Some Weber

“The Puritan wanted to work in a calling: we are forced to do so [...] In Baxter’s view the care for external goods should only lie on the shoulders of the ’saint like a cloak, which can be thrown aside at any moment’. But fate decreed that the cloak should become an iron cage [...] Today the spirit of religious asceticism – whether finally, who knows? – has escaped from the the cage. But victorious capitalism, since it rests on mechanical foundations, needs its support no longer [...] In the field of its highest development, in the United States, the pursuit of wealth, stripped of its religious and ethical meaning, tends to become associated with purely mundane passions, which often actually gives it the character of sport. Of the last stage of this cultural development, it might well be truly said: ‘Specialists without spirit, sensualists without heart; this nullity imagines that it has attained a level of civilisation never before achieved’”

(The Protestant Ethic & The Spirit of Capitalism, p.123-4).

SOME COMMENTARY: Max Weber is obviously most well known for the connection he drew between the ‘Protestant Work Ethic’ (notions of vocation, calling etc.; privileging of the active life over the contemplative life; rejection of monasticism) and the ‘Spirit of Capitalism’ (utility; profit as an end in itself). I’ve been reading for review a book by a guy called John Hughes, and he points out that Weber’s account of the connection between these two was not as simplistic or (apparently) reductionist as it is sometimes portrayed. It seems that Weber was at least partially aware of the effect of secularization on the ‘Spirit of Capitalism’. Protestantism may have played a crucial role in the birth of the capitalist spirit, but modern capitalism has ruthlessly thrown off its religious heritage. Even in the worst, most Puritan context, the Protestant work ethic was tempered by a concern for the spiritual. Unhooked from this spiritual dimension via secularization, however, we have slowly emerged into the vulgar, suffocating ‘iron cage’ of the modern capitalist society.

On a related note, the ongoing collusion of the Religious Right with today’s vulgar (stultifying, dehumanizing, profiteering, exploitative) mode of free-market, secular capitalism remains a complete and utter mystery to me, and ridiculously (insanely, absurdly, farcically, disturbingly) hypocritical given all their high-handed and somewhat obsessive moral rhetoric in other areas. I’m of course aware that this is not a new insight.

The Poet Laureate vs. Politics (with a hint of Augustine)

Carol Ann Duffy, the new Poet Laureate, has chosen for her first royal composition to attack politics. The 14 line poem positively spits with disgust at the corrosive effect the political machine apparently has on individual politicians, making “of your face a stone… of your heart a fist”. It is a chaotic rant capturing very well the prevailing sense of public anger at the political system in the wake of the expenses scandal. Towards the end she invokes the Blarite mantra “education, education, education” and Gordon Brown’s “moral compass” with utter disdain. “The poem’s technique is that of someone almost speechless with rage – a great tumbling catalogue. No time for structure”, says John Sutherland, a professor at University College, London. The poem, entitled just Politics and published in The Guardian, suggests Duffy won’t be afraid to tackle the high profile topics during her 10 year tenure as Poet Laureate. Here’s it is:

How it makes of your face a stone

that aches to weep, of your heart a fist,

clenched or thumping, sweating blood, of your tongue

an iron latch with no door. How it makes of your right hand

a gauntlet, a glove-puppet of the left, of your laugh

a dry leaf blowing in the wind, of your desert island discs

hiss hiss hiss, makes of the words on your lips dice

that can throw no six. How it takes the breath

away, the piss, makes of your kiss a dropped pound coin,

makes of your promises latin, gibberish, feedback, static,

of your hair a wig, of your gait a plankwalk. How it says this –

politics – to your education education education; shouts this –

Politics! – to your health and wealth; how it roars, to your

conscience moral compass truth, POLITICS POLITICS POLITICS.

