tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post5316820875923337859..comments2024-03-15T00:12:57.489-07:00Comments on Covenant Zone: Radio Memories: Easter Passiontruepeershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16401984575637492845noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-31277669351909660782009-04-13T08:40:00.000-07:002009-04-13T08:40:00.000-07:00That's right, and the interesting thing about our ...That's right, and the interesting thing about our times is that the kind of maximally differentiated culture we once had can come alive again via the blogs! The state can rediscover its respect for the God that separates church and state because ultimately the state is us, those bound by a covenant that we make ours or live as slaves.truepeershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16401984575637492845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-3395388883331975012009-04-12T23:52:00.000-07:002009-04-12T23:52:00.000-07:00Rourke makes an excellent point. The etymologogy o...Rourke makes an excellent point. The etymologogy of religion is, very much close to the etymology of fascism, "binding." The difference between a binding religion and a binding poligion, I think, is that religion leaves open the possibility of another kind of life in competition with the state so that neither is totalitarian in effect, whereas the poligion combines all in itself, leaving no room for anything but enforced conformity in all aspects of life. Often, it seems, those without religion still have a religious impulse, and they turn to poligions to satisfy their need. <BR/><BR/>If I can dismiss the preacher's view of the morality of President Polk, and dismiss Polk's version of the demerits of Catholicism, then I have some chance of freedom. A winning situation.<BR/><BR/>But if the State and God are the same, then I am stuck with no choice but being a slave or an outlaw. If religion promises Heaven in the next life, then I won't be so keen to try to make it happen in the here and now, particularly if that requires killing off the kulaks to make it happen. One might work within the government for one end, and within the religion for another, avoiding, as Rourke points out, both totalitarianism and utopianism.Daghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664271893389366772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-44691025127526000452009-04-12T23:30:00.000-07:002009-04-12T23:30:00.000-07:00It's interesting, as we listen to this and remembe...It's interesting, as we listen to this and remember a time - still alive in the 1970s and maybe early 80s - when the MSM could tell the Christian story as if it were the mainstream story. Today's victimary forces will listen to this kind of program and, in the name of multiculturalism, feign shock or amusement at how hegemonic Christianity then was, as if Christianity were claiming the American state and/or secular culture for itself. But I think that would be to miss an important point the Pope has made and that I think was somehow intuitive to the culture until the 1980s, and implicit in this program:<BR/><BR/><I>Describing Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) as "a most profound political thinker," Professor Rourke writes:<BR/><BR/> . . . a central feature of the pope's fundamental politics is to show how the state's openness to God, far from leading to theocracy, is actually the only thing that enables the state to distinguish itself properly from the Church, and thus to resist the twin temptations of utopianism and totalitarianism.</I><BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://cornerstone-forum.blogspot.com/2009/03/pope-as-political-philosopher.html" REL="nofollow">Gil Bailie</A>truepeershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16401984575637492845noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-11506875480435642932009-04-12T23:28:00.000-07:002009-04-12T23:28:00.000-07:00whoops, I mean Ecclesiastes, with an "e" not an "i...whoops, I mean <I>Ecclesiastes</I>, with an "e" not an "i".Charles Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18168475254263681673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-43264853670493936072009-04-12T23:25:00.000-07:002009-04-12T23:25:00.000-07:00Thanks, Dag, I appreciate the compliment.I have a ...Thanks, Dag, I appreciate the compliment.<BR/><BR/>I have a feeling that if you were home on Sunday afternoons during 1956 and '57, you would definitely be tuning in to the CBS Radio Workshop. This was definitely a show that a travel-loving student of history and philosophy like you would find greatly rewarding. <BR/><BR/>From a show on buying a dog in New York City, to an audio tour of the seven hills of Rome, to interviewing Shakespeare in order to make sure he indeed was the author of the plays attributed to him, every show introduces you to a new corner of the world, past present, even future (in a two-part adaptation of Brave New World). <BR/><BR/>Come to think of it, there's even an episode devoted entirely to Ecclisiastes. <BR/><BR/>(You won't see **that** on CBS too often, these days..!)Charles Henryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18168475254263681673noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-25624602.post-58530559700725519502009-04-12T22:29:00.000-07:002009-04-12T22:29:00.000-07:00I think this is the best part of our blog, Charles...I think this is the best part of our blog, Charles.Daghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664271893389366772noreply@blogger.com