Author: Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 266

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Do You ‘Believe in Science’…or Not? (Jacob Hess, Pub­lic Square): “…what if we’re wit­ness­ing the true nature of sci­ence in its full glo­ry? Not as an ora­cle that speaks in some mono­lith­ic voice. But as an argument—between oth­er­wise thought­ful and good-heart­ed peo­ple all seek­ing truth, but read­ing the data dif­fer­ent­ly, defin­ing terms dif­fer­ent­ly, empha­siz­ing dif­fer­ent indi­ca­tors in deter­min­ing what is true and trust­wor­thy, etc. If so, rather than wait­ing for Sci­ence to declare the truth of a matter—maybe we need to start doing some­thing else: Think­ing for our­selves.” This was a much bet­ter arti­cle than I expect­ed.
  2. Aca­d­e­mics Are Real­ly, Real­ly Wor­ried About Their Free­dom (John McWhort­er, The Atlantic): “One pro­fes­sor notes, ‘Even with tenure and author­i­ty, I wor­ry that stu­dents could file spu­ri­ous Title IX com­plaints … or that stu­dents could boy­cott me or remove me as Chair.’ I have no rea­son to sup­pose that he is being dra­mat­ic, because exact­ly this, he says, hap­pened to his pre­de­ces­sor.” The author is a lin­guis­tics pro­fes­sor at Colum­bia.
    • Relat­ed: The Denial of Can­cel Cul­ture (Eric Kauf­mann, Quil­lette): “Aca­d­e­mics don’t dis­crim­i­nate more than oth­er edu­cat­ed pro­fes­sion­als, and the Right dis­crim­i­nates as much as the Left, but the fact the Left out­num­bers the Right 6:1 (9:1 among cur­rent [social sci­ences and human­i­ties] staff) means that con­ser­v­a­tives and Leavers expe­ri­ence a far high­er dis­crim­i­na­to­ry effect than the left-lib­er­al major­i­ty. On a four-per­son hir­ing pan­el, a Leaver faces an 80 per­cent chance of dis­crim­i­na­tion.” The author is a pro­fes­sor of pol­i­tics at Birk­beck Col­lege in the UK.
  3. Arti­cles Relat­ed To Race, Racism and Relat­ed Top­ics
    • Amer­i­can Chris­tian­i­ty’s White-Suprema­cy Prob­lem (David Luo, New York­er): “…Chris­t­ian nation­al­ism is not the same as per­son­al reli­gios­i­ty. In fact, reli­gious commitment—as mea­sured by church atten­dance, prayer, and Scrip­ture reading—tends to improve atti­tudes on race, serv­ing as a pro­gres­sive influ­ence. This sug­gests the root of the white church’s prob­lem may not be ‘Chris­tian­i­ty prop­er,’ as Dou­glass put it, so much as the cul­ture around white Chris­tian­i­ty, which nar­rows and dimin­ish­es the Amer­i­can project.” This arti­cle cov­ers a lot of ground and not all of it with equal insight (or per­haps fair­ness is the word I’m look­ing for), but as a whole well-done.
    • Black Chris­tians Play a Cru­cial Role in Ath­lete Activism (Paul Putz , Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “While some black Chris­t­ian ath­letes have abstained from the recent wave of activism in sta­di­ums and arenas—Orlando Mag­ic for­ward Jonathan Isaac, for exam­ple, cit­ed his under­stand­ing of the gospel when declin­ing to ful­ly par­tic­i­pate in a pre-game racial jus­tice ceremony—far more have played a lead­ing role.”
    • I was the woman sur­round­ed by BLM pro­test­ers at a D.C. restau­rant. Here’s why I didn’t raise my fist. (Lau­ren Vic­tor, Wash­ing­ton Post): “Last week, I went out to din­ner in D.C. with a friend. As we sat out­side at a neigh­bor­hood restau­rant, a group of pro­test­ers sur­round­ed our table and demand­ed that I raise my fist in sup­port of the Black Lives Mat­ter move­ment. I had marched repeat­ed­ly in the past sev­er­al months in sup­port of their cause, but I refused their demands. That inter­ac­tion wound up in a viral video that with­in 48 hours had been viewed more than 12 mil­lion times.” This is fas­ci­nat­ing.
    • ‘You’re Not Allowed To Film’: The Fight for Con­trol Over Who Reports From Port­land (Nan­cy Rom­mel­mann, Rea­son): “I can­not say who came up with these anti-cam­era bat­tle cries. But it’s easy to under­stand why pro­test­ers use them: to shape the nar­ra­tive the coun­try sees about the protests. And that nar­ra­tive, in my esti­ma­tion after many weeks cov­er­ing street clash­es in a city where I lived for 15 years, is 90 per­cent [men­da­cious non­sense].”
    • Don’t take your guns to town, son (Tim Car­ney, Wash­ing­ton Exam­in­er): “In life, there are hor­ri­ble sit­u­a­tions in which there are no good deci­sions or where it is extreme­ly easy to make the wrong deci­sion. So when we can avoid these hor­ri­ble sit­u­a­tions, we ought to.”
      • This is an insight with wide-rang­ing appli­ca­tion. It’s why you shouldn’t bring guns to a protest and also why there are some par­ties on cam­pus you shouldn’t go to.
    • Police reforms inspired by George Floyd face defeat in CA (Edi­to­r­i­al Board, Sacra­men­to Bee): “The leg­is­la­tors who authored these cru­cial reforms deserve sup­port and recog­ni­tion for walk­ing the walk. But Cal­i­for­ni­ans must also remem­ber the names of any leg­is­la­tors who took a knee to hon­or Black Lives Mat­ter in front of the cam­eras and then, behind the scenes, bowed down to police groups to kill much-need­ed reforms.”
  4. The Social Fab­ric of the US Is Fray­ing Severe­ly, if Not Unrav­el­ling (Glenn Green­wald, The Inter­cept): “Why is vir­tu­al­ly every met­ric of men­tal and spir­i­tu­al dis­ease — sui­cide, depres­sion, anx­i­ety dis­or­ders, addic­tion, and alco­holism — increas­ing sig­nif­i­cant­ly, rapid­ly, in the rich­est coun­try on earth, one filled with advanced tech­nolo­gies and at least the pre­tense of lib­er­al democ­ra­cy?”
  5. Boy­cotts Can’t Be a Test of Moral Puri­ty (Zephyr Tea­chout, The Atlantic): “We don’t ask peo­ple to boy­cott libraries in order to change library rules; we don’t ask peo­ple to boy­cott high­ways to ask for them to be safer; we don’t demand that you buy only bot­tled water while protest­ing water-util­i­ty gov­er­nance.” The delight­ful­ly-named author is a law prof at Ford­ham. Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  6. On pres­i­den­tial pol­i­tics:
    • What You Should Know About the 2020 Demo­c­ra­t­ic Par­ty Plat­form (Joe Carter, Gospel Coali­tion): “Why should Chris­tians care about a doc­u­ment that few non-politi­cians will ever read? Because of the influ­ence the two major par­ty plat­forms have on pub­lic pol­i­cy. While the plat­form is not bind­ing on the pres­i­den­tial nom­i­nee or any oth­er politi­cians, polit­i­cal sci­en­tists have found that over the past 30 years law­mak­ers in Con­gress tend to vote in line with their party’s plat­form: 89 per­cent of the time for Repub­li­cans, and 79 per­cent of the time for Democ­rats.“
    • What You Should Know About the 2020 Repub­li­can Par­ty Plat­form (Joe Carter, Gospel Coali­tion): “This arti­cle will pro­vide, with­out com­men­tary, an out­line of the Repub­li­can plat­form as it relates to sev­er­al social issues. Every state­ment is either a direct quote or a sum­ma­ry of the platform’s posi­tion.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. Amer­i­ca in one tweet:“We are liv­ing in an era of woke cap­i­tal­ism in which com­pa­nies pre­tend to care about social jus­tice to sell prod­ucts to peo­ple who pre­tend to hate cap­i­tal­ism.” (Clay Rout­ledge, Twit­ter) First shared in vol­ume 186.

