[Sider] attempted to articulate a comprehensive pro-life ethic in opposition to abortion, capital punishment, and of course hunger. In 1987 Sider wrote a book called Completely Pro-Life: Building a Consistent Stance, in which he tied together several issues that would defy the conventional labels of conservative and progressive. Sadly, his efforts did not prevent especially evangelical Christians from dividing along the political lines familiar to us today.
This week Jason Scott Montoya interviewed me for his podcast, which can be seen immediately below:
The interview can also be found at Jason's website, along with relevant links: Political Visions & Illusions: A Survey & Christian Critique of Contemporary Ideologies — With Author David T. Koyzis. Thanks to Jason for a stimulating conversation!
Nevertheless, what stood out for me in these three memorial services is the extent to which they focussed, not so much on the Queen's life and witness, but on the person of Jesus Christ whom she trusted as her Saviour. To be sure, there was some eulogizing, especially by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, during the funeral.
Last week Calvin University hosted Prof. Sherif Girgis, who teaches at the Law School at my alma mater, the University of Notre Dame. His lecture on Constitutional Law and Culture After Dobbs can be found immediately below:
One of Girgis' more persuasive points is that, in today's United States, there is a predominant notion that the courts—and the courts alone—are the arbiters of what is constitutional and what is not. But it has not always been thus. In the early history of the US, presidents and Congress alike saw themselves as guarantors of the constitution, alongside the courts. The introduction of judicial review in 1803 was not meant to negate the responsibilities of the other branches of government to uphold the constitution. Two centuries later, however, something like judicial supremacy has become a poor substitute for constitutional supremacy, as provided for in Article VI, paragraph 2, of the Constitution of the United States.
I have just posted my Global Scholars newsletter for September online, including, once again, a request for prayers for my return to health, especially after COVID made its way through our household this month: September 2022 newsletter. Thanks once again for your financial support and prayers!
Although we knew it was coming, we still experienced the death of Queen Elizabeth II as a blow. I myself was caught off guard and wept when I heard the news. A good friend put it well: we are all orphans. The Queen had been on the throne for seven decades, since before I was born, and serving until after my retirement. . . .
In Canada and 14 other Commonwealth Realms, once styled dominions, Queen Elizabeth II served as head of state, serenely carrying out the responsibilities she believed God had given her. No other monarch reigned as long as she. During her years on the throne, she earned the admiration of her own subjects and of people around the world, who have good reason to envy people living in these realms.
Twice in recent months I have had speaking events related to Chile, an unusually long and thin Spanish-speaking republic stretching along the Pacific coast of South America bounded to its east by the Andes Mountains and Argentina. On sunday, 4 September, Chilean voters rejected the new constitution proposed by the administration of the country's 36-year-old president Gabriel Boric by a substantial margin of 62 percent over 38 percent. This new draft, intended to replace the 1980 constitution introduced by former dictator Augusto Pinochet, boasted a whopping 388 articles, making it one of the longest, if not the longest, constitutional documents in the world. After unrest in 2019 over price rises, the government decided to hold a plebiscite on a new constitution, which 80 percent of voters supported the following year. The next two years were spent drafting the document, which was to be placed before Chileans for their approval. While Pinochet's constitution had enshrined a neoliberal market-oriented economic régime, ordinary Chileans became increasingly dissatisfied with it, culminating in the mass protests of three years ago.
Last thursday evening, 1 September, United States President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., delivered a speech in Philadelphia, a city of historic significance for Americans. Here is the speech in full:
There is reason to be ambivalent about the appropriateness of this speech, which will likely be seen as hopelessly partisan by his political opponents. I will make three observations concerning the speech.
Not far from our home in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, is one of southern Ontario's premier universities, McMaster, known internationally as a centre for advanced scientific and medical research. What few remember is that the university once had a connection with the Baptist Convention of Ontario and Québec, the only remnant of which is the presence on campus of McMaster Divinity College, whose most famous faculty member was probably the late Clark Pinnock.
