Many of you know we are in the midst of our transition overseas. I've planned to take a sabbatical from blogging for 2 months. I'll look forward to reading and responding to any comments when I return. I'm sure I will also have a few ideas stored up by December as well. Pray for an undivided heart and mind as we prepare and transition into our new life overseas.
Reflections on Philosophy, Theology, and random ideas on the human race.
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
Monday, September 22, 2014
Saturday, September 20, 2014
From Enemy to Ally
The brutal Syrian civil war has been lingering on for 3 1/2 years. At this time last year the US was preparing airstrikes against the Syrian regime as it fought against the rebels, mostly comprised of the Free Syrian Army and the Islamic Front. But recently a rebel group has overtaken a third of Syria's eastern territories. The US Secretary of State now finds himself denouncing them as terrorists and has been preparing a coalition to resist these new rebels militarily. The US is now hinting that Iran –the Syrian regime's primary mid-east ally– should play a role in resisting the Islamic State! Oh, how the tables have turned so quickly.
The NY Times writes how awkward some of this has been with a report on the recent international meeting in Paris:
“Regional powers used the meeting, which was ostensibly designed to support the beleaguered Iraqi government in its struggle against the Islamic State, to take swipes at one another –and Syria was the elephant in the room.”
The NY Times writes how awkward some of this has been with a report on the recent international meeting in Paris:
“Regional powers used the meeting, which was ostensibly designed to support the beleaguered Iraqi government in its struggle against the Islamic State, to take swipes at one another –and Syria was the elephant in the room.”
Friday, September 19, 2014
Promiscuous Worship
The Romans were well known for their promiscuity of worship. They
worshiped many gods. They worshiped their own Etruscan and Latin
gods, of course. They worshiped the gods of their neighbors. They
worshiped the gods of the people they conquered. Their toleration of a
plethora of gods came with the patriotic demand for all others to tolerate
their own gods –especially as the empire expanded. One of their favorite
pastimes was god-matching. It streamlined this toleration process.
Ares is Mars, Thor is Jupiter, Zeus is also Jupiter, Artemis is Diana, Hermes
is Mercury, etc. Even though Parthians, Greeks, and Norseman have
different names, they would say, we all still worship the same god(s).
The promiscuous nature of Roman worship was not really because they loved
honoring and invoking blessings from any and all gods. Roman worship was primarily a means to
another end. It was for the sake of
something else –something more significant in their mind. They called it pax romana, the peace of Rome or the peace of the empire. Theological toleration was for the higher
goal of maintaining political stability throughout all the territories. They allowed traditional worship and matched up
cross-cultural gods not because of some deep theological reflection. Romans were statesmen. They knew what it meant to build and sustain
an empire. And not upsetting their
conquered people by uprooting their religion helped maintain the political
status quo. If the god-matching strategy
didn’t fit well, at the very least there was an imperial expectation for devotion
and sacrifice to the Roman pantheon alongside any local gods. It was promiscuous worship that demanded the
same promiscuity on everyone else. A
toleration that demands toleration.
Romans tolerated most everything religious except one thing. The god deniers. They called them “athiests.” They refused to offer sacrifices to the gods, the gods who could potentially curse the empire into instability and decline. Ultimately, denying the gods was a political statement of ultimate allegiance. More specifically, it was an act of treason. The athiests denied the very foundation of Roman society and way of living.
In AD 155, a feeble old bishop was on trial for “atheism” in the ancient arena
of Smyrna. The wild beasts ready to be
loosed on the almost 90 year-old man for all to observe what happens to
traitors and the “intolerant.” Rome’s
one simple demand for his release was for him to offer incense (as a form of
worship) to the emperor (emperor’s were even part of the pantheon in those
days) and curse “the atheists.” Looking around
the stadium, the old bishop turned the tables with a curse of his own. He waved his hand toward the crowd and shouted,
“Away with the Atheists!” The whole
stadium was in an uproar. Instead of
being fed to lions because of his age, the emperor graciously allowed him to
burn at the stake.
