car so the wife can be at home. Not because it’s what she insisted, but because HE (the husband) wanted what he felt was best for his family and for his kids: a faith and family centered home rather than a home driven by cultural norms and materialism.
Your know-it-all rhetoric fits well in the manosphere and it’ll earn you plenty of pats on the head there, but it has very little to do with the real world situations many of us are trying to live in to the best of our ability.
You sound as judgmental as the people you berate for their own tendency to be judgmental.
One of the things you will have to do going forward is try to read pro-Christian, pro-Traditional writings without assuming that the judgmental mean-spirited people you have encountered negate the truth of the message.
Well, whenever I comment on pro-Christian, pro-Traditional websites, I tend to get flamed or cyberbullied. Don’t blame me for being on the defensive.
My charge to you is to stop looking for perfect people. And stop judging every one who calls themselves a Christian by the bad experiences you’ve encountered. You are far too young to possibly have encountered all that Christianity has to offer, dear.
I’m not looking for perfect people; however I don’t think Christianity should have hurt me the way it has. My bad experiences with Christianity aren’t flukes; way too many Christians today are getting the faith wrong – and for some reason not many people want to acknowledge the flaws in the faith.
Seriously, is that what you think this is about? Let em tell you something. Most people who choose this life out of love of faith and family don’t do it for monetary reasons. In fact in most instances, the budget is very tight but conviction keeps them on the path.
“Traditionalists” tell me I’m not supposed to work, and God wants men to “provide” for me. I’m told that since I’m a silly feeble minded woman, I can’t make any decisions, or do any substantial work [besides laundry and vacuuming]. My future husband is supposed to do everything, because that’s what “God” wants. They also never talk about acknowledging their significant other’s feelings. Besides raising children, women have very little responsibility to their spouse. In fact, quite a few traditionalists consider porn viewing infidelity [instead of wondering why their husband would be viewing porn].
…IDK, the whole deal sounds very suspicious to me. Especially since it’s often preached by former feminists. [& I'm not even sure if it's real traditionalism - it's some weird neo-traditionalism that is only beneficial to women looking to settle down and have kids. I found some genuine 1950's relationship texts - nothing in them resembles what I'm being told by modern traditionalists]
I’m not judging you, you’re possibly the only female traditionalist blogger I like. I realize you have a big family, and working wouldn’t be economically feasible for you. I realize you put your family first. When I have [or adopt] children, I plan to be a SAHM mom until they are in college.
I’ve seen families downsize to a smaller home and give up a car so the wife can be at home. Not because it’s what she insisted, but because HE (the husband) wanted what he felt was best for his family and for his kids: a faith and family centered home rather than a home driven by cultural norms and materialism.
But that’s just it – you’re assuming the lifestyles different from yours are driven by materialism and those awful “cultural” norms. My boyfriend wants to provide me with a housewife lifestyle; it’s just I’m not sure how him working hard so I myself don’t have to work – somehow makes me a better Christian than others. You may not have said that [& I don't believe you believe such a thing], but many other Traditionalist Christian bloggers have. Heck, my [feminist influenced...?] religious education taught me that.
& I’m sure I’ll be judged by traditionalists for only wanting to have one or two kids [for health reasons]. I often read on blogs how women who have small families are “selfish”.
Like what you said before, Traditionalism has some good ideas…but it isn’t perfect. It shouldn’t be considered an automatic solution to the modern ills of the world; especially not in it’s current incarnation.
Your know-it-all rhetoric fits well in the manosphere and it’ll earn you plenty of pats on the head there, but it has very little to do with the real world situations many of us are trying to live in to the best of our ability.
But how are you so sure of that? I’ve seen “devout” traditional Christian women divorce their husbands; my religious education was full of man-shaming woman pedestalising lessons – I don’t know what world you’re living in, but in my real world I can’t help but raise suspicion of women preaching traditional Christian lifestyles. How do I know they aren’t Christian when it’s convenient? “Frivolous divorce is wrong…but not when I do it!” How do I know that they honestly want to change the current status quo? Are modern traditionalists’ motives altruistic?
…I can’t help but remain skeptical.
