Well, the opera hall was full of paying guests who enjoyed watching and listening to us discuss big issues. Who knows what might come out of that? In any case, isn't conversation itself fun, and therefore worthwhile? I think so. One young Dutch man approached me after it was over to say he doesn't agree with me politically, but he thought it was really interesting, the things I had to say and the way I said them. He asked me for book recommendations. I got his email address, will put in some thought, and send them to him. You never know!
I can see that. I did not realize there were actual paying guests. I just remember presenting at an academic conference and thinking this is pointless as there was basically no one there outside of your select group of people. I assumed it was like that.
Also people get to see that Rod Dreher is articulate, erudite and a writer/thinker worth grappling with, and not the cross bw Ned Flanders and Savanorola on Orban's payroll that they've been warned about. And then word gets around!
God, I just finished that Packer piece, it's like his pen is dipped in sanctimony. You can feel him struggling to fit that novel onto the Procrustean bed of his political agenda, but it doesn't work without massive oversimplification.
And when he tries to draw some vague comparison bw Trump and Stalin's show trials, I'm once again faced with typical left-intellectual amnesia. It was people like him who supported Stalin and did all they could to obscure the reality of the Soviets—a George Packer born 100 years earlier would have been in the vanguard class.
American left-intellectuals are so dull now (they would certainly find reasons to denounce a 2024 "Magic Mountain" for some ideological crime or oversight), their entire program and worldview is either be like them or be a Nazi—and they wonder why their audience is vanishing.
It's too bad about Packer. I read The Unwinding, which came out about a decade ago, and chronicled America's decline since the 1970s and into the Great Recession. He better than anyone should have been able to survey the 2024 political landscape.
The conference looked like a blast! But I'm bummed that you won't put in a good word with VP-elect Vance - I was hoping you could convince him to do something to fix the Dallas Cowboys (like whack Jerry Jones).
I see that demographic decline was mentioned in the same substack that having to contain China was mentioned in. I wonder has anyone really stopped to think about the demographic disaster that China is heading towards? I am not sure outside of a decade how they will be a true threat. Their demographics are a disaster and not looking to get any better. I don't see how they really don't start having true social and economic problems because of it. Same with South Korea. I do think that eventually both places are going to put severe restrictions on women to increase the birth rate. You can't have death feminism and a functioning society
South Korea appears to be heading to non-existence. It is morally wrong to force people to reproduce, not that I could see how that could be done in 2024.
China's financial situation, particularly with seriously declining RE investments (which the party encouraged their people to purchase as a primary savings vehicle), is quite unstable. From what I read the regime's recent squashing of news of major accidents (one incident which killed 35 people, another more recent killed 7-8 people) is also causing restiveness.
Xi and the CCP retain a firm grip and their extensive belt/road investments (some in South America) are worrisome, not to mention their extensive defense build up (particularly in naval vessels).
Still, there are definite fissures in their economy which, if Trump is successful in his economy plans, don't bode well for them.
Meanwhile a number of U.S. businesspeople are quite optimistic about upside in the U.S.--as are foreign investors. The prospect of reducing the regulatory burden (Biden added over $1Trillion in new regulatory burdens in his term) and improving our energy situation has fueled the "animal spirits" driving our stock market. I'm cautiously optimistic as long as the Ukraine/Russia conflict doesn't become worse in the next 2 months.
A disturbing possibility is that post-Christian conservatism is in danger of becoming a strange amalgamation of Nietzcheanism and Ayn Randism--i.e., a type of conservatism that scoffs at sayings of Jesus such as "bless those who curse you" and "he who loses his life will find it" even as aspirational values.
Mike Johnson would affirm those values, but he is ideologically stuck in 1980s zombie Reaganism and tags along with the post-Christian conservatism to stay relevant. The pictures of him desperately trying to get in the frame with Trump, Musk, etc. down in Mar-a-Lago are kind of sad.
I don't detect so much as a whiff of "desperation" about Johnson. He strikes me as someone with a solid sense of himself and of his responsibilities, but who's also having the time of his life suddenly learning to work with the likes of Trump and Musk. He's smart, sober, and sane, and if he can keep Trump from poaching more of his narrow House majority, he'll do just fine.
Johnson voted for Ukraine aid, warrantless surveillance by the NSA and is a huge "free trader". Trump could depose him with one word, though, so I hope that intimidates him out of his zombie Reaganism.
Ah, let's hope so—in my view, this would be the ideal scenario. Let's hope he smashes the establishment at least half as hard as the politicos fear and imagine that he's gonna smash them.
Over the weekend, I ran into a mathematician and a science-minded atheist. Oh wow, I'd forgotten how out there some of your ideas about enchantment are, relative to the cultural status quo. They were trying to "explain" a proof against God's reality, and at some point I offended them by looking too bored. Evidently they thought they were being edgy and brilliant, and I was just going, ". . . Wait, was that it? So you're done?"
More generally, I find that it is becoming more difficult to communicate with the godless liberal heathens as they continue to harden into their ideological madness: their picture of reality is just too narrow and demented. I'm thinking that it might be getting to be about time for me to get outta Austin and go to somewhere less saturated with the crazies.
Also, Rod, I've gotta e-mail you about something; I'll send it to your Substack address soon, surely by tomorrow.
Math whiz and garden-variety atheist fail to see that scientific proof against God's existence is just as untenable as scientific proof for His reality (although some scientists are certainly working in that direction -- Stephen Meyer come to mind).
They appeared to be of the opinion that math and physics can supplant metaphysics, which strikes me as a category error. They didn't understand (for example) that their aversion to concepts such as teleology is in fact a metaphysical prejudice, not something dictated by the empirical data itself. File under "metacognition sorely lacking": technical processing power isn't the same thing as self-awareness or wisdom.
