AD Fontes : an apologetic on the election

[Otherness]

“Quemadmodum desiderat cervus AD FONTES aquarum ita desiderat anima mea ad te Deus” (As a hart longs for the flowing streams, so longs my soul for thee, O God.)” Psalm 42:1(Latin Vulgate).

Both the Enlightenment and the Reformation had their roots in the “ad fontes” cry of the Renaissance. Collective humanity had reached a breaking point in the fullness of the corruption of its political and ecclesiastical insttitutions, and began to cry out for ad fontes, for a “return to the sources” that had promised better things.

Is something like this happening in our country at this time? For over a hundred years now the zeitgeist of our nation has been radically different than what it was when its founding principles were laid down in its Declaration of Independence and Constitution. An understanding of history must include the WISDOM within which our country was founded during what historians call the Modern Era. Since the late 19th and early 20th century we have been stewing in the principles of the Postmodern Era, an entirely alien zeitgeist vis-a-vis the principles of the founding era. Just because something happens later in history does not necessarily make it better than what went before. The Russian communist revolution and the rise of the Third-Reich were not improvements to the prior governing systems.

It is necessary to understand the spirit and mindset, and the immediate history, of those who enshrined the principles that created the great experiment that is America. They were the progeny of all the “sturm and drang” of the long medieval Dark Ages. Their wisdom was a experiential one in that they were eyewitnesses of the failures of the past. What they did keep, and what was one of the primary impetuses of our founding, was their faith in God as He is revealed in the life of Christ. They brought with them not only the learned lessons of history (the Enlightenment), but also the Judeo-Christian witness that human nature is, ontologically, corrupt. That is, that human nature is, in every human being, turned in on itself. This self-centeredness is the antithesis of what God always intended us to be : that is, other-centered (being other-centered is the ontology of love). This tragic (sinful) state of human nature is the primal cause of all the dysfunction, no...horror, that is the history of humanity. The founders knew that they could not fix this themselves (as it is the work of God alone in the individual soul), but they could sublimate it somewhat by balancing the powers of government. They did the best that Man could do, but they did warn us that this would only work to bridle human nature if citizens were a moral and religious people. “We have no Government armed with Power capable of contending with human Passions unbridled by morality and Religion” (John Adams). Thus their “social contract theory” rejected Rousseau's notion that humanity is essentially good, and only shackled by dysfunctional systems. They knew the problem lay much deeper : it was in human nature itself.

Well...this corrupt human nature raised one of its ugly heads again in “thinking up” the principles that under gird our Postmodern zeitgeist. The fundamental philosophical linchpins of Postmodernism are : (1) the idea of “God” is, and only can be, an unprovable theory, therefore “MEANING” (if there is even such a thing) is grounded in MAN, (2) there is no universal (objective) truth, only consensus leading to convention, (3) each and every worldview has equal claim to “reality,” (4) language is fluid, and meanings are not more grounded in authors intent than they are in readers interpretations (Derrida’s deconstructionism). This truly is an (the) accurate (formal and academic) analysis of the zeitgeist of our era (from the late 19th century to present). Though all times have their corruption, this is most certainly the corrupt ethos of our time.

Again, this Worldview is the antithesis of the founding era, and in embracing this political philosophy we have drifted away from the spirit of our founding. Our Constitution is necessarily a somewhat sterile and formal legal document in which it is difficult to “feel” the spirit of our founders, but the Declaration of Independence pulses with it. To wit : GOD IS, and the Natural Laws of God demand this DECLARATION. There is no more competent and worthy witness to this than Abraham Lincoln who praised Thomas Jefferson as “the man (who), in the concrete pressure of a struggle for national independence by a single people, had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce into a merely revolutionary document (the Declaration of Independence), an abstract truth, applicable to all men and all times.”

Well, Postmodernism rejects not only the idea of an abstract (absolute / transcendent) truth, but that any truth could possibly be “applicable to all men and at all times.”

