In Search of the Common Good - A Review

At the end of Ecclesiastes, Qoheleth warns his audience, “Of making many books there is no end, and much study is a weariness of the flesh.”

This was, of course, a favorite quip among seminarians who both loved the quest for knowledge and, at the same time, found it wearying.

In that vein, I did not read Jake Meador’s book, In Search of the Common Good, for more than a year after I received it. There are a number of books on my shelf that address similar issues. As the subtitle indicates, Meador is trying to help his readers understand what it means to be a faithful Christian in a fractured world.

Though there are myriad of books that are promoting faithful Christianity in our modern world, Meador’s book is a welcome addition. Not only is it a good addition to my library and a useful tool for my own research, but it would be a good place for many people to start in on the conversation.

The book begins by considering the problem, at least in the US: We have too little community and too little sense of shared experience with each other. This is a common theme that is recognized by Rod Dreher, Wendell Berry, Ben Sasse, Arthur Brooks and many more. Our lack of a sense of belonging to a community or a place helps explain a great deal of the dis-ease of our time. Among the problems that community could help solve and that are now overwhelming what remains of community are a loss of meaning, a loss of wonder, and a loss of good work. It is entirely possible to disagree with some of the particulars in Meador’s argument here, but there is substantive force even if one does not agree fully. We have lost our way.

As a result, Meador calls readers back to what he calls the practice of community through a vision of the Sabbath and fulfillment in worship of the creator, participation in a community with works, and a thoughtful return to meaningful work. The book concludes by discussing civic virtues and by pointing toward our final hope in heaven. Both are important parts of faithful living.

Meador writes well and uses thoughtful illustrations, which makes this a pleasure to read even for those that have covered the ground extensively before. For those that are new to the discussion, In Search of the Common Good, may well raise a sense of longing for something that is missing from so many of our lives and which the church ought to be able to provide. Meador gives a reminder that the common good is not something that we snatch from the center and devour in our own home. Rather, it is like a symphony that is only enjoyable when all the instruments lend their voices together to make the whelming wave of music.

This is a good book that would be worth examining with a group of friends, a small group at church, or a series of neighbors. All the answers are not contained within the pages of this relatively short volume, but there are some practical examples along side the theoretical discussion. Most significantly, no careful reader will walk away from this without a deeper sense that there is a vision here that, if made real, would be lovely to be a part of. This is the sort of volume that makes the reader long for something good, wholesome and true.

In Search of the Common Good: Christian Fidelity in a Fractured World

By Meador, Jake

Buy on Amazon

NOTE: I received a gratis copy of this volume with no expectation of a positive review.

Prudence and Grace in the Face of Pandemic

And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. (Heb 10:25)

As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions. . . .  Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.  One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind (Rom 14:1, 3-5)

Fears about COVID-19 are spreading, which is leading organizations around the globe to make difficult decisions about the common good, economic needs, and individual well-being. Christians, too, must wrestle with these basic, but difficult questions.

For example, in light of a virus that is spread largely through human-to-human contact, should we meet together on Sunday to shake hands, pass the offering plate, and share the Lord’s Supper as we gather in our classrooms and sanctuaries?

Beware those for whom the answer to this question seems obvious. On the one hand, we should avoid glib over-confidence as if there is nothing to be concerned about. On the other hand, we should not too quickly abandon meeting together to renew one another in the love of Christ. Different concerns will play into decisions about whether to gather or not, and we should be careful not to judge those too harshly that disagree with us.

To Gather

My own bias is to continue to meet with any others that are willing to come out. I do not want to forsake gathering with my brothers and sisters in Christ. I would prefer to continue to spend time with my church family, as long as we take reasonable precautions.

Among those precautions are encouraging others who are not well to stay at home, washing hands carefully and frequently, and minimizing close, personal contact to a reasonable degree. There are simple measures to take to change the way the offering is collected and to change the delivery of the Lord’s Supper that can make continued gathering safe and encouraging.

Recognize that in this decision, I am middle aged with younger children that are not as significantly affected by the disease. We also homeschool, which minimizes the danger that we pose to others, though my job puts me in contact with a range of people during the day.

Not to Gather

At the same time, there are some for whom getting COVID-19 is a factual, significant risk. It is entirely reasonable for those with compromised immune systems to remain home, especially since there is a fairly lengthy period of contagiousness while someone with the virus is asymptomatic.

Additionally, there are those for whom sickness would be a greater economic burden due to lack of paid time off. It may be wiser for someone with a greater risk exposure to listen online.