But we're talking about people here who have an axiomatic belief that metaphysics is reducible to the physical universe, or that transcendence is reducible to immanence. And they think the math and science affirm them in that, but in fact math and science logically can't support any such claim.
Libertarians often have the same blindness. Only for them everything is reduced to making choices, with differing degrees of freedom or coercion in those choices, with weak moral guidance like the Harm Principle. More sophisticated libertarians at least recognize the harm question as loaded and childish, but still cannot escape the choice / freedom / coercion question, and still arrive at a Rousseauian conclusion with a blind faith that "THE MARKET" will, in some ineffable god-like manner, be able to solve everything, fairly for all. If you really want to hack such types off, start drawing parallels between their theories and Marxism - it's fun to watch the smoke come out of their ears. Nothing that is non-material can actually exist except as abstract rhetorical ways to discuss... choices - it's like Nominalism run amok.
As a biologist originally, I find that biologists and mathematicians tend to insist that science opposes religion, whereas physicists tend to think it points towards religion, although not necessarily Christianity. The chemists tend to be the wisest, or at least humblest, maintaining that science has nothing to say in this respect.
Waco looks nice. But I was thinking 50k or less. The bigger cities of 100k or more have all the same stuff as the super big cities. At less than 50 K they define growth as being big enough for an IHOP. And many of the smaller towns don’t want growth. They don’t fetishize it which is very different from the big cities.
I could see Sethu in Marfa, TX. I passed through during a road trip years ago and it was a mix of hippie & cowboy. Prices are probably going thru the roof like everywhere but who knows, could still be cool.
Heartily recommend it. I currently live in a town of 25,000, and grew up in a town of 5,000 - both in the Midwest. I’ve traveled all over the world and lived on 3 continents. Small-town rural America is a great place to hole up while the rest of the world destroys itself by acculturated progressive ennui.
In my high school algebra book was a "proof" that 0=1. Trying to develop a PROOF against God's reality must be something like that. (The equation is fairly well known. It involved a fraction formed by variables a and b, such that without clearly seeing it, one is dividing by zero).
I like Gödel's incompleteness theorem, which I gloss to mean that a complete system cannot demonstrate its own axioms to be valid. That lacuna should make people feel much less fanatically certain about systems of all kinds, but of course it doesn't.
Before I moved from IL to NC, in my research I found out that the county I ended up moving to had not voted for a Dem for President since FDR. Works for me. FYI, it’s fun to live with your tribe. Before you move, remember that once you choose a state you’d like to live in, all research then shifts to picking the right county. You can pick a great state, but you also need pick a great county in the great state, because so much local policy begins at a county level.
To be clear, as an inquisitive person, I do not live in a bubble. In general I find that the left only knows its arguments, but the right knows its arguments *and* those of the left. This is born out in the many lefties we’re hearing about post-election who don’t know why Trump won.
I’m a Protestant (Presbyterian)who is gifting Living in Wonder to several friends and relatives for Christmas, so maybe I’m the wrong person to ask. But I agree with most if not all the things cited as contributing to the decline of Christian practice in the later years of the 20th century. Bring the woo back and address the purposelessness holes in our psyche. We don’t need religion to be relevant to modern life; we need modern life to be relevant to religion.
I agree with most of it too! I'm Protestant (also Presbyterian). I do feel Calvinists get a bad rap because generally people believe the stereotypes about Calvinists, without ever really delving into Calvin.
I've just finished Living in Wonder, and I have a lot to say about it, most of it positive, but for now I'd like to express a friendly challenge to Rod's characterization of Elon Musk. Is he really just an apostle of the Machine and transhumanism? I think that a lot of his popular appeal, especially to young men, is that he represents something that Rod correctly praises in LiW: acknowledging, and relishing, the fact that we do not, and cannot, have complete control over our personal or collective lives, no matter how advanced our technology. Before the SpaceX booster rocket was caught by the "chopsticks" tower last month, Musk said something like (I'm paraphrasing) "Entertainment is guaranteed. Success is possible." He knows, and the young people who admire him know, that the colonization of Mars will include disasters and tragedies. That's a big part of what makes it an exhilarating adventure. In some ways it's the opposite of what the Machine offers, which it to connect to a screen and "safely" imbibe pornography and other ersatz experiences.
The problem with Musk is that he doesn't see space exploration as part of the ongoing project of learning about God's universe, but sees planetary colonization as the salvation of mankind and the purpose of our existence (i.e. having as many children as possible and populating the universe). That is not our salvation or our purpose.
These are strange times. I don't rule out Musk having a Christ encounter at some time in the future. He seems just weird enough for that to happen to him. :)
I would add another issue with Musk - he often doesn't think things through, and works in an ad hoc manner. Starlink is a prime example - Earth is becoming enwebbed with cheap LEO satellites while an awful lot of debris is chucked into orbit too, all in a quest to connect everyone everywhere to the internet... for a price. There are deep ethical considerations in this operation, from litter in LEO making future launches difficult (not good to run into even small metal chips at orbital escape velocities), to privacy issues. It's getting hard to go anywhere where one cannot be quickly found, which will be abused. He's very much the exemplar of doing something without ever asking whether he should.
One thing that worries me about human colonisation elsewhere is that it means all life on earth could be destroyed without the Petrine promise being broken.
I also liked his speech about abortion and pregnancy where he said the problem is schools etc. teaching teenagers that their life is over if they get pregnant when having a kid is such a great source of joy.
Their life is not over but it would be good if adoption was not stigmatized as the path forward. The 3 mothers of Musk's children have a billionaire providing resources which most will not have (but i doubt he is spending much parenting time with 12 kids when he is running 4 or 5 companies plus trumps commission))
I think adoption should only be a last resort. I think there should be decent welfare for single mothers, and really obvious things like good crèches at colleges. I also don’t think shotgun marriages are necessarily a bad thing; my guess is that in many cases the couple are actually in love, and could make a go of it if supported and encouraged.
