A Child Left to Himself
Timothy Birdnow
Proverbs19:18 Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.
Proverbs 13:24 He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.
Proverbs 29:15 The rod of correction imparts wisdom, but a child left to himself disgraces his mother.
Hebrews 12:7 Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his father?
In a recent American Thinker article Carol Peracchio lamented the judgementalism of Rick Santorum. http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/gongs_cymbals_and_pharisees.html
She speaks about love, and quotes 1 Corinthians 13:
"If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing."
End excerpt.
Carol, who worked in a crisis pregnancy center and has great concern for pregnant teenagers, bemoans the "the judgmental superiority of Santorum and his supporters" and refers to his supporters as "the Pharisee vote". Odd indeed for someone who spent the first half of the article expostulating on the importance of love and acceptance. One must ask; where is the love and acceptance for these "sinners"? Surely they, too, merit her concern?
Carol Peracchio has fallen into a trap. That is the trap that has been laid out by Liberalism; it uses aspects of Christian charity as a bludgeon against those who would maintain certain standards. It emphasized love and forgiveness, and exonerates sin itself. It commands that we love the sinner in such a way as to excuse the sin. It is a flawed understanding of love.
At the top I quote several examples of "tough love" from the Bible to illustrate that the liberal notion of love is not love at all. Creating an environment where sin is excused does no favors for the sinners, but merely makes their lives harder. There is nothing humane in smiling and waving as a person strolls toward an unseen precipice, yet that is precisely what the Left has told us we are morally bound to do in the name of non-judgementalism. If we know, say, a food is spoiled, do we feed it to our children? What if the child is hungry? An act of love is to let the child go hungry rather than poison him, yet we are supposed to close our eyes in matters of sexual morality lest we make the fornicator feel bad? That is not love.
But, you may ask, why did Jesus say "judge not, lest ye be judged"? What does that really mean?
There is a difference between how we conduct ourselves personally and how we conduct ourselves as a nation. In interpersonal relations we are not to be judgemental, but neither are we to be dismissive. St. Paul clearly states:
"2 Thessalonians 3:6 In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received from us."
So there IS judgementalism in the Christian faith! But this judgementalism is structural, in that it is aimed at cutting out the cancer caused by sin, and not personal. If a sinner repents he is to be welcomed, but unrepentent sin cannot be tolerated. Carol Peracchio has fallen into the trap set by the Left that says all sin must be tolerated (except intolerance) because otherwise we are not being loving.
And as a nation we are to maintain moral standards.
The reality is that no civilization could possibly survive without maintaining a moral code. And our civilization is dying because we have allowed ourselves to be silenced by our hedonistic critics who use our own righteousness against us. They have disarmed us with "judge not" and proceeded to vandalize every institution we hold dear, and we have not lifted a finger to stop them for fear of being judgemental. We have bequethed to our children a course and debased culture which encourages them to double down on the bad behavior that we had a duty to protect them from in the first place. Carol Peracchio has fallen into this trap of moral relativism masquerading as love. It is not love; it is heterodoxy, a hatred of Christ and Christianity that plays on sympathy and decency. It's fruits are ruined lives.
If this more "tolerant" attitude were effective, wouldn't we have seen a decline in out-of-wedlock births, in venereal diseases, in abortions? Shouldn't we be able to take statistics from the prudish old days and see they compare unfavorably with today? The results are the exact opposite; our"loving" attitude has created a veritable wasteland. Can anyone claim this is love?
According to Jesus:
15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
(Matthew 7:15-20)
The moral relativism born of good intentions has born remarkably bad fruit. It is not love. It is at the root of nearly every societal problem we face today. Rick Santorum is right in his "judgemental superiority" for without it we become beasts driven by our passions. You bet we need to be judgemental!
That is not to say we should be unkind or hard, but we must make it clear that, yes, there is a line and it must not be crossed. We do this all of the time with our children. It may seem cruel and arbitrary to the child to be told not to play in the street, but the father who tells his child to enjoy the traffic can not claim to love that child.
Oh, and Rick Santorum is running for President, not an elected version of Oprah. His job is to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, and not to mew and handhold. The moral relativists are the enemies of the United States. They have been systematically dismantling the protections and traditions that guide this nation.
Now, Carol may rightly worry about the perception of the voting public, but that is a failing of the people, and a purposeful distortion by the media, not a fault of Santorum. It's a part of the trap, to intimidate us into silence. America will continue to decline as long as we fear being called mean-spirited.
We must be the ones to show the true meanness of the liberal moral relativists, to make the public understand that our "judgementalism" is the real act of love. If we adopt the rhetoric and viewpoint of the Left we are nothing more than a part of the problem.
Proverbs19:18 Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.
Proverbs 13:24 He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.