During my first years of teaching at a neighbouring institution, I often found myself in the Mills Library at McMaster. During one visit, I happened to notice the university's crest outside the elevators, and I was surprised to read the motto emblazoned in Greek letters above the shield: ΤΑ ΠΑΝΤΑ ΕΝ ΧΡΙΣΤΩΙ ΣΥΝΕΣΤΗΚΕΝ: "In Christ all things hold together." This, of course, is a reference to Colossians 1:17. I imagined that hundreds of people would walk past this coat of arms every day as they moved between the floors of the library, unaware of what the words meant or of their history. According to the university's website, "One may suppose that the motto and book were intended to express the concept, espoused in the Will of Senator McMaster, of 'a Christian school of learning'."
He will undoubtedly be remembered as one of the great leaders of the last quarter of the 20th century, who brought to a fairly peaceful end one of the most oppressive regimes in history, yet without being able to alter for the better the political culture that had nurtured it. Successfully ending the Cold War after just over four decades, Gorbachev proved more skilled at initiating good relations with the major western powers than at securing and maintaining the support of his own people. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher memorably called the Soviet leader "a man one could do business with." Nevertheless, co-operation at élite levels does not necessarily lead to lasting friendship between nations, as we are seeing at present with Russia's international isolation over its attack on Ukraine.
I will have more to say about Gorbachev's legacy in the near future.
As I mentioned in my August newsletter, Jonathan Chaplin interviewed me on the subject of my book, Political Visions and Illusions. The interview has now been posted on YouTube:
I personally found the book a delightful read. Few nonfiction books are likely to be page turners, but this one is. Despite its nearly 400 pages, Conservatism is difficult to put down once you’ve begun, so it’s best to set aside some time to do it justice. Indeed, virtually every page is brimming with wisdom rooted in the biblical tradition with which the author, an observant Jew, is familiar. He shows considerable insight into human relationships and the qualities needed to maintain them over the long term. In fleshing out his conservative vision, Hazony succeeds in making the rival liberal and Marxist worldviews look thin and remote from lived reality. Nevertheless, despite the book’s considerable strengths, I was not persuaded by his overall argument for two reasons that I will explain below.
To learn what those reasons are, click here.
Three years ago I reviewed Hazony's earlier book, The Virtue of Nationalism, at Kuyperian Commentary: Is Nationalism Worth Defending? Both books are worth reading and pondering.
I have now posted my latest Global Scholars newsletter online, including a request for prayers for my health: August 2022 newsletter.
The Brazilian city of João Pessoa is on the other side of South America from Santiago, Chile, and this is the location of the hosts for my next lecture, which took place last evening. The sponsoring institution was the Faculdade Internacional Cidade Viva in the tropical northeast of the continent's largest country. Every day between 8 and 14 August, to open the new semester, the faculty is discussing Political Visions and Illusions. I spoke to them on "Ideologies and Idolatry," taking the form of a first-person account of how I came to write the book and a brief glimpse into my plans for a sequel.
Last evening I delivered a remote lecture to the community associated with the Facultad de Teología Reformada in Santiago, Chile. This is a winter seminar (Chile is in the southern hemisphere of course) devoted to the Well-Being of the City (based on Jeremiah 29), connected with a larger discussion of Christian Faith, Political Action, and the New Constitution. After the turmoil of 2019, Chile is in the process of formulating a new constitution to replace the 1980 constitution adopted during the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet. A plebiscite on the document will take place next month.
Here is my lecture and subsequent discussion below. I especially liked the question about the element of truth in anarchism, something I did not cover in Political Visions and Illusions.
Sources differ on the numbers of Spanish speakers in the United States, but their presence is enough to make that country one of the largest hispanophone nations in the world, possibly outranking Spain itself. Indeed, automatic teller machines in banks will prompt you to choose between English and Spanish, even though Spanish is not an official language of the United States . . . .
