A voluntary subjection

      "What is being referred to is that subjection about which the divine apostle spoke, when the Son subjects to the Father those who freely accept subjection [1 Cor 15:28].  This subjection will be voluntary, and through it the last enemy, death, will be destroyed.  That which is in our power, our free will, through which the power of corruption entered into us, will surrender voluntarily to God and will have mastery of itself because it had been taught to refrain from willing anything other than what God wills. . . .
     "Do not be disturbed by what I have said.  I have no intention of denying free will.  Rather I am speaking of a firm and steadfast disposition, a willing surrender [(θέσιν . . . τὴν κατὰ φύσιν παγίαν τε καὶ ἀμετάθετον, ἤγουν ἐκχώρησιν γνωμικὴν)], so that from the one from who we have received being [(τὸ εἶναι)] we long to receive being moved [(τὸ κινεῖσθαι)] as well."

     St. Maximus the Confessor, Ambiguum 7, trans. Blowers & Wilken (On the cosmic mystery of Jesus Christ:  selected writings from St Maximus the Confessor, trans. Paul M. Blowers and Robert Louis Wilkin, Popular patristics series 25 (Crestwood, NY:  St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2003), 51-52).  Greek from PG 91, col. 1076B.

"Time, in which we have found nothing to offer up to God, is lost for eternity"

      "Every offering has value only insofar as one snatches it away from one's own benefit and dedicates it to God through this self-conquest. One loves and gives precisely because one loves, and because one considers what is given as a good, as a treasure. Love of creatures must be subordinated to the love of God, whom one is pledged to love above all things.
     "Time, in which we have found nothing to offer up to God, is lost for eternity. If it is only the duties of our vocation that we fulfill with dedication to the will of God; if it is the sweat of our faces that, in resignation, we wipe from our brow without murmuring; if it is suffering, temptations, difficulties with our fellowmen—everything we can present to God as an offering and can, through them, become like Jesus his Son. Where the sacrifice is great and manifold, there, in the same proportion, is the hope of glory more deeply and more securely grounded in the heart of him who makes it."

     St. Francis Xavier Seelos (1819-1867), Letter, as translated for the Liturgy of the hours, 5 October, Archives of the Redemptorists of the Baltimore Province, (variously (?) translated and) published now, presumably, in Sincerely, Seelos:  the collected letters of Blessed Francis Xavier Seelos, ed., trans., and introduced Carl Hoegerl, C.Ss.R. (New Orleans:  Seelos Center, 2008).

Aquinas in the first person

"Therefore, with trust in divine mercy, pursuing the task of a wise man, although this surpasses our own powers, our intention is to clarify, in our own small way, the truth which the Catholic faith professes, eliminating contrary errors.  [At this point St. Thomas speaks, as he very rarely does, in the first person:]  I do this so that I may make my own the words of Hilary:  I am mindful that I owe this to God as the greatest task of my life, that my every word and thought may speak of him."

"Assumpta igitur ex divina pietate fiducia sapientis officium prosequendi, quamvis proprias vires excedat, propositum nostrae intentionis est veritatem quam fides Catholica profitetur, pro nostro modulo manifestare, errores eliminando contrarios: ut enim verbis Hilarii utar, ego hoc vel praecipuum vitae meae officium debere me Deo conscius sum, ut eum omnis sermo meus et sensus loquatur."

     St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa contra Gentiles I.2[.2], as translated Fr. Simon Francis Gaine, O.P., "Introduction to the life and work of St. Thomas Aquinas," Angelicum Thomistic Institute 2022 Student Summer Seminar "Aquinas, Philosophy, & Contemporary Science," 3-6 July 2022, at c. 22:13.  The Latin from here, where the Shapcote (FEDP) translation (with my emendations) appears: 

"Therefore, assuming the office of the wise man with confidence from God’s loving kindness, although it surpasses our own powers, the purpose we have in view is, in our own weak way, to declare the truth which the Catholic faith professes, while weeding out contrary errors; for, in the words of Hilary [(for, in order that I might make my own the words of Hilary)], I acknowledge that I owe my life’s chief occupation to God [(I am conscious of this, that I owe the chief office of my life to God)], so that every word and every thought of mine may speak of him [(On the Trinity 1, 37 =PL 10, col. 48)]."

Trans. Pegis:

"And so, in the name of the divine Mercy, I have the confidence to embark upon the work of a wise man, even though this may surpass my powers, and I have set myself the task of making known, as far as my limited powers will allow, the truth that the Catholic faith professes, and of setting aside the errors that are opposed to it.  To use the words of Hilary:  'I am aware that I owe this to God as the chief duty of my life, that my every word and sense may speak of Him.'"

