Henry Imler January 5th, 2007

Travis Gilmore has introduced and lent me a book by J. Budziszewski entitled The Revenge of Conscience, Politics and the Fall of Man.
I am only into the first chapter, but it has been engaging and
challenging. It hits on several things that I often find myself
drifting towards in thought.

I believe the book serves as a introduction to genuine Christian
Political Philosophy. Budziszewski suggests that in all the politics we
see around us, Liberal, Conservative, Progressive, Libertarian and
others, there is a lack original sin. Correcting this fundamental flaw
will guide us to developing a proper, more helpful political
philosophy. He defines original sin as humans that are created good,
but broken. Thereby bypassing the either-or of humans being basically
good or bad.

So far, he has discussed his foray into and retreat from nihilism.
He has argued against Pluralism and for a return to Classicism.
Pluralism, for Budziszewski, is the maintaining of all worldviews as
fundamentally compatible. Classicism, on the other hand, allows for one
worldview being correct, and has the participants of Babel struggle to
convince others of the truth that they have.

“Each
makes some one voice in the Babel his own and then takes on his
competitors by arguing the issues on their merits. The Epicurean tells
you why he thinks pleasure is the sovereign good; the Christian tells
you why he thinks Jesus the risen son of God; the Gnostic tells you why
he thinks evil coeval with good.” (p. 7)

Pluralism’s acceptance of each particular truth leads to a denial of all truth.

This and the continuing discussion in the book is of particular
importance to me. This is the POV that I am required to assume in my
writing, the assumption of Atheism. I cannot, in academic writing,
betray to the reader my faith, nor let it influence my work. There are
areas where this can be a good thing. In the area of textual
scholarship, I should not let my theological views influence a study of
the 1^st Century worldview and culture, nor allow Church
Traditions or theological implications have the final say in a study of
the authorship of the Pauline letters.

However, after a while all of this is just speech on the first
things, or the foundations of theological study, or any kind of
ultimate evaluative determinations. Ultimately, we need to, in addition
to merely discussing how things are, discuss how things should be. A
return to Classicism does that. In my personal reflections durring this
past semester, I had come to similar conclusions, albeit poorly worded
conclusions.

But all of this is a side-track to what the book is really about. I
am looking forward to finishing the book. From the little that Travis
has told me about his criticisms of Progressivism, Libertarianism, and
Conservatism, they seem to be spot on with my personal reservations.

• Politics
• Comments(0)