“They were men of terrible strength. Their willingness to die for their faith was real and their strength outshone every one of us. We should be cautious of the arrogance to believe that we can prescribe a superior ideology that we manufactured on the internet.”
Wise words and captures the courage and strength necessary to living as a Christian man.
A great continuation of exploring the friction between the Christians and the Vitalists. You're correct to assert a true attempt at synthesizing the two will, at best result, in a naturalistic worldview that acknowledges the superficial and aesthetic values of Christianity only. This is a problem worth wrestling with, as it seems that it is the prevalence of weak Christianity that has resulted in apostasy and a hollowing out of our beliefs. As an authoritarian religion (literally, one which claims to have authority to bind and loose), it is impossible for Christianity to appear weak and simultaneously be taken seriously. I think in this age, learning from the Vitalists about strength and beauty is useful to work towards the liberation and exaltation of the Church, as long as we don't lose sight that the True, the Good, and the Beautiful only come from God above.
Towards the end of this exceptional essay, my mind went to the battle of LePanto and Our Lady’s intercession as well as other famous relevant battles in the past. Interesting topic. Very engaging. 🙏🏻
Johann, you have now broached the most important topic of 2024.
We've been building, leading, ramping up to this. In my daily life and personal life, it seems universally recognized that the New Year brought about a palpable shift in the spirit that binds us together, and not only due to the political and material tension. This essay's topic is, in so many ways, the fundamental, foundational problem that all else rests on. Everything else is a superstructure placed on top.
Luke 22:36 alone says volumes; why then, as the hour of His death approached, did Christ tell His disciples to arm themselves? Why then, and not before? Isn't the spirit of the warrior, who arms himself as the dark (an Iron Age?) approaches, the same spirit that compelled our forefathers to build cathedrals, even in the midst of the Plague?
Johann, thank you. Great essay, and I particularly enjoyed some of the references you made.
As you know I have kept Christian Vitalism as a theme of Position & Decision, and nonetheless I agree with everything you have to say. Perhaps I will explore an alternative phrase.
What we must learn to do is express a faith that is rich in life and strength. I used Vitalism as a frame to express that our faith can be active and powerful, and that we can be likewise. In the face of a popular Christianity which is so often seen as passive and doddering, mealy-mouthed etc. but what you've successfully illuminated is that Vitalism has now taken on the characteristics of, instead of a stance, but a new frame entirely.
I think this is a great article, and it is a necessary reminder of the supreme witness of early Christianity which in no way feared death and, in fact, if Christians were to re-adopt such a faith would be criticized from many august corners for lacking prudence. I also appreciate the clarification on the participation in the military of the day whose rituals in many ways mirror that of the present day that in a way that they did not at the turn of the millennium.
However, and perhaps this is beyond the scope of this work, the motivating force behind the impulse toward a syncretic Christianity/vitalism is not addressed. To me, the great driver behind such a mistaken attempt is the absolutely uxorious state of serious, "conservative" Christian men today (who are otherwise exceptionally virtuous and Godly men, they certainly surpass me by great lengths). Reading someone like Leon Podles or Callum Brown really lays the groundwork for understanding the current mess.
I don't understand how anyone could think that Christians categorically oppose any kind of violence. Christ himself made a whip and drove out the money changers from the temple! There is a place for righteous anger.
It seems no mere coincidence that the movement into interpretation of early Christians as doctrinaire pacifists arose once war became so immensely destructive in the early years of the 20th century--esp the Great War, of course--and in the wake of the widespread use of Christianity to justify arguments for the U.S. "Civil War" and other destructive conflicts of previous decades. Terror of war seems a large element of the motivation for the use of the early years of Christianity to argue for hardcore pacifism.
Obviously, no Christian loves worldy war (rightly preferring to engage in the spiritual kind), but falsehoods are certainly no foundation for wisdom. The truth will set us free from all delusions, including that there are simple answers to any questions about what humans do and why.
What advice would you give a man who wants to believe in Christ, and reject vitalism, but struggles to have that true conviction?
Hell, I've personally even had 'visions' or religious experiences of Christ and God, and I still struggle to have faith in their absolute Truth. How does one grapple with this issue, especially coming from a modern, athiestic, rationalist background/social miliue?
Thought I'd drop in and offer a few comments about your excellent essay:
"But to equivocate, to pursue a contrived attempt at intellectual synthesis between two competing models of reality, will destroy your absolute belief - your true, transcendent faith - in both."
.
