"Lost Causes," A Lenten Devotion

 Fourth Sunday of Lent Devotional                     Rev. Lee Cheek

 

Old Testament: Joshua 5:9-12

Epistle: 2 Corinthians 5:16-21

Gospel: Luke 15:1-3, 11b-32

 

Lost Causes

 

                The great poet T. S. Eliot once suggested there were no “lost causes.”  The statement is rather peculiar when first encountered, as all of us can think of family, friends, places, and the like, that we would like to avoid or at least forget.  We also do not have to look around too closely to see “lost causes.”  A friend of mine inherited an old wool cloak from his grandfather, a once fancy piece of clothing he would wear at formal events.  When asked why he adored the old piece of clothing, my friend responded “this coat has outlived the Russian czar, the Hapsburg Empire, and the Ottoman Empire”—all “lost causes.”  Like my friend’s example, we have to consider that some “lost causes” are not really lost at all. 

 

                More importantly, many of us have considered ourselves lost causes to some degree.  The Parable of the Prodigal Son teaches us that no one is beyond the possibility of  Divine forgiveness, redemption, and external life with God.   

 

                As a young minister over thirty years ago in North Carolina, I faced a challenge I could not resolve.  My communion steward, an elderly lady and vital part of the church, asked me to visit her son, Jerry, and she later informed me that he was a very serious alcoholic, but still living with his wife and three children across the street from the church.  Jerry, in fact, was  a proverbial “stone’s throw” from my office, but I had never encountered him.  I called Jerry, but could not contact him by phone.  I left notes on his door, and in his mailbox, all to no avail.  Community and church members who noticed me attempting to visit Jerry suggested I would not be able to reach him, as he had lost his job as a computer programmer a decade earlier, and had even been removed from his post as the local Kiwanis president because of his addiction and troubling behavior.  Jerry’s uncle informed me that Jerry’s shadow had not darkened the church door in a quarter century.  He was a true “lost cause” in the estimation of those closest to him, except his faithful mother, and God.

 

A few days later, I saw some teenagers playing badminton in his yard and recognized these folks as Jerry’s children.  I walked over to them and asked if Jerry was home, and the children told me he was asleep.   I introduced myself, and the eldest of the children told me he would take me to his father.  As we approached the house, the children, and Jerry’s wife, began disparaging their father and husband, as I was escorted into the family’s living room and finally meeting Jerry.  We met for a few minutes and scheduled a time to have a cup of coffee together.  He was a troubled but kind man.  We met weekly for a month or so, and I asked Jerry if would accompany me to an AA meeting.  He agreed, and Jerry became a regular attendee, and even returned to church, and eventually to the church choir.  Over the next year, the church community accepted Jerry back into the fold in a very Christlike manner.  He experienced the renewal of his faith and his most important commitments to family.  Jerry had neglected and damaged his relations with many people due to his substance abuse, but slowly, and with God’s help, he experienced personal and Divine forgiveness.  With the help of a loving God and a redemptive community, Jerry who was once a “lost cause,” became a gained cause, and a vital part of the community of faith. 

 

Text Notes and Questions for Discussion

 

I.  Luke 15 is one of the most famous chapters of scripture in the Bible, and a beautiful teaching about the joy of God when His children return to His fold.  In Luke 15 we find three parables (“Lost Sheep,” 15:3-7; “Lost Coin,” 15:8-10; and “Prodigal Son,” 15:11-32).

 

15:1-2                 The Sinners Come Together

15: 11 and 12 Two sons and the sharing of property

15:13                  “reckless” living

15:14                  The two disasters

15:15                  Swine Challenge

15.16                  Thief?

15:17-19           Disillusionment

15:20-26           Central Issue

15:27-32           Conclusion

 

 

Totalitarianism Reconsidered

 

CHOICE

www.choice360.org

Social & Behavioral Sciences
Political Science - Political Theory

62-0242

JC480

MARC

Forti, Simona. Totalitarianism: a borderline idea in political philosophy, tr. by Simone Ghelli. Stanford, 2023. 182p bibl index ISBN 9781503627505, $100.00; ISBN 9781503637375 pbk, $25.00; ISBN 9781503637382 ebook, contact publisher for price.