Of course, a cultural assumption in favour of chastity would be great too.
‘It takes a village to raise a child’: Try imagine liberals saying that now!
First, congratulations on all the good press and major conferences! I feel like our esteemed host is finally catching a break, even if it may be small.
Second, and I'm curious if anyone else can feel it, there does seem to be something "in the air" regarding our seismic political shift. I am cautiously hopeful that there can actually be meaningful change in our bureaucracy. I want to see Elon rip through the government like Javier Milei.
Third, having watched some of the liberal pundits (Jon Stewart, John Oliver, etc.) I'm surprised by some of what they said. They really believed that bringing the Cheneys on board would sway the moderates! John Oliver was surprised that Harris was not considered "moderate" by the voters! I don't know if they are capable of understanding outside the progressive paradigm.
I think Living in Wonder comes at a very fortuitous time. I was talking with a Methodist friend of mine while our kids played this Saturday. He mentioned and brought up spiritual warfare and how to look for it. He said his preacher has seen stuff also. He is listening to podcast by Catholic Exorcists.
I am not sure I would put Anglican's in with other protestants when it come to this stuff. The ACNA has exorcists that have trained other conservative Anglican groups on this. As you said Hans Boursema is an Anglican. Yes we have had our fair of struggles over the past 50 or so years but I think the tide is turning. I see myself as an Anglo Catholic and I am convinced by salvation by faith alone and that is what keeps me from jumping ship
Great interview with one of my faves, Emily Jashinsky, but I gotta say, Rod, the filter you used completely erased all your wrinkles. We want to see the real you!
I'm a Protestant (charismatic) and while I haven't read very far into Living In Wonder, and while I don't really get the significance of a priest blessing water to make "water more fully what it is", I like to think of this realm of enchantment from the perspective of Star Trek.
Imagine if Captain Kirk and Spock came down and visited you and told you that they were looking for recruits for their next voyage into space. You would have a year to get ready when they would return to pick you up. Wouldn't that change how you see everything? Wouldn't your days be filled with the "enchantment" of knowing where your destiny was headed? Wouldn't that bring significance and meaning to your life? Even if you couldn't "prove" to anyone else that you were about to get beamed up the the starship Enterprise.
My point is, that when you run into the real, then you see things differently. If Star Trek were real, then things would change for you.
Well there's something way more real than Star Trek. But just like how science covered up all sorts of things in recent years, it also covers up what we know about God, or more specifically, what we know about how rare the Earth is and what that implies. Scientists assume the correct stance is that there is no God, or at least that God is not involved, and so He is ignored and they are forced to develop materialistic explanations for how we got here. But that is a crazy stance given what science itself tells us about our rareness, and especially given that the bible matches what we have discovered.
The evidence is right there in front of us - just as much as if Captain Kirk and Spock were standing in front of you. In a sense, we don't have to search for a sense of the enchanted, the enchanted in the form of what God has done is yelling at us.
Years ago, when I was in college, I used to sit in church and look at everyone else just sitting there. And I would think, why are they all just sitting there? Don't they understand how real God is? Don't they get what that means?!
And I would want to start singing Bill Gaither's "Get All Excited" song. We serve a God that we should be so thankful for. But even more, we should be downright excited about our God. He's out of this world. Literally.
I pulled up my favorite AI and asked it about that song. I asked it: The song says, "Get all excited and tell everybody that, Jesus Christ is King". Why should knowing Jesus is king make us excited? Here's its reply. It sounds like it "gets" why we should be excited:
------------------
According to Christian theology, Jesus being King has several significant implications that believers consider exciting:
1. Personal significance - It means each person has direct access to the ruler of the universe who cares about their individual life, concerns, and wellbeing. This contrasts with earthly kings who are typically distant from their subjects.
2. Ultimate authority - The belief that Jesus is King means He has authority over all other powers, circumstances, and challenges people face. For believers, this provides comfort and confidence knowing that their King is ultimately in control.
3. Purpose and meaning - If Jesus is King, then His followers are part of His kingdom and have a meaningful role in His plans. For many Christians, this gives their lives a sense of purpose and significance.
4. Promise of justice - The concept of Jesus as King includes the belief that He will ultimately establish perfect justice and make all things right, which gives hope to those facing difficulties or injustice.
5. Future hope - In Christian theology, Jesus being King points to both present comfort and future promises - that He will return to fully establish His kingdom and make everything new.
So when Gaither wrote these lyrics, he was expressing the Christian perspective that recognizing Jesus as King isn't just acknowledging a fact - it's embracing a relationship and reality that transforms how one views life, challenges, purpose, and the future. The excitement comes from both the personal implications and the cosmic significance of His kingship.
Dean, I wish Rod would have written something like: When the priest blesses water, as someone set apart for ministry he is asking God to make the water more fully what it is by the power of the Holy Spirit." That's actually more in keeping with the Orthodox prayers for the blessing of water.
I was part of one of the original Vineyard churches for a few years, and (apart from resonance with Catholic spirituality) such a thing would be not be far from what anyone could pray for with regard to the medical means God might use to heal someone, for example.
I grew up Catholic but left and became a (mostly) Charismatic Evangelical Protestant. However, one thing that sustained me in my Protestant years was the answer to the Catholic Catechism questions I had to learn at age 7: Who made you? God made me. Why did God make you? God made me to know him, love him and serve him in this world, and to be happy with him forever in heaven. Further study altered my view of what "heaven" is all about, but my experience as a Protestant didn't always give me theological solidity under my feet. There were some truly kind and Christ-like people in my life during those years, for which I'm grateful - and I needed a place for the intellect as well.
