Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 223

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. Ethiopia’s Evan­gel­i­cal Prime Min­is­ter Wins Nobel Peace Prize (Kate Shell­nutt, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “The son of a Mus­lim father and Ortho­dox moth­er, Ahmed is a Protes­tant Pen­te­costal, or ‘Pentay,’ like many Ethiopi­an politi­cians. His faith is seen as a dri­ving fac­tor in his push for peace.”
  2. Alge­ria Forces Chris­tians Out of the Country’s Largest Church­es (Kate Shell­nutt, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “At least 15 Protes­tant churches—out of only about 46 in the country—have been shut­tered since Jan­u­ary 2018, accord­ing to the Chris­t­ian advo­ca­cy group Mid­dle East Con­cern. The coun­try, home to just 125,000 Chris­tians, few­er than 1 per­cent of the pop­u­la­tion, ranks 22nd on Open Doors’ World Watch List. Chris­t­ian con­gre­ga­tions strug­gle to reg­is­ter with the gov­ern­ment agency tasked with reg­u­lat­ing non-Mus­lim wor­ship, per a 2006 law. It nev­er con­venes and has not issued a sin­gle approval.”
  3. The Per­ilous Pow­er of the Preacher’s Wife (Kate Bowler, New York TImes): “Ordained pro­gres­sive women secure a mea­sure of insti­tu­tion­al sway, but they lack the cul­tur­al cap­i­tal of their con­ser­v­a­tive coun­ter­parts. My research shows that con­ser­v­a­tive women gain con­sid­er­able influ­ence with­out insti­tu­tion­al pow­er, and lib­er­al women gain insti­tu­tion­al pow­er with­out con­sid­er­able influence.” The author is a pro­fes­sor at Duke Divin­i­ty School and I have spot­light­ed arti­cles by her three times pre­vi­ous­ly, in vol­ume 37, vol­ume 116, and vol­ume 143.
  4. The delud­ed cult of social jus­tice (John Gray, UnHerd): “Seldom have the demands of jus­tice been so man­i­fest­ly fad­dish. Increas­ing­ly, jus­tice is seen as not an attribute of legal sys­tems but of entire soci­eties. At the same time it is believed to be owed to groups more than indi­vid­u­als. In these cir­cum­stances, every­thing depends on whether the group to which peo­ple are deemed to be belong is in vogue.” The author is a retired pro­fes­sor of polit­i­cal phi­los­o­phy (Lon­don School of Eco­nom­ics) and a well-known athe­ist. 
  5. How to Con­vince an Athe­ist that God Exists (John Ellis, per­son­al blog): “I didn’t become an athe­ist because that’s what I want­ed; I became an athe­ist because I believed it was the truth. So, stand­ing on that side­walk while try­ing not to think about my mom pray­ing for me, I cursed a God I didn’t even believe existed.”
  6. Some thoughts about China’s gov­ern­ment:
    • What are the Options Part III: The Big­ger Pic­ture (Christo­pher Bald­ing, per­son­al blog): “The Unit­ed States must be pre­pared to lay­out a vision for the val­ue it wants to pro­mote, to make the biggest sac­ri­fices to real­ize those val­ues, share the ben­e­fits with aligned coun­tries, and deny ben­e­fits to adver­sary or non­aligned countries.” Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent. I linked to anoth­er of Balding’s posts about Chi­na back in vol­ume 162. 
    • Here’s a grow­ing list of com­pa­nies bow­ing to Chi­na cen­sor­ship pres­sure (Natasha Pinon, Mash­able): “Major glob­al com­pa­nies have been bow­ing to both direct and indi­rect pres­sure from Chi­na’s polit­i­cal lead­ers to con­trol how the eco­nom­ic pow­er­house of a coun­try is por­trayed for some time.”
    • Chi­na’s Vision of Vic­to­ry? (Tan­ner Greer, per­son­al blog): “So-called influ­ence oper­a­tions are aimed at the ene­mies China’s lead­ers fear most: the ones who pose an ide­o­log­i­cal, not a geopo­lit­i­cal, threat to the Com­mu­nist Par­ty. These are the hos­tile forces that threat­en the sta­bil­i­ty of the Com­mu­nist regime, and many of them—from Chris­tians and Uighurs flee­ing reli­gious per­se­cu­tion to Tai­wanese, Hong Kongers, and oth­ers of Chi­nese descent who dare imag­ine dif­fer­ent futures for their people—live in Amer­i­ca. As long as these groups can safe­ly assem­ble and freely speak with­in the Unit­ed States, Amer­i­ca will be seen as a threat to the Chi­nese par­ty-state. Sim­i­lar fears have already led Bei­jing to demand ide­o­log­i­cal feal­ty from its for­eign debtors. China’s lead­ers do not ask clients to change their sys­tem of gov­ern­ment but to squelch crit­i­cism of Chi­nese com­mu­nism inside their borders.” Greer has appeared once before in vol­ume 217.
    • China’s Loom­ing Class Strug­gle (Joel Kotkin, Quil­lette): “Initially, China’s progress lift­ed up all class­es, rais­ing as many as 850 mil­lion peo­ple out of extreme pover­ty in 40 years, one of the great­est eco­nom­ic accom­plish­ments in his­to­ry. Yet the boom has been less suc­cess­ful in cre­at­ing a West­ern-style mass mid­dle class which ana­lyst Nan Chen esti­mates at rough­ly 12 per­cent of the pop­u­la­tion. ‘Rather than repli­cat­ing the mid­dle-class growth of post-World War II America,’ she observes, ‘China appears to have skipped that stage alto­geth­er and head­ed straight for a mod­el of extra­or­di­nary pro­duc­tiv­i­ty but dis­pro­por­tion­ate­ly dis­trib­uted wealth.’” Kotkin is a pro­fes­sor of urban stud­ies at Chap­man Uni­ver­si­ty.
  7. Attor­ney Gen­er­al William P. Barr Deliv­ers Remarks to the Law School and the de Nico­la Cen­ter for Ethics and Cul­ture at the Uni­ver­si­ty of Notre Dame (William Barr, Depart­ment of Jus­tice): “From the Found­ing Era onward, there was strong con­sen­sus about the cen­tral­i­ty of reli­gious lib­er­ty in the Unit­ed States. The imper­a­tive of pro­tect­ing reli­gious free­dom was not just a nod in the direc­tion of piety. It reflects the Framer­s’ belief that reli­gion was indis­pens­able to sus­tain­ing our free sys­tem of government.” (you can watch a video of the speech instead)
    • What Barr Got Right — And What He Might Add (Howard Husock, Nation­al Review): “Barr stands accused of endors­ing some sort of Chris­t­ian theoc­ra­cy. Barr, of course, hard­ly endorsed the idea the church–state divide should be erased in the Unit­ed States. Nor did he insist that only the reli­gious could live a healthy and pro­duc­tive life. Rather, he sin­gled out for crit­i­cism those who believe that, in effect, gov­ern­ment social pro­grams could replace the virtues instilled by reli­gion. It’s an impor­tant distinction.”
    • William Barr Is Neck-Deep in Extrem­ist Catholic Insti­tu­tions (Joan Walsh, The Nation): “In a histri­on­ic speech at Notre Dame Law School on Fri­day, he blamed ‘secularists’ and ‘so-called pro­gres­sives’ for destroy­ing soci­ety and pre­cip­i­tat­ing the crises of fam­i­ly dis­so­lu­tion, crime, and drugs, while talk­ing of a war between reli­gious and non­re­li­gious Americans.”
    • Bill Barr: Reli­gious Lib­er­ty War­rior (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “It’s a stan­dard defense of religion’s role in Amer­i­can life. It would have been unre­mark­able for any US Attor­ney Gen­er­al, Repub­li­can or Demo­c­rat, pri­or to 2008 to have giv­en. But now, many on the Left have become so hate­ful of reli­gion that Barr’s speech strikes the ears of peo­ple like Nobel Prize-win­ning econ­o­mist Paul Krug­man as the hand­i­work of a Cos­sack propagandist…” I prob­a­bly include more arti­cles from Dreher than any­one else because he is so amaz­ing­ly pro­lif­ic and often writes about top­ics I am inter­est­ed in.