For me, the poem articulates the lingering suspicion, I think widely held, that even the most idealistic and hopeful of young visionaries, once they enter the murky waters of party politics, will inevitably become tainted and corrupted. That’s not a very optimistic picture, but I think it encapsulates the cynicism held by many of my generation especially, when it comes to such matters. The apathetic attitude to, and disengagement from, the political by many in British society are just symptoms of this deeper cynicism, which recent events will only ingrain further. In fact, perhaps there is a little Augustinianism in Duffy’s poem, which echoes his deep scepticism in the politics of the earthly city as essentially destructive and divisive; always bound to fall short of expectations, because of wrongly ordered and wrongly directed loves. A dose of this kind of realism can never be a bad thing, though neither should it necessitate a complete withdrawal from the political; indeed, from a Christian perspective it makes even more necessary our participation in earthly politics, as faithful advocates of the Good who are nevertheless free from bondage to this city and this system, because citizens of a different (heavenly) city founded on a different love.

There is a discussion of the poem here, at the Guardian, and here, at the BBC.

Wilfred Owen

The Guardian’s ”Poem of the Week” is Wilfred Owen’s famous The Parable Of The Old Man & The Young, in which he recounts the biblical story of Abraham almost sacrificing his son Isaac, retelling it through the lens of the First World War. It’s a classic, so I thought I’d stick it up here. The original article is pretty interesting from a literary perspective as well. It would be interesting at some point to take a look at all the different (less orthodox) uses of the Abraham / Isaac story. The treatments given by Kierkegaard and Derrida both spring to mind, in addition to this one by Owen. Anyway, here it is:

The Parable of the Old Man and the Young

So Abram rose, and clave the wood, and went,
And took the fire with him, and a knife.
And as they sojourned both of them together,
Isaac the first-born spake and said, My Father,
Behold the preparations, fire and iron,
But where the lamb for this burnt offering?
Then Abram bound the youth with belts and straps,
And builded parapets and trenches there,
And stretched forth the knife to slay his son.
When lo! an angel called him out of heaven,
Saying, Lay not thy hand upon the lad,
Neither do anything to him. Behold,
A ram, caught in the thicket by its horns;
Offer the Ram of Pride instead of him.

But the old man would not so, but slew his son,
And half the seed of Europe, one by one.

Ladies Football

From the International Design Festival, Berlin

“Made in Scotland, From Girders”

…is a famous advertising slogan used in the 70s for Irn Bru, the Scottish soft drink that tastes a bit like, well, iron girders. I read a fascinating article today though which tickled my nostalgia for a romantic past before digitalisation and automation. It turns out the recipe for Irn Bru is only known by 2 people in the entire world (and for that reason they never fly together on the same plane). One of those people is company chairman Robin Barr whose great grandfather came up with the Irn Bru recipe in 1901. It has not changed in 108 years, and Robin Barr still every month enters a sealed room at the company’s HQ in Scotland where he combines the 32 different ingredients making up the drink, mixing them in a huge vat containing enough mixture for 8000 litres of the stuff. Robin Barr is soon to stand down as chairman of A.G. Barr, the company which makes Irn Bru, but he will continue for the time being to come in monthly to mix the drink. Eventually, he admits, he will pass the recipe on to his daughter, who will then take over mixing duties. What a brilliant, romantic way of running a business.

It’s made me thirsty… thirsty for a drink made from girders!

P.S. For anyone worried that both people who know the Irn Bru recipe might die from swine flu, taking the recipe with them, they needn’t fear, as it is also stored on paper in a secret, secure bank vault somewhere in Scotland.

Who’d be a Politician?

Take a long hard look at this picture:

These are four MPs instigated in the latest ‘expenses’ scandal, having supposedly exploited the system for their own benefit (read HERE). Now, I’m pretty sceptical about the moral integrity of our politicians, mostly because their lives are so rigourously divided between what’s ‘public’ and what’s ‘private’ – the point being that when acting publicly they are supposed to uphold strong moral standards, but what they do in private is ‘their own business’. This is obviously absolute stupidity, as moral character, like religious faith, is either all or nothing – it is who you are, not what you do. The idea that you can turn ‘on’ moral standards when acting publicly, if you don’t have them privately, is so ridiculous as to border on lunacy.