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 265

lots about race and racial ten­sion

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Here are the things about race and racial ten­sion that stood out to me.
    • Why Did the Police Shoot Jacob Blake? (Trevor Noah, The Dai­ly Show): “I could tell you this sto­ry with my eyes closed by now. If I want­ed to I could pre­re­cord five of these seg­ments and go on vaca­tion and you would nev­er know.” Ten worth­while min­utes.
    • The Kenosha shoot­ing did­n’t hap­pen in a vac­u­um (Denise Lock­wood, CNN): “I am remind­ed of what Rod­ney Prunty, the for­mer exec­u­tive direc­tor of the Unit­ed Way of Racine Coun­ty, said to me dur­ing an inter­view: ‘If you have a pond full of fish and a few of them die, you ask what’s wrong with the fish. But when the pond full of fish dies, we ask what’s wrong with the pond.’ In Wis­con­sin, it’s time we talked about what’s wrong with the pond.”
    • Riots in John Piper’s Neigh­bor­hood (Sarah Eekhoff Zyl­stra, Gospel Coali­tion): “Piper’s peo­ple moved in with­out a mas­ter plan, which was both con­fus­ing (‘What should we do?’) and exact­ly what When Help­ing Hurts authors would lat­er advise (start with build­ing rela­tion­ships, watch­ing, and learn­ing). Every­one end­ed up doing some­thing dif­fer­ent. But for decades, they’ve kept at it, work­ing through dis­ap­point­ments and chal­lenges, loot­ing and riots, bro­ken glass and home­less tent cities in the parks. They’re still doing it.” This is an out­stand­ing sto­ry.
    • Feel Good or Do Good (George Yancey, Patheos): “To gain the sup­port of real con­vic­tion we need the type of con­ver­sa­tions where we lis­ten to oth­ers as much as dis­cuss our point of view with them. We con­nect with oth­ers and get at the core of why they dis­agree with us. We under­stand their argu­ments and con­sid­er how to deal with the issues they bring up. We admit the valid­i­ty of those issues even if we dis­agree with them. Does this sound like any­thing that is hap­pen­ing with antiracism?” The author, who is black, is a soci­ol­o­gist at Bay­lor whom I have ref­er­enced sev­er­al times. 
    • Rule of Law Imper­iled (R. R. Reno, First Things): “The destruc­tion of prop­er­ty is not just an attack on another’s pos­ses­sions. It is a vio­la­tion of jus­tice. This is why riot­ing and loot­ing affects far more than those whose stores are burned. Cit­i­zens begin to wor­ry that they do not live in a soci­ety com­mit­ted to jus­tice. As we know from blacks who resent mis­treat­ment by the police, which is also unjust, this wor­ry can become explo­sive, even among those not per­son­al­ly affect­ed.”
    • Kyle Rit­ten­house, Pop­ulist Hero (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “If I were a polling firm, I would run a nation­al poll ask­ing peo­ple who have heard of Kyle Rit­ten­house whether they think he’s a vil­lain, a hero, or don’t know. That would tell us a lot about the mood of the coun­try.”
  2. Unbe­com­ing Amer­i­can (Johann N. Neem, Hedge­hog Review): “A shared cul­ture is not a total­iz­ing one; indeed, it makes real plu­ral­ism pos­si­ble by giv­ing us some­thing larg­er to share regard­less of our many dif­fer­ences. Or so I believed. But when that shared world was rede­fined as white—and when white peo­ple, threat­ened by its loss, reclaimed it—I found myself an exile. A per­son los­ing his coun­try. I felt myself unbe­com­ing in more than one sense. On col­lege cam­pus­es, includ­ing the one where I now teach, the left impos­es new bound­aries on thought and speech in its effort to chal­lenge his­tor­i­cal bound­aries, while, in pol­i­tics, the right embraces bound­aries that we had hoped nev­er to see again.” The author, a man of Indi­an descent, is a his­to­ri­an at West­ern Wash­ing­ton Uni­ver­si­ty. I real­ly liked this arti­cle.
    • Fol­low-up inter­view: An Immi­grant’s Plea: “Don’t Con­vert to White­ness” (Conor Frieder­s­dorf, The Atlantic): “My biggest fear, actu­al­ly, is vio­lence. We for­get that social order is frag­ile. You don’t have to look far to see how preva­lent eth­nic or reli­gious vio­lence is around the world. If we form tribes, we will respond in hate­ful ways to each oth­er. Right­ly or wrong­ly, peo­ple will feel belea­guered. We will get angri­er and angri­er. There will be less empa­thy.” I share his con­cern. 
  3. Advice For Stu­dents In a Time of Strife (a whole pas­sel of Prince­ton pro­fes­sors, First Things): “Remem­ber, as an Amer­i­can col­lege or uni­ver­si­ty stu­dent you are one of the luckiest—most privileged—people on plan­et earth. Do not fall into the trap of think­ing of your­self as a vic­tim or build­ing an iden­ti­ty for your­self around that idea. You can avoid the trap while strong­ly stand­ing up for your right to fair and equal treat­ment and bold­ly work­ing for reform where there are dou­ble stan­dards need­ing to be rec­ti­fied.” Tech­ni­cal­ly not a whole pas­sel, which con­notes a large but uncer­tain num­ber. I count 16 sig­na­to­ries!
  4. Chi­na Secret­ly Built A Vast New Infra­struc­ture To Imprison Mus­lims (Megha Rajagopalan, Ali­son Killing, and Chris­to Buschek, Buz­zfeed): “Down­load­ing What­sApp, which is banned in Chi­na, main­tain­ing ties with fam­i­ly abroad, engag­ing in prayer, and vis­it­ing a for­eign web­site are all offens­es for which Mus­lims have been sent to camps, accord­ing to pre­vi­ous­ly leaked doc­u­ments and inter­views with for­mer detainees. Because the gov­ern­ment does not con­sid­er intern­ment camps to be part of the crim­i­nal jus­tice sys­tem and none of these behav­iors are crimes under Chi­nese law, no detainees have been for­mal­ly arrest­ed or charged with a crime, let alone seen a day in court.” I’ve shared sim­i­lar news this before. This arti­cle is fresh and espe­cial­ly damn­ing.
    • Part 2: What They Saw: Ex-Pris­on­ers Detail The Hor­rors Of Chi­na’s Deten­tion Camps (Buz­zfeed): “More than a dozen for­mer detainees con­firmed to Buz­zFeed News that pris­on­ers were divid­ed into three cat­e­gories, dif­fer­en­ti­at­ed by uni­form col­ors. Those in blue, like Pari­da and the major­i­ty of the peo­ple inter­viewed for this arti­cle, were con­sid­ered the least threat­en­ing. Often, they were accused of minor trans­gres­sions, like down­load­ing banned apps to their phones or hav­ing trav­eled abroad. Imams, reli­gious peo­ple, and oth­ers con­sid­ered sub­ver­sive to the state were placed in the strictest group — and were usu­al­ly shack­led even inside the camp.”
    • Part 3: Blanked-Out Spots On Chi­na’s Maps Helped Us Uncov­er Xin­jiang’s Camps (Buz­zfeed): “Our break­through came when we noticed that there was some sort of issue with satel­lite imagery tiles load­ing in the vicin­i­ty of one of the known camps while using the Chi­nese map­ping plat­form Baidu Maps. The satel­lite imagery was old, but oth­er­wise fine when zoomed out — but at a cer­tain point, plain light gray tiles would appear over the camp loca­tion…. We ana­lyzed the masked loca­tions by com­par­ing them to up-to-date imagery from Google Earth, the Euro­pean Space Agency’s Sen­tinel Hub, and Plan­et Labs.” This one will be par­tic­u­lar­ly inter­est­ing to CS peo­ple. 
  5. Alexan­dria Oca­sio-Cortez talks about trust­ing the news (Twit­ter): “…when you see a FACT that is report­ed, cit­ed, and ver­i­fied by sev­er­al rep­utable out­lets, 99.999% it’s going to be true. HOWEVER! There is a big dif­fer­ence between a fact and the STORY. And the STORY (often the head­line) that’s sur­round­ing the fact is fre­quent­ly stretched, mis­char­ac­ter­ized, or dra­ma­tized to get you to click.” She and I have a remark­ably sim­i­lar per­spec­tive on the media.
    • Relat­ed: Giv­en my time again, I would­n’t choose jour­nal­ism (Sarah Ditum, Unherd): “Being mad was impor­tant because the eco­nom­ics of this kind of con­tent required fast out­put (since time­li­ness is crit­i­cal) and high engage­ment (since this is how edi­tors, and writ­ers, mea­sure suc­cess). I write quick­ly when I’m angry, and anger begets more anger, so peo­ple are more like­ly to share and react. Not every­thing I wrote when this was my main form of jour­nal­ism was bad, but only some of it was good, and the worst of it had a dis­hon­esty that made me feel ashamed…” 
  6. Do Pro-Lif­ers Who Reject Trump Have ‘Blood on their Hands’? (David French, The DIs­patch): “Decades of data and decades of legal, polit­i­cal, and cul­tur­al devel­op­ments have com­bined to teach us a few, sim­ple real­i­ties about abor­tion in the Unit­ed States: 1. Pres­i­dents have been irrel­e­vant to the abor­tion rate; 2. Judges have been forces of sta­bil­i­ty, not change, in abor­tion law; 3. State leg­is­la­tures have had more influ­ence on abor­tion than Con­gress; 4. Even if Roe is over­turned, abor­tion will be most­ly unchanged in the U.S.; and 5. The pro-life move­ment has an enor­mous cul­tur­al advan­tage.“ Chock-full of insights. Despite the title, it is less about par­ti­san pol­i­tics and more about abor­tion in Amer­i­ca.

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Facts Are Not Self‐Interpreting (Twit­ter) — this is a short, sound­less video. Rec­om­mend­ed. First shared in vol­ume 184.

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 264

sub­stan­tive pieces this week, plus reli­gious argu­ments for and against both Biden and Trump

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

As always, just skim and open the links that seem inter­est­ing to you in new tabs.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Chal­lenge of Marx­ism (Yoram Hazony, Quil­lette): “Not very long ago, most of us liv­ing in free soci­eties knew that Marx­ism was not com­pat­i­ble with democ­ra­cy…. Indeed, the entire pur­pose of demo­c­ra­t­ic gov­ern­ment, with its plu­ral­i­ty of legit­i­mate par­ties, is to avoid the vio­lent recon­sti­tu­tion of soci­ety that Marx­ist polit­i­cal the­o­ry regards as the only rea­son­able aim of pol­i­tics.”
  2. The par­ti­cle col­lec­tion that fan­cied itself a physi­cist (Ed Fes­er, per­son­al blog): “Democritus’s point is that if the atom­ist says both that atoms are all that exist and that col­or, sweet­ness, etc. and the oth­er qual­i­ties of con­scious expe­ri­ence are not to be found in the atoms, then we have a para­dox.” Fes­er, as I’ve men­tioned before, is one of my favorite philoso­phers.
  3. Anti-racist Argu­ments Are Tear­ing Peo­ple Apart (Conor Frieder­s­dorf, The Atlantic): “I made a series of rapid assump­tions about what I was watch­ing. I sur­mised that Broshi was a col­lege-edu­cat­ed, upper-mid­dle-class pro­gres­sive who sits on some sort of edu­ca­tion coun­cil in the pub­lic-school sys­tem and owns copies of White Fragili­ty and How to Be an Antiracist. I sur­mised that she was call­ing some­one out. And I sur­mised that her white, male tar­get was off­screen rolling his eyes. All of which turned out to be cor­rect.” This is amaz­ing.
    • Relat­ed: Why we can­not ignore Insti­tu­tion­al Racism (George Yancey, Patheos): “Pre­tend that we are going to have a mile race a year from now. I tell a third of the class about the race and hire a train­er for them. For anoth­er third of the class I tell them about the race six months lat­er but do not hire them a train­er. But I do advise them that they may want to work on their own to get ready for the race. The last third of the class I call them the morn­ing of the race and tell them that it is time to run. Assum­ing that the class is ran­dom­ly divid­ed into thirds, we know what will hap­pen in the race do we not?”
    • Relat­ed: Black and White evan­gel­i­cals once talked about ‘racial rec­on­cil­i­a­tion.’ Then Trump came along. (Sarah Pul­liam Bai­ley, Wash­ing­ton Post): “…despite shared Chris­t­ian beliefs and com­mit­ment to reli­gious obser­vance, White evan­gel­i­cals are among the most strong­ly Repub­li­can con­stituen­cies, while Black Protes­tants tend to vote Demo­c­ra­t­ic. And that divide appears to have grown hard­er to bridge since Trump took office.”
    • Col­leges aren’t report­ing anti-Semi­tism as a crime (Aiden Pink, For­ward): “A For­ward analy­sis com­par­ing news reports of cam­pus anti­semitism between 2016 and 2018 to the fil­ings for those years found that few­er than half of the inci­dents that could have been report­ed as hate crimes actu­al­ly were. Out of a total of 158 inci­dents at 64 schools, 93 — includ­ing anti­se­mit­ic van­dal­ism at brand-name schools known for vibrant Jew­ish com­mu­ni­ties like Har­vard, Prince­ton, MIT, UCLA and the Uni­ver­si­ty of Mary­land — were left out of the fed­er­al fil­ings.” Stan­ford comes off look­ing pret­ty good in this arti­cle. 
  4. The Amer­i­can Mis­un­der­stand­ing of Nat­ur­al Rights (Cameron Hilditch, Nation­al Review): “Our inher­i­tance of human rights was built to reflect the fact that we are all liv­ing images of a par­tic­u­lar cru­ci­fied crim­i­nal from Galilee, who pro­claimed that we are each and all more than what Cae­sar would make of us. If we care to enjoy the rights bequeathed to us by this tra­di­tion through­out the com­ing years, decades, and cen­turies, then we can no longer avoid pub­licly dis­cussing the inex­tri­ca­ble nature of reli­gious and polit­i­cal ideas.” 
    • Relat­ed: Is Amer­i­can Chris­t­ian Jurispru­dence a Thing? (Steven D. Smith, Law & Lib­er­ty): “Tak­en togeth­er, these assump­tions gen­er­ate an over­all atti­tude toward the project of law that resists oppos­ing extremes: on the one hand, an exces­sive or decon­struc­tive cynicism—one that would reduce the law to sim­ply a man­i­fes­ta­tion of pow­er based on class, race, or gender—and on the oth­er hand a dan­ger­ous utopi­anism that would use law to achieve per­fect jus­tice but end up destroy­ing human free­dom.” The author is a law pro­fes­sor at the Uni­ver­si­ty of San Diego. 
    • Relat­ed. Ish. The end of sec­u­lar­ism is nigh (Tom Hol­land, UnHerd): “That there exist­ed things called ‘reli­gions’ — ‘Hin­duism’, ‘Islam’, ‘Judaism’ ­— and that these func­tioned in a dimen­sion dis­tinct from entire spheres of human activ­i­ty — spheres called ‘sec­u­lar’ in Eng­lish — was not a con­vic­tion native to any­where except for West­ern Europe.”
  5. Chi­na’s Arti­fi­cial Intel­li­gence Sur­veil­lance State Goes Glob­al (Ross Ander­sen, The Atlantic): “In the ear­ly aughts, the Chi­nese tele­com titan ZTE sold Ethiopia a wire­less net­work with built-in back­door access for the gov­ern­ment. In a lat­er crack­down, dis­si­dents were round­ed up for bru­tal inter­ro­ga­tions, dur­ing which they were played audio from recent phone calls they’d made. Today, Kenya, Ugan­da, and Mau­ri­tius are out­fit­ting major cities with Chi­nese-made sur­veil­lance net­works.” I think hor­ri­fy­ing might be the best word for this arti­cle. 
  6. On pres­i­den­tial pol­i­tics and Chris­tian­i­ty:
    • From the right: Let­ter to an Anti-Trump Chris­t­ian Friend (Wayne Gru­dem, Town­Hall): “In every col­umn that I’ve pub­lished in sup­port of Trump, I have explic­it­ly reg­is­tered my dis­ap­proval of his char­ac­ter flaws and pre­vi­ous immoral behav­ior. I sup­port him because of the poli­cies he has enact­ed and will enact, and in spite of his char­ac­ter flaws (which I don’t think rise to a lev­el that would dis­qual­i­fy him from being pres­i­dent; more on this below).” The author is a pro­fes­sor at Phoenix Sem­i­nary.
    •  From the left: The Joe Biden that I know is a man of faith (Chris Coons, Fox News): “For Democ­rats like Joe and me, tak­ing care of the plan­et isn’t just about ris­ing sea lev­els and extreme weath­er, it’s also about pro­tect­ing and hon­or­ing God’s cre­ation. For Democ­rats like Joe and me, fight­ing for civ­il rights and equal­i­ty isn’t just about polit­i­cal cor­rect­ness, it’s about lov­ing our neigh­bor and rec­og­niz­ing that all of us are cre­at­ed equal in the eyes of God.” The author is a US Sen­a­tor.
    • A crit­i­cism of the right: Why Evan­gel­i­cals Sup­port Trump—and Why They Shouldn’t (George Yancey, The Bul­wark): “Many evan­gel­i­cal Chris­tians see Trump as some­one who will save them from Chris­tianopho­bia. And while I under­stand and respect the nature of these Chris­tians’ fears—in fact, I share them—I believe that Trump is not only not a solu­tion to these issues but in the long run he will make things worse.” The author is a pro­fes­sor at Bay­lor.
    • A crit­i­cism of the left: Devout Catholics and Sec­u­lar Pro­gres­sives (Robert George, First Things): this one is dif­fi­cult to excerpt. Very well done. The author is a pro­fes­sor at Prince­ton. 