In 2014 the Pew Research Center reported that the Catholic share of the Latino population was declining, with evangelical and unaffiliated numbers growing. According to the report, Hispanic evangelicals attend church at higher rates than Catholics and are more involved in related activities such as Bible studies and evangelism. With the Latino population increasing in the U.S., it seems likely that Christianity will become more Hispanic as religious observance declines among the white middle class.
[W]hen a particular group asserts a right not contained in a written constitution or previously unacknowledged in the unwritten constitution, such a claim must be adjudicated by a generally recognized authority. At the outset such a claim to a right is only that: a claim. Those making such a claim must make their case in the proper forum along with those who might have legitimate reasons to contest the claim. Justice requires, not simply acknowledging the claim, but hearing all sides, weighing the issue according to recognized principles of justice anchored in the law, and deciding whether the claimed right, either in whole or in part, should be recognized as positive law. In the vast majority of such cases, a representative body is the most appropriate authority to weigh such a claim, either by enacting a new statute or initiating an amendment to the Constitution. If a given polity is divided on the claim, neither side is likely to obtain the entirety of what it is seeking. But such outcomes are in the very nature of democracy, in which compromise enables some measure of conciliation in the midst of disagreement.
If you begin reading the first instalment, you can simply move to the next one by clicking on the link at the bottom, without needing to return to this page.
As in many things, Canada and the United States differ with respect to abortion policy. As noted earlier, unlike the US, Canada has a unified Criminal Code for the entire country. For the first century after Confederation, abortion was banned as a criminal offence. Under Pierre Trudeau's Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1968-69, also known as the "Omnibus Bill," abortion was allowed under certain circumstances, provided it was performed in hospital under the supervision of a therapeutic abortion committee. If the life or health of the mother was at stake, the three-physician committee was authorized to approve it. In 1970, this provision was numbered section 251 of the Criminal Code, the first two subsections of which read as follows:
As we noted earlier, the English common law treats established precedents as binding on current and future court decisions. The ancient doctrine of stare decisis, or stand on what is decided, is a fundamental principle that guides the courts in common law jurisdictions. The common law is often said to be "judge-made law," as distinct from law made by a legislative body. But to say that judges make the law may not be altogether accurate. According to Cicero,
Christian Courier has published my latest column here: An era of good feelings, with the subtitle: "Happiness vs. joy: what's the difference?" Here is an excerpt:
The concern for human happiness is by no means new; Aristotle affirmed it as the proper end of human life. Aristotle, however, identified happiness with living a life of virtue, not with cheerful emotions.
What is new is the identification of happiness with feeling good about oneself. The slightest dip in one’s self-esteem is increasingly regarded as a crisis needing to be addressed and resolved, probably through some form of therapy combined with social approbation. Suffering, and even mere inconvenience, are rendered meaningless, regarded as the deprivation of a good life. Sadly, even Christians have imbibed this worldview. Many Christians effectively subordinate the authority of God’s word to their personal aspirations, diminishing the seriousness of our sinful proclivities and with them Christ’s sacrifice to atone for our sins.
Read the entire article here, and don't forget to subscribe to Christian Courier.
In 1988 and 1989 the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, led by Governor Robert Casey, enacted new abortion statutes that required that a woman seeking an abortion give her informed consent, that a minor seeking an abortion obtain parental consent (the provision included a judicial waiver option), that a married woman notify her husband of her intended abortion, and, finally, that clinics provide certain information to a woman seeking an abortion and wait 24 hours before performing the abortion. Before any of these laws could take effect, Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania brought suit against the governor, protesting the constitutionality of the statutes.
I recently received a copy of this book by Josué Reichow, Reform Your Mind: The Christian Philosophy of Herman Dooyeweerd, published by the Cántaro Institute, for which I was privileged to write a foreword.
Of special interest to North Americans will be chapter 5, in which he discusses the reception of Dooyeweerd's philosophy in Brazil.
The book can be purchased from the publisher and from the usual online vendors.
