[Amy Welborn 03/24 05:06 PM]Rod writes of the importance of traditional forms of faith as a basis for, well, traditionalism - another way of describing the particular form of Crunchy Con-ness we are discussing. What you describe, Rod, over and over, is what amounts to a sacramental sensibility (as you yourself call it) - basically that our beliefs manifest themselves in what we do in the world, and conversely, what we do in the world can deepen our experience of the transcendent.
But as I was mulling over this and the conversations of the past month, a thought came to me. The sensibility that Rod is describing, whatever you want to call it, is vital to conservatism..and any other ideology or institution. Why? Because it is a constant reminder of what lasts and what doesn't.
That brings us to a knotty, perhaps paradoxical place
- a subgenre of an ideology focused on drawing meaning from how we live draws its power, ultimately, from being a reminder that the way we live will not be around forever.
What the Crunchy Con manifesto brings to the debate, I think, is skepticism about the powers and principalities. This is ironic, as I said, because Crunchy Con-ness is anything but abstract and ethereal. It is about the earth, other creatures and our relationship to them. But the point is that Crunchy Con-ness, as a reflection of a religious sensibility, ultimately values the creatures and the stuff and the relationship because they point, not to themselves, but to what lasts. Or, if I may be so bold, to Who lasts.
That's a useful, if sometimes irritating and discomfiting reminder, I think.
