I thought some statements Zippy Catholic made against the neoreactionaries on a comment thread here could be challenged fairly easily. His original statements are in bold and are followed by my responses:
1. “[Neoreactionaries] don’t mean someone who is living off of the tattered remains of Christian patrimony while not being a believing Christian.”
[On the contrary:] This is almost exactly what Moldbug thinks; for him, the essential elements of the Puritan patrimony have carried over, except the elements aren’t tattered–they’ve never been stronger.
2. “NRx is so committed to its postmodern nominalism that Christian neoreactionaries literally blaspheme the name of Christ…”
“Christianity” is not the name of Christ. Anyone who is capable of understanding Moldbug knows he uses the term to say he thinks modern day Progressives are intellectual heirs of a specific type of Christian sectarianism.
3. “NRx expects to be able to resist cultural forces better than a millennia old notoriously reactionary institution.”
Similarly, “Christianity” is not the Catholic Church. No one is required to use the term to connote the “true beliefs and correct practices of the Christian faith.” It can be used to refer to the set of communities (either in whole or in part) who claim to follow the precepts of Jesus Christ, a very mixed bag indeed.
Jim would like to bring back the old Anglican system, which he thinks–with a few improvements–would make the most effective safeguard against progressivism, which he clearly understands to be evil. In this, he is not far from the Kingdom of God.
Jim wrongly thinks that biblical fundamentalism is the strength of true Christianity. Again, he is close to the Kingdom here because he senses that plenary inspiration is essential.
What Jim can’t see (because he lacks faith) is that the true Christian Religion, embodied by the Catholic Church will be preserved because of the divine promises and the sacraments. He thinks everything depends on the present [apparent] milquetoast leadership of the church.
It doesn’t. The novus ordo mass, despite its accidental deficiencies is more than enough to overcome the world.
4. “It is not considered acceptable for NRx to be a Christian movement or to develop into a Christian movement.”
It did not begin as a Christian movement. Why don’t we take a look at a list of the essential insights of NRx and then decide whether it’s compatible with the faith or not?