Families that Discuss together, stay together
Families that Discuss together, stay together
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Thursday, September 30, 2010
How to Raise Boys Who Read
.
Focusing on the reading gap between girls and boys is not the most effective topic in this incredible article. However, I especially was drawn to the eye-opening and deplorable environment that society is dishing out to our young boys in the way of "gross-out" books and highly addicting video games.
Focusing on the reading gap between girls and boys is not the most effective topic in this incredible article. However, I especially was drawn to the eye-opening and deplorable environment that society is dishing out to our young boys in the way of "gross-out" books and highly addicting video games.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Understanding and Partaking in the Atonement of Jesus Christ (Talk given during Easter)
.
This season we celebrate that Christ has overcome the world, He has fulfilled his divine mission to redeem His people from Spiritual and Physical death. That fateful night in the Olive Grove at the Garden of Gethsemane He took upon Himself the sins of the world--He took upon him all our infirmities, our pain and sorrows in the past, the present and the future that he might "know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities." This single act is our key to our salvation. It is only through his atonement that we can overcome our sin and to overcome all things in this life and to become clean to enter into our Father's Kingdom.
I have thought of three things that can help us understand and partake in the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
1. We must first attain knowledge of Him-come to know Him.
2. We must exercise faith in Him.
3. We must become Humble
First, We must come to know Him. Our ability to overcome all things depends greatly on our effort to know the Savior, of His mission, of His teachings, of our relationship with Him, and ultimately of his redeeming Atonement. John tells us of the danger that comes of not knowing Him. He writes, "He was in the world and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own (meaning the Jews) and his own received him not. (Now, here is the truth that will exalt us) But as many as received him (says John) to them gave he the power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name."
Leo Tolstoy said it simply when he penned the words in a conversation between two characters of his book, War and Peace. Omen teaches Pierre the reason for his unhappiness, "[Pierre], you know him not, and that is why you are unhappy."
James E. Faust said, "Our salvation depends on believing in and accepting the Atonement. Such acceptance requires a continual effort to understand it more fully."
Hermano Juarez of the Spanish Branch is a great example of coming to know Christ. One day I needed to pick up something from his home and when I knocked on the door, his wife, Celia, opened the door wide to invite me in. A wondrous scene was before my eyes as I looked at Hermano Juarez sitting there on his couch with both his scriptures open on the coffee table before him. In addition to those where his reading glasses, his sunday school student manual and a few other books, including the Liahona, the church magazine in Spanish, all wide open to his studious mind. I was impressed and touched by his example. His calling was not a teacher of Sunday School, nor was he a leader in an organization, he was simply the president of a Sunday school class who welcomes students and calls someone to say the prayers. I came away from that humble home knowing that Hermano Juarez was anxiously engaged in getting to know the Savior.
As we more fully come to know Christ we can more readily:
Exercise faith in Him
Nephi reminded his older brothers that the Lord could do all things if they would but have faith. While traveling from Jerusalem into the wilderness, Laman and Lemuel along with two daughters and two sons of Ishmael become rebellious and desired to return to Jerusalem. Nephi was grieved. He asked them, "How is it that ye have forgotten that the Lord is able to do all things according to his will, for the children of men, if it so be that they exercise faith in him? [Then Nephi exhorts his brethren], Wherefore, let us be faithful to him."
I would like tot share an experience with you about faith. This past summer our family went with Grandpa Tibbets to the Uintah Wilderness on a backpacking trip. The trail is located in the southern part of the range in the Garfield Basin. The mountains are breathtakingly beautiful. The name Rocky Mountains surely had to have originated in this part of the series because there is no trail that I can think of between the Sierra Madres in California and the Sawtooths in Idaho to the Wind Rivers in Wyoming that have such huge boulders right on the trail. Sometimes it doesn't even seem like a trail because of the abundance of rocks. Our hike was 10 miles long and we were on our way out. It was a beautiful sunny morning. We felt invigorated after a hearty meal of instant oatmeal and hot chocolate. I stayed back with my father walking his pace to keep him company. It was sweet to hear the stories of his youth and about the first times he backpacked along this trail some forty years before. At lunchtime we found that the others had stopped in a place called Swasey Hole to wait for us. After a delicious lunch of bagels and cheese, we proceeded forward. I again stayed back with my father as the children and David proceeded ahead. We trod along slowly up...up...up...the switchbacks. We rested quite often to catch our breath. It was difficult for me to go that slow with such a heavy pack, but it was important that I stay with my dear father. We noticed the sky becoming a little darker. My father's expert knowledge about weather patterns suggested that there were three storm systems coming together and that it could become very dangerous as we neared the ridge of twelve thousand feet elevation. Lightening loves to strike the tops of mountains and we were coming nearer all the time to the top. This knowledge helped to push us a little faster up the trail in hopes that we could clear the top before the storm hit, but more and more my father felt that we might need to stay this side of the mountain if we were to stay alive.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the ridge, and unbeknownst to us, our children, having been informed by David about the dangers of mountain storms began to exercise faith in our Living God and to pray for us and to sing hymns. David laid down his backpack near the children and took off running back over the ridge and to the other side where he found us still trudging along. He grasped the backpack of my father's, slung it over his shoulder and encouraged us to hustle over the top as fast as we could to safety. We made it! Somewhere in the trees down below us we heard shouts of joy and clapping as our children recognized the power of God to save lives. Faith is the key essential to overcome all things.
We must become humble
We must refine ourselves and become humble, even with a broken heart and a contrite spirit. At the end of Father Lehi's life he dedicated his last moments teaching his children of the foundational doctrine of the Atonement. He instructed Jacob, "Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the Holy Messiah; for he is full of grace and truth. Behold, he offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit; and unto none else can the ends of the law be answered." (2 Ne 2:6-7)
King Benjamin taught us why and how to obtain a broken heart and a contrite spirit. He said in those famous words: "For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, for ever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father."
I know that Jesus Christ atoned for our sins. He is risen and for this great act we celebrate this season. It is my prayer for us that we may without hesitation come to know Christ, exercise faith in Him and become humble. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
This season we celebrate that Christ has overcome the world, He has fulfilled his divine mission to redeem His people from Spiritual and Physical death. That fateful night in the Olive Grove at the Garden of Gethsemane He took upon Himself the sins of the world--He took upon him all our infirmities, our pain and sorrows in the past, the present and the future that he might "know according to the flesh how to succor his people according to their infirmities." This single act is our key to our salvation. It is only through his atonement that we can overcome our sin and to overcome all things in this life and to become clean to enter into our Father's Kingdom.
I have thought of three things that can help us understand and partake in the Atonement of Jesus Christ.
1. We must first attain knowledge of Him-come to know Him.
2. We must exercise faith in Him.
3. We must become Humble
First, We must come to know Him. Our ability to overcome all things depends greatly on our effort to know the Savior, of His mission, of His teachings, of our relationship with Him, and ultimately of his redeeming Atonement. John tells us of the danger that comes of not knowing Him. He writes, "He was in the world and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not. He came unto his own (meaning the Jews) and his own received him not. (Now, here is the truth that will exalt us) But as many as received him (says John) to them gave he the power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name."
Leo Tolstoy said it simply when he penned the words in a conversation between two characters of his book, War and Peace. Omen teaches Pierre the reason for his unhappiness, "[Pierre], you know him not, and that is why you are unhappy."
James E. Faust said, "Our salvation depends on believing in and accepting the Atonement. Such acceptance requires a continual effort to understand it more fully."
Hermano Juarez of the Spanish Branch is a great example of coming to know Christ. One day I needed to pick up something from his home and when I knocked on the door, his wife, Celia, opened the door wide to invite me in. A wondrous scene was before my eyes as I looked at Hermano Juarez sitting there on his couch with both his scriptures open on the coffee table before him. In addition to those where his reading glasses, his sunday school student manual and a few other books, including the Liahona, the church magazine in Spanish, all wide open to his studious mind. I was impressed and touched by his example. His calling was not a teacher of Sunday School, nor was he a leader in an organization, he was simply the president of a Sunday school class who welcomes students and calls someone to say the prayers. I came away from that humble home knowing that Hermano Juarez was anxiously engaged in getting to know the Savior.
As we more fully come to know Christ we can more readily:
Exercise faith in Him
Nephi reminded his older brothers that the Lord could do all things if they would but have faith. While traveling from Jerusalem into the wilderness, Laman and Lemuel along with two daughters and two sons of Ishmael become rebellious and desired to return to Jerusalem. Nephi was grieved. He asked them, "How is it that ye have forgotten that the Lord is able to do all things according to his will, for the children of men, if it so be that they exercise faith in him? [Then Nephi exhorts his brethren], Wherefore, let us be faithful to him."
