Anthony Esolen has a usually provocative post about the inconsistencies of our times. He calls this the Contradictory Values Syndrome.
. . . on Monday, the harridans of the National Organization for Women announce their great discovery that it is a bad thing for men to beat women black and blue. We wonder what took them so long to discover it. APPLES FALL TO THE GROUND, runs the headline, with the helpful addition, Effects on Agriculture Undetermined. So terrible a thing it is for women to be beaten that they must promote a national law, the Violence Against Women Act, to ensure the safety of women against the fist of a brawling boyfriend.
Then on Tuesday, the same harridans announce the great discovery that it is a good thing for women to join the infantry, to confront not boyfriends, but enemy men who will be at the peak of their physical prowess, armed to the teeth, and filled with the rage of killing and plunder and rape. The chivalry or plain common decency that once protected a woman against brawling—or war—is derided as a masculine plot to keep women in subjection. . . .
On Wednesday, the keepers of our national morality inveigh against a priest or a coach who entices a teenage boy into sodomy. On Thursday, the same keepers inveigh against the Boy Scouts, for shying away from scoutmasters who might do the same.
I am not about to take on Esolen, especially since the flip-flops he notices would be hard even for Ethan Coen to script. At the same time, I am a tad sensitive about consistency. One reason is that being a Protestant and belonging to conservative circles appears to be contradictory. Another is that practically every post the Baylys or Rabbi Bret writes in derision of 2k contains a huff about how inconsistent 2kers are who oppose homosexuality in the church but not in the public square.
At the same time, I wonder what the advocates of consistency make of the consequences of their quest (or if they notice that Roman Catholics and neo-Calvinists, both forged in the fires of the French Revolution, pursue the same end of a society rooted in Christian convictions — as opposed to the other kind [read secular]). The way I figure, consistency between faith and politics or church and the public square lands you in one of two places. The first makes society Christian (as in theonomy) and leaves no room for the un-Christian (read Jew, Protestant or Roman Catholic, Mormon, Muslim). Here society must conform to God’s law, a demand that is seriously at odds with the United States’ founding as well as the experience of Jesus and the apostles. The second makes Christianity conform to society (as in liberal Christianity) and regards non-Christians as Christian as long as they conform to Christian behavior. Both places feature the Christian moral code as essential to Christianity, though the theonomic morality is more tough minded than the liberal Christian (think adultery as a capital offense). Another difference is that the theonomist may actually acknowledge that a member of a Christian society needs to be regenerate to have any chance of observing God’s law. The liberal Christian generally conceives of human nature as sufficiently good to comply with the demands of biblical or ecclesiastical standards.
Since most moderns don’t want to exclude people from their societies (with the exception of undocumented aliens), theonomy is a tough sell. But the liberal Christian response is so common that even the pope can sound like he is giving into it.
The takeaway here is that the gospel cannot be applied “consistently” to society. Grace, mercy, and forgiveness are not the goals that motivate foreign or domestic policy (though the Amish may be giving it a run). Now, of course, someone may want to say that grace, mercy, and forgiveness are not of the essence of Christianity. Instead, the law is, and so making a society conform to Christian law is how we arrive at a Christian society. The problem with that logic, aside from Protestantism and all that material-principle-of-the-Reformation-business, is that it completely ignores what happened to the Israelites where the law did not lead to human “flourishing” but to human diaspora.
The other takeaway is that morality does exist without Christianity. We used to call this civic as opposed to spiritual (or true) goodness. Whatever the reasons for such goodness, it exists, whether in Sweden or at a street corner where a tatted and severely pierced twenty-something waits for a light to signal he can cross the street. Calvinists generally want to encourage the civic virtues for the sake of social order and the safety of the church. But the orthodox ones have always been careful to distinguish civic from Christian virtue.
Works done by unregenerate men, although for the matter of them they may be things which God commands; and of good use both to themselves and others: yet, because they proceed not from an heart purified by faith; nor are done in a right manner, according to the Word; nor to a right end, the glory of God, they are therefore sinful, and cannot please God, or make a man meet to receive grace from God: and yet, their neglect of them is more sinful and displeasing unto God. (WCF 16.7)
Without that distinction you lose the fall, regeneration, salvation, and the third-use of the law (for starters). So the next time someone objects to the inconsistencies of 2k advocates, say “bless those 2kers for their gospel inconsistency.”
