Home » Posts tagged 'Worldviews'

Tag Archives: Worldviews

Thoughts on Current Events (Nice, Dallas, etc…)

At the risk of seeming a bit verbose, I humbly submit the following:

  1.      Evil exists.  In the classic Christian worldview, sin, death, disease, the devil, and the like, are real.  All of humanity and all of creation is affected by this.  There is not one aspect of life that has not been affected by what we in the church call “original sin.”  Until Christ comes to restore all things, we should expect evil things to happen.   Now, that doesn’t mean that there shouldn’t be a pursuit of truth, justice, mercy, etc…, but we should be prepared to be disappointed if we are looking for “heaven on earth.”  No political candidate or political system, no amount of lawmaking, court decisions, media awareness, dialogue, educational system, economic opportunity, or the like, will solve or eliminate the problem of evil.    The purpose of government is to restrain evil, promote the good, and protect the life and property of its citizens.  As Chesterton said, “Once abolish the God, and the government becomes god.”  Looking to flawed people in a flawed system to fix a flawed world will always result in despair and disappointment.  The ultimate solution to evil is found in a manger, a cross, and an empty tomb.    However, we do have a duty to expose, confront, and at times, eliminate evil when it appears for the love of neighbor, especially from the “kingdom” that wields the sword (government).


  1.      Worldviews matter.  Who are we? Where did we come from? Where are we going? What should we do about it? Can you answer these questions in a coherent and systematic way, and  by doing so, account for what is observed in the world?  How you answer these questions will lead you to better understandings of things like natural law, justice, freedom, the purpose and role of government, etc…If we can’t agree on the answers to these questions, how can we agree on what things like truth, justice, or virtue are?  If we have very different understandings and definitions of these words, our conversations will be nonsensical.  If you believe that all of the world should be under the banner of Islam, your answers to these questions will be different than one who holds to classic Christianity, or secular progressivism for that matter.  Beliefs have consequences, and not all beliefs or actions are equal or beneficial.
  1.      We are living in an era of both transition and dissolution.  For centuries, western civilization operated under certain assumptions about the universe, man, the rule of law, and the pursuit of truth and virtue.  These assumptions, such as a created and rational universe, a fallen but redeemable humanity, and the pursuit of objective good and beauty, are no longer held by most, and in fact are under attack in some quarters, and have been for several generations.  When this happens in a culture, there are “growing pains” or perhaps “death pains,” and a constant sense of anxiety and uncertainty.  As communal beings, all us of crave a sense of “connectedness” and purpose.  By removing the foundations, people fall and flail and lash out to try and grasp at something that makes sense and creates a form of cultural coherence.    Because the west has emphasized a sort of “privatization” principle about anything important (keep your religion to yourself and only on Sundays), what used to unite communities is now a pariah.  Rather than a common language, music, history, religion, virtue, calendar, etc…we now are supposed to find our identity in amorphous principles of “democracy,” “rights,” or “equality” without any sort of coherent worldview and culture.  In fact, trying to create or preserve such a culture is considered “intolerant” or “bigoted” or (insert-prefix)-phobic.    So we want the benefits of thousands of years of cumulative western civilization, but reject the reasons for that civilization.  And we wonder why we are anxious, confused, and divided?  Should we wonder why we can’t seem to confront the rise of “political Islam” or “Jihadists” in any systematic way?


  1. The good news is that this level of cultural chaos and volatility is simply unsustainable.  Bad ideas, bad decisions, and bad philosophies will die, and the truth will have its day.   However, it is certainly possible that things could get much worse before there is any sort of “revival” or cultural renewal.  In history, this sometimes came because of significant war or complete economic collapse (often both).  While we can remain hopeful and prayerful that we can avoid something of this magnitude,  we need to honest and realistic about the challenges ahead.   So let’s start working on our worldviews as we confront evil, pursue truth, and winsomely present that worldview and culture that made Western Civilization such a potent force for good.


And finally, remember that in the end, a broken world isn’t our final destination anyway, since we also believe in “the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come” (Nicene Creed).