If the US Supreme Court had not made its Roe v Wade decision, abortion would have remained a matter for the individual states to decide. Whether a national pro-life movement would have arisen is difficult to say, but pro-lifers would have had to wage their political battles in each of the fifty state legislatures. In any event, a pro-life movement did indeed gain momentum, and the court's 1973 decision effectively exacerbated the deepening divisions in society over the issue. Because of the nature of the political process and because legislatures are able to put together carefully balanced compromises that at least minimally take into account the concerns of all sides, there is a good chance that everyone will come to own that decision for themselves, even if they are not completely satisfied with it.
Three years ago I read a review of a recently released film, Mr. Jones, and I looked forward to seeing it in the cinema or at home. This past weekend we discovered that it is now being streamed over Amazon Prime and decided to watch it.
Mr. Jones was directed by Agnieszka Holland and tells the story of Welsh journalist Gareth Jones (1905-1935), who uncovered the truth about Josef Stalin's disastrous effort to collectivize agriculture in Ukraine and elsewhere, leading to mass starvation. Holland is a Polish film director and screenwriter whose family background in communist Poland and, before that, under nazi occupation has uniquely positioned her to tell the story of someone attempting to communicate truth in the midst of the ideological distortions of the day.
Following the publication of the Brazilian edition of Political Visions and Illusions, I received many invitations to speak to Brazilian groups, the vast majority of which have taken place online. With the release of the Spanish-language edition by Teología para Vivir, my first interview relevant to a Spanish-speaking country took place on the first of the month. Under the auspices of Fe Pública Chile, I was interviewed by Luis Pino, of Santiago's Iglesia Presbiteriana Puente de Vida, with Jonathan Muñoz serving as translator. The interview can be seen below:
God has built into his creation an eschatological destiny to be accomplished at Christ’s return when he establishes his kingdom in a new heaven and new earth. This is when the biblical sixth day, referred to in Genesis 1:24–31, yields to the seventh day when God rests from his work and his elect enter with him into that rest. The entire redemptive story laid out in Scripture points to this as our ultimate hope. At that hour, in the fulness of God’s time, our work in his creation will find its fulfilment and commendation, much as the law itself will be fulfilled.
If we look at Jesus’ miracles in light of this sabbatarian reading of Scripture, they come to appear less like protests against legalism and more like an affirmation of the centrality of sabbath to the biblical story.
Ayer encontré un paquete en nuestro buzón que contenía una copia de Visiones e Ilusiones Políticas, la traducción al español de Political Visions and Illusions. Es un voluminoso volumen encuadernado de 420 páginas con el índice. El traductor es Juan M. Londoño. Publicado por Teología para Vivir en Lima, Perú, el volumen fue elaborado en Monee, Illinois, en el quinto país de habla hispana más grande del mundo.
Throughout the past months, I have sat through the grisly footage on television, often breaking into tears at the sight of what Russian troops are doing to innocent civilians. I cannot fathom why they would think they are in the right, but they have the tacit blessing of the odious Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, who refuses to discipline his most powerful parishioner for his crimes. As in Cyprus, many Ukrainians are refugees in their own country, and many may never return to their homes, if they are still standing.
Although I am not a member of Cordileone’s communion, I do not believe that he exceeds his legitimate authority over one of his flock. Of course, no church should pretend to instruct public officials who are members which policies they should be pursuing. This is one of the points I make in a “Concluding Ecclesiological Postscript,” which I appended to the second edition of Political Visions and Illusions. The institutional church does not possess the normative competence to pronounce on the specifics of concrete policies, although many denominational bodies routinely take positions on controversial matters over which there is legitimate disagreement, even among Christians. But the church, as a particular differentiated institution with its own divinely-appointed task, does indeed bear responsibility for disciplining its members, whether or not they hold public office. In fact, the Belgic Confession states that one of the marks of the true church is that “it practices church discipline for correcting faults.”
