Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Pragmatism of Russell Kirk Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_pragmatism_of_russell_kirk#3664 Post contents: "And both have more in common with Catholicism than they do with liberal Presbyterians and liberal Methodists." But at some point they become so liberal that they cease to be authentically Christian. When they deny the Trinity for example. So of course we have more in common with Catholic Christians than Presbyterian anti-Trinitarians. "But the statistics show that most Presbyterians and most Methodists in the United States belong to the liberal branches of those denominations." Most belong to the liberal branches, but that does not mean they are liberal, anymore than belonging to the Catholic Church means you follow their doctrine. Like I said, this is esp. true in the South, where a lot of people have remained in the mainline denominations because that is where their parents went to church. But most Protestants are not mainline. Most Protestants are evangelicals of one sort or another. "Red, that will come as a shock to most conservative Protestants, and rightly so." The partisans of each denomination will certainly tell you they are very unique. That is what partisans do. But there is a broad orthodox consensus. And they are united certainly around the importance of sola fide and sola scriptura. The soteriology of almost all the Protestant groups is in line with the Reformation. (Minus the degree of election question.) I think this exchange illustrates the fundamentally important nature of this question. An American conservative movement that is not primarily Protestant would not be an American conservative movement. It would not be an organic product of the culture. It wouldn't really be conserving. It would be altering. Sent at: 2008 10 12