Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Friday, April 27, 2012
Liberalism's Illiberalism (part two)
“No servant can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or else he will be devoted to one and despise the other.” -Luke 16:13
Liberalism at the crossroads: that is where we find ourselves today. Classic liberalism has taught us much and been successful in creating some of the most diverse yet unified nations the world has ever seen. Still today, there are parts of the world that desperately need a generous dose of this medicine. But modern liberalism is tearing at the social structure in ways that portend divisiveness and open conflict.
Psychologist Jonathan Haidt observes in a new book, The Righteous Mind, that Americans have traditionally embraced six major moral concerns: caring for the weak, fairness, liberty, loyalty, respect for authority, and sanctity. His studies suggest that hardcore, modern liberalism affirms the first three, caring for the weak, fairness, and liberty, while conservatives affirm all six. Modern liberals find conservatives rather alien and when push comes to shove, they see conservatives “as motivated by irrational fears such as racism or ‘homophobia’ … rather than as morally serious beliefs about the common good.”* The tricky part about affirming loyalty, respect for authority, and sanctity is they “require the preservation and transmission of robust and commanding moral truths.”* This comes only from a religious base. Hence, the inherent and widening divide between religious communities and the newly predominant forces of modern, secular liberalism.
The simmering conflict over what constitutes marriage is a classic case in point. Modern liberalism seeks to “empower” sexual minorities to live whatever lifestyle they so choose. A traditional understanding of marriage has been affirmed in referendum after referendum by the people only to be overturned in the courts and in a few liberal legislatures. The new definition of marriage is not being put in place by popular consensus but rather by force from above. Religious communities are seen as mean-spirited grinches and narrow-minded bigots.
“But no social order can be entirely neutral about moral truth. Diversity cannot be infinite. …Not everything can be permitted; some things, even some ideas, must be prohibited.”* And our Christian faith stands in direct opposition to the idea that people are happier when free to decide for themselves what is right and wrong. We believe that men are slaves to sin and have not the power or vision to deliver themselves from that bondage. It is only as we submit ourselves to the lordship and authority of Jesus Christ that we can be freed from the tyranny of sin and the slow death it brings. As God’s life-giving authority penetrates deeper and deeper into our being, we truly become the free creatures that God intended from the beginning. True freedom is the power to do what we ought rather than the power to do as we want.
In 1979, Bob Dylan wrote in a song, “You’re gonna have to serve somebody, yes indeed. You’re gonna have to serve somebody. Well, it may be the devil or it may be the Lord, but you’re gonna have to serve somebody.” Or, as the Apostle Paul put it, “you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness”(Rom. 6:16). It is never a welcome message in this world, however. Up to now we have learned to live in tension with these different voices in our community. But today, the lifestyle-liberationists have identified religious voices as direct roadblocks to their aims. And dialogue has given way to demagoguery. Once again, we are hearing the crowd cry out, “Crucify him, crucify him.” It is the world’s way of silencing the opposition. May we find it in our hearts to forgive them for they know not what they do.
Mercy and Truth, *First Things, May 2012, p.5, “After Liberalism.”
Mr. Moe
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Liberalism's Illiberalism (part one)
“…and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.” –John 8:32
I am a liberal. Shocking, I am sure. But then so are you. I am, of course, speaking here of the classical sense of the term dating back to the 1600’s when liberalism first emerged and then flowered in the 1700’s. In the process, it knocked kings off of thrones, de-established national churches, and affirmed religious freedom, civil rights, and individual liberties. In order to understand liberalism, one must keep in mind the state of things against which it rebelled. In that day, the divine right of kings gave them absolute power over all persons and property. Religion was established by governments and enjoyed total monopoly, country by country. Constitutional government was seen as a heretical threat to the established order and the common man was viewed as incapable of ruling himself through any kind of participatory government. Authority was situated in persons, royal or ecclesiastical, rather than law.