The War Continues…

Like the previous item outlining the beginnings of a Christian worldview using John of Damascus (and outlined here by this site’s Statement of Faith), it is sometimes worthwhile to remind ourselves that our beliefs and worldviews have consequences, and that some worldviews are simply incompatible with each other.  I have highlighted several news/current events items in order to demonstrate the continuing lack of cultural consensus, and how there really is a “war” or sorts going on, both in the U.S. and throughout the West, especially against orthodox Christians and traditionalists.

“Occupiers” throw condoms at Roman Catholic School girls and Disrupt Pro-Life Rally.

Roman Catholic Bishops Refuse to Comply with Obama Mandate

Washington State Attempts to Redefine Marriage

Stand Up for Traditional Marriage and the Scriptures and you are a “Bully” or “Ignorant”

University Shuts Down Christian Groups as “Discriminatory” for Requiring Leaders to Be Christian.

While I could provide several other examples, it is clear that the current secularist and pluralist worldview is increasingly hostile to the classical Christian faith of the West, and that Christians and traditional-minded Westerners should be prepared for it to continue. Gird Thyself!

A New Axiom

“Law increases as cultural consensus decreases.” I encountered this statement in a review of James Hunter’s recent book, “To Change the World,” found in the latest Touchstone Magazine (which is highly recommended by the way). This eerily echos David F. Wells, who in his book “Losing Our Virtue,” talks of a sliding scale of absolute freedom and absolute autocracy, with the lack of virtue leading to the latter. In other words, since we now live in a “low consensus society,” we are now held together by the secularist state and the increasing powers that belong to it, and little else. Since there is no longer any consensus, “every faction that seeks state power does so in order to impose its understanding of the good on the whole society.” (Hunter Baker, Touchstone)  This is why moral issues such as abortion and homosexuality have been increasingly politicized, as worldviews compete with each other.  Humans inherently desire some sort of order, and the lack of cultural consensus causes many to look to a top-down legal solution to provide some sort of order.

This also relates to a question I asked in a post quite awhile ago, relating to whether or not America is even a nation anymore, or a variety of nations held together by geographic accident and state control. If a nation or people is defined as those who share a common faith, heroes, history, holidays, festivals, language, the arts and the like, the U.S. and many countries of the West have ceased being nations long ago. Instead they are supposedly bound together by some sort of romantic, “progressive,” idealistic idea of egalitarian democracy as a sort of savior (based on an ever-increasing list of rights that come from “natural” sources).  While there may be pockets of what one might call consensus cultures, most large cities on the coasts and the states they reside in have abandoned any semblance of cultural unity for the sake of “diversity” as some sort of inherent value.

In summary, as the West increasingly abandons its own heritage, look for a great increase in the amount of litigation and legislation to try and either “preserve ” or “change” society, while individuals and communities become increasingly “tribal” in order to foster some sort of healthy, culture-sustaining community.  Those who try to do this, will of course be labeled “bigots,” “racists,” “______phobic,” etc…Perhaps we will see the rise of city-states/principalities again?

Any comments or solutions?

Blinded by Fads

In her book, “Saving Leonardo: A Call to Resist the Secular Assault on Mind, Morals, and Meaning,” Nancy Pearcey traces the different types of modern, post-modern, and post-Christian Western thought and the resultant effects on culture (especially art). While the book is relatively straightforward and non-technical, the amount of cultural and intellectual history covered can be a bit daunting for many, so I have chosen to focus on the idea of deconstructionism and Political Correctness, to show how “ideas have consequences,” and why certain things are taught today, especially in universities.

In a nutshell, deconstructionism is a literary and artistic theory that assumes that the meaning behind a given text or work is found in the reader, not in the author or creator. This means that literature is simply a “tissue of quotations,” that are supposed to be sorted out and explained. There is really no limit in the meaning, since the meaning is found in the reader or interpreter alone. One is then supposed to be “creative” in interpreting, choosing the meaning to be found, and this has been expanded to include areas such as theology or history. Oddly, many deconstructionists become angry when people “misinterpret” what they say, which seems to imply there is meaning to be found after all. One wonders what the point of writing in the first place is in such a view.

