William Cavanaugh in his Being Consumed: Economics and Christian Desire argues that Christianity and consumerism are basically at odds. Christianity promises to cure our restlessness but consumerism tries to exploit it. But this doesn't mean that Christianity is totally against consumption. Worldly consumption actually detaches us from the objects we consume. We use something, throw it away, and then go shopping. No big deal. But when we consume our Lord's body and blood, we don't become detached but rather more attached to him.
Cavanaugh also points out that creation contains revelations of its creator. So when we consume it, we should be growing closer to him in our enjoyment of the created objects. They point beyond themselves to him. I remember being struck by how many times God told Israel to feast, and said that he would be with them in the midst of their enjoyment. Let's eat, drink, and be merry, because tomorrow we live forever!!
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Friday, September 24, 2010
Thursday, September 23, 2010
The Not So Slippery Greece
My rating: 3 of 5 stars
Solid overview but with no substantial thesis. Martin focuses on the plight of the common man, women, and slaves whose existence changed little from down through the ages. Martin documents it as "nasty, brutish, and short" no matter the period: prehistoric, classical, or hellenistic.
The prose is accessible though not not especially memorable. Discussions are informative with a few quotes from the primary sources but more would've been welcome. The arts are given a fair shake as well as the philosophers. The dramatic changes in society via Themisticles, Pericles, etc. are understated and it comes across a little lifeless. On the positive side, Martin is clear, generally concise, and great for giving the reader the big picture. It filled in a lot of gaps for me while leaving me disappointed that the glorious moments seemed a little "ho-hum."
My main criticism is that author's personality seems to hide beneath a veneer of objectivity when he could've revealed it by arguing various theses or points of view. This approach usually makes for more interesting reading than the objective approach. I would rather an author take a position and try to be fair to his opponents than be dull and uninteresting by trying to "appear" objective.
The prose is accessible though not not especially memorable. Discussions are informative with a few quotes from the primary sources but more would've been welcome. The arts are given a fair shake as well as the philosophers. The dramatic changes in society via Themisticles, Pericles, etc. are understated and it comes across a little lifeless. On the positive side, Martin is clear, generally concise, and great for giving the reader the big picture. It filled in a lot of gaps for me while leaving me disappointed that the glorious moments seemed a little "ho-hum."
My main criticism is that author's personality seems to hide beneath a veneer of objectivity when he could've revealed it by arguing various theses or points of view. This approach usually makes for more interesting reading than the objective approach. I would rather an author take a position and try to be fair to his opponents than be dull and uninteresting by trying to "appear" objective.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Linkage Here
My friend Jason Carter has posted a Distributist Biblio on his blog Outlines of Sanity. I highly recommend your taking long draughts from this well!
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Coercive Commercialism
I've just begun William T. Cavanaugh's book Being Consumed. He observes that Milton Friedman's definition of freedom as the absence of coercion has ironically led to coercive commercialism. It doesn't force anyone to buy, but it does surround and manipulate. "Consumers feel besieged by marketing and surveillance" (1).
The free market promises to make the individual his own god, determining good and evil for himself as a consumer. It promises to liberate man from definitions of right and wrong but it enslaves him to his appetites. It is guided by no definition of human nature and thus no position on what is good or bad for humans. Man is left without a telos or goal of human fulfillment to strive for. In this vacuum, man's will is at the mercy of the marketers. It is not even a battle. The will of the consumer helplessly acquiesces to the relentless onslaught of the marketers.
We need a positive definition of freedom. The classical and Christian view is that freedom is the ability to choose the Good. This means we need a definition of the Good to serve as a guide for human consumption. Where are we going to get that if not from Christianity? Don't we need Christianity to be honored again in the public square? To the extent that we still pay lip service to the common good aren't we living off of borrowed capital? The checks are starting to bounce and we are in trouble. We must return to font of living water as individuals, families, and a society. Lord help us!
Friday, September 10, 2010
Darwinists Admit They Have No Morality
Click on the title of this post to read a review of a new book called Sex at Dawn and some other confessions of what it means to be a consistent Darwinist.
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Against Christianity?
