There comes a time – not very often, but once or twice in every epoch – when a man emerges upon the scene so bold, so courageous, so full of God’s might that mere others can only stand back and gape at him in wonder.
Such was Abraham the herdsman.
Such was Charles Martel, duke and prince of the Franks.
Such was Lieutenant General Thomas Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson.
Such is Marc Daniels.
^Uhhh….who?
Oh, come now! Do you mean to tell me that you, who either revel in your testosterone levels or swoon over those men who do, have never heard of this swaggering chunk of Dude, extra rare?? He must be one to ride the river with, given this hearty endorsement:
Y’all want to see a REAL man? A man’s man? Check this out. All the big talkers about manliness and masculinity, all puffing chests at all the effeminacy out there these days—listen up, pay attention. Here’s a real manly man. This is biblical manhood.
However…as this rave review comes from the keyboard of the decidedly un-rugged Joel McDurmon, perhaps a little skepticism might be in order. And sure enough, it turns out Mr. Daniels’s claim to greatness was to dance a ballet in front of tens of….well, tens of people at his little girl’s dress rehearsal, that she might not be afraid to do so in front of an audience. I guess you’ll forgive me if I don’t perceive this feat of derring-do aspiring to the heights of an Arthurian quest or a Cortezian advance against a horde of Aztec cannibals.
Now, let’s be fair and give Mr. Daniels his due. As a black man resident in Bermuda, it is very commendable that he is involved in his daughter’s life at all, let alone at this level of dedication. It is also touching to see a husband take on the proper duties of the wife when she is so obviously indisposed…..right??? Still, this hardly qualifies him for membership in the warrior caste. Had Lee adopted a general strategy of interpretive dance to touch the hearts of the Union army, I’m well assured Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville would have become outposts of blue.
This, however, was merely the opening salvo in a frontal attack – or maybe dorsal would be more appropriate? – launched by McDurr, Inc. against the entire biblical conception of manhood, masquerading as a mere campaign against ‘patriarchy’ to make it appear more moderate to the credulous, of which there is a plethora in the Church in these dying days of the Reformation. As Paul became as a Jew unto the Jews to gain the Jews unto Christ’s camp, so McDurr has become as a feminist unto the feminists to gain the feminists unto American Vision’s camp. This is what comes of letting your inner rage over being laughed at for constantly wearing your effeminate cargo shorts to church services make your managerial decisions for you.
And so we witness such base and petty snipings as AV commissioning a hideous Australian shrew to contribute a piece on how the Crusaders were losers because they had a tough slog through the Middle East despite their ‘macho’ posturings, and anyone who posts a social media avatar in their honor is similarly misguided, and probably a closeted homosexual to boot. We witness McDurr responding to Doug Wilson’s rather tepid critique of his new obsessive bugaboo (talk about the World Flyweight Championship!) with a bitchy rebuttal about the ‘well-known’ sodomite subcultures thriving in the manly worlds of lumberjacking and long-haul trucking. (How’d you come by this esoteric knowledge, Joel? Hands-on research?) Left unsaid is that his right to paint his toenails during his bi-weekly pedicure and to daub his numerous tats with aloe-scented moisturizer is entirely in accord with his special blend of antinomian anarcho-libertarianism. But the most stunning proclamation of all – and the likely impetus for this anti-Christ campaign to begin with – comes from McDurr’s partner in slime, Bojidar “the Turks shoulda kept Bulgaria” Marinov. Let’s read what he boldly avers, in his own words – bereft of his thick, alien Kissinger-like accent, alas:
Yes, this is your ‘mainstream’ Reformed orthodoxy anymore, gang. As perpetrated by a fifth-column Slav who imagines the Frankfurt School and Leon Trotsky to be whimsical right-wing myths and thus feels free to gleefully impugn our forebears as advocates of buggery to maintain their ‘privileged’ positions. Oh, yes: you also have no possible counter-argument to make, because ‘Rushdoony says’. Isn’t that nice? When will your church be hosting him as a guest speaker? Be sure to bring the children!
I shouldn’t be so judgmental, though. After all, I’m accusing a brother in the faith of some kind of sinister agenda. I should just take McDurr at face value and accept that he merely wants to call out the extra-biblical notion of wifely subservience to the husband, which many a slack-jawed yokel has used as a justification to sit on his ass all day while she fetches him beer and waves the flies away from his face with a gigantic palm frond fan, correct? This is about correcting a mere injustice or two, not fundamentally undermining doctrine for revolutionary purposes, innit? Well, that’s not how McDurr’s favorite theologian R.L. Dabney saw things. From his essay ‘Women’s Rights Women’:
…the unsexed politicating woman can never inspire in man the true affection on which marriage should be founded. Men will doubtless be still sensual; but it is simply impossible that they can desire them for the pure and sacred sphere of the wife. Let every woman ask herself: will she choose for the lord of her affections an unsexed effeminate man? No more can man be drawn to the masculine woman. The mutual attraction of the two complementary halves is gone forever. The abolition of marriage would follow again by another cause. The divergent interests and the rival independence of the two equal wills would be irreconcilable with domestic government, or union, or peace. Shall the children of this monstrous no-union be held responsible to two variant coördinate and supreme wills at once? Heaven pity the children! Shall the two parties to this perpetual co-partnership have neither the power to secure the performance of the mutual duties nor to dissolve it? It is a self-contradiction, an impossible absurdity. Such a co-partnership of equals with independent interests must be separable at will, as all other such co-partnerships are. The only relation between the sexes which will remain will be cohabitation continuing so long as the convenience or caprice of both parties may suggest; and this, with most, will amount to a vagrant concubinage.
