The second sentence of Ch.2 is as accurate a description of our ailing culture as I've found anywhere: "Our own age is one of great philosophical poverty, and as a result, we live in an age of tremendous moral and ethical confusion." We are indeed "dazed and confused," (I never saw the movie), and Kelly outlines the three "practical" philosophies on which he believes we have constructed our modern culture: Individualism, Hedonism, and Minimalism.
There are certainly many other candidates, some of which overlap with these and some we may touch on later in the book. These might include moral relativism, radical secularism, materialism, utilitarianism, and the belief that science is the only real source of truth and knowledge, and faith is somehow in opposition to science and reason.
The problems of Individualism are well outlined. I like his concept of a "false freedom," and that this is an adolescent notion. One thinks especially of the impact of Individualism on marriage and divorce, abortion, and even declining birth and marriage rates in the Western world. I do have one quibble, with his statement that "everything has been done to weaken the rights of the Church, the State and authority of any type." It seems to me that the rights and power of the State have only grown over many decades, with very harmful effects on individual (and religious) rights.
Hedonism no doubt produces a "lazy, lustful, and gluttonous" society. One of the most damaging examples is the growing addiction to Internet pornography. On a less extreme, less hedonistic level, though, are the "thousand different whims, cravings, addictions, and attachments" (Ch.3, p.28 - forgive me, Lindsay) with which we are amusing ourselves to death. The daily bombardment of these "lesser" evils and distractions in our culture is unprecedented in history, and produces a steady drift of our attention and desires away from God.
Kelly's choice of "Minimalism" surprised me a bit. Not that I think it's an inaccurate indictment. I just might have chosen one of the others above. (Having heard him speak on CD and seen his schedule, it may also reflect his impressive energy - and relative youth!). This philosophy of minimalism is all too common in the practice of our Catholic faith.
We liked the frog in the pot of water analogy. I think we can all see the slow but steady erosion of our culture and its standards of morality and behavior in the few decades of our own adult lives.
A final thought (offered while being acutely aware of the large log in my own eye): I think there are very many people in our culture who are not Christian but aren't especially caught up in these three damaging philosphies, yet are ultimately as lost and rudderless as those that are. In general, they lack a basic belief in God, that we are His children and made in His image, and that Truth and meaning in this world come through Him. Specifically, they lack knowledge of or faith in the saving grace of Jesus Christ.
- John Paul
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Lindsay and Theodore, great comments! I suppose the question is: Where can we authentically find and receive God's grace? What is truth?
ReplyDeleteSomehow Lindsay's and Theodore's comments got moved or deleted. Not sure how...please re-post! They were both very good!
ReplyDeleteNever MIND, Luke is an idiot. The two comments referred to above were made in reference to chapter one, and can be found there. DUH!
ReplyDeleteLuke
I wonder if the word "individualism" has different connotations in Australia where Mr Kelley is from. The "ism" he objects to is indeed objectionable (really it's secularism in the example he gives), but it's not individualism:
ReplyDeleteIndividualism is defined as
1) tendency or a person to act without reference to others, particularly in...mode of thought.
2) moral stance, political philosophy, or social outlook that promotes self-reliance of individuals, while opposing the interference of those choices by society or any group or institution.
Kelley is right that in the USA, individualism has been a common philosophy; but as he also condemns minimalism, we see that individualism has actually become less common than it once was. While losing much of our "self"reliance, we have also lost much of our reliance on God, and on the Church. Instead, we rely more and more on the State - whether it's for "charitable offerings"(e.g. entitlements), financial support (e.g. subsidies), health care, etc - as "John Paul" points out above.
Kelley's main point, here, and I agree, is that we are not only individuals, but intrinsically part of a community - an "ekklesia". Trying to seperate people from their community is nonsense. It's also anarchy. (Which as Kelley points out, ends up being the biggest tyrrany of all. See Somalia). Christ is the cornerstone of that ekklesia. The State does nothing to take that away; it only can make us more likely to ignore its reality.
Patrick
WOW! Whoa There …, Leader, Team and Followers!
ReplyDeleteKelly presents the following shock statements:
“Our own age is one of great philosophical poverty, … we live in an age of tremendous moral and ethical confusion.”
“Individualism always weakens the community and causes the whole to suffer.”
“This naked Individualism is only furthered by the present generation’s assertion that pleasure is the supreme good”
“Minimalism has infected every aspect of our lives and society…”
Reading this, my mind drifted into the arena of a good ‘ol Protestant revival setting! Scare ‘em into redemption and salvation!
According to its etymology, the word "philosophy" (philosophia, from philein, to love, and sophia, wisdom) means "the love of wisdom".
Individualism is scarcely a principle, for it exhibits too many degrees, and it is too general to be called a theory, a doctrine or particularly, a philosophy. Perhaps it is better described as a tendency or an attitude of an individual within society – certainly not the society as a whole. To state that Hedonism has seduced and deceived present generations is really reaching down, and can only serve to shock an assuming, gullible audience. To state that most people make their daily decisions driven by these individual attitudes is, at best, misleading and assumptive on the author’s part.