As stated above, the whole of Western culture is infected with this philosophy, but it is primarily the Left that has swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. The Right, by dint of its conservative spirit, is intuitively resisting it...somewhat.

This Worldview got a real foothold in American politics under Woodrow Wilson in his wholehearted acceptance of its Progressive principles. He delineated it thusly :

“The Constitution was founded on the law of gravitation. The government was to exist and move by virtue of the efficacy of “CHECKS AND BALANCES.” The TROUBLE WITH THE THEORY is that government is not a machine, but a living thing. It falls, not under the theory of the universe, but under the theory of organic life. It is accountable to Darwin, not to Newton. It is modified by its environment, necessitated by its tasks, shaped to its functions by the sheer pressure of life.”

No! The Constitution was founded upon an enlightened analysis of the failures of human history combined with the Judeo-Christian principles that “survived” the religious wars of Europe. The government, though not a machine, is only a “living thing” in the sense of how the Scriptures refer to it : as a (the) BEAST. One need only read Daniel and Revelation to see God’s view of even the “best” systems with which we govern ourselves. As a “beast” it must be tethered [[Thomas Aquinas and John Locke Natural Law, which is at the heart of the originalist thinking of the Constitution championed by Justice Scalia versus the “living document” thinking on the left that has given us all manner of libertine interpretations of it]] lest it run roughshod over the political landscape, and it must be caged [[checks and balances, in contradistinction to Wilson's critique of it above]] lest it grow in power and size unrestrained. The progressive / globalist agenda feeds this beast lustily and must be checked by an informed patriotism.

By an informed patriotism is meant the principle instantiated by God Himself. That is, that the establishment of nation states are a “check and balance” mechanism to limit the ambition of humanity to co-opt His creative agenda of making man in His image and likeness. This is seen in the archetypal narrative of the Tower of Babel in Genesis when mankind set about to make for itself a unified society based on its own understanding of itself, thereby corrupting God's image in us. We see this very thing going on today as humanity has arrogated to itself the right to self-identify according to every nonsensical fantasy it feels itself free to entertain. And, again, it is the Left that has bought into this entirely, and, fascistically demands that it should be institutionalized. Jordan Peterson burst on to the world stage as a preeminent example of resistance to such oppression.

And now some first person thoughts.

I don't vote personalities, I vote Worldviews. Not only that, but I pretty much don't so much vote for, as I vote against. I will always vote against increasing the influence of the global, postmodern, progressive philosophy because I recognize it as the harmful virus it is in the body politic. As stated, it infects the entire body in the Western world, and it is only by dint of its conservative spirit that the Right is still resisting it, albeit weakly. It may well be that this is, ultimately, a losing battle, but as long as I have a choice...well, I'll make it. For now, Trump is associated with that choice, and the Left would prefer to "cancel" that choice. As a matter of fact, the Left is doing all that it can to be the (subtle) authority in all things (it has owned the academy, arts and entertainment, and the mainstream media, and almost the whole of the popular culture). Moreover, due to its underlying philosophy, as delineated above and exposited by Woodrow Wilson, it is inherently antagonistic to the founding concept of checks and balances. This is a very subtle form of the urge to authoritarianism, but it is still the ontology of fascism. The American spirit will not tolerate this, that is, it will “violently” react against it. So...it must be snuck in in a stealthy manner, and this is exactly what has been happening on the Left (which is no longer the Classical Liberalism it used to be...no, it is the Far Left). The American spirit has intuited, has sensed, this, and this is why The Right won both the popular vote and the electoral college.

In closing it is necessary to anticipate an objection to something quoted above. To wit : “We have no Government armed with Power capable of contending with human Passions unbridled by morality and Religion” (John Adams). Is Trump a worthy exemplar of this standard? The superficial answer to this is...well, not obviously. But I will not be the judge of what is going on in his heart and where he is in his soul's struggle to live in, and up to, this standard. But what I do know is that, at least superficially, he is on the side that supports this standard. And as long as we can keep alive the American spirit we, the people, will provide the check and balance that will keep him (help him, force him to be) faithful to the true American spirit.