Nonetheless, I want to open up another front of attack on our beloved politicians. Looking at the picture above, who the heck would want to become an MP if you end up looking like one of them? You can positively see the slime dripping off them. The word ’smarmy’ doesn’t quite do it justice.

New Post at D&L

I have a new post up at the Dust & Light blog for anyone interested, entitled “Totalised Speech & Two Poverties”. It critiques the nature of speech and public discourse in society, using Oliver O’Donovan as a springboard. <CLICK HERE>

A Reading Binge

I have been on something of a reading binge for the last few weeks in the run up to two essays I have due in May. For the first time in my life I’ve actually got into a reading routine (which has a lot to do with the fact I am otherwise unoccupied throughout the day, as I continue to look for a job that fits round my studies in this stupid recession). Nevertheless, here is the fruit of my labours, both completed and ongoing, and some I will be starting imminently:

Books Completed:

Ivan Illich - Tools For Conviviality. A staple of Illich’s corpus which extends the thesis he set out in Deschooling Society, that the institutionalization of the West – in terms of education, healthcare, transport, technology etc. – has done far more damage than good, acting as dehumanizing forces which make us slaves to the very things that were supposed to help us. Illich was something of a phenomenon in the 70s, but his work was rather neglected from the mid-80s on. However, the theological foundations of his work – the argument that modern society is essentially a corruption of Christianity – has recently been retrieved by Charles Taylor.

John Ruskin – Unto This Last. A scathing critique of the political economy of 19th Century Victorian society from what might be called a ‘theo-aesthetic’ and romantic perspective. Ruskin has been of interest lately to the likes of John Milbank and Jamie Smith, and has been cited as inspiration for the (related) political sensibility known as ‘Red Toryism’, with which Philip Blond is identified. I found Ruskin had much to say to our current economic situation, even though he was addressing a social context quite different (in some ways, not others) from our own.

Stanley Hauerwas – With The Grain of the Universe. This comprises Hauerwas’ Gifford Lectures, and is a pretty standard Hauerwasian text. He argues natural theology can only distort God’s character if it is divorced from a full doctrine of God and the cross. He examines the theologies of William James, Reinhold Niebuhr and Karl Barth, showing in very articulate fashion how the latter offers a necessary corrective to the liberalism evident in James and latent in Niebuhr. He makes his usual points about the difference of the church and the distinctiveness of its politics, and the important of this for Christian witness. It’s a good and easy read, written in Hauerwas’ usual conversational style.

Stanley Hauerwas – The Peacable Kingdom: A Primer on Christian Ethics. This is another staple Hauerwas text in which he outlines the meat of his ethical argument in systematic fashion. This seems like a very good place to start for anyone who wants to get to know Hauerwas’ work. And again, very easy to read. And the cover art has some very handsome animals on it.

David Fergusson – Community, Liberalism & Christian Ethics. A survey of the liberal vs. communitarian debate, looking also at the ethical critiques of liberalism offered by Stanley Hauerwas and Alisdair Macintyre. Fergusson attempts to come up with a less radical, more pragmatic proposal for Christian engagement in contemporary political and ethical discourse. He is sympathetic to the critiques of Hauerwas and Macintyre, but doesn’t like where their proposals finally take him. Instead, he wants to find greater common ground with liberal discourse, and sees this as emerging from a shared commitment to human rights theory. Fergusson is trying to be constructive and offer a more balanced account than Macintyre etc., and while his task is taken up valiantly, in the end I was left a tad unconvinced as to whether his proposal was all that coherent.

