Terminal Degree Curiosity

Dallas home prices

2010-09-28T08:42:00.000-07:00

Dallas Home prices are down 5.7% since the peak before the Financial Crisis. Here is a nice map from Dallas Morning News, showing the finer details of the one-year price changes in the metroplex.

And here is a chart from Calculated Risk, showing the Dallas price declines in relation to the price declines in other metro areas. (Look for Dallas on far right)

Walk away from mortgage - by political party

2010-09-17T07:25:00.000-07:00

Pew Research Center just put out a very interesting report on American's beliefs regarding walking away from a mortgage. People were asked if it is ok to walk away from a mortgage. Something that stood out to me was the Political party difference associated with the answers.

Democrats were more than twice as likely as Republicans (23% vs 11%) to believe it is ok to stop making payments on a mortgage.

Why is that? Any ideas?

Small health insurers stop writing new coverage

2010-09-08T08:07:00.000-07:00

Dallas Morning News reports that small insurers are having trouble meeting the 'medical loss ratio' requirement in the new National health legislation, which requires that 80% of their premiums be paid out for medical services. Some are discontinuing writing certain policies to their customers, since they do not believe they will be able to pay their employees, cover their administrative costs, etc. with just 20% of the premium money.

There are a couple of things interesting about this story.

Is this pressure on private providers really an unintended consequence of the new health legislation?
Insurers are walking away even before the policies interpreting the new law have been crafted. (What the businesses and individuals have to do in response to laws in the US depends on the policies that administrators write, based on the text of the law that is signed by the President) US DHHS has yet to write many of the policies based on the new law, but insurers are already seeing the writing on the wall.

Surprisingly, the Secretary of DHHS Kathleen Sebelius is telling the insurers that they are making a mistake by walking away. "It is premature for insurers to make business decisions about participation in particular markets based on rules that have yet to be published...", said Sebelius. That is rather funny! So the businesses are staring in the face of new laws that go into effect on January 1; law that may make their continued actions illegal (with penalties ranging from fines to jail-time) and the person writing the policies is telling them, 'Don't worry about it! Surely whatever we write is going to be just fine!'
Does she really want businesses to carry on through the rest of this year hoping that in the months between now and January the clear text of the law will be overturned by an administrative policy? Those who do business and provide people with valuable services cannot afford to sit by and run on hope, they have paychecks to meet and services to provide, and when one avenue is shut down for them (private health insurance), they they have to plan ahead to divert their resources into another area that is valuable for their customers.

The article about the particulars is worth reading. Good reporting by DMN!

Prices move faster than traffic in China's gridlock

2010-08-24T09:43:00.000-07:00

(image from 'politics and world')

What a story from China! A 60 mile traffic jam is going on its 10th day now, with drivers moving forward at half-a-mile per day. In an almost universally typical fashion, the local townsfolk who weave between cars with water or noodles, supplying the drivers with precious food and water, are being accused of price-gouging because they dare to sell the goods at higher than a certain previous price.

Think of this 10-day jam on the way home tonight, when you are in traffic for a few minutes!

Moral Hazard is coming home to roost

2010-08-12T07:47:00.000-07:00

What a sad, sad, predictable, sad state of affairs.

I am disgusted to be living in an era when so many people are forging a new 'morality' of walking away from their contractual obligations; and - what's worse - when they are being encouraged to do so. Respect for contracts, property protection, and common decency seem to have been (unintentionally?) sacrificed in an effort to bail out mistakes big and small. Having seen high risk activity (corporate and private) 'rescued' by those taxpayers who have made prudent decisions, is it any wonder that the marginal homeowner is now more likely than ever to think it is OK to simply not re-pay the debt?

I don't know how it is possible to read these quotes from the New York Times without some sense of despair about the morality that has been encouraged by the moral hazard that well-intentioned actions have put in front of the nation's borrowers:

During the great housing boom, homeowners nationwide borrowed a trillion dollars from banks, using the soaring value of their houses as security. Now the money has been spent and struggling borrowers are unable or unwilling to pay it back.

"... the more money you borrowed, the less likely you will have to pay up.

“It rewards immorality, to some extent.”

“Americans seem to believe that anything they can get away with is O.K.”

Many also say that the banks were predatory, or at least indiscriminate, in making loans, and nevertheless were bailed out by the federal government. Finally, they point to their trump card: they say will declare bankruptcy if a settlement is not on favorable terms.

Fewer than 5 percent of these clients said they would continue paying their home equity loan no matter what. ... 85 percent said they would default and worry about the debt only if and when they were forced to.

“It’s come to the point where morality is no longer an issue.”

“I’m kind of banking on there being too many of us for the lenders to pursue,” [a defaulted homeowner] said. “There is strength in numbers.”

(Read the entire article from the NYT here)

Who here really thinks that this is a way to build a great society?

Bonds move stocks and currencies

2010-08-10T12:13:00.000-07:00

Today the Fed announced that (among other things) it will buy Treasuries to help bolster the recovery (read: prevent a recession). This announcement, other things equal, should push up prices of Treasury bonds, push down their yields, push up stock prices, and also move currencies. People will expect that the Treasury yields will fall (or stay low), that return-seekers will be less likely to invest in dollar denominated assets and more in other currencies, leading to sales of dollars and purchases of other currencies, leading to a fall in the value of the dollar.

This analysis is nothing new, of course, but I do enjoy living in today's world of technology where such moves can be observed in real-time. Here are the post-announcement screenshots from Yahoo Finance:

(I am still pessimistic about the Dow)

'Who owns GM' and other car company relationships

2010-08-10T10:55:00.001-07:00

According to this graphic linked on coolinfographics.com GM is owned by:

US government: 61%
United Autoworkers: 17.5%
Canada: 11.7%
Bondholders: 9.8%

Did you know?

Follow the link for more of the car company ownership relationships all around the world.

By the way (and unrelated) - I am now pessimistic about Dow.

Personal Income in Dallas - $39,514 (-3%)

2010-08-09T12:32:00.000-07:00

According to the BLS release today, the per-capita personal incomes of the major Texas metro areas are (with the percentage change from 08 to 09 in parentheses):

Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown: $43,568 (-2.6%)

Dallas-Ft. Worth-Arlington: $39,514 (-3.0%)

Austin-Round Rock-San Marcos: $35,522 (-2.0%)

San Antonio-New Braunfels: $34,500 (+0.8%)

Waco: $30,731 (+1.0%)

Here is also a nifty little map of all the metro areas, classified by how much their incomes changed from 08 to 09. More orange means that the incomes increased more in these areas than in others, and more blue means that incomes decreased more here than elsewhere.

Worst paying college degrees

2010-08-06T07:19:00.000-07:00

Here is a list of the worst-paying college degrees. What do they have in common?

Worst-Paying College Degrees in 2010
College Degree	Starting Pay	Mid-Career Pay
1. Child and Family Studies	$29,500	$38,400
2. Elementary Education	$31,600	$44,400
3. Social Work	$31,800	$44,900
4. Athletic Training	$32,800	$45,700
5. Culinary Arts	$35,900	$50,600
6. Horticulture	$35,000	$50,800
7. Paralegal Studies/Law	$35,100	$51,300
8. Theology	$34,700	$51,300
9. Recreation & Leisure	$33,300	$53,200
10. Special Education	$36,000	$53,800
11. Dietetics	$40,400	$54,200
12. Religious Studies	$34,700	$54,400
13. Art	$33,500	$54,800
14. Education	$35,100	$54,900
15. Interdisciplinary Studies	$35,600	$55,700
16. Interior Design	$34,400	$56,600
17. Nutrition	$42,200	$56,700
18. Graphic Design	$35,400	$56,800
19. Music	$36,700	$57,000
20. Art History	$39,400	$57,100

This is from Yahoo Finance.

Christopher Hitchens

2010-08-05T18:33:00.000-07:00

From Christopher Hitchens on his terrible diagnosis and fight ahead:

"...

Against me is the blind, emotionless alien [his euphemism for terminal cancer], cheered on by some who have long wished me ill. But on the side of my continued life is a group of brilliant and selfless physicians plus an astonishing number of prayer groups. On both of these I hope to write next time if—as my father invariably said—I am spared."

Who would have thought that Christopher Hitchens would kindly refer to "prayer groups"?

I pray for him also.

Breakfast to cost more

2010-08-05T06:13:00.000-07:00

Breakfast is an important meal. In Latvia they say "Eat breakfast yourself, share lunch with a friend, give dinner to your enemy".

It seems that the weather this year is cutting into supply of major breakfast ingredients - wheat, coffee, OJ - causing the prices to go up by 25% since June. I better load up on my bagels and coffee before the rise of ingredients' prices is reflected in the prices on supermarket shelves!

(from The Economist magazine)

Dallas City Budget

2010-08-04T12:47:00.000-07:00

Dallas Morning News has created a nice interactive graphic for the Dallas City Budget.

Dallas General Fund Budget (09-10)

I didn't know Dallas spends $64 million on Parks and Recreation, did you? I do visit the trails at Cedar Ridge Preserve frequently and White Rock Lake occasionally (both of which are in the City of Dallas Parks), and they are both great! But $64 million annually does seem like a large number.

I need to go visit these parks more often!!

Map - Credit ratings of the various states

2010-08-03T20:33:00.000-07:00

I was thinking about the budgetary problems of various states in the news recently, and I wanted to see a map overview of the various states' credit ratings. Here is the result:

Click map for larger view.

(map original; data from Financial Times)

Moody's and S&P provide credit ratings as they assess the fiscal position of states. The more "red" the state in this map, the higher the likelihood that those who lent money to the state might not see all of it repaid.

Texas Strong

2010-08-02T07:56:00.002-07:00

Texas is a good state to call home during a bad economy! A nice write-up in the Atlantic briefly explains why Texas is doing well even amidst poor conditions in the national economy. Here are some facts about Texas:

more people are moving to Texas than to any other US state
more Fortune 500 companies are based in Texas than in any other state
Texas economy would rank as 15th largest in the world, ahead of Australia, Turkey, Argentina
Texas is the biggest exporting state in the US, exporting 33% more than the next on the list - California

God Bless Texas!

What happens when things are DEregulated?

2010-07-30T06:34:00.000-07:00

Students often ask about the consequences of deregulation. If the government is closely regulating an industry, be it railroads, the airlines, banking, or cable tv, then it does so in the name of ensuring competition. Without the regulation, wouldn't the businesses just "charge whatever they want" and "take advantage" of the customers? Without the regulation prices would go up, and the greedy firms would just sit back on their past achievements not being productive, right?

Wrong! Not according to the data we have. According to history, when industries are closely regulated, prices tend to go up (not down) and productivity tends to stay low. When industries are DEregulated, prices actually fall, and productivity increases. Here is a graph dramatically illustrating this fact from this week's Economist magazine:

(the red line indicates deregulation of the US railroads)

Notice - after railroads were deregulated, prices dropped by 50%. The insightful article in the Economist discusses the fact that, prerhaps surprisingly, the US has the most competitive and the cheapest freight rail system in the world. Did you know that? So why is it that the passenger railways are not doing so well in the US? (Hint: it has to do with regulation!)

Click the image below to go to the full article on US railroads in the Economist.

Economic Indicators at a glance

2010-07-29T12:12:00.000-07:00

I wanted to look at a whole range of economic indicators side-by-side. I am a bit surprised about the good performance of the stock market over the last month, but unfortunately I do not take that to be an indicator of what is to come in the broader economy. Take a look at the indicators, and decide for yourself!

(click image for a larger view)

All charts from http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/ with data from Bloomberg.

"Unintended" consequences

2010-07-27T07:41:00.001-07:00

Stories are beginning to emerge about the "unintended" consequences of the new US Health Care bill. The first of these consequences is that insurance companies in three states are no longer under-writing new policies for children. Parents can continue to buy policies and have children covered on their plans, but these companies (and surely others will follow) no longer insure individual children.

Why?

Because the new law mandates that companies that underwrite children must issue policies to cover underlying conditions. In effect, this means that the parents can chose not to insure their children until they need coverage (this will save money on monthly premiums) and then, once a need arises, the child can be insured while on the way to a doctor; the company will need to cover the child. Insurers are realizing that continuing with business as usual will reduce their cash inflows (premiums on these policies) and increase their cash outflows (as more parents buy policies when children are in need, and then immediately file claims). In order to protect their other customers from undue rate increases (increases which would solicit a further frown from the regulators) these insurers are choosing to stop underwriting individual children altogether.

The only thing to add, is that this consequence may be unintended, but it is hardly unexpected. Other consequences that are not unexpected are that (a) other private insurers will cut services and coverages, and (b) regulators and media will rise up to lay blame at the feet of these insurers very soon.

Barter is still alive

2010-07-22T07:38:00.000-07:00

This guy traded an old phone - through fourteen barter trades - into a convertible Porsche; all through Craigslist swaps. Pretty neat, isn't it? Story is here.

From the Ministry of Truth

2010-07-21T07:29:00.001-07:00

The White House has just released their animated explanation of the "Financial Regulation Bill".

It's a nice effort. They have built the video taking their cues from last year's trailblazing and very popular The Crisis of Credit. This is clearly their effort to communicate their spin on the regulation and also to win back some popularity points. I am afraid it looks too much like something from The Ministry of Truth.

According to the video, the 2000+ page Financial Regulations bill will help simplify the transactions between a bank and a borrower. :) Good luck with that!

Persecution for Christ's sake... 7/19/2010

2010-07-20T07:38:00.001-07:00

From the Wall Street Journal Photo blog: "Pakistani volunteers carried away the bodies of a pair of Pakistani Christian brothers accused of blasphemy against Islam The brothers were shot to death Monday as they left a court in Faisalabad."

Here is the full story of this crime from the Associated Press.

Let us pray for the family of the victims, and also for all those who are persecuted for Christ's sake today. We must work to enhance and protect the freedom of speech and thought.

“Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
--Matthew 5:10-12

Why go to college?

2010-07-19T06:26:00.000-07:00

Here is one reason - from BLS:

Wage disparity

2010-07-16T06:55:00.000-07:00

Click the image to enlarge

Source: Fixr

Taxes and speed

2010-07-15T08:25:00.000-07:00

Usain Bolt will not compete in Britain this year because doing so would make him pay taxes on his huge endorsements collected in 2010. Here is the story:

Britain's sports minister offered to help resolve the tax issues that have caused Olympic champion Usain Bolt to withdraw from the Crystal Palace Diamond League meet.
Bolt announced on Monday he would not compete at the August 13-14 event because his earnings in London would be greatly diminished after taxes.
Sports Minister Hugh Robertson told the BBC he'll see what he can do, but said "three weeks doesn't give us a whole lot of time to organize a tax concession."
The British finance ministry has already exempted visiting soccer players from local tax laws to ensure the Champions League final can be staged at Wembley Stadium next year. (From USA Today). More at NY Times economix blog.

It is great seeing governments compete! Competition is what forces businesses to keep costs low and quality high. Typically governments have not had to compete much, but in the increasingly globalized world athletes like the Champions League soccer players or Usain Bolt can increasingly "shop" among jurisdictions for where to offer their entertainment services. This will put long overdue pressure on jurisdictions to be more people-friendly. US states and cities are also experiencing the same pressures to have competitive tax environments, as illustrated by this story about choices of locations for boxing bouts.

tax-transfer payments - grade transfers

2010-07-15T07:41:00.000-07:00

I came across this quote yesterday in my reading of the forthcoming "Common Sense Economics":

"To see the negative effect of almost any transfer policy on productive effort, consider the reaction of students if a professor announces at the beginning of the term that the grading policy for the class will redistribute the points earned on the exams so that no one will receive less than a C. Under this plan, students who earned A grades by scoring an average of 90 percent or higher on the exams would have to give up enough of their points to bring up the average of those who would otherwise get Ds and Fs. And, of course, the B students would also have to contribute some of their points as well, although not as many, in order to achieve a more equal grade distribution.
Does anyone doubt that the students who would have made As and Bs will study less hard when their extra effort is "taxed" to provide benefits to others? And so would the students who would have made Cs and Ds, since the penalty they paid for less effort would be cushioned by point transfers they would lose if they earned more points on their own.
The same logic applies even to those who would have made Fs, although they probably weren't doind very much studying anyway. Predictably, the outcome will be less studying, and overall achievement will decline. The impact of tax-transfer schemes will be similar: less work effort and lower overall income levels."

I'm itching to offer at least one quiz in my economics course this fall on the terms described above, so that the results could be demonstrated to class and effects of redistribution explained!

Mind the Gap

2010-07-14T10:37:00.000-07:00

http://bostonreview.net/BR35.4/fischer.php

Interesting review and response article to a new book, The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger.

US External Debt

2010-04-01T12:21:00.001-07:00

Nice dynamic chart of the evolution of the US external debt.

Enjoy!

Who Owns America's Debt - A Dynamic Perspective on Major Foreign Holders of Treasury Securities (2002-Present) from Computational Legal Studies on Vimeo.

The Interactive Obama Budget

2010-02-12T08:33:00.000-08:00

The New York Times recently created a cool, interactive breakdown of the Obama Administration's proposed budget for 2011. Please note that the federal fiscal year runs from October 1 through September 30. The budget is subject to congressional after analysis by the congressional Budget Office. The approval process is time-consuming which is why the administration completed its proposal in January.

The federal budget process has many troubling aspects. Agencies have long followed the "use=it-or-lose-it" approach to spending. In other words, saving money only means the agency gets less money next year. That concerns me as a taxpayer.

This feature allows you to distinguish non-discretionary/mandatory from discretionary. Defense is discretionary. Also, another budgetary concern is that most mandatory budget items like Social Security must have annual cost of living increases commensurate with the rate of inflation. Of cruse, the Federal reserve said there was no inflation last year so no COLA for seniors. This did not go over well as you might imagine.

Students may enjoy reviewing which programs enjoy an increase in the budget. Why are some programs costing more while others are getting less money? did the president allude to these changes in any of his speeches?

Finally, note the increase in interest payments to the federal debt. This is the scariest part of the budget!!

E-Books

2010-02-12T08:24:00.000-08:00

I found an interesting blog covering how the publishing industry is managing the transition from paper to electronic books. Of course, this could transform the industry and increase profit margins.