Old Life 
Hmmmm…I say so what to a lot of his “contradictory values.” The WWII-era Russian military made extensive use of women in combat roles, from fighter pilots to snipers to tank crew members. Since we’ve been more or less drifting toward that same Marxist/fascist ideal since the Roosevelt administration (recently accelerated) it should all seem perfectly normal.
LikeLike
Women in combat has a long history of being supported by liberals in theory but a disaster in practice. Men aren’t genetically programmed to conquer mountains or defend bridges. Men are genetically programmed to be extremely concerned about the welfare of breeding females. Any female of breeding age they are regularly exposed to and not related to their DNA is going to consider a breeding female. The IDF which has a ton of combat experience and a society at least as dedicated to sexual equality than ours has found this a complex balancing act and not a simple issue.
Theoretically we should be seeing more problems than we have been with women being in combat. It may because of our sophisticated weapons and the growing asymmetry of all of our wars since WWII that this just doesn’t matter as much anymore. That the types of combat we have rarely are the types of combat that aren’t going to work well with a mixed force. That seems to be the case, the data so far on the USA makes it hard to justify worries mixed units have been a big advantage.
LikeLike
CD, welcome back.
I’ll agree with your skepticism, though not your method of reducing the complexity of human beings into breeders subject to the sovereign gene.
You talk about not seeing many problems. I believe the problems – unreported sexual assaults and pregnancies within our own military – are numerous, but I’m going to go out on a limb and say our Commander in Chief does not want that kind of thing publicized. Then – duh, women just aren’t as strong as men in battle. That’s not to say some can’t be highly competent performing other functions for the military.
LikeLike
I’ve been hearing and reading news stories about the military having very serious problems with female soldiers being assaulted and with under reporting of assault. From guys I’ve know through school and work I don’t find this at all surprising at all, although unfortunate. I’ve worked with guys who think every woman they see wants to go to bed with them. I think under high stress circumstances like combat the problems may be even worse. I know I’d never want my daughters to join the military, even if they weren’t going to be in combat. Then in combat soldiers don’t respect enemy males, so why would they respect women who represent the enemy?
LikeLike
Losing the “3rd use of the law” is a blessing.
“Since Christ is the end of the law for all those who have faith.”
We already know what to do (the law is written upon our hearts).
We just flat out refuse to do it, so much of the time. And when we do do it. More than likely our motives are shot to hell.
LikeLike
M&M, first you’re policing Sean and now you’re welcoming CDH. Who died and made this your blog? (think sarcasm)
LikeLike
DGH, it’s your bar. I’m just talking to whomever sits down next to me. Although, yeah, I might shout across the bar at Sean to intercept him just moments before he moons somebody.
LikeLike
MM, I thought you were wearing a back brace this whole time, I didn’t realize that was just how you walked. You might wanna have a doctor remove that for you, that’s gotta chafe. (think, I just really mean it)
LikeLike
I can’t crack that code, Sean, though I highly suspect I should be offended.
But, anyway, everyone should know I have invited you to blog on RC over at my place but nooo, it’s like you’re U2 being invited to play at Joe’s Bar and Grill in Perry, Iowa.
(This would be an opportunity for folks to pressure Sean into doing said blogging.)
LikeLike
See that’s how it is with you MM, it’s always a hermenuetic of suspicion. Where’s the criss-crossity charity?
I appreciate the offer but I’m just a dude, and that sounds a lot like work.
LikeLike
Eh, it’s of little consequence anyway, Sean. I figure I earn insults from time to time. What do they say, “I wouldn’t join any club that would take me”?
OK, back to the regularly scheduled programming
LikeLike
M&M, send Sean a David Robinson jersey and the relationship will be redeemed.
LikeLike
Sez JC:
<blockquote.The writings of Solomon differ much from those of David; while the former was intent on forming the outward man and teaching the precepts of civil life, the latter spoke continually of the spiritual worship of God, peace of conscience, God’s mercy and gratuitous promise of salvation.
LikeLike
Actually, I’m pretty sure JC never said “blockquote”. That would be quite anachronistic.
LikeLike