It never fails. About two or three weeks into the school year a parent (or hopefully pair of parents) give me a call or stop me in the hallway to ask about the content of the books we read in Humanities. They have usually just realized that the subject of sexuality has been mentioned or that the book may contain “bad words.” Sometimes they have come with true inquisitiveness, “Is this appropriate to read and discuss?” Other times it is less congenial, “I can’t believe my child is reading this at a Christian school!” Rather than focus on an apologetic for our reading here – which has merit – I want to discuss a different, related issue in this article.
Our diet is important. In our materialistic, botox-injected, fashion model, American Idol culture, you would think we get that. Sadly we only get the physical implications of this. We totally miss the broader worldview-centered applications of this concept. If our lives are meant to be a reflection of the glory of God (and they are, 1 Cor. 10:31) and if we are to cultivate this by attending to truth, goodness, and beauty (and we should, Phil. 4:8) then we must have a diet consistent with these ideals.
The reason I began with the example I did is because this question is really a dietary question. In both cases the answer is that there is no better place to read about pagan (or biblical) sexuality than a Christian school where the sexual activity can be analyzed and given a critique from a biblical standard. And by the way, there are no “bad” words. Words may be poorly used in order to revolt against propriety (in which case “friggin” or “that sucks” may fit the same bill as many four-letter words) but words themselves are not intrinsically bad.
How is the context of a literature class an issue of diet? Because for many families it is such a stark contrast to the diet their children get outside of school. Our entertainment diet has the same effect on our mind and character as our food diet does on our mid-section and gluteal muscles. Think of MTV as McDonald’s for your mind.
In my own experience I recently came to this understanding myself. Raised in Middle Tennessee, my entertainment diet grew from playing outside with action figures to watching television and then finally to video game consoles, walkman tape players, trips to the movie theater and an unhealthy obsession with popular culture. Not that I had an educational environment working against the entertainment mentality, but it would have made no difference if I had. It is a simple case of immediate gratification versus delayed gratification. Neil Postman has argued that our modern world has demanded that learning be a form of entertainment. As a college student, after my conversion to classical pedagogy I began to lament the time spent in entertainment, recognizing an antithesis between entertainment and the cultivation of wisdom and virtue. Entertainment is self-centered, even if it is done in a group. Wisdom and virtue are kingdom centered and desire to be taught, learned and discovered (cf. Prov. 9:3-6).
But as I began to have a family a sense of nostalgia gripped me. I did, after all, have two boys. I wanted them to develop a sense of dominion over creation but I wanted to share my boyhood joys with them as well. I unintentionally, and foolishly, set a paradox in front of them. I read C.S. Lewis, A.A. Milne, and J.R.R. Tolkien to them and set them in front of Star Wars and Robotech. Guess which had more of an influence?
It eventually struck me as I tried to cultivate discretion and gentleness and my children injured themselves in sword fights that I had fed them a diet of violence and action and expected to harvest reflection, simplicity, and virtue. How dumb was that?
Many families have this same tension. They want their children to have entertainment experiences they had (or sometimes ones denied to them in their youth). They also want the ideals of a classical child (meekness, self-control, etc.). It is very difficult (if not impossible) to have both of these together. They are antithetical to the tune of having cake and eating said cake.
This is what I have found to be the problem with families from the example at the beginning of this article. This past year I had a parent who was indignant about her son reading the sexually explicit portions of the Epic of Gilgamesh but had been fine with him watching an unedited version of the movie 300. There are simply no words for this contradiction.
Too often we assume that Disney and Nick Jr. or whatever is fine because it is aimed at kids. I have had to take a step back and drastically curb the shows my children watch or what they read because the content was not something the cultivated biblical attitudes. Attitudes like sarcasm and self-indulgence, mean-spiritedness and arguing are prevalent in modern cartoons and young-reader books. I’m not just talking about Harry Potter or The Golden Compass. This affects such shows as Arthur and new versions of Looney Toons.