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have God­speed: The Pace Of Being Known (Vimeo): a stu­dent brought this 30 minute video to my atten­tion and said it made her think about how she should be liv­ing in her dorm (sad­ly irrel­e­vant for that pur­pose at the moment). First shared in vol­ume 181.

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 263

this one is short­er than nor­mal

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Pan­demics Aren’t New—Just Look at Plagues in the Bible (Karen Engle, Logos): “With coro­n­avirus on everyone’s mind, ques­tions abound of whether the word ‘pan­dem­ic’ appears in the Bible, too. The short answer is no—’pandemic’ is not in the Bible. How­ev­er, the words “plague” and ‘pesti­lence’ are (no less than 122 times) and often ref­er­ence indi­vid­u­als or nations afflict­ed with a ter­ri­ble ill­ness.”
  2. ‘Chris­tian­i­ty Will Have Pow­er’ (Eliz­a­beth Dias, New York Times): “‘Trump’s an out­sider, like the rest of us,’ he said. ‘We might not respect Trump, but we still love the guy for who he is. Is he a man of integri­ty? Absolute­ly not,’ he went on. ‘Does he stand up for some of our moral Chris­t­ian val­ues? Yes.’ The guys agreed. ‘I’m not going to say he’s a Chris­t­ian, but he just doesn’t attack us,’ his friend Jason Mul­der said.” Need­less­ly snarky at times, but one of the rare mus­ings on evan­gel­i­cal Trump sup­port in a promi­nent media source that gets a lot of things right.
    • An inter­est­ing counter-per­spec­tive: Chris­tians want pow­er? Sioux Cen­ter push­es back on New York Times sto­ry (Lee Pitts, Reli­gion Unplugged): “Our church small group [in Sioux Cen­ter] is more diverse than my small groups in Wash­ing­ton, D.C. We enjoy the com­pa­ny of three peo­ple from Mex­i­co, a gen­tle­man from Paraguay, a woman from Japan, an engi­neer­ing pro­fes­sor from Ghana and a cou­ple orig­i­nal­ly from that exot­ic place called South Car­oli­na (that’s me). In fact, out of our 12-mem­ber small group, only two orig­i­nal­ly hail from North­west Iowa. Mean­while my D.C. small groups fea­tured all upper mid­dle-class White peo­ple most­ly sport­ing advanced degrees and flashy jobs inside the Belt­way. But the stereo­type would reverse that. My Sioux Cen­ter small group should be all White and my D.C. one would sure­ly be full of diver­si­ty, right? Wrong.” This arti­cle doesn’t real­ly rebut many of the reli­gious claims of the NY Times arti­cle, but it does under­cut some of the cul­tur­al ones.
  3. Wok­e­ness: old reli­gion in a new bot­tle (Sean Collins, Spiked): “What we’re see­ing now is an ampli­fi­ca­tion of what I wrote about five years ago: an intense spir­i­tu­al hunger that has no out­let. There’s no way to see peo­ple kneel­ing, or singing ‘Hands up, don’t shoot’, or sway­ing while they hold up can­dles, and avoid acknowl­edg­ing that it’s dri­ven by a spir­i­tu­al desire. I per­ceived this when I wrote about Occu­py Wall Street, and it’s become even more like this. It is an intense spir­i­tu­al hunger that is man­i­fest­ing itself more vio­lent­ly. Because to the post-Protes­tants, the world is an out­rage and we are all sin­ners.”
  4. How Megachurch­es Spent Coro­n­avirus Relief Funds (Luke Scorziell, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Accord­ing to Vaughn’s account­ing, the church spent 93 per­cent of the mon­ey on pay­roll. The addi­tion­al 7 per­cent went to rent and util­i­ties. The PPP rules say loans will be con­vert­ed to grants if 75 per­cent of the funds are used for pay­roll and the rest for spec­i­fied needs, includ­ing rent and util­i­ties. The mon­ey helped with more than just pay­ing the bills, how­ev­er. Because Palm Valley’s staff didn’t have to wor­ry about their job secu­ri­ty, they were able to focus ful­ly on car­ing for the church in the pan­dem­ic, Vaughn said.”
  5. Abol­ish the Police? Those Who Sur­vived the Chaos in Seat­tle Aren’t So Sure (Nel­lie Bowles, New York Times): “Faizel Khan was being told by the news media and his own may­or that the protests in his home­town were peace­ful, with ‘a block par­ty atmos­phere.’ But that was not what he saw through the win­dows of his Seat­tle cof­fee shop.”
    • Relat­ed: replac­ing police with social work­ers (Jes­si­ca Crispin, per­son­al blog): “If we do not have police, an armed squadron of men and women asked to inter­vene in sit­u­a­tions we our­selves can­not man­age, whether that be crime, acute men­tal ill­ness, or vio­lence, then who will we turn to in those sit­u­a­tions? One such pro­pos­al is to replace police with social work­ers. But as my friend R. said to me as we dis­cussed these ideas, ‘I don’t think these peo­ple have inter­act­ed with social work­ers.’ ” This is a per­spec­tive I had not heard before.
  6. Injus­tice, Out­rage, and the Prob­lem of Atheod­i­cy (Pub­lic Square): “In a world with­out God, there is no ulti­mate pur­pose in the injus­tice. And there is no pos­si­bil­i­ty of any ulti­mate prov­i­den­tial redemp­tion. It is just raw, rank, irra­tional injus­tice. And so what is the appro­pri­ate reac­tion? Out­rage! (And per­haps also despair.)” The author is a law prof at the Uni­ver­si­ty of San Diego. Also, bear in mind that Pub­lic Square is the Mor­mon equiv­a­lent of First Things.
  7. Bill Gates on Covid: Most US Tests Are ‘Com­plete­ly Garbage’ (Steven Levy, Wired): “The major­i­ty of all US tests are com­plete­ly garbage, wast­ed. If you don’t care how late the date is and you reim­burse at the same lev­el, of course they’re going to take every cus­tomer. Because they are mak­ing ridicu­lous mon­ey, and it’s most­ly rich peo­ple that are get­ting access to that. You have to have the reim­burse­ment sys­tem pay a lit­tle bit extra for 24 hours, pay the nor­mal fee for 48 hours, and pay noth­ing [if it isn’t done by then]. And they will fix it overnight.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Elisha and the She‐bears (Peter J Williams, Twit­ter): an insight­ful Twit­ter thread about a dis­turb­ing OT sto­ry. The author is the War­den of Tyn­dale House at Cam­bridge. First shared in vol­ume 179.

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 262

Hon­est­ly, this week’s col­lec­tion of arti­cles has some of the best I’ve seen in some time.