Chris,
Forgive me if I sound argumentative, but I get a bit tired of the meme of the wife working her husband into an early grave while she drives around town spending his money.
Male version of whispering… along with she will divorce you. Common in the “all women are idiots” end of the Men’s Rights Movement. A whisper to be avoided. By men.
Of course you will be annoyed about this. You don’t live your life that way
It’s laughable to me because it is so far removed from the reality of my life. But it’s also infuriating because not only is it insulting to women who are living this faithfully when it’s not easy, but it implies that the men who are married to SAHM’s are stupid suckers. LOL, Okay, a lot of them are and I know it.
But in cases where it’s the husband who has set the tone for the order of the family rather than a wife getting her own way on it, NOTHING could be farther from the truth.
If I start dropping the ball my husband says something and he expects things to be set aright. This ain’t no feminist driven house masquerading as something else. And I think that’s true in most homes when it’s the husband who has declared he doesn’t want a career driven wife or even one who works full time.
But BF,
A truly Christian wife believes you are to submit to your husband. If that means working outside the home, then so be it.
I have a college degree. I think those who think a wife is only useful for vacuuming and laundry have a flawed view of Christian womanhood. I don’t see that in the Bible.
You need to run as far as possible away from that kind of teaching as possible. You need to explore your theology for yourself within your church and with your fiance.
There are a lot of well meaning people running around with all kinds of ideas about what a marriage should be. The Bible however, makes it very simple:
1. Husband love and lead your wife
2. Wife respect you husband and submit to him.
3. Have sex and don’t deprive one another of physical affection
4. Stay together until death do you part.
The rest is largely to be negotiated largely by the couple under the husband’s leadership. Which is why I get a little perturbed when people take it upon themselves to judge how one couple negotiates their relationship just because it’s not how you would do it.
Chris, I think the terms ‘conservative’ or ‘traditionalist’ Christians, might be more appropriate than ‘fundamentalist’, an oft-abused term that more narrowly applies to the small group of mostly Baptist churches that cite the Five Fundamentals as a doctrinal basis of sorts (though they tend to deny they have any creeds or confessions; whatever…
As regards the actual fundamentalists, I agree with a recent commenter at Patriactionary, here, that due to being more uncompromising than evangelicals, who eventually always seem to sell out and get dragged along with the wider society, they are, like the Amish, more likely to preserve themselves and their values, intact, than evangelicals.
Butterfly, you delicate Flower, aren’t those fundies horrible, CYBERBULLYING you like that. I mean, all you did was call them “hateful” and “crazy”! LOL, the nerve of them, probably flaming you…
Anyway, I just commented on the same Mangan thread on my blog. Of course Dan is correct. His attackers are desperately deranged, it is just weird.
Oh, and madame Butterfly, IF your husband even provides for you and your children so you can stay home and raise them, you will certainly NOT be “without a job”. In fact, you will be working a lot harder than your husband, if you have a family of any size….
A truly Christian wife believes you are to submit to your husband. If that means working outside the home, then so be it.
My boyfriend doesn’t want me to work [especially not with my poor health] it’s just I don’t want him to martyr himself for me. I rather him be happy, than take a stressful high paying job just so he could provide for me.
I’m not going to be able to have children right away; and if I have to adopt, the process will take years. When it comes to my own personal circumstances; I feel like I should put my future husband’s feelings first.
I have a college degree. I think those who think a wife is only useful for vacuuming and laundry have a flawed view of Christian womanhood. I don’t see that in the Bible.
You need to run as far as possible away from that kind of teaching as possible.
You do realize that discredits 95% of the Traditional Christian blogosphere?
…I mean, I’m not aware of any traditional Christian blogs that say there is more to Christian womanhood than domestic duties.
Butterfly, you delicate Flower, aren’t those fundies horrible, CYBERBULLYING you like that. I mean, all you did was call them “hateful” and “crazy”! LOL, the nerve of them, probably flaming you…
Um, they started it. Let’s see all the reasons I’ve been flamed by Christians on the blogosphere:
Being mixed faith/race [I'm part Japanese *feels uncomfortable admitting to that*]
Being confused about my sexuality [I didn't even bring it up; a Christian dug it up from a comment I made on a different blog - just to prove I'm not a "real" Christian]
Dating a Christian from the “wrong” denomination [did you know Anglicans aren't Christians?]
