LINKAGE
First, an article from the New Yorker on Patrick Henry College, a most unusual liberal arts college aimed at evangelical Christians who have been homeschooled. Provoked more than a few sighs from yours truly; as Verbum Ipsum pointed out, Christians on this model seem to combine a radical suspicion of "the world" with a radical trust for government--a combination that doesn't seem quite rational to me.
Second, an article from Rolling Stone on 'the new virginity.' All I have to say about this one is: hmmmmmmmmmm. Via the always thought-provoking Get Religion.
Second, an article from Rolling Stone on 'the new virginity.' All I have to say about this one is: hmmmmmmmmmm. Via the always thought-provoking Get Religion.
7 Comments:
On the second point, I have a lot more to say than "hmmmmmmmmmmmm." I'll refrain, 'cause we've already had this conversation.
Still, the part that drives me nuts is that I have so many Christian friends (and even seminarians) who would say, "Wow, that's great." It's not.
If I have to listen to one more group of Christian guys sit around in their homoerotic circle of sin and talk about masturbation, I'm going to puke, or weep, can one do both at the same time?
Bruner: thanks for the article link to the Rolling Stone article...
-drm-: amen. a crazy article...pretty sad. i'd be interested in hearing your thoughts, since we haven't had the conversation...email me.
Adam--
I'll try to find some time in the next week to write more. However, don't hold your breath as I'm rather busy at the moment.
In the meantime, read:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,592-1647622_2,00.html
It may not be readily apparent what this article has to do with the Rolling Stone's article. However, when I write more, I'll reference it with the purpose of building a conception of how particular notions are historically contextualized - a perspective the people in the article and the article itself fail to possess. Both fail to ask a question like, what particular constellations of beliefs come together in order to turn out people who live their Christianity in such a manner. I know, I know...it's Rolling Stone.
Further, I'll argue that what is recounted in the Rolling Stone's article, fails to have an adequate appreciation of how the virtue of chastity is connected to the other Chistian virtues, and also demonstrates an inadequate connection to both the history of Christianity and its Scriptures. Further, the overcoming of lust that is displayed seems to rely too heavily on tricks and will power, rather than a more substantive formation. Not to say that there is no formation shown here (there is!), but the formation presupposes too much of an autonomous subject with the power to choose (regardless of whether this is conceived as empowered by the Spirit or not). While this is a prevalent modern conception, it names a certian anemic ecclesiology which in turn overburdens individuals.
As you can see, it would take me a lot of time to develop all of the above. Maybe I'll find time on the plane on Thurs.
Best,
-drm-
Guys,
I stand by my mixed (rather than overwhelmingly negative) feelings. Yes, these guys are pretty extreme in their focus on chastity. It made me sigh and squirm just as it did you guys. I couldn't help wondering what that one guy might be doing with his time and creativity if he wasn't so focused on not getting aroused by streetlights and cute girls walking down Broadway. (And I don't mean that as a rhetorical statement--I really wonder what else he might do. It'd probably be wonderful: start a Bible study, write a poem, invent a new mixed drink, work at a homeless shelter. Who knows.)
But at the same time...guys. You haven't lived in Williamsburg, Brooklyn (aka Hipster Capital of NYC). The willingness these guys have to be countercultural, and the courage it must take, isn't something I overlook lightly. Being sexually active is such a norm in the communities these guys must move in (like the one girl said in the article, "like eating,") that taking a more relaxed, less 'intense' attitude toward it (which might make all of us more comfortable) probably wouldn't be very helpful to them.
Furthermore, look at the communities these guys have. Dan, I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss what these guys have as a 'homoerotic circle of sin.' Yes, there is that element to it, but at least to me it seems that there's also an element of genuine brotherhood and spiritual community, and I think that's worth praising.
Do I share their POV on everything? No. Do I think they're pretty extreme? Yes. Would I drink a beer and listen to their story? Yes.
I drank a beer during "Batman Begins." So what if you'd listen to their story while drinking a beer? As would I...
There is "brotherhood" at country clubs. Anything done as a group creates some sense of bonding, does it not? I miss my chess club...
There are 101 ways to be counter-cultural. That isn't the question, but rather...
Whose culture? Which Christianity?
[You know what I think: This is still-born virtue from an illegitimate mother, a whored ecclesia mater. Celebrate death if you wish.]
...further, I wasn't dismissing it, if I were I wouldn't have commented, but I will say that the excessive rhetoric is free of charge! I use it because I'm absolutely serious about the gravity of such matters. This sort of soteriological building is burning and I'd prefer to save as many as possible.
Dave, haven't you lived in Williamsburg, Brooklyn? Hard, perhaps. Don't know how you made it without group to talk to about masterbation and a trusty Masterband?
"Lord, please deliver me from by erect penis that I might continue to wear my Masterband and find favor in your sight."
Ahh...the lovely prayers of the people...good liturgy.
Dan,
In short: I think we may have to agree to disagree.
At length: please see my reply via email.
Post a Comment
<< Home