We cannot feed our children an entertainment diet full of sensationalized pop culture and unbiblical attitudes and expect our children to be content with poetry or even deep study of the Scriptures. If our children have no patience or are averse to contemplation or reflection we must consider what has helped them be that way. This is no different from an obesity crisis. The prescription for obesity is to change your diet (to healthy foods) and exercise. The prescription for lazy minds and poor behavior is the same thing. Change their entertainment diet and make them exercise their mind.
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
Saturday, July 12, 2008
Culture
Many of us are aware of Henry Van Til's classic formulation in The Calvinistic Concept of Culture.
that culture is religion externalized. It turns out he was not the first to make such a suggestion, though he was the first that I know of to explore it from a purely Reformed and theological perspective. In 1930, the Agrarians made this statement concerning culture.
They were defining humanism as a culture, something we have still not really caught on to as clearly as we ought to.
I am constantly amazed at how right they were about so much.
that culture is religion externalized. It turns out he was not the first to make such a suggestion, though he was the first that I know of to explore it from a purely Reformed and theological perspective. In 1930, the Agrarians made this statement concerning culture.
the whole way in which we live, act, think, and feel. It is a kind of imaginatively balanced life lived out in a definite social tradition.
They were defining humanism as a culture, something we have still not really caught on to as clearly as we ought to.
I am constantly amazed at how right they were about so much.
Recovering the Lost Art of Reading Aloud
With obvious respect to Dorothy Sayers, I would like to argue for a moment about something very essential that has managed to slip out of our education process. Reading aloud. I often have students come to me in seventh grade who cannot pronounce words aloud. I believe they can read them to themselves, most of the time, but they cannot read them out loud. We read a lot of literature at the school I teach at and we do a lot of it aloud when we are able. It pains me to hear students just completely butcher Mark Twain or Homer because they lack reading ability.
After several years, I have come to believe that this is related to the fact that parents stop reading to their children after their children learn to read. I don't remember being read to as a child. I remember having lots of books, but I don't remember my Mom or Dad actually reading them to me. I am sure they did, but they probably stopped once I learned how to read for myself. As a result, I often had to figure out how things were supposed to sound, and still struggle with this if the original is Latin or Greek. How do you say Aristides or Darius?
I have a friend at another school who was read to his entire childhood. His parents read short easy to read books to him when he was learning to read. They upped it to authors like Lewis, Tolkien and Wordsworth when he was able to follow them. As he grew the family began reading Homer and Livy, Plutarch and Augustine during the family reading time. By the time he was in high school they were reading serious non-fiction and long fiction together (think McCullough's 1776 or Melville's Moby Dick). The result: He has no problem reading very difficult material. He has begun the same trend with his own children. I have as well. My boys (6 and 8) and I are reading Jules Verne's Journey to the Center of the Earth right now. I have already read the Chronicles of Narnia to them and we regularly read from Bennett's Book of Virtues.
Taking the time to read aloud to your children will have many results. The most important, assuming you choose good literature to read to them (I recommend not reading Stephen King or Harry Potter), is that they will hear a lot of good literature in their lifetime. Another result will be they will hear language being read. This is very important! It relates to the seventh graders I get from time to time. I can always tell which ones come from families that read together and which don't. Those that read together are much more comfortable reading aloud than those that don't.
I know it takes time to do this. But I would argue that whether you are homeschooling or classical schooling, this is a must for any family. Take the time. Sit down for thirty minutes each evening and read something together. Don't just read some dribble either, get something with meat on it. I recommend poetry or short fiction for the beginner. Read Lewis' Narnia books together. Read Tolkien together. Read something together.
After several years, I have come to believe that this is related to the fact that parents stop reading to their children after their children learn to read. I don't remember being read to as a child. I remember having lots of books, but I don't remember my Mom or Dad actually reading them to me. I am sure they did, but they probably stopped once I learned how to read for myself. As a result, I often had to figure out how things were supposed to sound, and still struggle with this if the original is Latin or Greek. How do you say Aristides or Darius?
