City of Man
The City of Man, Religion and Politics in a New Era, by Michael Gerson and Peter Wehner.
The subject and perspective of this book guaranteed a certain level of interest for me. And I did appreciate it. It frames a lot of discussion of politics, particularly for Christians, but I think it would be insightful for non-Christians to see what thoughtful Christians understand the essence of faithful politics to be.
The book aims at neither the depth nor the scope of To Change the World. The authors do cite James Davison Hunter’s book several times, mostly in agreement. They clearly write with desire to persuade Christians that involvement in politics is warranted and important, and it seems some of this motivation is partly fueled by concerns that Hunter or his readers might devalue that involvement. I did not find Hunter’s book to undermine political involvement. Whether or not Christians should involve themselves did not seem to be exactly central to Hunter’s thesis, but as To Change the World does of course address Christian involvement in politics, I did not find it to undermine involvement, only to give solid grounding and appropriate expectations for it, and to check irresponsible (less than faithful) ambitions and distortions of true Christ hope.
City of Man provides a great framework and starting point for these conversations. It certainly does not close any conversations, nor does it seem intended to do so. Plenty of subjects could be taken up from the book and advanced, and hopefully thoughtful, faithful Christians will (whether in book form or otherwise).
I especially appreciated the authors’ interest in first principles and the solid grounds for politics and the legitimate warrants for government. I also appreciate their recognition that almost no political issues are clearly divided between pure right and pure wrong, and wisdom and prudence are crucial for faithful engagement.
Excerpts from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham City Jail were quoted very effectively. Believers should give more attention to his convictions and applications from this 1963 letter and other writings.
Five suggestions in chapter six under a section called “A Primer for Christian Persuaders” (pages 124-127) were especially good – “maintain self-awareness; maintain spiritual grounding, maintain perspective, maintain community, and maintain a spirit of grace and reconciliation.” These were only briefly presented, and I think the last one could be helpfully clarified by explaining the differences between a basic interest in justice and human good versus a basic interest in “winning” some political game. The latter fundamentally undermines all involvement. The former carries with it a disposition that will rightly recognize the opportunities for “grace and reconciliation” that the authors champion but caution can be easily misapplied.
I also appreciate the principled defense and promotion of capitalism as an economic system (in chapter 5). Again, the authors do not really get into an argument for it here, but the framework is there, and another book by Arthur C. Brooks and Peter Wehner is cited (Wealth and Justice: The Morality of Democratic Capitalism). I think this subject has been tremendously under-appreciated by Christians. Too often Christians settle for a very shallow conception of both politics and especially economics, make some nods toward the corruption and greed associated with capitalism and move on with some vague assumptions that a moderate position must be the most enlightened and most faithful. I don’t think that’s a very responsible or faithful engagement with economics (nor with politics).
Other times and places would be more appropriate to comment on the value of capitalism (and of course there is a lot out there in this vein – just not a lot of appreciation for it among most Christians). But for now William F. Buckely’s quote sums up a lot: “The problem with capitalism is capitalists; the problem with socialism is socialism.”
The authors conclude their Epilogue with three propositions (p. 134-136). The last point about nobility reminds me of one favorite passage on the virtues and hope of good governance – Isaiah 32:1-8. After opening the chapter with promises of a king and even princes who will rule in justice and who will provide refuge and cultivate life for those they govern, the passage goes on in description for seven verses. Verse eight reads: “But he who is noble plans noble things and on noble things he stands.”
Another wonderfully relevant passage is 2 Samuel 23:1-4. These passages do not advocate for a Christianization of government; not at all. They point to the ideals for a government that serves, not exploits, the governed, that cultivates life instead of death and justice instead of oppression. These basic principles for government are on the level of what often is called “natural law” (see p. 118 – 121), and we should genuinely appropriate them in discussions of what government should be about, without direct regard for Christian-izing anything. Government should simply be good government.
Christians should faithfully engage in government and economics for what those enterprises are on their own – legitimate, God-ordained goods that should not be considered either “Christian” or “un-Christian,” and not even “more-or-less Christian.” They can be more-or-less good governments, more-or-less good economies. We should put a lot of thought into what criteria makes for good governments and good economies.
Thanks for a great review, I’ve always liked Gerson and will certainly check out this book.
Thanks, Kolburt!
On that last topic, an article from WSJ.com of 2/10/11 by Arthur B. Laffer, “Reaganomics: What we learned” concludes this way: “The true lesson to be learned from the Reagan presidency is that good economics isn’t Republican or Democrat, right-wing or left-wing, liberal or conservative. It’s simply good economics. …”
Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704364004576132473777840938.html?mod=rss_opinion_main