However, we must consider the employment consequences. What happens to the printing side of the business? Distribution? How long will the transition take and what will the book industry eventually look like?

Huge Deficits May Alter U.S. Politics and Global Power

2010-02-02T13:12:00.000-08:00

"Projections suggest there is virtually no room over the next decade for new domestic initiatives for President Obama or his successors."

This is a fascinating and startling article.

What Me, Worry??

2010-01-26T13:35:00.000-08:00

This article provides excellent historical context to presidential approval ratings in general and President Obama's predicament in particular. While the author poohs poohs any concern over the president's political fortunes at this stage, I found one of his disclaimers/footnotes to be very interesting:

Let me add a bit more nuance here: I think you can make a good (although probably not rock-solid) case that the idea of a substantially progressive Obama presidency is on the line right now. But there are a lot of scenarios where the combination of voters getting a little something out of their system in 2010, combined with (eventually) an improving economy and perhaps a foreign policy success or two, could leave Obama personally in fairly good shape in 2012

In essence, Silver sees no cause for the White House to have immediate concern that they will be looking for new jobs come 2013. However, the change liberals hoped for may be DOA.

Before Republican types rejoice, never forget the lessons of Bill Clinton. His pivot to the center salvaged his administration.

The Mortgage Market Tightens

2010-01-21T09:16:00.000-08:00

The Federal Housing Administration announced today a tightening of its lending standards for borrowers.

A little background is in order. The FHA provides an alternative financing option for borrowers who are short on cash. While private market lenders historically expected down payments in the 10-20% range of the sale price, the FHA underwrote loans with down payments of 3.5%. FHA interest rates are very competitive.

The agency has an interesting and pivotal history itself. Founded in 1934 as part of the New Deal, the FHA primed the housing market and accelerated middle class wealth accumulation and home ownership. Basically, the agency does not fund loans as much as it indemnifies private lender against default. This makes the agency carries out a credit insurance function as opposed to a banking function. Bankers traumatized by the collapse of the American financial system were suddenly incentivized to lend since the government covered their losses.

Additionally, the FHA did not spend tax dollars. Borrowers paid for the insurance as part of their closing costs and monthly payments. This is similar to mortgage insurance for those readers who own a home.

Prior to the FHA, bankers required borrowers to bring 50%-60% of the sale price to the closing table. Loans typically lasted five years and included a balloon payment which forced homeowners to scurry to the nearest lender and re-finance. The FHA changed this reality permanently by requiring willing and conforming lenders to fiance borrowers for 20 years with reasonable interest rates. This allowed middle income Americans to enter the housing market which created a real estate explosion.

While the FHA is still very much a significant player in the housing market, the agency simply cannot afford to underwrite loans for questionable borrowers absent some assurance of re-payment. This reality forced the FHA to increase the down payment to 10% for some borrowers with low credit. This move could significantly affect the housing market since 40% of all current mortgages are FHA paper.

One final note-bankers in the 1930's and 1940's were still leery of doing business with the FHA. specifically, the 20 year term (which eventually became 30 years) scared many lenders. While the mortgage insurance against default was nice, 20 years was a long time to tie up capital. enter the Federal National Mortgage Association or Fannie Mae. Fannie Mae paid lenders cash for their existing loan which allowed the banking industry to increase the churn rate of capital. This churn provided more money to lend and contributed to the American real estate explosion.

What are the lessons here? Both the FHA and Fannie Mae have changed the way they do business. of course, Fannie Mae has bigger problems than the FHA. Also, remember these lessons when the banking industry cries fouls over government regulation and interference. The government they criticize for limiting their wealth options actually played a large role in creating the modern real estate market.

The Massachusetts Miracle

2010-01-20T13:16:00.000-08:00

The Democrats and the Obama Administration suffered another stinging defeat yesterday in Massachusetts of all places. This is the same state that last elected a Republican Senator in 1979 and provided the current president a comfortable margin of 26% in November of 2008. Massachusetts is simply among the bluest of blue state.

So, what happened? How or why did a little known local politician with scant political resources take Edward Kennedy's seat from the Democrats?

Special Elections often Create special/memorable results

True to its moniker, special elections emerge via special circumstances. Typically, an incumbent resigns or passes away while in office. While these circumstances might well alter the political environment, the comparative brevity is the real equalizer in special elections. For example, This campaign had a six week election cycle. Normal election cycles run 9-10 months and even longer for big races.

Basically, Scott Brown had enough money and momentum to thrive for six weeks. Additionally, this time-frame limited the effectiveness of TV ads while also simply reducing available air-time. A candidate with less name recognition like Brown also benefits from the short cycle since the favored candidate's campaign has less time to conduct opposition research.

The National Political Context

What can the White House make of this election? Well, combine this result with earlier Democratic losses in New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorial races. Things look grim. Should Democrats prepare for political Armageddon in November? That is a topic for another post!

Bottom line, moderate voters are worried about the economy, health care, Iraq and the corrupt banking system. People simply do not think President Obama is moving in the right direction on these issues.

The Blame Game

While there is plenty of blame to go around, the bottom line is that Democrats are now in trouble. How much trouble is yet to be determined.

What Happens Now?

The results from Tuesday create endless questions and numrerour blogging opportunites for me. The following questions flow from last nights head shaker:

What happens to Congress in November? Can the GOP re-gain control of both chambers?
Do rank and file Republicans truly desire a new majority?
How does this affect our expectations for 2012?
What must the Democrats do to get out of this rut?
What must Republicans do to keep them in the rut?

helping Haiti

2010-01-13T12:12:00.000-08:00

Does anyone have a recommendation for how to help the people in Haiti following the devastating earthquake of 1/12/10?

I am looking at ticket prices and it seems that a weekend trip there would cost about $1200 departing Friday evening, arriving Saturday morning, then leaving Haiti Monday night and arriving back in Dallas Tuesday morning. Does anyone have an experience in doing this kind of relief work? Any comments on whether you think one or two people traveling there could make a difference and be helpful in any practical way?

We definitely need to pray for the relief efforts there, but perhaps there is more that we, Christians living in the US, can do. No matter what else globalization does, one thing that it allows us to do is go and help quickly, we only need will to do it.

When the Jobs Were Lost

2010-01-01T14:56:00.001-08:00

A very cool (and depressing) interactive map that tracks monthly job losses by county from 2007-2009. Note that certain regions such as the Midwest felt the pain earlier than the rest of the country. However, bubble states like California and Arizona faced major employment losses as the recession picked up steam. In fact, the financial and banking crisis nailed both the East and West Coast. Granted, no region was completely immune.

Obama's Eye on Intelligence

2010-01-01T14:41:00.000-08:00

Americans enter 2010 again questioning whether our government is keeping us safe. President Obama is determining whether intelligence personnel is fully sharing information.

Economic Prosperity: A Step of Faith

2009-11-16T14:38:00.000-08:00

"There is a strong relationship between economic prosperity and religious liberty."

William T. Cavanaugh, Being Consumed; Economics and Christian Desire: Review Part 3

2009-10-28T13:46:00.000-07:00

Finally in chapter 4, “Scarcity and Abundance,” Cavanaugh uses the logic of communion to challenge the logic of the market. We are desiring beings, but only in God can our desires be put to rest. An economics that bases itself on the assumption of scarcity is not only based on hunger but also on endless human wants. Shopping, then, is finally about the “pleasure of stroking desire,” for in “scarcity is implied . . . the daily erotics of desire that keeps the individual in the pursuit of novelty” (91). Such a lifestyle, Cavanaugh insists is “the death of Christian eschatology” (93). Instead, of placing our hope in Christ’s kingdom breaking into this fallen world system, we continually distract ourselves with more consumption even as we shrug before “a tragic world of scarcity.” Worse, we come to develop a taste for hearing of global tragedies: “Even the suffering of others can become a spectacle and a consumable item: tsunamis sell newspapers” (94). Cavanaugh holds that the Eucharist should teach us of “the communicability of pain from one person to another” within the Body of Christ. Rather than individuals facing off in competition over a scarce supply, we become truly individual as we impart help to each other, becoming dependent upon each other. We cannot give into despair but must respond in eschatological hope, for Christ daily gives of his self that we may know “where we are going” (100).

There are numerous ways to go about responding to Cavanaugh’s claims. One, for instance, could place his theology within numerous streams of Christian reflection. He draws off the Christian personalism of John Paul II and the economic distributism of early 20^th-century Catholic ethics. He also shows a great debt to the tradition of virtue ethics currently taught by Stanley Hauerwas at Duke Divinity School. Likewise, Cavanaugh is much indebted to the Augustinian tradition of reflection on ordered and disordered loves within the City of God and the City of Man, as well as the new Trinitarian insights of Hans urs von Balthasar, to name only one theologian. Each of these streams of Christian reflection has strengths and weaknesses. One could also ascertain whether he has truly understood the experience and logic of late, global capitalism in the last few decades. Has he, for instance, ignored counter-examples that might go against his theses of hypermobilization of capital, of the creation of constant, movable desire, and of globalization as a false parody of true Christian catholicity?

However, I want to respond more personally as one First World, Christian individual to his book. In my experience, much of what he claims rings true, at least some of the time. I am ashamed to say that I have found myself at various points in my life addicted to the buying of things, and of late, equally tempted by the consumption of short bursts of image and experience though online social networking and news. I, too, have often thrown up my hands in despair at the news of overseas economic abuses, wondering where to buy my clothing, my coffee, or my children’s toys. And I, too, have taken a kind of superficial pride and joy in my “diversity,” listening to African music while I eat fajitas, read a Russian novel, and look forward to watching a Dutch film on video later that evening. I would rather play it safe and not have to interact with the truly poor, unless, of course they seem grateful and don’t smell too much. After I finished reading Being Consumed , I struggled with what I should do in response, and my first desire was to simply and sadly think I could do nothing. Of course, this would simply be to “consume” Being Consumed as part of the endless diet of ideas in a collegiate environment. Instead, I am praying and seeking how my family should act differently in what we eat and buy and give. I have talked to my wife some about the book and will continue to do so.

It does not seem to me that you need be convinced by everything that Cavanaugh claims in order to respond to it with repentance and action. For example, I am somewhat dissatisfied with his theology of the Church and world. He seems to conflate the distinction between them too much at times, the logic of the Eucharist almost dissolving the need for individual repentance. I can’t always tell if his doctrine of the Supper actually merges nature and grace or simply brings them into a particular and local relationship for our time. Likewise, his portrait of multi-national abuses does not reflect the experience of local managers who are attached to their workers and seek to work for change for their benefit. Nonetheless, I am still left crying mea culpa. Well, not only “my fault” per se, for that too is part of his point. I am joined to the Body of Christ, and I must learn to work within the messy, faulty life of that local community called a church if I am to develop with others the habits and practices that help address some of these matters. Happily, Cavanaugh has provided some examples worth learning more about:

Mondragón Cooperative Corporation, based on the principles of distributism, is worker-owned and governed and contributes greatly to neighborhood health, education, and lower crime.
CRS Fair trade program in coffee, chocolate, and handcrafted items seeks to deal directly with growers and local artisans to promote fair payment, as well as promote a sense of solidarity with those overseas.
Church Supported Agriculture (CSA) seeks to create a direct market between local family growers and local churches in hopes of providing a face-to-face buying environment with growers and helping to promote sustainable farming.
The Economy of Communion Project associated with the Focolare Movement promotes a business model that divides profits into 1/3 aid to the poor, 1/3 education promotion, and 1/3 business sustainability. As of 2006, 700 businesses worldwide had adopted their model.

I would challenge us all to learn more about these and other Christian options like them.

William T. Cavanaugh, Being Consumed; Economics and Christian Desire: Review Part 2

2009-10-28T13:43:00.000-07:00

Cavanaugh offers an insightful critique of consumerism, which he charges as being driven not by ownership of things but by consumption of things: “Consumerism is not so much about having more as it is about having something else; that’s why it is not simply buying but shopping that is the heart of consumerism” (35). Strangely then, consumerism is a kind of parody of the Christian call to be detached from things and, in giving things away, to become attached to others. Cavanaugh believes the problem is that currently we as consumers are disconnected from almost every stage of the making of things, including being separated from those who make them. Most of us, he believes, are not comfortable with the plight of exhausted and desperate workers in overseas sweatshops, but we are unable to know exactly where and under what conditions our clothing, our toys, or our electronic devices are produced, and since many of these might also be produced in conditions that are somewhat better than starvation in the fields, we are left mostly with a vague ennui and free-floating guilt. What’s worse for us is that increasingly we are even detached from the things we consume, so that marketers must produce simultaneously an “organized creation of dissatisfaction” and yet also invest the products we purchase with positive emotional associations. “Products are made in the factory, but brands are made in the mind,” as one marketer observed (45). What, then, are Christians to do? Cavanaugh, writing in the tradition of Antony of Egypt, Clement of Alexandria, and Thomas Aquinas, suggests that we return to the pursuit of God as our chief desire. To be the Body of Christ is to identify with the “least of these.” We must take practical steps to overcoming our detachment by giving to others in a way that supports a sustainable life for them. We must also make our homes places where food is prepared, musical instruments are played, and people are engaged in making things.

Chapter 3, “The Global and the Local,” is the most densely theological of the book, yet I suspect it is also the heart of Cavanaugh’s attempt to provide a Christian vision that runs counter to consumerism: “[C]ulture and economics are not autonomous spheres with no mutual effect. Economic relationships do not operate on value-neutral laws, but are rather carriers of specific convictions about the nature of the human person” (59). Globalization is a false catholicity; it purports to offer a universal world of multicultural communication and exchange, but it actually tends to flatten out local cultures into a world of McDonalds and Disneys, even as it also works to dismember communities into atomistic individuals. Here, he returns to his concern with the “hypermobility of capital” which can abandon its people easily, thus creating a situation that makes labor unions fairly impossible, as well as negotiations for better working environments, higher wages, and more ownership in the means of production. Cavanaugh is equally suspicious of the claims of religious pluralism and multiculturalism. Both doctrines, he believes, really perpetuate a post-modernist version of persons and reality that is still radically individualistic. We can consume surface-level, multi-cultural experiences without necessarily changing anything about ourselves and our patterns of First World consumption. The global village is a comforting fiction. In response to this, Cavanaugh looks to Jesus Christ as the “concrete universal: “Only in the Incarnation can an individual be universal and the universal be individual” (76), and only in the mission of Christ can we truly discover ourselves, for Christian discipleship teaches us to lay ourselves aside for others: “The true identity of each unique human person is thus founded on the overcoming of an illusory self-sufficiency” (83). This practice is deeply Trinitarian, for we enter into an exchange of mutual giving and receiving. But this Christian exchange is always realized in local places over time. Only then can we truly be and model what God intends for Creation.

William T. Cavanaugh, Being Consumed; Economics and Christian Desire: Review Part 1

2009-10-28T13:38:00.000-07:00

Jekabs Bikis and I reviewed together Cavanaugh's Being Consumed. We've both agreed to post our reviews and our responses to each other here. Below is the first section of mine:

William T. Cavanaugh’s book is a slim volume on a broad topic. Just under a hundred pages, Being Consumed brings to our attention the impact of consumerism, commodification, and globalization on personhood, free markets, multinational corporations, marketing, shopping, tourism, self-identity, and human freedom. Yet despite such a wide range of concerns, Cavanaugh’s target is much more defined. As “a contribution to a kind of theological microeconomics,” he desires above all to help Christians “to discern and create economic practices, spaces, and transactions that are truly free” (viii). To do this, requires a theological critique of the spiritual and moral temptations of global capitalism. So rather than mount a macro-level reform of multinational markets, Cavanaugh is more concerned with how Christians might live differently at the local and particular level, and how by living in such a way they might further incarnate the eschatological promises that God has extended in the Lord’s Supper.

In chapter 1, “Freedom and Unfreedom,” Cavanaugh asserts that “true freedom requires an account of the end (telos) of human life and the destination of creation” (2), which for the Christian is to desire and participate in God. We need to keep this end in view because otherwise we cannot distinguish true and false desires. A model that judges the freedom of economic exchange as simply equal to the exchange itself is not truly free, for it has no standard by which to judge human flourishing. A model that values exchange in itself doesn’t care whether that exchange is about bread and beans or pornography and breast augmentation. Christians, on the other hand, are called to cultivate true desires, and we must do this in the face of marketing that seeks to create imprudent yearning in us and to addict us to the constant stimulation of those desires. We also have to work against large-scale organizations which ignore the needs of their employees. Charges Cavanaugh, we delude ourselves if we think that late capitalism is truly free for all its participants. Multinational corporations may choose to relocate their operations from one cheap source of labor to the next, quickly abandoning their workers, who after all, cannot easily move without disrupting their lives and communities. The ownership of property, Cavanuagh insists, is intended by God to serve the common good, not to pursue the maximization of profits at the expense of people. Christians then should work to create companies which keep this as one of their preeminent purposes.

Another one in the series - the fruit of capitalism

2009-09-29T12:14:00.000-07:00

Another nice advantage of capitalism - products get better with time, leading to more convenience, less injuries, longer lives. It is a beautiful thing that we can use our God-given intellect to improve the world around us in practical ways!

I got the video from Marginal Revolution - one of my favorite blogs.

6 applicants per job opening

2009-09-28T07:40:00.000-07:00

Interesting chart from New York Times via ritholtz.com

Number of job unemployed people rising, number of job openings falling - not a good combination.

Not the best time to be graduating if you are looking for a job.

Let us hope that the grip of the visible hand of rules and regulations is relaxed, so that the employers, the business owners can regain their confidence and resume business investment and hiring. Let us hope that starts happening soon!

Mystery quote of the day

2009-09-25T20:33:00.000-07:00

The quote below was written several decades ago by someone who was responding to claims that usury and greed are the root causes of societal problems. Professor [X] had just accused the author of the quote below, that the usury should be absolutely rejected, citing the then-Soviet Union as a 'one sixth of the world's landmass' as a sort of beacon of hope where money is not allowed to rule. Read the quote if you have a minute - you will be very surprised to see who wrote it.

The difference between us is that the Professor [X] sees the ‘World’ purely in terms of those threats and those allurements which depend on money. I do not.

