Rod Dreher was recently interviewed on Andrew Sullivan’s podcast, and when pressed by Sullivan could not give much defense of why traditional Christian sexual morality is good. To Sullivan (and even to me), Rod’s standards sounded like sheer legalism.
Rod realized the inadequacy of his defense, and has been mulling over why he was so dumbstruck. Sunday’s Rod Dreher’s Diary is partly some longish thoughts about the Sullivan podcast débâcle:
Once I surrendered entirely to Christ, in the tradition, the entire question of sex and sexuality became one of: how do you live out this truth? I have not spent much time thinking about why it’s good; I believe that for most Christians who struggle with this, the truth is to be found not in propositional logic, but in their unwilling hearts … the kind of questions that preoccupy the minds of Christians like Andrew Sullivan simply don’t occur to me, and haven’t for a long time. I accept the authority of Scripture and Tradition.
Two years ago, in Hungary on my first fellowship, I became friends with a fellow with whom I shared, after a while, my own struggles in a failed marriage. He is not a Christian, and encouraged me to find a girlfriend. I told him that is out of the question, because I’m a believer, and that I am going to be faithful to my wife, because in so doing, I am being faithful to Christ. That ended that conversation. Thinking about it later, I realized that I had fallen back on spiritual training within Orthodoxy, which teaches us to swat thoughts like that down as soon as they present themselves. The paracosm in which I lived, and do live, has no space for that kind of speculative thought (“I wonder if God would mind so much if I got a girlfriend…”). That would begin the road to rationalization, because it is very, very easy — especially if you are me! — to talk yourself into something you secretly want to do, but know you shouldn’t.
…
To be clear, I’m certainly not saying that one should not explore difficult moral and religious questions! I’m saying that we have to know whether it is right for us — me, or you — to do so, given our own particularities. Nobody faults a reformed alcoholic for not dwelling on when it is permissible to consume booze. Nobody faults an ex-smoker for choosing to stay away from places where she may be tempted to smoke …
Contemporary culture makes it extremely hard to master our thoughts, not only by fragmenting our attention, but also by construing desire as constitutive of the authentic person. Why should it be the case that a man with same-sex attraction who watches gay porn, and then goes out to find an anonymous partner in a bar, is a more authentic human than a man with same-sex attraction who refuses his desire to do so, and instead prays the rosary then goes over to watch Star Wars movies with friends? Doesn’t it make more sense, even from a strictly secular perspective, that the man who can choose to say no to his desires is more authentic, because he is in greater control of his consciousness?
…
[T]he philosophical writer Matthew Crawford points to neuroscience studies showing that when people are compelled to confront a wide variety of choices in daily life, it wears them down mentally and physically. And that wearing-down makes it harder for them to pay attention. Crawford said that in the past, we had “cultural jigs” that made it easier to focus. A “cultural jig,” in his definition, is a constraint imposed by the culture or tradition into which we are embedded, that gives us a pattern to which to conform, for the sake of focusing our attention. A cultural jig is one or a group of ideas and practices that we take on without thinking about them, but that shape our thought and behavior. These are structures of ideas and incentives that form desires and behavior. They can be good or bad, but when they are good, they make it easier for us to choose to be good. The cultural jig closes certain doors to make it easier to move through the open doors that we need to pass through on our pilgrimage.
Rod Dreher (bold and hyperlink added)
I’m so glad to see Rod emerging from the torture of his last year. I’m starting to think I might, once again, buy a forthcoming book even though he has pawed it over in advance in his blog(s).
I’ve been blindsided in debate by a tack I should have foreseen; Rod’s lapse was extra understandable for the reasons he states and because he was going in for a chat with an old friend (whose sexuality comes up a lot, granted).
Tradition is a bulwark against the power of commerce and the dissolving acid of money, and by removing these, all revolutions in the modern period have ended up accelerating the commercial and technological shift towards the Machine.
You can read most of my more impromptu stuff here (cathartic venting) and here (the only social medium I frequent, because people there are quirky, pleasant and real). Both should work in your RSS aggregator, like Feedly or Reeder, should you want to make a habit of it.
Tipsy Teetotaler ن 