First Things Spengler Blog Reviews The End of Secularism

A fellow named David Layman (not David Goldman, who I think is THE Spengler) has reviewed The End of Secularism for the First Things website.

Wow.

This was the first full contact review by a person who doesn’t know me at all.

Pretty exhilarating.

Layman is very complimentary of the book, particularly the first half where I review the history of church and state in the west and go through the American constitutional situation. He’s a bit less on board with me when I start talking about anti-foundationalism and the impact of postmodernism on the case for secularism. I think he says what Robert George would say, which is to suggest I should talk more about the case for our values than the weaknesses in secularism as a construct.

In my defense, I did what I set out to do, which was (as inspired by C. John Sommerville) to undercut secularism by being skeptical about it. It was more about deconstructing someone else’s castle than shoring up my own.

Still, a wonderful experience. And thank you to David Layman.

Has Damon Linker Dethroned Natural Law?

I’ll save you the suspense. No.

Linker, known primarily for betraying Richard John Neuhaus by serving as editor of First Things and then publishing a book accusing Neuhaus of scurrilous theocratic aims, now writes primarily at the New Republic. In a recent post there, he brilliantly claims to have demonstrated the idea of natural law is obvious poppycock. Why? Because he disagrees with two officials of the Catholic Church holding that a nine year old who was raped and with her life endangered by the pregnancy should still have the children rather than an abortion. Linker reasons that if the Catholic Church is wrong about that, then their idea of natural law is wrong.

Where to start?

Given that Mr. Linker worked at First Things, I’d figure he had his Aquinas down pat. Thomas Aquinas (AKA, the DOCTOR OF NATURAL LAW) held that we should agree on the first principles of natural law (like that the lives of innocent children should be protected), but that we may well disagree with the application of that natural law on a case by case basis. Well, guess what? Here we have just such a case. Does it mean the idea of natural law is vacuous? No. And Aquinas didn’t think so, either.

Mr. Linker thinks the church (or more specifically two church officials) is wrong about this case. And maybe they are. I’m unfamiliar with it. But does his disagreement with their reasoning about this case mean that the larger principle (the lives of innocent children should be protected) no longer holds? No, that position is obviously incorrect. The broad propositions of the natural law continue to hold.

First Things, Economics, and Conservative Protestants

First Things online just published my thoughts on conservative Protestants and their attitude toward corporate behavior.

Here’s a clip:

Several months ago, I heard a story that forced me to give more careful thought to my views on the built-in morality of the market. A large airline on the brink of bankruptcy in 2002 asked employees to make substantial wage concessions. They agreed. The airline returned to profitability, and management acknowledged that it had the workers to thank, but in the subsequent years, instead of restoring the wage concessions, it awarded hundreds of millions of dollars in bonuses to executives.

When pressed by reporters, the airline’s spokesman said the bonuses were necessary to retain top managerial talent. Pilots and other airline personnel could not leave because the airlines’ seniority systems would require them to start over at a new company. In effect, the workers could not easily punish the airline for failing to pay them back, so it was in no hurry to do so.

The story jarred me. Somehow, I had never applied my Christian conception of a sinful world to corporate behavior. In hindsight I realize my faith should have cautioned me against too easily deferring to the idea of the sufficiency of the invisible hand to produce justice.

Now, judging from this short bit, I’m guessing some of you will think I’ve gone all lefty on you.  Not so.  Read the piece.  There is not a call for the slightest government action.  What I’m calling for is the exercise of moral suasion.  If we can protest when the convenience store decides to carry porn, we can also protest when an airline screws its employees.  Follow the link and see whether you agree.