Regardless of this contradiction, certain remnants of Marxist are thought are still clinging in certain circles, even though it has been discredited as an economic theory. These two streams (deconstructionism and Marxist thought) are then combined in many arts and humanities departments. This leads to individuals associating themselves with certain “victim groups” and viewing any sort of historical, artistic, or theological study through this identity politics lens. Also inherent in this view is suspicion of any sort of “metanarrative” (an overarching idea or system that explains everything from the beginning of man to the end). This suspicion is what leads to buzzwords and phrases such as “diversity is a value,” or “multiculturalism.” I will now quote Pearcey demonstrating where this thinking leads:

“…only select groups are singled out to represent “diversity”-certified victim groups based on race, class, gender, and sexual orientation. And the analysis of the problem is typically derived from Marxism. Some group is said to be victimized and oppressed, and the path to liberation is to revolt against the oppressors.

This explains why art and literature departments on the university campus have become thoroughly politicized…Politically correct regimes are not liberating students to think for themselves. They are turning students into cadres of self-absorbed reactionaries ready to take orders from the faddish theorist of the moment.” (Pearcey, 241-242)

This is also why any sort of artistic endeavor that is “innovative,” “revolutionary,” “subversive,” or “liberating,” is automatically better than anything traditional, religious, etc…Because the west has abandoned the Classical Christian worldview in favor of such nonsensical relativism, is it any surprise why new types of “rights” and the glorification of “democracy” take place? Even though the view is inherently self-refuting, it is extremely popular because it allows one to choose an identity, rather than be accountable to the created order. While it claims to be liberating, the view actually is imperialist, insisting that it alone “has the ability to see through everyone else’s underlying interest and motives-to deconstruct and debunk them. Thereby it effectively silences every other perspective.” (Pearcey, 242). This also leads to labeling any sort of counterargument as “bigoted,” “patriarchal,” any sort of phobic, etc. as a means of silencing opposition.

Classical Christians and western traditionalists need to be ready to challenge such suicidal (the view kills itself) thinking and offer a better and more truthful alternative (of course that means I’m part of the “problem” because I have a “metanarrative” and am therefore bigoted). Any thoughts?

War Reminder

One of the sessions that I teach regularly is entitled “Worldviews At War” found in the “notes” section of this website.  An idea that starts to become prevalent in the ultramodern era, and in certain postmodern circles as well is the idea of the autonomous individual, accountable to no authority but the self.  This means one can simply choose everything that one does or is, including one’s own identity, regardless of the created order, Church, Scripture, tradition, family, or any sort of societal norms.   Choice in this case is inherently virtuous, and the consequences are immaterial, or privy to one’s private interpretation of truth. This is of course at variance with the Christian and Classical worldview, and leads to increasing levels of evil behavior being praised as “diversity” or “choice.”  As noted in the post on modern chauvinism, if you oppose such evil, ultramodern “progressives” label you as “bigoted,” “intolerant,” “unaccepting,” etc…, which brings me to this disturbing news item:

“As two transgender bills (AB 433 and SB 48) are poised to be passed by the California Legislature, at least one elementary school in Oakland is already indoctrinating kids starting in kindergarten about “gender diversity”…Young children are being taught that they can choose to be a boy or a girl — or both. Boys, for example, should be comfortable wearing girls’ clothes and nail polish, etc. And there aren’t just two genders, there can be a range. And, of course, the school does not allow parents to opt their kids out…”

The report goes on to state that this program is a “necessity” to “help kids,” and if you oppose it, you want kids to commit suicide.  This sort of tactic is called “ritual defamation,” which is one of the main tactics of modern chauvinism, and is used to silence those who defend the Christian and Classical West.  Do not be deceived, this is indeed a war, and it is being fought over everything from the education of children to the arts.  You may find the rest of this report here, with video evidence of such “diversity” indoctrination taking place.  

War is being waged for the heart and soul of the West.  What are you doing to be involved?