In a culture that worshiped many things… religious tolerance was the reigning ethic. Promiscuity in worship was the reality. Political allegiance was the supreme value. This is a familiar picture that will always take shape when true worship is subservient to political/social goals. It is also familiar because the religious tolerance of our day, just like Rome, has little to do with theological reflection. It has everything to do with establishing an equitable and peaceful society. When worship only has instrumental value –not ultimate value– will we demand the kind of tolerance that is so prolific today. It is the kind of tolerance that has “demands” –which is actually very strange. It is a kind of tolerance that –when fully formed– will work itself out like Rome’s version of it. I pray not.
Mars |
Ares |
Romans tolerated most everything religious except one thing. The god deniers. They called them “athiests.” They refused to offer sacrifices to the gods, the gods who could potentially curse the empire into instability and decline. Ultimately, denying the gods was a political statement of ultimate allegiance. More specifically, it was an act of treason. The athiests denied the very foundation of Roman society and way of living.
Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna |
In a culture that worshiped many things… religious tolerance was the reigning ethic. Promiscuity in worship was the reality. Political allegiance was the supreme value. This is a familiar picture that will always take shape when true worship is subservient to political/social goals. It is also familiar because the religious tolerance of our day, just like Rome, has little to do with theological reflection. It has everything to do with establishing an equitable and peaceful society. When worship only has instrumental value –not ultimate value– will we demand the kind of tolerance that is so prolific today. It is the kind of tolerance that has “demands” –which is actually very strange. It is a kind of tolerance that –when fully formed– will work itself out like Rome’s version of it. I pray not.
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
True Virtue
St. Augustine says true virtue is rightly–ordered
affections. It is supremely loving only what is worthy of one’s supreme
love. It is being mildly inclined toward what is worthy of only mild inclinations.
And it is despising what is truly despicable. Another way of saying it is
true virtue is valuing deep in your soul everything according to its actual
worth. Everything in its proper order.
I remember watching an interview of a rodeo bull–rider after
he had won. The interviewer commented
about the rider’s fearlessness out there.
With a straight face the bull–rider retorted: “I’m not afraid to die. I’ll do whatever it takes.” I suppose growing up in the city my
perception of the virtues of bull-riding is short-sided. But when did it become standard jargon to
express paying the ultimate price for riding a bull as something noble?
It is common to hear reflections at funerals related to the
life of the deceased. “His greatest
passion was bass-fishing every morning.” “She really lived for cycling more
than anything.” “His one passion in life
was the Dodgers.”
The question Augustine would ask is: Does this bull-rider love bull-riding
according to its actual worth? Another
way of asking it is: Are our greatest
passions supposed to be our greatest
passions? Do we love supremely something we should only be mildly inclined toward? Are those things that we are mildly
inclined toward instead supposed to be actually our greatest passions? Is everything in its proper order according
to its actual worth? Do you see the question
he’s shaping for us?
It will not be surprising to you that I find Augustine’s
account of virtue very compelling. The
center of true virtue is the affections, the heart. Probably something Augustine picked up from
his adored Savior. Second, virtuous
living is lining yourself up with a reality outside of yourself. You don’t create value, it is already out
there. You don’t invent it, you discover
it. Of course this is uprooting for the
gate-keepers of our culture. Those
journalists and senators and celebrities and kindergarten teachers that have programmed
us to find whatever we love and pursue it.
Conditioned us to see virtue as the passionate pursuit of our dreams,
and then they leave the most important question intentionally unanswered. What are those dreams? What is the object of our pursuit? Bull-riding?
God? The Dodgers? Bass-fishing?
It doesn’t matter, or so we’re told.
All that matters is that in the land of opportunity we pursue it with
all our heart. The American Dream. Augustine would shutter. Maybe we should too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)