I would like tot share an experience with you about faith. This past summer our family went with Grandpa Tibbets to the Uintah Wilderness on a backpacking trip. The trail is located in the southern part of the range in the Garfield Basin. The mountains are breathtakingly beautiful. The name Rocky Mountains surely had to have originated in this part of the series because there is no trail that I can think of between the Sierra Madres in California and the Sawtooths in Idaho to the Wind Rivers in Wyoming that have such huge boulders right on the trail. Sometimes it doesn't even seem like a trail because of the abundance of rocks. Our hike was 10 miles long and we were on our way out. It was a beautiful sunny morning. We felt invigorated after a hearty meal of instant oatmeal and hot chocolate. I stayed back with my father walking his pace to keep him company. It was sweet to hear the stories of his youth and about the first times he backpacked along this trail some forty years before. At lunchtime we found that the others had stopped in a place called Swasey Hole to wait for us. After a delicious lunch of bagels and cheese, we proceeded forward. I again stayed back with my father as the children and David proceeded ahead. We trod along slowly up...up...up...the switchbacks. We rested quite often to catch our breath. It was difficult for me to go that slow with such a heavy pack, but it was important that I stay with my dear father. We noticed the sky becoming a little darker. My father's expert knowledge about weather patterns suggested that there were three storm systems coming together and that it could become very dangerous as we neared the ridge of twelve thousand feet elevation. Lightening loves to strike the tops of mountains and we were coming nearer all the time to the top. This knowledge helped to push us a little faster up the trail in hopes that we could clear the top before the storm hit, but more and more my father felt that we might need to stay this side of the mountain if we were to stay alive.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the ridge, and unbeknownst to us, our children, having been informed by David about the dangers of mountain storms began to exercise faith in our Living God and to pray for us and to sing hymns. David laid down his backpack near the children and took off running back over the ridge and to the other side where he found us still trudging along. He grasped the backpack of my father's, slung it over his shoulder and encouraged us to hustle over the top as fast as we could to safety. We made it! Somewhere in the trees down below us we heard shouts of joy and clapping as our children recognized the power of God to save lives. Faith is the key essential to overcome all things.
We must become humble
We must refine ourselves and become humble, even with a broken heart and a contrite spirit. At the end of Father Lehi's life he dedicated his last moments teaching his children of the foundational doctrine of the Atonement. He instructed Jacob, "Wherefore, redemption cometh in and through the Holy Messiah; for he is full of grace and truth. Behold, he offereth himself a sacrifice for sin, to answer the ends of the law, unto all those who have a broken heart and a contrite spirit; and unto none else can the ends of the law be answered." (2 Ne 2:6-7)
King Benjamin taught us why and how to obtain a broken heart and a contrite spirit. He said in those famous words: "For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, for ever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father."
I know that Jesus Christ atoned for our sins. He is risen and for this great act we celebrate this season. It is my prayer for us that we may without hesitation come to know Christ, exercise faith in Him and become humble. In the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
My review of Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises
The Sun also Rises is a disagreeable book about the gloomy human conditions after WWI. I disliked the writing style, but nonetheless could feel its powerful tug on my emotions with its straight-to-the-point account. I don’t know whether Hemingway was satirical or not; whether he was making fun of the “lost generation,” as Gertrude Stein describes the post war expatriates or if he was recounting many of his own experiences as an expatriate in France and Spain. The Characters were definitely a lost generation in morals, in purpose, in relationships, in vision of the future. Nothing I have read has ever presented dialogue so shallow and meaningless.
The reader follows the characters from café to café and bar to bar in Paris all the way to Spain. The dialogue consists of such degrading topics such as adultery to prostitution, financial irresponsibility and bankruptcy to immorality and irreligion. Within the center of the plot the reader is introduced to men fighting men and women being the cause of it and women degrading men—leaving them for lack of a marital commitment.
I think what Hemingway was trying to show the world was a new existence of immorality and the easiness of life without a strict moral code. No commitments, no laws, no morals, no values had to be enforced, only a life of fun and entertainment, including plenty of wine, women and profanity. He may have hoped that by reading his novel, individuals and communities would see the pointless and empty lives fabricated by a false moral code. If that is the case, then I agree with his purpose for writing.
However much I hated this story, I see the advantage of having read about and learned lessons from “the lost generation.” It is an eye-opener to the evils that lurk in the lives of lazy, materialistic and drunken people.
The reader follows the characters from café to café and bar to bar in Paris all the way to Spain. The dialogue consists of such degrading topics such as adultery to prostitution, financial irresponsibility and bankruptcy to immorality and irreligion. Within the center of the plot the reader is introduced to men fighting men and women being the cause of it and women degrading men—leaving them for lack of a marital commitment.
I think what Hemingway was trying to show the world was a new existence of immorality and the easiness of life without a strict moral code. No commitments, no laws, no morals, no values had to be enforced, only a life of fun and entertainment, including plenty of wine, women and profanity. He may have hoped that by reading his novel, individuals and communities would see the pointless and empty lives fabricated by a false moral code. If that is the case, then I agree with his purpose for writing.
However much I hated this story, I see the advantage of having read about and learned lessons from “the lost generation.” It is an eye-opener to the evils that lurk in the lives of lazy, materialistic and drunken people.
Saturday, August 28, 2010
Ghastly Grimy Gossip
.
Mud was everywhere, but I did not see it at first, I only felt it. Arriving late at an important meeting yesterday where we were to discuss the details of Pyramid Project, I sat down with Erica, interrupting, but not intentionally, my friend who was conducting. Seeming as if I was bothering some in the room, I stated my regret in arriving late and that Erica and I had a few questions. There seemed to be some contentious feelings between me and my friend and I wasn’t quite certain where it stemmed from, thus this is the mud I am referring to in the opening sentence. I felt it, but could not see it. As the meeting continued, the feeling remained and grew heavier and yet I endeavored to remain happy and excited in order to defuse the tenseness in the air.
Just before leaving I asked my friend if she was all right and if there was anything that I had done to offend. What came next was like opening the double doors into a room filled with mire. The ooze burst through covering both of us until it was difficult to breath. She had been hurt badly by a false rumor that had been spreading throughout our circles and she was bold enough to tell me what others had said they thought I had said. It was an awful and erroneous speculation with an aim to hurt and maim relationships. Being covered with the “mire” caused me to grapple for air and words that might save our relationship. Trying to tell her it was not true was like trying to dam up the Snake River with human hands. Or as Shana Alexander once said, “Trying to squash a rumor is like trying to unring a bell.” My friend would not believe me and I let that usurp my self-control causing me to cry like a baby and leave. I got in my car and headed for home. I felt awful as an innocent victim feels when they are carted off to prison. Even more awful was the scene I had caused—in front of so many friends and their youth. On the drive home a feeling came over me to return and apologize with all my might and to try and make amends of the situation. Because of the knowledge of the truth that I had never said such a thing, I felt free and clear and this feeling boosted me on. Truth always prevails and so surely she would someday know it in her heart and that was my only assurance.
All were still there, no doubt, trying to make sense of the “mire” and the unbridled behavior of the scene I had enacted just minutes before. Sincerely and anxiously I pleaded forgiveness of all the wrong that I seemed to have caused and she took me into her arms and let me cry there for a few moments. The mud seemed to clear up and our lungs could breath fresh air again. We stood to discuss a few concerns and I left feeling more love than ever from this friend.
Mud is ugly and stifling. The Rabbi Wayne Dosick wrote of this muddy Gossip, "Gossip and slander are not victimless crimes. Words do not just dissipate into midair . . . Words can injure and damage, maim and destroy - forcefully, painfully, lastingly . . . Plans have been disrupted, deals have been lost, companies have fallen, because of idle gossip or malicious slander. Reputations have been sullied, careers have been ruined, lives have been devastated, because of cruel lies or vicious rumors . . . Your words have such power to do good or evil that they must be chosen carefully, wisely, and well."
I came away today with a firm commitment to choose my words carefully when I speak. This situation caused me to pour over all the conversations I had been engaged in previously to search for where I went wrong. The exercise revealed to me a possible root to the rancorous rumor. I had told some people that I was anxious for Erica to take more vigorous classes to get her ready for Williamsburg Academy next year. Incidentally that innocent conversation lead to the demeaning rumor stating that I said my friend’s “son was slow and that Erica would be dumbed-down in the offered Pyramid Project class.” How hurtful is that statement and yet it was not true. I reflected on the adversary’s desire to bring misery on all and how easily it can be done when we engage in scandalous hearsay. “To hearken to evil conversation is the road to wickedness,” said the anonymous one.
Cato the Elder taught, “we cannot control the evil tongues of others; but a good life enables us to disregard them.” Gossip will continue as long as humans live upon this earth. However, we have the choice to engage in it and darken the earth or we can disregard it with all our might; let it roll off our souls and into the gutter where it belongs. I resolve today to carefully choose my words and to make amends where amends must take place. I also resolve to follow Johann K. Lavater’s advice to “Never tell evil of a man, if you do not know it for certainty, and if you know it for a certainty, then ask yourself, 'Why should I tell it?'” It has been said that when there is much good in the worst of us and plenty of bad in the best of us, then it hardly behooves any of us to talk about the rest of us. I choose today to clean up the mud whenever it comes my way, regardless of who put it there.
Mud was everywhere, but I did not see it at first, I only felt it. Arriving late at an important meeting yesterday where we were to discuss the details of Pyramid Project, I sat down with Erica, interrupting, but not intentionally, my friend who was conducting. Seeming as if I was bothering some in the room, I stated my regret in arriving late and that Erica and I had a few questions. There seemed to be some contentious feelings between me and my friend and I wasn’t quite certain where it stemmed from, thus this is the mud I am referring to in the opening sentence. I felt it, but could not see it. As the meeting continued, the feeling remained and grew heavier and yet I endeavored to remain happy and excited in order to defuse the tenseness in the air.