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 A (Not So) Sec­u­lar Saint (James K.A. Smith, Los Ange­les Review of Books): “Mill’s lega­cy was effec­tive­ly ‘edited’ by his philo­soph­i­cal and polit­i­cal dis­ci­ples, excis­ing any hint of reli­gious life. One would nev­er know from the canon in our phi­los­o­phy depart­ments, for exam­ple, that Mill wrote an appre­cia­tive essay on ‘Theism.’” First shared in vol­ume 190.

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 222

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

This has been a crazy week for me, so a short­er list than nor­mal. Enjoy!

  1. More on Both­am Jean, Amber Guyger, and for­give­ness:
    • Both­am Jean’s Brother’s Offer of For­give­ness Went Viral. His Mother’s Calls for Jus­tice Should Too. (Dore­na Williamson, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “When a black per­son extends rad­i­cal for­give­ness, we see the grace of the gospel. But when we ignore a black person’s call for jus­tice, we cheap­en that grace. Both are act­ing like the God we serve; we need to lis­ten to them both.” Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
    • Pas­tor Delonte Gholston’s Face­book post. “I agreed with so much of what this broth­er said and did because what he did is deeply root­ed in the truth of the gospel. What I despise is the ways that the pow­ers love to use sto­ries like these to tell peo­ple who are being active­ly oppressed, ‘why don’t you just for­give like them?’” Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
    • Amber Guyger’s Judge Gave Her a Bible and a Hug. Did That Cross a Line? (Sarah Mer­vosh and Nicholas Bogel-Bur­roughs, New York Times): Deb­o­rah Rhode, an expert in legal ethics and the direc­tor of the Cen­ter on the Legal Pro­fes­sion at Stan­ford Law School, said she believed that Judge Kemp’s behav­ior stayed with­in eth­i­cal bounds, espe­cial­ly because it came after the sen­tenc­ing had end­ed. ‘All the judge did is express some bonds of com­mon human­i­ty, and I don’t think we should be pun­ish­ing judges for that,’ she said. ‘If any­thing, our legal sys­tem has suf­fered from an absence of ade­quate com­pas­sion.’”
    • Why a Judge Says She Gave Amber Guyger a Bible, a Hug and Hope of Redemp­tion (Sarah Mer­vosh, New York Times): ““‘She asked me if I thought her life could have pur­pose,’ Judge Kemp recalled. “I said, “I know that it can.” She said, “I don’t know where to start, I don’t have a Bible.”’ Judge Kemp said she thought of the Bible in her cham­bers. “I said, “Well, hold on, I’ll get you a Bible.”’”
    • Don’t Mis­un­der­stand the ‘White Chris­t­ian’ Reac­tion to Brandt Jean’s Act of For­give­ness (David French, Nation­al Review): “The moment went so viral not because for­give­ness was expect­ed or white inno­cence was pre­sumed. The moment went viral because the guilt was so obvi­ous, and rage was so under­stand­able. The moment went so viral because it was shock­ing. Brandt Jean demon­strat­ed a lev­el of grace that most Chris­tians (white or oth­er­wise) sim­ply couldn’t com­pre­hend, and they couldn’t com­pre­hend it because the hor­ror inflict­ed on his broth­er was so obvi­ous and so thor­ough­ly unjus­ti­fi­able.”
    • Both­am Jean’s neigh­bor, a key wit­ness in Amber Guyger tri­al, shot to death in Dal­las (Dal­las News): “A key wit­ness in Amber Guyger’s mur­der tri­al was shot and killed Fri­day evening at an apart­ment com­plex near Dal­las’ Med­ical Dis­trict, author­i­ties said.” 👀 Real­i­ty is entire­ly too much like a movie script late­ly.
  2. And some thoughts on Chi­na, Hong Kong, and free­dom.
    • The Chi­na Cul­tur­al Clash (Ben Thomp­son, Strat­e­ch­ery): “The prob­lem from a West­ern per­spec­tive is that the links Clin­ton was so sure would push in only one direc­tion — towards polit­i­cal free­dom — turned out to be two-way streets: Chi­na is not sim­ply resist­ing West­ern ideals of free­dom, but seek­ing to impose their own.”
    • I Can See Clear­ly Now (Alan Jacobs, per­son­al blog): “I thought this day was com­ing, but I didn’t expect it to come so soon. I don’t believe Bei­jing expect­ed it to come so soon either: the Chi­nese author­i­ties were play­ing a long game, bid­ing their time and build­ing their pow­er, and I do not think they were rel­ish­ing an imme­di­ate con­fronta­tion with West­ern cap­i­tal­ism. But the Hong Kong protests forced their hand. Bei­jing clear­ly per­ceives these protests as an exis­ten­tial threat, and have decid­ed that the moment has come to go all-in. They have pushed all their chips into the cen­ter of the table … and the cap­i­tal­ists imme­di­ate­ly fold­ed like a Chi­nese-made lawn chair.”
    • In relat­ed news: US announces visa restric­tions on Chi­na for Xin­jiang abus­es (Jen­nifer Hansler, CNN): “The move comes as the State Depart­ment has increased its pub­lic con­dem­na­tion of Chi­na’s arbi­trary deten­tion of up to two mil­lion Uyghurs in ‘in intern­ment camps designed to erase reli­gious and eth­nic iden­ti­ties.’”
  3. Upcom­ing book leaves sci­en­tif­ic pos­si­bil­i­ty for exis­tence of ‘Adam and Eve’ (USA Today): “…a lead­ing pub­lic schol­ar — Joshua Swami­dass, a physi­cian and genome sci­en­tist at Wash­ing­ton Uni­ver­si­ty in St. Louis, Mis­souri — is mak­ing a bold new attempt to rec­on­cile the bib­li­cal sto­ry of Adam and Eve with what we know about the genet­ic ances­try of the human race…. [He] makes an auda­cious claim: A de novo-cre­at­ed Adam and Eve could very well be uni­ver­sal human ances­tors who lived in the Mid­dle East in the last 6,000–10,000 years. This is not the first attempt to rec­on­cile the Gar­den of Eden sto­ry with sci­ence, but rarely does some­one with Swami­dass’ cre­den­tials do what most sci­en­tists would deem unthink­able: Take the sto­ry seri­ous­ly. How­ev­er, some athe­ist sci­en­tists are tak­ing Swami­dass seri­ous­ly.” The author is a biol­o­gy pro­fes­sor at the City Uni­ver­si­ty of New York.

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 The Philoso­pher Redefin­ing Equal­i­ty (Nathan Heller, New York­er): “When she was three, her moth­er asked, ‘Why do you allow your broth­er to talk for you?’—why didn’t she speak for her­self? ‘Until now, it sim­ply was not necessary,’ Eliz­a­beth said. It was the first full sen­tence that she had ever uttered.” I think that’s the best first sen­tence I’ve ever heard of. A tad long, but rec­om­mend­ed. First shared in vol­ume 189.