Integrating the insights of political theory and contemporary politics, Forti (Scuola Normale Superiore, Italy) offers a timely analysis of the “evolving” concept of totalitarianism in theory and practice. The book is a survey of how “reflection on totalitarianism ushered in a new, unprecedented way of thinking [about] power” (p. 145). Forti provides a convincing overview of the emergence of “one of the most significant and stormy debates in contemporary political theory and philosophy” (p. 4), which advances the standard depiction of the concept as the comparison between Nazism and Stalinism. In a succinct manner, Forti outlines the development of totalitarianism from the origins of the notion in the works of Amendola, Gramsci, and Schmitt, among others, through subsequent understandings. With clarity, she critiques the critics of totalitarianism, especially the work of Eric Voegelin and the central role of Hannah Arendt's scholarship. The book’s final chapter and conclusion take the form of a convincing plea for the continued assessment of totalitarianism's dangers and the many forms of the idea. Summing Up: Highly recommended. Graduate students, faculty, and general readers. -- H. L. Cheek Jr., emeritus, East Georgia State College

Choice Vol. 62, Issue 1

Sept 2024

Understanding Democracy

 

With the increased public and scholarly interest in the meaning and endurance of democracy, this tome by Jason Brennan (Georgetown) provides a lucid and accessible introduction to the concept.  The older, negative assessments (for example, Plato) of democracy to the modern defenders of the centrality of democracy as the “best form of government” are chronicled with care, and in a manner that will appeal to a wide readership (p. 1).  The author offers a “sixth grade model of democracy” to provide a “basic model of how democracy works” (p. 6).  Five core democratic values are explicated to provide for a greater understanding of the concept, including stability, virtue, wisdom, liberty, and equality.  Two chapters are devoted to each democratic value, with a chapter affirming each core value, followed by a closely related chapter that is “skeptical and critical” of the value.  At the end of each chapter a clear and lucid summary is provide.  The treatment of virtue (chaps. 3 and 4) and liberty (chaps. 8 and 9) as democratic values, and as part of democratic theory, also make a significant contribution to the understanding of democracy in practice.                                               

New History of the Democratic Party

 

Hilton, Adam. True Blues: The Contentious Transformation of the Democratic Party. Pennsylvania, 2021. 280p bibl index ISBN 9780812252996, $55.00; ISBN 9780812297966.

In this imaginative, lively book on the history of the Democratic Party, Hilton (Mount Holyoke College) offers a challenge to existing scholarship on the evolution of the Democratic Party since the end of the New Deal. Instead of affirming the role of party leaders and officeholders as the main force in shaping the party’s direction, this book argues that "conflict between extra-party groups" (p. 2) controlled political changes. Over time, a different type of political party was created—an advocacy party—that diminished older sources of political authority. The advocacy party is the result of several developments: the rise of political entrepreneurs, reform movements that sought to overcome the limitations of the old party structure, and persistent conflict among factions to define the party’s focus and electoral strategies. The second half of the book provides exemplary case studies of group activity related to the overall theme of the volume. This study allows for a greater understanding of the change that has taken and continues to take place in the Democratic Party.

--H. L. Cheek Jr., East Georgia State College

(Forthcoming, Choice, November 2022, Vol. 60 No. 3)

Government's "Worst Enemy'? George Washington Himself Pointed to Partisanship

 

By H. Lee Cheek and Sean Busick

(This commentary is co-authored by H. Lee Cheek Jr., a political science professor at East Georgia State College in Swainsboro, and Sean Busick, a professor of history at Athens State University in Alabama. Cheek is a Tybee Island resident.)

America’s Founders did not agree on much. They were not a monolithic group of men. Further, some of the things they did agree on make us uncomfortable today. Those who are in the habit of citing what “The Founders” thought as gospel would do well to keep this in mind.

Here is one thing most of the Founders did agree on: political partisanship is unhealthy and a danger to the country. They believed that republics were fragile and that civic virtue was necessary to prevent them from collapsing into anarchy or despotism.