I have a friend at another school who was read to his entire childhood. His parents read short easy to read books to him when he was learning to read. They upped it to authors like Lewis, Tolkien and Wordsworth when he was able to follow them. As he grew the family began reading Homer and Livy, Plutarch and Augustine during the family reading time. By the time he was in high school they were reading serious non-fiction and long fiction together (think McCullough's 1776 or Melville's Moby Dick). The result: He has no problem reading very difficult material. He has begun the same trend with his own children. I have as well. My boys (6 and 8) and I are reading Jules Verne's Journey to the Center of the Earth right now. I have already read the Chronicles of Narnia to them and we regularly read from Bennett's Book of Virtues.
Taking the time to read aloud to your children will have many results. The most important, assuming you choose good literature to read to them (I recommend not reading Stephen King or Harry Potter), is that they will hear a lot of good literature in their lifetime. Another result will be they will hear language being read. This is very important! It relates to the seventh graders I get from time to time. I can always tell which ones come from families that read together and which don't. Those that read together are much more comfortable reading aloud than those that don't.
I know it takes time to do this. But I would argue that whether you are homeschooling or classical schooling, this is a must for any family. Take the time. Sit down for thirty minutes each evening and read something together. Don't just read some dribble either, get something with meat on it. I recommend poetry or short fiction for the beginner. Read Lewis' Narnia books together. Read Tolkien together. Read something together.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Thanks to Dr. Grant for this quote
“If the church of Jesus Christ does not become central to the life of growing cities then the cities will become mere geographies of no singular place.” Thomas Chalmers
On a Replica of the Parthenon
Why do they come? What do they seek
Who build but never read their Greek?
The classic stillness of a pool
Beleaguered in its certitude
By aimless motors that can make
Only incertainty more sure;
And where the willows crowd the pure
Expanse of clouds and blue that stood
Around the gables Athens wrought
Shop-girls embrace a plaster thought,
And eye Poseidon's loins ungirt,
And never heed the brandished spear
Or feel the bright-eyed maiden's rage
Whose gaze the sparrows violate;
But the sky drips its spectral dirt,
And gods, like men, to soot revert.
Gone is the mild, the serene air.
The golden years are come too late.
Pursue not wisdom or virtue here,
But what blind motion, what dim last
Regret of men who slew their past
Raised up this bribe against their fate.
Donald Davidson
Who build but never read their Greek?
The classic stillness of a pool
Beleaguered in its certitude
By aimless motors that can make
Only incertainty more sure;
And where the willows crowd the pure
Expanse of clouds and blue that stood
Around the gables Athens wrought
Shop-girls embrace a plaster thought,
And eye Poseidon's loins ungirt,
And never heed the brandished spear
Or feel the bright-eyed maiden's rage
Whose gaze the sparrows violate;
But the sky drips its spectral dirt,
And gods, like men, to soot revert.
Gone is the mild, the serene air.
The golden years are come too late.
Pursue not wisdom or virtue here,
But what blind motion, what dim last
Regret of men who slew their past
Raised up this bribe against their fate.
Donald Davidson
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Interesting thoughts from Gary DeMar
Gar DeMar, from American Vision, sends out email articles on a regular basis to those signed up to get them. Often they are particularly insightful. I thought the one from July 8 was very helpful to me as a teacher. It helped me critique not only my students but myself. See for yourself.
Is the Internet Making Some People Stupid and Gullible?
The next step is to take action. Simply identifying the problem is not enough. At the SCL conference a couple of weeks ago I heard several good talks from people and some that weren't so good. Those that weren't so good inevitably had conceded some critical aspect of the Christian antithesis in their educational philosophy. The most obvious one I heard was that teens today are under a lot of pressure that we don't get and we (as teachers) must accept that fact. There was no hint of identifying this trend and then looking to how we can transcend this or call them out of their self-absorbed lives into communion with the rest of the civilized world. No, we'll just concede defeat and try to "meet them where they are."