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 221

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, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. The Black Church After Chris­ten­dom (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “I don’t know about you, but I can­not recall the last time I wit­nessed more pow­er­ful pub­lic expres­sions of what it means to be a Chris­t­ian than what Brandt Jean and Judge Tam­my Kemp did in that court­room. Guyger — again, a white woman — is going to prison to do time for her crime — but both Mr. Jean and Judge Kemp want­ed her to know that there is hope for her, and redemption.”
    • There are lots of news sources that fea­ture the video clip of Brandt Jean. I chose Dreher’s piece because he also focus­es on the judge. Both of their actions inspire me.
    • I first saw video clips of Brandt Jean’s mov­ing words surg­ing on social media, and I almost imme­di­ate­ly after­wards saw a back­lash which I found per­plex­ing. Some com­menters even sug­gest­ed that there is some­thing racist about lik­ing this video. I think the truth is much more whole­some — Chris­tians love see­ing cost­ly acts of obe­di­ence to Christ. Wit­ness the sim­i­lar reac­tions Chris­tians had to the gospel-fueled tes­ti­mo­ny of Rachael Den­hol­lan­der against Lar­ry Nas­sar and to the Amish community’s for­give­ness of a school shoot­er years ago. There were dif­fer­ent racial dynam­ics but sim­i­lar respons­es from Chris­tians.
  2. The Inter­net Is Over­run With Images of Child Sex­u­al Abuse. What Went Wrong? (Michael Keller and Gabriel Dance, The New York Times): “Pictures of child sex­u­al abuse have long been pro­duced and shared to sat­is­fy twist­ed adult obses­sions. But it has nev­er been like this: Tech­nol­o­gy com­pa­nies report­ed a record 45 mil­lion online pho­tos and videos of the abuse last year…. the prob­lem of child sex­u­al abuse imagery faces a par­tic­u­lar hur­dle: It gets scant atten­tion because few peo­ple want to con­front the enor­mi­ty and hor­ror of the con­tent, or they wrong­ly dis­miss it as pri­mar­i­ly teenagers send­ing inap­pro­pri­ate selfies.” WARNING — this is very dis­turb­ing. The reporters non-gra­tu­itous­ly describe some of the con­tent. If you sus­pect that the scene pre­ced­ing “The pre­dom­i­nant sound is the child scream­ing and cry­ing” will both­er you, it will.
    • I know some of our alum­ni who work in tech and in pol­i­cy still receive my Fri­day emails. If that is you, you need to read the pre­ced­ing arti­cle.
    • Relat­ed: Porn Cul­ture and Polit­i­cal Courage (Ter­ry Schelling, First Things): “The uncom­fort­able truth is that the rapid growth in child pornog­ra­phy is con­nect­ed to the cul­tur­al nor­mal­iza­tion of online pornog­ra­phy as a whole.”
  3. I Spent Years Search­ing for Magic—I Found God Instead (Tara Isabel­la Bur­ton, Cat­a­pult): “I want­ed mag­ic. I didn’t think too much about mean­ing. Or at least, as long as every­thing meant some­thing, the specifics didn’t seem to mat­ter. Basil could mean love. Thurs­days could mean pow­er. The full moon puri­ty. Why not? The alter­na­tive was that noth­ing meant any­thing at all.” This is won­der­ful­ly writ­ten. High­ly rec­om­mend­ed.
  4. How Do Chris­tians Fit Into the Two-Par­ty Sys­tem? They Don’t (Tim Keller, New York Times): “I know of a man from Mis­sis­sip­pi who was a con­ser­v­a­tive Repub­li­can and a tra­di­tion­al Pres­by­ter­ian. He vis­it­ed the Scot­tish High­lands and found the church­es there as strict and as ortho­dox as he had hoped. No one so much as turned on a tele­vi­sion on a Sun­day. Every­one mem­o­rized cat­e­chisms and Scrip­ture. But one day he dis­cov­ered that the Scot­tish Chris­t­ian friends he admired were (in his view) social­ists. Their under­stand­ing of gov­ern­ment eco­nom­ic pol­i­cy and the state’s respon­si­bil­i­ties was by his lights very left-wing, yet also ground­ed in their Chris­t­ian con­vic­tions. He returned to the Unit­ed States not more polit­i­cal­ly lib­er­al but, in his words, ‘humbled and chastened.’ He real­ized that thought­ful Chris­tians, all try­ing to obey God’s call, could rea­son­ably appear at dif­fer­ent places on the polit­i­cal spec­trum, with loy­al­ties to dif­fer­ent polit­i­cal strategies.”
    • Relat­ed: A Basic Primer on Rights and Oblig­a­tions (Justin Tay­lor, The Gospel Coali­tion): “…the Bible doesn’t say much about rights. It does, how­ev­er, fre­quent­ly address oblig­a­tions, so the key to for­mu­lat­ing a bib­li­cal doc­trine of rights is to flip the doc­trine of obligation.”
  5. How Stan­ford Hides Con­flicts of Inter­est (Daniel “Bob” Fer­reira, Stan­ford Sphere): “We start­ed by going through all 127 full-time, non-cour­tesy pro­fes­sors in Biol­o­gy, Chem­istry, Bio­engi­neer­ing, and Chem­i­cal Engi­neer­ing, and we checked what Bloomberg, Crunch­base, and the SEC had on them. Then, we went on to ver­i­fy whether this infor­ma­tion was current—through com­pa­ny web­sites, men­tions on their own pub­lic CVs, or media cov­er­age. Final­ly, we removed fac­ul­ty whose links to busi­ness­es had noth­ing to do with biotech.”
  6. Hong Kong: First Line of Defence against a Ris­ing Fas­cist Pow­er (Aaron Sarin, Quil­lette): “China’s gov­ern­ment has only retained the name ‘Communist Par­ty’ because to do oth­er­wise would be a first step towards admit­ting the atroc­i­ties of the past. The sev­er­ing of the link between Xi and Mao would make it pos­si­ble to acknowl­edge that Mao was one of history’s worst vil­lains. This would set a prece­dent for crit­i­cis­ing author­i­ty that would inevitably lead to Xi’s own down­fall. So the name stays, but in truth there is noth­ing ‘communist’ about this Com­mu­nist Par­ty (save its author­i­tar­i­an­ism). In fact, Marx­ist stu­dents, activists, and social work­ers have been arrest­ed and tor­tured since Xi took pow­er, and uni­ver­si­ties have shut down Marx­ist societies.”
    • The Prophet­ic Voice of Hong Kong’s Pro­test­ers (Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Many Hong Kong Chris­tians, while com­pris­ing less than 12 per­cent of the pop­u­la­tion, have played a promi­nent role in the protests—marching, singing hymns, hold­ing prayer cir­cles, and pro­vid­ing food and shel­ter to oth­er demon­stra­tors. (The Jesus Peo­ple song ‘Sing Hal­lelu­jah to the Lord’ became an unex­pect­ed anthem of the protests, as par­tic­i­pants sang the tune to calm con­fronta­tions with police.) For Chris­tians there, the Chi­nese Com­mu­nist Par­ty may be the great­est exis­ten­tial threat to the Hong Kong church.”
  7. The Impor­tance of Stu­pid­i­ty in Sci­en­tif­ic Research (Mar­tin A. Schwartz, Jour­nal of Cell Sci­ence): “At some point, the con­ver­sa­tion turned to why she had left grad­u­ate school. To my utter aston­ish­ment, she said it was because it made her feel stu­pid. After a cou­ple of years of feel­ing stu­pid every day, she was ready to do some­thing else. I had thought of her as one of the bright­est peo­ple I knew and her sub­se­quent career sup­ports that view. What she said both­ered me. I kept think­ing about it; some­time the next day, it hit me. Sci­ence makes me feel stu­pid too. It’s just that I’ve got­ten used to it. So used to it, in fact, that I active­ly seek out new oppor­tu­ni­ties to feel stupid.” The author is a pro­fes­sor at Yale. This essay is about a decade old but I only recent­ly stum­bled upon it.

