Skip to main content

Posts

Hispanidad

HISPANIDAD by Frederick D. Wilhelmsen This year we celebrate the discovery of America by Christopher Columbus. Five hundred years have passed since he planted the cross of Christ, the cross of Burgundy and the colors of Castile on the sands of La Española. I regret that time does not permit me to dwell on this remarkable man, so maligned today by a secular press too cheap to understand his grandeur. On a personal note, I am an amateur sailor who has had the honor of sailing twice in square-rigged vessels, and I have enjoyed following Columbus' amazing first voyage to the New World through the pages of Admiral Morrison and others. But here, at least in this lecture, we are not looking at the man, but at the adventure in history that he carried forward: Hispanidad. Of all the nations of Europe from which we inherit our civilization, Spain alone has been defined by its adherence to the Catholic Faith and thus to the Royal Sovereignty of Christ, the only Sovereign to whom the name itse...
Post a Comment
Read more
Recent posts

The critique of Leo Strauss by traditionalist Catholic philosopher Frederick D. Wilhelmsen regarding religion—frequently contextualized around Strauss's instrumentalization of civil or "Vergilian" religion—centers on the fundamental tension between reason and revelation

The critique of Leo Strauss by traditionalist Catholic philosopher Frederick D. Wilhelmsen regarding religion—frequently contextualized around Strauss's instrumentalization of civil or "Vergilian" religion— centers on the fundamental tension between reason and revelation . Wilhelmsen’s arguments are primarily developed in his landmark work, Christianity and Political Philosophy (1978) . [ 1 , 2 ] 1. The Accusation of "Latin Averroism" Wilhelmsen famously characterizes Strauss as a "Latin Averroist" . In medieval philosophy, Latin Averroism was associated with the "double-truth" theory—the idea that something could be true in philosophy while its opposite could be true in theology. Wilhelmsen argues that Strauss views reason (philosophy) and revelation (religion) as absolutely irreconcilable and incapable of synthesis . Because Strauss believes a genuine philosopher can never truly submit to a revealed faith, he treats religion and philosop...
Post a Comment
Read more

Strauss believed that modern Western thought had run aground because it assumed that scientific advancement and enlightenment must naturally result in atheism and relativism. By returning to the medieval Islamic-Jewish tradition, Strauss found a "golden mean." These Arabic sources demonstrated to Strauss that reason and revelation do not need to destroy one another. Instead, they can co-exist within a well-ordered society where philosophy remains a private quest for the few, and religious law governs the political life of the many.

The medieval Islamic philosophers ( falāsifa ) fundamentally shaped Leo Strauss’s political thought , providing him with a framework to critique modern secularism and recover ancient philosophy . While conventional scholarship often viewed thinkers like al-Fārābī, Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā), and Averroes (Ibn Rushd) through a metaphysical or Neoplatonic lens, Strauss argued that their core contributions were deeply political and Platonic . [ 1 , 2 , 3 ] He discovered in Islamic philosophy a unique reconciliation of reason and revelation that served as his gateway to understanding both the Jewish philosopher Maimonides and Plato himself. [ 1 , 2 ] 1. The Theological-Political Problem: Law vs. Theology Strauss contended that Islam, unlike Christianity, presents itself primarily as Divine Law ( Sharia or nomos ) rather than dogmatic theology. Because Islamic philosophy operated within a framework of legal revelation, medieval Muslim thinkers turned to Plato’s political philosophy (specific...
Post a Comment
Read more

Although it is understandable that Janowski should dwell upon presently hot issues such as transgenderism, it might be more helpful to ask how yesteryear’s initial conservative ranting against affirmative action or gay “marriage” has long since given way to such innovations being embraced in the pages of William F. Buckley’s National Review. That is, rather than simply highlight America’s decline, we must consider how she reached such a condition. If we believe American discourse is suffocating under an “unconditional commitment to equality,” surely it behooves us to scrutinize the American record and ask some hard questions. Can Antifa and the “woke” set point to any precedents for their monist religion, for their assumption that Equality automatically and absolutely trumps not only the Constitution and rule of law, but also friendship, loyalty, and family ties? Can we ourselves identify particular events, figures, and movements which led to the enshrining of the claim that America is not a patria in the traditional sense, but is instead an ideological regime based upon the proposition that all men are created equal? Are those of us who would challenge conventional wisdom permitted to dispute the conventional interpretation of such precedents, events, figures, and movements? Unless and until he addresses such riddles, Dr. Janowski’s erudite analysis will remain less dissident than it could be.

https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2021/12/homo-americanus-zbigniew-janowski-jerry-salyer.html The Rise of Totalitarian Democracy in America By Jerry Salyer | December 12th, 2021 | Categories: American Republic , Books , Equality With the publication of “Homo Americanus,” author Zbigniew Janowski has tentatively entered the dissidents’ camp, and does so by following in the footsteps of Southern agrarian professor Mel Bradford, who warned us several decades ago about “the heresy of Equality.” Homo Americanus: The Rise of Totalitarian Democracy in America , by Zbigniew Janowski (255 pages, St Augustine’s Press, 2021) For some years now I have taken a keen interest in the work of dissident rightists, from old-school Chronicles paleoconservatives, to European identitarians, to Catholic traditionalists. While these and the numerous other dissident groups I could name hardly represent a unified school of thought, and would no doubt disagree with one another regarding many important ques...
Post a Comment
Read more