Consider the following

I've been reading about Critical Legal Theory in my jurisprudence (philosophy of law) class; I love the material in this class and find myself mentally clapping upon the class fodder... well more than contracts class anyway.

Recently, in class, I read a quote by Paul Butler from a '95 Yale law review article; he stated, "The fullness of time allows us to judge..." Then he went into his current judgments of past cases, based upon his current enlightened state by the supposed manifestation of a new and wonderful theory; the theory was an offspring of Critical Legal Theory. That may sound boring, it really isn't; but my point is not about either critical race or any other legal theory but rather about the foundational belief that we are as a culture could discover a more perfect way to live.

The word "progressive" impresses upon our minds a kind of journey to "the Good" or at least "the Better." Most Neo-Marxists would tell you that we are progressing to a new and better system of governance, or non-governance that will free us to be our good and wonderful selves, freed from the chains of oppressive, dust-dry, lifeless, morality. In contrast, the problem with being a "Conservative" is it, as  Chesterton says, forces us into a stagnancy; a kind of hat tipping to current social ailments.

I think the answer is neither to be morally progressive nor morally conservative but morally regressive. There was this one guy who lived a couple of millennia ago who had some really great ideas. Really, if we were morally regressive, that is regressing chronologically to the standard that Christ laid out for us, or regressing internally to the law written on our hearts, given solidification and direction by God's Word; we would be doing the right kind of regressing.

I heard a technocrat* scientist on TV the other day saying they found a place in the Brain that fired a certain way when people saw pictures of a babies. In contrast when people saw ugly people their brains fired in a different way. They induced, by regional firing, people think Baby's are cute. From that premise they said, "Our brains recognize cuteness so... we can take care of Babies! we see babies as cute and want to take care of them."
I was like holy craaaaaaaaaaapppp......... They've Discovered cuteness!!! Yeaaaaa!!! Honey... Get in here..... they've discovered Babies are cute!!!! Finally, Cuteness is scientifically validated, we can now know it's real and it's morally ok to think babies are cute, get Leon out of the closet! Wooooo-hoooooooooooooooo!

Our moral behavior is not validated or invalidated by Science nor is it validated or invalidated by, as Professor Butler believes, the "fulness of time." Morality is based upon God's standard and although the technocrats rage against it and the progressives plot a vain thing, the God-Man who came for a visit still is the representation of that unchanging standard.

*Technocrat: The moral ruling class whose ideological validation comes not from a "religious" system of belief but from technological validation and or scientific discovery. (this is my first time trying to actually define this term; this is an approximation)

Psalm 2

 ¹ Why do the nations conspire^[a]
   and the peoples plot in vain?
² The kings of the earth rise up
   and the rulers band together
   against the LORD and against his anointed, saying,
³ “Let us break their chains
   and throw off their shackles.”  ⁴ The One enthroned in heaven laughs;
   the Lord scoffs at them.

I talked to a friend this week who gave me some great advise. See, I'm a little competitive, so if I can't be the best I tend to want to give up on the whole processes, whatever process that happens to be. One time my older brother and I were playing a video game and I lost, (a total freak accident) he wrenched the controller from my hand and said "my turn." I could smell the static in the air and had no choice but to, like lightning, batter his face with my fist... And so I did... And then I ran. Sometimes rather than loose in competition it feels better to throw the match. Using my story as an illustrative point, I can think of lots of redeemable characteristics of the soul that could potentially be developed into something worthy of expression but there is a pressure to give up unless it is "the best" or I "win."


There are clear Biblical statements prohibiting such intentions of the heart. Jesus said if you want to become great be a servant and he may have said something about not punching people in the face. There is also an element of good biblical competition; Paul said he runs the race to win the prize. Paul also talks about training and not beating your fists at nothing.


So I am competitive, did I mention that? But something I  get excited about is confrontation with someone huge, mammoth, nay even gargantuan. I recognize that I will likely loose, but there is a feeling of redemption in merely rising to the challenge. I wonder if that's how King David felt? "Man this Giant is about to crush me but I'm going to try and plunge one of these rocks into his skull as he's running toward me, and if I die everyone will think I'm awesome." I would think that.


So one of the pressures is to be the best or leave the game, let's say that's an inappropriate pressure but the other pressure is good; I want to do the best I can and try to kill this thing, I probably can't but I'll take a crazy, consistent, aggressive swing and hope that God backs me up. Here's hoping-