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. A Bib­li­cal Cri­tique of Sec­u­lar Jus­tice and Crit­i­cal The­o­ry (Tim Keller, Gospel In Life): “In the Bible Chris­tians have an ancient, rich, strong, com­pre­hen­sive, com­plex, and attrac­tive under­stand­ing of jus­tice. Bib­li­cal jus­tice dif­fers in sig­nif­i­cant ways from all the sec­u­lar alter­na­tives, with­out ignor­ing the con­cerns of any of them. Yet Chris­tians know lit­tle about bib­li­cal jus­tice, despite its promi­nence in the Scrip­tures.” The read of the week.
  2. The Church Forests of Ethiopia (YouTube): nine min­utes. This com­men­tary by Rod Dreher was what brought the video to my atten­tion. Watch the video before you read the com­men­tary. These forests are a beau­ti­ful pic­ture of the way the Church bless­es the world around it, and what the Church must do to thrive in the envi­ron­ment we find our­selves in.
  3. Lis­ten to Thomas Sow­ell (Cole­man Hugh­es, City Jour­nal): “…peo­ple pre­dictably line up on oppo­site sides of polit­i­cal issues that seem­ing­ly have noth­ing in com­mon. For instance, know­ing someone’s posi­tion on cli­mate change some­how allows you to pre­dict their views on tax­ing the rich, gun con­trol, and abor­tion. It’s tempt­ing to dis­miss this as mere polit­i­cal trib­al­ism. But Sow­ell con­tends that more is at work: that there are two fun­da­men­tal ways of think­ing about the social world, two sets of basic assump­tions about human nature, and two con­flict­ing ‘visions,’ from which most polit­i­cal dis­agree­ments fol­low.” Sow­ell is a senior fel­low at the Hoover Insti­tu­tion.
  4. Some reflec­tions on the media:
    • The Truth Is Pay­walled But The Lies Are Free (Nathan J. Robin­son, Cur­rent Affairs): “You want ‘Port­land Pro­test­ers Burn Bibles, Amer­i­can Flags In The Streets,’ ‘The Moral Case Against Mask Man­dates And Oth­er COVID Restric­tions,’ or an arti­cle sug­gest­ing the Nation­al Insti­tutes of Health has admit­ted 5G phones cause coronavirus—they’re yours. You want the detailed Times reports on neo-Nazis infil­trat­ing Ger­man insti­tu­tions, the rea­sons con­tact trac­ing is fail­ing in U.S. states, or the Trump administration’s under­cut­ting of the USPS’s effectiveness—well, if you’ve clicked around the web­site a bit you’ll run straight into the pay­wall.”
      • This is a good arti­cle. For the record, I agree with his assess­ment of the New York Times: it often con­tains the facts, but some­times incor­rect­ly framed with fool­ish infer­ences built upon them. That burn­ing Bibles and flags thing Robin­son knocks, though? That real­ly hap­pened: Did Port­land Pro­test­ers Burn Bibles and Amer­i­can Flags? (Snopes)
    • How the Media Could Get the Elec­tion Sto­ry Wrong (Ben Smith, New York Times): “The coro­n­avirus cri­sis means that states like Penn­syl­va­nia may be count­ing mail-in bal­lots for weeks, while Pres­i­dent Trump tweets false alle­ga­tions about fraud. And the last bar­ri­ers between Amer­i­can democ­ra­cy and a deep polit­i­cal cri­sis may be tele­vi­sion news and some ver­sion of that mad­den­ing nee­dle on The New York Times web­site.”
      • This is ter­ri­fy­ing and is 100% worth using up one of your pay­wall arti­cles for.
    • How the Media Led the Great Racial Awak­en­ing (Zach Gold­berg, Tablet): “Dur­ing this same peri­od, while exot­ic new phras­es were enter­ing the dis­course, uni­ver­sal­ly rec­og­niz­able words like ‘racism’ were being rad­i­cal­ly rede­fined. Along with the new lan­guage came ideas and beliefs ani­mat­ing a new moral-polit­i­cal frame­work to apply to pub­lic life and Amer­i­can soci­ety.”
  5. On the divi­sions in Amer­i­ca:
    • To unite the coun­try, we need hon­esty and courage (Robert George and Cor­nell West, Boston Globe): “Hon­esty and courage alone can save our wound­ed, dis­unit­ed coun­try now. We need the hon­esty and courage to speak the truth — includ­ing painful truths that unset­tle not only our foes but also our friends and, most espe­cial­ly, our­selves.” The authors (both Chris­t­ian) are pro­fes­sors at Prince­ton and Har­vard, respec­tive­ly. 
    • Remem­ber­ing John Lewis, and the Polit­i­cal The­ol­o­gy that Changed a Nation (David French, The Dis­patch): “What looks inevitable in hind­sight was any­thing but cer­tain. In fact, if you were plac­ing con­tem­po­rary bets on a polit­i­cal out­come, would you guess that some ver­sion of a three-cen­tu­ry sta­tus quo would pre­vail, or that the civ­il rights move­ment would achieve a legal rev­o­lu­tion near­ly on par with eman­ci­pa­tion itself? At the same time, can we even recall a mod­ern Chris­t­ian polit­i­cal move­ment so con­sis­tent with the upside-down log­ic of bib­li­cal Chris­tian­i­ty?”
    • This is Not The Amer­i­can Cul­tur­al Rev­o­lu­tion (Tan­ner Greer, per­son­al blog): “Amer­i­cans are extreme­ly fond of exag­ger­at­ing the threat their polit­i­cal ene­mies pose. Histri­on­ics about Don­ald Trump end­ing Amer­i­can democ­ra­cy are every­where to be found; read­ers will no doubt remem­ber the pro­tes­tors who claimed that Dick Cheney was the sec­ond com­ing of Hitler, or that Barack Oba­ma was a stealth author­i­tar­i­an social­ist.” This is a reas­sur­ing essay.
    • Sec­u­lar­ism Can­not Sus­tain Lib­er­ty, a Response to Greg Forster (Al Mohler, Law & Lib­er­ty): “I believe that the project of civ­i­liza­tion in the West, and in the Eng­lish-speak­ing world in par­tic­u­lar, has brought the great­est flow­er­ing of lib­er­ties and the great­est oppor­tu­ni­ties for human flour­ish­ing in human his­to­ry. I also believe that this civ­i­liza­tion­al project has arrived at this moment of max­i­mum dan­ger after decades of both neglect and mount­ing oppo­si­tion. The most fun­da­men­tal prob­lem is the loss of the intel­lec­tu­al and moral pre­con­di­tions that make the project of ordered lib­er­ty pos­si­ble.”
    • Could Amer­i­ca split up? (Damon Link­er, The Week): “I often catch myself pon­der­ing exact­ly what it is that keeps our coun­try togeth­er. What do we hold in com­mon? What do we share?” 
  6. Church­es and the pan­dem­ic:
    • How Two Cal­i­for­nia Megachurch­es Kept Wor­ship­ing (Kate Shell­nutt and Nicole Shanks, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Two Cal­i­for­nia church­es were so eager to meet last week­end that when their ser­vices began, wor­shipers erupt­ed in applause. In Sun Val­ley, con­gre­gants fill­ing Grace Com­mu­ni­ty Church’s 3,500-seat sanc­tu­ary rose and cheered, some doc­u­ment­ing the moment with their iPhones, when pas­tor John MacArthur opened the sec­ond week in a row of in-per­son ser­vices…. An hour away in River­side, Cal­i­for­nia, wor­ship­pers at Har­vest Chris­t­ian Fel­low­ship were greet­ed with cheeky pink and pur­ple signs that said, ‘Smile with your eyes (and wear a mask)’ and ‘Just leave room for your Bible—and anoth­er 5½ feet.’ It was the third Sun­day that Har­vest met in a white tent half the size of a foot­ball field to com­ply with state orders restrict­ing indoor wor­ship.”
    • Should Church­es in Cal­i­for­nia Defy Gov­ern­ment Restric­tions? A Response to John MacArthur (Gavin Ortlund, per­son­al blog): “To my mind, there are at least four bib­li­cal val­ues that should inform our deci­sion-mak­ing in this sit­u­a­tion: 1. the impor­tance of wor­ship (Hebrews 10:25), 2. love for neigh­bor (Mark 12:31), 3. obe­di­ence to gov­ern­ment (Romans 13:1–7), and 4. main­tain­ing a good wit­ness (Colos­sians 4:5–6). What con­cerns me about defy­ing the state order right now is that it seems to pri­or­i­tize 1 at the expense of 2–4.”
    • Mask­ing and Masks: A Hypo­thet­i­cal Inter­view (Doug Wil­son, per­son­al blog): “A free peo­ple should be jeal­ous of their lib­er­ty. And one of the best ways to be jeal­ous of your lib­er­ty is to require the gov­ern­ment, when­ev­er it exer­cis­es its author­i­ty coer­cive­ly, to be able to give a very spe­cif­ic rea­son. A gen­er­al rea­son is not good enough. The law should pro­hib­it steal­ing, for exam­ple, and when the cops arrest a thief, they should be able to say that they arrest­ed him because he was ‘steal­ing.’ Neg­a­tive pro­hi­bi­tions are the foun­da­tion of civic lib­er­ty, and broad, gen­er­al feel-good direc­tives are the foun­da­tion of tyran­ny.“ I am not opposed to manda­to­ry masks, but this is a good defense of the oppo­si­tion. 
  7. Con­cern­ing Chi­na:
    • The Tik­Tok War (Ben Thomp­son, Strat­e­ch­ery): “TikTok’s algo­rithm, unmoored from the con­straints of your social net­work or pro­fes­sion­al con­tent cre­ators, is free to pro­mote what­ev­er videos it likes, with­out any­one know­ing the dif­fer­ence. Tik­Tok could pro­mote a par­tic­u­lar can­di­date or a par­tic­u­lar issue in a par­tic­u­lar geog­ra­phy, with­out any­one — except per­haps the can­di­date, now indebt­ed to a Chi­nese com­pa­ny — know­ing. You may be skep­ti­cal this might hap­pen, but again, Chi­na has already demon­strat­ed a will­ing­ness to cen­sor speech on a plat­form banned in Chi­na; how much of a leap is it to think that a Par­ty com­mit­ted to ide­o­log­i­cal dom­i­nance will for­ev­er leave a route direct­ly into the hearts and minds of mil­lions of Amer­i­cans untouched?”
    • Books pulled from the library shelves, songs banned…it’s the new nor­mal in Hong Kong (Louisa Lim, The Guardian): “Put sim­ply, with­in a sin­gle month, Bei­jing has dis­man­tled a par­tial­ly free soci­ety and is try­ing to use its new law to enforce glob­al cen­sor­ship on speech regard­ing Hong Kong.”
    • Chris­tians Wor­ry Hong Kong’s New Law Will Ham­per Mis­sions (D. Cheng, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “…Chris­tians liv­ing out­side of Chi­na now won­der: Is it still safe for them to com­mu­ni­cate open­ly with friends and col­leagues in Hong Kong? For years, the ter­ri­to­ry has served as a stag­ing ground for min­istry orga­ni­za­tions oper­at­ing across the region. But now, will they face pres­sure or per­se­cu­tion, as those in the main­land do? If they are crit­i­cal of Bei­jing on social media or in an arti­cle such as this, will they be denied entry to Hong Kong—or worse, detained and pos­si­bly impris­oned upon land­ing in Hong Kong?”
    • ‘Clean Up This Mess’: The Chi­nese Thinkers Behind Xi’s Hard Line (Chris Buck­ley, New York Times): “While China’s Com­mu­nist Par­ty has long nur­tured legions of aca­d­e­mics to defend its agen­da, these author­i­tar­i­an thinkers stand out for their unabashed, often flashily eru­dite advo­ca­cy of one-par­ty rule and assertive sov­er­eign­ty, and their turn against the lib­er­al ideas that many of them once embraced.”
    • Trump Admin­is­tra­tion Penal­izes Chi­nese Offi­cials for Hong Kong Crack­down (Pran­shu Ver­ma and Edward Wong, New York Times): “The action is anoth­er in a series of mea­sures the Trump admin­is­tra­tion has tak­en in recent months to ratch­et up pres­sure on Bei­jing. Last month, the admin­is­tra­tion imposed sanc­tions on the Chi­nese gov­ern­ment, includ­ing a senior mem­ber of the Com­mu­nist Par­ty, over human rights abus­es against the large­ly Mus­lim Uighur minor­i­ty.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have What Is It Like to Be a Man? (Phil Christ­man, The Hedge­hog Review): “I live out my mas­culin­i­ty most often as a per­verse avoid­ance of com­fort: the refusal of good clothes, mois­tur­iz­er, painkillers; hard phys­i­cal train­ing, pur­sued for its own sake and not because I enjoy it; a sense that there is a set amount of phys­i­cal pain or self-imposed dis­ci­pline that I owe the uni­verse.” Very well-written. Every­one will like­ly find parts they res­onate with and parts they reject. The author is a lec­tur­er at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Michi­gan and based on his CV seems to be a fair­ly devot­ed Epis­co­palian. First shared in vol­ume 178.

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 261

Links to some encour­ag­ing sto­ries, some hor­ri­fy­ing sto­ries, and some con­fus­ing sto­ries. Because it be like that some­times.

