Tolerance and Authority

Although we associate authority with intolerance (with good reason), it seems that there's a sense in which authority may encourage tolerance.  Specifically, where an authority sets clear boundaries, tolerance *within* those boundaries *may* be more robust than if these boundaries clarify the limits of freedom .... unless one of the authority's boundaries is that the individual is "owned" by the authority.

When the authority recognizes no other authority as legitimate, then oppressive intolerance appears inevitable.  The trend toward autonomous intolerance seems to be growing worldwide, in China, in the Arab world, and in the West ... here are just a few recent items that illustrate the point:

• Four recent columns by Al Mohler:
  (1) Nero in Beijing - as Mohler notes, "One of the hallmarks of democratic societies is the existence of 'mediating institutions' between the individual and the brute power of the state."  If the state is all-powerful, it cannot tolerate these institutions, the primary ones being the church and the family.  Christians in China now outnumber the Communist Party; I suspect the Chinese leadership understands all to well what happened to Rome when Christianity hit critical mass.  See, also, STRATFOR's China and the End of the Deng Dynasty.
  (2) Why Conservative Churches Are Growing - it seems that humans don't thrive outside of a group that constrains our tendency towards individual autonomy.  While this can be unhealthy if the group is based on false beliefs, living under God's authority clearly results in growth.
  (3) "God's True Vision ... - A church with roots in the Restoration Movement announces that it will no longer perform weddings ... as a protest against Kentucky's refusal to recognize same-sex marriage.
  (3) A Warning of Intimidations to Come - the law firm hired by the House to defend DOMA is attacked by homosexual activists, and the firm drops the case.  For those who think that proponents of sexual liberation are interested in "live and let live", think again.  The evidence grows daily that *any* public expression (workplace, school, city council, etc) that is neutral or skeptical of such liberation will be greeted with the sort of intense hostility last seen in the 1960's protest movements.  If you are involved in a profession that is publicly funded (eg, school teacher) or is certified by a national or state organization (eg, medical doctor), be prepared for persecution if you hold to the traditional Christian understanding of "all truth is God's truth."
• Three lectures by Hunter Baker (author of The End of Secularism) - Freedom, Democracy, and Secularism; Decline, Fall, and the Options; and Secularism, Church, and Society are all interesting lectures.  I found the last two had more depth, but anyone who thinks a secular society will be tolerant of Christianity and Christians is willfully ignorant of the past century.

Note that Christianity and the secular institutions it shaped (public and private) are careful to (a) disperse authority, (b) recognize that there are multiple legitimate and complementary loci of authority, and (c) recognize (explicitly or implicitly) that all authority is ultimately delegated by God.  These (and other) reasons are why Christian cultures are the most tolerant the world has ever seen.

Interesting Take on Churches of Christ by Methodist Professor at SMU

"Why The Churches of Christ Were Right After All" ... It's always interesting to see the familiar through the eyes of a stranger.  Ted Campbell is an Associate Professor of Church History at SMU's Perkins School of Theology.

His blog is subtitled "Renewal in the Methodist and Wesleyan churches"; I suppose it's only natural that any serious student of the Bible associated with any of the various mainline Protestant groups might be prompted to investigate a more fundamentalist perspective on Christianity in light of the chaos (epistemological, theological, etc) that is engulfing some of them.

A more recent post, "Why the Baptists Were Right After All", is also worth reading.

Is the Reality Drought Ending?

It seems like the two major U.S. political parties are in the midst of an existential crisis.  The Republicans can't figure out Moral Reality, the Democrats are struggling with Fiscal Reality, and both are uncertain on Relational Reality (foreign policy).

Moral Reality - after almost five decades of sexual revolution, reality is setting in.  The relational and economic costs of abortion, promiscuity, objectification, perversion, and other flavors of "liberation/choice" are obvious to even the most libertine observer.  But ... if you've rejected God's authority as non-existent or antiquated, then you're left with an appeal to pragmatism ... a very weak defense against the power of sexual desires, which are fundamental in both focus and strength.  It's still unclear whether most Republicans understand that any culture (this is more about identity than laws) that does not set clear limits on sexual conduct cannot long survive.

Fiscal Reality - after eight decades of making promises with other people's money, reality is setting in.  We long ago ran out of our own money, so we started making promises with our children's and grandchildren's money.  That game is over.  We have two choices: (a) follow Europe and increase taxes into the 25%+ GDP range, or (b) admit that we made promises we can't keep and scale back benefits.  The former runs the risk of actually making things worse by making the U.S. even less competitive than it is today, and the latter runs the risk of a violent backlash by several generations of individuals who have lost any idea of how to create wealth (ie, they either work for the government, or take from the government).  It's still unclear whether most Democrats realize that making promises with other people's money is no longer possible, and that they will have to find some other basis for attracting voters.

Bottom line: declining birth rates, chaotic families, and raising taxes / monetizing the debt (ie, inflation) will inevitably reduce national income (and tax revenues).  While there may be temporary methadone-type relief, I'm not sure I see any alternative to some sort of "cold-turkey" withdrawal in the sexual and fiscal arenas.  Whether the patient has the will to survive is unclear.

Here's a few recent articles on these and related topics:

1. "We've Become a Nation of Takers, Not Makers" - Most folks just don't realize (a) how productive we are in manufacturing and farming (ie, how few people it takes to produce good & food), and (b) how unproductive government is.
2. "Where The Tax Money Is" - this helps explain why the leaders of President Obama's bipartisan commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform recently said that we have less than two years to fix our spending problem (ie, before we either default or monetize our debt).
3. "How to Get a Real Education" - a great description of "making something happen" by the creator of Dilbert, Scott Adams
4. "Don't Let Your Babies Grow Up to be Knowledge Workers" - Andrew McAfee of Enterprise 2.0 fame throws cold water on the naive post-WWII notion that anyone who gets an education is set for life.  If you don't realize that you're potentially competing against every smart person who has an Internet connection, then it's time to wake up.