tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post3655940443215477226..comments2023-09-05T05:04:38.668-05:00Comments on Philosophy Foosball: The VDB Report: Faith and PoliticsHendrik van der Breggenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04149481975577863835noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-15017529462878065762011-12-07T13:46:17.103-06:002011-12-07T13:46:17.103-06:00Hi Jordan,
Yes, it is remarkable how ideas are in...Hi Jordan,<br /><br />Yes, it is remarkable how ideas are intertwined. I suspect that when it comes to individualism and (political) collectivism, there is a continuum and Christianity fits somewhere in the middle. I would hope that Christians can argue (with gentleness and respect, of course) about exactly <i>where</i> in the middle.<br /><br />Regarding sin, I think the creation is fallen due to the misuse of the creature's freedom, with sin's <i>effects</i> being manifested in the creation. Therefore, I'm inclined not to locate sin <i>per se</i> in social and political systems and cultural institutions; rather, I'm inclined to think that these systems and institutions, insofar as they are human creations, are tainted by or reflect the sin of those who create them. So I'm also inclined not to reduce the effects of sin manifested in these systems and institutions to the individuals in them. These effects are real, but I think that social and political systems and cultural institutions, insofar as they are bad, arise from and reflect the sin of people. People need to be changed (e.g., by the Gospel) and, if an institution is bad because it reflects or promotes sin (e.g. an institution such as slavery or human trafficking), then the institution should be changed (or ended). Both sorts of change are needed—and they are intertwined. Gospel without social action is dead; social action without Gospel is blind; moreover, social action without Gospel withers.<br /><br />(For whatever is good in my last quip, I give thanks to Immanuel Kant, James the brother of Jesus, and Jesus the Son of God. Of course, the responsibility of the mistakenness of the quip, if it’s mistaken, is all mine.)<br /><br />I suppose that what I want to maintain is a distinction between sin and sin's effects. Sin lurks in the human heart, whereas sin's effects stomp all over the hearts and minds and bodies of others.<br /><br />(I seem to be on a roll with the quips, so I’ll stop before I make a huge blunder, or blunder even further.)<br /><br />Thanks for the discussion, Jordan.<br /><br />P.S. Now that there are <i>two</i> Lecoka coffee shops in Steinbach, our chances of crossing paths for coffee have been reduced. If I don’t see you soon, I wish you and Alexandra a Merry Christmas!Hendrik van der Breggenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04149481975577863835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-48722741171109656602011-11-15T17:23:17.228-06:002011-11-15T17:23:17.228-06:00Thanks for that link to Colson's reponse, Dr. ...Thanks for that link to Colson's reponse, Dr. V. Having read Hunter's book closely (though fallibly), I think Colson's critique is off the mark in some places, but it's always good to read responses from authors who are critiqued in another author's books (Andy Crouch has also responded to Hunter's critique of him).<br /><br />This ongoing conversation you have begun with your essay is very thought-provoking. It is leading me to wonder about things like the relationship between individualism and Christianity, and the relationship between individualism and morality. <br /><br />I am also led to think about whether sin is located only in individual human hearts, or whether it is also sometimes located in social and political systems and cultural institutions (and if so, whether it is legitimate to reduce the sin located in these institutions and systems to the sin of the individuals in them). <br /><br />As an aside, isn't it remarkable how ideas are intertwined?Jordanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17202279122400159625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-57191056923868013772011-11-13T13:48:07.527-06:002011-11-13T13:48:07.527-06:00P.S. (for Jordan): James Davison Hunter would prob...P.S. (for Jordan): James Davison Hunter would probably think that with Montgomery's quote I'm emphasizing the political realm too much. I like to think that I'm emphasizing the merely public realm, while also keeping in mind that being a salting influence in the public realm includes, but is not exhausted by, being a salting influence in the political realm. <br /><br />P.P.S. Charles Colson, of whom Hunter is critical, has a thoughtful reply to Hunter <a href="http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/mayweb-only/29-52.0.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Hendrik van der Breggenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04149481975577863835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-20482258133038610372011-11-13T13:46:25.184-06:002011-11-13T13:46:25.184-06:00Mr. Ross (Jordan),
Thanks for recommending James ...Mr. Ross (Jordan),<br /><br />Thanks for recommending James Davison Hunter's book. I've heard of the book, and I like much (not all) of what I've heard -- I especially like the notion of "faithful presence." I like to think of faithful presence as living out one's life as a salting influence in one's spheres of influence. I wonder if I capture some of Hunter's notion in the following excerpt (pasted below) from some of my lecture notes in my ethics course? I like to think that I do (especially if we keep in mind that Hunter's elite social networks and cultural institutions presuppose the moral formation of the key actors involved in producing those networks and institutions). Of course, I'll have to check out Hunter's book. At any rate, thanks for the book recommendation. I hope that you and your new bride are doing well!