HerbEly

Do We Have to Make a 180 Degree Turn?

    Our scripture readings for the 13th Sunday in Ordinary Time deliver a challenging message, one which challenges and fascinates. It is also one from which most of us would like to escape. Elisha (1 Kings 19:16-21)  gave up his career as a farmer, killed his oxen and used is plow as fuel to boil the oxen and gave the food to his people to eat. Then he followed Elijah. If that were not enough of a challenge we read in Luke 9:51-62 that no one who sets out on the journey and then looks back is fit for the kingdom of God.

    While I admire the dramatic sacrifice, I find myself hoping that a similar action will not be required of me. Being willing to go to any lengths is fine. I may need to give up my old ideas in favor of better ones - but do I have to? Maybe the First Principle and Foundation  in St. Ignatius of Loyola's Spiritual Exercises will offer an escape hatch:

The First Principle and Foundation
(St. Ignatius of Loyola, as paraphrased by David L. Fleming, S.J.)

St. Ignatius begins his Spiritual Exercises with The First Principle and Foundation. While not typically thought of as a prayer, it still contains much that is worth reflecting on.

The Goal of our life is to live with God forever.

God, who loves us, gave us life.

Our own response of love allows God's life

to flow into us without limit.

 

All the things in this world are gifts from God,

Presented to us so that we can know God more easily

and make a return of love more readily.

As a result, we appreciate and use all these gifts of God

Insofar as they help us to develop as loving persons.

But if any of these gifts become the center of our lives,

They displace God

And so hinder our growth toward our goal.

 

In everyday life, then, we must hold ourselves in balance

Before all of these created gifts insofar as we have a choice

And are not bound by some obligation.

We should not fix our desires on health or sickness,

Wealth or poverty, success or failure, a long life or a short one.

For everything has the potential of calling forth in us

A deeper response to our life in God.

 

Our only desire and our one choice should be this:

I want and I choose what better leads

To God's deepening his life in me.

    If I read St. Ignatius correctly, we need to review each of the things/activities to which we are attached or attracted. If we are not bound by some obligation (family, promise to a community or ethical obligation to employer) we should be willing enjoy and use and appreciate them - or to set them aside if they are leading away from God. This may not be much of an escape hatch.

    I remind myself that what starts as a sacrifice - giving up old ways or ideas - becomes a transformation. The very energies that lead us in the wrong direction can be transformed into strength for the journey. Then we won't even want to look back.

Presidential Candidates: the Unasked Just War Questions

Prolife supporters are actively debating whether or not they should support any of the presidential candidates based on their positions on abortion. They, and other Christian leaders are overlooking the question about the justice of a pre-emptive attack on Iran.

Every major Democratic candidate - Obama, Edwards, & Clinton – has implicitly endorsed a preemptive attack on Iran in order to prevent the development of nuclear weapons. Neither Huckabee, McCain, Thompson or Giuliani thought it necessary to obtain congressional permission prior to an attack. To his credit, Romney advocated a preliminary discussion with his attorneys in order to ascertain his authority. Ron Paul simply advocated following the Constitution.

Christians have reconciled Deut 5:17 “You shall not kill” with the necessity for defense by means of the
Just War theory.For purposes of review, the just war criteria that govern the decision to go to war are:

Legitimate authority
Only duly constituted public authorities may use deadly force or wage war
Right intention
Force may be used only in a truly just cause and solely for that purpose—correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right intention, while material gain or maintaining economies is not.
Probability of success
Arms may not be used in a futile cause or in a case where disproportionate measures are required to achieve success;
Last resort
Force may be used only after all peaceful and viable alternatives have been seriously tried and exhausted.

Even if we give the candidates credit for the criteria of right intention (just cause), reasoning that preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons is a sufficient cause, the other criteria still must be met. In order to meet the criteria of legitimate authority, a President must have a pre-authorization from Congress. (President Bush already has sufficient legal authorization.) It is possible, I suppose, to reconcile the criteria of last resort with mounting a preemptive attack. It would be a tricky argument and would have to assume adequate intelligence – something notably lacking in recent years.

My guess is that none of the candidates would be able to reconcile the notion of a preemptive attack with these two criteria. The most likely response would be total confusion.

Prolife advocates and Christian leaders should be asking this question now. They can demand answers while there may still be time. On the other hand, George Will contends that overturning Roe v. Wade will make little difference.

Maggie Gallagher on the "Christmas Wars"

For some time, I've suspected that the so-called "Christmas wars", i.e. public fights over whether or not religious symbols can be displayed, are fueled by journalists, who are looking for examples of outrageous behavior. Their stories scare public officials who then behave outrageously giving the journalists more stories. Here is townhall columnist Maggie Gallagher on How the Grinch stole Hanukkah 

Frank Greenhall, the superintendent of the Warwick (NJ) public schools, is not feeling the joy yet. Parents are grumbling that his new winter wonderland strategy of inclusion is "anti-Santa": "Maybe the Gingerbread Man is insulting to someone. Then you have to say Gingerbread Person. If you don't like the Gingerbread Person in the picture, get a picture with the winter scene. I'm not pushing any one agenda," an exasperated Greenhall sputtered, "I just look forward to when this is over." In Yorktown, interim superintendent Vincent Ziccolella is singing the same tune: "I would really like to get busy and do some education issues instead of ... creches," he told a local reporter.

