My thanks to Prosthesis, who caught a significant blunder in my review of Smith’s book on postmodernism below. I quoted Smith summarizing Foucault, and then interacted with that as though it were Smith himself. Mea maxima blunda, and I have corrected the problem. My apologies to all my readers, and particular apologies to Smith for misrepresenting him at that point.
Having said this, I obviously believe that the critique of Smith’s book still stands. I have been interested that the mild consternation this post of mine caused in the blog world has not resulted in anyone (that I have seen) interact with the central argument I was making. Smith is clearly opposed to any kind of Christendom. According to Leithart, this means he is still in the grip of modernity. I think this is dead on. Does postmodernity make our laws? Or does modernity? And who among the pomo-friendly evangelical writers is challenging the super-structure of modernity as represented in our laws? Smith repudiates anything that might start to look like that. Leithart identifies this for what it is.