Speaking as a Christian man, the only truly transcendent faith is divine faith; it is something that must be given from God as a gift. It's not something you can conjure up from your own will. That, and honestly, there's no such thing as 'absolute belief' because faith is first *required* for _any_ belief in Christ. Then that faith must be exercised over a lifetime of sanctification to grow. Faith, therefore is a work in progress - is increased and strengthened by our obedience to God's word and by observing God's gracious and faithful hand at work when we are obedient. Even the Apostles struggled with their faith, standing not more than 3 feet from God in the flesh.
.
"To attempt to fuse the two position is just ‘soft’ Vitalism (attempting to alter metaphysical truth based on natural desires). This is cowardice and obscurantism, and an insult to the theologians and philosophers on whose paths we tread."
.
Well put. It is our earthly-permanent nature to resist and disobey divinely revealed instruction. It is, as most Christian Theologians persist, the age-old war between the Spirit and the Flesh.
.
"Facile solutions will fail, and if a faith is inauthentic, the consequences - which echo in eternity - are greater than contemporary politics. Choose wisely."
.
Indeed, choose wisely! Our actions, words and even our thoughts all have impacts and therefore outcomes and therefore consequences that ring through eternity. Getting the average Christian to wrap their heads and hearts around this is difficult.
.
"We must pierce through ideological caricatures, and dive deep into the rich thought of our forefathers to understand the fullness of their belief. With Christianity, reductive modern portrayals abound, including the notion that the sin of pride precludes Christians from pursuing excellence and magnificence, and that Christians are never permitted to hate."
.
So very well stated. As I wrote in my essay, No Other Gods, Christians - particularly Christian men - have willfully abandoned taking up their cross and instead, have opted to bow at the altar of career, family and selfish gain. Many hackles have been raised at the inclusion of, 'family' in false-god worship, but truly, many don't seem to realize that putting _anything_ before God is in fact idolatry. This includes giving more worth to family functions in place of worship and fellowship services.
.
"Does authentic Christianity demand that we become weak and pacifistic?"
.
That is the demand of *inauthentic* Christianity - its a pale, virtue-signaling shadow of faith that concerns itself more with social appearances and acceptability than it does with personal sacrifice and confronting sickness, lies and corruption. This is evidenced by their own inability to deal effectively with their own moral issues, is reflected in the relativistic values of their household, and shows up as cowardice and faithlessness in the face of conflict.
.
"They were men of terrible strength. Their willingness to die for their faith was real and their strength outshone every one of us. We should be cautious of the arrogance to believe that we can prescribe a superior ideology that we manufactured on the internet."
.
There's a whole essay in those two sentences. I was once yelled at by a condescending acolyte of pacifism over my time as a volunteer Deputy Sheriff. Their tirade centered around my profession as both a pastor and badge-carrying LEO. "You have to choose - one or the other, you CAN'T be BOTH!" Their inability to reconcile the difference between their own projections based in what they _wanted_ to believe about law enforcement was strongly coupled with their breathlessly naive biblical illiteracy. Mere words can't penetrate the hardened heart - it can only be accomplished by divine intervention followed by a willing love for the truth. Neither of which can be manifested by force; only by prayer.
I've always associated Pacifism as we know it today as coming from the Protestant Peace Churches and from the popularity of the works of Erasmus. It's really more of a modern thought than a classical one, though granted there were Greek and Roman writers who wrote against War. But it never seemed to really catch on during Antiquity and the Middle Ages, and only really developed as a movement once the Western Mind was sundered by the Protestant Revolt (I say sundered because the event broke, in the Western mind, the idea of Just Authority).
I've always harbored a suspicion that the big push for pacifism in the 20th century might have ties to International Communism, though I've never looked into it. It just works so well as a subversive idea to get your enemy to drop their guard. Most Christians of the West, Catholic, Protestant and likely even Orthodox (if living in the West) probably think their faith calls for Pacifism and Tolerance, neither of which is true. There is a time for peace and time for war, and no tolerance can be given to the wicked, the unrepentant and the Enemy of Man.
Absolutely fantastic, thank you. This is pushing towards the type of historical clarity that is absolutely vital now in these confused times. Whether one is Christian or otherwise, being able to see this historical antagonism is just vital. Maybe we can understand the historical significance of "Christ Crucified" for the first time in history.
“They were men of terrible strength. Their willingness to die for their faith was real and their strength outshone every one of us. We should be cautious of the arrogance to believe that we can prescribe a superior ideology that we manufactured on the internet.”
Wise words and captures the courage and strength necessary to living as a Christian man.
Well done.