Gratia non tollit naturam, sed perficit

"Love alone, properly speaking, proves that the human person is in the image of the Creator, by making his self-determination submit to reason, not bending reason under it, and [by] persuading the inclination to follow nature and not in any way to be at variance with the logos of nature.  In this way we are all, as it were, one nature, so that we are able to have one inclination and one will with God and with one another, not having any discord with God or one another, whenever by the law of grace, through which by our inclination the law of nature is renewed [(whenever by the law of grace, through which we deliberately renew the law of nature)], we choose what is ultimate."

Αὔτη μόνη, κυρίως εἰπεῖν, κατ' εἰκόνα τοῦ Κτίσαντος τὸν ἄνθρωπον ὄντα παρίστησι, τῷ μὲν λόγῳ σοφῶς τὸ ἐφ' ἡμῖν ὑποτάσσουσα· τούτῳ δὲ τὸν λόγον οὐχ ὑποκλίνουσα· καὶ πείθουσα τὴν γνώμην κατὰ τὴν φύσιν πορεύεσθαι, μηδαμῶς πρὸς τὸν λόγον τῆς φύσεως στασιάζουσαν· καθ' ὃν ἄπαντες ὥσπερ μίαν φύσιν, οὕτω δὲ καὶ μίαν γνώμην καὶ θέλημα ἓν, θεῷ καὶ ἀλλήλοις ἔχειν δυνάμεθα, οὐδεμίαν πρὸς θεὸν καὶ ἀλλήλους διάστασιν ἔχοντες, ὅτ' ἂν τῷ νόμῳ τῆς χάριτος, δι' οὗ τὸν νόμον τῆς φύσεως γνωμικῶς ἀνακαινίζομεν, στοικεῖον προαιρούμεθα.

     Maximus the Confessor, Letter to John the Cubicularius On charity dated c. 626, trans. Louth and quoted in the Introduction to On the cosmic mystery of Jesus Christ:  selected writings on St. Maximus the Confessor, trans. Paul M. Blowers and Robert Louis Wilken, Popular patristics series 25 (Crestwood, NY:  St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2003), 43, underscoring mine.  The Greek should be checked for errors-in-transcription against a more crisply printed copy of PG 91, col. 396C-D.  On ἀνακαινίζω see Heb 6:4 on renewal again to repentance, but also ἀνακαινόω at 2 Cor 4:16 and Col 3:10 (there are a few occurrences in the Septuagint as well (e.g. Ps 102 (103):5 and 103 (104):30)).

Hoisted on her own petard?

     "In these terms, the disenchantment of the world is a distinctly Protestant phenomenon.  So says [Peter] Berger:  'The Protestant believer no longer lives in a world ongoingly penetrated by sacred beings and forces' but in a world 'bereft of numinosity.'  By relegating religion from the public sphere of transcendental truths to the private one of voluntary associations, this process of disenchantment transformed religion into a private choice.  What this meant practically speaking was that religion was no longer 'second nature' and part of man's assumed culture.  Rather, it became just another option:  something to choose, or not.  The necessity of religious choice, then, meant that 'the pluralistic situation is, above all, a market situation.'
     "Berger’s is a stunning claim, and it’s worth pausing to consider its implications.  The process of [disenchantment or] secularization transforms religious institutions into what he calls 'marketing agencies' and religious traditions into 'consumer commodities.' . . .  Evacuated of a central teaching office or a shared liturgy, with a phenomenology void of the supernatural, evangelicalism is a religious consciousness that needed to market itself to private individuals who were no longer constrained to participate in religious activities.
     "Evangelicalism, therefore, has adopted private values that would appeal to the widest possible audience.  These values, however, have shifted historically. . . .  The values that are often associated with evangelicalism were not produced by evangelicals out of whole cloth; rather, they presented the best way to market a religion with any hope of surviving. . . . .
     "Although Du Mez’s [Jesus and John Wayne:  how white evangelicals corrupted a faith and fractured a nation] reads as an apt description and indictment of [Evangelicalisms B’s] twists and turns, the private values and cultural norms that were easily marketed in 1990s America are [of course] no longer the ones being marketed today.  A shortcoming of Du Mez’s book is that she does not reflect on whether she, too, has taken part in a process of secularization whereby one’s religious beliefs must square with the concerns of the marketplace and, perhaps unintentionally, has become [herself] just another participant in the process of secularization Peter Berger describes.  Seen from this perspective, Jesus and John Wayne is an example of how quickly values change, and the alacrity with which purveyors of evangelical religion rush to market themselves accordingly.  They did not find the 'God, faith, and family' values problematic in the days of Evangelicalism B because such values weren’t problematic during that cultural period.  Du Mez identifies those religious artifacts marketed most avidly to evangelicals during Evangelicalism B, when religious identity reached the apogee of its mass-market appeal.  But she analyzes them through the lens of what I’m calling Evangelicalism C, the landscape we currently inhabit. . . .
     "When it comes to matters of gender, sexuality, and race, . . . Evangelicalism C stands apart from Evangelicalisms A and B.  Its emerging class of influencers is more affirming of sexual expression, more sensitive to matters of social justice, and at times acutely critical of the stands aging generations of evangelicals have taken on both.  Still, there remains a striking continuity that can be traced across the decades, a parade of salesmanship built on a view of the religious life, conceived through the lens of the home and consumer identities.  As Peter Berger writes, 'A sky empty of angels becomes open to the intervention of the astronomer and, eventually, of the astronaut.'  We are in a moment when sexuality, gender, and race have become the astronauts of the modern religious sphere. . . .
     "Many influencers and leaders prominent in the world of Evangelicalism C tend to reject the 'evangelical' label.  But in seeking to distance themselves from a previous movement and casting around for a new religious identity that better squares with their social concerns—one that correlates broadly with the culture of the day—such religious figures bear an uncanny, if unintended resemblance to their evangelical predecessors.  As inheritors of an increasingly secular religious landscape, they have been left with little choice than to market their religious beliefs and values to whoever will buy them.  The best way to do this is to adopt the preferences, values, and strategies of the surrounding culture.
     ". . . It is not simply that the movement resists easy definition.  It is, rather, that evangelicalism has been so buffeted by the waves of consumer trends, been so malleable and revisable for every cultural moment, that the movement cannot be meaningfully distinguished from a broader American religiosity.  The disturbing conclusion might just be that evangelicalism does not exist."