The Christmas wars are not about ideology, in other words, but bureaucracy: Busy officials have better things to do than negotiate the hurt feelings of an increasingly fired-up (also lawyered-up) public. It would be easier to just ban everything.

You can't help but sympathize. You also can't help but pause and give thanks to God that we share a country where religious wars consist of fights about what Breakfast With Santa will be called this year.

Exactly.

Voting: A Basis for Choosing Among Candidates

    Central Virginia voters face repellant choices in both the house and Senate races. Virgil Goode, the independent candidate for reelection as representative, has taken (and then returned) large campaign contributions from MZM Corporation. MZM was connected with the bribery scandal with former California congressman Duke Cunningham. Democratic candidate Al Weed strikes me as a doctrinaire liberal.
    Republican Senate candidate George Allen, his foot planted firmly in his mouth, removed it and attempted to counter charges of racism by charging his opponent with sexism. He now says he wants the campaign on the issues. His Democratic opponent, James Webb, has an honorable record – but I worry that his election might send a message of surrender to terrorists.
    Paying attention to campaign ads and debates means descending into and endless swamp of unverifiable claims and counterclaims.
    Now Ralph Peters steps forward with a rational basis for deciding. one that stands apart from the issues and focuses on the process.

IT'S time to get a grip. And to be honest with ourselves. The fear-mongering and juvenile nastiness we, the people, endure from both political parties would have us believe that disaster looms in November.
    It doesn't. You, the voters, are going to make your individual choices based upon your private beliefs. And our country is going to be better for it.
    The Republicans are going to get a dose of castor oil. They need it. If we, the people, are lucky, the Dems will take the House, while the Republicans will hold on to a majority in the Senate. That split-decision would be good news for America.
…
    When either party - it doesn't matter which one - controls both houses of Congress, we get two very bad results. First, the party in power becomes arrogant and exclusive. Second, half of our population feels it doesn't have a voice in government.
    The result is polarization of the sort we suffer now. Extremist voices are too influential in both parties and the rest of us - in the vast center - are treated as irrelevant. When either party controls everything, it ignores the wishes of the majority. A monopoly of power isn't democracy.
…
    It would be unfortunate if the Dems captured both houses of Congress. But even Republicans should hope they get the House.
    Why? For all of the reasons cited above - and one more: For six years, the Dems have had a free ride, criticizing everything while accepting responsibility for nothing; with control of the House, they'd have to get serious at last.
    Let's see Nancy Pelosi & Co. offer serious legislation instead of sound-bites. Show us what the donkey can do when it has to stop braying and shoulder a burden.

Gotta love Ralph. He is always straighforward and clear about his opinions. Thanks. Give him a reading.

Sexual Harassment at the Air Force Academy, the Archdiocese of Boston and the US Congress

As I think about these recent scandals:

• Representative Mark Foley (R-FL) resigns after his harassment of a young male page is exposed
• Cardinal Bernard Law is transferred to Rome and placed in a Basilica after numerous news stories and investigations of priests sexually harassing young boys

I’m reminded of this statement concerning a series of rapes at the Air Force Academy:

DENVER, March 26, 2003
(AP) The top two leaders at the Air Force Academy are not responsible for the sexual assault scandal at the school, but they should be held accountable for the culture that allowed the problem to continue, Air Force Secretary James Roche said Wednesday.

"Still, change must occur, and a new leadership team to implement these changes is in the best interest of the academy and the Air Force," Roche said in a statement.

The top two academy officers - Lt. Gen. John D. Dallager and Brig. Gen. S. Taco Gilbert III - are among five officers involved in the shake up. Dallager is expected to remain as superintendent and the top official at the 4,100-cadet institution until his scheduled retirement in June.

The Air Force announced Wednesday that it will replace the other four, at least two of them by women, and it will implement a series of directives aimed at making the school safer for cadets.

Air Force officials declined additional comment until a news conference scheduled later Wednesday.

Roche said he and Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. John Jumper would monitor the academy closely.

"You can't just fire a couple of generals and think the problem is solved because you've missed the point," Roche said. "The culture at the academy absolutely must change. We're going right at the culture, but you don't change the culture with one memorandum."

Based on these examples, which of the three institutions holds its leaders to a higher ethical and moral standard? Where would you rather have your son, or daughter, serve?

Spiritual Principles and Practices in Intelligence Work

Here is a working abstract for the paper that I've been asked to present at the Intelligence and Ethics 2007 conference in January.