I wonder what would have happened if Jesus had acted that way? He did indeed identify our central problem and meet us where we were, but only as an avenue to call us forth out of our sin and misery into vital communion with the Godhead.
Is the Internet Making Some People Stupid and Gullible?
The next step is to take action. Simply identifying the problem is not enough. At the SCL conference a couple of weeks ago I heard several good talks from people and some that weren't so good. Those that weren't so good inevitably had conceded some critical aspect of the Christian antithesis in their educational philosophy. The most obvious one I heard was that teens today are under a lot of pressure that we don't get and we (as teachers) must accept that fact. There was no hint of identifying this trend and then looking to how we can transcend this or call them out of their self-absorbed lives into communion with the rest of the civilized world. No, we'll just concede defeat and try to "meet them where they are."
I wonder what would have happened if Jesus had acted that way? He did indeed identify our central problem and meet us where we were, but only as an avenue to call us forth out of our sin and misery into vital communion with the Godhead.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
17 years before Sayers...
John Gould Fletcher (1886-1950) included an essay on education in the 1930 I'll Take My Stand that bears remarkable similarity to aspects of Dorothy Sayers Lost Tools of Learning essay from 1947. An apologetic needs to be made before any discussion of Fletcher's essay is done. This is done in case anyone ever follows up this post with an actual reading of the primary source and finds, as I did, that Fletcher has some very racist language in his writing. Fletcher frequently betrays himself as "undemocratic" and anti-egalitarian in his opinions about education. Yet, politically incorrect as he is, Fletcher has some excellent ideas if we are willing to listen.
According to Fletcher, the purpose of education is "to produce the balanced character - the man of the world in the true sense, who is also the man with spiritual roots in his own community in the local sense" (111). In Fletcher's perspective the antebellum Southern education system did this much better than the public school postbellum system. He does not go so far as to say the Southern system is the best period. He acknowledges the victories of the Northern system in the North and attributes it to the industrial and urban character of the North. In the South, however, the rural character brought about a much different system of education, that of the Academy. Fletcher describes the Academy as a school of tutors and pupils who pay tuition to learn. He says "Their object was to teach nothing that the teacher himself had not mastered, and could not convey to his pupils." Sounds a lot like John Milton Gregory here. The result, according to Fletcher was that "their training was therefore classical and humanistic, rather than scientific and technical" (103).
What is a classical education according to Fletcher? He describes the three stages of the trivium very well. He begins with the Grammar stage.
From this basic understanding of fact, Fletcher represents an interesting picture of the Logic (Dialectic) stage. This stage lasts from "ten to twelve years of age" according to Fletcher and during this period "the sole abiding object of education is not to convey information at all" (115).
It is fascinating to me that we have come to expect so little from our school children. Given the opportunities open to them, we should expect much more. I often wonder what Martin Luther or St. Augustine would have done with a word processor, given their already prodigious output of works. I had a parent of an eleventh grader come to me expressing concern that her daughter had not learned something several years ago. I listened carefully and respectfully and then suggested that now was the time to expect her daughter to learn that for herself, to teach that to herself. She should begin using the tools of learning to teach herself. Needless to say, this wasn't what this mother wanted to hear. But it should represent exactly what we want our students to do in life. No school can teach every art and science that will be needed. Public schools may try, but then look at what comes out. We have graduates who have very open minds to all forms of religion and sexuality, but cannot make change at a cash register.
Fletcher represents a picture of what American education could be again. He does so in a fallen state, remember this if you read him, but he does paint a beautiful picture of the educated man.
According to Fletcher, the purpose of education is "to produce the balanced character - the man of the world in the true sense, who is also the man with spiritual roots in his own community in the local sense" (111). In Fletcher's perspective the antebellum Southern education system did this much better than the public school postbellum system. He does not go so far as to say the Southern system is the best period. He acknowledges the victories of the Northern system in the North and attributes it to the industrial and urban character of the North. In the South, however, the rural character brought about a much different system of education, that of the Academy. Fletcher describes the Academy as a school of tutors and pupils who pay tuition to learn. He says "Their object was to teach nothing that the teacher himself had not mastered, and could not convey to his pupils." Sounds a lot like John Milton Gregory here. The result, according to Fletcher was that "their training was therefore classical and humanistic, rather than scientific and technical" (103).
