And?
Rod Dreher is deeply unsettled by Mark Shea's belief that the Antichrist "seems much more like to come from a Decadent West triumphant over Islam than from Radical Islam triumphant over the West."
Me? I'm still trying to see his point. Is he arguing that, because the Antichrist will likely come from the West, our victory over jihad is assured and so we can shirk our personal duties in bringing that victory about? That's ludicrous; we have our duties, and it may be that it includes defending Western civilization, flawed as it undeniably is.
The blogger Torquemada writes, "arguing that our culture is far more likely to produce the eschatological embodiment of evil than Islam strikes me as a de facto argument that we are, at the end of the day, more evil than our current crop of enemies."
I'm not sure I completely agree, as there are other possible interpretations (see above), but it's certainly a plausible conclusion to draw. In which case, Mark's thesis isn't disturbing, it's disturbed.
Me? I'm still trying to see his point. Is he arguing that, because the Antichrist will likely come from the West, our victory over jihad is assured and so we can shirk our personal duties in bringing that victory about? That's ludicrous; we have our duties, and it may be that it includes defending Western civilization, flawed as it undeniably is.
The blogger Torquemada writes, "arguing that our culture is far more likely to produce the eschatological embodiment of evil than Islam strikes me as a de facto argument that we are, at the end of the day, more evil than our current crop of enemies."
I'm not sure I completely agree, as there are other possible interpretations (see above), but it's certainly a plausible conclusion to draw. In which case, Mark's thesis isn't disturbing, it's disturbed.
posted by Anonymous at 1:02 PM
5 Comments:
bubba, great minds think alike. as i posted on coalition for fog:
Shea's post is bizarre enough that the implication of moral equivalence between islamists and the west is the only thing that prevents the post from being an utter non-sequitur . (the antichrist will be western ... and so? we should just sit back, prevent our hands from getting dirty and let terrorists have their way while we passively continue to evolve into the sort of decadent, western society that would yield the antichrist? the war ill-conceived because the bible says that we'll be top dog at the end of the world anyway, so why bother? )
The thing that struck me was this: even given his narrative of "The Decadent Christian West", that took about 1,700 years of temporal power to accomplish. So.... given 1,000,000 years Islam will never be corrupted? I don't buy it. As if it doesn't have plenty of corruption within it currently. But it's just another instance of Mark's love of tricky triangles.
Shea says, "I retain a confidence, if you can call it that, that the winners of this particular "civilizational struggle" will be the post-Christian West, whose cultural and technological masters are laboring even now to create fresh sins that cry out to heaven"
I love the talk of "fresh sins" born of new technology -- for example, a blogger letting his anger get out of control on the internet?
hey, maybe the antichrist will arise from the *blogosphere*.
For those of you who are not clear as to what Mr. Dreher means by "disagreeing agreeably" read the following:
Marky Mark said:
"I wonder how many times I have to point out that a) I don't buy Left Behind theology and b) I confined myself to the teaching of the Catechism before they actually notice that."
There is a first time for everything, Mark isn't there?
Joe d'Hipp said:
"The fact that the U.S. has a funamentally Protestant religious millieu also makes a big difference, since Catholic bigotry against Protestants is one of the Huge Elephants in the Catholic Room"
As oppossed to the Anti-Catholicism which Arthur Schlesinger said is the "Deepest bias in the history of the American People" which people like Joe and Rod deny the existence of! They just use this blog to engage in what Richard Hofstader called "The Pornography of the Puritans."
Christopher Marlowe | 01.28.07 - 4:25 pm | #
A reminder to everyone: you must state your criticism without making ad hominem attacks on others. I will have your comments deleted if you cross the line. And if you have been banned from this blog for your obstreperous behavior -- as two people on this thread have been -- your comments will be deleted as soon as possible, no matter what pseudonym you're using. So don't waste your time posting here.
Rod Dreher | 01.28.07 - 4:52 pm | #
"A reminder to everyone: you must state your criticism without making ad hominem attacks on others. I will have your comments deleted if you cross the line. And if you have been banned from this blog for your obstreperous behavior -- as two people on this thread have been -- your comments will be deleted as soon as possible, no matter what pseudonym you're using."
Of course, if we where in your clique with Mark et. al. that rule would not apply wouldn't it?
Christopher Marlowe | 01.28.07 - 4:56 pm | #
If you want to know what conclusion to draw, you might look at Mark's own conclusion in the post Rod quotes.
Post a Comment
<< Home