The most ‘worldly’ society I have ever lived in is that of schoolboys: most worldly in the cruelty and arrogance of the strong, the toadyism and mutual treachery of the weak, and the unqualified snobbery of both. Nothing was so base that most members of the school proletariat would not do it, or suffer it, to win the favour of the school aristocracy: hardly any injustice too bad for the aristocracy to practise. But the class system did not in the least depend on the amount of pocket money.

Who needs to care about money if most of the things he wants will be offered by cringing servility and the remainder can be taken by force?

This lesson has remained with me all my life. That is one of the reasons why I cannot share [X's] exaltation at the banishment of Mammon from ‘a sixth of our planet’s surface’ [i.e. from the Soviet Union]. I have already lived in a world from which Mammon was banished: it was the most wicked and miserable I have yet known. If Mammon were the only devil, it would be another matter. But where Mammon vacates the throne, how if Moloch takes his place?

As Aristotle said, ‘Men do not become tyrants in order to keep warm’. All men, of course, desire pleasure and safety. But all men also desire power and all men desire the mere sense of being ‘in the know’ or the ‘inner ring’, of not being ‘outsiders’: a passion insufficiently studied and the chief theme of my story. When the state of society is such that money is the passport to all these prizes, then of course money will be the prime temptation. But when the passport changes, the desires will remain.

Who wrote this? I recommend forming some opinion about the words before looking to see who wrote them; if you are like me you will be shocked to see that it is this person who takes such a non-antagonistic view toward money.

New images of the center of Milky Way galaxy, then some reflection

2009-09-24T19:34:00.000-07:00

Beautiful, isn't it? (click picture to enlarge, click here to see the same image with explanatory labels)

---

Here is a pretty good video explaining the Milky Way Galaxy.

---

Here is a beautiful time lapse photo sequence of the Milky Way photographed from Spain:

---

And here, just for good measure (pun), is a video that impresses me every time I see it - the size of earth in context:

"In the beginning, God Created the Heavens and the Earth" --Genesis 1:1

"O Lord, you have examined my heart and know everything about me... You both precede and follow me... If I go up to heaven, you are there... To you the night shines as bright as day..." --from Psalm 139

Graphic of the day - US oil imports

2009-09-23T07:20:00.000-07:00

From where do we import most of our oil?

Your first guess is probably wrong. Take a look at this map (click to expand):

(This June 2009 data comes from CoolInfoGraphics.)

The top oil suppliers to the US are (top supplier first):

Canada
Venezuela
Mexico
Saudi Arabia
Nigeria
Angola
Iraq
Russia

Is that in line with what you would have expected?

Strange syllabus policies :)

2009-09-22T07:42:00.000-07:00

This is from an actual syllabus in our university:

1. Trimming of the nails should be done on a regular and consistent basis, preferably twice a week. This will keep the quick of the nail pushed back so that the nails do not ... .
2. The recommended nail length is 1/16" beyond the quick of the nail. Please note, however, that the nails should never be cut so short as to cause pain or discomfort!
3. Sculpted nails, glued-on nails and the like are not allowed. Artificial nails can get caught in the ... , so they are expressly forbidden.
4. The ... student has up to one week after receiving notice of this fingernail length policy to trim his or her nails according to the above guidelines. Profesional manicures are at the student's own expense.
5. Failure to trim the nails may cause a student to lose up to ten points per lesson grade.

Can you guess what type of a course would have this in the syllabus?

Prisoners' last words

2009-09-22T06:21:00.000-07:00

What do people say right before being executed? The following are actual last words of people before they received lethal injections in Texas. This is from New York Times.

Go ahead?
Nothing I can say can change the past.
I done lost my voice.
I would like to say goodbye.
My heart goes is going ba bump ba bump ba bump.
Is the mike on?
I don’t have anything to say. I am just sorry about what I did.
I am nervous and it is hard to put my thoughts together. Sometimes you don’t know what to say.
Man, there is a lot of people there.
I have come here today to die, not make speeches.
Where’s Mr. Marino’s mother? Did you get my letter?
I want to ask if it is in your heart to forgive me. You don’t have to.
I wish I could die more than once to tell you how sorry I am.
Could you please tell that lady right there — can I see her? She is not looking at me — I want you to understand something, hold no animosity toward me. I want you to understand. Please forgive me.
I don’t think the world will be a better or safer place without me.
I am sorry.
I want to tell my mom that I love her.
I caused her so much pain and my family and stuff. I hurt for the fact that they are going to be hurting.
I am taking it like a man.
Kick the tires and light the fire. I am going home.
They may execute me but they can’t punish me because they can’t execute an innocent man.
I couldn’t do a life sentence.
I said I was going to tell a joke. Death has set me free. That’s the biggest joke.
To my sweet Claudia, I love you.
Cathy, you know I never meant to hurt you.
I love you, Irene.
Let my son know I love him.
Tell everyone I got full on chicken and pork chops.
I appreciate the hospitality that you guys have shown me and the respect, and the last meal was really good.
The reason it took them so long is because they couldn’t find a vein. You know how I hate needles. ... Tell the guys on Death Row that I’m not wearing a diaper.
Lord, I lift your name on high.
From Allah we came and to Allah we shall return.
For everybody incarcerated, keep your heads up.
Death row is full of isolated hearts and suppressed minds.
Mistakes are made, but with God all things are possible.
I am responsible for them losing their mother, their father and their grandmother. I never meant for them to be taken. I am sorry for what I did.
I can’t take it back.
Lord Jesus forgive of my sins. Please forgive me for the sins that I can remember.
All my life I have been locked up.
Give me my rights. Give me my rights. Give me my rights. Give me my life back.
I am tired.
I deserve this.
A life for a life.
It’s my hour. It’s my hour.
I’m ready, Warden.

Does reading this change your stance on the death penalty?

Community and Heresy

2009-09-16T09:32:00.000-07:00

DBU student Kyle Worley over at his blog is discussing biblical interpretation and community. A theme that I am obviously interested in, his reflections raise some important questions for our reflection:

1. Does individualism lead to heresy?

2. Does community safeguard orthodoxy?

Here's his address: http://yougottaserve.blogspot.com/2009/09/doing-theology-only-for-community.html

Is this the health care future we want?

2009-09-15T20:42:00.000-07:00

The following is a translation of a September 15, 09 news story from Latvia where healthcare is largely nationalized.

------------------------------------------

Today Leukemia patients gathered near the Parliament building, as they were asking to be awarded the funds for their medical provisions. The Health Minister Baiba Rozentale came out to speak with the protesters, and she explained to them that during the current [financial] situation it is not possible to award treatment funds to all. However, the President [of Latvia] Valdis Zatlers also came out to speak with the protestors later, telling them that leukemia is one of the diseases for which the state will always provide treatment funds for individuals.

Today leukemia patients and their supporters picketed near the Parliament building, asking the state to fid funds for treating their leukemia and lymphoma.

The picketers were at a loss because of the contradictory statements from two officials, saying that they don't know who to believe, the health minister Baiba Rozentale or President Valdis Zatlers.

Rozentale, as she was meeting with the picketers, stressed that health is an area in which the state cannot cut funding, however, she was skeptical that funding would actually be found; Zatlers on the other hand stated "There are those diseases for which the state will always provide treatment. Leukemia is one of those diseases."

Picketers asked the state to guarantee funding for the treatment of all leukemia and lymphoma victims, and also for victims of other forms of cancer, because such treatment is crucial for maintaining life, and it is critical for preventing the humiliating and life-threatening quotas on medicines, analyses, and the rest of the treatments.

"My daughter has to go to court to ensure that she will be able to get her medicines for treating leukemia," one protest participant Agra Jaunozolina explains. Her daughter needs 4800 Lati ($9000) for purchasing medicines, but the entity deciding whether she will get the medicines is the court. "And you never know in the court whether they will give her the medicines or not. So she goes on living from one court session to the next. Can you imagine - how stressful and humiliating it is at the moment when the Health Ministry asks you, 'Why do you think you need treatment more than others do?" But my daughter is not at fault for getting this disease. Why do we have to be humiliated? A person wants to live, after all."

"Mr. Zatlers said that the state has enough resources to resolve this issue, however the health minister said that this is not possible. Whom should I believe?", asked leukemia victim Irina Salova. "Behind each of their decisions there lies a life of a human being. Leukemia patients need medicines today and now, and they can't wait half a year until somebody somewhere makes a decision."

"Unfortunately nobody - no member of the government, no relative of theirs - is excluded from these types of diseases, so the society is asking now not to ignore the patients, thinking 'this will not affect us'. When the patients were healthy, they paid their taxes to the state, but now it turns out that the sickness is 'their own problem'. "

Organization of leukemia patients stresses that while the government keeps posturing with their supposedly strong position for cutting the budget, young women and even children are forced to go to court to fight for every next dose medicine for saving their lives. The neighboring countries offer dignified treatment to cancer patients even during crisis situations.

---------------------------------------

Is this the health care future we want?

Were Father's Manors Best?

2009-09-15T09:43:00.000-07:00

The following exchange took place between myself and two other DBU professors on Facebook. With both professors' permission, I'm posting it here. It began with a quotation by James K.A. Smith in my status line. What do you think, is capitalism incompatible with Christianity?

"Construing our relationship to the world as one of 'consumption' is to take a good, creational reality of dependence and the need for acquisition in a direction that runs against the grain of God's universe. In sum, consumption i...s a way of relating to the resources of the world that runs counter to shalom."--James K. A. Smith

Professor Hatcher: Absolutely. What is the opposite of shalom? That's what we have.

Doctor Collins: So, what does this say about capitalism?

Hatcher: Is capitalism the opposite of shalom? I don't see the hand of God in capitalism. Eden was agrarian.

Collins: It seems to me that capitalism is based on consumption, so whatever Smith says about consumption, I think should apply to capitalism, too. I agree with you Elaine. Whether capitalism is the opposite of shalom or not, it leads in that opposite direction.

Mitchell: Capitalism is such a big, magic word, that can be scary for some and miracle-working for others. I think there is much positive to be said about free markets, the production of goods, and the creativity that goes into investing capital. However, I'm fully in agreement that in the extreme consumerist version we live in, it's hard not to kiss the devil's hand and say you're only kidding.

Hatcher: I can't even imagine how a godly, Christ-like capitalist system would operate.

Mitchell: However, I certainly don't think socialist systems have proved themselves capable of producing long-term prosperity for a people. They tend to devolve into either utopian projects and/or totalitarian collectives. What capitalism offers at its best is the ability to people to use their creativity and drive in work and production of goods. Is radical consumption the natural end of all capitalism or only the kind we've developed in the West?

Hatcher: I certainly don't consider socialist systems a viable solution! The end result is much worse than our "radical consumerism." Due to the fallen nature of humankind, radical consumption is probably the natural end of all capitalism. We just can't seem to do anything right on a large scale although individuals might practice a godly form of ... Read more capitalism on a local scale. But I don't know of any society where either capitalism or socialism has ended well for all. I say back to the land! Maybe manorialism with benevolent landlords?

Election Questions

2009-09-14T11:05:00.001-07:00

Here are some election questions from Cari Montgomery. Cari is a student in one of my onlne courses:

1.) How much power do the American people really have during the political elections?

2.) How much power do each divisions of the political parties really have? And what can and will they do with it in the next four years to help the American economy?

Feel free to post your thoughts. I will comment shortly.

Christian Education and Personhood (John Paul II series)

2009-09-14T07:45:00.000-07:00

This is the last entry culled from the encyclicals of John Paul II. The following is from Ex Corde Ecclesiae, the encyclical that attempted to give a more Christian course to Catholic university education. Much of what he has to say is true of Christian universities in general. Try replacing the word "Catholic" below with "Christian" and see how much you agree with and how much you can learn from:

4. It is the honour and responsibility of a Catholic University to consecrate itself without reserve to the cause of truth. This is its way of serving at one and the same time both the dignity of man and the good of the Church, which has "an intimate conviction that truth is (its) real ally ... and that knowledge and reason are sure ministers to faith." Without in any way neglecting the acquisition of useful knowledge, a Catholic University is distinguished by its free search for the whole truth about nature, man and God. The present age is in urgent need of this kind of disinterested service, namely of proclaiming the meaning of truth, that fundamental value without which freedom, justice and human dignity are extinguished. By means of a kind of universal humanism a Catholic University is completely dedicated to the research of all aspects of truth in their essential connection with the supreme Truth, who is God. It does this without fear but rather with enthusiasm, dedicating itself to every path of knowledge, aware of being preceded by him who is "the Way, the Truth, and the Life", the Logos, whose Spirit of intelligence and love enables the human person with his or her own intelligence to find the ultimate reality of which he is the source and end and who alone is capable of giving fully that Wisdom without which the future of the world would be in danger.

6. Through the encounter which it establishes between the unfathomable richness of the salvific message of the Gospel and the variety and immensity of the fields of knowledge in which that richness is incarnated by it, a Catholic University enables the Church to institute an incomparably fertile dialogue with people of every culture. Man's life is given dignity by culture, and, while he finds his fullness in Christ, there can be no doubt that the Gospel which reaches and renews him in every dimension is also fruitful for the culture in which he lives.

7. In the world today, characterized by such rapid developments in science and technology, the tasks of a Catholic University assume an ever greater importance and urgency. Scientific and technological discoveries create an enormous economic and industrial growth, but they also inescapably require the correspondingly necessary search for meaning in order to guarantee that the new discoveries be used for the authentic good of individuals and of human society as a whole. If it is the responsibility of every University to search for such meaning, a Catholic University is called in a particular way to respond to this need: its Christian inspiration enables it to include the moral, spiritual and religious dimension in its research, and to evaluate the attainments of science and technology in the perspective of the totality of the human person.

In this context, Catholic Universities are called to a continuous renewal, both as "Universities" and as "Catholic". For, "What is at stake is the very meaning of scientific and technological research, of social life and of culture, but, on an even more profound level, what is at stake is the very meaning of the human person"(10). . . .

21. A Catholic University pursues its objectives through its formation of an authentic human community animated by the spirit of Christ. The source of its unity springs from a common dedication to the truth, a common vision of the dignity of the human person and, ultimately, the person and message of Christ which gives the Institution its distinctive character. As a result of this inspiration, the community is animated by a spirit of freedom and charity; it is characterized by mutual respect, sincere dialogue, and protection of the rights of individuals. It assists each of its members to achieve wholeness as human persons; in turn, everyone in the community helps in promoting unity, and each one, according to his or her role and capacity, contributes towards decisions which affect the community, and also towards maintaining and strengthening the distinctive Catholic character of the Institution. . . .

33. A specific priority is the need to examine and evaluate the predominant values and norms of modern society and culture in a Christian perspective, and the responsibility to try to communicate to society those ethical and religious principles which give full meaning to human life. In this way a University can contribute further to the development of a true Christian anthropology, founded on the person of Christ, which will bring the dynamism of the creation and redemption to bear on reality and on the correct solution to the problems of life.

By its very nature, a University develops culture through its research, helps to transmit the local culture to each succeeding generation through its teaching, and assists cultural activities through its educational services. It is open to all human experience and is ready to dialogue with and learn from any culture. A Catholic University shares in this, offering the rich experience of the Church's own culture. In addition, a Catholic University, aware that human culture is open to Revelation and transcendence, is also a primary and privileged place for a fruitful dialogue between the Gospel and culture.

44. Through this dialogue a Catholic University assists the Church, enabling it to come to a better knowledge of diverse cultures, discern their positive and negative aspects, to receive their authentically human contributions, and to develop means by which it can make the faith better understood by the men and women of a particular culture(36). While it is true that the Gospel cannot be identified with any particular culture and transcends all cultures, it is also true that "the Kingdom which the Gospel proclaims is lived by men and women who are profoundly linked to a culture, and the building up of the Kingdom cannot avoid borrowing the elements of human culture or cultures(37). "A faith that places itself on the margin of what is human, of what is therefore culture, would be a faith unfaithful to the fullness of what the Word of God manifests and reveals, a decapitated faith, worse still, a faith in the process of self-annihilation"(38).

45. A Catholic University must become more attentive to the cultures of the world of today, and to the various cultural traditions existing within the Church in a way that will promote a continuous and profitable dialogue between the Gospel and modern society. Among the criteria that characterize the values of a culture are above all, the meaning of the human person, his or her liberty, dignity, sense of responsibility, and openness to the transcendent. To a respect for persons is joined the preeminent value of the family, the primary unit of every human culture.

How much faith in our almsgiving and in our investments?

2009-09-11T09:15:00.000-07:00

Interest piece, though I'm not entirely convinced by the analogy he draws between the faith that almsgiving requires of us (we trust that in giving to others that we are also giving to God) and the faith that markets and investment need.

http://www.firstthings.com/article/2009/05/faith--finance-1243315689

Love to hear what others think.

Fun with charts - Well-being and stock market

2009-09-10T21:53:00.000-07:00

The first graph is Gallup's Healthways Well-being index (this link explains how the index is calculated, page 2). It measures people's well-being in particular in how they evaluate their life, how they feel emotionally, how satisfied they are with their work environment, what their physical health is, and what is their level of healthy behavior and basic access.

The second chart is the stock market (Dow, Nasdaq, and S&P500) for the same time period.

Surprisingly similar, aren't they? What does that mean?

Free Markets and Human Persons (John Paul II series)

2009-09-10T15:02:00.000-07:00

Here's some of the juicer passages from the 1991 encylical Centesimus Annus. John Paul II clearly condemns the collectivism and state-ownership practiced by communism, and he also clearly praises the free market for many things, particular monetary ("solvent") matters. Yet he also decries a business model that sees the maximization of profits as its own reason for existence. He warns against the potential idolatry in the consumption of goods, and insists that business must be guided by moral and ethical concerns that profit the community of persons. The conditions of the workplace matter to Christians, he says, because they matter to proper human flourishing everywhere:

It would appear that, on the level of individual nations and of international relations, the free market is the most efficient instrument for utilizing resources and effectively responding to needs. But this is true only for those needs which are "solvent", insofar as they are endowed with purchasing power, and for those resources which are "marketable", insofar as they are capable of obtaining a satisfactory price. But there are many human needs which find no place on the market. It is a strict duty of justice and truth not to allow fundamental human needs to remain unsatisfied, and not to allow those burdened by such needs to perish. It is also necessary to help these needy people to acquire expertise, to enter the circle of exchange, and to develop their skills in order to make the best use of their capacities and resources. Even prior to the logic of a fair exchange of goods and the forms of justice appropriate to it, there exists something which is due to man because he is man, by reason of his lofty dignity. Inseparable from that required "something" is the possibility to survive and, at the same time, to make an active contribution to the common good of humanity. . . .