Pentecostals often pray over handkerchiefs so that people can take them and put them under someone's pillow to be healed. I guess a priest blessing water is similar. Normal water can only quench your physical thirst, but blessed water could perhaps heal you. But I still don't get the idea of making "water more fully what it is". In my mind, it's just water that was prayed for. It's holy in the sense that it has been set apart for use by God. Or a better word might be consecrated. But then I was never Catholic or Orthodox so I must be missing something.
I think that to understand the "make water more fully what it is", you would need to read Fr. Alexander Schmemann's classic "For the Life of the World". It's fairly short and powerful. It's a fully sacramental way of being in the world.
One of the understandings of Christ's baptism in the Jordan is that Christ's entry into the waters blessed the waters and cleansed them from spiritual taint. You can see this in Orthodox icons of Theophany - often you will see two water spirits present in the river as Christ's entry is driving them off.
Water can quench your thirst, but it can also kill you by drowning, by carrying diseases and filth, or by freezing or cooking you. It is necessary for life, but it is often put to other uses, not just by humans but by spiritual forces too.
By making it "more fully what it is", you could also say "it is put back to its right purpose."
Yes, Matthew B. Crawford's review of 'Living in Wonder' is well-written, insightful and complimentary. But I wish he had not accused you of being an internet polemicist. I think that is over the top.
As happy as I am and as amused as I am, I’m honestly really scared. Not in a meltdown sense….Lord have Mercy, I’m a stronger woman than that… but, everything feels surreal and off, like I’m living in a Goya or a VanGogh, it’s all so…sideways.
The Gospel coalition review was of interest, Rod, because it was both Baptist and Calvinist. The combination exists but I do not believe it is very common. You may have spotted it right away but I had to dig down to see where they were coming from.
"By 2000, Reformed Baptist groups in the United States totaled about 16,000 people in 400 congregations" Johnson, Robert E. (2010). A Global Introduction to Baptist Churches. Cambridge University Press. p. 358. ISBN 978-0-521-70170-9. (quick edit for typo)
This may be a good time to say it - though you did not directly imply such.
I feel it is sometimes assumed here that Reformed theology, i.e .Calvinism, is common for Protestants. They are only about 12 percent of Protestants. Generally in Dutch Reforomed and Presbyterian Churches, as well as some small denominations and smaller off-shoots of denominations. For instance, as stated, about 18,000 Baptists in all whereas thee are 13 million Southern Baptists in the USA.
I think it is very unusual for any Baptist church to teach that baptism saves*. It is an gernally held to be an outward symbol of an inward work in their theology. It is faith - usually expressed by praying to accept Christ as Savior - that saves. Most believe it is not true acceptance unless one repents of sins.
There are 2 types of Baptists. Free-will Baptists are basically Arminian. Particular Baptists are (mostly) Calvinists. What unites Baptists is their hatred for church hierarchy (each church is self governing), and their adamant belief that only a "believer's baptism" is valid.
Some Baptists even rebaptize "Restorationists" (or "Campbellites:" Disciples of Christ, Church of Christ, or Churches of Christ) because while the latter only baptize adults, they all believe that it is baptism itself which "saves" or "regenerates," cf. I Peter 3:21, while Baptists believe that it is a symbolic token.) These "Restorationists" have a very "apostolic" view of Baptism, while at the same time holding a Zwinglian view of the Lord's Supper.
Yes, Particular |Baptist are one type of Reformed Baptist There is also Strict \Baptist, Primitive Baptist, Regular Baptist, United Baptist, Soverign Grace Baptist, etc I would agree they dislike hierarchy, and only adut baptism on confession of faith is considreed valid.
I have a Hotel de l'Europe story. In 2015 Amsterdam was the kickoff point for a 3 week bucket list trip through Europe. First stop was Hotel. Unfortunately my wife had forgotten one of her key medications. She thought she could tough it out but by the end of dinner she was in agony. It was so bad that we actually contemplated cancelling our trip and returning to the US. Talked to the front desk and they said they had a hotel doctor. Spoke to my wife and got comfortable with what she needed. We got the prescription called in to a pharmacy about 10 blocks away. I prepared to venture out as it was a nasty cold and blustery night. The front desk said "No" "we will send someone". So off wnet the bellman into the storm. He returned 30 minutes later with the medication. I offered him a generous tip but he declined it saying it was his pleasure. vacation saved! Love that hotel
Interesting! Did the hotel doctor live in the hotel? Leave other patients to come straight to your wife? Or would have, had it the need arose in the day? The doctor "spoke" to your wife - in person? Was the doctor perhaps retired and free to attend the occasional patient in need? I've heard of hotel doctors but I did not know they still existed, and I 'm rather impressed. I'd like to know how it works.
Prescriptions are in the cloud here in Hungary. There is no transferring them from chain to chain depending on were you are, just go in any pharmacy and show your passport. Prices are low and do not vary from store to store.
I have to ask two things. What is the point of these conferences besides stroking one's ego and what do they ever produce meaningful results?
Well, the opera hall was full of paying guests who enjoyed watching and listening to us discuss big issues. Who knows what might come out of that? In any case, isn't conversation itself fun, and therefore worthwhile? I think so. One young Dutch man approached me after it was over to say he doesn't agree with me politically, but he thought it was really interesting, the things I had to say and the way I said them. He asked me for book recommendations. I got his email address, will put in some thought, and send them to him. You never know!
I can see that. I did not realize there were actual paying guests. I just remember presenting at an academic conference and thinking this is pointless as there was basically no one there outside of your select group of people. I assumed it was like that.
Also people get to see that Rod Dreher is articulate, erudite and a writer/thinker worth grappling with, and not the cross bw Ned Flanders and Savanorola on Orban's payroll that they've been warned about. And then word gets around!
Oh, that's funny!
God, I just finished that Packer piece, it's like his pen is dipped in sanctimony. You can feel him struggling to fit that novel onto the Procrustean bed of his political agenda, but it doesn't work without massive oversimplification.