And there may be some people for whom the fear of the virus is so great that it makes being in a space like a local church a source of great stress. It should not be a misery to attend church. If someone is really that fearful, then they should stay at home.

Prudence and Grace

In this time when there is a great deal at stake and a great deal of confusion, the best policy is to begin by being prudent and gracious.

People who are not well should be encouraged to remain at home. Those with compromised immune systems should listen online. Church leaders should evaluate practices to minimize close contact and limit the risk of spread. These are all prudential measures. It may be necessary for a church to “meet online” for a couple of weeks if the area is experiencing a high level of infection.

This requires those who continue to gather to be gracious. Cancelling services due to an abundance of caution is not a failure to love Jesus; it is an attempt to love neighbors faithfully. We may not agree, but each should be convinced in his or her own conscience. Not cancelling services is not necessarily a sign that a congregation doesn’t love their neighbor; it is merely a way of recognizing the importance of corporate worship and the encouragement it offers.

In the end, this virus will pass like an inconvenient blip in the memory of most of us. But we must remember that some people are not going to make it through it. There is no reason to take undue risks to keep average attendance at a certain level. Grace and prudence are in order.

Obedience to Authority

In some cases, the government may recommend or, perhaps, require cancellation of services. This, again, is a matter of conscience. I believe that a temporary cessation of services would be wise in the face of a government order, because the intention is to preserve life and minimize spread. We should not feel obligated to meet simply to spite the government.

Romans 13:1 urges us, “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.”

There are certainly limits to this, but it is unclear to me that it is absolutely necessary to resist a temporary order not to meet. In the face of real risk, and not simply religious persecution, I see a temporary cessation of in-person meetings as a reasonable accommodation, although I do not like it.

In the end prudence and grace must be measured out in equal shares again.

Conclusion

There is no simple answer to the question of what to do in light of COVID-19.

However, whatever we do should be done for God’s glory and with the love of our neighbor in mind. We should be careful not to bind each other’s consciences or see ourselves as better than others for our decision to gather or not.

Ultimately, God will judge our deeds and our motives. We should be thankful for his mercy.

Them - A Review

Every generation has its share of people lamenting the loss of the good old days. Products were better before. Bread was only 5 cents a loaf. The cent symbol was still on a standard keyboard. People used two spaces after periods.

But at the same time, we are told that history is also fairly consistent and people are generally just people. In a recent Smithsonian Magazine article, the author claims that the ongoing Fortnite craze and the concerns of parents about their children’s excesses are no different than concerns about Pinball back in the early days. These are just fads. People that are concerned about the new thing are just clutching at pearls, and so the world spins on.

What if there really are some seismic shifts going on though? What if something is changing our culture and altering the way people view each other? And, what if some of those changes aren’t making things better?

Ben Sasse’s recent book, Them: Why We Hate Each Other and How to Heal, asks some of these basic questions about the increasingly divided America. He’s not arguing that America was once great and needs to be made so again. In fact, throughout he notes many of the ways that America has failed to live up to her founding ideals. But without wishing for the restoration of a mythical past, Sasse does note that there have been fundamental changes in what it means—especially in the ideal sense—to be American.

According to Sasse, who is now a politician, the solution is not political. No election or new law will fix what is ailing the United States. Instead, the solution is found primarily through a restoration of a sense of community.

If we can trust surveys, we know that people are lonelier now than they were previously. Multiple studies, some of which Sasse cites, correlate the loneliness to the rise of social media and even more significantly, the spread of smart phones. These devices that are supposed to keep us connected all the time seem to be making us less content and desperately disconnected. Add to that the shifts in work, not least of which is the increase of automation, which is replacing a lot of low skill labor, and you have a recipe for dislocation, disorientation, and breakdowns in communities. Sasse describes all of this as a break down in tribes.

Political anti-tribes are rising up to replace the geographic and more heterogenous (at least ideologically) tribes of the past, and they are being fertilized by the merging of politics and entertainment. This is the world that Neal Postman predicted in Amusing Ourselves to Death. But the perpetual IV drip of outrage and often misrepresentation is taking a toll on people’s ability to see others with different views as human. Sasse spends a chapter outlining many of the techniques that news organizations and pundits use to create and spread clickbait, fanning a tiny sliver of devoted followers into an addicted frenzy. His argument is both well-supported and frightening.