[I]t is right to speak of a struggle against an economic system, if the latter is understood as a method of upholding the absolute predominance of capital, the possession of the means of production and of the land, in contrast to the free and personal nature of human work. In the struggle against such a system, what is being proposed as an alternative is not the socialist system, which in fact turns out to be State capitalism, but rather a society of free work, of enterprise and of participation. Such a society is not directed against the market, but demands that the market be appropriately controlled by the forces of society and by the State, so as to guarantee that the basic needs of the whole of society are satisfied.

The Church acknowledges the legitimate role of profit as an indication that a business is functioning well. When a firm makes a profit, this means that productive factors have been properly employed and corresponding human needs have been duly satisfied. But profitability is not the only indicator of a firm's condition. It is possible for the financial accounts to be in order, and yet for the people — who make up the firm's most valuable asset — to be humiliated and their dignity offended. Besides being morally inadmissible, this will eventually have negative repercussions on the firm's economic efficiency. In fact, the purpose of a business firm is not simply to make a profit, but is to be found in its very existence as a community of persons who in various ways are endeavouring to satisfy their basic needs, and who form a particular group at the service of the whole of society. Profit is a regulator of the life of a business, but it is not the only one; other human and moral factors must also be considered which, in the long term, are at least equally important for the life of a business. . . .

It is the task of the State to provide for the defense and preservation of common goods such as the natural and human environments, which cannot be safeguarded simply by market forces. Just as in the time of primitive capitalism the State had the duty of defending the basic rights of workers, so now, with the new capitalism, the State and all of society have the duty of defending those collective goods which, among others, constitute the essential framework for the legitimate pursuit of personal goals on the part of each individual. . . .

Certainly the mechanisms of the market offer secure advantages: they help to utilize resources better; they promote the exchange of products; above all they give central place to the person's desires and preferences, which, in a contract, meet the desires and preferences of another person. Nevertheless, these mechanisms carry the risk of an "idolatry" of the market, an idolatry which ignores the existence of goods which by their nature are not and cannot be mere commodities.

Marxism criticized capitalist bourgeois societies, blaming them for the commercialization and alienation of human existence. This rebuke is of course based on a mistaken and inadequate idea of alienation, derived solely from the sphere of relationships of production and ownership, that is, giving them a materialistic foundation and moreover denying the legitimacy and positive value of market relationships even in their own sphere. Marxism thus ends up by affirming that only in a collective society can alienation be eliminated. However, the historical experience of socialist countries has sadly demonstrated that collectivism does not do away with alienation but rather increases it, adding to it a lack of basic necessities and economic inefficiency.

The historical experience of the West, for its part, shows that even if the Marxist analysis and its foundation of alienation are false, nevertheless alienation — and the loss of the authentic meaning of life — is a reality in Western societies too. This happens in consumerism, when people are ensnared in a web of false and superficial gratifications rather than being helped to experience their personhood in an authentic and concrete way. Alienation is found also in work, when it is organized so as to ensure maximum returns and profits with no concern whether the worker, through his own labour, grows or diminishes as a person, either through increased sharing in a genuinely supportive community or through increased isolation in a maze of relationships marked by destructive competitiveness and estrangement, in which he is considered only a means and not an end.

The concept of alienation needs to be led back to the Christian vision of reality, by recognizing in alienation a reversal of means and ends. When man does not recognize in himself and in others the value and grandeur of the human person, he effectively deprives himself of the possibility of benefitting from his humanity and of entering into that relationship of solidarity and communion with others for which God created him. Indeed, it is through the free gift of self that man truly finds himself. This gift is made possible by the human person's essential "capacity for transcendence". Man cannot give himself to a purely human plan for reality, to an abstract ideal or to a false utopia. As a person, he can give himself to another person or to other persons, and ultimately to God, who is the author of his being and who alone can fully accept his gift. A man is alienated if he refuses to transcend himself and to live the experience of selfgiving and of the formation of an authentic human community oriented towards his final destiny, which is God. A society is alienated if its forms of social organization, production and consumption make it more difficult to offer this gift of self and to establish this solidarity between people.

What the Numbers Tell Us

2009-09-10T13:28:00.000-07:00

Probably the best way to track the effectiveness of the speech is via approval ratings and surveys that ask voters whether they approve of the Obama plan or the way he is handling health care reform.

Did we see any movement one way or the other when comparing the numbers for today versus the numbers for yesterday.

Rasmussen tracks presidential approval by comparing Obama's strongly approve ratings with his strongly disapprove numbers. According to the Rasmussen, 33% of all voters survey strongly approve of the president's job Performance while 41% disapprove. This means his overall rating for September 10Th is -8 which is unchanged from September 9Th.

Additionally, 44% of all voters surveyed approve of his health care reform package while 53% disapprove.

At this point, the speech appears to have made little impact with voters. Of course, Democratic members of Congress were a target group of the speech as well. The speech may have swayed them. Also, it is important to note that opinions may change as the media forms a consensus message of failure or success. This could take a few days to crystallize

Rasmussen

Some particular benefits of capitalism: It's the little things...

2009-09-10T12:21:00.000-07:00

As I was mingling with my friends this morning, eating a doughnut, I couldn't help but be thankful to God for his provisions. Particularly I was looking at one delicious product of capitalism - the Krispy Kreme doughnut. How great it is that some people choose to get up before sun comes up, to drive to work before my alarm clock rings, and to offer their product to those who choose to buy it for a trifling sum.

Of course, today I did not have to buy the doughnut because of another blessing that God provided -a free breakfest for faculty and staff at the university, so I am even more thankful for God's provisions for the university as a whole.

Meet Joe Wilson!!

2009-09-10T10:40:00.000-07:00

A quick thumbnail sketch of the man who heckled the president during the nationally televised speech.

The President has a Large Hill to Climb

2009-09-10T10:30:00.000-07:00

This Associated Press poll indicates the distance President Obama must travel to pass comprehensive health care reform. We will see what these numbers look like during the early, post-speech phase of the news cycle.

Obama's Healthcare Hail Mary

2009-09-10T08:50:00.000-07:00

The pundits proclaimed this as the make or break speech for President Obama and his health care plan. Of course, the media issues the same dire warning in July and August. The networks know a sense of urgency or impending doom means more viewers!!

While the jury is still out regarding this latest effort, the White House must grapplw over its inability to communicate a precise, easily digestible message to voters. Of course, this problem exists because they are still not certain as to what this bill Will ultimately look like and what it will accomplish. Current efforts are truly all over the place even though the public option still creates the most buzz.

Joint Ownership of the Means of Production? (John Paul II series)

2009-09-10T06:48:00.000-07:00

This selection from Laborem exercers shows John Paul II embracing the "middle way" of distributism. he argues against socialist collectivist and state control of the means of production, as well as those forms of capitalism that would deby labor the right to ownership of the means to produce. He insists on the right to private property but not on the absolute right divorced form the higher good of the common good of a society of persons. My guess is there's something here to annoy everyone:

". . . the Church, diverges radically from the programme of collectivism as proclaimed by Marxism and put into pratice in various countries in the decades following the time of Leo XIII's Encyclical. At the same time it differs from the programme of capitalism practised by liberalism and by the political systems inspired by it. In the latter case, the difference consists in the way the right to ownership or property is understood. Christian tradition has never upheld this right as absolute and untouchable. On the contrary, it has always understood this right within the broader context of the right common to all to use the goods of the whole of creation: the right to private property is subordinated to the right to common use, to the fact that goods are meant for everyone.

"Furthermore, in the Church's teaching, ownership has never been understood in a way that could constitute grounds for social conflict in labour. As mentioned above, property is acquired first of all through work in order that it may serve work. This concerns in a special way ownership of the means of production. Isolating these means as a separate property in order to set it up in the form of "capital" in opposition to "labour"-and even to practise exploitation of labour-is contrary to the very nature of these means and their possession. They cannot be possessed against labour, they cannot even be possessed for possession's sake, because the only legitimate title to their possession- whether in the form of private ownership or in the form of public or collective ownership-is that they should serve labour, and thus, by serving labour, that they should make possible the achievement of the first principle of this order, namely, the universal destination of goods and the right to common use of them. . . .

". . . The principle of respect for work demands that this right should undergo a constructive revision, both in theory and in practice. If it is true that capital, as the whole of the means of production, is at the same time the product of the work of generations, it is equally true that capital is being unceasingly created through the work done with the help of all these means of production, and these means can be seen as a great workbench at which the present generation of workers is working day after day. Obviously we are dealing here with different kinds of work, not only so-called manual labour but also the many forms of intellectual work, including white-collar work and management.

"In the light of the above, the many proposals put forward by experts in Catholic social teaching and by the highest Magisterium of the Church take on special significance -- proposals for joint ownership of the means of work, sharing by the workers in the management and/or profits of businesses, so-called shareholding by labour, etc. Whether these various proposals can or cannot be applied concretely, it is clear that recognition of the proper position of labour and the worker in the production process demands various adaptations in the sphere of the right to ownership of the means of production. This is so not only in view of older situations but also, first and foremost, in view of the whole of the situation and the problems in the second half of the present century with regard to the so-called Third World and the various new independent countries that have arisen, especially in Africa but elsewhere as well, in place of the colonial territories of the past.

"Therefore, while the position of "rigid" capitalism must undergo continual revision, in order to be reformed from the point of view of human rights, both human rights in the widest sense and those linked with man's work, it must be stated that, from the same point of view, these many deeply desired reforms cannot be achieved by an a priori elimination of private ownership of the means of production. For it must be noted that merely taking these means of production (capital) out of the hands of their private owners is not enough to ensure their satisfactory socialization. . . .

". . . A way towards that goal could be found by associating labour with the ownership of capital, as far as possible, and by producing a wide range of intermediate bodies with economic, social and cultural purposes; they would be bodies enjoying real autonomy with regard to the public powers, pursuing their specific aims in honest collaboration with each other and in subordination to the demands of the common good, and they would be living communities both in form and in substance, in the sense that the members of each body would be looked upon and treated as persons and encouraged to take an active part in the life of the body."

Graph of the day - Who should get medical treatment?

2009-09-09T07:13:00.001-07:00

From an article in Lancet, here is one proposal of how to prioritize medical treatment to people according to patient's age.

The higher the red line the higher the likelihood that a person in that age group would be 'awarded' medical services.

The implication is that if a 5-year old, a 25-year old, and a 55-year old all line up for kidney dialysis and only one procedure is available, then the procedure will be awarded to the 25-year old, and not to the other two. The article (full text) is written by Rahm Emanuel's brother Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the White House health care policy advisor. I read about the article in The Economist.

What would be a Christian way to 'award' scarce health interventions? Would the decision to 'award' medical services to a person be based on that person's age, gender, health status, other characteristics?

There is no arguing that we do not live in a world of scarcity and disease, so the question about how to allocate scarce resources is an important one. The Christian view is very much consistent with holding that health care decisions should be made by individuals for themselves and for their family members, even (voluntarily) for the people in their community. When there is an unresolved health need in the neighborhood, church, or the community, then individuals should voluntarily band together voluntarily to help the sick.

If the individuals do not make their own health care decisions, but allow someone else to do it on their behalf, then the need to ration scarce care to others becomes inescapable, and every method of rationing scarce care to human beings brings with it major, devastating ethical problems.

Any commenters have a good idea for how rationing decisions (deciding who would get care and who would not) could be made ethically, or consistently with Christian principles?

Graph of the day - majors and salaries

2009-09-08T21:33:00.000-07:00

Best Undergrad College Degrees By Salary

Methodology
Annual pay for Bachelors graduates without higher degrees. Typical starting graduates have 2 years of experience; mid-career have 15 years. See full methodology for more.

Luckily, we know that education is about much more than salary. However, it is interesting to know the starting and mid-career salaries of various majors.

This is from http://www.payscale.com/best-colleges/degrees.asp

Family, Work, and "Dominion" (John Paul II series)

2009-09-08T08:34:00.000-07:00

This is section 10 of John Paul II's encyclical Laborem exercens. It raises a number of important questions about not only the nature of work, but also what Christians should believe about the nature of the family and community:

"Work constitutes a foundation for the formation of family life, which is a natural right and something that man is called to. These two spheres of values-one linked to work and the other consequent on the family nature of human life-must be properly united and must properly permeate each other. In a way, work is a condition for making it possible to found a family, since the family requires the means of subsistence which man normally gains through work. Work and industriousness also influence the whole process of education in the family, for the very reason that everyone "becomes a human being" through, among other things, work, and becoming a human being is precisely the main purpose of the whole process of education. Obviously, two aspects of work in a sense come into play here: the one making family life and its upkeep possible, and the other making possible the achievement of the purposes of the family, especially education. Nevertheless, these two aspects of work are linked to one another and are mutually complementary in various points.

"It must be remembered and affirmed that the family constitutes one of the most important terms of reference for shaping the social and ethical order of human work. The teaching of the Church has always devoted special attention to this question, and in the present document we shall have to return to it. In fact, the family is simultaneously a community made possible by work and the first school of work, within the home, for every person.

"The third sphere of values that emerges from this point of view-that of the subject of work-concerns the great society to which man belongs on the basis of particular cultural and historical links. This society-even when it has not yet taken on the mature form of a nation-is not only the great "educator" of every man, even though an indirect one (because each individual absorbs within the family the contents and values that go to make up the culture of a given nation); it is also a great historical and social incarnation of the work of all generations. All of this brings it about that man combines his deepest human identity with membership of a nation, and intends his work also to increase the common good developed together with his compatriots, thus realizing that in this way work serves to add to the heritage of the whole human family, of all the people living in the world.

"These three spheres are always important for human work in its subjective dimension. And this dimension, that is to say, the concrete reality of the worker, takes precedence over the objective dimension. In the subjective dimension there is realized, first of all, that "dominion" over the world of nature to which man is called from the beginning according to the words of the Book of Genesis. The very process of "subduing the earth", that is to say work, is marked in the course of history, and especially in recent centuries, by an immense development of technological means. This is an advantageous and positive phenomenon, on condition that the objective dimension of work does not gain the upper hand over the subjective dimension, depriving man of his dignity and inalienable rights or reducing them."

Should we see work and family as intimately related? Why or why not?
Is human dignity tied to our work, to its place in our homelife, and its place in the larger community?
What role should technology play in the humanizing of work, especially as a part of family and community?

Graph of the day - the problem with future

2009-09-06T20:26:00.000-07:00

The problem about making claims about the future is that the future hasn't happened yet.

See this chart above - the blue lines are the predictions of the White House economic team about unemployment rate with or without the stimulus (report from Jan 10, 2009). Darker blue shows the projected best case - a lower unemployment rate that is 'lower' precisely because of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The lighter blue line is the projected worst case unemployment rate without the stimulus. The problem is that the real numbers (the black dots) show that the actual rate is higher than even the White House's worst case scenario.

Are we to believe that the stimulus made unemployment worse, or that without the stimulus, the current 9.7% unemployment would have been even higher?

The chart is from Innocent Bystanders and I originally saw it at Greg Mankiw's blog.

Graph of the day - Unions less popular

2009-09-04T12:59:00.001-07:00

According to a new poll from Gallup, the suport for labor unions in the US is continuing to erode.

How would you answer Gallup's simple question - do you approve or disaprove of labor unions? Do you think there are Christian reasons to approve or disaprove of labor unions?

Here is the Gallup report.

Here is where I saw the article.

Persons, Their Dignity, and Work (John Paul II series)

2009-09-04T07:12:00.000-07:00

The encyclical Laborem exercens, written in 1981 while the Polish workers' movement Solidarity resisted its Communist government, speaks to the nature of work and the innate dignity of human beings:

"Work is one of the characteristics that distinguish man from the rest of creatures, whose activity for sustaining their lives cannot be called work. Only man is capable of work, and only man works, at the same time by work occupying his existence on earth. Thus work bears a particular mark of man and of humanity, the mark of a person operating within a community of persons. And this mark decides its interior characteristics; in a sense it constitutes its very nature. . . ." (intro.)

"In order to continue our analysis of work, an analysis linked with the word of the Bible telling man that he is to subdue the earth, we must concentrate our attention on work in the subjective sense, much more than we did on the objective significance, barely touching upon the vast range of problems known intimately and in detail to scholars in various fields and also, according to their specializations, to those who work. If the words of the Book of Genesis to which we refer in this analysis of ours speak of work in the objective sense in an indirect way, they also speak only indirectly of the subject of work; but what they say is very eloquent and is full of great significance.

"Man has to subdue the earth and dominate it, because as the "image of God" he is a person, that is to say, a subjective being capable of acting in a planned and rational way, capable of deciding about himself, and with a tendency to self-realization. As a person, man is therefore the subject to work. As a person he works, he performs various actions belonging to the work process; independently of their objective content, these actions must all serve to realize his humanity, to fulfill the calling to be a person that is his by reason of his very humanity.

"This does not mean that, from the objective point of view, human work cannot and must not be rated and qualified in any way. It only means that the primary basis of the value of work is man himself, who is its subject. This leads immediately to a very important conclusion of an ethical nature: however true it may be that man is destined for work and called to it, in the first place work is "for man" and not man "for work". Through this conclusion one rightly comes to recognize the pre-eminence of the subjective meaning of work over the objective one. Given this way of understanding things, and presupposing that different sorts of work that people do can have greater or lesser objective value, let us try nevertheless to show that each sort is judged above all by the measure of the dignity of the subject of work, that is to say the person, the individual who carries it out. On the other hand: independently of the work that every man does, and presupposing that this work constitutes a purpose-at times a very demanding one-of his activity, this purpose does not possess a definitive meaning in itself. In fact, in the final analysis it is always man who is the purpose of the work, whatever work it is that is done by man-even if the common scale of values rates it as the merest "service", as the most monotonous even the most alienating work. . . .