And when he tries to draw some vague comparison bw Trump and Stalin's show trials, I'm once again faced with typical left-intellectual amnesia. It was people like him who supported Stalin and did all they could to obscure the reality of the Soviets—a George Packer born 100 years earlier would have been in the vanguard class.
American left-intellectuals are so dull now (they would certainly find reasons to denounce a 2024 "Magic Mountain" for some ideological crime or oversight), their entire program and worldview is either be like them or be a Nazi—and they wonder why their audience is vanishing.
It's too bad about Packer. I read The Unwinding, which came out about a decade ago, and chronicled America's decline since the 1970s and into the Great Recession. He better than anyone should have been able to survey the 2024 political landscape.
in the Trump era every brain on the left side of the aisle has become the same brain...he is the Satan that sits at the center of their universe
Indeed it is. (I can never get a simple "Like" to respond).
The conference looked like a blast! But I'm bummed that you won't put in a good word with VP-elect Vance - I was hoping you could convince him to do something to fix the Dallas Cowboys (like whack Jerry Jones).
Bravo! The best part: “INTERNALLY SCREAMING!!!!”
I see that demographic decline was mentioned in the same substack that having to contain China was mentioned in. I wonder has anyone really stopped to think about the demographic disaster that China is heading towards? I am not sure outside of a decade how they will be a true threat. Their demographics are a disaster and not looking to get any better. I don't see how they really don't start having true social and economic problems because of it. Same with South Korea. I do think that eventually both places are going to put severe restrictions on women to increase the birth rate. You can't have death feminism and a functioning society
South Korea appears to be heading to non-existence. It is morally wrong to force people to reproduce, not that I could see how that could be done in 2024.
I wonder if North Korea is having a similar situation. Do you know?
The scarier prospect is artificial wombs. Not many people seem to be talking about that.
China's financial situation, particularly with seriously declining RE investments (which the party encouraged their people to purchase as a primary savings vehicle), is quite unstable. From what I read the regime's recent squashing of news of major accidents (one incident which killed 35 people, another more recent killed 7-8 people) is also causing restiveness.
Xi and the CCP retain a firm grip and their extensive belt/road investments (some in South America) are worrisome, not to mention their extensive defense build up (particularly in naval vessels).
Still, there are definite fissures in their economy which, if Trump is successful in his economy plans, don't bode well for them.
Meanwhile a number of U.S. businesspeople are quite optimistic about upside in the U.S.--as are foreign investors. The prospect of reducing the regulatory burden (Biden added over $1Trillion in new regulatory burdens in his term) and improving our energy situation has fueled the "animal spirits" driving our stock market. I'm cautiously optimistic as long as the Ukraine/Russia conflict doesn't become worse in the next 2 months.
A disturbing possibility is that post-Christian conservatism is in danger of becoming a strange amalgamation of Nietzcheanism and Ayn Randism--i.e., a type of conservatism that scoffs at sayings of Jesus such as "bless those who curse you" and "he who loses his life will find it" even as aspirational values.
Mike Johnson would affirm those values, but he is ideologically stuck in 1980s zombie Reaganism and tags along with the post-Christian conservatism to stay relevant. The pictures of him desperately trying to get in the frame with Trump, Musk, etc. down in Mar-a-Lago are kind of sad.
I don't detect so much as a whiff of "desperation" about Johnson. He strikes me as someone with a solid sense of himself and of his responsibilities, but who's also having the time of his life suddenly learning to work with the likes of Trump and Musk. He's smart, sober, and sane, and if he can keep Trump from poaching more of his narrow House majority, he'll do just fine.
Johnson voted for Ukraine aid, warrantless surveillance by the NSA and is a huge "free trader". Trump could depose him with one word, though, so I hope that intimidates him out of his zombie Reaganism.
"Donald Trump as a kind of walking apocalypse"
Ah, let's hope so—in my view, this would be the ideal scenario. Let's hope he smashes the establishment at least half as hard as the politicos fear and imagine that he's gonna smash them.
Over the weekend, I ran into a mathematician and a science-minded atheist. Oh wow, I'd forgotten how out there some of your ideas about enchantment are, relative to the cultural status quo. They were trying to "explain" a proof against God's reality, and at some point I offended them by looking too bored. Evidently they thought they were being edgy and brilliant, and I was just going, ". . . Wait, was that it? So you're done?"
More generally, I find that it is becoming more difficult to communicate with the godless liberal heathens as they continue to harden into their ideological madness: their picture of reality is just too narrow and demented. I'm thinking that it might be getting to be about time for me to get outta Austin and go to somewhere less saturated with the crazies.
Also, Rod, I've gotta e-mail you about something; I'll send it to your Substack address soon, surely by tomorrow.
Math whiz and garden-variety atheist fail to see that scientific proof against God's existence is just as untenable as scientific proof for His reality (although some scientists are certainly working in that direction -- Stephen Meyer come to mind).
They appeared to be of the opinion that math and physics can supplant metaphysics, which strikes me as a category error. They didn't understand (for example) that their aversion to concepts such as teleology is in fact a metaphysical prejudice, not something dictated by the empirical data itself. File under "metacognition sorely lacking": technical processing power isn't the same thing as self-awareness or wisdom.
They'll never make that leap, Sethu.
Sigh, I know. I mean, I guess anything is technically possible with the Holy Ghost, but yes, one shouldn't hold one's breath on it.
If I should happen to meet anyone like these two, I’m going to have to ask them what they think about enchantment and wonder in life.
Its a simple Venn diagram. Physical universe is a rather large oval. Metaphysical universe is a much larger oval, partly or entirely overlapping.
But we're talking about people here who have an axiomatic belief that metaphysics is reducible to the physical universe, or that transcendence is reducible to immanence. And they think the math and science affirm them in that, but in fact math and science logically can't support any such claim.
