Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Pragmatism of Russell Kirk Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_pragmatism_of_russell_kirk#3657 Post contents: Scott, I wasn't suggesting that the Protestant work ethic, etc. was "conservative." I was suggesting they reflect a dominant Protestant ethos. Those are some of the things Samuel Huntington points to. (I don't have a problem with those things, particularly the work ethic, but I do think they can be taken to excess.) Although I do think I am less hostile to capitalism than some paleos, I would never suggest that that is a "center piece" of conservatism. The fact that they became a center piece was I think partially a reaction to Communism. But I think Catholics get Protestantism wrong. (I'm sure the opposite is true as well.) Sure there are a lot of denominations. But most of those denominations are variations on a theme. But they are generally in the Protestant Reformation mold. (There are a few exceptions that are significantly different like the Quakers, but by and large they are similar.) So I don't accept the premise of multiple strains of Protestantism unless you want to be a splitter instead of a lumper. Conservative Calvinist Presbyterians have more in common with Conservative Wesleyan Methodists than either has with Catholicism. The mainline denominations are not inherently liberal. Recall that the main voices in the early Fundamentalist/Modernist debate (Machen for example) came from inside those mainline denominations. The liberals won the battle for the control of the denominations and the seminaries, but they lost the battle for the soul of Protestant Christianity. The rise of evangelicalism is a direct response to the victory of the liberals in the mainline. The people walked. Even to this day, the average parishioner in the mainline churches is much more conservative than the hierarchy. This is esp. true in the South. (A lot of Methodists churches in the rural South differ very little from the Baptist church next door.) Recall that modern evangelicalism arose from Fundamentalism. It was the more ecumenical and less separatistic aspect, but it emphasized the fundamentals of the faith. The problem with evangelicalism is that it is trying to be theologically conservative but culturally modern. These are two incompatible goals. I wish they would see that. But if Protestantism is an inherently corrupting/liberalizing force, then why is the South (the Bible Belt) more conservative than the North? (Religion is not the only factor, of course.) And why is America more conservative than Europe? The Euros think that Americans are all fundamentalist Bible thumpers, and by comparison we are. Do an experiment. I'm going to do this at some point and write it up. Randomly pick Protestant denominations that are generally considered conservative and evangelical from across perspectives. Wesleyan, Reformed, Charismatic, etc. Go to their official websites and look at their statement of beliefs. Do the same with denominational seminaries if you like. You will see an incredible amount of uniformity. Often it takes someone in the know theologically to even pick out the denominational distinctives. I think you will be surprise at the uniformity you will find. Again, unless you are a splitter, you will not find multiple Protestantisms. Sent at: 2008 10 07