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 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 220

On Fri­days I share articles/resources about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. My hope is that every­one will find at least one link intrigu­ing enough to click through for more. Be sure to see the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom. I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Does a Reli­gious Upbring­ing Pro­mote Gen­eros­i­ty or Not? (Tyler J. Van­der­Weele, Psy­chol­o­gy Today): “In 2015, a paper by Jean Dece­ty and co-authors report­ed that chil­dren who were brought up reli­gious­ly were less gen­er­ous. The paper received a great deal of atten­tion, and was cov­ered by over 80 media out­lets includ­ing The Econ­o­mist, the Boston Globe, the Los Ange­les Times, and Sci­en­tif­ic Amer­i­can. As it turned out, how­ev­er, the paper by Dece­ty was wrong.” Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus who not­ed, “it seemed up your alley.” A sto­ry which touch­es on reli­gion, fea­tures a sta­tis­ti­cal screwup, and high­lights media bias? Indeed it is! The author is an epi­demi­ol­o­gist at Har­vard whose writ­ing I have high­light­ed before. 
  2. Is Amer­i­can Chris­tian­i­ty on Its Last Legs? The Data Say Oth­er­wise. (Bradley Wright, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “…evan­gel­i­cal Chris­tian­i­ty is doing rather well for itself. Where it is not increas­ing, it is hold­ing steady. As Stan­ton writes, ‘Church­es that are faith­ful­ly preach­ing, teach­ing, and prac­tic­ing Bib­li­cal truths and con­ser­v­a­tive the­ol­o­gy are hold­ing sta­ble over­all. In some areas, they are see­ing growth.’ In con­trast, the for­tunes of main­line Protes­tantism in Amer­i­ca are falling fast. Its long decline has been doc­u­ment­ed before, and Stan­ton updates our under­stand­ing of it. As he puts it, ‘peo­ple are leav­ing those church­es like the build­ings are on fire.’” The author is a soci­ol­o­gist at U Conn whose writ­ing I have high­light­ed before.
  3. Look­ing back at the Snow­den rev­e­la­tions (Matthew Green, per­son­al blog): “One of the most impor­tant lessons we learned from the Snow­den leaks was that the NSA very much pri­or­i­tizes its sur­veil­lance mis­sion, to the point where it is will­ing to active­ly insert vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties into encryp­tion prod­ucts and stan­dards used on U.S. net­works…. This kind of sab­o­tage is, need­less to say, some­thing that not even the most para­noid secu­ri­ty researchers would have pre­dict­ed from our own intel­li­gence agen­cies. Agen­cies that, osten­si­bly have a mis­sion to pro­tect U.S. net­works.” The author is a pro­fes­sor at Johns Hop­kins.
  4. Harvard’s Lega­cies Are Noth­ing to Be Proud Of (Tyler Cowen, Bloomberg Opin­ion): “If you are won­der­ing why Amer­i­cans do not trust the cur­rent estab­lish­ment, or why Amer­i­cans are not so con­vinced that the Demo­c­ra­t­ic Par­ty actu­al­ly will reverse income inequal­i­ty, look no fur­ther than the Har­vard admis­sions case.”
  5. Inside Stanford’s Last Fall­out Shel­ter: a time cap­sule to Cold War pol­i­tics and protests (Patrick Mon­re­al, Stan­ford Dai­ly): “At the height of the Cold War, Stan­ford and the Office of Civ­il Defense, a fed­er­al agency estab­lished by Franklin D. Roo­sevelt, des­ig­nat­ed as many as 56 fall­out shel­ters on cam­pus. The Uni­ver­si­ty man­aged these shel­ters, which col­lec­tive­ly had a max­i­mum occu­pan­cy of 49,269 peo­ple, as a part of emer­gency plans in the event of a nuclear strike or nat­ur­al dis­as­ter.”
  6. Some diverse per­spec­tives on max­i­miz­ing your time at Stan­ford.
    • Class­es for the Col­lege Con­trar­i­an: The Com­pre­hen­sive Guide to Get­ting More out of Stan­ford (Anni­ka Nordquist, Stan­ford Review): “Although Stanford’s dom­i­nance in STEM fields is uni­ver­sal­ly acknowl­edged, it can be hard­er to find stel­lar human­i­ties and social sci­ences class­es, which don’t have the same struc­tured cur­ricu­lums and are more like­ly to suf­fer from severe grade infla­tion. This is not even to men­tion the dif­fi­cul­ty of find­ing class­es which rep­re­sent oppos­ing view­points and teach crit­i­cal thought rather than aca­d­e­m­ic ortho­doxy.” Anni­ka is involved in Chi Alpha. 
    • Eleven Must-Take Class­es This Fall (Stan­ford Sphere edi­to­r­i­al board): “In our old­est recur­ring fea­ture, we present below an alpha­bet­ized list of the most inter­est­ing class­es of the fall.”
    • I pro­pose a new rule at Stan­ford — all stu­dents shall be auto­mat­i­cal­ly enrolled in any cours­es which are rec­om­mend­ed by both the Sphere and the Review 
    • How to Major in Uni­corn (Max Read & Andrew Grana­to, New York Mag­a­zine): “Google was found­ed by two Stan­ford grad­u­ate stu­dents, Insta­gram by two Stan­ford alum­ni, Snapchat by a Stan­ford dropout. What­sApp, Net­flix, LinkedIn, Yahoo, and Hewlett-Packard were all found­ed by one­time Stan­ford stu­dents; the ear­li­est investors in Face­book and Ama­zon were Stan­ford grad­u­ates. Even Eliz­a­beth Holmes, sym­bol of Sil­i­con Val­ley self-delu­sion and fraud, was a stu­dent at Stan­ford when she dropped out to found Ther­a­nos. About the only two famous tech founders with no imme­di­ate­ly appar­ent Stan­ford con­nec­tion are Steve Jobs and Bill Gates — though is it a coin­ci­dence that each had a daugh­ter attend the school?”
    • If Not Snapchat, What? A Guide to Stanford’s Non-Tech Fief­doms (Andrew Grana­to, New York Mag­a­zine): “An anec­dote about the uni­ver­si­ty that is posi­tion­ing itself to take charge of the 21st cen­tu­ry: Jack­son Beard ’17, the for­mer stu­dent body pres­i­dent, told me a sto­ry about how a cab­i­net mem­ber of hers tried to sched­ule a meet­ing with the head of the stu­dent health cen­ter to dis­cuss school pol­i­cy on invol­un­tary psy­chi­atric holds of stu­dents. After many delays, a meet­ing occurred where the admin­is­tra­tor ‘just asked, straight up, “When do you two grad­u­ate?” He said, “I want to know when you’ll stop car­ing about this issue.”’” A remark­ably brief sum­ma­ry of a very real Stan­ford dynam­ic.
    • An Optimist’s Guide to Find­ing Mean­ing at Stan­ford (Ibrahim Bhar­mal and Ali­na Utra­ta, Medi­um) “The best advice I ever got about pick­ing a major was: plan out all the class­es you want to take, and then see what major lets you take those class­es. YOU HAVE TONS OF TIME! Spend fresh­man and sopho­more year tak­ing all the class­es you’re inter­est­ed in and expand­ing your hori­zons — even class­es that don’t seem ‘use­ful’ to you.”
  7. The Dan­ger of Reusing Nat­ur­al Exper­i­ments (Alex Tabar­rok, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “A cor­re­spon­dent writes to ask whether I was aware that Reg­u­la­tion SHO has been used by more than fifty oth­er stud­ies to test a vari­ety of hypothe­ses. I was not! The prob­lem is obvi­ous. If the same exper­i­ment is used mul­ti­ple times we should be impos­ing mul­ti­ple hypoth­e­sis stan­dards to avoid the green jel­ly bean prob­lem, oth­er­wise known as the false pos­i­tive prob­lem.” 