It’s no surprise, given Ben Sasse’s attitude toward Tocqueville and ideals that the country was supposed to represent, that he points toward building community and regaining a sense of place as solutions to the virulent divisions of our times. He urges readers to remember what the ideas of our liberal democracy were supposed to fulfill: free debate, opportunity, and a sense of the common good. There have certainly been gains in racial equality and equity between genders, but those gains should not require us to remember what it is supposed to mean to be American and teach our kids why that is important. Part of what will enable us to do that practically is limiting our tech exposure. Get off the continue flood of social media and enjoy the people you are around. Don’t click on clickbait headlines and read books, not just short articles. He commends building into communities and buying a cemetery plot. Find someplace to put down roots if possible. And, since many of have to move for one reason or another, look for ways to connect wherever you guy, find communities that you can become part of, and maintain permanent friendships through regular gatherings.

There is no panacea for the widening schism between our anti-tribes, but there are steps that we can take to begin to mend the rift. There are ways that we can begin to regain a sense of common ground, to build toward a common vision, and to seek the welfare of the city even when we disagree with many of the residents.

Sasse’s book is part of a bigger conversation that is happening and needs to happen. His analysis is solid and he makes a number of important points. As a Christian, he could have spent more time talking about the value of local congregations and the importance of the church being a family. However, all in all, this is an enjoyable volume that would make a good place to begin a discussion, especially between people of different ideological persuasions.

Them: Why We Hate Each Other--and How to Heal

By Ben Sasse

Buy on Amazon

Economics of Neighborly Love - A Review

Our economic activity, when done properly, is primarily about loving our neighbors. Neighbor love is not merely a description of so-called spiritual activities, like those done under the umbrella of a local church. Rather, neighbor love should shape everything we do in the home, in the marketplace, and in our neighborhoods.

In a helpful, recent book, Tom Nelson helps bring theology and economics together in a way the average Christian can understand it. His volume, The Economics of Neighborly Love: Investing in Your Community’s Compassion and Capacity, weaves together many of the themes in the Faith and Work movement in a single, digestible bundle.

Nelson’s basic assumption is that we live in a fundamentally economic world. His is not, however, an attempt to reduce humans to homo economicus. Instead, he argues for understanding humans to have the imago Dei, which leads to a demand to live compassionately among others. His basic argument in the entire book is that the best workers make the best neighbors, as long as they are working for reasons that matter.

Humans are made to flourish. Part of that flourishing is having our material needs met. Another component of flourishing is pursuing a purpose higher than ourselves. Work is a primary means by which humans flourish.

One sign of flourishing (though not the only or even best sign) is material wealth. Such wealth is a resource to be stewarded for the glory of God and the good of neighbors. It is neither the reward for holiness as the prosperity gospel argues, nor is it intrinsically evil. It is a simply one way that God provides for humans to be fruitful.

Lest Nelson be guilty of reducing flourishing to the accrual of wealth, he quickly explains that intimacy with other people, godly character, and productively contributing to the world around are vital ways that humans are fruitful. Being fruitful and productive are ways that we love the world around us by making this world a better place.

All of the productivity in the world does not do any good, however, unless it is directed toward our neighbors. Nelson explains a vision, consistent with Scripture, of how godly people can engage in a relatively free market for the glory of God.

One way humans engage wisely in economic activity is to be generous, using our wealth to provide the means for the church to do good works in the name of Christ. Another way is to actively pursue the good of the materially poor around us. In the process of helping the poor, however, a biblically shaped worldview recognizes there are forms of poverty that no amount of material support will resolve. People are desperately need of the gospel, so we are called to demonstrate it through our actions and verbalize it through our language.

As part of our economic activity, Nelson also urges Christians to fight economic injustice, to show grace to the communities around us. Most of all, people simply need to get moving. It is altogether too easy to stay cooped up in our homes, never meeting our neighbors, and thus never learning how best to meet their needs. By making personal connections and seeking the common good in all of our economic activities—not just the ones where we spend and earn—Christians can demonstrate what hope looks like to the world.

The Economics of Neighborly Love is the sort of volume that makes a great introduction to a biblical view on faith, work, and economics. Nelson shows how the ordinary lives of ordinary Christians can be leveraged to make this world a better place for the love of God and the good of our neighbors. He presents a practical vision for Christians to be salt and light in the world.

Perhaps the most important takeaway from this volume is that there is a way for Christians to show neighborly love not despite our economic system, but because of our economic system. Though Nelson recognizes that sometimes sinful people oppress others in a free market economy, he also recognizes that freedom is an important part of allowing people to fulfill their potential as beings imbued with the image of God. The freedom within the market system helps make financial prosperity accessible to many more people, which helps provide the resources for many forms of productive engagement with society.