Many deny transcendence entirely, or if they have to admit it as a possibility then lock it another "dimension".
Libertarians often have the same blindness. Only for them everything is reduced to making choices, with differing degrees of freedom or coercion in those choices, with weak moral guidance like the Harm Principle. More sophisticated libertarians at least recognize the harm question as loaded and childish, but still cannot escape the choice / freedom / coercion question, and still arrive at a Rousseauian conclusion with a blind faith that "THE MARKET" will, in some ineffable god-like manner, be able to solve everything, fairly for all. If you really want to hack such types off, start drawing parallels between their theories and Marxism - it's fun to watch the smoke come out of their ears. Nothing that is non-material can actually exist except as abstract rhetorical ways to discuss... choices - it's like Nominalism run amok.
As a biologist originally, I find that biologists and mathematicians tend to insist that science opposes religion, whereas physicists tend to think it points towards religion, although not necessarily Christianity. The chemists tend to be the wisest, or at least humblest, maintaining that science has nothing to say in this respect.
Have you ever lived in small town rural America? I’d highly recommend it. It will change your view of America.
I haven't; that sure would be a big jump. I was thinking maybe a smaller city to start with—such as Waco, population 145K.
Waco looks nice. But I was thinking 50k or less. The bigger cities of 100k or more have all the same stuff as the super big cities. At less than 50 K they define growth as being big enough for an IHOP. And many of the smaller towns don’t want growth. They don’t fetishize it which is very different from the big cities.
I could see Sethu in Marfa, TX. I passed through during a road trip years ago and it was a mix of hippie & cowboy. Prices are probably going thru the roof like everywhere but who knows, could still be cool.
I've definitely thought about checking it out.
I grew up in a city that was just under 50,000 in the midwest.
Well, I guess so did I, technically: it was a suburb in greater Chicagoland.
Heartily recommend it. I currently live in a town of 25,000, and grew up in a town of 5,000 - both in the Midwest. I’ve traveled all over the world and lived on 3 continents. Small-town rural America is a great place to hole up while the rest of the world destroys itself by acculturated progressive ennui.
In my high school algebra book was a "proof" that 0=1. Trying to develop a PROOF against God's reality must be something like that. (The equation is fairly well known. It involved a fraction formed by variables a and b, such that without clearly seeing it, one is dividing by zero).
I like Gödel's incompleteness theorem, which I gloss to mean that a complete system cannot demonstrate its own axioms to be valid. That lacuna should make people feel much less fanatically certain about systems of all kinds, but of course it doesn't.
Before I moved from IL to NC, in my research I found out that the county I ended up moving to had not voted for a Dem for President since FDR. Works for me. FYI, it’s fun to live with your tribe. Before you move, remember that once you choose a state you’d like to live in, all research then shifts to picking the right county. You can pick a great state, but you also need pick a great county in the great state, because so much local policy begins at a county level.
To be clear, as an inquisitive person, I do not live in a bubble. In general I find that the left only knows its arguments, but the right knows its arguments *and* those of the left. This is born out in the many lefties we’re hearing about post-election who don’t know why Trump won.
I’m a Protestant (Presbyterian)who is gifting Living in Wonder to several friends and relatives for Christmas, so maybe I’m the wrong person to ask. But I agree with most if not all the things cited as contributing to the decline of Christian practice in the later years of the 20th century. Bring the woo back and address the purposelessness holes in our psyche. We don’t need religion to be relevant to modern life; we need modern life to be relevant to religion.
I agree with most of it too! I'm Protestant (also Presbyterian). I do feel Calvinists get a bad rap because generally people believe the stereotypes about Calvinists, without ever really delving into Calvin.
Well, some of us actually did delve into Calvin, he just didn't convince.
Well, when you’re sick of Calvin, there’s always a good old Presbyterian potluck. :)
I've just finished Living in Wonder, and I have a lot to say about it, most of it positive, but for now I'd like to express a friendly challenge to Rod's characterization of Elon Musk. Is he really just an apostle of the Machine and transhumanism? I think that a lot of his popular appeal, especially to young men, is that he represents something that Rod correctly praises in LiW: acknowledging, and relishing, the fact that we do not, and cannot, have complete control over our personal or collective lives, no matter how advanced our technology. Before the SpaceX booster rocket was caught by the "chopsticks" tower last month, Musk said something like (I'm paraphrasing) "Entertainment is guaranteed. Success is possible." He knows, and the young people who admire him know, that the colonization of Mars will include disasters and tragedies. That's a big part of what makes it an exhilarating adventure. In some ways it's the opposite of what the Machine offers, which it to connect to a screen and "safely" imbibe pornography and other ersatz experiences.
The problem with Musk is that he doesn't see space exploration as part of the ongoing project of learning about God's universe, but sees planetary colonization as the salvation of mankind and the purpose of our existence (i.e. having as many children as possible and populating the universe). That is not our salvation or our purpose.
These are strange times. I don't rule out Musk having a Christ encounter at some time in the future. He seems just weird enough for that to happen to him. :)
I would add another issue with Musk - he often doesn't think things through, and works in an ad hoc manner. Starlink is a prime example - Earth is becoming enwebbed with cheap LEO satellites while an awful lot of debris is chucked into orbit too, all in a quest to connect everyone everywhere to the internet... for a price. There are deep ethical considerations in this operation, from litter in LEO making future launches difficult (not good to run into even small metal chips at orbital escape velocities), to privacy issues. It's getting hard to go anywhere where one cannot be quickly found, which will be abused. He's very much the exemplar of doing something without ever asking whether he should.
One thing that worries me about human colonisation elsewhere is that it means all life on earth could be destroyed without the Petrine promise being broken.