Partisanship thrived where civic virtue was lacking. Whereas partisanship divides us and threatens effective governance, civic virtue unites us as citizens with a common interest

According to a famous anecdote, upon encountering Ben Franklin in Philadelphia in 1787, a woman asked him what the delegates in the Constitutional Convention had been busy creating. “Have we got a republic or a monarchy?” she asked. Franklin replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

A threat from the nation's beginning

The Constitution was designed to establish a republic which, like all republics, depended upon civic virtue in order to survive. Citizens and elected officials alike would have to behave responsibly; if we cared about our republic we would have to place the good of the country above selfish aggrandizement, above partisanship.

The degree to which we are disconnected from the Founders can easily be measured in our political partisanship. They, being human, often failed to live up to their own ideals.

Yes, they decried political parties, but they also split into Hamiltonians and Jeffersonians and founded our first political parties. However, they at least tried to temper their partisanship with civic-mindedness and were capable of feeling shame about their shortcomings.

Early American politicians seldom campaigned for themselves, leaving that bit of dirty work to their subordinates. For example, presidential aspirants confidentially sought out supporters to endorse their candidacy and write political biographies of themselves for public consumption.

Our politicians do not know how to stop campaigning and just might feel shame if it appeared they took a break from self-promotion and political warfare. Among the Founders it was an insult to be accused of partisanship or factionalism. We proudly announce our partisanship on our clothes, bumper stickers, and Facebook profiles.

In fact, some of our fellow citizens become so attached to a new, more dangerous partisanship that they are willing to attempt to disrupt our democratic way in pursuit of keeping their party in office.

Disagreement makes for good decisions

In terms of the “real world” of American politics, the Founders believed civic virtue in a republic also required deliberation and compromise.

These qualities allow leaders and citizens to listen to each others’ ideas. The Founders believed disagreement was not only good, but the interplay of ideas actually provided the basis for making the decisions that were in the best interest of the country.

Our Constitutional Convention and the state ratifying conventions that followed are the world’s best example of working through complicated issues, and compromising, in the pursuit of a higher purpose than self-interest.

George Washington warned us against partisanship in his Farewell Address, which is read to the Senate every year on his birthday. “Let me now . . . warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally,” he wrote.

Partisanship is the “worst enemy” of popular government. “It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration,” Washington cautioned. “It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption.” If we want to keep our republic we need to guard against our partisan impulses.

Successful governance is serious work and often requires deliberation and compromise for the common good. It is not a sport, there should not be teams. Our fellow citizens are not our enemies, nor should they be. When politics becomes a game of winners and losers we all are the losers.

This article originally appeared on Savannah Morning News and on Yahoo News.

Dr. Cheek Contributes to Major Study of Political Leadership

In times of crisis, countries naturally yearn for leaders who can defend the public good within the sphere of politics and governance, and in less turbulent periods, the sound political management of a country is also valued.  The term typically used to describe these abilities among national leaders is statesmanship.  In November the University of Notre Dame Press will publish a long-awaited volume on political leadership entitled American Statesmanship, edited by Joseph R. Fornieri, Professor of Political Science at Rochester Institute of Technology.  The volume will include a chapter on John C. Calhoun by East Georgia State College professor, Dr. Lee Cheek.  He is Professor of Political Science and the former Dean of the School of Humanities and Social Sciences at the College. Dr. Cheek also directs the College's Correll Scholars Program.  

According to Fornieri, “Our project was greatly enhanced by Dr. Cheek’s contribution.  As a leading scholar of American political thought, especially the political thought of the American South, his work balances our understanding of statesmanship and political leadership.”

The book, including Cheek’s scholarship, suggests the principles of statesmanship should view leaders’ commitment to the common good versus private interest; a sacrificial view of public service; and, the ability to distinguish between the proper use of persuasion and coercion.