Nelson’s book, however, will fall short of its final purpose if it fails to encourage Christians to live their lives for the good of the world around them. This is a book that deserves to be read, discussed, and shared widely as the body of Christ seeks to fulfill the greatest commandment by living out the second greatest commandment in a world of people who desperately need to be loved. The Economics of Neighborly Love is a volume that needs to be applied wholeheartedly, too.

The Economics of Neighborly Love: Investing in Your Community's Compassion and Capacity

By Tom Nelson

Buy on Amazon

Note: I received a gratis copy of this book from the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

Empirical Foundations of the Common Good - A Review

Empirical Foundations of the Common Good is the sort of project that offers hope for interdisciplinary dialogue. The premise of the book is to provide a response to the basic question how social sciences can inform theology. For the most part, the essays are helpful in this regard, especially for those who rely on traditional Catholic Social Teachings as a foundation for their theology.

With a few exceptions, the non-theologians’ explanations of their contribution to theology are helpful. The majority of the authors avoided the assumption that theology should conform to the findings of their discipline; instead they argued that their disciplines could inform the application of theology.

For example, Christian theology makes the moral claim that Christians should be engaged in seeking the welfare of the poor. Economics provides evidence for how best that should take place. Or, to state it differently, theology provides the telos for the method of economics. When political science, public policy, sociology, and economics claim to provide both the definition of the common good and the method for attaining to the common good, they transgress into the area of applied theology, or ethics. When discipline failure like that happen, the result is the current elevation of politics, economics, and sexuality to the status of summum bonum for society. That, as we see around us, is a guarantee of the pursuit of anything but a true common good.

After Daniel Finn’s editorial introduction, the volume contains eight essays by experts in a variety of disciplines, all making arguments about how their particular discipline contributes to theological arguments about the common good. Chapter One is political scientist, Matthew Carnes, showing how his discipline contributes to a cross-disciplinary discussion through four emphases within Political Science. In the second chapter, Andrew Yuengert asserts that economics can help theologians understand the role of individual choice in seeking the common good. Mary Jo Bane, a public policy specialist, argues in Chapter Three for the contribution of her discipline in helping theologians understand trade-offs implicit in pursuing the common good. In the fourth chapter, Douglas Porpora argues that sociologists have little to say about the constitution of the common good, but have a great deal of expertise in showing how to measure and evaluate the pursuit of those theologically identified ends.

Charles Wilber, an economist, echoes Porpora in his essay in Chapter Five. He argues that economics can help measure progress toward human flourishing, while acknowledging the failure of most economists to separate economic metrics from a holistic understanding of the common good. The sixth chapter puts bureaucracy in perspective, as Gerardo Sanchis Muños dissects the failure of public service to serve the common good. Theologian David Cloutier critiques contemporary iterations of Catholic social teaching, pointing to less individualistic emphases in earlier stages of the tradition in Chapter Seven. The eighth and final chapter, theologian-economist Mary Hirschfeld reasserts the importance of theology for the social sciences, so that a proper understanding of the common good may develop.

The clear message of this volume is that theology needs social sciences to understand how to accomplish its moral ends, while the social sciences need theology to inform them of the nature of the common good. In the present fragmented state of academia, there is too much isolation in separate ivory towers. That is unhealthy for students and tragic for the development of robust worldviews that have a defined end and cogent methodology.

Somewhat surprisingly, this volume is favorable toward markets, though critical of market economics untethered to a moral foundation. However, the various authors regularly affirm the improved possibilities for flourishing that come from enabling market economics. Given the use of Catholic Social Teaching by some to argue for forms of economic socialism, this is volume that deserves careful attention. It may be that proponents of various forms of socialism are, in fact, conflating a pursuit of the common good with discredited means to achieve it.

Like other volumes that Finn has edited, this collection of essays reflects careful conversation. The essays refer to one another and show signs of having been shaped by the arguments in various chapters. This makes the volume easier to read and more helpful for classroom instruction or dialog than many edited volumes that appear to be a random collection of voices shouting in the wilderness.

If there are two things clearly explained in this volume it is (1) that we need more interdisciplinary dialogue, else theology and social sciences tend toward tyranny, and (2) we need not abandon the methodology of market economics for central planning to better approximate the common good.

Empirical Foundations of the Common Good: What Theology Can Learn from Social Science

$85.17

Oxford University Press

Buy on Amazon

Note: I received a gratis copy of this volume from the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.