"[I]n the light of the analysis of the fundamental reality of the whole economic process-first and foremost of the production structure that work is-it should be recognized that the error of early capitalism can be repeated wherever man is in a way treated on the same level as the whole complex of the material means of production, as an instrument and not in accordance with the true dignity of his work-that is to say, where he is not treated as subject and maker, and for this very reason as the true purpose of the whole process of production.

"This explains why the analysis of human work in the light of the words concerning man's "dominion" over the earth goes to the very heart of the ethical and social question. This concept should also find a central place in the whole sphere of social and economic policy, both within individual countries and in the wider field of international and intercontinental relationships, particularly with reference to the tensions making themselves felt in the world not only between East and West but also between North and South." (section 6)

John Paul II ties work to the human vocation. For him, it is a biblical idea, one arising from the creation mandates of Genesis. Work must not, however, reduce human beings to their material existence alone. It must play a role in and recognize the nature of human beings--their personhood, their communal existence, their social and ethical existence, their need to make and create, to produce and partake. Human economic systems--socialist, communist, capitalist--that treat persons as objects, rather than as subjects, are to be condemned and brought to repentance.

Graph - Income and SAT scores

2009-09-03T23:05:00.001-07:00

Interesting chart from Economix:

Although, as Greg Mankiw points out - correlation does not always imply causation.

Sentenced to death on the NHS

2009-09-03T13:34:00.000-07:00

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6127514/Sentenced-to-death-on-the-NHS.html

This one should give us all pause, no matter your views of nationalizing healthcare.

The Law and the Life of Persons (John Paul II series)

2009-09-03T06:35:00.000-07:00

Here's a fascinating passage from Evangelium vitae, "The Gospel of Life" John Paul II's encylical on culture of life issues:

Life is indelibly marked by a truth of its own. By accepting God's gift, man is obliged to maintain life in this truth which is essential to it. To detach oneself from this truth is to condemn oneself to meaninglessness and unhappiness, and possibly to become a threat to the existence of others, since the barriers guaranteeing respect for life and the defence of life, in every circumstance, have been broken down.

The truth of life is revealed by God's commandment. The word of the Lord shows concretely the course which life must follow if it is to respect its own truth and to preserve its own dignity. The protection of life is not only ensured by the spe- cific commandment "You shall not kill" (Ex 20:13; Dt 5:17); the entire Law of the Lord serves to protect life, because it reveals that truth in which life finds its full meaning.

It is not surprising, therefore, that God's Covenant with his people is so closely linked to the perspective of life, also in its bodily dimension. In that Covenant, God's commandment is offered as the path of life: "I have set before you this day life and good, death and evil. If you obey the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you this day, by loving the Lord your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his ordinances, then you shall live and multiply, and the Lord your God will bless you in the land which you are entering to take possession of" (Dt 30:15-16). What is at stake is not only the land of Canaan and the existence of the people of Israel, but also the world of today and of the future, and the existence of all humanity. In fact, it is altogether impossible for life to remain authentic and complete once it is detached from the good; and the good, in its turn, is essentially bound to the commandments of the Lord, that is, to the "law of life" (Sir 17:11). The good to be done is not added to life as a burden which weighs on it, since the very purpose of life is that good and only by doing it can life be built up.

It is thus the Law as a whole which fully protects human life. This explains why it is so hard to remain faithful to the commandment "You shall not kill" when the other "words of life" (cf. Acts 7:38) with which this commandment is bound up are not observed. Detached from this wider framework, the commandment is destined to become nothing more than an obligation imposed from without, and very soon we begin to look for its limits and try to find mitigating factors and exceptions. Only when people are open to the fullness of the truth about God, man and history will the words "You shall not kill" shine forth once more as a good for man in himself and in his relations with others. In such a perspective we can grasp the full truth of the passage of the Book of Deuteronomy which Jesus repeats in reply to the first temptation: "Man does not live by bread alone, but ... by everything that proceeds out of the mouth of the Lord" (Dt 8:3; cf. Mt 4:4).

It is by listening to the word of the Lord that we are able to live in dignity and justice. It is by observing the Law of God that we are able to bring forth fruits of life and happiness: "All who hold her fast will live, and those who forsake her will die" (Bar 4:1).

John Paul II puts together the revelation of God's law, the nature of the covenant community, and the respect for human life and dignity that should mark our view of human persons and their communities. Life is not authentic without this fundamental respect for personhood. Once we begin to qualify away human life, deeming some as less than fully human, we risk before long sacrificng our human nature and our basic morality entirely.

Should Evangelical Colleges Hire Roman Catholics?

2009-09-02T07:19:00.000-07:00

I'm throwing out this question to see what kind of feedback I can generate on this topic. 25 years ago, the idea would have been all but unthinkable. But recently, with the reproachment between evangelicals and Catholics because of the culture wars (what one commentator called, "the ecumenism of the trenchs"), as well as such projects as ECT (Evangelicals and Catholics Together), the Joint Luthern-Catholic Statement on Justification, and numerous works of history and theology that explore the past divide and possibilities of future accord, it has become far more common for evangelical and conservative Catholic academics to see eye-to-eye on many things. (Plus, evangelical academics often teach at Catholic schools now. )

In a few years ago, Wheaton College chose not to renew Joshua Hochschild's contract when he converted to Rome, though he continued to self-identify as a "Catholic evangelical." Alan Jacobs, English professor at Wheaton, has an interesting piece on the issue in First Things, "To Be a Christian College."

Here, at DBU, we had our first Catholic Archbishop speak in chapel a few years ago, and we've quietly for some time now asked Catholic speakers to campus on various issues, but that is still far removed from even considering an adjunct or guest lecturer appointment.

What do you think? Is it even possible? What would be the pros and cons? if we ever did so, how shold we go about it? What might be the best approaches and/or cautions we need observe?

Visualization - One trillion dollars

2009-09-01T20:52:00.001-07:00

What can one do with a Trillion Dollars?

*Buy a $3 latte every day for ... 900 million years

*Fund the military of ... all NATO countries combined

*Run the US Federal Government for ... about three months

See the 1 minute video for more fun ideas for how to spend a trillion USD.

I found the link at http://infosthetics.com/

On the impossibility of guaranteeing positive rights without negating negative rights

2009-08-30T21:24:00.000-07:00

This is from an article I was reading about positive and negative rights:

The right to life certainly is a fundamental human right. It is a negative right since it only requires that others do not kill one. In this context, one should recall that about 169 million people have been killed by states or their governments in the 20th century. Communists and National Socialists established the most murderous regimes. Among the victims of communism, there are tens of millions of deaths from starvation after the coerced collectivization of agriculture in Stalin’s Soviet Union or Mao’s China. Although the 20th century suffered two world wars and other bloody wars, fewer people died on the battlefield or because of bombing campaigns than have been murdered or starved to death by their own governments. Whoever wants to protect human rights should therefore first of all focus on the necessity of protecting people from the state and its abuses of power.
...

As the balance of achievements and victims of communism demonstrates, the attempt to provide entitlements did not prevent tens of millions of deaths from starvation. Actually, the attempt to provide more than negative rights resulted in something less: the lack of respect of negative and positive rights. As I shall argue, this association between the attempt to guarantee entitlements by a monopoly of coercion and central planning is causally related to the repeated failure to protect even the right to life.

The rest of the article is here.

Chart of the Day - Government spending since 1870

2009-08-28T14:35:00.000-07:00

Today's charts show US Government spending in three contexts. The first chart shows various countries' government spending as a share of GDP roughly over the last 130 years (don't try to trace countries, just note the trend; US highlighted in red):

The second chart shows the same info for fewer countries:

The third chart shows the US government spending without being smoothed out. Here we see the peaks during the two world wars, and other minor increases and decreases in the government spending:

What do you think? To me what stands out is the following:

the world-wide sustained trend of increasing government spending is noteworthy even if unfortunate
the current (2009) increase in the government spending compares well with the increase during the early part of the Great Depression. Then spending about doubled from about 10% of GDP to 20% of GDP. Now spending is again increasing about 10 percentage points from 35% to 45%.

If history is any guide - don't hold your breath for trend reversal.

I took the data for charts come from Tanzi's book "Public Spending in the 20th century" for the first two charts, and from usgovernmentspending.com for the second chart.

What do you think upon observing the charts?

Chart of the day - Dallas house prices

2009-08-27T19:26:00.000-07:00

Here is a nice chart from economix (that's the New York Times econ blog; yes, I do occasionally read the NYTimes):

The blue indicates how much the Dallas house prices changed in a given month as compared to the same month in the previous year. So if last July the prices were on average $100,000 per house, and this July the prices were on average $110,000, then the blue line would show +10%, since the house prices increased by 10% in that one year period.

The gray area shows the same statistic not for Dallas, but the average for all the largest cities in the US.

So - Dallas' prices were 2.2% lower in June 09 than they were in June 08. Notice how prices in Dallas increased by much less than the national average in the boom years, but they also fell much less in the bust years. Maybe we can call our prices 'lukewarm'? :)

Also note the reversal of trend in Dallas and the nation early this year. Seems that the price drops are becomming smaller and smaller, perhaps we will soon see gains again?

Human Freedom and the Moral Law (John Paul II series)

2009-08-27T07:10:00.000-07:00

John Paul II in this selection from Veritatis splendor argues that while humans have the freedom to use their reason to explore and understand the natural world and to seek out expressions of ethical action, this freedom is not intended for the radical autonomy preached by modernity. The conscience is not an idol unto itself. He warns that a loss of belief in definitive right and wrong is accompanied by a loss of belief in universal truth that can adjudicate between the claims of various individuals. Instead of a heteronomy, in which each person is a will unto himself or herself, one should recognize the existence of a participatory theonomy, in which persons enter into the law of God with their whole persons:

32. Certain currents of modern thought have gone so far as to exalt freedom to such an extent that it becomes an absolute, which would then be the source of values. This is the direction taken by doctrines which have lost the sense of the transcendent or which are explicitly atheist. The individual conscience is accorded the status of a supreme tribunal of moral judgment which hands down categorical and infallible decisions about good and evil. To the affirmation that one has a duty to follow one's conscience is unduly added the affirmation that one's moral judgment is true merely by the fact that it has its origin in the conscience. But in this way the inescapable claims of truth disappear, yielding their place to a criterion of sincerity, authenticity and "being at peace with oneself", so much so that some have come to adopt a radically subjectivistic conception of moral judgment.

As is immediately evident, the crisis of truth is not unconnected with this development. Once the idea of a universal truth about the good, knowable by human reason, is lost, inevitably the notion of conscience also changes. Conscience is no longer considered in its primordial reality as an act of a person's intelligence, the function of which is to apply the universal knowledge of the good in a specific situation and thus to express a judgment about the right conduct to be chosen here and now. Instead, there is a tendency to grant to the individual conscience the prerogative of independently determining the criteria of good and evil and then acting accordingly. Such an outlook is quite congenial to an individualist ethic, wherein each individual is faced with his own truth, different from the truth of others. Taken to its extreme consequences, this individualism leads to a denial of the very idea of human nature.

These different notions are at the origin of currents of thought which posit a radical opposition between moral law and conscience, and between nature and freedom.

33. Side by side with its exaltation of freedom, yet oddly in contrast with it, modern culture radically questions the very existence of this freedom. A number of disciplines, grouped under the name of the "behavioural sciences", have rightly drawn attention to the many kinds of psychological and social conditioning which influence the exercise of human freedom. Knowledge of these conditionings and the study they have received represent important achievements which have found application in various areas, for example in pedagogy or the administration of justice. But some people, going beyond the conclusions which can be legitimately drawn from these observations, have come to question or even deny the very reality of human freedom.

The rightful autonomy of the practical reason means that man possesses in himself his own law, received from the Creator. Nevertheless, the autonomy of reason cannot mean that reason itself creates values and moral norms. Were this autonomy to imply a denial of the participation of the practical reason in the wisdom of the divine Creator and Lawgiver, or were it to suggest a freedom which creates moral norms, on the basis of historical contingencies or the diversity of societies and cultures, this sort of alleged autonomy would contradict the Church's teaching on the truth about man. It would be the death of true freedom: "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die" (Gen 2:17).

41. Man's genuine moral autonomy in no way means the rejection but rather the acceptance of the moral law, of God's command: "The Lord God gave this command to the man..." (Gen 2:16). Human freedom and God's law meet and are called to intersect, in the sense of man's free obedience to God and of God's completely gratuitous benevolence towards man. Hence obedience to God is not, as some would believe, a heteronomy, as if the moral life were subject to the will of something all-powerful, absolute, extraneous to man and intolerant of his freedom. If in fact a heteronomy of morality were to mean a denial of man's self-determination or the imposition of norms unrelated to his good, this would be in contradiction to the Revelation of the Covenant and of the redemptive Incarnation. Such a heteronomy would be nothing but a form of alienation, contrary to divine wisdom and to the dignity of the human person.

Others speak, and rightly so, of theonomy, or participated theonomy, since man's free obedience to God's law effectively implies that human reason and human will participate in God's wisdom and providence. By forbidding man to "eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil", God makes it clear that man does not originally possess such "knowledge" as something properly his own, but only participates in it by the light of natural reason and of Divine Revelation, which manifest to him the requirements and the promptings of eternal wisdom. Law must therefore be considered an expression of divine wisdom: by submitting to the law, freedom submits to the truth of creation. Consequently one must acknowledge in the freedom of the human person the image and the nearness of God, who is present in all (cf. Eph 4:6). But one must likewise acknowledge the majesty of the God of the universe and revere the holiness of the law of God, who is infinitely transcendent: Deus semper maior.

Is it better to be cold than lukewarm?

2009-08-26T08:53:00.000-07:00

I was just thinking about this. It is clear that it is best to be 'on fire' for Christ. But is it true that the second best is being 'cold' and not 'lukewarm'? Is it better to be cold than lukewarm?

I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth.

Revelation 3:15-16

Any thoughts?

Grace, Love, and Freedom (John Paul II series)

2009-08-26T06:56:00.000-07:00

This is part of a series of passages from the late John Paul II's encyclicals, which I as a Protestant can learn from. The following are reflections from the 1993 encyclical Veritatis splendor. Here, he examines the nature of grace and freedom and their role in Christian morality:

"To imitate and live out the love of Christ is not possible for man by his own strength alone. He becomes capable of this love only by virtue of a gift received. As the Lord Jesus receives the love of his Father, so he in turn freely communicates that love to his disciples: "As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; abide in my love" (Jn 15:9). Christ's gift is his Spirit, whose first "fruit" (cf. Gal 5:22) is charity: "God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us" (Rom 5:5). . . .

"Love and life according to the Gospel cannot be thought of first and foremost as a kind of precept, because what they demand is beyond man's abilities. They are possible only as the result of a gift of God who heals, restores and transforms the human heart by his grace: "For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ" (Jn 1:17). The promise of eternal life is thus linked to the gift of grace, and the gift of the Spirit which we have received is even now the "guarantee of our inheritance" (Eph 1:14).

"And so we find revealed the authentic and original aspect of the commandment of love and of the perfection to which it is ordered: we are speaking of a possibility opened up to man exclusively by grace, by the gift of God, by his love. On the other hand, precisely the awareness of having received the gift, of possessing in Jesus Christ the love of God, generates and sustains the free response of a full love for God and the brethren, as the Apostle John insistently reminds us in his first Letter: "Beloved, let us love one another; for love is of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God; for God is love... Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another... We love, because he first loved us" (1 Jn 4:7-8, 11, 19).

"This inseparable connection between the Lord's grace and human freedom, between gift and task, has been expressed in simple yet profound words by Saint Augustine in his prayer: "Da quod iubes et iube quod vis" (Grant what you command and command what you will).

"The gift does not lessen but reinforces the moral demands of love: "This is his commandment, that we should believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ and love one another just as he has commanded us" (1 Jn 3:32). One can "abide" in love only by keeping the commandments, as Jesus states: "If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love" (Jn 15:10)." [secs. 22-24]

Freedom, as John Paul II reads the New Testament, is not simply a matter of self-expressive choices of the will, but is found first as the gift of the Holy Spirit, whose love and grace enables us to begin keeping the dictates of the law. Following Augustine, John Paul II holds that obedience comes from the love created in our hearts by the grace of God. Rather than a justification by faith or works, though it includes each of these at some level, the key is a justification by love, that is the benevolent action of the Spirit in us.

John Paul II and the Common Good

2009-08-25T14:17:00.000-07:00

The last quotations from Redemptor hominis:

"The essential sense of the State, as a political community, consists in that the society and people composing it are master and sovereign of their own destiny. This sense remains unrealized if, instead of the exercise of power with the moral participation of the society or people, what we see is the imposition of power by a certain group upon all the other members of the society. This is essential in the present age, with its enormous increase in people's social awareness and the accompanying need for the citizens to have a right share in the political life of the community, while taking account of the real conditions of each people and the necessary vigour of public authority. These therefore are questions of primary importance from the point of view of the progress of man himself and the overall development of his humanity.

"The Church has always taught the duty to act for the common good and, in so doing, has likewise educated good citizens for each State. Furthermore, she has always taught that the fundamental duty of power is solicitude for the common good of society; this is what gives power its fundamental rights. Precisely in the name of these premises of the objective ethical order, the rights of power can only be understood on the basis of respect for the objective and inviolable rights of man. The common good that authority in the State serves is brought to full realization only when all the citizens are sure of their rights. The lack of this leads to the dissolution of society, opposition by citizens to authority, or a situation of oppression, intimidation, violence, and terrorism, of which many examples have been provided by the totalitarianisms of this century. Thus the principle of human rights is of profound concern to the area of social justice and is the measure by which it can be tested in the life of political bodies." (sec. 17)

What interests me about these two paragraphs are how John Paul II brings together an assumption about the common good of the people with stress on their rights and on an objective moral order in society and nature. He also points out that a totalitarian collective cannot fulfill the conditions for true society and a common good that brings goods to people.