Christianity has become the label for the church marginalized by the modern secular state. So Leithart is against Christianity but not the church. Leithart calls the church to repent of its retreat and reassert its culture, language, and influence in the world at large, which includes the state. The church must return from its state imposed exile.
Haven't we tried this before you ask? What about the evils of medieval Christendom? Leithart convincingly argues that the evils of Christendom were inconsistencies, and not a problem intrinsic to that social order. The church and state may cooperate in ruling under God without coercing its people. The church was never meant to rule Christendom but Christendom was supposed to be ruled by a state with "Christian politics."
Leithart agrees that the church's message to the state is countercultural, but he also maintains that this is compatible with a Christian political realm outside the church. Leithart doesn't talk much about the direction of influence between the state and the church, but seems to assume that both are in need of constant reform and renewal by the dynamic of the gospel.
Leithart does appeal to Augustine's city of God. The church is political because it is a polis and ekklesia which commands loyalty greater than any state. The church is a threat to the usurping state. It is the true United Nations. If the state won't respect the spiritual, moral, and theological authority of the church then all the worse for the state. The church is not a part of the polis, it is its own polis, say Leithart (28).
This rings true. Modern liberalism has "cleansed" the public sphere of religion but this hasn't helped us agree or get along. We are more polarized than ever. What modern liberalism has done is take away the basis of persuasion. The Christian conscience has been erased from the public square. Without the ability to make religious arguments, we are at the mercy of our ruling appetites.
Patrick Henry proposed that a non-sectarian Christianity be declared the state religion of Virginia. Jefferson and Madison opposed Henry and this was never tried. What about Massachusetts Bay Colony? Well, I would point out that that was a coercive Christendom which failed because it was too strong where it needed to be permissive to dissenters.
There is a lot more here than a defense of Constantinianism. There is a robust view of the sacraments as an efficacious union of the symbol with the reality. This also works for Leithart as a spearhead against the secularist divorce of the natural and the supernatural. Leithart also highlights ethical transformation as part of the gospel. The gospel seeks to transform the community. "She withdraws from the world for the sake of the world" (135). He points to the work of Rodney Stark who documents the rise of christianity through social transformation in the cities. This led to Christendom and to use the title of one of Stark's books The Victory of Reason.
Leithart's sword cuts through so many layers of secularist armor that it's shocking and refreshing at the same time. Only God can make obligatory. Otherwise everything is permissible and the state wields brute force while the culture festers. The separation of church and state doesn't promote liberty but only slavery to appetite.
Leithart's prescription for change is worship and liturgy. He calls worship is an historical exercise that reenacts redemptive history through word and sacrament. These center us in redemptive history and teach us to "name the world through the Word" just like Adam (72-73).
The church's mission is not to accommodate her language to the existing language, to disguise herself so as to slip in unnoticed and blend in with the existing culture. Her mission is to confront the language of the existing culture with a language of her own (57).
He says that worship is a language course and liturgy is the teacher. Excuse me, I think its time for class.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Thursday, September 2, 2010
The Way We Were
Our seminary curricula are largely identical to what they were around the First World War, but the entering seminarian is a profoundly different person than was the seminarian of the early twentieth century. Then, the individual was well-read in poetry, and had studied nearly a decade of classical language (Latin, Greek, or both), learning by reading poetry and ancient languages to read texts carefully. He had written compositions almost weekly in many of his academic classes, and often wrote letters to friends and family. In contrast, the entering seminarian today has the faculties of a sixth- to eighth grader sixty years ago, and the seminary curriculum cannot make this seminarian an adult by the time he graduates (Gordon, Why Johnny Can't Preach, p. 68).
I got this off of Doug Wilson's blog. This was certainly true of me.
The Frontline Against Secularism
In anticipation of Peter Leithart's Defending Constantine, due out in November, I am reading Against Christianity, and it has helped crystalize something for me.
The church's liturgy revels in the union of the natural with the supernatural. It revels in the wedding of word, water, bread, and wine with grace, forgiveness, cleansing, and strengthening.
This is the frontline in the battle against secularism, which marginalizes the supernatural to the private sphere of personal belief. It divorces grace from the natural order of everyday life. It tries to make the things of God off limits to public discussion (90-91).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)