<br /><br />Best regards, <br />Hendrik<br /><br />Here is the excerpt:<br /><br /><b>Christians and "Secular Ethics"</b><br /><br />At this juncture, I should emphasize that ethics can to a very large extent be done in the absence of reference to God. Such a study of ethics is basically a study of God's general ethical revelation for which an all-knowing, all-good, all-powerful God has good reasons which can to a large extent be understood in human or "secular" terms, i.e., solely in terms of earthly human welfare and flourishing, or the moral principles/ values may simply be seen or intuited (via rational insight) as true.<br /><br />So how should Christians do ethics in the non-Christian, public square? I'll close this section on theological ethics with some comments from the Christian historian, lawyer, philosopher, and theologian John Warwick Montgomery (from his <i>The Shaping of America</i> [Bethany House 1981], 155):<br /><br />"Our task in a secular society is not to force the society, come what may, into the framework of God's Kingdom, but rather to bring it as close as we can to divine standards consistent with effective Gospel preachment to the unbeliever.<br /><br />"We should actively strive to legislate all revelational standards whose societal importance can be demonstrated [via good, publicly accessible reasons] to our fellow citizens, and where we are unsuccessful in legislating them we should do all in our power to create a climate of opinion in which they will eventually become acceptable."<br /><br />I would add (and I think Montgomery would agree): And where we can’t demonstrate the social importance, we shouldn’t impose (because imposing may push people away from the Gospel).<br /><br />It seems to me that the creation of a climate of opinion in which God's ethics become more acceptable to our society requires us to show the superiority of God's ethics in two ways: (1) by living our lives in accordance with God's ethics; and (2) by giving (insofar as it is possible) "secular" reasons for why God's ethics are superior to competing moral principles and theories. In so doing, we can be "salt" and "light" to a morally deteriorating world. (Salt keeps meat from rotting, and light keeps the darkness at bay.)<br /><br />Of course, #1 should be done always and wherever we are. We can do #2 at home, work, school, church, discussion with friends, letters to editors and MPs. Also, we should encourage young people (who are relevantly gifted) to serve God as culture-shapers: lawyers, teachers, reporters, writers, moviemakers, artists, etc. Also, we should encourage young people to work as researchers/ thinkers who “translate” God’s moral law into “secular” terms to show its superiority and beauty and goodness—i.e., its relevance to human flourishing and the amelioration of human suffering.Hendrik van der Breggenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04149481975577863835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-21356355586769040042011-11-13T12:39:16.342-06:002011-11-13T12:39:16.342-06:00Dr. Greco (Nicholas),
Thanks for your thoughts ab...Dr. Greco (Nicholas),<br /><br />Thanks for your thoughts about Gospel, social gospel, capitalism, and socialism. I agree that capitalism has its problems (e.g., its tendency to overemphasize self-interest, creation of phony "needs," promotion of people as "consumers," exploitation of people and environment), but I think the problems arise at root from the morals (or lack of morals) of those who constitute the major players in the markets (i.e., the people who own/run businesses and the people who buy goods and services). On the other hand, I think that socialism is attractive primarily because of the moral values that are imposed onto the governing socialist structure that's being considered. Without those moral values in place at the roots (i.e., in the hearts and minds of those who shape the social system and those who hold its players accountable), we've again got (another) corrupt system. I'm inclined to think that whether one has political leanings towards capitalism or socialism (or some place in between), the key is to use government as a God-given tool to encourage a social system that reflects fundamental moral values AND to promote conditions that allow the Gospel to be promoted, so people—the governed (employees/ consumers/ voters) and the governors (whether business owners, CEOs, media elite, city councilors, MLAs, MPs, or Supreme Court Justices)—will have transformed hearts and minds that seek the good of others, not just self. I suspect that we're not really having a very great difference of view here.Hendrik van der Breggenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04149481975577863835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-37426044145850074282011-11-12T20:00:30.999-06:002011-11-12T20:00:30.999-06:00Thank you very much for putting together this essa...Thank you very much for putting together this essay, Dr. V. I very much wanted to be at this year's Lecture Series. It's the first one in 4 years that I have missed.<br /><br />Rather than offering my own half-baked thoughts, on the questions you have raised, I'll recommend a book that I think you would find very relevant and insightful (at least I did) when thinking about these topics.<br /><br />The book is James Davison Hunter's "To Change the World: The Irony, Tragedy, and Possibility of Christianity in the Late Modern World." <br /><br />http://jamesdavisonhunter.com/to-change-the-world/learn-more/Jordanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17202279122400159625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-8316647665793745392011-11-08T19:13:51.653-06:002011-11-08T19:13:51.653-06:00Dr. van der Breggen,