Interesting questions

2009-08-24T20:23:00.000-07:00

Interesting questions from Bill Frezza:

Do you find it natural to accept the varied religious beliefs of others even if they contradict your own? On the other hand, are you often at odds with people who espouse different economic beliefs and policies? Why, especially if the former forms the foundation for the latter?
...
Are you careful not to judge people by the color of their skin yet sometimes quick to make judgments based on economic status? If so, do you make distinctions based solely on wealth or lack thereof or does it make a difference to you how an individual became rich or poor?
...
Do you resent being asked to justify your economic beliefs or the moral foundation they rest on? Do your ends always justify your means? Do you feel entitled to having your beliefs respected solely because they are yours? Would you feel the same way about your mathematical beliefs?

Feel free to answer!

John Paul II and Human Freedom

2009-08-24T07:08:00.000-07:00

Two fascinating passages from Redemptor hominis that examine what Christ and the Church mean to human freedom:

"Jesus Christ meets the man of every age, including our own, with the same words: "You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." These words contain both a fundamental requirement and a warning: the requirement of an honest relationship with regard to truth as a condition for authentic freedom, and the warning to avoid every kind of illusory freedom, every superficial unilateral freedom, every freedom that fails to enter into the whole truth about man and the world. Today also, even after two thousand years, we see Christ as the one who brings man freedom based on truth, frees man from what curtails, diminishes and as it were breaks off this freedom at its root, in man's soul, his heart and his conscience. What a stupendous confirmation of this has been given and is still being given by those who, thanks to Christ and in Christ, have reached true freedom and have manifested it even in situations of external constraint!" (sec. 12)

"The Church cannot abandon man, for his "destiny", that is to say his election, calling, birth and death, salvation or perdition, is so closely and unbreakably linked with Christ. We are speaking precisely of each man on this planet, this earth that the Creator gave to the first man, saying to the man and the women: "subdue it and have dominion". Each man in all the unrepeatable reality of what he is and what he does, of his intellect and will, of his conscience and heart. Man who in his reality has, because he is a "person", a history of his life that is his own and, most important, a history of his soul that is his own. Man who, in keeping with the openness of his spirit within and also with the many diverse needs of his body and his existence in time, writes this personal history of his through numerous bonds, contacts, situations, and social structures linking him with other men, beginning to do so from the first moment of his existence on earth, from the moment of his conception and birth. Man in the full truth of his existence, of his personal being and also of his community and social being-in the sphere of his own family, in the sphere of society and very diverse contexts, in the sphere of his own nation or people (perhaps still only that of his clan or tribe), and in the sphere of the whole of mankind-this man is the primary route that the Church must travel in fulfilling her mission: he is the primary and fundamental way for the Church, the way traced out by Christ himself, the way that leads invariably through the mystery of the Incarnation and the Redemption." (sec. 14)

John Paul II here stresses that our freedom is tied to the truth of Jesus. Real freedom is not found in the unfettered expression of our wills, but in the grace that lays aside all that would burden and enslave us. This is not to suggest that our free actions themsleves are not meaningful. We each have a history made up of our numerous relations and choices. These various spheres of existence to which we are joined and which give us meaning are places that the mission of God moves within, offering the way of Christ. There is much here to reflect upon concerning the ethics and politics of culture. Since the work of the incarnation and redemption of Christ is encultured in each of us, who are in turn joined to our spheres of existence, the Church must always address us in our personal and social and community beings.

Chart of the day - Dow indicates recovery?

2009-08-21T20:38:00.000-07:00

Here is a chart comparing the several deep recessions preceding this one. The chart shows Dow performance following the low period in each recession. Hopefully we are not in a period like the early 1930 (light gray line) when Dow had rallied significantly just to fall and stagnate over the coming decade , but I am not so sure...

The chart comes by the way of Calculated Risk.

John Paul II & the Nature of Human Dignity

2009-08-21T07:41:00.000-07:00

Over the next few weeks, I plan to post passages from some of John Paul II's encyclicals as they help unpack his understanding of personalism. The first few passages are from Redemptor hominis (1979):

Man cannot live without love. He remains a being that is incomprehensible for himself, his life is senseless, if love is not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experience it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it. This, as has already been said, is why Christ the Redeemer "fully reveals man to himself". If we may use the expression, this is the human dimension of the mystery of the Redemption. In this dimension man finds again the greatness, dignity and value that belong to his humanity. In the mystery of the Redemption man becomes newly "expressed" and, in a way, is newly created. He is newly created! "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." The man who wishes to understand himself thoroughly-and not just in accordance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory standards and measures of his being-he must with his unrest, uncertainty and even his weakness and sinfulness, with his life and death, draw near to Christ. He must, so to speak, enter into him with all his own self, he must "appropriate" and assimilate the whole of the reality of the Incarnation and Redemption in order to find himself. If this profound process takes place within him, he then bears fruit not only of adoration of God but also of deep wonder at himself.

. . . . This amazement, which is also a conviction and a certitude-at its deepest root it is the certainty of faith, but in a hidden and mysterious way it vivifies every aspect of authentic humanism-is closely connected with Christ. It also fixes Christ's place-so to speak, his particular right of citizenship-in the history of man and mankind. Unceasingly contemplating the whole of Christ's mystery, the Church knows with all the certainty of faith that the Redemption that took place through the Cross has definitively restored his dignity to man and given back meaning to his life in the world, a meaning that was lost to a considerable extent because of sin. And for that reason, the Redemption was accomplished in the paschal mystery, leading through the Cross and death to Resurrection. (sec. 10)

This material is profound because it understands that our human dignity is recovered and rediscovered in the Incarnation and redemptive work of Jesus. Human meaning is returned to all of us because God became a human being and because of what he has accomplished through his suffering, death, and resurrection. And at the heart of all this is the human need for love, which is essential to our very personhood.

Max Schler and an Ethics of Feeling-- Part 2

2009-08-20T07:39:00.000-07:00

"There can be no society without a life-community (though there can be a life-community without society)."--Max Scheler

Manfred Frings in his discussion of Max Scheler's ethics traces the ethicist's distinction between a life-community and a society:

Natural thinking vs. conceptual thinking
Immediate membership (co-living) vs. contractual relations (the alien other)
Members not of age vs. individuals of age
Trust, solidarity vs. distrust
No criteria for truth vs. criteria for truth
Life-values vs. divisible values
Duration vs. no duration
Territory vs. non-spatial relations

There is much to disagree with in this list, though there is much to commend about Scheler's overall observational structure. he understands life-communities to be much more organic, to grow out of natural relationships, and therefore to be more stable, conservative, and personal. People are born into life-communities, and thus, they are nurtured to accept many conceptions of the world without critical reflection.

On the other hand, societies lack the trust that forms the basis of a life-communities because they are made up of multiple communities. Instead of natural relationships, they must be based on concepts that hold adult individuals together, and their differences are negotiated legally through contracts. Thus, they lack the durability of communities, and they tend to lack the geographic center that holds a community together.

I think Scheler overlooks how communities do have implicit good and methods by which they pursue and adjudicate those goods. I would also argue that the truths that supposedly hold societies together arise out of previous life-communities and their belief structures, and when these truths are divorced from the organic practices that originate them, they quickly become vapid over a few generations.

Scheler also holds that along with life-communities and societies, there exist "all encompassing persons" (Gesamtperson) who in religious, cultural, and political expressions represent comprehensive identities that create solidarity in people otherwise separated by life-communities and even national borders. Such persons (or perhaps one can say, personhoods) bring together the experiences and insights of the life-community and the society. Yet Scheler also seems to use the concept to point to individuals who radically change the ideals and directions of people. They sum up in themselves some key element of the Gesamtperson. The Buddha, Picasso, and Napoleon represent each type respectively.

Max Scheler and an Ethics of Feeling--Part 1

2009-08-17T14:38:00.000-07:00

"Whoever has the ordo amoris of man, has man himself. He has for man as a moral subject what the crystallization formula is for crystal. He sees through him as far as one possibly can. He sees before him the constantly simple and basic lines of his heart running beneath all empirical many-sidedness and complexity. And heart deserves to be called the core of man as a spiritual being much more so than knowing and willing."--Maz Scheler (trans. Manfred Frings)

The German ethicist and phenomenologist Max Scheler worked all his life on a theory of ethical personalism that influenced Karol Wojtyla (John Paul II) in both positive and negative ways. Scheler's emphasis on a rich description of the subjective emotions of human beings was a method quite conducive to the philosophical and artistic Wojtyla, and as I will try to recount in future posts, and impacted Wojtyla's stress on human feeling and human value. At the same time, Scheler's descriptive project ultimately downplayed the importance of human choice, a stress absolutely necessary to the thought of John Paul II, as well as eventually rejecting theism for a more pantheistic belief in an evolving ground of being with both spirit (Geist) and force (Drang), a position the late pope could also not embrace. Nonetheless, some knowledge of Scheler's hierarchy of values and intersubjectivity is helpful in understanding how he shaped some of Wotjyla's early thought.

Scheler felt that feelings are fundamentally basic, that they have priority to our thoughts and choices. Our hearts tell us something about our values before our minds begin to conceptualize them. He categorized value-feelings (the order of loves) in the following way:

Holiness: the highest value-feeling. I suspect he meant something here not unlike Rudolf Ott's mysterium tremendum.
The mind's values: aesthetic (beauty); juridical (rightness); philosophical (truth).
Life-values or vitals: those values that are felt either within one's own body of as appearances in external objects.
Utility: all animals experience that something is needed or not needed.
Sensations: the lowest feelings, such as comfort, pleasure, and so on.

Our feelings, felt Scheler, have an inherent drift, for example, towards comfort, beauty, and order. The higher values are more durable, so they are also more fulfilling. They also, then, impart a sense of "oughtness" to particular actions. This sense of kairos, by which Scheler meant inner moral guidance, creates a feeling of the moment in which one's heart, mind, and will converge around the ethical decision. This does not mean that a sense of moral guidance in our feelings can be reduced to one's passions, for distortions of the values can arise.

Scheler also held that the person should be understood as found in one's actions. Each of us has the very early experience of separation from others, as well as subsequent feelings that connect us with others. He also categorized these:

"Caught" feelings that people share simply by being in the same place together. This is the experience of the mob.
"Fellow" feelings that people naturally share by living with another. This is the experience of the life-community.
"Joint" feelings are common feelings that people experience together. These do not occur naturally but are willed by people on the basis of moral principles; thus, they are the ideal basis of a society.
Feelings of emotive identification in which the experience is entirely collective are experienced in religious mysticism. Church members often combine the solidarity of the life community with sense of an all-inclusive personhood (Gesamtperson) of shared unity.

In my next post, I will explore further how Scheler distinguishes life-communities and societies, as well as how this gives rise to both perceptions of the divine and of economic and political ressentiment.

Guardian Lions

2009-08-14T09:16:00.000-07:00

I ran across today this amazing story from a few years back. What do you make of it?

"Only 12-years-old, and in a moment one Ethiopian girl’s world turned into a nightmare. Seven violent men abducted the pre-teen, intending to force her into marriage. The men held the girl for seven days, beating her repeatedly.

"Such incidents are common in Ethiopia, as several men band together to abduct young girls for the purpose of securing a bride. The girls are typically beaten into submission and raped. In this particular instance, there was not a human being within earshot to hear the cries of this girl. But her cries were heard.
The unlikely heroes were three majestic Ethiopian lions. Famous for their large black manes, these lions are the national symbol of the country. In response to the girl’s cries for help, three large lions leapt from the brush and chased her captors away. Perhaps the child thought she had traded one danger for another, but remarkably, her heroes formed a protective perimeter around her. A half-day later, when the police arrived, the guardian lions simply stood up and walked away. Sgt. Wondimu Wedajo said, “They stood guard until we found her, and then they just left her like a gift and went back into the forest.”

"Among the explanations for the lions’ unusual behavior, one wildlife expert suggested the girl’s whimpering could have sounded like a lion cub. For whatever reason, the predator served as protector. The carnivore became a sentinel. “Everyone thinks this is some kind of miracle,” Wondimu commented.

"This 12-year-old girl was helpless, powerless to change her horrific circumstances. Her deliverance had to come from a power greater than, and outside of, herself. In the same way, we are powerless to save ourselves from sin and death. Our only hope is in Christ, the Lion of
Judah."

Anthony Mitchell, “Lions Rescue, Guard Beaten Ethiopian Girl
Yahoo News (6-21-05); “Lions Free Kidnapped Girl,” CNN.com (6-21-05)

Dorothy Day's Personalism--Some Resources

2009-08-13T14:05:00.001-07:00

Since I don't have time to summarize the way personalism was worked out by Catholic Worker activist Dorothy Day, a few links are in order:

The Catholic Worker on Day's Personalism and Distributism

The Influence of Emmanuel Mounier upon Peter Maurin and Dorothy Day

Dorothy Day's Radical Hospitality (Baylor Center for Christian Ethics)

Simone Weil and Rootedness--Part 3

2009-08-12T06:43:00.000-07:00

In the third part of Weil's The Need for Roots she reflects on how the French might be inspired to again love their homes and communities. I confess that I (often) find her overly idealistic, even contradictory, but she is worth listening to here. She is primarily concerned with the means that education possesses to cultivate the imaginative and moral sympathies of persons. She suggests that intimidation, false promises, simple suggestions or examples, or publicly sanctioned statements will not do the trick, that what is needed is the inspiration that comes through organized action. Yet having said this, she goes on to urge the use of inspiring words to reach the heart of the French people. She particularly recommends words that set forth the absolute good which pours from a sure faith in God.

The power of these words from God, she suggests, should be received in much the same way as a soldier receives a command--as an order of a superior. The other option is that of the technician, whom she believes to be subversive of true order and seeking false autonomy. A good command comes to both the mind and the feelings and has the shape of friendship, meaning there is a communique of trust to it. Thus, action "gives the fullness of reality to the incitations which have inspired it. The expression of such incitations, as heard on the outside, only gives them as yet a semi-reality. Action possesses a virtue of quite another order" (206).

Her vision for education, then, is one in which desire and example are married to living acts. We need faith more than realism, she says, and to see political action as spiritual rather than pragmatic. But, she observes, there are four chief obstacles in the way:

"our false conception of greatness;
"the degradation of the sentiment of justice;
"our idolization of money;
"and our lack of religious inspiration."

To begin to overcome these, Weil urges that the French revise and renew how they teach history, science, literature and philosophy, and religion. She insists that history should not be reduced to a Darwinian study of war, though war must be taught to do justice to the past. Instead, the gifts of the geniuses of art, activism, and sanctity must be taught, too. In literature, the "current of purity" must be studied, by which she means a healthy commitment to the integrity of the art on the part of writers. The modernist attitude of superiority in general must be jettisoned if the French are to recover true rootedness.

She places much more of the blame at the feet of modern science. Researchers are motivated by power and pragmatism rather than a love for the beauty and truth of the universe itself. As a result, they posit a world of complete determinism where force is the only political option, and in which technique is the overriding value: means without ends. "If justice is erasable from the heart of Man, it must have reality in this world. It is [modern] science, then, which is mistaken" (241). Pragmatism has polluted even the pure faith of Christians, who should know better, Weil believes. "A truth is always the truth with reference to something. Truth is the radiant manifestation of reality. Truth is not the object of love but reality. To desire truth is to desire direct contact with a piece of reality. . . . Pure and genuine love is in itself spirit of truth. It is the Holy Spirit" (250-1).

Weil, then, makes a move typical for her that I find problematic. She insists that Christians should understand God, not as someone who intervenes in response to particular circumstances, but as present in every event: "The sum of the particular intentions of God is the universe itself" (280). The world is, from one view, a closed system of determined action, while from another view, it is completely open to God's comprehensive control. . She goes so far as to suggest that we see the universe as entirely one of "perfect obedience" always acting in love. What we experience as "the blind forces of matter" are really a creature obedient to eternal Wisdom and love. Thus, the pain and suffering we experience are motivated by love and act as the punishment we each deserve that will restore us to faith and holiness.

At first blush, Weil seems to be setting forth the classic Augustinian understanding of providence, but her view would also seem to undercut prayer and regulate God to a Platonic being who does not respond per se to our individual requests. She urges a re-visioning of the world:

"The order of the world is the same as the beauty of the world. All that differs is the type of concentration demanded, according to whether one tries to conceive the necessary relations which go to make it up or to contemplate its splendor. It is one and the same thing, which with respect to God is eternal Wisdom; wth respect to the universe, perfect obedience; with respect to our love, beauty; with respect to our intelligence, balance of necessary relations; with respect to our flesh, brute force" (291).

If this were all she had written, I would accuse of her of promoting fatalism, but obviously, she believes in political action and reform. Nonetheless, her position would seem to render any prayer for these things at best moot, at worst as pragmatism under the cover of middle-class piety. To reach this position, she must, like Marcion, that ancient heretic, deny much of the Old Testament, and thereby, as Eliot points out in his introduction to the English translation, the very basis for the Church.

Physical labor, then, she concludes, is the most holy work because its daily tedium and suffering bring us closer to our deaths and thus force us to a place where repentance is truly possible. Weil concludes that "physical labor should occupy in a well-ordered social life . . . its spiritual core" (298). By ending this way, she offers a vision of the physical world in which place, work, family, and making are at the center of a truly human existence--one marked by gratitude, reverence, and connection with God, the land, and others.

I just don't see that such a vision need exclude the practice of daily intercession. A God who acts in direct ways to special requests can be the same God who guides the every action of his universe of obedient love.

Simone Weil and Rootedness--Part 2

2009-08-11T12:36:00.000-07:00

Weil's The Need for Roots begins with a basic assumption: rights and obligations are essentially two sides of the same thing, but with one key difference. Obligations remain whether human beings recognize them as such or not, while rights must be acknowledged. Our obligations to other human beings are eternal and without condition; they are the bond of love that arise from the needs of others. "The possession of a right implies the possibility of making either a good or bad use of it. While, on the other hand, the performance of an obligation is always, unconditionally, a good from every point of view" (275).

This distinction is important for Weil because obligations take root in physical and social relations. Writing in 1943, she sees the French as having been uprooted in the towns because of an education that prizes technical know-how at the expense of an expansive liberal learning. Workers have become alienated from their true obligations; the life of the factories is mechanical and inhumane. It demands work which is neither interesting nor lively. It is too often exhausting and dangerous. What is needed are "forms of industrial production and culture of the mind in which workmen can be, and be made to feel themselves to be, at home." She goes on to line out sixteen or so proposals that bear a striking resemblance to those of Catholic distributism, including the abolishment of large factories for small guild-run workshops; the ownership of the tools and machines invested in the workers themselves, and a system of vocational adaptation for those with superior or inferior talents in any one profession. Each one is intended to return workers to a life of natural obligation because they are connected to their work and their work to their lives.