Just before leaving I asked my friend if she was all right and if there was anything that I had done to offend. What came next was like opening the double doors into a room filled with mire. The ooze burst through covering both of us until it was difficult to breath. She had been hurt badly by a false rumor that had been spreading throughout our circles and she was bold enough to tell me what others had said they thought I had said. It was an awful and erroneous speculation with an aim to hurt and maim relationships. Being covered with the “mire” caused me to grapple for air and words that might save our relationship. Trying to tell her it was not true was like trying to dam up the Snake River with human hands. Or as Shana Alexander once said, “Trying to squash a rumor is like trying to unring a bell.” My friend would not believe me and I let that usurp my self-control causing me to cry like a baby and leave. I got in my car and headed for home. I felt awful as an innocent victim feels when they are carted off to prison. Even more awful was the scene I had caused—in front of so many friends and their youth. On the drive home a feeling came over me to return and apologize with all my might and to try and make amends of the situation. Because of the knowledge of the truth that I had never said such a thing, I felt free and clear and this feeling boosted me on. Truth always prevails and so surely she would someday know it in her heart and that was my only assurance.
All were still there, no doubt, trying to make sense of the “mire” and the unbridled behavior of the scene I had enacted just minutes before. Sincerely and anxiously I pleaded forgiveness of all the wrong that I seemed to have caused and she took me into her arms and let me cry there for a few moments. The mud seemed to clear up and our lungs could breath fresh air again. We stood to discuss a few concerns and I left feeling more love than ever from this friend.
Mud is ugly and stifling. The Rabbi Wayne Dosick wrote of this muddy Gossip, "Gossip and slander are not victimless crimes. Words do not just dissipate into midair . . . Words can injure and damage, maim and destroy - forcefully, painfully, lastingly . . . Plans have been disrupted, deals have been lost, companies have fallen, because of idle gossip or malicious slander. Reputations have been sullied, careers have been ruined, lives have been devastated, because of cruel lies or vicious rumors . . . Your words have such power to do good or evil that they must be chosen carefully, wisely, and well."
I came away today with a firm commitment to choose my words carefully when I speak. This situation caused me to pour over all the conversations I had been engaged in previously to search for where I went wrong. The exercise revealed to me a possible root to the rancorous rumor. I had told some people that I was anxious for Erica to take more vigorous classes to get her ready for Williamsburg Academy next year. Incidentally that innocent conversation lead to the demeaning rumor stating that I said my friend’s “son was slow and that Erica would be dumbed-down in the offered Pyramid Project class.” How hurtful is that statement and yet it was not true. I reflected on the adversary’s desire to bring misery on all and how easily it can be done when we engage in scandalous hearsay. “To hearken to evil conversation is the road to wickedness,” said the anonymous one.
Cato the Elder taught, “we cannot control the evil tongues of others; but a good life enables us to disregard them.” Gossip will continue as long as humans live upon this earth. However, we have the choice to engage in it and darken the earth or we can disregard it with all our might; let it roll off our souls and into the gutter where it belongs. I resolve today to carefully choose my words and to make amends where amends must take place. I also resolve to follow Johann K. Lavater’s advice to “Never tell evil of a man, if you do not know it for certainty, and if you know it for a certainty, then ask yourself, 'Why should I tell it?'” It has been said that when there is much good in the worst of us and plenty of bad in the best of us, then it hardly behooves any of us to talk about the rest of us. I choose today to clean up the mud whenever it comes my way, regardless of who put it there.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Whole Education vs. Abstract
Education should introduce the Greats to us and invite us to debate the most significant questions of all time, to find the meaning of life and to come face to face with the heroes that will inspire individual virtue. Tocqueville suggested that in a democracy we tend to focus on single theories; abstractions of a whole array of the greatest ideas and truths available in a whole education. The old writers are not perfect, nor are they always right, but they do make us aware of our individual imperfections as they portray human nature in a raw state. Intellectual danger lurks in our society when the university succumbs to teaching and promoting only the opinions of today's popular culture and current ideologies.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Monday, May 3, 2010
What is the Best Society?
.
The best society is found where the people choose to serve God over all else. St. Matthew records the Savior’s words, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” It is true that one cannot choose both. There is no golden mean in these two extremes; an individual must decide either to serve God or serve mammon. This Heavenly society could best be described in a Greek word, to kalon, which means, the beautiful. Thinking and acting beautifully in his or her service to God, would be the mode of life. Do we suppose that this will be a dull, monotonous and mechanical society? Absolutely not, situations will present themselves just as they do in today’s society, but we will respond to them in the way we were created to do as children of a royal and divine heritage.
Upon what principle should this society be based? Aristotle believed that virtue was the means to our ultimate happiness. Everything we do, he concluded, must depend on moral virtue to make its aim right. Moral virtue gives man the most stable and durable condition in which to confront all of life’s deterrents. David of the Old Testament inquires, “who shall stand in [the Lord’s] holy place? He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.” Numerous times the Lord condemns hypocrisy because it pretends to be virtuous. Hypocrisy is not being true to who we are and what we were created to be. This writer agrees that whether it is a pure heart or being true to self, virtue is the principle to base the best society owing to the fact that virtue encompasses all good qualities.
What would be the purpose for this society? Principally speaking, most all human beings wish to be happy no matter their race, culture or class. Even our Founding Fathers included happiness and the pursuit thereof, as one of the most important and attainable goals in the Declaration of Independence; they recognized happiness as one of the inalienable rights.
In addition to happiness, the purpose of this society would also be to prepare the people for the Lord’s second coming. Paul’s epistle to the Philippians teach the ancient saints to have one heart and one mind and to love and serve one another. In preparation of Christ’s second coming, the modern reader remembers Paul’s words, “That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Preparation for His reign on earth and the happiness of His people are the purpose for this society.
What would be the purpose of government in such a society? Cicero said, “there is no human being of any race who, if he finds a guide, cannot attain to virtue.” In most worldly governments that I have studied, there has been not only a guide, but also institutions set up to constrain the people to be virtuous. This coercion has not created a virtuous society, but one of corruption and vice. The government of the best society would not be an oppressive government as is the norm; in fact, there would not be a government, as we know it. The governing power would be within each person as Plato described in his Republic. He explained basically that our head and our heart would rule our gut and that we could achieve full happiness in this life as we applied virtue and justice to our individual character. Cicero writes of the natural propensity for love and service to others, “For these virtues originate in our natural inclination to love our fellow-men, and this is the foundation of Justice.” As a result of each person’s integrity to his or her true being and virtuous character there is no need for a government of man.
We have just discussed that the people govern self, however, in truth there is a higher government; one that is not coercive, but is based on character. It has to do with the intense individual desire to be virtuous. That drive to obey is because of the love each has for God, their loving Heavenly Father and for his laws. Talking of this heavenly city, Augustine writes, “The laws of the most high Creator and Governor are strictly observed, for it is by Him the peace of the universe is administered.” Additionally, the people yearn to obey God’s laws because of promised heavenly blessings. “Blessings are upon the head of the just,” taught wise King Solomon.
What would God’s government look like? Unlike the worldly governments, God’s government would naturally and without coercion provide for the poor and needy. By virtue that each person was created with certain gifts, talents and abilities to act, there would be some who would lift a sad heart, some who would feed the hungry, some who would cloth the poor, etc. until all the needs of each individual were accounted for. God knows our needs and desires and although he uses His children to fulfill the needs and desires, still He grants them. Worldly riches and wealth would not be the goal of this government. The goal, in accordance with Aristotle, would be to do individually what we were created to do and do it beautifully, and in that way provide for all. Christ differentiates between worldly and heavenly matter, “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon the earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Christ also teaches that we do not need to take thought for our life i.e. what to eat or what to wear or where we shall live. He knows our needs, presumably because we sincerely pray; and since He knows and that we desire it, He freely gives.
What would be the governmental powers? Isaiah prophesied of this heavenly society with Christ as the King, “And the government shall be upon His shoulder,” wrote Isaiah. The Resurrected Christ will reign in Glory as the King and Judge of the best society. Virtue will be His throne, truth will be His gospel and Love will be His governing power.
The best society is found where the people choose to serve God over all else. St. Matthew records the Savior’s words, “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.” It is true that one cannot choose both. There is no golden mean in these two extremes; an individual must decide either to serve God or serve mammon. This Heavenly society could best be described in a Greek word, to kalon, which means, the beautiful. Thinking and acting beautifully in his or her service to God, would be the mode of life. Do we suppose that this will be a dull, monotonous and mechanical society? Absolutely not, situations will present themselves just as they do in today’s society, but we will respond to them in the way we were created to do as children of a royal and divine heritage.
Upon what principle should this society be based? Aristotle believed that virtue was the means to our ultimate happiness. Everything we do, he concluded, must depend on moral virtue to make its aim right. Moral virtue gives man the most stable and durable condition in which to confront all of life’s deterrents. David of the Old Testament inquires, “who shall stand in [the Lord’s] holy place? He that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not lifted up his soul unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully.” Numerous times the Lord condemns hypocrisy because it pretends to be virtuous. Hypocrisy is not being true to who we are and what we were created to be. This writer agrees that whether it is a pure heart or being true to self, virtue is the principle to base the best society owing to the fact that virtue encompasses all good qualities.