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. How I Redis­cov­ered Faith (Mal­colm Glad­well, Rel­e­vant Mag­a­zine): “I have always believed in God. I have grasped the log­ic of Chris­t­ian faith. What I have had a hard time see­ing is God’s pow­er. I put that sen­tence in the past tense because some­thing hap­pened to me…” Shared with me by a stu­dent.
  2. Swe­den, Which Nev­er Had Lock­down, Sees COVID-19 Cas­es Plum­met as Rest of Europe Suf­fers Spike (Soo Kim, Newsweek): “Amid fears over a poten­tial sec­ond wave of the nov­el coro­n­avirus across Europe, new infec­tions in Swe­den, where full lock­down mea­sures were not imple­ment­ed, have most­ly declined since late June…. Mean­while, oth­er parts of Europe have report­ed large spikes in new cas­es over the same peri­od, includ­ing Spain, France, Ger­many, Bel­gium and The Nether­lands, which have seen increas­es between 40 and 200 per­cent over the last month, accord­ing to the lat­est WHO report Wednes­day.” Huh. Real­i­ty is com­pli­cat­ed and that’s why they make get­ting a PhD so ardu­ous. 
  3. John Roberts: Inside his sur­pris­ing streak of lib­er­al wins (Joan Biskupic, CNN): “…CNN offers a rare glimpse behind the scenes at how jus­tices on the Roberts court assert­ed their inter­ests, forged coali­tions and nav­i­gat­ed polit­i­cal pres­sure and the coro­n­avirus pan­dem­ic. The jus­tices’ opin­ions are pub­lic, but their delib­er­a­tions are pri­vate and usu­al­ly remain secret.”
  4. Har­vard Cre­ates Man­agers Instead of Elites (Saf­fron Huang, Pal­la­di­um Mag­a­zine): “At Har­vard, the implic­it sig­nal we receive every day is that every­thing requires a man­ag­er. Our extracur­ric­u­lars, despite vary­ing club names, most­ly revolve around admin­is­tra­tive work and send­ing emails. Emails solic­it­ing dona­tions, emails invit­ing speak­ers to a con­fer­ence, emails pub­li­ciz­ing your mag­a­zine launch with ‘FREE DONUTS’ dom­i­nat­ing the sub­ject line. Grant­ed, exe­cu­tion of mun­dane tasks is nec­es­sary for real work to be done. The skills of sub­tly bump­ing an unre­spon­sive team­mate, deft­ly achiev­ing a friend­ly-but-pro­fes­sion­al tone, and cre­at­ing Excel files wor­thy of a UI/UX design­er will serve you well in cor­po­rate life…. Very few clubs cre­ate a gen­er­a­tive and imag­i­na­tive vision for your future self at work, or for what you should be work­ing on. Although this is the stat­ed pur­pose of a Har­vard lib­er­al arts edu­ca­tion, cam­pus cul­ture has ele­vat­ed man­age­ri­al­ism above cre­ation…. The result is a class that excels at being judged and excels at man­ag­ing and exe­cut­ing defined tasks.” Quite inter­est­ing and very rel­e­vant to Stan­ford.
  5. The Supreme Court’s sur­pris­ing deci­sion on church­es and the pan­dem­ic, explained (Ian Mill­his­er, Vox): “Unlike his fel­low Repub­li­can jus­tices, in oth­er words, Roberts appears to believe that courts have a par­tic­u­lar­ly strong duty to defer to demo­c­ra­t­i­cal­ly account­able offi­cials dur­ing an his­toric pub­lic health cri­sis.” I found this analy­sis of Robert’s vote quite inter­est­ing. 
    • Obey­ing God Rather than Men? A Con­sti­tu­tion­al Schol­ar on What’s Real­ly a Reli­gious Lib­er­ty Issue (Ed Stet­zer inter­view­ing John Inazu, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Be peo­ple of hope who are known for putting the inter­ests of oth­ers above your own. Lament the costs of this virus to human life, men­tal health, and mate­r­i­al well-being. Lament our inabil­i­ty to gath­er for wor­ship. Pray for the end of this virus. But in the mean­time, love your neigh­bors and seek the peace of the city, even if it feels cost­ly.”
    • We Can’t Roll the Dice on Reli­gious Lib­er­ty: Neva­da, the Supreme Court, and Church­es (Ed Stet­zer, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Neva­da won the injunc­tion bat­tle, but church­es need to help the state back up and make the right choice. This is the line that every main­stream evan­gel­i­cal group said they would draw, and it has now been crossed.”
    • Christ, not Cae­sar, Is Head of the Church (John MacArthur, Grace To You): “His­to­ry is full of painful reminders that gov­ern­ment pow­er is eas­i­ly and fre­quent­ly abused for evil pur­pos­es. Politi­cians may manip­u­late sta­tis­tics and the media can cov­er up or cam­ou­flage incon­ve­nient truths. So a dis­cern­ing church can­not pas­sive­ly or auto­mat­i­cal­ly com­ply if the gov­ern­ment orders a shut­down of con­gre­ga­tion­al meetings—even if the rea­son giv­en is a con­cern for pub­lic health and safe­ty.”
    • A Time for Civ­il Dis­obe­di­ence? A Response to Grace Com­mu­ni­ty Church’s Elders (Jonathan Lee­man, 9 Marks): “We under­stand that we are not ancient Israel. And though in one sense all space is sacred for a Chris­t­ian because all space is under Christ’s lord­ship, in anoth­er sense no space is sacred, at least in a Tem­ple-like way; and the government’s author­i­ty also extends every­where inside its bor­ders.”
    • Fur­ther Reflec­tions on Recent Con­ver­sa­tions about Chris­t­ian Free­dom (Jonathan Lee­man, 9 Marks): “…my arti­cle and our pod­cast tried to do one sim­ple thing: remind fel­low believers—as we all ven­ture for­ward on our polit­i­cal­ly tumul­tuous landscape—of the cru­cial role of Chris­t­ian free­dom when we take these kinds of stances. On this and so many oth­er issues, believ­ers will come to dif­fer­ent con­clu­sions about the best path to take. And for the sake of main­tain­ing uni­ty, the unique author­i­ty of Scrip­ture, and the gospel, we need to keep train­ing our instincts to have a quick grasp for what belongs in the realm of free­dom and what does not.”
    • Our Gal­va­niz­ing Grand­fa­ther (Dou­glas Wil­son, per­son­al blog): “Suf­fice it to say that the civ­il gov­ern­ment does have legit­i­mate author­i­ty around sacred things (cir­ca sacra), but no author­i­ty what­ev­er in sacred things (in sac­ris). And when the gov­ern­ment abus­es this basic dis­tinc­tion willy nil­ly, as our gov­ern­ments have been doing in their overt and dis­crim­i­na­to­ry treat­ment of the church, it is time for the lead­er­ship of the church to take a stand. So with all of that run­ning in the back­ground, my pur­pose here this morn­ing is sim­ply to hon­or John MacArthur for his lead­er­ship in this.”
  6. Inter­view: Jour­nal­ist Michael Tracey on Riots & Protests (Michael Bren­dan Dougher­ty, Nation­al Review): “…the diver­gence in opin­ion — between local black and minor­i­ty pop­u­la­tions about the eth­i­cal impli­ca­tions of the riots, and the activists/journalists who claim to speak on their behalf — is strik­ing.”
  7. Are Chris­tians For­bid­den to Eat Blood? (David Clos­son, Gospel Coali­tion): “We can learn at least two things from the Jerusalem Coun­cil. First, on mat­ters per­tain­ing to the gospel, there is no room for com­pro­mise. The apos­tles and elders were firm and swift in their denun­ci­a­tion of those who sought to add works to the gospel. Sal­va­tion is by faith alone through grace alone; human effort is exclud­ed. Sec­ond, grace should be extend­ed for dif­fer­ences that aren’t cen­tral to the gospel.” Peo­ple dunked on this arti­cle, but it’s good and deals with an impor­tant ques­tion that will occur to any Bible read­er. 

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Eat, Pray, Code: Rule of St. Bene­dict Becomes Tech Developer’s Com­mu­ni­ty Guide­lines (Kate Shell­nutt, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “SQLite—a data­base man­age­ment engine used in most major browsers, smart phones, Adobe prod­ucts, and Skype—adopted a code of ethics pulled direct­ly from the bib­li­cal pre­cepts set by the ven­er­at­ed sixth-century monk.” This arti­cle blew my mind. First shared in vol­ume 175.

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Christianity For Modern Pagans: Alienation, Death, and Selfishness

It’s like we’re all watch­ing the same for­eign-lan­guage movie with sub­ti­tles for dif­fer­ent films. We’re see­ing the same things and can’t under­stand why we dis­agree about the plot.

Blog read­ers: Chi Alpha @ Stan­ford is engag­ing in our annu­al sum­mer read­ing project. As we read through an anno­tat­ed trans­la­tion of Pascal’s Pensees called Chris­tian­i­ty For Mod­ern Pagans, I’ll post the thoughts I’m email­ing the stu­dents here (which will large­ly con­sist of excerpts I found insight­ful). They are all tagged sum­mer-read­ing-project-2020. The read­ing sched­ule is online.

My sum­ma­ry of this week’s read­ing is a bit of a rant. Buck­le up.

I was caught off-guard by this tweet yes­ter­day from ABC News: “Pro­test­ers in Cal­i­for­nia set fire to a cour­t­house, dam­aged a police sta­tion and assault­ed offi­cers after a peace­ful demon­stra­tion inten­si­fied.”

It was those last few words that caught my eye: “a peace­ful demon­stra­tion inten­si­fied.” I would have thought the inten­si­fi­ca­tion of peace was some­thing akin to heav­en, but appar­ent­ly inten­si­fy­ing peace leads to a place full of flames.

I sup­pose it is pos­si­ble that the per­son who wrote the tweet sim­ply meant that the peace­ful protest changed into some­thing vio­lent, but it’s so in line with oth­er lan­guage that’s float­ing around that I sus­pect it reflects the author’s per­spec­tive: peace­ful demon­stra­tions are some­times accom­pa­nied by fire and vio­lence.

Per­haps the tweet was noth­ing more than poor­ly-word­ed. Even if so, it illus­trates the schism in our cul­ture. Go read the com­ments on the tweet. It’s like we’re all watch­ing the same for­eign-lan­guage movie with sub­ti­tles for dif­fer­ent films. We’re see­ing the same things and can’t under­stand why we dis­agree about the plot.

Exam­ples abound. Is the 1619 Project is a nec­es­sary cor­rec­tion of the stan­dard Amer­i­can nar­ra­tive or is it a mali­cious dis­tor­tion of our his­to­ry? Is can­cel cul­ture even a thing? Is free speech a real val­ue to cel­e­brate in all areas of life, a nec­es­sary legal stan­dard which we should con­strue as nar­row­ly as pos­si­ble, or a hyp­o­crit­i­cal tool used to mar­gin­al­ize peo­ple? How do you feel about Black Lives Mat­ter? Does it mat­ter whether we are talk­ing about Black Lives Mat­ter as an orga­ni­za­tion, as a slo­gan, or as a grass­roots upris­ing? Is reli­gious lib­er­ty the cor­ner­stone of human rights or does it deserve scare quotes because “reli­gious lib­er­ty” is real­ly a pre­text for priv­i­lege? Who should be pres­i­dent? How many gen­ders are there? Is the envi­ron­ment on the brink of col­lapse? Is social­ism one of the most ruinous mis­takes in his­to­ry or a hope­ful inevitabil­i­ty we should embrace? Can a well-informed and decent per­son be a con­ser­v­a­tive? Can a well-informed and decent per­son be a lib­er­al?

Peo­ple strong­ly (and even vio­lent­ly) dif­fer about each of these ques­tions. With that on my mind, two pas­sages from the read­ing stood out to me. The first is a reminder that the bro­ken­ness we see out there is an aggre­gate of the bro­ken­ness that is in each of us.

The prob­lem is not in our sys­tems but in our selves. This is the rea­son all soci­eties col­lapse, why the dams of good­ness nev­er hold out long against the floods of evil, why the bad peo­ple always some­how seem to come to the top. Soci­ety is only us. There is no “them”. If there were no such thing as Orig­i­nal Sin, why else couldn’t we ever attain the good­ness and jus­tice and joy and peace that the major­i­ty of sane peo­ple always want and have always want­ed? Orig­i­nal Sin is the only key that opens the mys­tery of his­to­ry.

