Skip to main content

Why are Americans So Afraid of Catastrophe?

Why are we Americans so afraid of catastrophe?

Why are we so allergic to crisis?

Why has this pandemic left us so paralyzed?

Our ancestors were used to incessant war, harsh winters, and poor crop yields.  They were used to pain and death.  Crises and suffering were realities of daily life in a fallen world.

Now we panic buy toilet paper and binge watch ridiculous Netflix shows.

We are, it would appear, not the hardiest of folk anymore.

We simply cannot accept the inescapable fact that bad things happen.  When we encounter hardship, we run to Uncle Sam for help.  Decades of peace and prosperity, along with our ignorance of history, have rendered us helpless and dependent.  We believe that we should be immune to the chaos of our broken world.

This weakness, so often bemoaned by the Boomers who epitomize it, defines our culture.  Our political and economic system is dominated by those who are convinced that the government should eliminate risk from the lives of the constituency.  We cannot accept that some people are born into and spend their lives in higher economic brackets than others.  The government, we insist, should not only protect, but fund, our modern, first-world rights.

When crisis strikes, we expect someone to pay us to sit at home.  We want the evil corporations to pay our wages even though we're not rendering any services.  We want our banks and landlords to forgive our mortgage and rent payments.  Instead being grateful that we are still able to work, we demand hazard pay.

This coronavirus pandemic is proving our mettle, and we're not looking very impressive.  We are being tried and are consistently found wanting.  The beauty of the American Dream is fading into the annals of history.  The days of pulling ourselves up by our bootstraps are long gone, it seems.  Our ancestors sailed across oceans and drove horse-drawn carriages over mountain ranges, but their indomitable spirit has drowned in a sea of ease and materialism.

As economic collapse looms on the horizon, we demand a bailout from the Federal government.  We never really debated whether or not a bailout should take place.  We only debated the dollar amount on the check.  

If we will not learn the lessons that history has to offer, she will have to teach us these lessons once more.

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...