Skip to main content

Relativism

I can't shake this feeling--or this snarky opinion--that everything is infected with relativism, like a disease. I mean, honestly. And you can't even say, "even among evangelicals," because that word is the epitome of the problem.

And don't even get me started on politics. This is the relativist's favorite playground. The only thing you have to do is say, "Well, we don't live for this world" or "Jesus didn't have a political program" or "Pox on both your houses!" or "I'm a moderate" or "I'm a Christian first" and you're done thinking.

That may not be fair, but it's kind of true. And anyone else who even dares suggest that it's more complicated than that, or Heaven forbid, that you might want details, oh, well, you're obviously taking a human, feeble thing way too seriously. OK, sorry I asked.

You know what, Christian Leader Guy? I want definitions of words; not everything is an endless search for a happy medium. And while I wholeheartedly concur that Barack Obama is not the Antichrist, pardon me for suggesting that this whole direction we are taking is illiberal.

This really isn't the time for measured tones, on a great many things. We have done a fair measure of listening, sharing, and mutual affirmation, from politics to ecclesiology, dogma, to family and a million other things. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.

Because if people can't look in my eyes and see the basic human respect that is there, and most times, should be assumed, nothing I say will change what they already decided. Save the apology tours; I'll make a friend or a brother based on what we actually share, not on feelings.

Just because it may not be cool to suggest that we're politically on a road to serfdom doesn't mean we aren't. And just because someone attends a church that sounds like yours, uses words you would use, and looks like you doesn't mean they aren't a gospel-destroying liar. Or at least imprecise and foolish enough to be used by them.

This is a touch more strident than I like to be. I'm sorry about that. I feel these shackles about me; they are called, "politeness." So many of the things that matter are so much more important than the Red Sox and the Yankees, and yet, people make a cottage industry out of saying, "It doesn't matter," or "Neither," as if we're supposed to be impressed with your detachment.

Niceness is not a gospel imperative; kindness is. And allow me to suggest that if time has weakened your stomach for speaking the truth in love, the wisest, most loving course is to step away.

Comments

Nathan said…
"It doesn't matter" may not be true very often, but I think that, especially regarding politics, "neither" is frequently the only reasonable option.

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...