     Kirsten Sanders, "The evangelical question in the history of American religion," The hedgehog review:  critical reflections on contemporary culture 24, no. 2 (Summer 2022):  59-60, 62-65 (56-65), underscoring mine.  There are some problems with this approach, for there have been profoundly counter-cultural evangelicals in every age of the movement, beginning well before 1904 and what Sanders calls Evangelicalism A.  And there have been and are (say) Catholics (Protestant Catholics) desperate to cut Catholicism down to the size of this very same Procrustean bed.  But Sanders does, in my view, a nice job of taking the likes of Du Mez (for I have not yet read Du Mez herself) to task for being guilty of the very same sorts of conformism for which they excoriate their predecessors.

Roots of the Great Awokening in the supposed anti-intellectualism of the Great Awakening?

Americas quarterly

      "For all of its supposed virtues, the Puritan clergy proved itself pusillanimous before the onslaught of the Great Awakening—the 'first moment of militant success' for American anti-intellectualism.  Hofstadter quotes Timothy Cutler, 'a rather prejudiced Anglican witness' to the ranting of a barnstorming preacher:

[Then] came one Tennent—a monster! impudent and noisy—and told them all they were damned, damned, damned!  This charmed them; and in the most dreadful winter I ever saw, people wallowed in snow, night and day, for the benefit of his beastly braying.

The contemporary inheritors of the legacy of the Puritan clergy—old-guard Ivy League-educated professors and Beltway courtiers—have put up even less of a fight for their brand of liberalism against insurgent moral movements emanating from the university.  The new dispensation ascendant in American political culture has sometimes been tagged with an epithet derived from the religious revival of the eighteenth century:  the 'Great Awokening.'  But today’s movement has no preachers, only consultants—the Elmer Gantrys de nos jours—of the likes of Robin D’Angelo, author of White Fragility.  Americans have clearly not changed much in the interim.  Many continue to take a slightly perverse enjoyment in being told they are damned or—through a kind of secularization of religious categories Hofstadter was always so perspicacious in tracking—racist."

     Nick Burns, “The tragedy of the American political tradition,” The hedgehog review:  critical reflections on contemporary culture 24, no. 2 (Summer 2022):  52 (46-55).  I am of course well aware of the fact that Hofstadter is today somewhat controversial among professional Americanists (as, indeed, Burns himself soon points out), and that it might well be possible to absolve at least some representatives of the Great Awakening of anti-intellectualism.

A relic of a bygone era

Public Diplomacy Council

"these autocracies[, China and Russia,] are advancing in the methods of coercion, combining newfangled digital surveillance with old-fashioned terror and brutality.  Some of these methods require a strong stomach, but these regimes are convinced that with the proper 'narratives,' they will not have to deploy them, except in certain extreme cases.  This confidence rests firmly on the assumption that the narratives are state of the art, persuasive not as propaganda but as 'truth,' because as the world now understands, there is nothing much out there to challenge their 'leadership in the ideological sphere.'  Even the West, with its sentimental attachment to Reason and the Enlightenment, considers objective truth a relic of that bygone era."

Martha Bayles, "Vladimir and Volodymyr:  a pivotal moment in history," The hedgehog review:  critical reflections on contemporary culture 24, no. 2 (Summer 2022):  44 (38-45).