|
Just read Daniels’ article and thought it very good. I am reminded of the vast difference between a (Masons-like) deliberately un-pietistic approach toward doing “good” in the world (separating man from motives that intertwine with ages-old religious faith), and genuine charity, which is in part inspired by love of God and the example of Christ, who tolerated those (all of us) who were less than Him, who chose to suffer for us for our benefit out of love, in part to manifest the selfless authenticity of His love for us who were undeserving. This portrait of Rand depicts a person who morally speaking never seems to have moved beyond the predictably self-absorbed world of childhood: Care for those who “deserve” it (i.e., those who do things I like and who think I’m great) and scorn those who don’t contribute to my ego by agreeing with me. |
Feb 15 at 7:57 pm
Scott Johnston comments:
Some conservative pundits seem to be fans of Rand. This would be one way in which I think an authentically Christian (and thus, most human) understanding of life can depart in significant ways from some contemporary commentators who might otherwise seem to be allies.
This is an indication of how important it is for faithful Christians to be present in contemporary politics, as distasteful as it can be at times. Imagine what might happen if the predominant voices in conservative politics were all avid devotees of Rand. Huge problem.