Saying that my religious education did more harm than good, and had feminist undertones [apparently churches are infallible!]
Yeah….I haven’t exactly encountered much kindness in the Christian blogosphere. [Chris' blog is one of the few...]
If I showed my [non-Christian] father the vicious Christian blogosphere, I’m sure he’d laugh and say something like “so this is what Jesus leads to?” Or “I’m not a Christian, but I think they might be doing it wrong…” [he's sarcastic]
Being mixed faith/race [I'm part Japanese *feels uncomfortable admitting to that*]
BF, who gives a crap what your race is? Do you realize that the Elusive Wapitii is ethnic Hawaiian, Terri is black, Alte is mixed race, Chris is white, and I am Indian– and NO ONE CARES. Since when has your race been a factor in anything?
Being confused about my sexuality [I didn't even bring it up; a Christian dug it up from a comment I made on a different blog - just to prove I'm not a "real" Christian]
Yet you were the one who had to initially talk about kissing girls? Expect that to be fair game when you advertise it on the ‘sphere. It’s one thing to be confused and another to advertise salacious nonsense.
Dating a Christian from the “wrong” denomination [did you know Anglicans aren't Christians?]
Again you sputter nonsense. Haven’t you read how many women have talked about their struggles with being married to non-Christians? And even if they spouse was a Christian, they did not share the same denominational faith? Instead you choose to ignore sage advice and babble away. Terri was gracious enough to offer intelligent insight, to which you ignore. There is no need to discredit Traditional Christian insight since the majority of the referenced issues focus on women who want to place their children into daycare so they can willingly choose to work, when it comes to the issue of SAHM’s.
Um, they started it.
Maturity check, please.
Again you sputter nonsense. Haven’t you read how many women have talked about their struggles with being married to non-Christians? And even if they spouse was a Christian, they did not share the same denominational faith? Instead you choose to ignore sage advice and babble away. Terri was gracious enough to offer intelligent insight, to which you ignore. There is no need to discredit Traditional Christian insight since the majority of the referenced issues focus on women who want to place their children into daycare so they can willingly choose to work, when it comes to the issue of SAHM’s.
I’m not sputtering nonsense!
I was banned from TC, because I defended my Anglican boyfriend’s faith. & before I was banned, I was viciously cyberbullied:
http://traditionalchristianity.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/cant-we-all-just-get-along/
You Christian bloggers sure know how to behave like Christians, huh?
…all I did was defend my boyfriend’s faith…
BF, who gives a crap what your race is? Do you realize that the Elusive Wapitii is ethnic Hawaiian, Terri is black, Alte is mixed race, Chris is white, and I am Indian– and NO ONE CARES. Since when has your race been a factor in anything?
It’s happened on other Christian blogs; it more has to do with being mixed faith with Christian – but it overlaps with subtle racism. Apparently Japan “deserved” the tsunami earlier this year, because it wasn’t a Christian nation.
Again you sputter nonsense. Haven’t you read how many women have talked about their struggles with being married to non-Christians? And even if they spouse was a Christian, they did not share the same denominational faith? Instead you choose to ignore sage advice and babble away. Terri was gracious enough to offer intelligent insight, to which you ignore. There is no need to discredit Traditional Christian insight since the majority of the referenced issues focus on women who want to place their children into daycare so they can willingly choose to work, when it comes to the issue of SAHM’s.
…you do realize Terri is the only Traditional Christian who hasn’t been cruel to me?
Yet you were the one who had to initially talk about kissing girls? Expect that to be fair game when you advertise it on the ‘sphere. It’s one thing to be confused and another to advertise salacious nonsense.
I didn’t bring it up first; someone derailed a topic to prove I wasn’t a real Christian, because I wrote a post on another blog claiming to be confused about my sexuality.
Please stop attacking me. Answer my questions kindly, instead of being vicious. Goodness, I’m sick of the vicious.