Kreeft com­ment­ing on Pensee 211 (page 155)

And then, as a cau­tion­ary note, this one:

Stag­ger­ing­ly enor­mous mis­eries have been the fruit of modernity’s five great rev­o­lu­tions: the Indus­tri­al Rev­o­lu­tion, the French Rev­o­lu­tion, the Bol­she­vik Rev­o­lu­tion, the Nation­al Social­ist Rev­o­lu­tion and the Sex­u­al Rev­o­lu­tion. These five rev­o­lu­tions are one rev­o­lu­tion: five vis­i­ble out-crop­pings of the same invis­i­ble under­sea con­ti­nent. Each stems from the same root: the idol­a­trous search for a new absolute, the diviniza­tion of pow­er or free­dom or equal­i­ty or pride or plea­sure, respec­tive­ly.

Kreeft com­ment­ing on Pensee 199 (page 135)

I have opin­ions about all of the ques­tions I rat­tled off ear­li­er, and I hold this opin­ion as strong­ly as any of them: words are bet­ter than weapons and bal­lots are bet­ter than bul­lets. Our dis­agree­ments must not dri­ve us to destroy one anoth­er or to tear down the soci­ety we live in. Peo­ple suf­fer when a soci­ety col­laps­es, and those who are already vul­ner­a­ble suf­fer even more.

I don’t think Amer­i­ca is on the cusp of a vio­lent rev­o­lu­tion, but why keep walk­ing down this road? Opt out. As fol­low­ers of Christ let us instead become what I’ve heard called “a cre­ative coun­ter­cul­ture for the com­mon good.” As our Mas­ter said, “Love your ene­mies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mis­treat you”(Luke 6:27–28).

Let your peace inten­si­fy. Here endeth the rant.

Some oth­er quotes from the read­ing that stood out to me:

Pas­cal, Pensee 165: The last act is bloody, how­ev­er fine the rest of the play. They throw earth over your head and it is fin­ished for ever. 

Kreeft com­ment­ing: A sto­ry, like a syl­lo­gism, gets its uni­ty and point from its con­clu­sion, its end. Life seems wretched and vain because its end, and hence its point, seems to be death, and death seems to be noth­ing­ness. There­fore the ques­tion of immor­tal­i­ty is exis­ten­tial­ly cru­cial.

Pas­cal, Pensee 165 (page 144)

This may seem abstract to you while you’re in col­lege, but Pas­cal makes an excel­lent point else­where:

Any­one with only a week to live will not find it in his inter­est to believe that all this is just a mat­ter of chance. Now, if we were not bound by our pas­sions, a week and a hun­dred years would come to the same thing. 

Pas­cal, Pensee 326 (page 141)

Relat­ed:

Is not our span of life equal­ly infin­i­tes­i­mal in eter­ni­ty, even if it is extend­ed by ten years?

Pas­cal, Pensee 199 (page 125)

On a dif­fer­ent note:

Sec­u­lar moral­i­ty is a plan for the ful­fill­ment of self­ish­ness, Chris­tian­i­ty is a plan for its destruc­tion. It cuts to the heart. In fact, it is heart surgery. Clear­ly, this is going to appear opti­mistic only to one who knows he has heart dis­ease. No one who thinks he is healthy is going to be hap­py to be offered a free heart trans­plant.

Kreeft intro­duc­ing chap­ter 12 (page 148)

And a use­ful reminder that peo­ple are the same wher­ev­er you go, whether 17th cen­tu­ry France, con­tem­po­rary Amer­i­ca, or ancient Israel (see Eccle­si­astes 7:21–22):

No one talks about us in our pres­ence as he would in our absence. Human rela­tions are only based on this mutu­al decep­tion; and few friend­ships would sur­vive if every­one knew what his friend said about him behind his back, even though he spoke sin­cere­ly and dis­pas­sion­ate­ly.

Pas­cal, from Pensee 978 (page 151)

In my expe­ri­ence this next obser­va­tion is spot-on:

The great­est liar in the world is still out­raged by being lied to. No one is a moral rel­a­tivist, sub­jec­tivist or min­i­mal­ist when it comes to oth­ers’ behav­ior to him, only his to oth­ers.

Kreet com­ment­ing on Pensee 978 (page 153)

And I am always amused when some­one pulls the move Kreeft describes here:

In Pas­cal, as in the Mid­dle Ages, the vast size of the uni­verse is used to show forth the vast­ness of God’s pow­er. The very same fact is com­mon­ly used by the mod­ern mind (which igno­rant­ly thinks it is the first to dis­cov­er the fact) as evi­dence for athe­ism! “How could you believe in a God when Man is but a lost speck in an infi­nite abyss?” Why the size of the uni­verse should count against the­ism is nev­er argued for, only assumed. For the argu­ment is worth­less or nonex­is­tent, but the feel­ing is strong. That’s where the change takes place: in feel­ing, in sen­si­bil­i­ty.

Kreeft com­ment­ing on Pensee 199 (page 128)

Sim­i­lar­ly:

Sci­ence no more proves that nature is not a moth­er but only mat­ter than an X‑ray proves that a woman is not a moth­er but only a bag of bones.

Kreeft, intro­duc­tion to chap­ter 10 (page 120)

And this last one seems to me to be most­ly true. It’s true enough to think about.

How nat­ur­al and nor­mal is our unnat­ur­al injus­tice! Of course we are annoyed at crit­i­cism, even true crit­i­cism. Espe­cial­ly true crit­i­cism. A man will for­give you for unjust crit­i­cism but not for just crit­i­cism. A bul­ly will for­give you if you call him a cow­ard but not if you call him a bul­ly. A cow­ard will for­give you if you call him a bul­ly but not if you call him a cow­ard.

Kreeft com­ment­ing on Pensee 978 (page 153)

It reminds me of the say­ing, “when you throw a stone into a pack of dogs, the dog that yelps is the one that got hit.” What makes you yelp? It’s worth pon­der­ing.

For this week we’re read­ing chap­ters 13 (Diver­sion) & 14 (Indif­fer­ence). I think you’ll be shocked at how con­tem­po­rary they seem.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 260

From naked pro­tes­tors in Port­land to slav­ery in Chi­na to the­o­log­i­cal reflec­tions on con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries.

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Chi­na’s Xin­jiang Province a Moral Quandary for the West (Michael Bren­dan Dougher­ty, Nation­al Review): “The attempt to place mod­ern slaves in the sup­ply chain of West­ern lux­u­ry goods is an attempt to impli­cate and moral­ly geld West­ern nations who would crit­i­cize or pun­ish the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty for its crimes.”
  2. USS Uni­ver­si­ty (Scott Gal­loway, per­son­al blog): “There is a dan­ger­ous con­fla­tion of the dis­cus­sion about K‑12 and uni­ver­si­ty reopen­ings. The two are stark­ly dif­fer­ent. There are strong rea­sons to reopen K‑12, and there are stronger rea­sons to keep uni­ver­si­ties shut­tered.“ The author is a busi­ness prof at NYU. Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
    • Relat­ed: Col­leges Are Get­ting Ready to Blame Their Stu­dents (Julia Mar­cus and Jes­si­ca Gold, The Atlantic): “Stu­dents will get infect­ed, and uni­ver­si­ties will rebuke them for it; cam­pus­es will close, and stu­dents will be blamed for it. Rely­ing on the self-con­trol of young adults, rather than deploy­ing the pub­lic-health infra­struc­ture need­ed to con­trol a dis­ease that spreads eas­i­ly among peo­ple who live, eat, study, and social­ize togeth­er, is not a safe reopen­ing strategy—and yelling at stu­dents for their dan­ger­ous behav­ior won’t help either.” The authors are pro­fes­sors at Har­vard and Wash­ing­ton Uni­ver­si­ty, respec­tive­ly. 
    • Vague­ly relat­ed: Your State’s COVID Num­bers In Con­text (Poli­Math, Sub­stack): “Head­lines are aller­gic to con­text and the high-pop­u­la­tion states get all the atten­tion because they show big num­bers (because they are big states). When a small­er state gets any report­ing, it is entire­ly out­side any con­text. In Wash­ing­ton, it was report­ed that we had 754 new cas­es and 7 new deaths. Is that a lot? How does that com­pare to oth­er states?” Very detailed and insight­ful. 
  3. Coro­n­avirus, Con­spir­a­cy The­o­ries, and the Ninth Com­mand­ment (David French, The Dis­patch): “Chris­t­ian teach­ing about our lives in our work­places is not pri­mar­i­ly about how to obtain a pro­mo­tion, how to invest our mon­ey, or how to start a busi­ness. In oth­er words, it’s not about the objec­tives of eco­nom­ic engage­ment, though those objec­tives are impor­tant. Instead, the focus is on min­is­ter­ing to col­leagues, cul­ti­vat­ing faith in adver­si­ty, and gen­er­al­ly learn­ing how to be salt and light even in some­times hos­tile or intim­i­dat­ing envi­ron­ments. [But we don’t do this with pol­i­tics.]” Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus, this one was real­ly good.
  4. 8 facts about reli­gion and gov­ern­ment in the Unit­ed States (Dalia Fah­my, Pew Research Cen­ter): “While the U.S. Con­sti­tu­tion does not men­tion God, every state con­sti­tu­tion ref­er­ences either God or the divine. God also appears in the Dec­la­ra­tion of Inde­pen­dence, the Pledge of Alle­giance and on U.S. cur­ren­cy.” Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
  5. Where is the nation­al news cov­er­age of cur­rent surge of van­dal­ism at Catholic church­es? (Clemente Lisi, GetRe­li­gion): “Who’s respon­si­ble for this anti-Catholic vio­lence? Is it Mus­lim ter­ror­ists? Neo-Nazis? Left-wing rad­i­cals? Are these iso­lat­ed inci­dents or part of a coor­di­nat­ed attack? We don’t know because the elite news­rooms with the tal­ent and resources to han­dle this kind of inves­ti­ga­tion are miss­ing in action, in this case.… One has to won­der how these inci­dents would have been cov­ered had they been mosques? What about pub­lic schools? Or say Planned Par­ent­hood facil­i­ties?”
    • Relat­ed: Roman Catholics: The Orig­i­nal Abo­li­tion­ists (Paul Ken­gor, Cri­sis Mag­a­zine): “Last week­end, one of Serra’s mis­sion church­es in Cal­i­for­nia went up in flames, with the cause of the fire not yet known. In the last few days, a stat­ue of Mary was set on fire in Boston and anoth­er was van­dal­ized in Brook­lyn (among oth­ers). As to what Mary has to do with the mod­ern anti-stat­ue-racism move­ment is anyone’s guess. Nonethe­less, if the issue is (right­ly so) a just con­dem­na­tion of slav­ery and racism, and if one is gen­uine­ly seek­ing accu­rate his­to­ry, then today’s activists ought to look back in admi­ra­tion at the impres­sive track record of the Roman Catholic Church.” The author is a pro­fes­sor of polit­i­cal sci­ence at Grove City Col­lege. The his­to­ry of the Catholic Church on the issue of slav­ery is bet­ter than the Protes­tant church.
  6. What You Need To Know About The Bat­tle of Port­land (Robert Evans, Belling­cat): “I report­ed on the fight­ing in Mosul back in 2017, and what hap­pened that night in the streets of Port­land was, of course, not near­ly as bru­tal or dan­ger­ous as actu­al com­bat. Yet it was about as close as you can get with­out using live ammu­ni­tion.“ A sig­nif­i­cant qual­i­fi­er at the end of that sen­tence, inter­est­ing nonethe­less.
    • Portland’s protests were sup­posed to be about black lives. Now, they’re white spec­ta­cle. (E.D. Mondainé, Wash­ing­ton Post): “We wel­come our white broth­ers and sis­ters in this strug­gle. In fact, we need them. But I must ask them to remain humbly attuned to the oppor­tu­ni­ty of this moment — and to reflect on whether any actions they take will tru­ly help estab­lish jus­tice, or whether they are sim­ply for show.” The author is pres­i­dent of the Port­land branch of the NAACP.
    • Out of Port­land tear gas, an appari­tion emerges, cap­tur­ing the imag­i­na­tion of pro­test­ers (Los Ange­les Times): “She emerged as an appari­tion from clouds of tear gas as fed­er­al agents fired pep­per balls at angry pro­test­ers in the ear­ly Sat­ur­day dark­ness. A woman wear­ing noth­ing but a black face mask and a stock­ing cap strode toward a dozen heav­i­ly armed agents attired in cam­ou­flage fatigues, lined up across a down­town Port­land street.” Port­land gonna port.
    • Tan­gen­tial­ly Relat­ed: Amer­i­can Crime and the Bal­ti­more Mod­el (Bret Stephens, New York Times): “Ide­al­ists may hope these changes will elim­i­nate police bru­tal­i­ty as com­mu­ni­ties find bet­ter ways to pre­vent crime than deter­rence and force. But on the hunch that human nature hasn’t changed, that isn’t going to hap­pen. Crim­i­nals, fear­ing less, will con­tin­ue to prey on oth­ers. Police, fear­ing more, will hold back from doing their jobs. Those with means to leave their neigh­bor­hoods, will. Those with­out the means will suf­fer.”
  7. A new intel­li­gentsia is push­ing back against wok­e­ness (Batya Ungar-Sar­gon, For­ward): “The anti-woke Black intel­li­gentsia is lead­ing a counter-cul­ture to a woke hege­mo­ny and the online cul­ture that pop­u­lar­ized it. But their views hew more close­ly to those of most Black Amer­i­cans than the new antiracism. Polling has long indi­cat­ed that white lib­er­als express rad­i­cal­ly more lib­er­al views on racial and social issues than their Black and Lati­no neigh­bors.” Very inter­est­ing inter­views.
    • Relat­ed: The Left is Now the Right (Matt Taib­bi, Sub­stack): “Things we once despised about the right have been ampli­fied a thou­sand-fold on the flip. Con­ser­v­a­tives once tried to leg­is­late what went on in your bed­room; now it’s the left that obsess­es over sex­u­al cod­i­cils, not just for the bed­room but every­where. Right-wingers from time to time made head­lines cam­paign­ing against every­thing from The Last Temp­ta­tion of Christ to ‘Fuck the Police,’ though we laughed at the idea that Ice Cube made cops lit­er­al­ly unsafe… today Matt Ygle­sias sign­ing a group let­ter with Noam Chom­sky is con­sid­ered threat­en­ing.”
    • Relat­ed: When Wokes and Racists Actu­al­ly Agree on Every­thing (Ryan Long Com­e­dy, YouTube) : two min­utes of bril­liance