John Locke was extremely influential in enunciating the basic tenets of classical liberalism. Thomas Jefferson considered Francis Bacon, John Locke, and Isaac Newton the three greatest men who ever lived. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison along with others of the founding fathers were also deeply influenced by John Locke. Portions of the Declaration of Independence such as “the long train of abuses” and “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” were lifted in part or whole from the writings of John Locke. His thoughts on religion became the basis of the separation of church and state arguing that no civil magistrate could ever hope to deduce what is the one true and right church nor compel belief on the part of others.
Classical liberalism has flourished for hundreds of years principally here and in Europe. It has worked remarkably well, everything considered, spawning great freedom and prosperity. Today, it is in trouble. One only has to read the papers daily to see that we are descending into an increasingly polarized society. Even secular voices are decrying the lack of “civil discourse.” And we are witnessing the galloping ascent of a new form of totalitarianism becoming known as “the dictatorship of relativism.” In this brave new world, nonjudgmentalism or tolerance becomes the supreme virtue that steam-rolls all others.
Classical liberalism meant defending the dignity of the individual against coercion and domination. Modern liberalism drinks from the fountain of John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) who focused on cultural or moral empowerment. We are not truly free unless we have the means to do what we want. Mill rebelled at the tyranny of any dominant social consensus desiring the freedom to undertake “experiments in living.” Today’s liberals champion social and cultural rebellion as a means of empowerment, expanding the limits of freedom so people can live as they please: lifestyle liberation.
Conservative Christians who stubbornly cling to certain moral absolutes are seen to stand in the way as an impediment and a threat. Classical liberalism argued from a strong base of principles and firm convictions. Modern liberalism today imposes their self-proclaimed “mainstream, majority status” as the club they are not in the least hesitant to use. They trump all argument by fiat because they can. Conservatives are to be denounced rather than debated. We are being driven into exile and forced to wear labels such as “mean-spirited” and “divisive.” It is very telling when civil issues are determined more by name-calling, political sloganing, and ridicule than by honest engagement.
Classical liberalism is fast descending into the abyss of absolutism of a new and different kind. In so doing, it will destroy itself by separating itself from its biggest ally and strongest base. Get ready for some interesting times. (…to be continued)
I am a liberal. Shocking, I am sure. But then so are you. I am, of course, speaking here of the classical sense of the term dating back to the 1600’s when liberalism first emerged and then flowered in the 1700’s. In the process, it knocked kings off of thrones, de-established national churches, and affirmed religious freedom, civil rights, and individual liberties. In order to understand liberalism, one must keep in mind the state of things against which it rebelled. In that day, the divine right of kings gave them absolute power over all persons and property. Religion was established by governments and enjoyed total monopoly, country by country. Constitutional government was seen as a heretical threat to the established order and the common man was viewed as incapable of ruling himself through any kind of participatory government. Authority was situated in persons, royal or ecclesiastical, rather than law.
John Locke was extremely influential in enunciating the basic tenets of classical liberalism. Thomas Jefferson considered Francis Bacon, John Locke, and Isaac Newton the three greatest men who ever lived. Alexander Hamilton and James Madison along with others of the founding fathers were also deeply influenced by John Locke. Portions of the Declaration of Independence such as “the long train of abuses” and “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” were lifted in part or whole from the writings of John Locke. His thoughts on religion became the basis of the separation of church and state arguing that no civil magistrate could ever hope to deduce what is the one true and right church nor compel belief on the part of others.
Classical liberalism has flourished for hundreds of years principally here and in Europe. It has worked remarkably well, everything considered, spawning great freedom and prosperity. Today, it is in trouble. One only has to read the papers daily to see that we are descending into an increasingly polarized society. Even secular voices are decrying the lack of “civil discourse.” And we are witnessing the galloping ascent of a new form of totalitarianism becoming known as “the dictatorship of relativism.” In this brave new world, nonjudgmentalism or tolerance becomes the supreme virtue that steam-rolls all others.