Cheek’s previous books include Political Philosophy and Cultural Renewal (Transaction/Rutgers, 2001; reprinted, Routledge, 2018 [with Kathy B. Cheek]); Calhoun and Popular Rule, published by the University of Missouri Press (2001; paper edition, 2004); Calhoun: Selected Speeches and Writings (Regnery, 2003); Order and Legitimacy (Transaction/Rutgers, 2004; reprinted, Routledge, 2017); an edition of Calhoun's A Disquisition on Government (St. Augustine's, 2007; reprinted, 2016); a critical edition of W. H. Mallock's The Limits of Pure Democracy (Transaction/Rutgers, 2007; reprinted, Routledge, 2017); Confronting Modernity: Towards a Theology of Ministry in the Wesleyan Tradition (Wesley Studies Society, 2010); an edition of the classic study, A Theory of Public Opinion (Transaction/Rutgers, 2013; reprinted, Routledge, 2017); Patrick-Henry Onslow Debate: Liberty and Republicanism in American Political Thought (Lexington, 2013); and, The Founding of the American Republic (Notre Dame University Press, 2023 [forthcoming]).

Warnock: The Pastor as Senator

 

With the certification of the results of the U. S. Senate election run-off, Georgia has elected Raphael Warnock to the world’s most elite club, American’s upper legislative chamber, the Senate.  Senator-elect Warnock will join Senator James Lankford as the only two ordained clergy in the Senate.  Warnock and Lankford are out-numbered by the majority of Senators who were lawyers and business people before being elected to the Senate, but in many important ways, having the calling, training, and mission of a pastor prepares Warnock more thoroughly for the work ahead.

Warnock’s ability to adjust to his new work environment is key to his potential re-election in 2022.  Unlike most senators who have six years to learn the arcane rules of Senate and begin to influence legislation, Warnock has no time to waste.  By the time he learns his way around the Senate, he will be on the campaign trail again.

Warnock’s background as a pastor provides him with gifts and graces that the average newly-elected senator does not possess.  In theological terms, Warnock has already accepted the “yoke of obedience” to follow the divine calling, or mission, in his life.  The attachment to mission that has guided his life as pastor now expands to a mission to support the citizenry of Georgia in a federal system with many claims on power and resources. 

Our new pastor-senator possesses the intellectual and pastoral gifts to assume these duties.  Contrary to the wildly exaggerated ads against Reverend Warnock during the election process—and while a man of the Left--he is certainly within the mainstream of American Christianity and politics.  He earned a Ph.D. at Union Theological Seminary, studying under the late James Cone, who was the leading black liberationist theologian in America.  Warnock extended Cone’s work to include feminist theology, especially Warnock’s major academic work, The Divided Mind of the Black Church, published by New York University Press in 2013. 

His intellectual gifts will need to be tempered by his pastoral gifts over time, allowing Warnock to witness to and work with the diverse constituencies that make up the Georgia electorate.  In other words, as the pastor of one of America’s most famous churches, who already possesses the talent to relate to a congregation of differing views, Warnock as pastor-senator must now support and advance the needs of all Georgians as well.  No one is better prepared politically or socially to accomplish such a complex task as is Pastor-Senator Warnock.

Can Senator Warnock accomplish his mission?  Yes, if he attends to the needs of Georgians, just as a pastor concentrates on his or her congregation.  In the language of the Congress, the pastor-senator must concentrate on constituency services, responding to basic needs of the individuals, communities and businesses he represents.  Instead of attempting to become a cause célèbre for ideological groups, Warnock should rely on his natural spiritual and political gifts to promote the most critical and faith-based needs as a servant leader.  He should avoid notoriety and concentrate on the hard work needed to promote public policy initiatives he supports, most often within the committee structure of the U.S. Senate, where most of the actual legislative work takes place.  Finally, Warnock must seek resolution of issues close to his calling as a pastor, including alleviating poverty, support for education, and the like, by asking Senate Majority Leader Schumer (D-NY) for major committee assignments related to his and Georgia’s legislative priorities.  If Pastor-Senator Warnock continues to follow his calling, his career in the U.S. Senate may be a long one indeed.

H. Lee Cheek, Jr., is a United Methodist minister, and Professor of Political Science at East Georgia State College, and a former congressional aide.  Dr. Cheek lives on Tybee Island.