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have Dis­solv­ing the Fer­mi Para­dox (Scott Alexan­der, Slate Star Codex): “Imag­ine we knew God flipped a coin. If it came up heads, He made 10 bil­lion alien civ­i­liza­tion. If it came up tails, He made none besides Earth. Using our one para­me­ter Drake Equa­tion, we deter­mine that on aver­age there should be 5 bil­lion alien civ­i­liza­tions. Since we see zero, that’s quite the para­dox, isn’t it? No. In this case the mean is mean­ing­less. It’s not at all sur­pris­ing that we see zero alien civ­i­liza­tions, it just means the coin must have land­ed tails. SDO say that rely­ing on the Drake Equa­tion is the same kind of error.”  First shared in vol­ume 159.

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 259

This week con­tains some of the most fas­ci­nat­ing arti­cles I ever have passed along. Def­i­nite­ly worth skim­ming!

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions. If you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Fer­til­i­ty rate: ‘Jaw-drop­ping’ glob­al crash in chil­dren being born (James Gal­lagher, BBC): “Chi­na, cur­rent­ly the most pop­u­lous nation in the world, is expect­ed to peak at 1.4 bil­lion in four years’ time before near­ly halv­ing to 732 mil­lion by 2100. India will take its place.” From a long-term per­spec­tive, this is pos­si­bly the most sig­nif­i­cant news you will read this year. Some of you will still be alive when China’s pop­u­la­tion is half what it is now. And it’s not just Chi­na — many nations are on the same path (with only a few siz­able ones head­ed in the oppo­site direc­tion).
  2. The Coro­n­avirus and the Right’s Sci­en­tif­ic Coun­ter­rev­o­lu­tion (Ari Schul­man, The New Repub­lic): “That so many views tut-tut­ted as the irra­tional defi­ance of expert con­sen­sus actu­al­ly became the expert con­sen­sus in the span of just a few weeks vivid­ly sug­gests that we need to reex­am­ine just how our cul­ture talks about exper­tise. The prob­lem is not main­ly that the experts were wrong—that is to be expect­ed. It is, rather, that our lead insti­tu­tions and pub­lic infor­ma­tion out­lets con­tin­u­al­ly treat­ed the assur­ances of experts as neu­tral inter­pre­ta­tions of set­tled sci­ence when they plain­ly were not.” Inter­est­ing through­out. This will like­ly enter my rota­tion of clas­sics that I repost from time to time. 
    • Relat­ed: An Open Let­ter To My Fel­low Chris­tians (David Carreon, per­son­al blog): “Large gath­er­ings are dan­ger­ous with a spread­ing virus regard­less of the rea­son for the assem­bly. Some resist the straight­for­ward response to this out of idol­a­try of church atten­dance and the church build­ing. Any good thing can become an idol. Gold is good but can be shaped into a gold­en calf (Exo 32:4). Sex is good but can we can also per­vert it through for­ni­ca­tion (1 Cor 6:9). A church build­ing or even phys­i­cal atten­dance at church can be mis­tak­en for the Church itself. This, too, is idol­a­try.” David is a Stan­ford psy­chi­a­trist (and a friend of mine)
    • Relat­ed: Andy Stan­ley Explains Why His Megachurch Won’t Gath­er on Sun­days Until 2021 (Ed Stet­zer, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Here is where I think the church needs to think about this: As a local church, we have lim­it­ed time, lim­it­ed staff, and lim­it­ed resources; it makes no sense to focus our staff time and resources on cre­at­ing a sub­par envi­ron­ment on Sun­day morn­ing for a nine and 11 o’clock ser­vice that only 20% of the peo­ple may attend. We decid­ed to focus on the 100% of all of our church folks and their friends and the rest of the world that may show up lat­er.“
  3. David Shor’s Uni­fied The­o­ry of the 2020 Elec­tion (Eric Levitz, New York Mag­a­zine): “Cam­paigns do want to win. But the peo­ple who work in cam­paigns tend to be high­ly ide­o­log­i­cal­ly moti­vat­ed and thus, super-prone to con­vinc­ing them­selves to do things that are strate­gi­cal­ly dumb.” Super inter­est­ing — well worth read­ing.
  4. Dis­turb­ing video shows hun­dreds of blind­fold­ed pris­on­ers in Xin­jiang (Matt Rivers, Max Fos­ter and James Grif­fiths, CNN): “The video — which was post­ed online anony­mous­ly last week — shows hun­dreds of men, most of whom are dressed in pur­ple and orange vests with the words ‘Kash­gar Deten­tion Cen­ter’ print­ed on them, seat­ed in rows on the ground of what appears to be a large court­yard out­side a train sta­tion. Their heads are shaved and their hands bound behind their backs. All of the men are wear­ing black blind­folds over their eyes and they are being watched over by dozens of police offi­cers in SWAT uni­forms.”’
    • Relat­ed: Chi­na cuts Uighur births with IUDs, abor­tion, ster­il­iza­tion (Asso­ci­at­ed Press): “While indi­vid­ual women have spo­ken out before about forced birth con­trol, the prac­tice is far more wide­spread and sys­tem­at­ic than pre­vi­ous­ly known, accord­ing to an AP inves­ti­ga­tion based on gov­ern­ment sta­tis­tics, state doc­u­ments and inter­views with 30 ex-detainees, fam­i­ly mem­bers and a for­mer deten­tion camp instruc­tor. The cam­paign over the past four years in the far west region of Xin­jiang is lead­ing to what some experts are call­ing a form of ‘demo­graph­ic geno­cide.’”
  5. Sit With Neg­a­tive Emo­tions, Don’t Push Them Away (Arthur C. Brooks, The Atlantic): “In sum, if we want a life full of deep mean­ing, true love, and emo­tion­al strength, it’s going to involve the risk (and often the real­i­ty) of dis­com­fort, con­flict, and loss. This means there will be sad­ness, fear, anger, and dis­gust. If we elim­i­nate neg­a­tive emo­tions and expe­ri­ences from our lives, we will be poor­er and weak­er for hav­ing done so.” The author is a pro­fes­sor at Har­vard, rec­om­mend­ed by a friend.
  6. 10 The­ses About Can­cel Cul­ture (Ross Douthat, New York Times): “The point of can­cel­la­tion is ulti­mate­ly to estab­lish norms for the major­i­ty, not to bring the stars back down to earth…. The goal isn’t to pun­ish every­one, or even very many some­ones; it’s to shame or scare just enough peo­ple to make the rest con­form.”
    • The Will­ful Blind­ness of Reac­tionary Lib­er­al­ism (Osi­ta Nwane­vu, The New Repub­lic): “The ten­sions we’ve seen late­ly have been inter­nal to lib­er­al­ism for ages: between those who take the asso­cia­tive nature of lib­er­al soci­ety seri­ous­ly and those who are deter­mined not to. It is the for­mer group, the defend­ers of pro­gres­sive iden­ti­ty pol­i­tics, who in fact are protecting—indeed expanding—the bounds of lib­er­al­ism. And it is the lat­ter group, the reac­tionar­ies, who are most guilty of the illib­er­al­ism they claim has over­tak­en the Amer­i­can Left.” Writ­ten before the let­ter I shared last week, this is one of the best defens­es of can­cel cul­ture.
    • The World That Twit­ter Made (Tan­ner Greer, per­son­al blog): “I sus­pect an entire class of pun­dits has inter­nal­ized the idea that [Twit­ter debate] is what pub­lic dis­cus­sion is. Of course they don’t believe in free expres­sion, civ­il debate, the spir­it of lib­er­al­ism, and all of that jazz. To this gen­er­a­tion those things are just words. The pub­lic sphere they have known has always been a bare-knuck­le brawl.”
    • Res­ig­na­tion Let­ter (Bari Weiss, per­son­al web­site): “What rules that remain at The Times are applied with extreme selec­tiv­i­ty. If a person’s ide­ol­o­gy is in keep­ing with the new ortho­doxy, they and their work remain unscru­ti­nized. Every­one else lives in fear of the dig­i­tal thun­der­dome.” Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent.
    • See You Next Fri­day (Andrew Sul­li­van, New York Mag­a­zine): “What has hap­pened, I think, is rel­a­tive­ly sim­ple: A crit­i­cal mass of the staff and man­age­ment at New York Mag­a­zine and Vox Media no longer want to asso­ciate with me, and, in a time of ever tight­en­ing bud­gets, I’m a lux­u­ry item they don’t want to afford. And that’s entire­ly their pre­rog­a­tive.”
    • Illu­sion and Agree­ment in the Debate over Intol­er­ance (Justin Wein­berg, Dai­ly Nous): “In short, I don’t think soci­ety has got­ten more intol­er­ant, but tech­nol­o­gy has facil­i­tat­ed, among oth­er things, the expres­sion of intol­er­ance.”
    • A More Spe­cif­ic Let­ter on Jus­tice and Open Debate (many authors, The Objec­tive): “In truth, Black, brown, and LGBTQ+ peo­ple — par­tic­u­lar­ly Black and trans peo­ple — can now cri­tique elites pub­licly and hold them account­able social­ly; this seems to be the letter’s great­est con­cern. What’s per­haps even more grat­ing to many of the sig­na­to­ries is that a cri­tique of their long held views is per­sua­sive.”
    • Liked tweets near­ly cost me my uni­ver­si­ty job (Mike McCul­loch, Unherd): “To think that I could have lost my career to a sin­gle com­plaint about my liked tweets shows just how hys­ter­i­cal the present social mood is. Now more than ever, it is vital that we — and in par­tic­u­lar the uni­ver­si­ties — stand up for enlight­en­ment prin­ci­ples and replace fear with rea­son and fact.” The author is a math lec­tur­er (sim­i­lar to an assis­tant pro­fes­sor in the US) at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Ply­mouth. 
    • A Dec­la­ra­tion of Inde­pen­dence by a Prince­ton Pro­fes­sor (Joshua T. Katz, Quil­lette): “I am friends with many peo­ple who signed the Prince­ton let­ter, which requests and in some places demands a dizzy­ing array of changes, and I sup­port their right to speak as they see fit. But I am embar­rassed for them.” 
    • Attempt­ed Putsch At Prince­ton (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “I am a Prince­ton pro­fes­sor who signed the let­ter that you wrote about today. I am also a devout Chris­t­ian and a dai­ly read­er of your blog.” Con­tains a let­ter from a Prince­ton prof with a dif­fer­ent view than the one above, worth con­trast­ing.
  7. My Time in Prison (George Car­di­nal Pell, First Things): “There is a lot of good­ness in pris­ons. At times, I am sure, pris­ons may be hell on earth. I was for­tu­nate to be kept safe and treat­ed well. I was impressed by the pro­fes­sion­al­ism of the warders, the faith of the pris­on­ers, and the exis­tence of a moral sense even in the dark­est places.”