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 219

New stu­dents: if this is your first email from the Chi Alpha list, wel­come! Every Fri­day I email out a com­pi­la­tion of arti­cles about broad cul­tur­al, soci­etal and the­o­log­i­cal issues. My hope is that every­one will find at least one link intrigu­ing enough to click through for more.

Most of the list’s con­tent isn’t remote­ly like this, so even if this isn’t your cup of tea be sure to stick around (although I’ve heard rumors that some peo­ple stay on our list just for this Fri­day email). Also pay atten­tion to the expla­na­tion and dis­claimers at the bot­tom — I real­ly mean them. And I wel­come your sug­ges­tions, so if you read some­thing fas­ci­nat­ing please pass it my way.

Things Glen Found Interesting

  1. Lega­cy and Ath­lete Pref­er­ences at Har­vard (Peter Arcidi­a­cono, Josh Kinsler and Tyler Ran­som, link is a PDF of a work­ing paper): “The law­suit Stu­dents For Fair Admis­sions v. Har­vard Uni­ver­si­ty pro­vid­ed an unprece­dent­ed look at how an elite school makes admis­sions deci­sions. Using pub­licly-released reports, we exam­ine the pref­er­ences Har­vard gives for recruit­ed ath­letes, lega­cies, those on the dean’s inter­est list, and chil­dren of fac­ul­ty and staff (ALD­Cs). Among white admits, over 43% are ALDC. Among admits who are African Amer­i­can, Asian Amer­i­can, and His­pan­ic, the share is less than 16% each. Our mod­el of admis­sions shows that rough­ly three quar­ters of white ALDC admits would have been reject­ed if they had been treat­ed as white non-ALD­Cs. Remov­ing pref­er­ences for ath­letes and lega­cies would sig­nif­i­cant­ly alter the racial dis­tri­b­u­tion of admit­ted stu­dents, with the share of white admits falling and all oth­er groups ris­ing or remain­ing unchanged.” The lead author is an econ pro­fes­sor at Duke.
  2. Too Much Dark Mon­ey in Almonds (Scott Alexan­der, Slate Star Codex): “Everyone always talks about how much mon­ey there is in pol­i­tics. This is the wrong fram­ing. The right fram­ing is Ansolabehere et al’s: why is there so lit­tle mon­ey in pol­i­tics? But Ansolabehere focus­es on elec­tions, and the mys­tery is wider than that. Sure, dur­ing the 2018 elec­tion, can­di­dates, par­ties, PACs, and out­siders com­bined spent about $5 bil­lion – $2.5 bil­lion on Democ­rats, $2 bil­lion on Repub­li­cans, and $0.5 bil­lion on third par­ties. And although that sounds like a lot of mon­ey to you or me, on the nation­al scale, it’s puny. The US almond indus­try earns $12 bil­lion per year. Amer­i­cans spent about 2.5x as much on almonds as on can­di­dates last year.” It builds to a sur­pris­ing twist. High­ly rec­om­mend­ed.
  3. I nor­mal­ly avoid two links from one author, but every once in a while some­one is on fire. Against Against Pseudoad­dic­tion (Scott Alexan­der, Slate Star Codex): “Let me con­fess: I think pseudoad­dic­tion is real. In fact, I think it’s obvi­ous­ly real. I think every­one should real­ize it’s real as soon as it’s explained prop­er­ly to them. I think we should be ter­ri­fied that any of our insti­tu­tions – media, acad­e­mia, what­ev­er – think they could pos­si­bly get away with claim­ing pseudoad­dic­tion isn’t real. I think peo­ple should be tak­ing to the streets try­ing to over­throw a med­ical sys­tem that has the slight­est doubt about whether pseudoad­dic­tion is real. If you can think of more hyper­bol­ic state­ments about pseudoad­dic­tion, I prob­a­bly believe those too.” I am ful­ly per­suad­ed by this arti­cle. 
  4. ‘I Basi­cal­ly Just Made It Up’: Con­fes­sions of a Social Con­struc­tion­ist (Christo­pher Dum­mitt, Quil­lette): “In my defence, I wasn’t alone. Every­one was (and is) mak­ing it up. That’s how the gen­der-stud­ies field works. But it’s not much of a defence. I should have known bet­ter. If I were to retroac­tive­ly psy­cho­an­a­lyze myself, I would say that, real­ly, I did know bet­ter. And that’s why I was so angry and assertive about what I thought I knew. It was to hide the fact that, at a very basic lev­el, I didn’t have proof for part of what I was say­ing. So I stuck to the argu­ments with fer­vor, and denounced alter­na­tive points of view.” The author is a his­to­ri­an at Trent Uni­ver­si­ty (in Cana­da). 
  5. The Chris­t­ian Right Is Help­ing Dri­ve Lib­er­als Away From Reli­gion (Amelia Thom­son-DeVeaux and Daniel Cox, FiveThir­tyEight): “Researchers haven’t found a com­pre­hen­sive expla­na­tion for why the num­ber of reli­gious­ly unaf­fil­i­at­ed Amer­i­cans has increased over the past few years — the shift is too large and too com­plex. But a recent swell of social sci­ence research sug­gests that even if pol­i­tics wasn’t the sole cul­prit, it was an impor­tant contributor.”
    • Relat­ed: Not every­body wants thoughts and prayers after a dis­as­ter, accord­ing to a study of hur­ri­cane sur­vivors (Allen Kim, CNN): “Thinking of send­ing your ‘thoughts and prayers’ to those affect­ed by tragedy or a nat­ur­al dis­as­ter? Well, not every­one wants them. While Chris­tians val­ue these ges­tures from reli­gious peo­ple, some athe­ists and agnos­tics would pay mon­ey to avoid them, accord­ing to a study pub­lished Mon­day in the Pro­ceed­ings of the Nation­al Acad­e­my of Sciences.” I am shocked at how aller­gic some peo­ple are to reli­gion. The aca­d­e­m­ic arti­cle upon which this news sto­ry was based is The val­ue of thoughts and prayers (Lin­da Thunström and Shiri Noy, PNAS).
  6. World Vision Flips the Script on Child Spon­sor­ship (Jere­my Weber, Chris­tian­i­ty Today): “Almost 1,000 chil­dren in rur­al Guatemala gained spon­sors this month from a megachurch in south­ern Indi­ana. But in this case, it was the indige­nous chil­dren in need who pon­dered pho­tos of smil­ing faces and chose one they felt a con­nec­tion with. And it was the adult donors in the Unit­ed States who ner­vous­ly wait­ed, won­der­ing who would pick them.”
  7. The grand­mas­ter diet: How to lose weight while bare­ly mov­ing (Aish­warya Kumar, ESPN): “Robert Sapol­sky, who stud­ies stress in pri­mates at Stan­ford Uni­ver­si­ty, says a chess play­er can burn up to 6,000 calo­ries a day while play­ing in a tour­na­ment, three times what an aver­age per­son con­sumes in a day. Based on breath­ing rates (which triple dur­ing com­pe­ti­tion), blood pres­sure (which ele­vates) and mus­cle con­trac­tions before, dur­ing and after major tour­na­ments, Sapol­sky sug­gests that grand­mas­ters’ stress respons­es to chess are on par with what elite ath­letes experience.”