A great continuation of exploring the friction between the Christians and the Vitalists. You're correct to assert a true attempt at synthesizing the two will, at best result, in a naturalistic worldview that acknowledges the superficial and aesthetic values of Christianity only. This is a problem worth wrestling with, as it seems that it is the prevalence of weak Christianity that has resulted in apostasy and a hollowing out of our beliefs. As an authoritarian religion (literally, one which claims to have authority to bind and loose), it is impossible for Christianity to appear weak and simultaneously be taken seriously. I think in this age, learning from the Vitalists about strength and beauty is useful to work towards the liberation and exaltation of the Church, as long as we don't lose sight that the True, the Good, and the Beautiful only come from God above.
Towards the end of this exceptional essay, my mind went to the battle of LePanto and Our Lady’s intercession as well as other famous relevant battles in the past. Interesting topic. Very engaging. 🙏🏻
Johann, you have now broached the most important topic of 2024.
We've been building, leading, ramping up to this. In my daily life and personal life, it seems universally recognized that the New Year brought about a palpable shift in the spirit that binds us together, and not only due to the political and material tension. This essay's topic is, in so many ways, the fundamental, foundational problem that all else rests on. Everything else is a superstructure placed on top.
Luke 22:36 alone says volumes; why then, as the hour of His death approached, did Christ tell His disciples to arm themselves? Why then, and not before? Isn't the spirit of the warrior, who arms himself as the dark (an Iron Age?) approaches, the same spirit that compelled our forefathers to build cathedrals, even in the midst of the Plague?
Johann, thank you. Great essay, and I particularly enjoyed some of the references you made.
As you know I have kept Christian Vitalism as a theme of Position & Decision, and nonetheless I agree with everything you have to say. Perhaps I will explore an alternative phrase.
What we must learn to do is express a faith that is rich in life and strength. I used Vitalism as a frame to express that our faith can be active and powerful, and that we can be likewise. In the face of a popular Christianity which is so often seen as passive and doddering, mealy-mouthed etc. but what you've successfully illuminated is that Vitalism has now taken on the characteristics of, instead of a stance, but a new frame entirely.
I haven't read it myself, but I think the following book might be of interest to you. Maybe (or probably) you already know it: Ivan Ilyin,
On Resistance to Evil by Force".
I think this is a great article, and it is a necessary reminder of the supreme witness of early Christianity which in no way feared death and, in fact, if Christians were to re-adopt such a faith would be criticized from many august corners for lacking prudence. I also appreciate the clarification on the participation in the military of the day whose rituals in many ways mirror that of the present day that in a way that they did not at the turn of the millennium.
However, and perhaps this is beyond the scope of this work, the motivating force behind the impulse toward a syncretic Christianity/vitalism is not addressed. To me, the great driver behind such a mistaken attempt is the absolutely uxorious state of serious, "conservative" Christian men today (who are otherwise exceptionally virtuous and Godly men, they certainly surpass me by great lengths). Reading someone like Leon Podles or Callum Brown really lays the groundwork for understanding the current mess.
I don't understand how anyone could think that Christians categorically oppose any kind of violence. Christ himself made a whip and drove out the money changers from the temple! There is a place for righteous anger.
It seems no mere coincidence that the movement into interpretation of early Christians as doctrinaire pacifists arose once war became so immensely destructive in the early years of the 20th century--esp the Great War, of course--and in the wake of the widespread use of Christianity to justify arguments for the U.S. "Civil War" and other destructive conflicts of previous decades. Terror of war seems a large element of the motivation for the use of the early years of Christianity to argue for hardcore pacifism.
Obviously, no Christian loves worldy war (rightly preferring to engage in the spiritual kind), but falsehoods are certainly no foundation for wisdom. The truth will set us free from all delusions, including that there are simple answers to any questions about what humans do and why.
What advice would you give a man who wants to believe in Christ, and reject vitalism, but struggles to have that true conviction?
Hell, I've personally even had 'visions' or religious experiences of Christ and God, and I still struggle to have faith in their absolute Truth. How does one grapple with this issue, especially coming from a modern, athiestic, rationalist background/social miliue?
Howdy Johann,
Thought I'd drop in and offer a few comments about your excellent essay:
"But to equivocate, to pursue a contrived attempt at intellectual synthesis between two competing models of reality, will destroy your absolute belief - your true, transcendent faith - in both."
.
