Politics of Change, II

“Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.” John 7:24

Conservative or progressive? I decided last week that I prefer G.K. Chesterton’s appellation of “reformer” to either of the two more traditional viewpoints concerning change. Change is the hinge pin upon which all this debate, both modern and ancient, revolves. In what direction are we moving? Is it good or bad? Who decides?

As Christians, we are uniquely situated between this world and the next to offer both friendship and judgment. We embrace this world as God’s gift to us both to use and to tend, fallen though it may be. But we also have a picture of what it was supposed to look like and what it will be when fully redeemed and restored. No one else can offer this perspective of where we came from and where we need to go. Our sense of “change” has a fixed standard, an eternal vision, by which we can measure true progress. Francis Bacon, the father of modern science, wrote back in 1620, “For man by the fall fell at the same time from his state of innocency and from his dominion over creation. Both of these losses however can even in this life be in some part repaired; the former by religion and faith, the latter by arts and sciences.” No need to apologize. We stand in good company.

To make judgments against our culture is the epitome of bad manners these days. The very word, “judgment,” is loaded with sinister connotations and will quickly make for embarrassed looks at modern day dinner parties. Yet that is clearly what we are called to do in the traditions of all the prophetic voices of Scripture. It may mean standing on a street corner and calling on fellow travelers to repent, but more likely, it will impel us to just examine on a daily basis the choices and the voices that confront us and decide which are of God and which are not. To judge is simply to discern truth from error. Those who deny the dichotomy of truth and error are hopelessly lost in an endless maze of aimless confusion. They are to be pitied; not emulated.

But the essential part of discernment is to have a clear vision of what the eternal non-negotiables are. I was raised to never attend movies in a theater. That protest against Hollywood lifestyles died when movies came into everyone’s home on TV. What is the standard that we are communicating, and where do we draw the line? As our culture and technology change around us, we have to have fresh insights into what exactly we are to cling to and what we should reject. This calls for constant, new-wineskin thinking. It is probably the most difficult challenge that each generation faces; to hand down the visions we cherish so dearly to a new generation without the chaff of outmoded forms and traditions. Even for myself, I need to have my visions of faith and stewardship reborn anew as I fight the stultifying agents of age and routine.

So, too, education must never become encrusted with unquestioning, rote repetition of the past. But neither should it be allowed to become a free-for-all sandbox of new and untested theories where innovation is prized for its own sake. Take the field of English for example (as I promised). I continue to believe that words have both power and meaning. (That can be revolutionary enough in some circles.) I do not believe that words should be allowed to fall into the hands of slick lawyers or querulous intellectuals who would shred their meaning for selfish purposes. I do not think they should be allowed to fall into the grasp of skeptics who would lace them with a thousand doubts. And I pledge to resist the perversion of language by pornographic perpetrators in the name of realism or the cheapening of language by trendy shortcuts that deny the power of the narrative or the poetic. I believe that the printed page still can represent the highest ends and accomplishments of mankind and can lead us to the Book of Books that continues to illumine our pathway home. This is my vision that I hope will guide me through the tumultuous waters of change already lapping at the boat we know of as “language arts.” It is also the vision I hope to impart to the next generation, whether they kindle, text, tweet, or blog (four words which were not even in our vocabulary ten years ago).

Mercy and Truth, Mr. Moe

Politics of Change, I

“You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot by men.” - Matt. 5:13

Since the decline of American reading habits is now so well documented, we have decided that the future commends us to de-emphasize writing in our curriculum and, instead, begin training our students in the art of producing short video clips for YouTube. We calculate that at the present rate, texting and twitter will supplant the need for day to day communication and that video is the wave of the future in reaching the masses. We will no longer be inflicting endless spelling and grammar lessons on students because of the new, freely abbreviated language emerging in txt & twt.

Do I have your attention yet? Is this scenario so far-fetched anymore? I do think it is time to admit we live in an era of unprecedented change in the field of communications. So should we endorse all this change and hop on board, not wanting to give up the chance to influence this cultural shift in the name of Christian education? Is this new shift a symptom of cultural decline or simply a new ministry opportunity? The larger question revolves around whether you consider yourself a conservative or a progressive.

Conservatism is based upon the idea that if you leave things alone you leave them as they are. But you do not. If you leave a thing alone you leave it exposed to a torrent of corrosive influences and change. A white post left alone soon becomes a black post. So, too, it is with human institutions. Men are natural backsliders. Human virtue tends by its own nature to rust and rot. Witness the moral drift of our oldest colleges, Harvard and Yale, and the similar tale of decline that has accompanied many churches over the years. Simply clinging to tradition as “the way we have always done it” is no hedge against dissolution and decay. I have decided I am no conservative.

Progressivism assumes that through technology and science the human condition is improving every day, in every way. Change is inevitable and natural and leads us on to broad sunlit paths away from the antiquated and primitive past. There are some problems with this assumption, as any student of nuclear war can tell you. Progressives also suffer from the lack of a fixed target, goal, or endpoint. It is hard for them to agree on a set goal because they have no absolute by which to measure “progress.” Progress should mean that we are always changing the world to suit a vision, but it has been found much easier to just change the vision. Schools used to stress striving for various competencies. Then they shifted to building self-esteem. What we have today are students with steadily declining test scores but who feel better about themselves than ever before in history (in documented test results). I decided I am no progressive.

G.K. Chesterton was much more comfortable with the appellation of “reformer” for it implied a certain set form for which we strive. For him the ideal vision must be set, and he looked to the Scriptures for a form that was set and fixed before time began. A reformer sees a certain thing out of shape and sets to put it into shape, knowing well what that shape is. A reformer is fond of this world in order to change it, but is also fond of another world in order to have something to change it to. This I can live with.

I have decided I am no conservative who will cling tenaciously to the dry crust of tradition long after it has been hollowed out and sucked dry of all essence and life. I am no progressive who is slave to a blind belief that change is of necessity both inevitable and good especially when those who propose it cannot define what the good is. I would rather claim to be a reformer, ever vigilant to call us back to the heavenly vision that remains a constant yet needs to be ever reborn in us anew with fresh zeal and insight. It is not by the might of tradition as it slogs along some weary path or the power of the crowd as it clamors for something new and novel but by the Spirit of the ever living eternal Lord that we build our lives or maintain any human institution (apologies to Zach. 4:6). I want to be ready and willing to judge cultural trends as they come and be an agent of cultural reform instead of either a mere, unthinking follower or an intransigent obstructionist.

As for reading and grammar … to be continued.


Mercy and Truth,
Mr. Moe

Thoughts were freely taken from G.K. Chesterton and his book, Orthodoxy (chapter 7), written in 1908.