Is diversity good for our communities?

Here is a fascinating post from Allan R. Bevere's blog:

It has become increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger.
But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam -- famous for "Bowling Alone," his 2000 book on declining civic engagement -- has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings...

I have several immediate reactions to this. The ancient Greek Philosophers, such as Aristotle, believed that a community's strength was to be found in its shared identity, values, and commitments; it's "hominoia." This idea flies in the face of our more progressive attitudes about the value of diversity, but the study would suggest that the Ancient Greeks and not the Post-moderns were actually correct about what strengthens a community.

That being said it is clear that, in our context, diversity is not going away. We are likely to be more diverse 10 years on than we are today. So how can we strengthen our communities?

My other reaction is to remember the promise of the Bible - that God is bringing together, uniting, people from every tribe and language in his Son Jesus. Every sort of diverse background is pictured in the Book of Revelation gathering around the Lamb of God and singing his praises. The dividing walls are broken down. It is not, however, their diversity that unites these people, but their shared submission to Christ as their King.

If this study tells us anything, perhaps it is that when we see diverse peoples coming together in Christ it really is something miraculous after all, something that we could not have built our way up towards apart from the power of Christ.

Kierkegaard on Love for St. Valentine's Day

Check out this quote at Through the Wardrobe on "Love in the Christian sense" from Kierkegaard.

"For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that counts is faith working through love." Galatians 5:6 (NRSV)

John Stott quote and proverb

I tend to have an affinity for Evangelical Anglican theologians. If you look among Bible-believing Anglicans such as John & Charles Wesley, C.S. Lewis, N.T. Wright and others, you'll find some of my favorite theologians. Because they are Anglicans, I can expect them to be well-educated, Biblically literate, intellectually coherent, and deeply formed in the great tradition of the holy catholic Church across the ages. Because they are Evangelicals they really, well, believe this stuff; they actually care about their faith in Jesus Christ.

One whom you may or may not know is John R. W. Stott. Rev. Stott has been a priest and leader in the Church of England for dacades now. He is widely-read and respected in Evangelical circles, and his best-known book is probably Basic Christianity.

I read a couple of Stott's books in seminary (to supplement my own 'official' curriculum with some well-respected Evangelicals) including one book dealing with the issue of “baptism in the Holy Spirit” called Baptism and Fullness. I've had on my mind lately an old (English?) proverb that he shares in chapter 3 of this book:

“Always, invariably, we reap what we sow (see Gal. 6:7). Therefore, because of the faithfulness of God, we can determine in advance what we shall reap by deciding what we shall sow. If I were a farmer wanting to harvest a crop of oats, I would have to sow oats...the same principle applies to human behaviour. If the Holy Spirit is to produce good fruit in our lives, then we have to sow good seed. The old proverb puts it well:

Sow a thought, and you reap an act;
Sow an act, and you reap a habit;
Sow a habit, and you reap a character;
Sow a character, and you reap a destiny."

This presents us with an important aspect of the classical teaching on virtue (as seen, for example, in Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics) in a pithy saying.

The question for each of us, as we look at our lives, is this, 'What are you 'sowing'?'

The telos of the State University?

Why do we have Universities? That was a question that popped into my mind again recently as I was watching the President's state of the Union address. At times it sounds as though he would like 100% of the population to attend college. But whether that is necessary or good begs the question of why we attend college at all, what is the University for? What is its end or purpose?

I am currently serving as a campus minister at The University of Louisiana at Lafayette and the Board of Regents (which has already taken away our philosophy degree) is now considering eliminating some 25 more programs so as to make the University "more efficient" in "training people for the work force." Is the purpose of a University only to train individuals for the workforce?

In his excellent little book The Decline of the Secular University, C. John Sommerville warned that our colleges and Universities are in danger of becoming little more than "credential factories." They have lost their original mission of seeking knowledge for the betterment of mankind, of exploring the deep questions of our existence, and preparing and sending into the world creative, inovative, and deep-thinking people. The job of the University is not only, he argues, to strengthen the economy, but also to help people ask the deeper questions about what "wealth" or "doing well" really means? What is money even for?

It may well be that we have too many programs, and indeed too many colleges, in Louisiana. But I strongly believe that if the Board of Regents, or the President, or the culture at large judges Universities soley by their contribution to economic output or gross GDP then we have strayed quite wide of the mark. That is not why the medieval University came into existence to begin with. That is not even the way that they were thought of or spoken of only a century ago.

If what we really want is not so much a University but a Vocational Schools or Technical College, then we should organize our public education priorities accordingly. I believe, however, that the University has a critical role to play in any society that wants to be cultured, creative, and civilized. There is more to "high standards of living" than just economics. There are the intangibles as well, the things that make us well-rounded human beings and not machines (which are capable of bolstering our economic output without ever going to college).

Coming soon: What is the purpose of a Church-Related or Christian University?