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. Rec­om­mend­ed. 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.

Celebration of Discipline: Concluding Thoughts

book cover - Celebration Of Discipline

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.

Our adven­ture through Cel­e­bra­tion of Dis­ci­pline the book is over. Now it’s time for Cel­e­bra­tion of Dis­ci­pline the real­i­ty TV show. We’ve got to live it or we wast­ed many hours this sum­mer. 🙂

Fos­ter cov­ered twelve dis­ci­plines which are all help­ful, but remem­ber that three dis­ci­plines are core:

  • pray­ing to God
  • med­i­tat­ing upon Scrip­ture
  • par­tic­i­pat­ing in a wor­ship­ing com­mu­ni­ty

Oth­er dis­ci­plines are good, but these are leg day. It’s tempt­ing to skip them, but over time it will be obvi­ous that you did.

These three are the gen­er­a­tive dis­ci­plines, and there­fore the core dis­ci­plines. They beget the oth­ers. When we pray, the Spir­it may speak to us to begin a fast. When we read the Word, a verse might cause us to begin serv­ing some­one. When we gath­er with God’s peo­ple to wor­ship and hear a ser­mon, we might feel com­pelled to con­fess a sin. If you prac­tice these three reg­u­lar­ly the oth­ers will come over time, but you can prac­tice soli­tude and sim­plic­i­ty for a life­time and nev­er move beyond that.

So keep those front and cen­ter as you explore oth­er spir­i­tu­al dis­ci­plines. And remem­ber why you are doing them. It’s not because they feel good (although some­times they will). You do the dis­ci­plines because you want the out­come: god­li­ness. In 1 Tim­o­thy 4:7b Paul says, “train your­self to be god­ly.” Peter like­wise teach­es that we should there­fore “make every effort” in our pur­suit of a god­ly life (2 Peter 1:3–8). We make every effort — we train our­selves — by means of the dis­ci­plines.

Final­ly, remem­ber this phrase: “try­ing with­out train­ing leads to frus­tra­tion.” May these next few months be fruit­ful as you train for god­li­ness!

P.S. Here are the results of my sur­vey about which chap­ter peo­ple found most help­ful: tied for first place were the chap­ters on prayer and fast­ing, hon­or­able men­tion goes to the chap­ter on soli­tude which was only one vote shy. Oth­er chap­ters received some love as well, but those three were far ahead. So if you’re behind on the read­ing, maybe jump straight to those chap­ters for max­i­mum ben­e­fit. And don’t for­get that I’ve post­ed my com­men­tary on each chap­ter at https://xastanford.org/summer-reading

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 218

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. “We May Have To Shoot Down This Air­craft” (Gar­rett Graff, Politi­co): “We can’t see the air­craft. We don’t know where it is because we don’t have any radars point­ing into the U.S. Any­thing in the Unit­ed States was con­sid­ered friend­ly by definition.” A grip­ping account of the Flight 93 sto­ry.
  2. Active Learn­ing Works But Stu­dents Don’t Like It (Alex Tabar­rok, Mar­gin­al Rev­o­lu­tion): “A care­ful­ly done study that held stu­dents and teach­ers con­stant shows that stu­dents learn more in active learn­ing class­es but they dis­like this style of class and think they learn less. It’s no big surprise–active learn­ing is hard and makes the stu­dents feel stu­pid. It’s much eas­i­er to sit back and be enter­tained by a great lec­tur­er who makes every­thing seem simple.”
  3. How Evan­gel­i­cals Invent­ed Lib­er­al­s’ Favorite Legal Doc­trine (Matthew Lee Ander­son, The Fed­er­al­ist): “…within the many ironies of his­to­ry, the social and polit­i­cal instru­ments a per­fec­tion­ist move­ment deploys may be eas­i­ly co-opt­ed for ends and pur­pos­es nev­er imag­ined in their devel­op­ment. That is, if late-twen­ti­eth-cen­tu­ry evan­gel­i­cal activists sowed the wind, today’s activists have reaped the whirlwind.” I love arti­cles that present a top­ic I think I know some­thing about and pro­ceed to show me some­thing I had nev­er known before.
  4. A Famous Argu­ment Against Free Will Has Been Debunked (Bahar Gholipour, The Atlantic): “It would be quite an achieve­ment for a brain sig­nal 100 times small­er than major brain waves to solve the prob­lem of free will. But the sto­ry of the Bere­itschaftspo­ten­tial has one more twist: It might be some­thing else entirely.”
  5. Vik­tor Orban Among The Chris­tians (Rod Dreher, The Amer­i­can Con­ser­v­a­tive): “Orban is what Trump’s biggest fans wish he was (but isn’t), and what Trump’s ene­mies think him to be (but isn’t). If Don­ald Trump had the smarts and skills of Vik­tor Orban, the polit­i­cal sit­u­a­tion in the US would be much, much dif­fer­ent — for bet­ter or for worse, depend­ing on your point of view.” I don’t have much inter­est in Hun­gar­i­an pol­i­tics, but this fas­ci­nat­ed me. 
  6. When the Cul­ture War Comes for the Kids (George Pack­er, The Atlantic): “I asked myself if I was mov­ing to the wrong side of a great moral cause because its tone was too loud, because it shook loose what I didn’t want to give up. It took me a long time to see that the new pro­gres­sivism didn’t just car­ry my own pol­i­tics fur­ther than I liked. It was actu­al­ly hos­tile to prin­ci­ples with­out which I don’t believe democ­ra­cy can survive.” This arti­cle came high­ly rec­om­mend­ed, but it only got inter­est­ing to me about halfway through — and then wow.
  7. Con­ser­v­a­tives Clash on the Goal of Gov­ern­ment (Jonathan Lee­man, Prov­i­dence): “There is no neu­tral­i­ty. The pub­lic square is a bat­tle­ground of gods. Our cul­ture wars are wars of reli­gion. For the time being, lib­er­al­ism keeps us from pick­ing up six­teenth-cen­tu­ry swords for those wars, which is no small achieve­ment. But don’t assume it won’t con­trol us with the sub­tler tools of a twen­ty-first cen­tu­ry legal totalitarianism.” Insight­ful reflec­tions on how Chris­tians should form their polit­i­cal posi­tions.

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.

Celebration of Discipline: Celebration

book cover - Celebration Of Discipline

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.

I hope this sum­mer has been a bless­ing to you! Today we come to the final dis­ci­pline — the dis­ci­pline of cel­e­bra­tion (which is an inver­sion of the book’s title, and this does not seem to be acci­den­tal).

Cel­e­bra­tion as Fos­ter describes it is a joy-filled approach to dai­ly liv­ing that we share with oth­ers. He is not pri­mar­i­ly refer­ring to events like wor­ship ser­vices or par­ties. He has in mind things like laugh­ing with your friends in the cafe­te­ria or turn­ing chores into games. When we con­sis­tent­ly and authen­ti­cal­ly live with joy, every­thing (includ­ing wor­ship ser­vices and par­ties) get bet­ter. But when we do not live this way, even the spir­i­tu­al dis­ci­plines we have been study­ing can become hor­ri­ble things:

Cel­e­bra­tion is cen­tral to all the Spir­i­tu­al Dis­ci­plines. With­out a joy­ful spir­it of fes­tiv­i­ty the Dis­ci­plines become dull, death-breath­ing tools in the hands of mod­ern Phar­isees. Every Dis­ci­pline should be char­ac­ter­ized by care­free gai­ety and a sense of thanks­giv­ing.