Thank you for the well-writt...Dr. van der Breggen,<br /><br />Thank you for the well-written exploration of the true problems that might be inherent in Canadian society, apart from Capitalism or "market idolatry." I also appreciate the mention (I'm that media prof who called Blaikie--and others--out on the notion that the media is to blame for everything). <br /><br />I think that I would take a simpler approach to things. I agree that the Gospel of Christ is what is required to fix things, and I understand the notion that systems in disrepair are simply symptoms of a greater problem.<br /><br />I suppose, in my cursory thinking on the subject matter here, I don't mind the notion of a "social gospel" on the part of government. I suppose that this is a lesser evil, a kind of "move towards morality," if you will forgive my perhaps crude way of putting it.<br /><br />In any case, I'm not sure that anything I'm saying is particularly thoughtful, but I thought I would throw my hat in the proverbial ring. Socialism, as a system, might be considered more moral (HA! I can't wait for that to be quoted by the media!) than capitalism, or the market. As one who is constantly tempted by market, and extremely susceptible to capitalist desire (through advertising, etc.), I understand the need (that <i>I</i> have) for this sort of system--or at least a move toward this sort of system.<br /><br />One final thing: the "social" is about working for the good of all, at the expense of all. "Capital" or "market" is about the self.<br /><br />I didn't find the above anywhere; I made it up from scratch. And I might not be right. Thanks for posting, nonetheless.Nicholas Grecohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12159802575350677365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-15269122955454788852011-11-02T15:25:39.351-05:002011-11-02T15:25:39.351-05:00Here's an interesting story of how spiritual t...Here's an interesting story of how spiritual transformation can change an evil industry from the inside out: <a href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/from-playboy-pornographer-to-christian-pastor-the-unlikely-story-of-donny-p?utm_source=LifeSiteNews.com+Daily+Newsletter&utm_campaign=3d43b2a9d8-LifeSiteNews_com_Canada_Headlines11_01_2011&utm_medium=email" rel="nofollow">From Playboy pornographer to Christian pastor</a>. (Kind of reminds me of the story of John Newton, the slave-trader-turned-pastor and author of "Amazing Grace.")Hendrik van der Breggenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04149481975577863835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-22337466898845768712011-10-30T20:31:20.284-05:002011-10-30T20:31:20.284-05:00Thank you, Landon Oakes (a.k.a. Theophilus), for y...Thank you, Landon Oakes (a.k.a. Theophilus), for your comments. I appreciate your usual good sense and philosophical insight. Yes, I agree that we should develop a new fallacy for the logic textbooks. We will have to think of a good name for the fallacy, i.e., a catchy name that accurately describes the mistake but does so without risk of personal insult to those who commit it (so we can avoid law suits). (Yes, the parenthetical remark was supposed to be humorous.) How about fallacy of hasty appeal to government? Landon, on behalf of the Philosophy Foosball Club, I hereby invite you to return to Providence to complete your degree! Best regards.Hendrik van der Breggenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04149481975577863835noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-89718503724839278582011-10-30T15:56:44.297-05:002011-10-30T15:56:44.297-05:00I should add that my defense of the market is not ...I should add that my defense of the market is not a description of what always happens in the market in modern Canada or in America especially with the rise of gigantic corporations which seem as little accountable to us as the government. (Also, on my account, we ought to view corporations as persons, so as to ensure their accountability to those they interact with before the law.)Theophilushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12132465956345080103noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2232903554513250778.post-21509083782664265382011-10-30T15:50:52.575-05:002011-10-30T15:50:52.575-05:00Thanks for this essay. I have been thinking about ...Thanks for this essay. I have been thinking about this as well. It seems correct to me to say that the social gospel proponents are shifting the concern of the Christian to unjust social structures instead of sin, and this seems backwards to me. I would really be encouraged if I heard more from the social gospel movement about individual sin which occurs naturally as a result of the Fall. Also, they seem to think that if there is a social problem there must be a solution and that this solution can be enacted by the government. I think this view should be included in logic textbooks as a fallacy.<br /><br />I also want to say that Mr. Blaikie's description of the market seems to miss the mark. As I see it, the market ties us together in a web of interactions and loyalties and helps us to enter into a moral community. These market interactions are upheld and guaranteed by the state which acts as an impartial judge according to a law which it has fixed and this allows to enter into our relations with each other with confidence.<br /><br />The "social-democratic government" what I think we can just call the planned economy, is a great threat to this community because it replaces the people with whom we interact with and whom we can have gratitude towards and hold grudges against with a nameless and faceless state. It cannot be thanked, for it has no apparatus with which to receive thanks; and cannot be sued, for it is itself the judge of what is just and unjust. If it sees fit to behave irresponsibly and in opposition to the good of those who enter into interaction with it it cannot be called to account. <br /><br />So I see two dangers: one is the erosion of a moral community of people who freely interact with each other for their own good and thereby form loyalties and friendships and the second is the lack of accountability that occurs when the state replaces all of our personal interactions with each other. (I must add that if the laws of the state are just and not used as means to accomplish programs important to their current enforcers, we avoid the problem of the greedy, power-mongering politician, as well as the problem of the totalitarian leader).Theophilushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12132465956345080103noreply@blogger.com