Speaking as a Christian man, the only truly transcendent faith is divine faith; it is something that must be given from God as a gift. It's not something you can conjure up from your own will. That, and honestly, there's no such thing as 'absolute belief' because faith is first *required* for _any_ belief in Christ. Then that faith must be exercised over a lifetime of sanctification to grow. Faith, therefore is a work in progress - is increased and strengthened by our obedience to God's word and by observing God's gracious and faithful hand at work when we are obedient. Even the Apostles struggled with their faith, standing not more than 3 feet from God in the flesh.
.
"To attempt to fuse the two position is just ‘soft’ Vitalism (attempting to alter metaphysical truth based on natural desires). This is cowardice and obscurantism, and an insult to the theologians and philosophers on whose paths we tread."
.
Well put. It is our earthly-permanent nature to resist and disobey divinely revealed instruction. It is, as most Christian Theologians persist, the age-old war between the Spirit and the Flesh.
.
"Facile solutions will fail, and if a faith is inauthentic, the consequences - which echo in eternity - are greater than contemporary politics. Choose wisely."
.
Indeed, choose wisely! Our actions, words and even our thoughts all have impacts and therefore outcomes and therefore consequences that ring through eternity. Getting the average Christian to wrap their heads and hearts around this is difficult.
.
"We must pierce through ideological caricatures, and dive deep into the rich thought of our forefathers to understand the fullness of their belief. With Christianity, reductive modern portrayals abound, including the notion that the sin of pride precludes Christians from pursuing excellence and magnificence, and that Christians are never permitted to hate."
.
So very well stated. As I wrote in my essay, No Other Gods, Christians - particularly Christian men - have willfully abandoned taking up their cross and instead, have opted to bow at the altar of career, family and selfish gain. Many hackles have been raised at the inclusion of, 'family' in false-god worship, but truly, many don't seem to realize that putting _anything_ before God is in fact idolatry. This includes giving more worth to family functions in place of worship and fellowship services.
.
"Does authentic Christianity demand that we become weak and pacifistic?"
.
That is the demand of *inauthentic* Christianity - its a pale, virtue-signaling shadow of faith that concerns itself more with social appearances and acceptability than it does with personal sacrifice and confronting sickness, lies and corruption. This is evidenced by their own inability to deal effectively with their own moral issues, is reflected in the relativistic values of their household, and shows up as cowardice and faithlessness in the face of conflict.
.
"They were men of terrible strength. Their willingness to die for their faith was real and their strength outshone every one of us. We should be cautious of the arrogance to believe that we can prescribe a superior ideology that we manufactured on the internet."
.
There's a whole essay in those two sentences. I was once yelled at by a condescending acolyte of pacifism over my time as a volunteer Deputy Sheriff. Their tirade centered around my profession as both a pastor and badge-carrying LEO. "You have to choose - one or the other, you CAN'T be BOTH!" Their inability to reconcile the difference between their own projections based in what they _wanted_ to believe about law enforcement was strongly coupled with their breathlessly naive biblical illiteracy. Mere words can't penetrate the hardened heart - it can only be accomplished by divine intervention followed by a willing love for the truth. Neither of which can be manifested by force; only by prayer.
.
God bless
I've always associated Pacifism as we know it today as coming from the Protestant Peace Churches and from the popularity of the works of Erasmus. It's really more of a modern thought than a classical one, though granted there were Greek and Roman writers who wrote against War. But it never seemed to really catch on during Antiquity and the Middle Ages, and only really developed as a movement once the Western Mind was sundered by the Protestant Revolt (I say sundered because the event broke, in the Western mind, the idea of Just Authority).
I've always harbored a suspicion that the big push for pacifism in the 20th century might have ties to International Communism, though I've never looked into it. It just works so well as a subversive idea to get your enemy to drop their guard. Most Christians of the West, Catholic, Protestant and likely even Orthodox (if living in the West) probably think their faith calls for Pacifism and Tolerance, neither of which is true. There is a time for peace and time for war, and no tolerance can be given to the wicked, the unrepentant and the Enemy of Man.
Excellent essay. "In Praise of the New Knighthood" is incredible too. Thank you for highlighting it!
This is incredibly well written and thought out, as is to be expected from you. Thank you!
Absolutely fantastic, thank you. This is pushing towards the type of historical clarity that is absolutely vital now in these confused times. Whether one is Christian or otherwise, being able to see this historical antagonism is just vital. Maybe we can understand the historical significance of "Christ Crucified" for the first time in history.
https://rontimus.substack.com/p/jesus-actually-is-lord-christ-crucified
Thank you for writing on this topic. I've been dealing with some of what your talking about and it was encouraging.