Oliver O’Donovan – The Desire of the Nations: Rediscovering the Roots of Political Theology. O’Donovan seeks to re-envision political theology by examining its roots in the whole biblical tradition, taking up the concepts of the authority of God and Jesus’ Lordship in particular. Interestingly, this book is basically a defence of Christendom – or at least presents a case for a more sympathetic and nuanced reading of the Christendom idea than is usually given. O’Donovan doesn’t explicitly advocate a return to Christendom today, but does want us to learn from its successes as well as its failures, and to remain open to that kind of idea in the future. I found this book a great remedy to the kind of reductionist historical snobbery, found in many enclaves of the Christian community, which effectively dismisses everything from around the 4th to the 18th Century as a great ‘Constantinian’ error on the part of the church. While I don’t agree with all O’Donovan says, the book is a real eye-opener in places, as well as being very clearly and well-written. His ultimate proposal actually seems very useful for today, particularly his critique of the dangers of ‘civil religion’. I found it to be a very good book indeed.

Bruce Ellis Benson & Peter Goodwin-Heitzel (Eds) – Evangelicals and Empire: Christian Alternatives to the Political Status Quo. I had to write a review of this for the Heythrop Journal, which will appear there at some point. This is basically a collection of 21 essays written to discuss (alternative) evangelical participation in the political, economic and social spheres. It mostly explores opportunities for an evangelical critique of empire – both ‘American Empire’, and the ‘empire’ of global capitalism. Regarding this latter, a sustained engagement with the work of Marxist theorists Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, who have written extensively on empire, is a major theme of the book. The book’s OK; some of the essays are good, some are rubbish.

Nathan Kerr – Christ, History & Apocalyptic: The Politics of Christian Mission. I read this over the last two days, also for a review for the Heythrop Journal. This is a dense read, but with a clear thesis. Kerr is doing a number of things, which include making a case for an understanding of the church as mission (as a ’sent people’), and for an apocalyptic understanding of history as grounded in the irruption of the Kingdom in the ’singular historicity’ of Jesus concrete life. He is trying to get over modern universalist historicism and a latent Hegelian idealism in recent theology. He traces a genealogy through Troeltsch, Barth and Hauerwas (of which he offers a rather surprising critique – that he is too Constantinian), and finally to Yoder, who is the key to Kerr’s argument. This seems like it could be a very significant thesis that Kerr is advancing, but time will tell. I haven’t made up my mind about it yet and I’ve delayed writing the review; I was initially drawn to his argument as I began the book, but had some reservations by the end. Hmm…

Books Ongoing

Ivan Illich & David Cayley – The Rivers North of the Future: The Testament of Ivan Illich. This was published posthumously and is the only account of Illich’s theological critique of modernity as a corruption of Christianity.

John Howard Yoder – The Priestly Kingdom. Only read the chapter on Christianity and Democracy, but that was interesting enough.

William T. Cavanaugh – Torture and Eucharist. Cavanaugh argues that the alternative to the State’s use of torture is the Christian celebration of the Eucharist. The modern state has gained a monopoly over ‘bodies’, with the church settling for the care of ’souls’. Cavanaugh argues for a recovery of a properly political account of the church, that takes back the care of both body and soul. The foundation for this is the church’s Eucharistic practice.

John Milbank – Theology & Social Theory. Been on this for ages. It’s like wading through treacle in flippers; slow-going to say the least. Will take me several years at this rate.

Milbank, Ward and Pickstock (eds) - Radical Orthodoxy: A New Theology. The foundational essay collection of the RO series. I’ve got through about half of it.

William Morris - Political Writings. A set of the 19th Century aesthete’s lectures and essays, that I’m dipping in and out of. Very, very similar to Ruskin in sensibility (obviously).

Graham Ward – Cities of God. Have been dipping in and out of this. Mostly looking at the sections on desire and the church as an erotic community.

G.K. Chesterton – Orthodoxy. I’ve been working on this for several months now, because I want to savour it, like a fine glass of scotch.

Stanley Hauerwas – A Better Hope. A collection of essays on democracy, capitalism and postmodernity. Again, dipping in and out of this.

Books Imminent:

Richard Horsley (ed) – In The Shadow of Empire: Reclaiming the Bible as a History of Faithful Resistance. This is for a book review.

John Hughes – The End of Work: Theological Critiques of Capitalism. So is this.

Jeffrey Stout – Democracy and Tradition. I am told this is an important book. It will be delivered this week.