Last wednesday afternoon, 18 May, I delivered this lecture at Calvin University, Grand Rapids, Michigan, titled: "Let the People Praise: The Enduring Legacy of the Genevan Psalter." This was to mark the 40th anniversary of the H. Henry Meeter Center for Calvin Studies. I was pleased to see so many familiar and unfamiliar faces there. For those unable to attend, here is a recording of the lecture.
Civil and religious liberty are so commonly associated in people’s mouths, and are so rare in fact, that their definition is evidently as little understood as the principle of their connection. The point at which they unite, the common root from which they derive their sustenance, is the right of self-government. The modern theory, which has swept away every authority except that of the State, and has made the sovereign power irresistible by multiplying those who share it, is the enemy of that common freedom in which religious freedom is included. It condemns, as a State within the State, every inner group and community, class or corporation, administering its own affairs; and, by proclaiming the abolition of privileges, it emancipates the subjects of every such authority in order to transfer them exclusively to its own. It recognises liberty only in the individual, because it is only in the individual that liberty can be separated from authority, and the right of conditional obedience deprived of the security of a limited command. Under its sway, therefore, every man may profess his own religion more or less freely; but his religion is not free to administer its own laws. In other words, religious profession is free, but Church government is controlled. And where ecclesiastical authority is restricted, religious liberty is virtually denied.
Given the powerful influence of liberalism in the western world, we increasingly face a version of religious freedom that isolates the person of faith from her faith community, ostensibly making her sovereign over her own spirituality, but effectively empowering the state at the expense of both individual and the community of which she is part. Acton clearly recognized the perils of a religious liberty interpreted through individualist lenses more than a century and a half ago. The peril is with us still.
the nuclear family is a weakened and much diminished version of the traditional family, one that is lacking most of the resources needed effectively to pursue the purposes of the traditional family. When this conception of the family became normative in America and elsewhere after the Second World War, it gave birth to a world of detached suburban homes connected to distant places of employment and schools by trains, automobiles, and buses. In other words, the physical design of large portions of the country reflected a newly rationalised conception of what a family is.
My most recent Global Scholars newsletter is now posted here: May 2022 newsletter.
Political Visions and Illusions is now out in a Spanish-language edition published by Teología para Vivir in Lima, Peru: Visiones e Ilusiones Políticas. The release of this edition makes it available to huge numbers of people who speak Spanish as their mother tongue, including the land of my birth, which is the fifth largest hispanophone country in the world. I pray that God will use it to advance his kingdom according to his own good purposes. ¡Que Dios bendiga a los países de habla hispana!
Over the past several days I have participated in three events relevant to the Christian community in Brazil. The first occurred last saturday, 30 April, and was hosted by two young friends, Leonardo Balena Queiroz and Samuel Aguiar, who had just led a multi-session study of my book, Visões e Ilusões Políticas, with their church congregation, Primeira Igreja Batista do Pará, Belém, Pará, in the tropical Amazon region. At the end of the series, I was beamed in to their gathering to answer questions and to make a pitch for a new book I plan to write on citizenship.
The following day, sunday, 1 May, I addressed a gathering of members of the Segunda Igreja Presbiteriana Renovada de Maringá, in the southern state of Paraná, at the opposite and more temperate end of Brazil. As most of the audience had not read my book, I briefly discussed the idolatrous religious character of ideology and why we have reason for hope in the midst of the ideologies' distorted understandings of God's world. This was followed by questions from listeners.
Finally, on tuesday, 3 May, I was interviewed online by my good friend, José Bruno Pereira dos Santos, known to one and all as Zé Bruno. I met him five years ago at the Ideolatria conference in Goiânia at which I spoke, and I was delighted to renew our friendship in this way last evening. Also interviewing me were Ruan Bessa (my translator), Gustavo Arnoni, and Lucas Pavanato. You can see the entire two hours of our conversation below:
Did I mention that I really love the people of Brazil? Que Deus abençoe o povo brasileiro!