What is a classical education according to Fletcher? He describes the three stages of the trivium very well. He begins with the Grammar stage.
Primary instruction in the English language in the elements of grammar and mathematics, in geography, in elementary history, is, after all, largely a question of being able to remember certain facts. It depends on memory - on being able to repeat a lesson correctly once it is given. (115)
From this basic understanding of fact, Fletcher represents an interesting picture of the Logic (Dialectic) stage. This stage lasts from "ten to twelve years of age" according to Fletcher and during this period "the sole abiding object of education is not to convey information at all" (115).
It is to train the pupil's mind in such a manner that he can master for himself whatever subject he wishes to take up, and to enlarge his mental horizon by showing the relationship of this subject to the whole of human life. (115-116)Technically, Fletcher does not represent a Rhetoric stage in his map of education. But given what he does say, one can deduce the content of the Rhetoric stage. It is whatever exists past the training stage. That period of a child's life after twelve years of age when he does introduce himself to new learning and does master whatever he desires. This is just what Sayers had in mind.
It is fascinating to me that we have come to expect so little from our school children. Given the opportunities open to them, we should expect much more. I often wonder what Martin Luther or St. Augustine would have done with a word processor, given their already prodigious output of works. I had a parent of an eleventh grader come to me expressing concern that her daughter had not learned something several years ago. I listened carefully and respectfully and then suggested that now was the time to expect her daughter to learn that for herself, to teach that to herself. She should begin using the tools of learning to teach herself. Needless to say, this wasn't what this mother wanted to hear. But it should represent exactly what we want our students to do in life. No school can teach every art and science that will be needed. Public schools may try, but then look at what comes out. We have graduates who have very open minds to all forms of religion and sexuality, but cannot make change at a cash register.
Fletcher represents a picture of what American education could be again. He does so in a fallen state, remember this if you read him, but he does paint a beautiful picture of the educated man.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Hometown
I have lived in Greenville, SC for a little more than 8 years. Before that I lived in Chattanooga, TN for about 5 years. Yet for some reason, every time I go back to Winchester, TN to see my parents, I feel like I have come home. None of the places I have lived since high school have felt like home to me.
This gets even more interesting when I recognize that the overwhelming desire for many children that grow up in small towns (including myself) it to get out as fast as possible and as far away as possible. I remember the first time a student of mine here in Greenville told me he wanted to get out of this small town. I laughed at him and told him the population of the city of Greenville alone was greater than the entire county I grew up in. Yet, for some reason, I am trying to get back.
It may have something to do with the agrarian streak developing in me (I picked the topic for a reason, you know). It may simply be a product of my middle age (I am a thirty-something now). Whatever it is, I miss Skip's Grill. I miss the Oldham Theater. I miss the Blue Front Drug Store and the Creekside Market. I miss so much about that place that I don't want to leave once I have visited.
Yet this can't just turn into a trip down nostalgia lane. I have to do analysis, even on myself. While there last week I was saddened by how much Winchester looks like everywhere; which is another way of saying it looks like nowhere. James Kunstler's fascinating book The Geography of Nowhere, explains how this has happened all across America. This process has turned vital and regional communities into "developments" and places for "growth." I saw this with my own two eyes last week. Housing subdivisions have gone crazy in my hometown. This wouldn't be so bad if they had some character to them, but sadly they all look alike.
I can't for the life of me figure out why a vibrant community would want to approve a by-pass around their town. I guess on some level they figure it will keep very large trucks from barreling through the town. But it will also keep people who need to see Hammer's department store and the Winchester Speedway from ever setting their eyes on these places. Watch Cars for heaven's sake. I cried (and still cry) through parts of that movie because it reminded me so much of what is happening in our towns.