The Church and its believers have real issues to deal with in their daily lives and we need real solutions to these issues.
St. Anthony of Padua
Now here we go! This is good!
ReplyDeleteIf I read this comment correctly Anthony is taking issue with Kelley's rather global assertions regarding people in our culture and the things that motivate them. We all do have a "plank in our eye" and should not rush to judgement. If we look for it we can, in fact, see evidence of good in the world and in our culture. Praise be to God for that!
But we are also far too familiar with the "dark side" of our culture, and the increasing willingness of people in our culture to rely on, as Ryan pointed out, The STATE to deliver what was formerly the responsibility of the CHURCH. Persecution of the Church by the State is becoming more and more evident by the day!
I think Kelly is telling us about these things in these terms, not so much to frighten us with "Hell Fire and Brimstone", but to have us look honestly within and without ourselves to see the forces at play in our world and to help us to move through them in effective Christian Witness, as more lively, charitable and authentic members of our Ekklesia.
Luke
Here is an interesting take on evangelization.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/2010/08/selling-jesus-like-a-chevy
Luke
great discussion...just soaking it in before taking the plunge!
ReplyDeleteWell said, Luke! Thank you!
ReplyDeleteSt. Anthony of Padua
That we live in "an age of tremendous moral and ethical confusion" is only further confirmed today by the absurd justifications given by the California judge in explaining his decision today on the homosexual marriage case. Read it and weep. We may say that as Christians and Catholics we are not so confused as the California judge. But are we able to articulate an appropriate response (to our children, or our gay friends or acquaintances) as to why the judge's decision and reasoning is so faulty? Also in the Chattanooga paper today is an article about another priest in Tennesee who was involved years ago in abusing minors. Further moral confusion. And the fact that we all know the term "cafeteria Catholics" and the very real problems this poses for the Church also illustrates our often shaky philosophical foundations. Regardless of what "-isms" we want to blame, we are in challenging times, both within the culture in general and the Church specifically.
ReplyDeleteI left a link on the prior post on an article that relates to hhpic above--relative to the gay marriage ruling. Might be worth a look.
ReplyDeleteI think individualism is alive and well pretty much as Kelly describes--one other commentator calls it the "Church of Sheila." When asked what she believes, the woman (Sheila) describes a crazy-quilt of vague and untethered beliefs that serve mostly to make her feel good about herself (you often hear this as "I am spiritual, but not religious."). She happens to be out of the Protestant mold, but the Cafeteria Catholic does the same--having a portion of love and reassurance and leaving behind the challenges.
I am reminded of our children's early years in school. Awards ceremonies were replete with awards for everything, meaning that nothing awarded had value. There was such an effort to affirm the kids that the school lost sight of the fact that the kids were there to grow and learn, and that does not come from false self-satisfaction. I got so sick of hearing about self-esteem! I wanted my kids to have self respect--very different. Of note is the fact that career criminals have among the highest measures of self-esteem.
Saints would often score very low on those measures--take St. John Vianney whose feast day was yesterday. He was a marvel--a poor, relatively uneducated country priest in post-Revolution France who ended up with a reputation for holiness so great that he spent as many as 16 hours a day in the confessional, because of the throngs of people who came to see him. He saw himself as terribly flawed and wanted only to be permitted to be a monk and make penances for the rest of his life--something his bishop wisely refused to do.
My point is that saints are more aware of the ways in which they sin, not necessarily less aware or less sinful, even (Augustine was quite a character prior to his conversion). They seek not something that makes them feel good about their sin, but to make their relationship with God right despite it. That means stepping out of themselves to respond to a challenge that is not of their own making, living according to a call and a Truth they do not control.
And sometimes they fall over and over again. St. Camillus the Hospitallier struggled throughout his life with gambling and the poverty it repeatedly reduced him to, but like my friend John Vianney, he was an amazing force. It reminds me of the bumper sticker--Christians are not perfect, just forgiven. I would add: and still working on it all...
Seeing the plank--which society an brand as being neurotic (I can see a modern equivalent of St. John Vianney being hauled off to the shrink's office; and I am quite sure there are many who think that the gay man who wrote the link I posted needs to have therapy so as to come to terms with himself and "embrace" and live out his homosexuality in secular terms) is not easy and perspective is difficult--but done in the right direction with the right heart overall brings great things.
Say what you will, one cannot make an honest attempt to live out the Catholic faith withour being challenged at many, many junctures to rise to a way of living that is neither familiar nor initially comfortable--one that is communal and not individual by its very nature. And it always demands that we ask not "what's in it for me?" but "how am I called to serve?" I think it is in that context that we do find real answers to our real problems, though often neither the ones we want nor the ones we expect.
Martha