Richard Fos­ter, Cel­e­bra­tion of Dis­ci­pline, page 191

This is, no doubt, why Fos­ter enti­tled his book Cel­e­bra­tion of Dis­ci­pline. The spir­i­tu­al dis­ci­plines must them­selves be both sources of joy and expres­sions of joy. This does not mean turn from fast­ing to feast­ing the moment we get hun­gry, or that when gen­eros­i­ty is a chal­lenge that we instead turn to greed. Of course the dis­ci­plines will be hard at times — that is why we call them dis­ci­plines!

But if our prac­tice of the spir­i­tu­al dis­ci­plines is noth­ing but duty with­out delight, we have bad­ly missed the mark. In this regard the spir­i­tu­al dis­ci­plines are no dif­fer­ent than the phys­i­cal dis­ci­plines — exer­cis­ing is hard at times but peo­ple endure it because they enjoy what comes on the oth­er side of the pain (and exer­cise itself is some­times fun). And so our spir­i­tu­al dis­ci­plines must be a cel­e­bra­tion. But since the spir­i­tu­al dis­ci­plines are woven into our every­day lives, they can only be marked by cel­e­bra­tion if our every­day lives are marked by cel­e­bra­tion.

Some peo­ple strug­gle to believe that God wants them to live this way. They have a hard time expe­ri­enc­ing joy with­out guilt. Some plea­sures, of course, are sin­ful. But there are peo­ple who are sus­pi­cious of even whole­some plea­sures. If that’s you, I urge you to remem­ber that enjoy­ing life is not only pleas­ant but wise. Eccle­si­astes makes this point repeat­ed­ly: “a per­son can do noth­ing bet­ter than to eat and drink and find sat­is­fac­tion in their own toil” (Ecc 2:24–25), “there is noth­ing bet­ter for peo­ple than to be hap­py and to do good while they live” (Ecc 3:12–13), “there is noth­ing bet­ter for a per­son than to enjoy their work” (Ecc 3:22), “when God gives some­one wealth and pos­ses­sions, and the abil­i­ty to enjoy them, to accept their lot and be hap­py in their toil — this is a gift of God” (Ecc 5:18–20), “go, eat your food with glad­ness, and drink your wine with a joy­ful heart, for God has already approved of what you do” (Ecc 9:7–10), “you who are young be hap­py while you are young, and let your heart give you joy in the days of your youth… ban­ish anx­i­ety from your heart” (Ecc 11:9–10).

Per­haps, on the oth­er hand, you do believe this but have a hard time putting it into prac­tice. Maybe you even feel guilty that you don’t enjoy life more. Fos­ter has good advice:

God has estab­lished a cre­at­ed order full of excel­lent and good things, and it fol­lows nat­u­ral­ly that as we give our atten­tion to those things we will be hap­py. That is God’s appoint­ed way to joy. If we think we will have joy only by pray­ing and singing psalms, we will be dis­il­lu­sioned. But if we fill our lives with sim­ple good things and con­stant­ly thank God for them, we will be joy­ful, that is, full of joy. And what about our prob­lems? When we deter­mine to dwell on the good and excel­lent things in life, we will be so full of those things that they will tend to swal­low our prob­lems. The deci­sion to set the mind on the high­er things of life an act of the will. That is why cel­e­bra­tion is a Dis­ci­pline. It is not some­thing that falls on our heads. It is the result of a con­scious­ly cho­sen way of think­ing and liv­ing.

Richard Fos­ter, Cel­e­bra­tion of Dis­ci­pline, page 195

If you strug­gle to live with joy, choose to fill your life with “sim­ple good things” and thank God for them. Are you broke? Take walks in beau­ti­ful places. Watch fun­ny videos online. Invite friends to come hang out at your place. Do you have some spare cash? Buy foods that you real­ly enjoy eat­ing. Buy the pre­mi­um ver­sion of an app that you already like using. Pur­chase tick­ets to an event.

And always remem­ber that the goal is to cul­ti­vate a tru­ly joy­ful spir­it. We’re not try­ing to live by hype; joy that lasts has a foun­da­tion. I appre­ci­at­ed Fos­ter’s warn­ing in this regard:

Often we try to pump up peo­ple with joy when in real­i­ty noth­ing has hap­pened in their lives. God has not bro­ken into the rou­tine expe­ri­ences of their dai­ly exis­tence. Cel­e­bra­tion comes with the com­mon ven­tures of life are redeemed. It is impor­tant to avoid the kind of cel­e­bra­tions that real­ly cel­e­brate noth­ing. Worse yet is to pre­tend to cel­e­brate when the spir­it of cel­e­bra­tion is not in us.

Richard Fos­ter, Cel­e­bra­tion of Dis­ci­pline, page 193

And with that, I close. We’re offi­cial­ly done with the book, but I’ll send one more sum­ma­ry email next week. Thanks for read­ing along!

In the mean­while, I have a ques­tion for you: which chap­ter did you find most help­ful? Reply and let me know — I’ll share the results anony­mous­ly with every­one!