I will probably never move back to Winchester. One reason for this is the lack of community. Community it partly where you make it, but there must be some like-mindedness as well. We are very different from the folks we grew up with. Christianity is mostly a social religion in places like Winchester. I know there are many, very many, authentic Christians there. But for a gross amount of people, their is no life in their religion. We take our religion very seriously and have a church that does as well. There would be no place to worship there. There is also the problem of occupation and calling. I am a teacher, but am not state certified. I don't even have a education degree (for which I continue to be grateful). There are no private schools of the caliber I teach at in that part of Tennessee. There are some in more urban centers of Tennessee (like Franklin, Memphis, Knoxville, Murfreesboro, even Columbia). But in little ole Winchester there are no classical schools. It is very interesting to talk to people there about what I teach and how. They don't even have categories to put it in. "So do you teach history or literature?" "Well, both actually, and philsophy and art, with aesthetics and theology." (Insert puzzled face here)
After visiting my hometown, I have to work out the reasons I am grateful to live where I live and work where I work. I have to remind myself of what I would give up just to eat at Skip's once a week or so. I can't say I'd never do it if I had a real opporunity to, but it's not on the To Do list.
This gets even more interesting when I recognize that the overwhelming desire for many children that grow up in small towns (including myself) it to get out as fast as possible and as far away as possible. I remember the first time a student of mine here in Greenville told me he wanted to get out of this small town. I laughed at him and told him the population of the city of Greenville alone was greater than the entire county I grew up in. Yet, for some reason, I am trying to get back.
It may have something to do with the agrarian streak developing in me (I picked the topic for a reason, you know). It may simply be a product of my middle age (I am a thirty-something now). Whatever it is, I miss Skip's Grill. I miss the Oldham Theater. I miss the Blue Front Drug Store and the Creekside Market. I miss so much about that place that I don't want to leave once I have visited.
Yet this can't just turn into a trip down nostalgia lane. I have to do analysis, even on myself. While there last week I was saddened by how much Winchester looks like everywhere; which is another way of saying it looks like nowhere. James Kunstler's fascinating book The Geography of Nowhere, explains how this has happened all across America. This process has turned vital and regional communities into "developments" and places for "growth." I saw this with my own two eyes last week. Housing subdivisions have gone crazy in my hometown. This wouldn't be so bad if they had some character to them, but sadly they all look alike.
I can't for the life of me figure out why a vibrant community would want to approve a by-pass around their town. I guess on some level they figure it will keep very large trucks from barreling through the town. But it will also keep people who need to see Hammer's department store and the Winchester Speedway from ever setting their eyes on these places. Watch Cars for heaven's sake. I cried (and still cry) through parts of that movie because it reminded me so much of what is happening in our towns.
I will probably never move back to Winchester. One reason for this is the lack of community. Community it partly where you make it, but there must be some like-mindedness as well. We are very different from the folks we grew up with. Christianity is mostly a social religion in places like Winchester. I know there are many, very many, authentic Christians there. But for a gross amount of people, their is no life in their religion. We take our religion very seriously and have a church that does as well. There would be no place to worship there. There is also the problem of occupation and calling. I am a teacher, but am not state certified. I don't even have a education degree (for which I continue to be grateful). There are no private schools of the caliber I teach at in that part of Tennessee. There are some in more urban centers of Tennessee (like Franklin, Memphis, Knoxville, Murfreesboro, even Columbia). But in little ole Winchester there are no classical schools. It is very interesting to talk to people there about what I teach and how. They don't even have categories to put it in. "So do you teach history or literature?" "Well, both actually, and philsophy and art, with aesthetics and theology." (Insert puzzled face here)
After visiting my hometown, I have to work out the reasons I am grateful to live where I live and work where I work. I have to remind myself of what I would give up just to eat at Skip's once a week or so. I can't say I'd never do it if I had a real opporunity to, but it's not on the To Do list.