Proverbs 29:15 The rod of correction imparts wisdom, but a child left to himself disgraces his mother.
Hebrews 12:7 Endure hardship as discipline; God is treating you as sons. For what son is not disciplined by his father?
In a recent American Thinker article Carol Peracchio lamented the judgementalism of Rick Santorum. http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/03/gongs_cymbals_and_pharisees.html
She speaks about love, and quotes 1 Corinthians 13:
"If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing."
End excerpt.
Carol, who worked in a crisis pregnancy center and has great concern for pregnant teenagers, bemoans the "the judgmental superiority of Santorum and his supporters" and refers to his supporters as "the Pharisee vote". Odd indeed for someone who spent the first half of the article expostulating on the importance of love and acceptance. One must ask; where is the love and acceptance for these "sinners"? Surely they, too, merit her concern?
Carol Peracchio has fallen into a trap. That is the trap that has been laid out by Liberalism; it uses aspects of Christian charity as a bludgeon against those who would maintain certain standards. It emphasized love and forgiveness, and exonerates sin itself. It commands that we love the sinner in such a way as to excuse the sin. It is a flawed understanding of love.
At the top I quote several examples of "tough love" from the Bible to illustrate that the liberal notion of love is not love at all. Creating an environment where sin is excused does no favors for the sinners, but merely makes their lives harder. There is nothing humane in smiling and waving as a person strolls toward an unseen precipice, yet that is precisely what the Left has told us we are morally bound to do in the name of non-judgementalism. If we know, say, a food is spoiled, do we feed it to our children? What if the child is hungry? An act of love is to let the child go hungry rather than poison him, yet we are supposed to close our eyes in matters of sexual morality lest we make the fornicator feel bad? That is not love.
But, you may ask, why did Jesus say "judge not, lest ye be judged"? What does that really mean?
There is a difference between how we conduct ourselves personally and how we conduct ourselves as a nation. In interpersonal relations we are not to be judgemental, but neither are we to be dismissive. St. Paul clearly states:
"2 Thessalonians 3:6 In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers, to keep away from every brother who is idle and does not live according to the teaching you received from us."
So there IS judgementalism in the Christian faith! But this judgementalism is structural, in that it is aimed at cutting out the cancer caused by sin, and not personal. If a sinner repents he is to be welcomed, but unrepentent sin cannot be tolerated. Carol Peracchio has fallen into the trap set by the Left that says all sin must be tolerated (except intolerance) because otherwise we are not being loving.
And as a nation we are to maintain moral standards.
The reality is that no civilization could possibly survive without maintaining a moral code. And our civilization is dying because we have allowed ourselves to be silenced by our hedonistic critics who use our own righteousness against us. They have disarmed us with "judge not" and proceeded to vandalize every institution we hold dear, and we have not lifted a finger to stop them for fear of being judgemental. We have bequethed to our children a course and debased culture which encourages them to double down on the bad behavior that we had a duty to protect them from in the first place. Carol Peracchio has fallen into this trap of moral relativism masquerading as love. It is not love; it is heterodoxy, a hatred of Christ and Christianity that plays on sympathy and decency. It's fruits are ruined lives.
If this more "tolerant" attitude were effective, wouldn't we have seen a decline in out-of-wedlock births, in venereal diseases, in abortions? Shouldn't we be able to take statistics from the prudish old days and see they compare unfavorably with today? The results are the exact opposite; our"loving" attitude has created a veritable wasteland. Can anyone claim this is love?
According to Jesus:
15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
(Matthew 7:15-20)
The moral relativism born of good intentions has born remarkably bad fruit. It is not love. It is at the root of nearly every societal problem we face today. Rick Santorum is right in his "judgemental superiority" for without it we become beasts driven by our passions. You bet we need to be judgemental!
That is not to say we should be unkind or hard, but we must make it clear that, yes, there is a line and it must not be crossed. We do this all of the time with our children. It may seem cruel and arbitrary to the child to be told not to play in the street, but the father who tells his child to enjoy the traffic can not claim to love that child.
Oh, and Rick Santorum is running for President, not an elected version of Oprah. His job is to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, and not to mew and handhold. The moral relativists are the enemies of the United States. They have been systematically dismantling the protections and traditions that guide this nation.
Now, Carol may rightly worry about the perception of the voting public, but that is a failing of the people, and a purposeful distortion by the media, not a fault of Santorum. It's a part of the trap, to intimidate us into silence. America will continue to decline as long as we fear being called mean-spirited.
We must be the ones to show the true meanness of the liberal moral relativists, to make the public understand that our "judgementalism" is the real act of love. If we adopt the rhetoric and viewpoint of the Left we are nothing more than a part of the problem.
posted by Timothy Birdnow | 4:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home