Locke's influence on America's founders is vastly overstated, and when Americans read him they understood him to be a thinker whose ideas were compatible with their Christian convictions. They may have misread him, but that is a different debate. https://t.co/UzRj8IvmUl
— Mark David Hall (@MDH_GFU) May 22, 2020
Showing posts with label Anglo-American political tradition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Anglo-American political tradition. Show all posts
Friday, May 22, 2020
Locke and the American Founding
Saturday, November 10, 2018
Wednesday, October 11, 2017
Localist conception of authority can be summed up as follows: "If you don't truly live with them, why are you trying to make
decisions for them?"
That is the truth to the American conservative or libertarian mantra, "Live and let live." (As opposed to being an endorsement of tolerance at the individual or family level.)
decisions for them?"
That is the truth to the American conservative or libertarian mantra, "Live and let live." (As opposed to being an endorsement of tolerance at the individual or family level.)
Thursday, August 20, 2015
New from Angelico Press
From Christendom to Americanism and Beyond: The Long, Jagged Trail to a Postmodern Void by Thomas Storck
He has written some good things about communitarianism, technology, and other related topics, but I generally disagree with his version of American history (which attributes too much to liberalism the very beginning), which is not unique among Latin traditionalists.
He has written some good things about communitarianism, technology, and other related topics, but I generally disagree with his version of American history (which attributes too much to liberalism the very beginning), which is not unique among Latin traditionalists.
Monday, July 07, 2014
Tuesday, November 26, 2013
Thursday, May 02, 2013
A Calvinist Responds to Feser and Kozinski
via TK: TWO ENDS OR TWO KINGDOMS? by Peter Escalante
Related: “We Hold These Truths to be Self-Evident”: A Dialogue
Related: “We Hold These Truths to be Self-Evident”: A Dialogue
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Deneen Responds to Schlueter
Re: Natural Law Liberalism - Beyond Wishful Thinking: A Response to Schlueter
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Natural Law Liberalism
Is this how we should understand the American founding fathers?
Sustainable Liberalism by Nathan Schlueter (via First Thoughts)
Previously...
Better than Our Philosophy: A Response to Muñoz by Patrick J. Deneen
Why Social Conservatives Should Be Patriotic Americans: A Critique of Patrick Deneen by Vincent Phillip Muñoz
Sustainable Liberalism by Nathan Schlueter (via First Thoughts)
Previously...
Better than Our Philosophy: A Response to Muñoz by Patrick J. Deneen
Why Social Conservatives Should Be Patriotic Americans: A Critique of Patrick Deneen by Vincent Phillip Muñoz
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Zenit: Benedict XVI's Address to US Bishops on 'Ad Limina' Visit
"The Legitimate Separation of Church and State Cannot Be Taken to Mean That the Church Must Be Silent"
"At the heart of every culture, whether perceived or not, is a consensus about the nature of reality and the moral good, and thus about the conditions for human flourishing. In America, that consensus, as enshrined in your nation’s founding documents, was grounded in a worldview shaped not only by faith but a commitment to certain ethical principles deriving from nature and nature’s God."
A certain view of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. But not the only conservative understanding of those documents.
"The Church’s witness, then, is of its nature public: she seeks to convince by proposing rational arguments in the public square. The legitimate separation of Church and State cannot be taken to mean that the Church must be silent on certain issues, nor that the State may choose not to engage, or be engaged by, the voices of committed believers in determining the values which will shape the future of the nation."
What is the basis for the legitimate separation of Church and State? Is the Holy Father speaking from a Catholic point of view or is he adopting an American point of view? I take the Catholic view to be this: the supernatural common good that resides in being a part of the Church is not the same as the temporal common good, and the authority of the Church is not the same as the authority of the secular government.
"Here once more we see the need for an engaged, articulate and well-formed Catholic laity endowed with a strong critical sense vis-à-vis the dominant culture and with the courage to counter a reductive secularism which would delegitimize the Church’s participation in public debate about the issues which are determining the future of American society. The preparation of committed lay leaders and the presentation of a convincing articulation of the Christian vision of man and society remain a primary task of the Church in your country; as essential components of the new evangelization, these concerns must shape the vision and goals of catechetical programs at every level."
I think this is a failed strategy and will continue to be a failed strategy if it is understood to be directed primarily at the national level.
"The Legitimate Separation of Church and State Cannot Be Taken to Mean That the Church Must Be Silent"
"At the heart of every culture, whether perceived or not, is a consensus about the nature of reality and the moral good, and thus about the conditions for human flourishing. In America, that consensus, as enshrined in your nation’s founding documents, was grounded in a worldview shaped not only by faith but a commitment to certain ethical principles deriving from nature and nature’s God."
A certain view of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. But not the only conservative understanding of those documents.
"The Church’s witness, then, is of its nature public: she seeks to convince by proposing rational arguments in the public square. The legitimate separation of Church and State cannot be taken to mean that the Church must be silent on certain issues, nor that the State may choose not to engage, or be engaged by, the voices of committed believers in determining the values which will shape the future of the nation."
What is the basis for the legitimate separation of Church and State? Is the Holy Father speaking from a Catholic point of view or is he adopting an American point of view? I take the Catholic view to be this: the supernatural common good that resides in being a part of the Church is not the same as the temporal common good, and the authority of the Church is not the same as the authority of the secular government.
"Here once more we see the need for an engaged, articulate and well-formed Catholic laity endowed with a strong critical sense vis-à-vis the dominant culture and with the courage to counter a reductive secularism which would delegitimize the Church’s participation in public debate about the issues which are determining the future of American society. The preparation of committed lay leaders and the presentation of a convincing articulation of the Christian vision of man and society remain a primary task of the Church in your country; as essential components of the new evangelization, these concerns must shape the vision and goals of catechetical programs at every level."
I think this is a failed strategy and will continue to be a failed strategy if it is understood to be directed primarily at the national level.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)