Monday, July 7, 2008
Busy couple of weeks
In the last two weeks I have done quite a bit. I first went to Charleston, SC for the Society for Classical Learning conference. I had a wonderful time there listening to and learning from many in the classical school community. Charleston was, of course, fantastic. I made some new friends in schools I hadn't heard of before.
One of the most interesting folks I met was Andrew Kern. Andrew is director of CiRCE in Charlotte, NC and editor of the Quiddity blog on the blogroll. I highly recommend checking his blog out from time to time.
After the SCL conference I went over to my home state of Tennessee and visited family for about a week. While there I did the impossible, I read an entire book. R.J. Rushdoony's Foundations of Social Order made it into my bag because I have been trying to read through the Bannockburn reading list. I found it a fascinating read with much to contribute to my thinking and the church as well. I highly recommend it. Through commentary on the creeds and councils of the early church, Rushdoony points out four key concepts that must be understood to lie at the heart of any social order. 1) A Creed: Every society has one. Even not having one is having one. 2) The State: The State with either be a ministry of justice (its god-given role) or it will attempt to be messianic (its humanistic desire). 3) Sovereignty: This will either be immanent or transcendent. 4) Grace: This element puts every outworking of the social order in proper perspective. Social action only makes sense if done through grace, which must understand the nature of sin and corruption. If done without a proper understanding of grace social action is just humanistic and attempting to fix a problem by adjusting the environment of the sinner. This will never work.
I just got back from Tennessee and think I have found a starting place for my thesis. After finishing Rushdoony I picked up my Agrarianism reading again. Donald Davidson wrote a piece about the New Deal in which he talks about a Agrarian-Distributist view. Once I read that something began clicking into place.
It has been amazing to see that stuff I've been thinking about for years has begun making sense the more I read the agrarians. They have dealt with much of this before. Immigration, industrialism, social action, ancient history, Chesterton and Belloc. All of this has begun to coalesce while I have been reading these guys.
I will have to do some serious study of Davidson and Distributism, but I think I'm going to latch onto that idea (the idea of a Agrarian-Distributist view) and move with it.
I am still blogging about Angels in the Architecture, or rather intend to still blog about it. I already have some later chapters blogged out, but want to do them in order.
One of the most interesting folks I met was Andrew Kern. Andrew is director of CiRCE in Charlotte, NC and editor of the Quiddity blog on the blogroll. I highly recommend checking his blog out from time to time.
After the SCL conference I went over to my home state of Tennessee and visited family for about a week. While there I did the impossible, I read an entire book. R.J. Rushdoony's Foundations of Social Order made it into my bag because I have been trying to read through the Bannockburn reading list. I found it a fascinating read with much to contribute to my thinking and the church as well. I highly recommend it. Through commentary on the creeds and councils of the early church, Rushdoony points out four key concepts that must be understood to lie at the heart of any social order. 1) A Creed: Every society has one. Even not having one is having one. 2) The State: The State with either be a ministry of justice (its god-given role) or it will attempt to be messianic (its humanistic desire). 3) Sovereignty: This will either be immanent or transcendent. 4) Grace: This element puts every outworking of the social order in proper perspective. Social action only makes sense if done through grace, which must understand the nature of sin and corruption. If done without a proper understanding of grace social action is just humanistic and attempting to fix a problem by adjusting the environment of the sinner. This will never work.
I just got back from Tennessee and think I have found a starting place for my thesis. After finishing Rushdoony I picked up my Agrarianism reading again. Donald Davidson wrote a piece about the New Deal in which he talks about a Agrarian-Distributist view. Once I read that something began clicking into place.
It has been amazing to see that stuff I've been thinking about for years has begun making sense the more I read the agrarians. They have dealt with much of this before. Immigration, industrialism, social action, ancient history, Chesterton and Belloc. All of this has begun to coalesce while I have been reading these guys.
I will have to do some serious study of Davidson and Distributism, but I think I'm going to latch onto that idea (the idea of a Agrarian-Distributist view) and move with it.
I am still blogging about Angels in the Architecture, or rather intend to still blog about it. I already have some later chapters blogged out, but want to do them in order.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)