What would be the purpose for this society? Principally speaking, most all human beings wish to be happy no matter their race, culture or class. Even our Founding Fathers included happiness and the pursuit thereof, as one of the most important and attainable goals in the Declaration of Independence; they recognized happiness as one of the inalienable rights.
In addition to happiness, the purpose of this society would also be to prepare the people for the Lord’s second coming. Paul’s epistle to the Philippians teach the ancient saints to have one heart and one mind and to love and serve one another. In preparation of Christ’s second coming, the modern reader remembers Paul’s words, “That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” Preparation for His reign on earth and the happiness of His people are the purpose for this society.
What would be the purpose of government in such a society? Cicero said, “there is no human being of any race who, if he finds a guide, cannot attain to virtue.” In most worldly governments that I have studied, there has been not only a guide, but also institutions set up to constrain the people to be virtuous. This coercion has not created a virtuous society, but one of corruption and vice. The government of the best society would not be an oppressive government as is the norm; in fact, there would not be a government, as we know it. The governing power would be within each person as Plato described in his Republic. He explained basically that our head and our heart would rule our gut and that we could achieve full happiness in this life as we applied virtue and justice to our individual character. Cicero writes of the natural propensity for love and service to others, “For these virtues originate in our natural inclination to love our fellow-men, and this is the foundation of Justice.” As a result of each person’s integrity to his or her true being and virtuous character there is no need for a government of man.
We have just discussed that the people govern self, however, in truth there is a higher government; one that is not coercive, but is based on character. It has to do with the intense individual desire to be virtuous. That drive to obey is because of the love each has for God, their loving Heavenly Father and for his laws. Talking of this heavenly city, Augustine writes, “The laws of the most high Creator and Governor are strictly observed, for it is by Him the peace of the universe is administered.” Additionally, the people yearn to obey God’s laws because of promised heavenly blessings. “Blessings are upon the head of the just,” taught wise King Solomon.
What would God’s government look like? Unlike the worldly governments, God’s government would naturally and without coercion provide for the poor and needy. By virtue that each person was created with certain gifts, talents and abilities to act, there would be some who would lift a sad heart, some who would feed the hungry, some who would cloth the poor, etc. until all the needs of each individual were accounted for. God knows our needs and desires and although he uses His children to fulfill the needs and desires, still He grants them. Worldly riches and wealth would not be the goal of this government. The goal, in accordance with Aristotle, would be to do individually what we were created to do and do it beautifully, and in that way provide for all. Christ differentiates between worldly and heavenly matter, “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon the earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Christ also teaches that we do not need to take thought for our life i.e. what to eat or what to wear or where we shall live. He knows our needs, presumably because we sincerely pray; and since He knows and that we desire it, He freely gives.
What would be the governmental powers? Isaiah prophesied of this heavenly society with Christ as the King, “And the government shall be upon His shoulder,” wrote Isaiah. The Resurrected Christ will reign in Glory as the King and Judge of the best society. Virtue will be His throne, truth will be His gospel and Love will be His governing power.
A Summary of Montesquieu's, The Spirit of Laws
.
What is the proper role of government? Aristotle would say that the end of politics is happiness and the means to that end would be virtue. He believes the state exists for the sake of the individual. Machiavelli would say that the stability of the State and the Power of the Prince is the ultimate end and that we should preserve the state at every cost; the end justifies the means. Finally Montesquieu would say that the State should be a reflection of the people. In his great work, Spirit of the Laws, he describes his purpose for writing, “I do not pretend to treat of laws, but of their spirit; and as this spirit consists in the various relations which the laws may bear to different objects, it is not so much my business to follow the natural order of laws as that of these relations and objects.”
The constitution of the country, explains Montesquieu, is a reflection of what the people are. If people want to have a democracy then laws will be passed to make all property equal. If the people want government to take care of their needs then a pure democracy or socialism would be established. A perfect government is one where the nature of the people are congruent to the nature of a government and the nature of a government is in congruence with the nature of the people. Is it any wonder why the people of certain countries in Europe are content with their socialist regime where the medical, educational and other sumptuary needs are controlled? They are a people that truly want a socialized government. “The government most comfortable to nature is that which best agrees with the humour and disposition of the people in whose favour it is established.”
The Spirit of Laws is comprehensive of the many and diverse kinds of people and therefore, the many types of government that should exist for the diverse peoples. He describes that the physical laws are constant, patterned, ordered, and predictable. However, opposite are the laws that govern the intelligent. Human beings are unpredictable and subject to error. Mediocrity exists because excellence abounds; evil is present because good exists; ignorance throngs our society because intelligence reigns. Writes Montesquieu, “Particular intelligent beings are of a finite nature, and consequently liable to error…their nature requires them to be free agents. Hence they do not steadily conform to their primitive laws; and even those of their own instituting they frequently infringe.” Thus the intelligent world is not as easily governed as the physical. He proposes that each country study their people and conform the government to balance with the people.
To simplify an otherwise very complicated system, Montesquieu suggests that there be three governments and that all others can be classified into one of the three, which are: Monarchical, Republic and Despotic. Illustrating in detail, he discovers the national principle of a people and their government and explains how the national principle can only work well with the national character of the State. To clarify, Montesquieu says that virtue is only needed in a republic form of government, including a democratic republic or an aristocratic republic. “[Political] virtue, in a republic, is the love of one’s country, that is the love of equality…it is the spring with sets the republican government in motion, as honour is the spring with gives motion to monarchy.”
The early founders were heavily influenced by Montesquieu’s separation of powers. The elements of human nature was vivid in their minds and it was in their best interest to form a very limited government. The Constitutional Convention successfully implemented three separate powers of the executive, the legislative including the senate and the house, and the judicial branches of government. The making of the law would be the sole responsibility of the legislative branch; the application of the law, the judicial; and the enforcement of the law would come from the executive branch. Each, along with the people, would form a check and a balance for the purpose of keeping the government at bay and limiting the natural encroachment of powers.
The laws of education would be different in each species of government, explains Montesquieu, “in monarchies they will have honour for their object; in republics, virtue; in despotic government, fear.” What would it take to educate a noble? You would teach them that they are better than the others and it would play naturally into the vice of the human. In a republic, students must be educated to keep up the love of country, their curriculum would be one of virtue and equality.
Montesquieu warned those of a republican government of the dangers of equality. Equality should be feared if it encroaches on the necessary liberties of the people. He wrote that too little or too much equality squelches liberty. Moreover he writes that, “The misfortune of a republic is when intrigues are at an end; which happens when the people are gained by bribery and corruption; in this case they grow indifferent to public affairs, and avarice becomes their predominant passion.”
What made Montesquieu great? Montesquieu looked to history to find the examples of principles and character and their practical applications. He used logic and historicism. His detail to the elements of society, national character and principles made all the difference for the unparalleled founding of the United States.
What is the proper role of government? Aristotle would say that the end of politics is happiness and the means to that end would be virtue. He believes the state exists for the sake of the individual. Machiavelli would say that the stability of the State and the Power of the Prince is the ultimate end and that we should preserve the state at every cost; the end justifies the means. Finally Montesquieu would say that the State should be a reflection of the people. In his great work, Spirit of the Laws, he describes his purpose for writing, “I do not pretend to treat of laws, but of their spirit; and as this spirit consists in the various relations which the laws may bear to different objects, it is not so much my business to follow the natural order of laws as that of these relations and objects.”
The constitution of the country, explains Montesquieu, is a reflection of what the people are. If people want to have a democracy then laws will be passed to make all property equal. If the people want government to take care of their needs then a pure democracy or socialism would be established. A perfect government is one where the nature of the people are congruent to the nature of a government and the nature of a government is in congruence with the nature of the people. Is it any wonder why the people of certain countries in Europe are content with their socialist regime where the medical, educational and other sumptuary needs are controlled? They are a people that truly want a socialized government. “The government most comfortable to nature is that which best agrees with the humour and disposition of the people in whose favour it is established.”
The Spirit of Laws is comprehensive of the many and diverse kinds of people and therefore, the many types of government that should exist for the diverse peoples. He describes that the physical laws are constant, patterned, ordered, and predictable. However, opposite are the laws that govern the intelligent. Human beings are unpredictable and subject to error. Mediocrity exists because excellence abounds; evil is present because good exists; ignorance throngs our society because intelligence reigns. Writes Montesquieu, “Particular intelligent beings are of a finite nature, and consequently liable to error…their nature requires them to be free agents. Hence they do not steadily conform to their primitive laws; and even those of their own instituting they frequently infringe.” Thus the intelligent world is not as easily governed as the physical. He proposes that each country study their people and conform the government to balance with the people.
To simplify an otherwise very complicated system, Montesquieu suggests that there be three governments and that all others can be classified into one of the three, which are: Monarchical, Republic and Despotic. Illustrating in detail, he discovers the national principle of a people and their government and explains how the national principle can only work well with the national character of the State. To clarify, Montesquieu says that virtue is only needed in a republic form of government, including a democratic republic or an aristocratic republic. “[Political] virtue, in a republic, is the love of one’s country, that is the love of equality…it is the spring with sets the republican government in motion, as honour is the spring with gives motion to monarchy.”