Spirituality in the Intelligence workplace – just as in every workplace – starts with the premise that our work is creative and, in some sense, a service aimed at building a more just world. In the normal case, this spirituality improves the quality of our service through the practice of specific disciplines (e.g. striving for quality; dealing with imperfections, treating colleagues with dignity). In the abnormal (we hope) case, it requires challenging superiors to ensure that the intelligence community is true to its purpose. In every case, it requires developing the faculty of discernment – intuitively knowing “the next right thing” to be done. While acquiring this faculty is ultimately a matter of personal development, it can be assisted through a program of mentoring, counseling, and training in professional skills and ethics.

Comments are invited.

Katrina & the Big Dig: It Wasn't Bush's Fault it was --

Tip Oneil's fault. Ten months ago I was writing this about Katrina and Tip O'Neil's remark that "all politics is local:

Katrina revealed that there were weak links in every level: local, state, federal and private. While this is true, the “all politics is local” remark reveals another set of links, firmly forged, that blocked informed efforts at preparedness. (See FEMA’s July 23, 2004 press release on the impact of notional “Hurricane Pam”and the telling photo of the mayor Nagin memorial motor pool). Local, state, and federal politicians have forged a well-oiled mechanism for channeling federal money to local flood related construction projects. These projects, however, are are more related to getting re-elected than to flood prevention.. Our Senators and Congress-critters all understand Tip O’Neil. Federal funds get local votes. Local voters are more likely to respond to appeals to short term interests than to long term efforts to prepare for the next crises.

Now Jeff Jacoby makes a similar point about the newlywed crushed by piece of falling concrete in the Boston tunnel

All politics is local, Tip O'Neil famously said, and it surely doesn't get any more local than when a 6,000-pound slab from a project championed by the late House speaker falls on a 38-year-old newlywed from the Boston neighborhood of Jamaica Plain, crushing her to death as her husband drives her to the airport. O'Neill died in 1994, but the political culture he epitomized is alive and well and enshrined in the Big Dig, a slough of corruption, callousness, and cover-ups that had become a synonym for government mismanagement long before it killed Milena Del Valle on July 10. It would be going too far to link O'Neill to the incompetent workmanship and negligent oversight that led to the collapse of a 3-ton ceiling panel in the Interstate 90 connector just as the Del Valles drove beneath it last week. But the culture that he embodied is still solidly in place.

George Bush was wrong when he said that the country was addicted to oil. It is addicted to Pork.

Peggy Noonan on the Conservative Outlook

Thursday morning always brings a Peggy Noonan column - always a treat. Today she is revising last week's remarks on The Complexity Crises. She makes her case for a conservative approach to governing and then says:

I note here what is to me a mystery. It is that people with lower IQs somehow tend, in our age, to have a greater apprehension of the meaning of things and the reality of life, than do our high-IQ professionals, who often seem, in areas outside their immediate field, startlingly dim. I don't know why intellectuals--or cerebralists or eggheads or IQ hegemonists--seem to miss the most obvious things, floating on untethered by common sense. If you talk to a brilliant scholar at a fine university about social policy, chances are he will say with honest perplexity that he cannot understand--really cannot understand--why people would not want men to marry men, or women women. I wish there were a name for this, for the cluelessness of the more intellectually accomplished, the simpler but truer wisdom of those who are often less lettered and less accomplished.

But I have strayed from my point, which is that in the midst of the increasing complexity we should limit as much as possible what is decided by government, limit its power, and have some actual sympathy for politicians who have to master the arcane subject matter. Better they make decisions than our black-robed masters.

Thanks, Peggy. We live in Charlottesville, near a fine Univesity filled with brilliant scholars. We know exactly what you mean.

Readers, Peggy deals with three topics today. Please scroll down to the third section for these remarks.

Book Review: Just War, Lasting Peace

    Thanks to Steve, I’ve just finished reading Just War, Lasting Peace: What Christian Traditions Can Teach Us. This book is the result of a one-day invitational forum on the applicability of the Just War tradition to the modern world. As readers of this blog know, I’ve been arguing for some time  that the church is failing to adapt its teaching to the ever changing nature of warfare and armed violence. I’m glad to find out that I’m at least partially wrong about this.

    The book, edited by John Kleiderer, Paula Mineart, and Mark Mossa presents a comprehensive overview of the just war tradition, how it has evolved, and what if might offer to policy makers today. First, while all of the sections are valuable, I will mention some particularly meaningful points. Second, the authors failed to take into account the recent rapid decline in warfare Third, they should have, in my opinion, have expanded on the meaning of Von Clausewitz’s famous dictum on war and politics. Fourth, the book might have added some on the context for the gospel injunction to turn the other cheek.(Mt. 5:38-48.) Fifth, there are other sources that an interested reader might also want to investigate.

Alan M. Dershowitz on Preemption

Michael W. Doyle's review lan M. Dershowitz's PREEMPTION: A Knife that Cuts Both Ways makes me want to read the book. I may - probably will - disagree with parts of it.Those who a following the question of adapting just war doctrine to the changing nature of war should read the review and the book.