Kristin Deede-Johnson – Theology, Political Theory & Pluralism: Beyond Tolerance & Difference. I’m getting this out of the library this week, and it will be a speed-read job.

The Return of Theology – Times article

Just came across this excellent article over at The Times on the return of theology to academia and the public sphere, focussing on Radical Orthodoxy and featuring an interview with John Milbank - <CLICK HERE>

Speed, Noise and the Asceticism of Ivan Illich

Modern life for those of us in the West is lived at breathtaking speed, a speed which would have made little sense in previous epochs, and which still makes little sense to many other cultures around the world. Time is money, and as such Western society seeks to eradicate those portions of time which are not spent productively. Our society is built upon what Charles Taylor has called a principle of ’simultaneity’; society runs like a vast, time-tabled machine of extreme temporal and spatial co-ordination, where many different things (e.g. the turning on of streets lights, opening of shops, collection and delivery of post etc.), must happen simultaneously in many different places for society to function. The speed at which all this takes place has been and will continue to accelerate until we can squeeze the very most out of our 24 hour days. As a result of this, our lives are also lived amidst tremendous noise. As the speed of life increases – as more and more things happen, simultaneously, at faster and faster rates, in more and more places – the background noise which accompanies our lives rises to a deafening clamour. It is hard for us to conceive of life separate from the incessant speed and unyielding noise of modern life.

Ivan Illich, the Catholic social theorist and theologian, was a fierce critic of developments such as these. His work suggests that they are symptoms of the way in which we have become subject to the very tools, processes and institutions which were intended to serve us. For example,

“It has taken a century to pass from an era served by motorised vehicles to the era in which society has been reduced to virtual enslavement to the car.“

_{[Tools for Conviviality, 1973, p.7]}

Our tools and institutions have caused us to become domesticated. From school onwards, our society breeds individuals intended to fit like a cog into the clamourous mega-machine of modern society. And for most of us, we cannot even envision anything different. For Illich, we have been dehumanised, and the only way to rediscover what has been lost is through a process of selective asceticism and renunciation. Asceticism is something of a dirty word these days, but Illich did not mean it in the sense of the needless renunciation of good things (such as sex, certain foods and drinks etc.), of which Nietzsche (and Paul) were critical. Rather, he advocates an asceticism which does precisely the opposite, and enables us to experience and appreciate the good things more fully:

“We have to engage in the asceticism which makes it possible to savour now-ness and here-ness – here is a place, here is that which is between us, as the Kingdom is – in order to be able to save what remains in us of a sense of meaning, of metaphor, of flesh, of touch, of gaze.“

_{[1986 interview - to get the full weight listen HERE]}

Our modern way of living has caged us in a world of breathtaking speed and deafening noise. For Illich, in order to live with hope, meaning and depth in our age, we need to make certain renunciations. Renunciations which enable us to withdraw from the speed and noise and clamour of our modern lives to a place of solitude and quietness, within which the voice of God can be heard (and the voices of our neighbours and friends), and within which the beauty and goodness of life can be properly savoured and reflected upon – and lived.

Ivan Illich was a remarkable man who, though a high-profile academic, sought a simpler existence. He was a traveller who, in an era of jet-age transportation, preferred the measured speed and humbler energy efficiency of the bicycle. He never wore a watch, believing it needlessly forced an artificial structure on life. And towards the end of his life, he sought more traditional treatments for a serious facial tumour, so as not to become a cog in the medical machine. These kinds of renunciation may not be for everyone, but for those of us who sense that the modern ‘rat-race’ drains and degrades life, Illich offers a different way. I get the sense that there is a profound wisdom to Illich’s asceticism, that deliberate and occasional acts of renunciation can give us the space to rediscover and reflect on the ordinary goodness and beauty of life. 

Amidst the speed and the noise of modern life, in order to have hope, perhaps what we need is stillness, simplicity and silence.

______________________

_{[Before reading Illich, I seem to have been echoing these sentiments in} this post _{on the value of Evensong.]}