Weil also laments the loss of rootedness in the countryside. This takes shape in the way "peasants" are denied the private ownership of the land, have no pensions to survive on when they grow old, and the general way in which rural persons are educated away from a love of the land. Weil argues that rural education should inspire in its workers a love of the beauty of the land and of the beauty of the lifecycle. Likewise, she holds that rural Catholicism should seek to prepare the people to engage a life of farming as a truly holy, noble task: "The contemporary form of true greatness lies in a civilization founded upon the spirituality of work" (97).

Nonetheless, for Weil, the most fearful trend towards uprootedness is in the nation a whole. Patriotism upon various levels has been replaced by a singular economy of state. The family, village, district, and region have all ceased to matter before the national interest: "Man has placed his most valuable possession in the world of temporal affairs, namely, his continuity in time, beyond the limits set by human existence in either direction, entirely in the hands of the State" (100). Her point is that life is made up of numerous intermediate communities and associations that stand between the individual and the nation-state, and patriotism has historically been made up of numerous types of loyalty to king, village, children, neighbor, region, and so on. These have been weakened by a nation that has money as its only value: "The State is a cold concern which cannot inspire love, but itself kills, suppresses everything that might be loved; so one is forced to love it, because there is nothing else. This is the moral torment to which all of us today are exposed" (114).

Weil overgeneralizes here; still, what she says has a a note of reality to it. Her key point is that the nation-state does not and cannot easily ask for the same kinds of personal obligations that other social formations more naturally call up. The general French disdain for politcs and for public life she sees as emblematic of this problem, one which has historical causes including that of the abuse of royal power, the large landed aristocracy, the military and social abuses of the republican regimes after the Revolution, and the colonial abuse of the country towards other nations. At the heart of these is the break up of the trades, families, and traditional education for morals. Nationalism has displaced obligations to family, fellows, and truth. To this, she replies that the only authentic patriotism at the moment is one of compassion, the same kind of compassion that one feels for those who are suffering and poor. "If their country is presented to them as something beautiful and precious, but which is, in the first place, imperfect, and secondly, very frail and liable to suffer misfortune, and which it is necessary to cherish and preserve, they will rightly feel themselves to be more closely identified with it than will other classes of society" (174-5).

Taken together, Weil's three concerns with uprootedness point to the local, human, and personal shape of our obligations and loyalties. We love what we know and what we are tied to. We respect, honor, and treat as sacred those to whom we are intertwined in the precious nets of family, neighborhood, town, and congregation. Of course, all of these can be abused, as Weil acknowledges. But they are also natural in a way that the power of national force is not. She concludes that the state is "sacred" only in the way an altar is, that is to serve a higher purpose, not to draw attention to itself. The only other options she thought were anarchy or the idolatry of communism.

Simone Weil and Rootedness--Part 1

2009-08-11T08:22:00.000-07:00

The French mystic and philosopher Simone Weil's last work, The Need for Roots, was written in 1943, the year of her death, and published posthumously in 1949, as well as being translated into English in 1952 with an introduction by T.S. Eliot. The Need for Roots offers a passionate call for helping the French return to a sense of true patriotism, tied not to the State, but to place and ideals. In the first part of the book, Weil explores briefly fourteen "needs of the soul" before focusing on her chief concern, the 15th and perhaps most comprehensive need--rootedness.

Order, by which Weil means a sense of epistemic coherence. The soul needs a sense that a balance of the forces of the universe exists, that they have a beauty to them, a rationality at some level.
Liberty, that is the ability to choose within a system of rules that we trust because they "emanate from a source of authority which is not looked upon as strange or hostile, but loved as something belonging to those placed under its direction." None are free unless they operate out of goodwill and obligation to others, she contends.
Obedience of a healthy sort is "necessary food for the soul," and the one who is forced to obey a tyrant must partake of the sickness of such a society.
Responsibility of a real sort, that is, of type that actually impacts the person and his or her fellows in a meaningful way.
Equality in degree of respect and with a degree of opportunity. There must also be a way for movement to take place up and down the ladder of social equilibrium.
Hierarchism, that is a proper veneration of one's superiors who are symbols of what we each desire.
Honor in being a part of a noble tradition with a proud past of examples of virtuous actions.
Punishment that restores the one who has moved outside the circle of obedience--fully for the one who is truly repentant, and partially for the one who refuses. "Punishment is a method for getting justice into the soul of the criminal by bodily suffering."
Freedom of Opinion, that is an unrestricted freedom to explore all opinions, though this pursuit is conducted by one who serves the truth.
Security from constant, debilitating fear or terror.
Risk that keeps one from boredom even while not descending into terror.
Private Property such as owning a piece of land and one's own tools, because these are the means of a necessary and bodily life.
Collective Property, a feeling of ownership in public monuments, parks, and ceremonies.
Truth: "The need for truth is more sacred than any other need," so we must do all we can to curtail lying in print or in public speech.
Rootedness. She defines rootedness in the following way:

"A human being has roots by virtue of his real, active and natural participation in the life of a community which preserves in living shape certain particular treasures of the past and certain particular expectations of the future. This participation is a natural one, in the sense that it is automatically brought about by place, conditions of birth, profession and social surroundings. Every human being needs to have multiple roots. It is necessary for him to draw wellnigh the whole of his moral, intellectual, and spiritual life by the way of the environment of which he forms a natural part."

Can There Be a Christian Culture?--Part 5

2009-08-07T07:20:00.000-07:00

So was Berlin right to charge Christian hope for the end of history with closet determinism? Are the theist claims of an all-provident God, a known future, and human freedom finally in the last analysis compatible?

For some Christian thinkers the key was to focus on the very question of final things. After all, what might a Christian eschatology have to offer? The biblical pattern of a good creation, a human fall into rebellion and subsequent decay, a redemptive history of covenants with Israel, culminating in the atoning work of Christ and Church, and leading up to a final consummation suggests a directional pattern and outcome to human history. Josef Pieper, while sharing the view that Christians cannot know the future, insisted nonetheless that human beings have a quality of "being-directed-toward-the-End," in which the chaotic events of history become understandable. Not every theologian or philosopher of history agreed.

For Karl Löwith, the promised future is a radical inbreaking into history and at the same time, a future hope not yet seen. The violence and contingency of history has no real discernable direction precisely because the future cannot be inferred from the past; it is a divine, mysterious promise not a human, rational pattern . Eric C. Rust and Carl Michalson concurred. For Rust, outside God's revelation in Christ, "history is generally a realm of meaningless chaos and frustration," while for Michalson, there can be no significant history since Jesus: "Christ is not the eschatological event because he will enter history at some moment of time but because when he appears in history, history comes to an end in its old form and the last, the eschatological age begins."

A divine destiny, some insisted, did not translate into a discernable pattern for human history in general. Jean Daniélou, however, would have us synthesize this eschatological double story. While there can be no progress beyond Christ who is "the culminating and final innovation" of history, yet to separate out secular and sacred history is to declare Christ as less than Lord of history. The Christian mission, he insisted, is not simply "to teach the word to individuals of all countries; it is to evangelize the civilizations . . . so that Christianity may find its appropriate and authentic expression in the idiom of every racial community."

The promised apocalypse, for Pieper, is both the end of history and the promise of a new eternal state which strictly speaking lies beyond time. Only in a willing commitment to martyrdom can the Christian truly understand the legitimacy of human action in history, not as a gnostic who denies the value of creation, but as one who "contains both affirmation of creation and readiness for blood-testimony; only the man who combines in himself this affirmation and this readiness will retain the possibility of historical activity." Martyrdom denies the cultural relativism of historicism. It is a commitment to the future. Eschatology, he felt, does not remove the call to human freedom and to responsible action.

To summarize, the debate about history, in trying to address questions of civilization and Christian culture, had to consider

how much one could say about the inner workings of history, as well as the moral nature of its events;
needed to answer the claims of the historicist persuasion on a number of levels;
had to consider questions of freedom and determinism and of idealism and materialism, especially the question whether some aspect of historical normativity still allowed for human free choice;
had to explore what a spiritual realm might say to human freedom;
had to ask what biblical eschatology had to say to the shape of history.

In particular, they needed to consider whether the eschatological promise of the gospel had anything to say to the national and cultural concerns of the average historian. For all its pledges of Christian faith, this was not a conversation with an easy consensus, nor I suspect should it have been, for they were seeking to hold together a number of tensions, as well as answer destructive claims from a number of directions. In my next post I will consider what this debate, then, has to teach us, as well as explore briefly how it relates to Christian personalism.

Can There be a Christian Culture?--Part 4

2009-08-07T06:06:00.000-07:00

In light of the threat to stable meaning and ethics that historicism brought, one of the urgent needs was for Christian thinkers to account for human choice in a meaningful way. Are human beings really free? Can they make decisions and choices that are meaningful in any way that the average person could point to? Thinkers, again, took different directions. Some looked to raise human beings above the material and social world, offering two levels of existence. They were faced with trying to bridge the Kantian divide between the material and moral worlds.

Theologian Reinhold Niebuhr, for example, condemned the modern attempt to master the historical process as sin and hubris; nonetheless, he looked to a kind of self-transcendence of history in which the repentant person’s heart is given "agape power" from on high, rising with the promise of Christ from the edge of history. For Niebuhr, who seems to finally deny the reality of a resurrection of the body or an afterlife, this transcendent freedom is somewhat limited: "Man, in both his individual life and in his total enterprise, moves from a limited to a more extensive expression of freedom over nature. If he assumes that such an extension of freedom insures and increases emancipation from the bondage of self, he increases the bondage by that illusion." Niebuhr by reducing the claims of Christianity to existential "heart" truths rather than real claims about the actual universe actual created a kind of ghostly neather-world. Niebuhr was no gnostic, but neither was he finally looking to a real eschaton.

Russian philosopher Nicolas Berdyaev went even further, seeing history not as a material but as a metaphysical work. Memory, being essentially non-material, points to the spiritual quality of human culture and its final eternal destiny. As such, a philosophy of history is to teach that the historical process is not “something that is alien to us, that is imposed upon us, that crushes and enslaves us.” As I've observed in another post, Berdyaev's personalism gave way to a real gnosticism.

Others, rather than posit a kind of two-tier world, embedded human responsibility within historical patterning itself. According to Herman Dooyeweerd, societies have religious ground motives that propel them along. What others identified as laws or forces of history are really God-given norms which can be obeyed or rebelled against with consequences: "Historicism . . . is the fatal illness of our 'dynamic' times. There is no cure for this unwholesome view of reality as long as the scriptural creation motive does not regain its complete claim on our life and thought." Dooyeweerd held that as long as historicism acted as a relativizing poison, anything like God-given norms could not be easily seen, but that did not mean they were not there,

For Brunner, too, human freedom is only true freedom when it acknowledges its dependence upon God. Human attempts to be autonomous from their Creator end in slavery. A “false liberalism,” which believes itself the ego-driven creator of reality, and “false determinism,” which robs human beings of any real creativity or action, both ultimately deny God’s existence. Yet this freedom was always to be bounded by the action of God in history.

For many Christian thinkers, the Incarnation of Christ was central to resolving the tension between destiny and freedom, for Christ made present what God promised for the future. For Eliot, as Dawson noted, religion is what gives spiritual freedom because “it alone brings man into relation with a higher order of reality than the world of politics or even culture.” While Eliot also believed in a more vertical world where eternity penetrates the world of time, he would not reduce that world to anything less than an incarnational one.

Hans Urs von Balthasar, too, recognized in Christ the concrete universal. Human freedom is a gift of God’s freedom, a locale for human action, yet “this space belongs to Christ,” and Christ’s incarnation as a human being and by extension in his people, “generates an inexhaustible abundance of Christian situations” in which his meaning may be imparted.

For each of these thinkers and writers, then, Christ in some manner freed people from the material relativism and determinism of history, but they differed significantly on how to conceptualize that salvation. What they did agree on was that Christians must navigate between the twin dangers of complete egotism and pure determinism.

Can There Be a Christian Culture?--Part 3

2009-08-06T17:15:00.000-07:00

The participants in the twentieth-century debate were all in agreement, nonetheless, that the meaning of history, if it had one, was a human meaning. The question as to whether history has socio-psychological laws was not precisely the same as to whether history has an inner dynamic that propels it in a certain direction, though the two were (and are) related. Human freedom as opposed to social and biological determinism concerned thinkers of all persuasions, as did whether history should be considered a matter of progress or of tragedy in light of two world wars. Had the last 40 years of violence disproved the early modern notion of progress? Equally, had the Hegelian notion that the divine Idea was working itself out in history been discredited by Nazi misuse of it?

Individualism and collectivism were, thus, important themes, and not just because of the rise of fascism and Marxism. They were at the heart of what to make of the politic orders of the last 50 years. They were also at the heart of what it means to be a human being within a political and social context. Finally, they were at the heart of whether human culture had any stable meaning at all.

Even deeper, then were what Ernst Troeltsch in 1922 had called the “crisis of historicism,” and what Benedetto Croce in 1916 had identified as the “humanity of history.” Historicism, the predominant worldview of nineteenth and early twentieth century Continental historians, held that each nation has its own intrinsic meaning, its own language, and is shaped by its history and place in nature. For some this suggested a divine guiding hand in giving expression to each nation, while for others this increasingly implied that no overarching human nature existed across cultures. For Troeltsch the crisis was that with historicism no objective laws or truths existed which could be applied to all people. People in their entirety are the product of their culture.

Croce in similar fashion decried the practitioners of individualist and/or collectivist historiography as reducing history to either a few powerful “men of genius” or to collectives as the producers of ideas. “Let him who cuts individuals out of history pay close attention,” Croce warned, “and he will perceive that either he has not cut them out at all, as he imagined, or he has cut out with them history itself.”

The shadow side, some would say the “demonic” side, was how such notions when tied to doctrines of the state led to Nazism or Communism, but just as important and as disturbing was the implication that most or all human choices were meaningless. That historicism actually undercut claims of Enlightenment progress or Hegelian idealism only opened the window for a further sense of meaninglessness. Was history's "truth" finally reducible to set of existential decisions by otherwise culturally-determined individuals?

For some such as Paul Tillich the category of the demonic need not be understand as strictly a spiritual category, but more like a general human Gestalt or archetypal flowering of irrational evil: "The dialectics of the demonic . . . the unity of form-creating and form-destroying strength. That is true of the demon who determines the great destiny which disrupts all forms of existence; it is true of the demon who drives the personality beyond the limits of its allotted form to creations and destructions it cannot grasp as its own. Where the destructive quality is lacking, one can speak of outstanding power, of genius, of creative force, not of demonry."

If history is the product of social and economic forces, if culture is the product of national collectives or even of a few inspired geniuses, or if a non-human force drives history (be it biological and/or spiritual), then human freedom would seem to be an illusion.

Berlin labeled any system that posited discoverable laws or outcomes for history as "deterministic," and charged them with being not only fatalistic but even desirous of a system that excused them from human action and freedom. He was especially distrustful of teleological systems: "For the teleological thinker all apparent disorder, inexplicable disaster, gratuitous suffering, unintelligible concatenations of random events are due not to the nature of things but to our failure to discover their purpose."

Strangely enough, history became reduced reduced to theodicy.

"Good is the Flesh" by Brian Wren

2009-08-06T14:07:00.000-07:00

What an amazing new hymn! Well worth pondering in it's Christ-centered and sacramental understanding of our bodily existence.

Good is the Flesh by Brian Wren

Good is the flesh that the Word has become,
good is the birthing, the milk in the breast,
good is the feeding, caressing and rest,
good is the body for knowing the world,
Good is the flesh that the Word has become.

Good is the body for knowing the world,
sensing the sunlight, the tug of the ground,
feeling, perceiving, within and around,
good is the body, from cradle to grave,
Good is the flesh that the Word has become.

Good is the body, from cradle to grave,
growing and aging, arousing, impaired,
happy in clothing, or lovingly bared,
good is the pleasure of God in our flesh,
Good is the flesh that the Word has become.

Good is the pleasure of God in our flesh,
longing in all, as in Jesus, to dwell,
glad of embracing, and tasting, and smell,
good is the body, for good and for God,
Good is the flesh that the Word has become.

from Bringing Many Names. Carol Stream: Hope, 1989.

Can There Be a Christian Culture?--Part 2

2009-08-06T11:15:00.000-07:00

As I examined in the last post, the question of whether twentieth-century Europe could still be considered a Christian culture occurred amidst the violence of World War I and II. The second world war itself left many with serious questions as to why it had happened and what this revealed about the course of humanity in general. Writing in 1949, E. Harris Harbison observed a hunger for meaning among the young veterans returning to American universities after the war: "[They] made it clear to advisers and teachers that they were looking for answers. . . . Somewhere in history, many of them thought, the answer to how it all came about was to be found." The same year in Britain, historian Herbert Butterfield's six BBC radio lectures on Christianity and history made him a public celebrity, becoming some of the most listened to broadcasts in BBC history. Clearly the public on both sides of the Atlantic was hungry for some sense of what history as a discipline could reveal about Christianity, the West, and civilization. Did the twentieth century invalidate Occidental values and beliefs, and could history give a needed perspective on the past and the future?

After all, one could ask, do the events of history mean anything? Are they, as Elbert Hubbard once remarked, just "one damn thing after another"? Can there be a philosophy, science, or theology of history that speaks in any way to the historical particulars? "Can the thinker who utilizes the empirically achieved data of historical study stand, as it were, outside the historical process and see pattern or meaning in the whole historical process itself?" (Connolly 41) If not, can the historical thinker still offer some intimation of the whole from a more limited vantage point? Likewise, what does the theology of the Christian Church have to say to how history has unfolded? Can the gospel, for example, explain the twentieth century?