Classical liberalism meant defending the dignity of the individual against coercion and domination. Modern liberalism drinks from the fountain of John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) who focused on cultural or moral empowerment. We are not truly free unless we have the means to do what we want. Mill rebelled at the tyranny of any dominant social consensus desiring the freedom to undertake “experiments in living.” Today’s liberals champion social and cultural rebellion as a means of empowerment, expanding the limits of freedom so people can live as they please: lifestyle liberation.
Conservative Christians who stubbornly cling to certain moral absolutes are seen to stand in the way as an impediment and a threat. Classical liberalism argued from a strong base of principles and firm convictions. Modern liberalism today imposes their self-proclaimed “mainstream, majority status” as the club they are not in the least hesitant to use. They trump all argument by fiat because they can. Conservatives are to be denounced rather than debated. We are being driven into exile and forced to wear labels such as “mean-spirited” and “divisive.” It is very telling when civil issues are determined more by name-calling, political sloganing, and ridicule than by honest engagement.
Classical liberalism is fast descending into the abyss of absolutism of a new and different kind. In so doing, it will destroy itself by separating itself from its biggest ally and strongest base. Get ready for some interesting times. (…to be continued)
Sunday, April 08, 2012
Dry, Dry Bones
“Put them in fear, O LORD; Let the nations know that they are but men.” -Psalm 9:20
The valley of bones. That is about all I could think of as we walked through the remains of the Roman Forum, that once proud seat of authority that held sway over all the known world of its day. We walked on the streets where proud Caesars once walked, where orators like Cicero held audiences in awe, and where legions tramped proudly on their arrival home from fresh victories across the seas. This was the equivalent of our National Mall in Washington, D.C., our sacred stretch of green that stretches from the Capitol, past the Washington Monument, over the reflecting pool, all the way to the Lincoln Monument. Only in Rome, everything was more concentrated as a result of the lack of motorized transport. One could easily walk from the Coliseum to Palatine Hill, from the Circus Maximus to the Pantheon, and from the Baths of Nero to the Senate House. The streets were all paved, unlike many great cities even as late as the 18th century. And the buildings were massive structures made of solid stone and marble. Caesar Augustus boasted that he had found Rome brick but left it marble. We have ample evidence of this and many descriptive passages to chronicle the glory that was Rome. Modern re-creations of the complex of temples, baths, palaces, government buildings, and entertainment venues that was Rome at the height of its glory leave one aghast at this concentration of wealth and beauty. There was never a city like it or surpassing it since. One could walk for blocks and blocks, miles perhaps, and see nothing but majestic marble monuments on par with the Parthenon in Greece in terms of costly grace and beauty.
And the Romans built everything to last. Thousands of miles of roads were constructed of four different layers in order to meet a construction standard of endurance for 100 years. Many have lasted 2000 years and are still in use today. Their engineering miracles are best seen in their system of aqueducts that brought fresh water into the heart of their cities. There were at least seven separate aqueducts that supplied Rome with its plentiful water supply that made its sanitation standards unequalled until the 19th century. Some of these are still operative today. Everything they constructed seemed to be built with an unequalled ability to endure. Much of the Coliseum still stands today even after 2000 years of invasions, erosion, neglect, outright theft, and predations of nature. Yet its foundations are secure holding up thousands of tons of walls and floors. We wandered its halls and passageways and marveled at its similarity to a modern stadium long before football, soccer, or baseball were even a thought.
So what had reduced this proud city, this cradle of an empire, this forum that concentrated the opulence and power of the world’s rulers for hundreds of years to a marble scrap yard; a valley of bones? Oh, how the mighty are fallen. It surely would have been thought absolutely impossible in the second century that this palatial setting would ever disappear under tons of debris and become a market place for farm animals, despoiling the very ground, and a refuge for the homeless and the criminal sort. Nor would it be thought that the proud Roman race would totally disappear in the sea of crisscrossing currents of humanity.
