Alas, I've stayed out of the political banter for the mainstay of this political season. Mostly disillusioned with the whole system and suspect of any so-called political "savior" or "maverick". Intrigued but admittedly jaded and yet committed to the ideals and beauties of American freedom, including our privilege to vote. Conflicted when I read about what a partial birth abortion entails while holding Grace. Wondering if I could vote for a candidate who opposed a ban on this disgusting practice, yet also wondering if I could vote for a candidate whose party some would argue has traditionally ignored the fundamental reasons and systematic injustices that drive some women to abortion in desperation. Wondering if there are bigger issues or a bigger picture I should be seeing and if so, where should I look? Wondering what a disciple of Christ should do? Having dedicated my life to serving an entirely different kingdom. Alas, I like many others am conflicted.
So, in response to Jeff's last post I ran across the following chapter in a book by Peter Kreeft, a Catholic theologian and apologist from Boston College in his book The Philosophy of Jesus. I couldn't find a link so I just pasted in the whole chapter below. Sorry for the length. Give it a read and see if it makes any sense. I don't know if I'm board with all he says, but perhaps it's worth some extended thought and will at least stir the pot a bit...
"All political issues today are seen through the prism of Right vs. Left, the
political 'us vs. them.' The categories are all-encompassing thought-savers,
knee-jerks that allow us to avoid thinking about each issue on its own
merits. But the categories, and the polarization they create, is even more
indefensible when applied to Christ because it means judging Christ by the
fallen world rather than vice versa.
The polarization is also harmful to morality because it lets us be
selectively moral, selectively idealistic-which means selectively immoral
and pragmatic. If we take the high road on abortion, euthanasia, and
sexuality, we can take the low road on war, poverty, and pollution; or vice
versa. Even when we focus on a specific question like whether all human
lives are intrinsically valuable, these categories allow us the moral
schizophrenia to say yes when we address abortion and no to that same
question when we address war and capital punishment-or vice versa. It's not
just that we give wrong answers (I'm not sure what the right answers are in
particular about a particular war or capital punishment in a particular
case), it's that we have self-contradictory principles.
Only from the viewpoint of the straight can we judge the skewered. Christ is
the straight, the plumb line-both when He is explicitly known, by divine
revelation, and when He is implicitly known, by conscience and the natural
law. He brings to all issues God's natural order to judge man's unnatural
disorders. Therefore, He does that to politics too.
He also unites the proper concerns of Right and Left, for He is the straight
path ('I am the Way') from which both Right and Left turns depart. He gives
a stronger reason for the rightful concerns of both Right and Left than
either Right or Left can do.
For instance, why feed the poor? Because the poor are Christ in disguise.
Not just because of political correctness or individual sentiment.
Why love sinners, as the Left does, and why ate sins, as the Right does? Why
love addicts to drugs, violence, money, or sex? And why hate their
addictions? For the same reason. Because Christ does. That's why we should
be more compassionate to sinners than liberals are and more uncompassionate
to sins than conservatives are. For the same reason: Christ.
Why preach and practice the 'social gospel'? Not to be politically correct,
or to refute the Fundamentalists, but because Christ did.
Why be universalistic and inclusive and ecumenical? Not to sneer at
xenophobia, isolationism, and provincialism, but because Christ was and is
universalistic. Christ is not a local tribal deity.
Why insist on 'the scandal of particularity,' and on the concrete, visible,
particular, and exclusive claims of Christ to be the one and only Savior?
Not to stick it to the liberals, but because Christ is particular and
concrete and visible and exclusive and literal.
Why be progressive and radical and creative and in love with the new? Why be
open to the winds like a sail? Because Christ is. Why be faithful and
stick-in-the-mud traditionalist, like an anchor? Because Christ is 'the same
yesterday, today, and forever.'
Why be a 'bleeding heart liberal'? Because Christ is. Why be a 'hard-headed
conservative'? Because Christ is.
Many have substituted Liberalism or Conservatism or some other ism for
Christ, and co-opted Christ for their cause. Christ cannot be co-opted for
any cause; all causes must be co-opted for Him. All isms are abstractions.
Even the perfect ism, if there is one, cannot save us and cannot love us.
The special danger of the religious Right is to worship Christ's doctrines
instead of Christ, confusing the sign with the thing signified. The Right is
absolutely right to insist on being right and to insist on absolutes. But a
finger is for pointing at the moon; woe to the fool who mistakes the finger
for the moon.
The special danger of the religious Left is to worship Christ's values
instead of Christ. That is just as abstract as the Right's substituting
Christ's doctrines for Christ. They are also only pointing fingers.
The Right argues that the Left is vague, but even the true and precise
doctrines of the Right are vague compared with Christ. Everything is. The
Left argues that the Right is hard, but even the soft, compassionate heart
of a liberal is hard compared with Christ. Everything is.
Right and Left cannot convince and convert each other for the same reason
that the Pharisees and the Sadducees could not convince and convert each
other. For what a Pharisee needs is not a little softening of the head, a
little dose of worldliness, pop psychology, relativism, and subjectivism.
What he needs is Christ. And what a Sadducee needs is not a little hardening
of the heart, a little arrogance, a little bit of Scrooge or Machiavelli
or Darwinian 'survival of the fittest' What he needs is Christ.
And our society needs nothing less, split as it is between Left and Right
today just as Jesus' society was split between Sadducees and Pharisees in
His time.
Earthly societies are not eternal, as souls are. Yet Christ is the Savior of
societies as well as souls. Our society is dying because it has turned the
holy name of its Savior into a curse word. Christophobia is the poison that
is killing our society. Our secularists are making us forget Christ faster
than we are making them remember Him: that is why our society is dying. Its
blood supply is drying up. The Precious Blood is evaporating. We are losing
more blood each day.
The answer is scandalously simple, unless Christ and Christianity and the
Bible and the Church and Christ's apostles and all the saints are liars. The
answer is that there is only one hope, for societies as well as souls: 'What
must I do to be saved?' 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be
saved.' (Acts 11:14)
Is that too simple and childish for you? Are you too 'advanced' and 'adult'
for that? Remember what 'advanced' tooth decay looks like. Remember what our
society means by 'adult.' Remember what 'adult' movies mean. And then put
that against The Passion of the Christ And then 'choose ye this day whom ye
will serve.' (Joshua 24:15)"
—Peter Kreeft, The Philosophy of Jesus (St. Augustine Press, South Bend Indiana, 2007)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Jacob- Thanks for sharing the reading. The message is confusing at first, yet powerful.
Thanks Jake, great stuff to ponder.
That's great Jake. Its easy to forget that we do not serve a political party or ideology but Christ. NT Wright writes similarly that as Christians our job is, "to call the authorities to acts of justice and mercy which will anticipate, in the present time, God’s final setting of all things to rights". And this then requires that we break from our party of choice when their position does not line up up with the picture of God's justice we see in the gospels. This makes it all the more difficult to make decisions when it comes to voting. The best approach may be to determine which are the defining issues at stake in any given election (i.e. abortion, economy, war, torture), and how will voting for a certain candidate affect the way decisions are made on these issues. Its not easy and its not as Peter Kreeft points out black and white, good guys and bad guys, etc. This should if anything allow us to graciously disagree. its late -- c ya
Appreciated Kreeft's unique perspective. He kind of puts both sides in their places, doesn't he?
Post a Comment