That said, to actually address the topic: Fundamentalism, as Will S. stated, has been strongly associated with a small segment of the Christian population. It is a narrow definition, but fundamentalist tenets are longer-lasting. For instance, take a look at the state of the ELCA today—because of the distancing from fundamentalist tenets, they’re splitting into churches that want to allow openly practicing gay pastors. The Lutheran Churches that no longer want to associate them selves from the ELCA because of this apostasy-like behavior are splitting into churches that adhere to more fundamentalist beliefs. Yet, even those churches aren’t that fundamentalist if they are allowing female pastors and reject patriarchal principles.
That said, to actually address the topic: Fundamentalism, as Will S. stated, has been strongly associated with a small segment of the Christian population. It is a narrow definition, but fundamentalist tenets are longer-lasting. For instance, take a look at the state of the ELCA today—because of the distancing from fundamentalist tenets, they’re splitting into churches that want to allow openly practicing gay pastors. The Lutheran Churches that no longer want to associate them selves from the ELCA because of this apostasy-like behavior are splitting into churches that adhere to more fundamentalist beliefs. Yet, even those churches aren’t that fundamentalist if they are allowing female pastors and reject patriarchal principles.
So I guess you thought how they treated me was okay?
After I said my boyfriend is a real Christian, Cottage Child told me this:
Then smite your parents and leave already – live in sin, since you’re so determined to, hell, get a girlfriend the two of you can share. Otherwise, stfu, bf, you’re so disingenuous as to make me think you’re a tranny with a daddy complex. I wouldn’t tolerate such behavior from a daughter, much less from someone pretending to be a friend. Go. away You already are a bad Christian. Oh Oh Oh did I say something wrong or shocking – I sure di’unt meeentoooo…..
Seriously bf, be a woman and stop your sniveling, or hush. This is not your diary.
& then everyone else attacked me. The only person who was kind to me was Clarence – the agnostic. [God works in mysterious ways, I guess....]
I think Christians who think it’s okay to cyberbully, aren’t real Christians. Jesus wouldn’t endorse cyberbulling.
So I guess you thought how they treated me was okay?
WOW your victim complex never ceases to amaze! Who would have thought since that response was about fundamentalism and the ELCA!?
Seriously bf, be a woman and stop your sniveling, or hush. This is not your diary.
What she said.
WOW your victim complex never ceases to amaze! Who would have thought since that response was about fundamentalism and the ELCA!?
You accused me of being a liar, and when I showed you proof I wasn’t lying – you conveniently ignored it.
Like how you’re conveniently ignoring all of the doctrines in Christianity about treat people with kindness. What did I do to you? Why are you cruelly targeting me?
@ Terri:
I appreciate your efforts to convince me traditional forms of Christianity aren’t bad, and traditional Christians are good people; however can’t forget all the pain that it caused me, or ignore all the pain that it still causes me. I’m sick of the hatemail, cruel comments, and everything.
When it comes to trusting traditional Christians, I’m broken. It happened awhile ago, and my interactions with traditional Christians on the blogosphere made it worse. I cannot fully trust them. It’s not possible. I’ve been trying, but I honestly can’t. I’m sick of feeling like I have to walk on eggshells, censor my opinions, or hide aspects of myself. No matter what I do or say, I always end up setting a trad-Christian off.
Devout traditional Shinto-Buddhists aren’t like that – so don’t chalk it up to “we’re all flawed”. Obviously there’s something about traditional Christianity that makes people vicious. Perhaps because people practice the faith just so they can use it as an excuse to hurt others? ’cause right now that’s the only logical theory making sense to me.
BF, I’m loathe to address you directly because I do not believe you are what you claim to be, but referring to your self-outing on TC MONTHS AGO and then continuing to whine about it throughout the blogosphere only confirms the doubts many people have of you – you were not banned because you defended your boyfriends faith, you were shunned because of your relentless attention whoring and inability to stay on topic even when given numerous, repeated, endless chances, by people attempting to engage you intellectually rather than entertain you emotionally. Continuing to reference the TC thread does nothing but confirm your desperate latch on childhood. You’ve been too old for that for about five years now – if you’re really a twenty year old woman, that is.
Well, I sleep in and take the boy to music practice and come home to a fight! I’ll post something in a minute once I have read thru everything.
OK guys.