I also liked his speech about abortion and pregnancy where he said the problem is schools etc. teaching teenagers that their life is over if they get pregnant when having a kid is such a great source of joy.
Their life is not over but it would be good if adoption was not stigmatized as the path forward. The 3 mothers of Musk's children have a billionaire providing resources which most will not have (but i doubt he is spending much parenting time with 12 kids when he is running 4 or 5 companies plus trumps commission))
I had no idea Musk had so many baby mamas. He also needs to stop smoking so much reefer.
I think adoption should only be a last resort. I think there should be decent welfare for single mothers, and really obvious things like good crèches at colleges. I also don’t think shotgun marriages are necessarily a bad thing; my guess is that in many cases the couple are actually in love, and could make a go of it if supported and encouraged.
Of course, a cultural assumption in favour of chastity would be great too.
‘It takes a village to raise a child’: Try imagine liberals saying that now!
"safe" is a word I am growing to hate.
First, congratulations on all the good press and major conferences! I feel like our esteemed host is finally catching a break, even if it may be small.
Second, and I'm curious if anyone else can feel it, there does seem to be something "in the air" regarding our seismic political shift. I am cautiously hopeful that there can actually be meaningful change in our bureaucracy. I want to see Elon rip through the government like Javier Milei.
Third, having watched some of the liberal pundits (Jon Stewart, John Oliver, etc.) I'm surprised by some of what they said. They really believed that bringing the Cheneys on board would sway the moderates! John Oliver was surprised that Harris was not considered "moderate" by the voters! I don't know if they are capable of understanding outside the progressive paradigm.
I think Living in Wonder comes at a very fortuitous time. I was talking with a Methodist friend of mine while our kids played this Saturday. He mentioned and brought up spiritual warfare and how to look for it. He said his preacher has seen stuff also. He is listening to podcast by Catholic Exorcists.
I am not sure I would put Anglican's in with other protestants when it come to this stuff. The ACNA has exorcists that have trained other conservative Anglican groups on this. As you said Hans Boursema is an Anglican. Yes we have had our fair of struggles over the past 50 or so years but I think the tide is turning. I see myself as an Anglo Catholic and I am convinced by salvation by faith alone and that is what keeps me from jumping ship
Great interview with one of my faves, Emily Jashinsky, but I gotta say, Rod, the filter you used completely erased all your wrinkles. We want to see the real you!
I'm a Protestant (charismatic) and while I haven't read very far into Living In Wonder, and while I don't really get the significance of a priest blessing water to make "water more fully what it is", I like to think of this realm of enchantment from the perspective of Star Trek.
Imagine if Captain Kirk and Spock came down and visited you and told you that they were looking for recruits for their next voyage into space. You would have a year to get ready when they would return to pick you up. Wouldn't that change how you see everything? Wouldn't your days be filled with the "enchantment" of knowing where your destiny was headed? Wouldn't that bring significance and meaning to your life? Even if you couldn't "prove" to anyone else that you were about to get beamed up the the starship Enterprise.
My point is, that when you run into the real, then you see things differently. If Star Trek were real, then things would change for you.
Well there's something way more real than Star Trek. But just like how science covered up all sorts of things in recent years, it also covers up what we know about God, or more specifically, what we know about how rare the Earth is and what that implies. Scientists assume the correct stance is that there is no God, or at least that God is not involved, and so He is ignored and they are forced to develop materialistic explanations for how we got here. But that is a crazy stance given what science itself tells us about our rareness, and especially given that the bible matches what we have discovered.
The evidence is right there in front of us - just as much as if Captain Kirk and Spock were standing in front of you. In a sense, we don't have to search for a sense of the enchanted, the enchanted in the form of what God has done is yelling at us.
Beam me up Scotty.
Years ago, when I was in college, I used to sit in church and look at everyone else just sitting there. And I would think, why are they all just sitting there? Don't they understand how real God is? Don't they get what that means?!
And I would want to start singing Bill Gaither's "Get All Excited" song. We serve a God that we should be so thankful for. But even more, we should be downright excited about our God. He's out of this world. Literally.
I pulled up my favorite AI and asked it about that song. I asked it: The song says, "Get all excited and tell everybody that, Jesus Christ is King". Why should knowing Jesus is king make us excited? Here's its reply. It sounds like it "gets" why we should be excited:
------------------
According to Christian theology, Jesus being King has several significant implications that believers consider exciting:
1. Personal significance - It means each person has direct access to the ruler of the universe who cares about their individual life, concerns, and wellbeing. This contrasts with earthly kings who are typically distant from their subjects.
2. Ultimate authority - The belief that Jesus is King means He has authority over all other powers, circumstances, and challenges people face. For believers, this provides comfort and confidence knowing that their King is ultimately in control.
3. Purpose and meaning - If Jesus is King, then His followers are part of His kingdom and have a meaningful role in His plans. For many Christians, this gives their lives a sense of purpose and significance.
4. Promise of justice - The concept of Jesus as King includes the belief that He will ultimately establish perfect justice and make all things right, which gives hope to those facing difficulties or injustice.
5. Future hope - In Christian theology, Jesus being King points to both present comfort and future promises - that He will return to fully establish His kingdom and make everything new.
So when Gaither wrote these lyrics, he was expressing the Christian perspective that recognizing Jesus as King isn't just acknowledging a fact - it's embracing a relationship and reality that transforms how one views life, challenges, purpose, and the future. The excitement comes from both the personal implications and the cosmic significance of His kingship.
Dean, I wish Rod would have written something like: When the priest blesses water, as someone set apart for ministry he is asking God to make the water more fully what it is by the power of the Holy Spirit." That's actually more in keeping with the Orthodox prayers for the blessing of water.
I was part of one of the original Vineyard churches for a few years, and (apart from resonance with Catholic spirituality) such a thing would be not be far from what anyone could pray for with regard to the medical means God might use to heal someone, for example.