The early founders were heavily influenced by Montesquieu’s separation of powers. The elements of human nature was vivid in their minds and it was in their best interest to form a very limited government. The Constitutional Convention successfully implemented three separate powers of the executive, the legislative including the senate and the house, and the judicial branches of government. The making of the law would be the sole responsibility of the legislative branch; the application of the law, the judicial; and the enforcement of the law would come from the executive branch. Each, along with the people, would form a check and a balance for the purpose of keeping the government at bay and limiting the natural encroachment of powers.
The laws of education would be different in each species of government, explains Montesquieu, “in monarchies they will have honour for their object; in republics, virtue; in despotic government, fear.” What would it take to educate a noble? You would teach them that they are better than the others and it would play naturally into the vice of the human. In a republic, students must be educated to keep up the love of country, their curriculum would be one of virtue and equality.
Montesquieu warned those of a republican government of the dangers of equality. Equality should be feared if it encroaches on the necessary liberties of the people. He wrote that too little or too much equality squelches liberty. Moreover he writes that, “The misfortune of a republic is when intrigues are at an end; which happens when the people are gained by bribery and corruption; in this case they grow indifferent to public affairs, and avarice becomes their predominant passion.”
What made Montesquieu great? Montesquieu looked to history to find the examples of principles and character and their practical applications. He used logic and historicism. His detail to the elements of society, national character and principles made all the difference for the unparalleled founding of the United States.
A Response to Machiavelli's, The Prince
.
Machiavelli seemed to reject the whole philosophical and theological tradition of generations past. Biblical history showed that obedience to God provided security and Divine protection wherever His children lived. Greek philosophy taught that justice was compliance with natural order. Creating and maintaining individual happiness was the purpose of the Platonic and Aristotelian State and virtue was the means to that end. In contrast to godly obedience, happiness and virtue, Machiavelli pushed aside the old belief in the gods and turned the face of the world in the direction of humanism. He felt that the state's fundamental purpose was power in the state itself.
His letter to the reigning Medici family inclined to favor arbitrary power. With the zeitgeist moving in the general direction toward a new humanistic approach, Machiavelli's The Prince, became an important political step towards the Renaissance. Machiavelli wanted to understand politics in a rational way—what is, is what is. The truth is, wrote Machiavelli, that men want power and they do not get it from the gods, angels and demons. Using speed and strength the Prince had magnificent power to conquer and maintain the State. Power should be an end in and of itself, according to Machiavelli. And yet, time has demonstrated the catastrophic implications of such a leader through modern rulers such as Mao, Mussolini, Hitler and many others. Arbitrary power, when used on a human being creates either resentment or it transforms them into a temporal being who lacks desire for individual growth and progression, thus remaining in their childish state—precisely what a Machiavellian prince desires.
Machiavellian thought transformed the world from theocratic politics to the new cynical approach to power and towards modern political science. Were his writings intentionally to teach kings or were they to open the eyes of an enlightened people to the workings of all levels of tyranny? Rousseau postulates, “Machiavelli was a proper man and a good citizen; but, being attached to the court of the Medici, he could not help veiling his love of liberty in the midst of his country’s oppression. The choice of his detestable hero, Caesar Borgia, clearly enough shows his hidden aim; and the contradiction between the teaching of The Prince and that of the Discourses on Livy and the History of Florence shows that this profound political thinker has so far been studied only by superficial or corrupt readers. The Court of Rome sternly prohibited his book. I can well believe it; for it is that Court it most clearly portrays.” Whether Machiavelli was a realist or satirist, it is evident that the rulers of today strongly favor his opinion. One current example is the power assumed in the Executive branch of the United States over the Health Care issue. Decisions were made behind closed doors and the power went to the minority.
His ideas influenced Marxism in view of the fact that people could be molded and manipulated to think and do what the powers above desired. No longer were people completely responsible for their lives or choices, but were shaped into what the State needed at the time. “Machiavelli seems to agree with Aristotle by saying that one cannot establish the desirable political order if the matter is corrupt, i.e. if the people is corrupt, but what for Aristotle is an impossibility is for Machiavelli only a very great difficulty: the difficulty can be overcome by an outstanding man who uses extraordinary means in order to transform a corrupt matter into a good matter. Matter (human matter) can be transformed from without.” (Strauss, Three Waves of Modernity). The doors have been closing in on human freedom for many centuries, but it does not have to continue. Wise and interested parties can restore the sovereign back to the people. I believe the answer exists in a classically educated and moral people.
Machiavelli seemed to reject the whole philosophical and theological tradition of generations past. Biblical history showed that obedience to God provided security and Divine protection wherever His children lived. Greek philosophy taught that justice was compliance with natural order. Creating and maintaining individual happiness was the purpose of the Platonic and Aristotelian State and virtue was the means to that end. In contrast to godly obedience, happiness and virtue, Machiavelli pushed aside the old belief in the gods and turned the face of the world in the direction of humanism. He felt that the state's fundamental purpose was power in the state itself.
His letter to the reigning Medici family inclined to favor arbitrary power. With the zeitgeist moving in the general direction toward a new humanistic approach, Machiavelli's The Prince, became an important political step towards the Renaissance. Machiavelli wanted to understand politics in a rational way—what is, is what is. The truth is, wrote Machiavelli, that men want power and they do not get it from the gods, angels and demons. Using speed and strength the Prince had magnificent power to conquer and maintain the State. Power should be an end in and of itself, according to Machiavelli. And yet, time has demonstrated the catastrophic implications of such a leader through modern rulers such as Mao, Mussolini, Hitler and many others. Arbitrary power, when used on a human being creates either resentment or it transforms them into a temporal being who lacks desire for individual growth and progression, thus remaining in their childish state—precisely what a Machiavellian prince desires.
Machiavellian thought transformed the world from theocratic politics to the new cynical approach to power and towards modern political science. Were his writings intentionally to teach kings or were they to open the eyes of an enlightened people to the workings of all levels of tyranny? Rousseau postulates, “Machiavelli was a proper man and a good citizen; but, being attached to the court of the Medici, he could not help veiling his love of liberty in the midst of his country’s oppression. The choice of his detestable hero, Caesar Borgia, clearly enough shows his hidden aim; and the contradiction between the teaching of The Prince and that of the Discourses on Livy and the History of Florence shows that this profound political thinker has so far been studied only by superficial or corrupt readers. The Court of Rome sternly prohibited his book. I can well believe it; for it is that Court it most clearly portrays.” Whether Machiavelli was a realist or satirist, it is evident that the rulers of today strongly favor his opinion. One current example is the power assumed in the Executive branch of the United States over the Health Care issue. Decisions were made behind closed doors and the power went to the minority.
His ideas influenced Marxism in view of the fact that people could be molded and manipulated to think and do what the powers above desired. No longer were people completely responsible for their lives or choices, but were shaped into what the State needed at the time. “Machiavelli seems to agree with Aristotle by saying that one cannot establish the desirable political order if the matter is corrupt, i.e. if the people is corrupt, but what for Aristotle is an impossibility is for Machiavelli only a very great difficulty: the difficulty can be overcome by an outstanding man who uses extraordinary means in order to transform a corrupt matter into a good matter. Matter (human matter) can be transformed from without.” (Strauss, Three Waves of Modernity). The doors have been closing in on human freedom for many centuries, but it does not have to continue. Wise and interested parties can restore the sovereign back to the people. I believe the answer exists in a classically educated and moral people.
A Study on Virtue
.
What is virtue?
According to Aristotle virtue or arête is doing what we were created to do and doing it beautifully. Virtue is found in a well-balanced person with all parts of the soul in harmony with one another. Virtue can be divided into two sorts: that pertaining to thinking and that pertaining to character. Excellence of thinking and excellence of character constitute virtue.
Aristotle taught that virtue can be destroyed by excess or deficiency, and yet can be preserved by the mean between them. Says he, “I am speaking of what holds a position equally apart from either of the extremes, which is one and the same thing for everyone, but the mean in relation to us is what neither goes too far nor falls short, and this is not one thing nor the same thing for everyone.” Think of the sisters in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Lydia and Kitty are deficient in virtue; Mary is excessive; Jane seem to be in the mean of their extremes and Lizzy is on her way to join Jane after some lessons in tolerance toward Darcy.
Should it be a means or an end?
Virtue is not an end, but should be a means to an end with the end being happiness. What is happiness? Is it living well and doing well? The reader of Aristotle’s Nicomachian Ethics arrives at the idea that it is more than this. He shall find that the classical writer intended for man to live beautifully well and to do things beautifully well. Said Aristotle, “Happiness is a being-at-work of the soul.” A student in the Lyceum Gardens in Greece learned that moral virtue was an active state or hexes. As each situation arose, he must decide how he would think and act. Deciding constantly whether he would act in a virtuous manner while in the mental, intellectual, spiritual and physical state created character, according to Aristotle. Thus character was composed of an active or a “being-at-work” condition.
Virtue is not a habit or ethos, according to Aristotle. While habits are a prerequisite to practicing virtue, it is more like a process of repeating habits. But ultimately virtue is a state of active thought and action; it is an effort of concentrating and paying attention and being teachable. “Then this must be our notion of the just man,” taught Aristotle, “that even when he is in poverty or sickness, or any other seeming misfortune, all things will in the end work together for good to him in life and death: for the gods have a care of any one whose desire is to become just and to be like God, as far as man can attain the divine likeness, by the pursuit of virtue.”