1. I was using fundamentalist to make a point. The author of the comment at Mangan’s is a Mormon.
2. It is about taking your faith seriously and your vows seriously.
3. I can confidently say that no one who comments here is perfect, so slow down.
Finally, I think some of the commentators apart from BF are single and trying to work through these issues… and there are memes out there like “she will work you into a grave” and “she will divorce you”. These are the male versions of the “you deserve better than him” whisper that leads to women doing an Eat, Pray, Love.
These are the male versions of the “you deserve better than him” whisper that leads to women doing an Eat, Pray, Love.
You’re right, and it’s unfair to singles seeking true lifelong marriages, regardless of how they choose to approach them – it’s a shame that the conversation has been reduced to a competition of grievances.
Chris, I apologize, you’ll never hear another peep from me about the other matter – I regret wading in at all. It’s not your problem to mediate and was best left unmentioned. Sorry.
– you were not banned because you defended your boyfriends faith, you were shunned because of your relentless attention whoring and inability to stay on topic even when given numerous, repeated, endless chances, by people attempting to engage you intellectually rather than entertain you emotionally. Continuing to reference the TC thread does nothing but confirm your desperate latch on childhood. You’ve been too old for that for about five years now – if you’re really a twenty year old woman, that is.
How did my behavior on that thread qualify as attention whoring? I defended my boyfriend’s faith. Anglicans are real Christians . I tried to engage intellectually, but everyone ignored me because apparently considering Anglicans real Christians qualifies as trolling. Since I didn’t agree with the “let’s hate Anglicans” status quo, I was banned.
I bring up that thread because it’s a perfect example of when traditional Christians fail to behave like actual Christians. Which seems to be a common situation, from my understanding.
I didn’t mean to derail this thread, but then I got attacked. Why do Christians think they have the right to cruelly judge me and paint me as a bad person? No wonder Hestia quit the blogosphere, I’m sick of getting sent hatemail and flamed on whatever blog I post on by “Christians”. I have enough struggles with my faith as it is, and Christians somehow only manage to make it worse. I don’t have the strength to stay around here anymore; I’m taking a break.
3. I can confidently say that no one who comments here is perfect, so slow down.
I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to be a burden. I realize I have to comment lightly, lest I trigger my….IDK what to call them. People who dislike me a lot? As much as I hate hatemail, I wish they could just quietly email me their negative thoughts about me. It’s much more polite, I don’t want to derail threads.
Yeah, but language is important, Chris; liberals smear anyone who’s a conservative Christian as ‘fundamentalist’, which is absurd, and unfair.
We are not fundamentalists; we’re confessionally Reformed Protestant Christians. Big difference… Ask J. Gresham Machen about it, i.e. read what he thought about fundamentalism… He never identified with it, despite some linking him with it. He was one of us. Machen was an intellectual, and commanded respect, even from a well-known, bright heathens (and a fellow intellectual, worthy of much respect himself) as H.L. Mencken, who praised him (see here and here).
We are not fundamentalists; we are not contemporary evangelicals in the American sense – though we are in the older, British sense of the word. We are Reformed. We have a developed, holistic, internally consistent, rational and faithful theology and worldview; a proud intellectual tradition (e.g. men like Abraham Kuyper and Groen van Prinsterer); a liturgical form of worship; a regard for history; a tradition of engaging with society rather than withdrawing from it. We have nothing to apologize for in any of these things (Puritan and Afrikaner excesses notwithstanding). We have neither the foolishness of fundamentalist and evangelical legalism, nor evangelical antinomianism, nor Papist unScriptural church traditions, nor world-escaping Anabaptist tendencies. We are Reformed, and we have a worthy tradition to uphold.