At a news conference in Poland after the visit, Mr Austin told reporters the US wants to see "Russia weakened to the degree that it can't do the kinds of things that it has done in invading Ukraine". . . . BBC diplomatic correspondent James Landale observed that Mr Austin's comments calling for a weakened Russia were unusually strong for a US defence secretary. It is one thing to help Ukraine resist Russian aggression, it is quite another to speak of weakening Russia's capabilities, he said.
During a dangerous time such as the present, government officials must weigh their words carefully to avoid unnecessarily aggravating existing tensions. I would suggest that Austin's remarks do not conform to this principle. Given that Vladimir Putin has expressed concern at Russia being surrounded by NATO and would prefer to see a cordon sanitaire between his country and the west, one might question Austin's wisdom in expressing what may or may not represent a change in US policy. I would furthermore suggest that US policy should support a strengthening and not a weakening of Russia.
Over the past two or more decades, Americans in particular have become increasingly polarized between a new highly-educated urban managerial class and a working class that has lost much of the political and economic clout it once wielded in the post-war era. From 1945 to around 1973, the economies of most western countries revolved around a tripartite power-sharing arrangement among business, labour, and government. The rule of an educated elite was kept in check by the power of labour unions and other nonpolitical associations which channeled the aspirations of ordinary workers. These were the "little platoons" celebrated by Edmund Burke, and together they constituted what has come to be called civil society.
However, during the dislocations of the 1970s, including the unprecedented coincidence of inflation and recession, this power-sharing arrangement broke down, with leaders like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan ushering in a neoliberal era of domestic deregulation, open borders, and labour arbitrage. Globalization was the net result, with a rising managerial class dominating policy-making at the expense of especially the unskilled workers who once manned the factories of America's northeast and Great Lakes industrial belt. The central problem with globalization, however, is that it is undemocratic. Because globalization cannot police itself, it tends to empower a transnational class with shallow roots in any particular country. This is what Michael Lind, in The New Class War, calls the managerial elite. In the United States, the Democratic Party represents this elite class of educated urbanites.
Christian Courier has published online my article, The world responds to Russia, which appears in the 11 April 2022 print issue. An excerpt:
I have been amazed at the international response to what virtually everyone agrees is an unprovoked and unjust attack. Putin’s public pretexts for sending Russian troops into a neighbouring country are scarcely credible, and there is widespread recognition of this. With Russia now locked out of the international banking system and economic sanctions depressing the value of the rouble, Putin risks the welfare of his own country to satisfy his imperial ambitions. That he has nuclear weapons at his disposal brings an additional element of danger to his isolation. Nevertheless, few want to see Putin go unpunished for raining missiles on defenceless Ukrainian civilians, many of whom speak Russian as their first language.
Today the world's Orthodox Christians celebrate the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. Here is a wonderful video of a flash mob singing the traditional paschal hymn in Arabic and Greek. Christ is risen! He is risen indeed!
Once more the Rev. Tim Keller has seen fit to endorse my Political Visions and Illusions in a video just posted two days ago. I am amazed that someone suffering from pancreatic cancer continues to retain such energy and purpose. Thanks be to God!
Few rulers have achieved such notable successes in so short a time. They have certainly secured his reputation and legacy in the history books, where he will take his place in the company of a small collection of similarly notorious rulers.
My new Global Scholars newsletter is now posted here: APRIL 2022 newsletter.
Two people I have come to admire conversed with each other recently, and the interview now appears in The New York Times: How a cancer diagnosis makes Jesus’ death and resurrection mean so much more. Tish Harrison Warren regularly writes for the Times and is a priest in the Anglican Church in North America. Author of Liturgy of the Ordinary: Sacred Practices in Everyday Life, Warren manifests considerable Christian wisdom in her writings, which are definitely worth reading. Here she interviews Timothy Keller, former pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City, who recently authored a new book, Hope in Times of Fear: the Resurrection and the Meaning of Easter. Keller has been suffering from stage 4 pancreatic cancer for the past two years. An excerpt from Keller in this interview:
