Caution about the Tragedy and Hope site
While I have enjoyed many resources of T&H, I am now finding it harder to believe all that is purported in the videos and podcasts. And in order to disprove them, I’ve been sidetracked from real study.
For instance, in the most recent podcast, John Taylor Gato accuses Calvin’s “Institutions..” of pernicious elitism. While it is true that Calvin was cozy with the elites in Geneva, it makes sense that he did so because he was trying to get along with them, having been exiled from France. Many of his followers in other areas took his teachings as inspiration to try to overthrow monarchies. (Hugenots in France, followers in Sweden, and many other locations.) Calvin returned to Strasbourg and was relectant to return to Geneva (where his power connections were stronger) when called, but he did so. Ostensively to use his power connections to further the reformation. *
Gato’s interpretation seems to be a biased interpretation of the doctrine of predestination. I disagree with predestination, but it certainly don’t think the doctrine means that (predestined) believers are justified no matter what evil they chose to do in this life.
I believe Calvin would have thought that evil deeds were evidence that the person had not been predestined. (Ignoring his own collusion in the death of the Spanish reformation bishop whose name escapes me right now) “Justification by faith” is a common term in protestant circles even today and does not mean one can do anything they please and deserve to get away with it. It is more about the “price paid” by Christ to justify the sinners obtaining the gift of eternal life, whose salvation would not be justified otherwise..
BTW, I’ve seen videos of Gato when he was quite clear speaking and articulate, but in these podcasts, his words are slurred – he even makes one reference to his excessive fondness for Scotch. One wonders……
I have ordered “Institutions” (trans. Beveridge) from the library and I will try to find any evidence to the contrary. I do not intend to read it all, but will try to find anyplace where this is clearly stated, or where one may logically infer it. But I’m getting tired of these sidetracks and it all makes me wonder if T&H itself is a diversionary tactic. Perhaps not created by the elite, but enjoyed by them in order to occupy those of us who are not obsessed with entertainment, sports and celebrities.
Having argued apologetics before, I know these differences often come down to “my authority is better than yours is” And that is my point. If one has to be a French scholar in order to understand, then one may assert anything if he/she is confident that few French scholars will ever hear it. Nevermind that historically most French scholars disagree.
The same type of arguments are made for Allegro’s writings (On Gnostic Media one of T&H’s partners), in my opinion. One has to be a well educated ancient linguist , knowledgeable in many ancient languages in order to either affirm or refute it. Most scholars refute it.
Since I am not a qualified ancient linguist I can only judge in my own framework of knowledge. Am I to believe these among other illogical assertions?
- mushrooms thriving in the dry arid conditions of the desert, the dung would dry out before it could grow.
- people under Roman authority choosing to die rather than refute their “sacred practice” of mushroom enlightenment, rather than a faith in a better life after death.
- not a shred of Roman (or other) history making reference to it, even though Jews as well as Romans would have loved nothing better than refute/destroy it. The Jews were particularly good at hiding important documents.
- only attested to in artwork, and that confined to relatively few examples.
It will take far more than that to convince me, my friends. I’m more than willing to become a deist if the proper evidence is presented, but thinking Semitic/Christian religious are based on the “enlightenment” from the mushroom? no. Not in the foreseeable future.
I do believe the US is falling victim to the greed and avarice of the wealthy who care little, perhaps even planned, the suffering their actions cause the majority – the world of non-elites. But some of the “revisionist history” notions I’ve read and heard about on T&H, or through this site, of religion and other motivations strain my disbelief in the more conventional explanations. .
In conclusion, I do recommend the site and most of the podcasts. Christian apologists will not be impressed with the sections on the Trivium and logical thinking, but other who are not well versed in logical fallacies and the rhetoric of persuasion will find answers to their nagging suspicions that they are being misled by modern media, pundits and politicians. But I think there are some people recommended by the site who should be examined with a very large grain of salt.
UPDATE: Aug. 4, ’11 I did locate and read Calvin’s chapters about predestination in Institutes and just as I suspected they do NOT indicate any sort of support for an elitist class. I suppose if one really wanted to read it that way one could stretch his words to include that, but any reasonable reading would not indicate that. Calvin was a peculiar fellow and I seriously question much that he proposed. But he was no eugenicist, as Gato claimed. in the T&H video. It concerns me that these types of gross errors are present in the work of the so called “researchers”. It confirms my opinion that I should be following the associates of Dr. Monteith rather than any recommended by T&H.
*source, A History of Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years” Diarmaid MacCulloch