Let us eschew all-too-often anti-Biblical fundamentalism and its excesses. Though we may join with them, evangelicals, and Papists, in condemning the errors in our times that all faithful Christians, regardless of tradition, can see…
Well, we are what used to be called Evangelicals. And I agree that the correct term is Reformed. But the audience here is broader. We have to remember that there is an evangelical wing in Anglicanism, and there are plenty of Catholics and Orthodox who preach the gospel well enough for the Spirit to draw his people to Christ
My previous comment is in moderation, and this one will go into moderation too, but anyway, why do you humour this troll? All she does is shit on everyone else, then cry ‘Persecution!’ when corrected… She plays the victim, but she is the one, who in attacking us faithful, is truly a nasty piece of work. Remember, many are called, but few are chosen. I submit we needn’t worry ourselves excessively about trying to evangelize the obnoxious, having tried and tried again, patiently. At the end of the day, if they won’t listen, and instead bitch about the faith, and link blogs like this, this, and this, and talk smack about Christians to the heretics here, don’t you think there’s a time to give up on obnoxious nasty passive-aggressive bitches like this one? I do. (Even if she occasionally says something sensible, like she did recently re: the pregnant woman who died through childbirth, yet didn’t even acknowledge my recognizing it…)
Pingback: Outside is everyone who practices falsehood | Dark Brightness
What’s wrong with non-Christians? [...and John Shore? He's one of the few Christian bloggers I enjoy - he's never hateful, ever...]. I find the Atheist blogosphere raises good points. & wanna know something ironic? I’ve never been attacked on the Atheist blogosphere. NEVER. However, I am repeatedly attacked by Christians on the Christian blogosphere.
I made that blog when I was struggling with my faith and you know what? I still am. When it comes to Christianity, I really do struggle to not throw out the baby out with the bathwater. It’s caused more harm in my life than good & I often wish I had been raised in my father’s faith. My father’s faith never hurt me or disappointed me the way Christianity has.
Atheists [and some Christians - Christians post on that blogosphere] seem to be the only people willing to discuss the flaws within modern Christianity. I’m optimistic, but lately I’m convinced Christianity is broken beyond repair.
I don’t hate non-Christians, homosexuals, or consider my belief in God a get-out-of-jail-free card. I guess I don’t have what it takes to be a “real” Christian.
BF…
If you go through my links — I have almost every branch of Christians (of the intelligent kind) at least one nihilist (Ferdinand of the NSFW), a couple of socialist (Chris Trotter, who is a really nice guy in real life), a bunch of Tories…
Intelligent Christians who are confident in their faith have the freedom to read. Voraciously, intelligently, and critically. Heck I quoted (next post, which I did not know would wind Will up so much) a bunch of really conservative catholics who hate Ratzinger more that the reformed do! (We think the theology of the pope places him between us and Christ and that is antichristian… go and read it).
You need to un-learn some things. This really needs some links — because I know Terri has written on this, as did Paige (before she killed her account) and I think Alte did as well (but I can’t get at TradCath). In Christ, all is permitted, not all is wise. We are allowed to read wisely, but we should use discernment.
We seek wisdom where we find it. We can learn from the athiest, the buddhist, the islamist… but we also try to teach. We invite them in and offer the red pill (truth), while keeping the blue pill (untruth) out.
I’m going to use Game of Thrones as an example. It is rated in NZ R18VSL (restricted to over 18, violence, sexual content and language).
I like it. The nudity is… well at least they are not repulsive but I have read the book and I found pushing a lad out a window 50 feet above the ground or beheading deserters more disturbing… or the way in which young (the girl is supposed to be 13) girls are being traded in marriage (Sansa and Aerys, if you know the book).
What sons and I talk about is not how nice her body was but why she was put in this position, how a person can live with attempting to kill a young boy who was a witness — the cruelty, the lack of personal responsibility.
As such, I think it is licit for the boys to watch. I’m trying to keep him away from Red Dead Redemption, though.
Now… the Catholics (god bless ‘em) try to have a system of censorship and right teaching that can become a form of legalism. And in that legalism, they can lose the major issues. We can debate tithing mint and cumin (or, if you want to be non biblical, fashions) and neglect to love each other, do good, and keep the faith.
To everyone: the Nicene creed is a place almost everyone starts from. That includes the Anglicans (who seem to be the perpetual whipping boy). There are people of faith in all the confessing churches. So let’s argue, but let’s not troll.
“Heck I quoted (next post, which I did not know would wind Will up so much) a bunch of really conservative catholics who hate Ratzinger more that the reformed do!”
I confess, I didn’t read it in detail. I was scanning your post quickly, but the other leapt out at me.