Their forum is dead, their language is dead, and their bloodline is untraceable. The mighty buildings of stone and marble are gone with the exception of a few which were saved in large part because of their later use as Christian churches, another triumph of a once sworn enemy. Walking among this valley of bones produced no thrill of triumph over a pagan foe, no urge to tramp up and down upon the ruins of a city that once enslaved the world. It produced, rather, an intense feeling of humility that bore witness to the transient nature of accomplishment, even when carved in tons of marble. What took ages to build was destroyed in a matter of days and years. There is no room for the boasting of man in kingdoms or monuments of grandeur. They do not last. These ruins testify mightily to the frailty of man in the flesh, even at his finest. “No man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (I Cor. 3:11) No one.
The valley of bones. That is about all I could think of as we walked through the remains of the Roman Forum, that once proud seat of authority that held sway over all the known world of its day. We walked on the streets where proud Caesars once walked, where orators like Cicero held audiences in awe, and where legions tramped proudly on their arrival home from fresh victories across the seas. This was the equivalent of our National Mall in Washington, D.C., our sacred stretch of green that stretches from the Capitol, past the Washington Monument, over the reflecting pool, all the way to the Lincoln Monument. Only in Rome, everything was more concentrated as a result of the lack of motorized transport. One could easily walk from the Coliseum to Palatine Hill, from the Circus Maximus to the Pantheon, and from the Baths of Nero to the Senate House. The streets were all paved, unlike many great cities even as late as the 18th century. And the buildings were massive structures made of solid stone and marble. Caesar Augustus boasted that he had found Rome brick but left it marble. We have ample evidence of this and many descriptive passages to chronicle the glory that was Rome. Modern re-creations of the complex of temples, baths, palaces, government buildings, and entertainment venues that was Rome at the height of its glory leave one aghast at this concentration of wealth and beauty. There was never a city like it or surpassing it since. One could walk for blocks and blocks, miles perhaps, and see nothing but majestic marble monuments on par with the Parthenon in Greece in terms of costly grace and beauty.
And the Romans built everything to last. Thousands of miles of roads were constructed of four different layers in order to meet a construction standard of endurance for 100 years. Many have lasted 2000 years and are still in use today. Their engineering miracles are best seen in their system of aqueducts that brought fresh water into the heart of their cities. There were at least seven separate aqueducts that supplied Rome with its plentiful water supply that made its sanitation standards unequalled until the 19th century. Some of these are still operative today. Everything they constructed seemed to be built with an unequalled ability to endure. Much of the Coliseum still stands today even after 2000 years of invasions, erosion, neglect, outright theft, and predations of nature. Yet its foundations are secure holding up thousands of tons of walls and floors. We wandered its halls and passageways and marveled at its similarity to a modern stadium long before football, soccer, or baseball were even a thought.
So what had reduced this proud city, this cradle of an empire, this forum that concentrated the opulence and power of the world’s rulers for hundreds of years to a marble scrap yard; a valley of bones? Oh, how the mighty are fallen. It surely would have been thought absolutely impossible in the second century that this palatial setting would ever disappear under tons of debris and become a market place for farm animals, despoiling the very ground, and a refuge for the homeless and the criminal sort. Nor would it be thought that the proud Roman race would totally disappear in the sea of crisscrossing currents of humanity.
Their forum is dead, their language is dead, and their bloodline is untraceable. The mighty buildings of stone and marble are gone with the exception of a few which were saved in large part because of their later use as Christian churches, another triumph of a once sworn enemy. Walking among this valley of bones produced no thrill of triumph over a pagan foe, no urge to tramp up and down upon the ruins of a city that once enslaved the world. It produced, rather, an intense feeling of humility that bore witness to the transient nature of accomplishment, even when carved in tons of marble. What took ages to build was destroyed in a matter of days and years. There is no room for the boasting of man in kingdoms or monuments of grandeur. They do not last. These ruins testify mightily to the frailty of man in the flesh, even at his finest. “No man can lay a foundation other than the one which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (I Cor. 3:11) No one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)