Socrates final counsel in his Republic may have set the precedent for Aristotle’s belief, “Wherefore my counsel is that we hold fast ever to the heavenly way and follow after justice and virtue always, considering that the soul is immortal and able to endure every sort of good and every sort of evil.”
How does virtue relate to government?
Plato taught that a just being would create a just society. Thus virtue was directly linked to freedom and liberty according to the classical school of thought. From Aristotle we know that “The highest good is the end of politics, while it takes the greatest part of its pains to produce citizens of a certain sort, namely, ones that are good and inclined to perform beautiful actions.” The classical writers knew that to maintain a just and noble government the people would need to be trained in virtue. They believed that moral virtue is learned just as a child learns his native language. It is not imposed upon him, but is taught and lived. In Physics, Aristotle said that virtues no more alter what we are than putting on its roof alters a house. In Politics, he wrote of the importance of education in the maintaining of the constitution, “For, inasmuch as every family is a part of a state, and these relationships are the parts of a family, and the virtue of the part must have regard to the virtue of the whole, women and children must be trained by education with an eye to the constitution, if the virtues of either of them are supposed to make any difference in the virtues of the state. And they must make a difference; for the children grow up to be citizens, and half the free persons in a state are women.”
What are the most important virtues? Why?
According to the Classical writers, virtue encompasses all good qualities that create a good and well-balanced character. Plato felt that the most important virtues were wisdom, justice, fortitude and temperance. Aristotle agreed with Plato and added five others, prudence, courage, liberality, magnificence, and magnanimity, but he and possibly, Plato, felt that wisdom was the most important virtue. On wisdom, Plato taught in Republic that a whole education would teach a man about virtue as well as vice. That he need not feel the obligation to live a life of corruption to know vice—his virtuous education would inform him and give him wisdom. Said he, “A virtuous nature, educated by time, will acquire a knowledge both of virtue and vice: the virtuous, and not the vicious man has wisdom.”
This writer believes that honesty, faith, hope and charity are the most important virtues. Honesty demands the highest trust from anyone and with that trust one can teach all truths to the edifying of the human mind. Faith lends itself to trust in God and man in order to learn all truths. Hope is the optimism in obtaining truth. Finally, charity is the absence of all pride and the application of all the good found in life.
What is the ultimate virtue? Why?
In the Aristotelian society, the full measure of virtue was to think and act like God; it was the greatest aim. If charity is what they are describing then I will agree with them, for this writer believes that charity is the ultimate virtue. It was the virtue that Christ most emulated and is the subject of the two most important commandments in the law; that of loving God and loving our fellow man. Charity is considered the highest form of love and the pure love of Christ.
How has our concept of virtue changed since the days of Plato and Aristotle?
The general notion of virtue has not changed much, but there has been a deeper value lost over the centuries. It is almost as if the great philosophers believed that each individual was created for a specific purpose or mission and that as they developed the virtues within, they would essentially do what they were created to do in a beautiful manner. Today virtue means conforming to moral conduct and moral excellence. However fine that may be, it is missing the classical element of the who we are and the what we can become and how beautifully we can perform our actions.
What is virtue?
According to Aristotle virtue or arête is doing what we were created to do and doing it beautifully. Virtue is found in a well-balanced person with all parts of the soul in harmony with one another. Virtue can be divided into two sorts: that pertaining to thinking and that pertaining to character. Excellence of thinking and excellence of character constitute virtue.
Aristotle taught that virtue can be destroyed by excess or deficiency, and yet can be preserved by the mean between them. Says he, “I am speaking of what holds a position equally apart from either of the extremes, which is one and the same thing for everyone, but the mean in relation to us is what neither goes too far nor falls short, and this is not one thing nor the same thing for everyone.” Think of the sisters in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Lydia and Kitty are deficient in virtue; Mary is excessive; Jane seem to be in the mean of their extremes and Lizzy is on her way to join Jane after some lessons in tolerance toward Darcy.
Should it be a means or an end?
Virtue is not an end, but should be a means to an end with the end being happiness. What is happiness? Is it living well and doing well? The reader of Aristotle’s Nicomachian Ethics arrives at the idea that it is more than this. He shall find that the classical writer intended for man to live beautifully well and to do things beautifully well. Said Aristotle, “Happiness is a being-at-work of the soul.” A student in the Lyceum Gardens in Greece learned that moral virtue was an active state or hexes. As each situation arose, he must decide how he would think and act. Deciding constantly whether he would act in a virtuous manner while in the mental, intellectual, spiritual and physical state created character, according to Aristotle. Thus character was composed of an active or a “being-at-work” condition.
Virtue is not a habit or ethos, according to Aristotle. While habits are a prerequisite to practicing virtue, it is more like a process of repeating habits. But ultimately virtue is a state of active thought and action; it is an effort of concentrating and paying attention and being teachable. “Then this must be our notion of the just man,” taught Aristotle, “that even when he is in poverty or sickness, or any other seeming misfortune, all things will in the end work together for good to him in life and death: for the gods have a care of any one whose desire is to become just and to be like God, as far as man can attain the divine likeness, by the pursuit of virtue.”
Socrates final counsel in his Republic may have set the precedent for Aristotle’s belief, “Wherefore my counsel is that we hold fast ever to the heavenly way and follow after justice and virtue always, considering that the soul is immortal and able to endure every sort of good and every sort of evil.”
How does virtue relate to government?
Plato taught that a just being would create a just society. Thus virtue was directly linked to freedom and liberty according to the classical school of thought. From Aristotle we know that “The highest good is the end of politics, while it takes the greatest part of its pains to produce citizens of a certain sort, namely, ones that are good and inclined to perform beautiful actions.” The classical writers knew that to maintain a just and noble government the people would need to be trained in virtue. They believed that moral virtue is learned just as a child learns his native language. It is not imposed upon him, but is taught and lived. In Physics, Aristotle said that virtues no more alter what we are than putting on its roof alters a house. In Politics, he wrote of the importance of education in the maintaining of the constitution, “For, inasmuch as every family is a part of a state, and these relationships are the parts of a family, and the virtue of the part must have regard to the virtue of the whole, women and children must be trained by education with an eye to the constitution, if the virtues of either of them are supposed to make any difference in the virtues of the state. And they must make a difference; for the children grow up to be citizens, and half the free persons in a state are women.”
What are the most important virtues? Why?
According to the Classical writers, virtue encompasses all good qualities that create a good and well-balanced character. Plato felt that the most important virtues were wisdom, justice, fortitude and temperance. Aristotle agreed with Plato and added five others, prudence, courage, liberality, magnificence, and magnanimity, but he and possibly, Plato, felt that wisdom was the most important virtue. On wisdom, Plato taught in Republic that a whole education would teach a man about virtue as well as vice. That he need not feel the obligation to live a life of corruption to know vice—his virtuous education would inform him and give him wisdom. Said he, “A virtuous nature, educated by time, will acquire a knowledge both of virtue and vice: the virtuous, and not the vicious man has wisdom.”
This writer believes that honesty, faith, hope and charity are the most important virtues. Honesty demands the highest trust from anyone and with that trust one can teach all truths to the edifying of the human mind. Faith lends itself to trust in God and man in order to learn all truths. Hope is the optimism in obtaining truth. Finally, charity is the absence of all pride and the application of all the good found in life.
What is the ultimate virtue? Why?
In the Aristotelian society, the full measure of virtue was to think and act like God; it was the greatest aim. If charity is what they are describing then I will agree with them, for this writer believes that charity is the ultimate virtue. It was the virtue that Christ most emulated and is the subject of the two most important commandments in the law; that of loving God and loving our fellow man. Charity is considered the highest form of love and the pure love of Christ.
How has our concept of virtue changed since the days of Plato and Aristotle?
The general notion of virtue has not changed much, but there has been a deeper value lost over the centuries. It is almost as if the great philosophers believed that each individual was created for a specific purpose or mission and that as they developed the virtues within, they would essentially do what they were created to do in a beautiful manner. Today virtue means conforming to moral conduct and moral excellence. However fine that may be, it is missing the classical element of the who we are and the what we can become and how beautifully we can perform our actions.
National Principle Decides Government Form
.
The best society, according to Montesquieu, is a matter of connecting the right form of government to the national principle of the people. “The government most conformable to nature,” says Montesquieu, “is that which best agrees with the humor and disposition of the people in whose favor it is established.” For instance, if the people esteem their leaders with honor, then this particular society’s best form of government would be a monarchy. If with fear, then the correct form would be despotic. On the other hand, if a people loved their country and perpetuated the value of political virtue, according to Montesquieu, then this society’s best form of government would be a republic. The United States was established upon political virtue, which can best be described as both a love of country and for the rule of law; its government was a democratic republic.
As I look at the people surrounding me in our once democratic republic, I see a change in the governing principle from its former political virtue, as well as private virtue, to that of extreme equality and commercialism. Many leaders and experts agree that our founding constitution is not compatible with our nation’s people any longer. I will have to agree with them. It is true that our national principle of equality and commercialism is pulling us along the path of pure democracy or socialism. Once the Constitution was completed, a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what the Founders had given the nation. He replied, “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.” If Ben Franklin and Montesquieu were here they would certainly suggest that our best government, in relation to our national principle of extreme equality, should be a social democracy; a massive paternal government.