“Well, we are what used to be called Evangelicals. And I agree that the correct term is Reformed. But the audience here is broader. We have to remember that there is an evangelical wing in Anglicanism, and there are plenty of Catholics and Orthodox who preach the gospel well enough for the Spirit to draw his people to Christ”
And none of them call themselves fundamentalists, either. Only fundamental Baptists, and some Paisleyite Free Ps, call themselves fundamentalists, AFAIK. It’s a term the media misuses greatly. And ordinary people follow suit, like an Amazon reviewer for this evil new anti-Christian movie “Higher Ground” (which no doubt BF will lap up like catnip), which is set amidst an evangelical church community, NOT a fundamentalist community. But too many people are ignorant of the distinction, alas.
27 posts for far, and only a few of them relating to the post topic itself – though not the fault of most of the commenters, only one obviously…
Ah well.
“So far”
That includes the Anglicans (who seem to be the perpetual whipping boy).
Well, to be clear, it’s not the Anglicans, but more specifically the ECUS -they seem to have ditched the Bible and absconded with their buildings. I would say they fall more in line with the UU’s than a traditional confessing denomination anymore. Of course there are exceptions, but the church leadership is unapologetic in it’s deliberate divorce from orthodoxy. I was raised in that church, and watched it morph from mainline to almost fringe in it’s lack of Christ-focus. It’s deserving of criticism, it’s a Jesus +/- institution anymore.
“Amazon Reviewer” – I meant “IMDB reviewer”, obviously.
As a NZer, I don’t understand the politics of the ECUS.
But if it is anything like the PCUSA, there is a difference between what the liberal end are doing and most of the faithful…
PS. Will. Read the review on Higher Ground and looked at the trailer.
Words fail me. I’m just not mean enough. It needs someone like Haley crossed with Dalrock at his most abrasive to really deal with it. Though the reviewer indicating that the women speaking in tongues was speaking Polish (when she is Polish) was priceless.
“Though the reviewer indicating that the women speaking in tongues was speaking Polish (when she is Polish) was priceless.”
I missed that; where was that?
In a review… I think the most negative one. The actor is Polish… (the best friend) so just switched into a Polish patios. I would have missed it as well.
At IMDB? I tried looking for it, but couldn’t find it. Ah well; no matter. That’s funny.
Yeah, it looked from the reviews, like it was the usual Hollywood Christianity-bashing, disguised as ‘being sensitive to the faith yet not uncritical’, as people say.
We can debate tithing mint and cumin (or, if you want to be non biblical, fashions) and neglect to love each other, do good, and keep the faith.
But these days, all Christianity seems to be about is legalisms, debating, and trying to disprove other denominations. I don’t know many Christians who follow the golden rule. Everyone’s too busy being cruel to those “heathen [insert denomination]!” or whatever group they’re against [homosexuals, other races, other religions, etc.] to actually follow Christ’s teachings. I know so many vicious Christians [and very few nice ones] I sometimes wonder if people become Christian just so they can use religion as an excuse to hate others. I mean, “people living a life that is different from mine are evil!” is such a prevalent attitude…
& how can I seek wisdom within Christianity, when I’m not even allowed to ask questions? I have to hide my questions, and doubts – lest clergy/other Christians shame me, and act cruel [apparently only bad sinful Christians question the Church...] The only Christians I really feel comfortable talking to are liberal Christians [like Anglicans] because they don’t judge me for asking questions or forming my own opinions.
..I think it’s time I just stay away from this part of the blogosphere. I never mean to annoy anyone here. My intentions weren’t to start trouble, I just wanted to talk about religion. Alas, like IRL, I find it’s best to just avoid traditional Christians [Who I find hurt witness more than anyone else. It turns out, treating people badly in the name of Jesus doesn't make Christianity look good].
“I think it’s time I just stay away from this part of the blogosphere.”
You’ve said that before, yet you keep coming back.
And you wonder why no-one takes you seriously? Liars and promise-breakers don’t get taken seriously.
BF and Will:
Personal examples can help and doubts are OK.
But if you express doubts, you will have people fisk you. Inevitable. BF, check the next thread, where Will accuses me of being not a Calvinist.
Well, we disagree on some things. And there was a comment from Alte yesterday that the faith of a child is good… as a child. But as an adult, we have to move into a maturity of faith. The simple answers don’t work.