Things Glen Found Interesting, Volume 217

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 Study Guide For Human Soci­ety, Part 1 (Tan­ner Greer, The Scholar’s Stage): “…there are two meth­ods [for find­ing good his­to­ry books] in par­tic­u­lar I have often have use­ful. The first is to Google syl­labi. If you are inter­est­ed in the his­to­ry of the Roman Repub­lic, Google ‘Roman Repub­lic syl­labus’ and see what pops up. Read a few cours­es and see what books are includ­ed. Alter­na­tive­ly, if you just read a book you thought was par­tic­u­lar­ly good, put its title into Google and then the word ‘syl­labus’ after­wards and see what oth­er read­ings col­lege pro­fes­sors have paired with that book in their cours­es.” I just found this blog and am lov­ing it.
  2. When Faith Comes Up, Stu­dents Avert Their Eyes (Michael Roth, The Atlantic): “As a non­be­liev­er myself, I am not try­ing to con­vert any stu­dent to any reli­gion. Yet how to dis­cuss reli­gious faith in class pos­es a major chal­lenge for non­re­li­gious col­leges and uni­ver­si­ties. How can such an insti­tu­tion claim to edu­cate stu­dents about ideas, cul­ture, and ways of life if stu­dents, pro­fes­sors, or both are uncom­fort­able when talk­ing about some­thing that’s been cen­tral to human­i­ty through­out record­ed his­to­ry?” Roth is a his­to­ri­an and the pres­i­dent of Wes­leyan Uni­ver­si­ty. Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus.
  3. The Pint-Size Nation off the Eng­lish Coast (Ian Urbina, The Atlantic): “Though no coun­try for­mal­ly rec­og­nizes Sealand, its sov­er­eign­ty has been hard to deny. Half a dozen times, the British gov­ern­ment and assort­ed oth­er groups, backed by mer­ce­nar­ies, have tried and failed to take over the plat­form by force.” Rec­om­mend­ed by a stu­dent. Very enter­tain­ing.
  4. Elite Fail­ure Has Brought Amer­i­cans to the Edge of an Exis­ten­tial Cri­sis (Derek Thomp­son, The Atlantic): “What Amer­i­cans young and old are aban­don­ing is not so much the promise of fam­i­ly, faith, and nation­al pride as the trust that America’s exist­ing insti­tu­tions can be relied on to pro­vide for them.”
    • Use­ful­ly read along­side The End of the Roman Empire Wasn’t That Bad (James Fal­lows, The Atlantic): “Gov­ern­men­tal ‘fail­ure’ comes down to an inabil­i­ty to match a society’s resources to its biggest oppor­tu­ni­ties and needs. This is the clear­est stan­dard by which cur­rent U.S. nation­al gov­er­nance fails. In prin­ci­ple, almost noth­ing is beyond America’s capac­i­ties. In prac­tice, almost every big task seems too hard. Yet for our own era’s coun­ter­parts to duchies and monasteries—for state and local gov­ern­ments, and for cer­tain large pri­vate orga­ni­za­tions, includ­ing uni­ver­si­ties and some companies—the coun­try is still main­ly func­tion­al, in exact­ly the areas where nation­al gov­er­nance has failed.”
    • Relat­ed: How Uni­ver­si­ties Have Been Part of the Prob­lem (And Can Be Part of the Solu­tion) for America’s Civic Crises (Musa al-Ghar­bi, Het­ero­dox Acad­e­my): “Stu­dents are taught to real­ly hone their crit­i­cal capac­i­ties at uni­ver­si­ty – but what of their affir­ma­tive ones? Put anoth­er way, there is a big focus on iden­ti­fy­ing prob­lems, crit­i­ciz­ing, prob­lema­tiz­ing, decon­struct­ing, high­light­ing dif­fer­ences, etc. – but much less on com­ing up with prac­ti­cal solu­tions, or explain­ing what works, what is good (and why), or acknowl­edg­ing what the peo­ple we engage are right about, or build­ing con­sen­sus through the things we share in com­mon. These are not skills that are pri­or­i­tized in high­er edu­ca­tion today.” The author is a soci­ol­o­gist at Colum­bia. Rec­om­mend­ed by an alum­nus. Also see his com­pan­ion piece Aca­d­e­m­ic and Polit­i­cal Elit­ism at Inside High­er Ed.
  5. Can Jesus Close the Wage Gap? Inside Hill­song’s Insta­gram-Fueled Wom­en’s Move­ment (Hay­ley Phe­lan, Elle): “This year’s theme, ‘Be Found in the New,’ is tak­en from the Book of Rev­e­la­tion. But if you didn’t know that, the pam­phlet could be an Urban Out­fit­ters cat­a­log or an Ever­lane lookbook—a sign of both Hillsong’s cul­tur­al flu­en­cy and mar­keters’ aware­ness of con­sumer fatigue. A new sofa or cute leg­gings are just the win­dow dress­ing in a life of purpose—a way to tran­scend exhaus­tion, lone­li­ness, and low self-esteem, and step into a world of our own mak­ing. Which, when you get right down to it, sounds a lot like reli­gion.”
  6. Five Things They Don’t Tell You About Slav­ery (Rich Lowry, Nation­al Review): “None of the oth­er soci­eties taint­ed by slav­ery pro­duced the Dec­la­ra­tion of Inde­pen­dence, a Wash­ing­ton, Jef­fer­son, and Hamil­ton, the U.S. Con­sti­tu­tion, or a tra­di­tion of lib­er­ty that inspired peo­ple around the world for cen­turies. If we don’t keep that in mind, as well as the broad­er con­text of slav­ery, we aren’t giv­ing this coun­try — or his­to­ry — its due.” The title is not great but the arti­cle is quite inter­est­ing. 
  7. Home­less­ness and the high cost of liv­ing (Chris­tos Makridis, The Hill): “…econ­o­mists have reached a con­sen­sus that the pri­ma­ry dri­ver behind increas­ing hous­ing prices and rental rates is the pres­ence of, and increase in, land use restric­tions. Put sim­ply, land use restric­tions, or hous­ing mar­ket reg­u­la­tions more gen­er­al­ly, place restric­tions on the types of struc­tures that can be built — that either implic­it­ly or explic­it­ly raise the cost for devel­op­ers.” Chris­tos is an alum­nus of our min­istry.

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.

Celebration of Discipline: Guidance

book cover - Celebration Of Discipline

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 chap­ter has three emphases: Fos­ter talks about com­mu­ni­ties of believ­ers seek­ing the will of God togeth­er (should our con­gre­ga­tion buy this build­ing or not?), he talks about indi­vid­u­als turn­ing to the gath­ered body for advice (like that cou­ple who asked the con­gre­ga­tion to assess their readi­ness for mar­riage), and he talks about indi­vid­u­als turn­ing to oth­er indi­vid­u­als for spir­i­tu­al coun­sel (see­ing a spir­i­tu­al direc­tor).

I’m just going to talk about the first one — when an entire group (such as a life group or a wor­ship team) seeks the will of God togeth­er. When a group like that needs to make a deci­sion we almost always do one of two things: we vote or we just leave every­thing up to the leader. There are times when each of those is appro­pri­ate (for exam­ple, when it is a rou­tine deci­sion), but there are also times when this is an infe­ri­or solu­tion (for exam­ple, when pas­sions are high and a wrong deci­sion can destroy the entire com­mu­ni­ty).

Fos­ter describes an alter­na­tive:

“As a peo­ple they had decid­ed to live under the direct ruler­ship of the Spir­it. They had reject­ed both human total­i­tar­i­an­ism and anar­chy. They had even reject­ed democ­ra­cy, that is, major­i­ty rule. They had dared to live on the basis of Spir­it-rule; no fifty-one per­cent vote, no com­pro­mis­es, but Spir­it-direct­ed uni­ty.”

Richard Fos­ter, Cel­e­bra­tion of Dis­ci­ple, pages 178–179

And then a lit­tle lat­er:

“[these groups] all oper­ate on the basis on Spir­it-direct­ed uni­ty. Issues are approached with an assur­ance that the mind of the Spir­it can be known. They gath­er in Christ’s name, believ­ing that his will will be fleshed out in their midst. They do not seek com­pro­mise, but God-giv­en con­sen­sus.”

Richard Fos­ter, Cel­e­bra­tion of Dis­ci­pline, page 184

In oth­er words, there are times when we real­ize that our com­mu­ni­ty needs wis­dom beyond human wis­dom and that the issue is so impor­tant that we can­not leave it to one leader to seek the face of God for it. We must all do it togeth­er.

When we do that, Fos­ter sug­gests, we must expect uni­ty. I know sev­er­al church lead­er­ship teams that fol­low this prac­tice: if there is no uni­ty then the team does not pro­ceed. This means that even one voice can derail a plan that every­one else is in favor of. When­ev­er I’ve spo­ken to peo­ple about this prac­tice, they can point to spe­cif­ic times one per­son vetoed a deci­sion that enjoyed over­whelm­ing sup­port. At the time the rest of the team had been mild­ly to intense­ly annoyed, but it lat­er became appar­ent that their friend’s refusal to express false con­sen­sus had saved the team much grief. In ret­ro­spect the entire team saw that God had pro­tect­ed them through the integri­ty of their friend and the integri­ty of their process.

Again, this should not be the way we usu­al­ly make col­lec­tive deci­sions. If a large com­mu­ni­ty always does this they will inevitably find them­selves held hostage by unsta­ble peo­ple. Or if a church rou­tine­ly does this they will find them­selves in thrall to a hand­ful of unbe­liev­ers who attend the church. And so for sim­ple mat­ters touch­ing on every­one, take a quick vote. For deci­sions requir­ing an aware­ness of back­ground knowl­edge or per­haps some spe­cial exper­tise, defer to the lead­ers.

But if doing this for every deci­sion would be unwise, I would like to sug­gest that nev­er doing it would be even less wise.

The next time you are part of a Chris­t­ian group fac­ing a sig­nif­i­cant deci­sion, con­sid­er propos­ing this idea — “Let’s pray until we have uni­ty on this issue and then do what­ev­er God tells us.”