Less Serious Things Which Also Interested/Amused Glen

Things Glen Found Interesting A While Ago

Every week I’ll high­light an old­er link still worth your con­sid­er­a­tion. This week we have How the State Serves Both Sal­va­tion and Reli­gious Free­dom (Jonathan Lee­man, 9 Marks): “Two basic kinds of gov­ern­ments, then, show up in the Bible: those that shel­ter God’s peo­ple, and those that destroy them. Abim­elech shel­tered; Pharoah destroyed. The Assyr­i­ans destroyed; the Baby­lo­ni­ans and Per­sians, ulti­mate­ly, shel­tered. Pilate destroyed; Fes­tus shel­tered. And depend­ing on how you read Rev­e­la­tion, the his­to­ry of gov­ern­ment will cul­mi­nate in a beast­ly slaugh­ter of saint­ly blood. Romans 13 calls gov­ern­ments ser­vants; Psalm 2 calls them imposters. Most gov­ern­ments con­tain both. But some are bet­ter than oth­ers.” First shared in vol­ume 165. 

Why Do You Send This Email?

In the time of King David, the tribe of Issachar pro­duced shrewd war­riors “who under­stood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chron 12:32). In a sim­i­lar way, we need to become wise peo­ple whose faith inter­acts with the world. I pray this email gives you greater insight, so that you may con­tin­ue the tra­di­tion of Issachar.

Disclaimer

Chi Alpha is not a par­ti­san orga­ni­za­tion. To para­phrase anoth­er min­is­ter: we are not about the donkey’s agen­da and we are not about the elephant’s agen­da — we are about the Lamb’s agen­da. Hav­ing said that, I read wide­ly (in part because I believe we should aspire to pass the ide­o­log­i­cal Tur­ing test and in part because I do not believe I can fair­ly say “I agree” or “I dis­agree” until I can say “I under­stand”) and may at times share arti­cles that have a strong par­ti­san bias sim­ply because I find the arti­cle stim­u­lat­ing. The upshot: you should not assume I agree with every­thing an author says in an arti­cle I men­tion, much less things the author has said in oth­er arti­cles (although if I strong­ly dis­agree with some­thing in the arti­cle I’ll usu­al­ly men­tion it). And to the extent you can dis­cern my opin­ions, please under­stand that they are my own and not nec­es­sar­i­ly those of Chi Alpha or any oth­er orga­ni­za­tion I may be per­ceived to rep­re­sent. Also, remem­ber that I’m not report­ing news — I’m giv­ing you a selec­tion of things I found inter­est­ing. There’s a lot hap­pen­ing in the world that’s not mak­ing an appear­ance here because I haven’t found stim­u­lat­ing arti­cles writ­ten about it. If this was for­ward­ed to you and you want to receive future emails, sign up here. You can also view the archives.

Christianity For Modern Pagans: Vanity of Human Reason, of Dogmatism, and of the Philosophers

why Chris­tian­i­ty has such a coun­ter­cul­tur­al per­spec­tive on sex

Blog read­ers: Chi Alpha @ Stan­ford is engag­ing in our annu­al sum­mer read­ing project. As we read through an anno­tat­ed trans­la­tion of Pascal’s Pensees called Chris­tian­i­ty For Mod­ern Pagans, I’ll post the thoughts I’m email­ing the stu­dents here (which will large­ly con­sist of excerpts I found insight­ful). They are all tagged sum­mer-read­ing-project-2020. The read­ing sched­ule is online.

This week we’re talk­ing about chap­ters 7–9, the van­i­ty of human rea­son, of dog­ma­tism, and of the philoso­phers.

The thing that stood out most to me is the skep­ti­cism that Pas­cal applies to rea­son. Recall that he is one of the great­est sci­en­tists in his­to­ry and that his pio­neer­ing work laid the foun­da­tion for many fields of study. He knows well what rea­son can achieve, and as a result he also real­izes its lim­i­ta­tions.

…demon­stra­tion is not the only instru­ment for con­vinc­ing us. How few things can be demon­strat­ed! Proofs only con­vince the mind; habit pro­vides the strongest proofs and those that are most believed…. We must resort to habit once the mind has seen where the truth lies, in order to steep and stain our­selves in that belief…, for it is too much trou­ble to have the proofs always present before us…. When we believe only by the strength of our con­vic­tion and the automa­ton is inclined to believe the oppo­site, that is not enough. We must there­fore make both parts of us believe: the mind by rea­sons, which need to be seen only once in a life­time, and the automa­ton by habit.

Pas­cal, Pensee 821 (pages 99–100)

This is bril­liant, although the trans­la­tion feels clum­sy to me. Kreeft’s com­men­tary on this is help­ful:

…once rea­son has con­vinced us to believe, we require the aid of good habits to over­come bad habit­u­al ten­den­cies in the oppo­site direc­tion. There­fore we must act as if we believed, go to church and so forth, thus habit­u­at­ing the automa­ton to obey what rea­son has dis­cov­ered to be true. Habit is not an hon­est sub­sti­tute for rea­son, but it is an hon­est and need­ed ser­vant to rea­son. If we try to fight against irra­tional­i­ty with rea­son alone, we will lose. We need crud­er weapons too.

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 821, page 100

This is one rea­son that Chris­t­ian com­mu­ni­ty is often so instru­men­tal in some­one’s con­ver­sion. Rea­son, like a map, can guide peo­ple to Christ but only if they actu­al­ly fol­low the direc­tions. Oth­er parts of their self must be engaged for the jour­ney to take place, and these parts are most com­mon­ly called forth through rela­tion­ships.

It also occurs to me that this may be a good way to explain why Chris­tian­i­ty has such a coun­ter­cul­tur­al per­spec­tive on sex. Sex engages the whole per­son and can either do so in a way that rein­forces the gospel mes­sage or in a way that under­mines it (see Eph­esians 5:31–32 and 1 Cor 6:12–20). Paul lays this out in Romans 1:18–27

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heav­en against all the god­less­ness and wicked­ness of peo­ple, who sup­press the truth by their wicked­ness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the cre­ation of the world God’s invis­i­ble qualities—his eter­nal pow­er and divine nature—have been clear­ly seen, being under­stood from what has been made, so that peo­ple are with­out excuse.

21For although they knew God, they nei­ther glo­ri­fied him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their think­ing became futile and their fool­ish hearts were dark­ened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23and exchanged the glo­ry of the immor­tal God for images made to look like a mor­tal human being and birds and ani­mals and rep­tiles.

24There­fore God gave them over in the sin­ful desires of their hearts to sex­u­al impu­ri­ty for the degrad­ing of their bod­ies with one anoth­er. 25They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and wor­shiped and served cre­at­ed things rather than the Creator—who is for­ev­er praised. Amen.

26Because of this, God gave them over to shame­ful lusts. Even their women exchanged nat­ur­al sex­u­al rela­tions for unnat­ur­al ones. 27In the same way the men also aban­doned nat­ur­al rela­tions with women and were inflamed with lust for one anoth­er. Men com­mit­ted shame­ful acts with oth­er men, and received in them­selves the due penal­ty for their error.

Romans 1:18–27 (NIV)

When peo­ple reject the knowl­edge of God, they must build lives to rein­force that rejec­tion of God. Paul says they do it using idols and sex, and he adds that they suf­fer for it. Of course they do. They are liv­ing based on a false con­cep­tion of human nature, which makes it inevitable that there will be need­less pain. Paula recent­ly had a plate shat­ter in the microwave. We had both assumed it was microwave-safe, but because we were wrong the shat­ter­ing was inevitable. The cause of the dam­age was the inter­ac­tion of invis­i­ble things (the microwaves and the mol­e­c­u­lar struc­ture of the plate), but the result­ing dam­age was eas­i­ly observed. Sad­ly, our cul­ture (and many lives with­in it) are shat­ter­ing and the rea­sons are invis­i­ble to many peo­ple.

Oth­er thoughts from these chap­ters that stood out to me:

To rea­son is to rely on rea­son, and to rely on rea­son is an act of faith, not of rea­son. There­fore rea­son pre­sup­pos­es faith… Indeed, how could rea­son itself be val­i­dat­ed? There are only three pos­si­bil­i­ties: (1) by some­thing sub­ra­tional, like ani­mal instinct (which is obvi­ous­ly absurd: How can the infe­ri­or val­i­date the supe­ri­or?); or (2) by some­thing ratio­nal, by a piece of rea­son­ing (which is also absurd: How can the part jus­ti­fy the whole? All rea­son is on tri­al; how dare the one piece of rea­son­ing you use to jus­ti­fy all rea­son­ing be exempt from tri­al?); or (3) by some­thing super­ra­tional, by faith in God (which is the only pos­si­bil­i­ty left).

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 131, pages 110–111

FWIW, I think Kreeft’s inclu­sion of God in the third point is valid but it’s real­ly some­thing he should argue for. I think many skep­tics would counter that some­thing like the pla­ton­ic laws of log­ic could stand in for God in option 3, which is true but does­n’t get them as far away from God as they think. Hav­ing read oth­er things by Kreeft, I believe he has had this argu­ment before and is mere­ly announc­ing check­mate when it is still not obvi­ous to his oppo­nent that the game is over.

You can think skep­ti­cism, but you can’t live it.

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 131, page 111

Philoso­phers and the­olo­gians do not prac­tice what they preach any bet­ter than the rest of us–less, if they preach bet­ter than the rest of us.

Kreeft’s com­men­tary on Pensee 142, page 117