I would fire up project Gutenberg, girl, and read some of the Puritans — Richard Baxter on suffering and melancholia is simply brilliant.
Will, the elect can and will struggle with the LORD. We trust in his keeping us sheep safe, because we will sniff the air and stray. To correct a brother or sister to they return is indeed a good thing… and getting the balance of being true and being heard is really difficult.
Says me, who fails there daily.
Pingback: Virginity, salvation and eunuchs (and divorce) | Dark Brightness
Whoa, whoa, whoa! I did not accuse you of not being Calvinist; I simply posed the question, what do you find wrong with the WCF, and how can you call yourself Presbyterian whilst finding error in it? IOW, I didn’t explicitly question your commitment to your tradition, though I did wonder at the discrepancy I perceived. That is all.
I need some hyperbole here… see Ulysses below. I’m dealing with someone who needs to read the creeds (not you).
Don’t get me wrong; I did not do so from any position of self-righteousness; Lord knows I am far too aware of my own many weaknesses and shortcomings. But I think I was in the right to call you on your statements, my own sinfulness and imperfections notwithstanding.
I’m late to this thread but. . .
Chris, you made a good point with regard to the American Presbyterian and Episcopal churches. The leadership is generally cleaved from the members, even from the mushiest members.
Which brings me back to BF’s oft-repeated claim about why she was banned from TC – I’m an Episcopalian and though I haven’t contributed recently, I’m still on the contributor roll at TC. It’s not about your fiance’s faith.
Which brings me back to BF’s oft-repeated claim about why she was banned from TC – I’m an Episcopalian and though I haven’t contributed recently, I’m still on the contributor roll at TC. It’s not about your fiance’s faith.
Did you read the thread? I was banned because I said I enjoyed the Anglican Church more than the Catholic Church. How dare I dislike the infallible Catholic Church. & they may allow you to contribute, but they certainly don’t respect your faith; they went out of their way to paint the Episcopalian church as a heathen non-Christian establishment. & when I disagreed with their assertion, I was labeled as a troll.
But if you express doubts, you will have people fisk you. Inevitable. BF, check the next thread, where Will accuses me of being not a Calvinist.
But it often feels like Christianity is all fisk; there’s no love, compassion, or understanding. & then I wonder if my father is right…Christianity is ineffective; it doesn’t work. Focus on being a good decent person, not a good Christian.
Well, we disagree on some things. And there was a comment from Alte yesterday that the faith of a child is good… as a child. But as an adult, we have to move into a maturity of faith. The simple answers don’t work.
But my faith as a child wasn’t faith to begin with. I was just believing what adults told me to believe. & what the adults told me to believe, certainly wasn’t simple! Catholicism is complex and frightening. I look back and think “boy, I sure was afraid of receiving the Eucharist” [ritualistic cannibalism isn't a concept a seven year old would find comforting]. & the times when I needed spiritual guidelines, I was forced to navigate through a labyrinth of documents and legalisms. I didn’t have an innate faith in God, all I had was a catechism.
I think, in my case, I need simple answers. I’m sick of legalisms and bureaucracy. Shinto-Buddihism is simple; it’s about honoring the Kami [which is actually more like the gnostic concept of God, than a polytheistic pantheon] by being a good decent person, and by being a helpful member of the community. There’s no catechism to search through. It just provides me with a simple, comforting type of spirituality I’ve started to think doesn’t even exist within Christianity. Which is a shame, because it’s quiet nice.
I would fire up project Gutenberg, girl, and read some of the Puritans — Richard Baxter on suffering and melancholia is simply brilliant.
I’ve been reading up on Christianity as of lately; but like you said, I think I need to focus more on unlearning. & healing. I kinda always expect the church to lie to me, or hurt me… same thing with Christians; I always expect them to use the faith to hurt me [it's happened so many times, can't blame me for being cautious].
Concerning my favorite Christian writer when it comes to topic of struggling/pain, I’m fond of Evelyn Underhill. Although she was an occultist [in fact, a member of the Golden Dawn] I find her writings are wise, and quite underrated: “After all it is those who have a deep and real inner life who are best able to deal with the irritating details of outer life.”