Whether Calvinism’s soft feminists like it or not, biblical marriage is established on a hierarchical basis, and of a necessity that codifies patriarchy – unless we are prepared to consign the likes of Romans 7:2 (‘For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth’) and Ephesians 5:23 (‘For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body’) to the scrap heap of apocrypha – at which point we all might as well identify as a bunch of damned Quakers, which no doubt would suit McDurr’s purposes very well. As Dabney points out above, a marriage founded on leveling principles would amount to little more than a not especially friendly joint venture, to be abandoned like a junk bond at the first hiccup to come down the pike. And this wicked pragmatism will be entirely absorbed by the children of this union of soviets and shape their worldview and their future accordingly. Pine away for the opposite ideal all the live-long day, McDurr! It’ll come to about the same end as every other facet of your ill-conceived utopian campaign in favor of universal abolitionism.
But let’s grant you that the forces of Jacobin revolution are on your side – for they most certainly are – and your awesome non-subservient state of social affairs is a total and irrevocable reality. Man has finally subdued Adam’s crypto-fascist reactionary ways. What about Eve’s rebellious spirit? Does it get a free pass? It must, considering you never once address it in any of your polemics. That being the case, we can soon look forward to being dominated by a matriarchy – and if you want to know what that’s like, Reformation scholar Diarmaid MacCulloch provides us with an inspiring example of what happened when some women fell under the ecstasies of ‘liberation’ in northeastern Switzerland in 1524:
Magdalene Muller applied the words of Christ in St John’s Gospel, ‘the way, the truth, and the life’, to herself, while one of her companions Frena Bumenin, a servant girl from Appenzell, so identified herself with God that she proclaimed herself the New Messiah and gathered disciples. Bumenin’s excitement turned to self-destructive delusion, and she became convinced that she was going to bear the Antichrist…a new horror emerged when the women ostentatiously began offering themselves sexually to the men in their devotional circle. ‘Why do you judge?’ they replied to the appalled townsfolks’ rebukes. ‘We have passed through death. What we now do is against our will in the spirit.'[1. Diarmaid MacCulloch, The Reformation: A History, Penguin Books, 2003, pg. 168.] [i.e. ‘it’s not our fault, but someone else’s!’ – CM)
Oh, but there I go being judgmental again. Guru Bojidar Marinov has admitted to being under the sway of an Israeli prophetess before, and I’m sure she knows for sure these things could never be again.
Can patriarchal societies degenerate into such imbroglios of orgiastic self-worship? If divorced from God’s precepts, certainly. Will matriarchal societies degenerate into such? Equally certainly, as they are divorced from God’s precepts at their inception. Ergo, the McDurr-Marinov axis proves itself once again to be operating entirely in the spirit of Antichrist, and both of its loci are heathens. Period.
Materialistic heathens, to boot. For as in every other venture American Vision reaches its grasping claws toward, the anti-patriarchy kick is designed to pander to a specific base in order to garner some more shekels, that the lights in McDurr’s comfy office might stay on another week. A certain malcontent pointed out a while ago some of the new faces in alienism, and (despite the noticeable tattoos and piercings on some of them) all could be categorized under that eloquent demographic descriptor ‘soy-boys’. These are eunuchs who are either confirmed bachelors or who allow their wives to make all the household decisions while they don false beards and black flat caps and LARP at being Zwingli all day. What better way to appeal to the sensitivities of these ‘nice guys’ than by assuring them their abysmal failure in headship is in no wise inexcusable negligence on their part, but rather enlightened leadership towards the New Matrimonial Way? And just like orphaned kittens, they’re lapping up this milksop as though their lives depended on it. They are also carrying the torch forward in exceptionally creepy tandem. Here are some representative screenshots, all in lockstep like the North Korean army on manoeuvres:
But all work and no play makes Che a dull boy, so hopefully McDurr kicks back after his onerous virtue-signalling soon and gets caught up on his movie-watching. Here’s a suggestion for you, my wounded-in-the-stones friend: if you take a winter break, the Hallmark Channel has announced it is releasing no less than thirty-four new holiday-themed movies towards the end of this year. There’s an estrogen-laden binge watch that should be right up your alley. Light up a menthol-flavored cigar, nustle in your Snuggie, and enjoy!
The anthill has been thoroughly agitated. They will pick the bones clean on the carcass of what passes for Western Christian masculinity, and then hopefully devour each other as their voracious appetites are nowhere near satisfied.
| Tweet |
|
|
|