Is this the government that we want, one that will suck every drop of ambition from its people and leave them in a mess of mediocrity? If not, then everything depends on establishing the lost political virtue that America once had. “To inspire it ought to be the principal business of education: but the surest way of instilling it into children is for parents to set them an example,” says Montesquieu. Dinner discussions apropos the Founding Fathers, rule of law and love of country will invite the national principle of political virtue to return to our communities. By fostering a love of God, implementing a classical education and turning toward a true free market economy, we could have the very best of societies once again, that of a republic. It all depends on you.
The best society, according to Montesquieu, is a matter of connecting the right form of government to the national principle of the people. “The government most conformable to nature,” says Montesquieu, “is that which best agrees with the humor and disposition of the people in whose favor it is established.” For instance, if the people esteem their leaders with honor, then this particular society’s best form of government would be a monarchy. If with fear, then the correct form would be despotic. On the other hand, if a people loved their country and perpetuated the value of political virtue, according to Montesquieu, then this society’s best form of government would be a republic. The United States was established upon political virtue, which can best be described as both a love of country and for the rule of law; its government was a democratic republic.
As I look at the people surrounding me in our once democratic republic, I see a change in the governing principle from its former political virtue, as well as private virtue, to that of extreme equality and commercialism. Many leaders and experts agree that our founding constitution is not compatible with our nation’s people any longer. I will have to agree with them. It is true that our national principle of equality and commercialism is pulling us along the path of pure democracy or socialism. Once the Constitution was completed, a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what the Founders had given the nation. He replied, “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.” If Ben Franklin and Montesquieu were here they would certainly suggest that our best government, in relation to our national principle of extreme equality, should be a social democracy; a massive paternal government.
Is this the government that we want, one that will suck every drop of ambition from its people and leave them in a mess of mediocrity? If not, then everything depends on establishing the lost political virtue that America once had. “To inspire it ought to be the principal business of education: but the surest way of instilling it into children is for parents to set them an example,” says Montesquieu. Dinner discussions apropos the Founding Fathers, rule of law and love of country will invite the national principle of political virtue to return to our communities. By fostering a love of God, implementing a classical education and turning toward a true free market economy, we could have the very best of societies once again, that of a republic. It all depends on you.
Friday, April 23, 2010
The Theology of the Family
.
The men and women of the Old Testament understood the theology of the family. Adam and Eve were given the command to multiply and replenish the earth. Throughout all of the biblical teachings we see that family life is safeguarded with divine commandments. The three major pillars of the gospel hinge upon the family; the Creation, the Fall, and Christ’s Atoning Sacrifice were implemented to create, teach and save the families of God.
Julie B. Beck taught gospel educators that; “The Creation of the earth was the creation of an earth where a family could live. It was a creation of a man and a woman who were the two essential halves of a family. It was not about a creation of a man and a woman who happened to have a family. It was intentional all along that Adam and Eve form an eternal family. It was part of the plan that these two be sealed and form an eternal family unit. That was the plan of happiness.” (Seminaries and Institutes of Religion Satellite Broadcast, August 4, 2009, Conference Center Theatre.) The Fall provided a way for Adam and Eve to leave the garden and to form their family. Adam was commanded to work hard and “in the sweat of [his] face [could] he eat bread.” (Genesis 3:19) Eve, his wife, would work alongside him throughout their lengthy lives. They begat children and taught them to work hard, but most importantly, to obey God. The Atonement, not only would accomplish the necessary salvation for individuals, but would provide a means for the family to be sealed together eternally under the Celestial Law.
Throughout the Bible, the prophets acknowledged the doctrine of eternal families. Isaiah wrote that Israel must follow after righteousness and ought to, “look unto the rock whence [they] are hewn, and to the pit whence [they] are digged.” He continues his plea to the families, “Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him.” (Isaiah 51:1-2)
The children of Israel were forewarned of the dangers of mingling with other faiths and marrying outside of their faith. And yet, Israel, not listening to the warnings, lived and mingled among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and others. As is the case in any setting where we lurk among physical and spiritual dangers, we put ourselves at risk physically and spiritually. Israel was not immune to that fact. In Judges we read about Israel’s spiritual danger in intermingling with the godless and then we observe the loss of covenanted families. “And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim: And they forsook the Lord God of their fathers, which brought them out of the land of Egypt, and followed other gods, of the gods of the people that were round about them, and bowed themselves unto them, and provoked the Lord to anger…And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods.” (Judges 2:11-12; 3:6) Another time we see Israel’s physical danger from not heeding the Lord’s command to “destroy the accursed” from among them. Joshua records the destruction of many disobedient Israelites, “Therefore the children of Israel could not stand before their enemies, but turned their backs before their enemies, because they were accursed: neither will I be with you any more, except ye destroy the accursed from among you.” (Joshua 7:12) God warns his people because he loves them and knows that the only way to preserve them is for them to live as covenanted families and to know and live His law.
Numerous examples in the Old Testament describe righteous women and mothers who knew His law for families. These ancestral mothers taught their children to love God and eschew evil. They taught their daughters the theology of families and to desire the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant. Julie B. Beck recounts the story of Isaac and Rebekah,
“If Abraham wanted these blessings—to be the ‘father of many nations’—how important was Isaac’s wife? Isaac’s wife was pivotal in Abraham being able to receive his blessings. She was so important that he sent his servant on a mission to find the right girl—a girl who would keep her covenants, a girl who understood what it meant to form an eternal family and have those same blessings…Now, Rebekah gave up everything—she left her family and her homeland to go form an eternal family because she wanted these blessings. And of her two sons, she had one left; and of the daughters of the land, there was not one who could form an eternal marriage with her son. She needed to see that her righteous son got the blessings. Rebekah used her influence to see that the priesthood blessings and keys passed to the righteous son. It’s a perfect example of the man who has the keys and the woman who has the influence working together to ensure their blessings.” (Seminaries and Institutes of Religion Satellite Broadcast, August 4, 2009, Conference Center Theatre.)
Ruth understood the covenant and blessing of Abraham. Having lost her husband, but not wanting to leave her Mother-in-law and the God of Israel to go back to her godless family among the Moabites, she chose to stay and was blessed to marry a kinsman of Naomi and stay within the faith. She understood her role as a wife and mother in the family chain of God’s covenanted children. She bore Obed, the father of Jesse, who became the father of David and the ancestor of Jesus Christ.
Hannah understood the blessing of Abraham and desired a child, however barren. She vowed to the Lord that if she were blessed with a son, she would dedicate him to the service of God’s work. She poured out her soul, “O Lord of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thine handmaid, but will give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the Lord all the days of his life. And there shall no razor come upon his head.”
Diligent, obedient wives and mothers of the Old Testament were women who understood their divine role and mission of the families. They knew how to create the seedbed for their children to grow up unto the Lord. They taught the theology of the family so their children would know how to perpetuate the blessings of Abraham. Malachi records the Lord’s last words to His people in the Old Testament; they are a powerful statement to future generations on the unifying of the family, “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.” (Malachi 4:5-6) In the last days of God’s kingdom on earth there will be a mighty change in the hearts of parents and children as they learn and understand the theology of the family.
How does that mighty change come about? Just before Malachi writes of the unified hearts of the family members, the Lord’s words remind us to, “Remember…the law of Moses…which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.” The change of heart will surely come about as we remember the law of God. In Deuteronomy we learn that we are to fear God and keep His commandments, “And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all they soul, and with all thy might.” (Deut. 6:6) However it is not enough to live in this manner, but more important is it to teach our children continually that they might remember the good examples of our ancestral parents in Israel. “And thou shalt teach [the laws] diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.” (Deut. 6:7) Moreover Moses pleads with the parents to instruct their children respecting their heritage and remind them continually of their divine deliverance out of Egyptian bondage.
Do the rising generation know the rich heritage of their ancestors, of their country’s treasured heritage? Do they know that they are the future fathers and mothers of a coming generation of the Lord? Do they fully understand the theology of families that they may have the power to safeguard future families and continue the blessings of Abraham throughout all the nations of the earth? If so we can be assured of Isaiah’s prophecy, “And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children.” (Isaiah 54:13)
The men and women of the Old Testament understood the theology of the family. Adam and Eve were given the command to multiply and replenish the earth. Throughout all of the biblical teachings we see that family life is safeguarded with divine commandments. The three major pillars of the gospel hinge upon the family; the Creation, the Fall, and Christ’s Atoning Sacrifice were implemented to create, teach and save the families of God.
Julie B. Beck taught gospel educators that; “The Creation of the earth was the creation of an earth where a family could live. It was a creation of a man and a woman who were the two essential halves of a family. It was not about a creation of a man and a woman who happened to have a family. It was intentional all along that Adam and Eve form an eternal family. It was part of the plan that these two be sealed and form an eternal family unit. That was the plan of happiness.” (Seminaries and Institutes of Religion Satellite Broadcast, August 4, 2009, Conference Center Theatre.) The Fall provided a way for Adam and Eve to leave the garden and to form their family. Adam was commanded to work hard and “in the sweat of [his] face [could] he eat bread.” (Genesis 3:19) Eve, his wife, would work alongside him throughout their lengthy lives. They begat children and taught them to work hard, but most importantly, to obey God. The Atonement, not only would accomplish the necessary salvation for individuals, but would provide a means for the family to be sealed together eternally under the Celestial Law.
