In a recent article referencing history as an interpreter of
current events, I said: The lessons and
realities of history are on his side and there's a real comfort in that, especially
in the face of storm and assault. Those who study history with open eyes will
know great sorrow and frustration. They will often stand alone but having
walked the paths of the past... they need not fear. They've seen it all before.
A further elaboration was requested and is in order.
This is a position contrary to 'being on the right side of
history', a progressive even sometimes Hegelian notion that views historical
currents in terms of destiny... not the destiny leading to Parousia fires but rather
(from a Biblical perspective) to Babel masquerading as Utopia and Elysium. The
progressive impulse is deeply rooted in the Western psyche and particularly in
the New World. It's no wonder it took deep roots in American thought. The
commitment to democracy and a host of additional Enlightenment ideals have
always been wed to progress... these notions are but a step-child or
modification of the Protestant impulse to break with Medievalism, recast the
world and culturally build the Kingdom of God.
This is why Whig History, a belief in progress and cultural
advancement and (for Protestants) the idea that these attainments were
expressions of the Kingdom was born in the Post-Reformation milieu. Though not
readily admitted, the Reformers and particularly the Scholastics who followed
in their wake planted the intellectual and epistemological seeds for their own
destruction (which came by means of Enlightenment) and by the 19th
and 20th centuries the old 'progress' of Protestant
Postmillennialism had been transformed into a secular kingdom vision. Whether
utilising the moniker of the Social Gospel or some form of civic minded
patriotism this impulse still seeks the 'Kingdom', retaining some notion of the
concepts but only aspects of the old vocabulary.
While heartily rejecting Roman Catholicism as a false form of
Christianity I nevertheless also reject the Neo-Christendom project of
Protestantism as well as its extra-scriptural intellectual foundations. While
Sola Scriptura is enshrined, a more careful examination of the intellectual and
philosophical pedigree of Protestantism demonstrates this principle was all but
abandoned (or at the very least modified) and in fairly short order. The hybrid
forms of Protestantism that emerged by the mid- to late16th century
were already set on a wayward path leading to the modern world. Classical
Liberalism, progress and even Modernity, once celebrated by the Whig historians
are now concepts generating hesitation. Today most conservative thinkers,
particularly the more reflective ones, necessarily must pause and reconsider
the question. Even if technological advance is reckoned a blessing and gift
from on high, there are not a few who question the legacy and cost of reshaping
the political and social order. Few (I'm afraid) have rightly considered the
effects of industrialisation and technology and the economic systems they have
produced on the life of the family, the re-structuring of communities and the
shift in values with reference to time, possessions and how security and
respectability are defined.
Additionally there has been a failure to recognise how such
restructurings have affected the life of the Church. This in part explains why
even today, generation after generation of 'conservatives' continue to
capitulate to the culture. Led by the blind guides that are their church
leaders, committed more to middle class security and respectability, they are
unable to divorce themselves from the monied bureaucracies of which they are a
part. Antithesis is not in their nature and thus they fall prey to the
'progress' of the age and instead of resisting the world they allow it in...
just a generation or two later.
Do the Scriptures present a positive or progressive view of
history? Certainly not for the Church, at least not before the Parousia.
Ultimately the victory is ours and glory awaits.... in the age to come. This Age is marked for doom and subjected to
cycles of futility. Certainly this ought to affect our understanding of
history. Eschatology helps to shape both epistemology and ethics. Our historiography need not be wholly cynical as indeed the Church is
at work in the Earth spreading the Gospel. There is hope, but not in tribe, institution,
flag, charter or war the very things championed by the False Church and its
prostituted leadership as it seeks to build Pseudo-Zion.