Skip to main content

Guilty by Association?

You know what's annoying?

People.

People and the Internet.

Mostly people on the the Internet.

We are all crisis-mongers anymore.  It's like we're happy to see a mass murder or a botched abortion,  as if the horrors we purport to oppose bring us a twisted sort of glee.

We're all capitalists--we're quick to capitalize on a crisis!  Like ferocious felines we crouch, ready to pounce, always eager to exploit pain and tears.

School shooting--20 dead!

The virtue signaling and political maneuvering pervade social media for about three days.  After that we forget and go back to watching Game of Thrones and eating bonbons (what, I ask, is a bonbon?).

We decry Donald Trump because CNN showed us a smug kid wearing a MAGA hat (but, surprise, surprise...there was more to the story).

We attack blacks, gays, and liberals because some black, gay, liberal actor staged a hate crime.

We denounce Antivaxxers because some kids in New York got the measles (Heaven forbid!).

We divide and hate and draw lines in the sand because the media feeds us an us-vs-them narrative.

We call for legislation because Uncle Sam is our Lord and Savior.

We ignore the fact that essentially every single belief system and cultural movement in the history of the world has had its fair share of rotten apples.  Every single idea has been taken too far by someone.

In this respect, Democrats are no better than Republicans, Christians are no better than atheists, and  Vaxxers are no better than Antivaxxers.  We all jump on a story that makes our ideological opponents look bad.

The reality of life is that sometimes bad things happen.  Sometimes bad people do bad things.  Sometimes all we can do is mourn with those who mourn and weep with those that weep.

There are real problems in the world.  There are moral absolutes.  There are rights and wrongs and movements that demonstrate patterns of destructive behavior.  There are valid points for discussion that we as a society should address, but it's hardly productive to condemn automatically anyone who has anything in common with some guy who just shot up a school.

Before you exploit the next crisis or scandal for sociopolitical ends, just don't.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, l...

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repe...

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...