Throughout the Bible, the prophets acknowledged the doctrine of eternal families. Isaiah wrote that Israel must follow after righteousness and ought to, “look unto the rock whence [they] are hewn, and to the pit whence [they] are digged.” He continues his plea to the families, “Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah that bare you: for I called him alone, and blessed him, and increased him.” (Isaiah 51:1-2)
The children of Israel were forewarned of the dangers of mingling with other faiths and marrying outside of their faith. And yet, Israel, not listening to the warnings, lived and mingled among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and others. As is the case in any setting where we lurk among physical and spiritual dangers, we put ourselves at risk physically and spiritually. Israel was not immune to that fact. In Judges we read about Israel’s spiritual danger in intermingling with the godless and then we observe the loss of covenanted families. “And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served Baalim: And they forsook the Lord God of their fathers, which brought them out of the land of Egypt, and followed other gods, of the gods of the people that were round about them, and bowed themselves unto them, and provoked the Lord to anger…And they took their daughters to be their wives, and gave their daughters to their sons, and served their gods.” (Judges 2:11-12; 3:6) Another time we see Israel’s physical danger from not heeding the Lord’s command to “destroy the accursed” from among them. Joshua records the destruction of many disobedient Israelites, “Therefore the children of Israel could not stand before their enemies, but turned their backs before their enemies, because they were accursed: neither will I be with you any more, except ye destroy the accursed from among you.” (Joshua 7:12) God warns his people because he loves them and knows that the only way to preserve them is for them to live as covenanted families and to know and live His law.
Numerous examples in the Old Testament describe righteous women and mothers who knew His law for families. These ancestral mothers taught their children to love God and eschew evil. They taught their daughters the theology of families and to desire the blessings of the Abrahamic covenant. Julie B. Beck recounts the story of Isaac and Rebekah,
“If Abraham wanted these blessings—to be the ‘father of many nations’—how important was Isaac’s wife? Isaac’s wife was pivotal in Abraham being able to receive his blessings. She was so important that he sent his servant on a mission to find the right girl—a girl who would keep her covenants, a girl who understood what it meant to form an eternal family and have those same blessings…Now, Rebekah gave up everything—she left her family and her homeland to go form an eternal family because she wanted these blessings. And of her two sons, she had one left; and of the daughters of the land, there was not one who could form an eternal marriage with her son. She needed to see that her righteous son got the blessings. Rebekah used her influence to see that the priesthood blessings and keys passed to the righteous son. It’s a perfect example of the man who has the keys and the woman who has the influence working together to ensure their blessings.” (Seminaries and Institutes of Religion Satellite Broadcast, August 4, 2009, Conference Center Theatre.)
Ruth understood the covenant and blessing of Abraham. Having lost her husband, but not wanting to leave her Mother-in-law and the God of Israel to go back to her godless family among the Moabites, she chose to stay and was blessed to marry a kinsman of Naomi and stay within the faith. She understood her role as a wife and mother in the family chain of God’s covenanted children. She bore Obed, the father of Jesse, who became the father of David and the ancestor of Jesus Christ.
Hannah understood the blessing of Abraham and desired a child, however barren. She vowed to the Lord that if she were blessed with a son, she would dedicate him to the service of God’s work. She poured out her soul, “O Lord of hosts, if thou wilt indeed look on the affliction of thine handmaid, and remember me, and not forget thine handmaid, but will give unto thine handmaid a man child, then I will give him unto the Lord all the days of his life. And there shall no razor come upon his head.”
Diligent, obedient wives and mothers of the Old Testament were women who understood their divine role and mission of the families. They knew how to create the seedbed for their children to grow up unto the Lord. They taught the theology of the family so their children would know how to perpetuate the blessings of Abraham. Malachi records the Lord’s last words to His people in the Old Testament; they are a powerful statement to future generations on the unifying of the family, “Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord: And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.” (Malachi 4:5-6) In the last days of God’s kingdom on earth there will be a mighty change in the hearts of parents and children as they learn and understand the theology of the family.
How does that mighty change come about? Just before Malachi writes of the unified hearts of the family members, the Lord’s words remind us to, “Remember…the law of Moses…which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments.” The change of heart will surely come about as we remember the law of God. In Deuteronomy we learn that we are to fear God and keep His commandments, “And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all they soul, and with all thy might.” (Deut. 6:6) However it is not enough to live in this manner, but more important is it to teach our children continually that they might remember the good examples of our ancestral parents in Israel. “And thou shalt teach [the laws] diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.” (Deut. 6:7) Moreover Moses pleads with the parents to instruct their children respecting their heritage and remind them continually of their divine deliverance out of Egyptian bondage.
Do the rising generation know the rich heritage of their ancestors, of their country’s treasured heritage? Do they know that they are the future fathers and mothers of a coming generation of the Lord? Do they fully understand the theology of families that they may have the power to safeguard future families and continue the blessings of Abraham throughout all the nations of the earth? If so we can be assured of Isaiah’s prophecy, “And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the peace of thy children.” (Isaiah 54:13)
Lyceum Lessons on Liberty
.
My wise thrifty husband delights in spending time in second-hand stores. His patience and diligence add up to furnish our home with beautiful and simple treasures. Recently David brought home an old solid oak bookcase from our local Deseret Industries Thrift Store. After a vigorous cleaning and polishing it was pristine as if it were newly handcrafted, but more beautiful still was David’s manner of action. A careful observer will perceive that he takes pleasure in doing things well. With a vision of excellence and the mastery of superb skill, he uncovered the beauty of the oaken cabinet. What constitutes this manner of excellence? Aristotle would say it was arête or virtue.
Virtue in the classical sense is best understood in knowing the aim of a specific tool. Precisely as a tool has its noble and distinct purpose, equally a man is created for a noble and virtuous end. Virtue, for Aristotle, was doing what we were created to do individually and doing it beautifully. The full measure of virtue was to think and act like God; it was the greatest aim for an Aristotelian society.
As Aristotle’s mentor, Plato taught that a just being would create a just society. Thus virtue was directly linked to freedom and liberty according to the classical school of thought. From the Lyceum gardens of Greece came the propitious words of Aristotle, “The highest good is the end of politics, while it takes the greatest part of its pains to produce citizens of a certain sort, namely, ones that are good and inclined to perform beautiful actions.” His students learned that moral virtue was an active state. It is not just a habit, but an effort of concentrating and paying attention and being ready to learn more.
The American Founders were strong believers in the principle. As statesmen in colonial times they understood the souls of men as they constructed possibly the most successful society in the world’s history. Being well versed in first principles, an enlightened constitution was created to promote the long yearned-for freedoms from a despotic Britain. Virtue would be the guiding principle in the new nation. Said Benjamin Franklin, “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
Are we a virtuous people? Are we doing well and beautifully those things we were created to do? Only as individuals can we answer these questions and only as individuals can we endeavor to make virtue our habit as we actively work at it in all situations of life, whether it be polishing an oaken cabinet or creating a free society.
My wise thrifty husband delights in spending time in second-hand stores. His patience and diligence add up to furnish our home with beautiful and simple treasures. Recently David brought home an old solid oak bookcase from our local Deseret Industries Thrift Store. After a vigorous cleaning and polishing it was pristine as if it were newly handcrafted, but more beautiful still was David’s manner of action. A careful observer will perceive that he takes pleasure in doing things well. With a vision of excellence and the mastery of superb skill, he uncovered the beauty of the oaken cabinet. What constitutes this manner of excellence? Aristotle would say it was arête or virtue.
Virtue in the classical sense is best understood in knowing the aim of a specific tool. Precisely as a tool has its noble and distinct purpose, equally a man is created for a noble and virtuous end. Virtue, for Aristotle, was doing what we were created to do individually and doing it beautifully. The full measure of virtue was to think and act like God; it was the greatest aim for an Aristotelian society.
As Aristotle’s mentor, Plato taught that a just being would create a just society. Thus virtue was directly linked to freedom and liberty according to the classical school of thought. From the Lyceum gardens of Greece came the propitious words of Aristotle, “The highest good is the end of politics, while it takes the greatest part of its pains to produce citizens of a certain sort, namely, ones that are good and inclined to perform beautiful actions.” His students learned that moral virtue was an active state. It is not just a habit, but an effort of concentrating and paying attention and being ready to learn more.
The American Founders were strong believers in the principle. As statesmen in colonial times they understood the souls of men as they constructed possibly the most successful society in the world’s history. Being well versed in first principles, an enlightened constitution was created to promote the long yearned-for freedoms from a despotic Britain. Virtue would be the guiding principle in the new nation. Said Benjamin Franklin, “Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.”
Are we a virtuous people? Are we doing well and beautifully those things we were created to do? Only as individuals can we answer these questions and only as individuals can we endeavor to make virtue our habit as we actively work at it in all situations of life, whether it be polishing an oaken cabinet or creating a free society.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)