I grew up Catholic but left and became a (mostly) Charismatic Evangelical Protestant. However, one thing that sustained me in my Protestant years was the answer to the Catholic Catechism questions I had to learn at age 7: Who made you? God made me. Why did God make you? God made me to know him, love him and serve him in this world, and to be happy with him forever in heaven. Further study altered my view of what "heaven" is all about, but my experience as a Protestant didn't always give me theological solidity under my feet. There were some truly kind and Christ-like people in my life during those years, for which I'm grateful - and I needed a place for the intellect as well.
Dana
Pentecostals often pray over handkerchiefs so that people can take them and put them under someone's pillow to be healed. I guess a priest blessing water is similar. Normal water can only quench your physical thirst, but blessed water could perhaps heal you. But I still don't get the idea of making "water more fully what it is". In my mind, it's just water that was prayed for. It's holy in the sense that it has been set apart for use by God. Or a better word might be consecrated. But then I was never Catholic or Orthodox so I must be missing something.
I think that to understand the "make water more fully what it is", you would need to read Fr. Alexander Schmemann's classic "For the Life of the World". It's fairly short and powerful. It's a fully sacramental way of being in the world.
One of the understandings of Christ's baptism in the Jordan is that Christ's entry into the waters blessed the waters and cleansed them from spiritual taint. You can see this in Orthodox icons of Theophany - often you will see two water spirits present in the river as Christ's entry is driving them off.
Water can quench your thirst, but it can also kill you by drowning, by carrying diseases and filth, or by freezing or cooking you. It is necessary for life, but it is often put to other uses, not just by humans but by spiritual forces too.
By making it "more fully what it is", you could also say "it is put back to its right purpose."
I would only "boldly go" if Nurse Chapel and Lt. Uhura were onboard...
Beam me up!!!!
Yes, Matthew B. Crawford's review of 'Living in Wonder' is well-written, insightful and complimentary. But I wish he had not accused you of being an internet polemicist. I think that is over the top.
Well, Rod does polemicize at times, and he does publish on the internet. Why is that an accusation?
As happy as I am and as amused as I am, I’m honestly really scared. Not in a meltdown sense….Lord have Mercy, I’m a stronger woman than that… but, everything feels surreal and off, like I’m living in a Goya or a VanGogh, it’s all so…sideways.
It’s disorienting. The change is so rapid it’s almost vertigo inducing.
The Gospel coalition review was of interest, Rod, because it was both Baptist and Calvinist. The combination exists but I do not believe it is very common. You may have spotted it right away but I had to dig down to see where they were coming from.
There are a lot of reformed Baptists actually
"By 2000, Reformed Baptist groups in the United States totaled about 16,000 people in 400 congregations" Johnson, Robert E. (2010). A Global Introduction to Baptist Churches. Cambridge University Press. p. 358. ISBN 978-0-521-70170-9. (quick edit for typo)
This may be a good time to say it - though you did not directly imply such.
I feel it is sometimes assumed here that Reformed theology, i.e .Calvinism, is common for Protestants. They are only about 12 percent of Protestants. Generally in Dutch Reforomed and Presbyterian Churches, as well as some small denominations and smaller off-shoots of denominations. For instance, as stated, about 18,000 Baptists in all whereas thee are 13 million Southern Baptists in the USA.
I think it is very unusual for any Baptist church to teach that baptism saves*. It is an gernally held to be an outward symbol of an inward work in their theology. It is faith - usually expressed by praying to accept Christ as Savior - that saves. Most believe it is not true acceptance unless one repents of sins.
There are 2 types of Baptists. Free-will Baptists are basically Arminian. Particular Baptists are (mostly) Calvinists. What unites Baptists is their hatred for church hierarchy (each church is self governing), and their adamant belief that only a "believer's baptism" is valid.
"only a "believer's baptism" is valid"
Some Baptists even rebaptize "Restorationists" (or "Campbellites:" Disciples of Christ, Church of Christ, or Churches of Christ) because while the latter only baptize adults, they all believe that it is baptism itself which "saves" or "regenerates," cf. I Peter 3:21, while Baptists believe that it is a symbolic token.) These "Restorationists" have a very "apostolic" view of Baptism, while at the same time holding a Zwinglian view of the Lord's Supper.
Yes, Particular |Baptist are one type of Reformed Baptist There is also Strict \Baptist, Primitive Baptist, Regular Baptist, United Baptist, Soverign Grace Baptist, etc I would agree they dislike hierarchy, and only adut baptism on confession of faith is considreed valid.
I have a Hotel de l'Europe story. In 2015 Amsterdam was the kickoff point for a 3 week bucket list trip through Europe. First stop was Hotel. Unfortunately my wife had forgotten one of her key medications. She thought she could tough it out but by the end of dinner she was in agony. It was so bad that we actually contemplated cancelling our trip and returning to the US. Talked to the front desk and they said they had a hotel doctor. Spoke to my wife and got comfortable with what she needed. We got the prescription called in to a pharmacy about 10 blocks away. I prepared to venture out as it was a nasty cold and blustery night. The front desk said "No" "we will send someone". So off wnet the bellman into the storm. He returned 30 minutes later with the medication. I offered him a generous tip but he declined it saying it was his pleasure. vacation saved! Love that hotel
wow!
Interesting! Did the hotel doctor live in the hotel? Leave other patients to come straight to your wife? Or would have, had it the need arose in the day? The doctor "spoke" to your wife - in person? Was the doctor perhaps retired and free to attend the occasional patient in need? I've heard of hotel doctors but I did not know they still existed, and I 'm rather impressed. I'd like to know how it works.
Prescriptions are in the cloud here in Hungary. There is no transferring them from chain to chain depending on were you are, just go in any pharmacy and show your passport. Prices are low and do not vary from store to store.