Typically, a Christian understanding of history had been understood to be linear as opposed to the wide cycles of history in Greek, Chinese, or Hindu thought, and twentieth-century Christian thinkers mostly rejected the cyclical view of Oswald Spengler’s infamous The Decline of the West, which traced eight “high cultures” through the cycle of birth-development-fulfillment-decay-death, as well as the view of Arnold Toynbee that civilizations arise, grow strong, fall, and die in reaction to cultural problems. Did civilizations, cultures, or societies have life cycles, or was it permissible to divide history into periods, such as ancient, medieval, and modern?

Particularly in response to the fascist claims of historical destiny, Christian thinkers of the period were quite divided on these questions. Jacques Maritain, William Albright, and Eric Voegelin, for example, all held that some order or process was observable in history, though each was cautious as to how much could be predicted or exhaustively understood. For Maritain, historical laws cannot explain history entirely or predict it, but they can help interpret it: axiomatic laws can point to general characteristics of history, while typological laws can suggest various periods in history: a growth is observable, so some periods are better than others. He held that history possessed "two faces."

Axiomatic laws included the law of two-fold contrasting progress; the ambivalence of history; the law of the historical fructifications of good and evil ; the law of the world-significance of history-making events; the law of prise de conscience ; and the law of the hierarchy of means.
Typological laws included the law of the passage from the "magical" to the "rational" regime or state; the law of the progress of moral conscience; the law of the passage from "sacral" to "secular" or "lay" civilizations; the law of the political and social coming-of-age of the people.

Maritain in general, then, held that one could predict that good and evil would bear results in certain ways, that certain means tend to overshadow others, and that in general history was moving to more secular and rationalistic expressions of culture. (Of course, this is a variation of the secularization thesis that has in the last two decades been called seriously into question.)

Albright, too, held the search for laws was not fruitless, but the larger the scope of observation, the less certain, “until we reach a plane where the number of variables makes prediction impossible.” Albright's simple point was that smaller local changes are more predictable than wide-spread national, continental, and global shifts. These later ones were better observed in hindsight.

Voegelin, not an entirely unrepentant Hegelian, nonetheless broke with Hegel in holding that one cannot predict the outcome of history even if one can understand some of its laws. Humans are too sinful to hold to anything like the ideal, divine plan: “The truth of order has to be gained and regained in the perpetual struggle against the fall from it.” For each of these, some observation of order and direction did not suggest total predictability. The fascist doctrines of an unopposable direction to the spirit of history were to be treated agnostically at best.

Others were even more cautious. Butterfield and Kenneth Scott Latourette stationed themselves in a middle ground. Only general principles and observations are possible from a Christian perspective, though these can still offer much. Though Butterfield himself condemned easy judgments on human actions, he did feel that in the broadest sense one could obviously conclude that human beings were sinful, that the personal nature of historical lives included sinful effects, and that general, historical judgments on evil actions, such as the militarism of Nazi Germany, were conclusive from history itself.

For Butterfield, broadly speaking there are three ways of looking at history:

biographically, which offers the meaningful life of individuals;
technically, in the study of the law-like social forces of larger history;
holistically, attempting to view the providence of God in broad strokes.

It is significant that while Isaiah Berlin praised Butterfield's position as a "prima facie very humane and convincing thesis," that he finally dismissed it as one in which "individual responsibility is made to melt away" because we declare ourselves never fit to judge, be that by virtue of ignorance or sinful ineffectiveness .

Latourette, the great historian of world missions, in different fashion, sought to provide for the Christian claims for history the sense that these truths, though they cannot be "proved" by history itself, nonetheless have "strong probability for the truth of Christian understanding.”

Still others felt even this went too far, such as Henri-Irénée Marrou and Mircea Eliade who rejected any philosophy of history, though each conceded a theology of history was still possible. Eliade sniffed that attempts at "scientific" laws of history were but the “decomposition product of Christianity,” seeking the sense of history’s meaning while denying “a transhistorical, soteriological intent.” Marrou, in turn, warned against “the sin of immoderation” so tempting to philosophies of history; history is always a subjective reconstruction of the past by the historian, and “[e]very problem in history, no matter how small, gradually and eventually demands a knowledge of universal history in its entirety,” which is impossible for any but God. Marrou, however, did not see this as a counsel of despair, rather humility.

Finally, not all would agree with even this claim. Gerhard Ebeling observed, "Wherever historicity is not taken seriously, there is also a failure to take really seriously either the text of the Scriptures or the man to whom this text must be interpreted." Likewise, voices like Yves Congar and J. P. Mackey insisted that without tradition no Christian dogma existed. Any large meaning in history was rightly obtainable only through God's revelation.

This wide-spread continuum suggests perhaps why no single Christian answer was available at the time to those in search of spiritual and theological insights into the twentieth-century ideological wars. We can still ask today, what did they hope to find in the study of history that might explain their political and social dilemmas? Likewise, what might we hope to find, if anything, in the midst of our own?

Can There Be a Christian Culture? -- Part 1

2009-08-04T08:46:00.000-07:00

Over the next week, I will summarize and explore an intellectual debate that took place among a number of theologians, philosophers, social critics, and political leaders in Europe and the United States. I am particularly interested to ask what their concerns might teach us about current Christian reflection on culture, relativism, and the meaning of human existence.

"Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilization."

These famous penultimate words were spoken by Winston Churchill before the House of Commons on June 18, 1940. Delivered the day after France surrendered to Nazi invaders, Churchill's speech was intended to steel British resolve, yet perhaps not surprisingly, in retrospect it also raised important questions about the nature of Western civilization itself.In his 1947 Gifford lectures, the theologian Emil Brunner observed, "All Europe uttered a sigh of relief when those words were spoken."

That they were spoken as words of comfort and of determination suggests that a consensus, however fuzzy, still existed among many in Europe. For Brunner, however, Churchill's words raised a rather sticky question: can there be a Christian civilization, and if there can, does it follow that the Occidental world could in any sense still be considered Christian?

These were questions that many twentieth-century historians, philosophers, cultural critics, and theologians struggled with, and between the 1930’s and the 1950’s, a huge number of lectures, essays, articles, and books were generated on the issue of Christian civilization and history. For some, such as philosopher John MacMurray, European civilization could not understand itself or its success and failure without remembering that its origins were in Christian culture: “To understand Christianity is to understand the crisis of civilization in which we are involved." The twentieth century’s violence and loss of meaning were traceable to the incoherence of the West, he contended.

Historian Christopher Dawson, too, felt in 1949 that the relationship between Western and Christian culture had to be delimited. He held that every society at its heart was based on a religious vision. What distinguished the West was its long-term instability; the Christian consensus had always been a dance between temporal and eternal impulses, and this imbalance had led to its productivity and power. such moments of vital fusion between a living religion and a living culture are the creative events in history, in comparison with which all external achievements in the political and economic orders are transitory and insignificant.”

Poet and cultural critic T.S. Eliot was also convinced that a people's religion and their culture were intertwined, "culture being, essentially, the incarnation (so to speak) of the religion of a people." Culture is "a "lived religion," though no people ever have a perfectly pure religion. By incarnation, Eliot meant neither a simple relation nor an absolute identification but something more like two elements existing in tandem with one another. One cannot finally understood a civilization without having a sense of the religious vision that historically informed it, no matter how faded and shabby it has become. Yet Eliot was not claiming that Europe was somehow nor or had ever been a perfect place. Europe has always been more or less Christian, never totally so.

Theologian John Baillie, following Eliot, believed that what made the past Western civilization Christian was its common belief and opinion, and what made it vaguely one in 1945 was the continued presence of some Christian influence. Baillie, a Presbyterian, compared this to infant baptism, observing that a society with Christian influence need not be wholly full of Christians. He concluded that this was the best one might expect in a fallen world; there can be no final utopia on earth: "no pax Britannica no less than the pax romana, and Christendom no less than Babylon and Troy." Perhaps the days were simply limited in which such a Christian world could continue.

Brunner agreed, but like MacMurray, held that the crisis of the West was already quite far gone, “in some parts . . . more than shaken, in fact shattered and even annihilated.” There was not much of a Christian civilization left to hold on to. Yet even this crisis, Brunner thought, attested to the power of the gospel traditions that they could have such dynamic, long-standing impact “even where life has been only superficially touched by them, or where they are present in very diluted and impure manifestations.”

Notice that to make such claims required a sense of history, as to where the West had been and where Christianity had been with it, as well as some intimations as to where it was going. That these reflections occurred around the global cataclysm of World War II is quite understandable. Much that had seemed solid and stable was now in flux and troubled. Nonetheless, they explore the first question worth considering: could European culture (and the U.S. by extension) have ever been considered a "Christian" culture? And if so, what would that imply?

5 Freedoms You Could Lose. . . .

2009-08-03T14:37:00.000-07:00

in the new proposed health plan. Worth pondering what ever your position.

For-Profit, for God

2009-08-03T09:56:00.000-07:00

Interesting article. I know librarians from each of the schools mentioned (Grand Canyon University and Crichton College). The one at Grand Canyon was library director through the whole process of the school failing as a private institution and coming back as a for-profit one. Her library staff was cut in half and she was so unhappy there that she left the position without having another one lined up.

Nikolai Berdyaev and Personality's Gnostic Turn

2009-08-03T08:19:00.000-07:00

The Russian philosopher and exile Nikolai Berdyaev in his 1944 Slavery and Freedom set forth his mature position on the human person, the political state, and freedom. He contrasted the triumphant existential subjectivity of God and of the human with the enslaving objectification brought by nature, by the collective, and by false views of religion. One caveat: Berdyaev especially prized the subjective and contingent nature of philosophy, so trying to describe his position is a bit like trying to track a moving target. He defended his pursuit of truth as necessarily contradictory in places because that is how humans think.

He did set out in Slavery and Freedom, however, his chief categories of thought: "the primacy of freedom over existence, of spirit over nature, subject over object, personality over the universal, creativeness over evolution, dualism over monism, love over law. The acknowledgement of supremacy of personality involves metaphysical inequality, distinction, dissent from fusion, the affirmation of quality against the power of quantity" (10). But these can perhaps be best summed up as the "principle of personality and freedom and the principle of compassion, sympathy, and justice" (11). Any system that seeks to crush human creativity does so because it denies the infinite creativity of each person. At the same time, without some measure of compassion and sympathy persons can turn inward and wither up, losing their freedom yet again.

Berdyaev, a former Marxist, was suspicious of the language of the common good, the collective, or even at times that of society or community. He feared any system that claimed to absorb the individual person into a collective whole, and thus, he also rejected any claims that the person's good came from society or that of the community as a unity. He also rejected any sense of social hierarchy except that of the natural hierarchy that arose from differences in talents and abilities, and even this he warned against encoding into a social or political hierarchy. Nonetheless, Berdyaev was an advocate of personalism, holding that personality could enslave itself in egoism and that individualism was not true personality unless it discovers itself in turning outward towards others.

For the Russian philosopher, each personality is truly unique, "unrepeatable," one of a kind, yet each personality must grow into itself, becoming a Gestalt of its parts. Like Martin Buber and the German phenomenologists, Berdyaev feared the self, the Thou, being enslaved by any force that objectified it. He saw this potential in the natural world and in human egoism, but he especially warned of it in political forces that sought to conform each person to a utopian vision. He did understand and value the language of communion, the turn outward 0f persons in relationships of compassion and love. Freedom is found in being subject to the truth, he insisted, but that truth is to discovered for each person. Obedience to the truth does not call for obedience to the claims of tyrants, and truth is not given but found.

Bedyaev has been charged with testing the boundaries of orthodox Christianity, and I think rightly so up to a point, for he held the nature of Christ as divine-human to be emblematic of all persons. We all have "theandric existence" he insisted (45). At its best, this approach does recognize that the image of God in all persons includes a spiritual element of supreme worth. At its worst, though, this approach can exalt too quickly the human person while excluding the communal nature of our personhoods. Berdyaev was quick to isolate anything like truth from its community of origins:

"To freedom belongs supremacy over tradition, but the possibility of free living lies in the fact that there has been truth in the tradition. . . . Not for a moment does personality become a part of any organism whatever or of any hierarchical whole. . . . The source of human freedom cannot be in society; the source of human freedom is in the spirit. Everything which proceeds from society is enslaving; everything which issues from the spirit is liberating" (106).

There are immense problems with this, not the least of which is a lack of any real rationale for the social form of communion other than separate persons reaching outward in their isolation. Much of this begins with his over dependence upon a Kantian view of the universe as broken into a subjective moral law within and an objective deterministic world of nature without. Berdyaev doesn't consider a truly Trinitarian interpersonal world where individuals are made up in part by each other and, therefore, are truly dependent upon each other, not in an oppressive uniform anthill, but in a pattern of relations that only draws out the vocation of each more fully and yes, unrepeatably.

His position lead him also to treat the authority of God as limited to a kind of existential offer of relationship while distrusting the Creator's role as King and Lord. He held that God was not the provident master of the natural, physical world, but only ruled in the realm of spirit. Of course, this then, creates a dilemma as to why Christ needed to come to earth at all. The world, for Berdyaev is finally not the home of persons but a place of temporary suffering that offers some measure of personal growth. He comes close to being a Christian Gnostic, his persons trapped in and warring against an oppressive physical world of ilusion. Thus, his position shows us a danger of personalism without any metaphysical sense of community's value as more than just a meeting place of sovereign selves.

Charles Péguy on the Failure of a Culture

2009-07-29T14:23:00.000-07:00

The French poet Charles Péguy in 1910 wrote a lengthy essay Notre Jeunesse (Memories of Youth) in defense of the actions of the party of Dreyfusards, those who defended Captain Alfred Dreyfus, an artillery officer of Jewish descent. Dreyfus was falsely accused of selling military secrets to the German embassy in Paris. Later exonerated, his case deeply divided the nation along conservative and republican lines, and became a symbol not only for the issue of French antisemiticism, but also for broad political and religious questions, and effected important changes in the official status of the Roman Catholic Church in the country.

Péguy, a Catholic convert and a committed socialist, was also an ardent nationalist, and he wrote Notre Jeunesse to defend the patriotism of his convictions when many saw him as a betrayer of country and of religion. Conservative Catholics on the right were to charge him with disloyalty to the Church, while republicans often held that Catholics could not be true Frenchmen. Yet Péguy also ending up writing an essay that set out his own theory of social and political authenticity.

Péguy held that authentic action for a community arose out of a mystique, a word that can be translated as a faith, a mystery, a tradition, and an operation or action. A mystique is not held by a people consciously, at least not in a way that one debates and studies. It is a more settled way of life and set of convictions that come naturally to a community. The problem is that its mystique could over time become a politique, a political party or theory, an institution imposed from without, a set of values that are debated and proven or disproven but that no longer have a grasp on the community's heart. "Everything begins as a mystique and ends as a politique," he lamented.

As a Catholic and political progressive, Péguy took the radical step of arguing that "the derepublicanization of France is essentially the same movement as the de-Christianization of France. Both together are one and the same movement, a profound demystification." Both are a kind of idolatrous and yet sterile modernization that substitutes profound belief and action for cynical theorization and manipulation of an older language.

Péguy goes on to point out that mystiques treat each other in different ways that politiques even when they are in disagreement. The former are far less violent and oppressive, and when they are enemies, the distinction is "at a much deeper, more essential level, and with an infinitely nobler profundity." It is as simple as the distinction between rival virtue and rival malice. Péguy insists, then, that it is a mistake to compare the mystique of one position with the politique of another. The worst sin of all, however, is to pretend to be of a mystique while actually playing the game of the politique: "To steal from the poor is to steal twice. To deceive the simple is to deceive twice over. To steal the most precious thing of all, belief. Confidence."

A true mystique is marked by ardent loyalty, by love. Only what one is prepared to die for can reveal what one truly believes. "The only strength, the only dignity that exists, is to be loved. . . . Puns will not restore a culture." Péguy's formulation raises a profound and important question for social and political change: how do you know when a people, tradition, culture, or community is truly possessed by a faith rather than theoretical language alone that can be easily adopted without conviction? Moreover, once that mystique is lost, can it be recovered, and it political action useful unless it is?

Augustine's Definition of Peace

2009-07-29T07:50:00.000-07:00

Augustine of Hippo in the nineteenth book, thirteenth chapter of City of God explores the need for civic or natural peace even in a society dominated by pagan and temporal purposes. His definition of peace is worth reviewing, which I've broken in up into bullet points for analysis:

"The peace of the body then consists in the duly proportioned arrangement of its parts.
The peace of the irrational soul is the harmonious repose of the appetites,
and that of the rational soul the harmony of knowledge and action.
The peace of body and soul is the well-ordered and harmonious life and health of the living creature.
Peace between man and God is the well-ordered obedience of faith to eternal law.
Peace between man and man is well-ordered concord.
Domestic peace is the well-ordered concord between those of the family who rule and those who obey.
Civil peace is a similar concord among the citizens.
The peace of the celestial city is the perfectly ordered and harmonious enjoyment of God,
and of one another in God.
The peace of all things is the tranquility of order.
Order is the distribution which allots things equal and unequal, each to its own place. "

His set of definitions suggests that order and concord are necessary for many layers and levels of human relations, not only within the self and the human person, but also between families, between polities, and between God and humans ultimately, a peace which arises out of God's own Triune harmony. Only then can all creation be truly at peace. But, Augustine goes onto suggest that Christians have good reasons to promote civil peace within a country even knowing that the non-Christians themselves are cut off from God, are wretched because they are God's enemies:

"And hence, though the miserable, in so far as they are such, do certainly not enjoy peace, but are severed from that tranquility of order in which there is no disturbance, nevertheless, inasmuch as they are deservedly and justly miserable, they are by their very misery connected with order. They are not, indeed, conjoined with the blessed, but they are disjoined from them by the law of order. And though they are disquieted, their circumstances are notwithstanding adjusted to them, and consequently they have some tranquility of order, and therefore some peace. But they are wretched because, although not wholly miserable, they are not in that place where any mixture of misery is impossible. They would, however, be more wretched if they had not that peace which arises from being in harmony with the natural order of things. "

Better to have some order and peace in this world even if it is no lasting version, for it is not up to Christians to increase the wretchedness of their fellow citizens. I think Augustine's point here is the seed of a larger rationale for why Christians should work for shalom and the order of God even in a fallen world that rejects him.