Dear Mr. Williamson,
I have enjoyed reading your posts on PEN-l. Recently I looked at
your web page and noting your background wondered if you might
help me with the following:
Request #1. Perhaps with your contacts you could help me locate
a book. Sometime ago I heard about a manuscript by Duns Scotus
(Medieval theologian c. 1100?) that dealt with the topic of human
development on the lines of the metaphor of Aristotle's famous
oak tree. Each human being is like a tree with its own unique
essence. In order for the tree to develop into what it is meant
to be (into its full potential/flowering) it requires the proper
environment -- the right nutrients, sunshine, right amount of
rainfall, etc. Only with the proper environmental support can
the tree reach its full potential/actualize its essence
implanted in it by its creator. So, similarly with each human
being. Implicit in this view also is the idea that without the
proper environmental support, development will be stunted.
Supposedly there is a book out (70s? 80s? 90s?) by some
author giving an exposition of and commentary on this text by
Scotus. (Don't know the author or the press). I am on the adult
education committee of my church (Bethany Methodist) and we are
reviewing books that we might use in our class next fall.
If there is any difficulty with this request, please ignor
it. The person who could finger this book for me, supposing it
exists, is currently out of town. This Sunday I'll get some
further help on this.
Request #2. Do you have a publication date for your 150 page
bibliography? Would it be possible to get a copy of this
anytime soon?
Request # 3. Do you have any idea when Gar Alperovitz will
publish his "magnum opus?"
When you were six years old I called Alperovitz (got hold of his
wife) and he gave me permission to include his "Notes on a
Pluralist Commonwealth" as an appendix to my "Note I" on
"Reframing the U.S. Constitution" -- still unpublished. I have
an electronic conference on IGC (Peacenet), <econ.democracy>.
It started in January 1995 and currently contains 112 topics.
The subject is a model constitution for a democratic economy.
The topics Contents, Introduction and Art 1 constitute my
"introduction." Topic 43 contains a bibliography. Topic 112 is
a reading list. Topic 48 (response 1) is a current list of
topics and responses, sort of an index of the conference.
I thought you might be interested in some of this, given your
breadth of interest in the area of economics.
Finally, I have not yet had a chance to read your "long" paper on
religion that you speak of in your message below but will do so
shortly.
Sincerely,
Curtis Moore, San Francisco.
Original message:-------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 19:41:50 -0700 (PDT)
Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Thad Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [PEN-L:10893] Re: religion
Alright, as to the first question on materialist analysis of religion: Still
nothing better that I know of than Feuerbach; an excellent monography
considering Feuerbach in historical perspective by Stanford professor Van
Harvey, out in '96, would be the place to start.
Secondly, I think you will find the non-consumerist (I won't say
anti-consumerist) sentiment present in many, many pulpits in America. Even
the conservative journal Christianity Today ran a long cover article last
fall on the conflict between Christian teaching and capitalist consumption
patterns [alongside its analysis of the election from Ralph Reed, et al!].
And the critique of the image of the person and the types of communities is
a staple of politically progressive theological discourse.
I'm very interested in the subject of how churches might contribute to a
long-term process of social reconstruction in the US, and have written a
long paper about this available at
http://www.northcarolina.com/thad/church.htm .
[A couple of versions should be out in small religion journals this fall.]
The basic points are that 1. The declared social principles of the mainline
Protestant denominations at least, are very good and progressive, even
radical if taken seriously but 2)few in the denominations seem willing to
note the obvious and fundamental contradiction between those stated
principles [universal income, etc.] and the fundamental operations of
capitalism 3)which results in a mostly ineffective political lobby that
invites more scorn than positive outcome as well as 4)a tendency by even
progressive religious leaders to toady to power (i.e. Clinton, whom a number
of key leaders lay hands on in a white house prayer service in November '95)
in a misbegotten attempt to preserve a shadow of the influence the churches
once had. Moreover, you have a huge gap between the basically conservative
people in the pews and the clergy and top leadership in the Protestant
churches, which means that the leaders' statements often don't have many
people behind them. My suggestions for correcting all this all are laid out
in the paper--recognize the fundamental contradiction between the kingdom of
capital and the kingdom of God (as it were!), and concentrate on developing
alternatives and nurturing bottom-up change instead of issuing statements
that nobody much pays attention to or lobbying efforts in Washington
(although on a few issues the religious role has played a very positive role
and could continue to do so...like world hunger.)
If anyone is going to be at the TOES '97 [The Other Economic
Summitt]conference in Denver this weekend and is interested, I'm speaking on
a couple of a different panels sponsored by faith community folks, one on
the question of "What is Real Wealth?", the other on "real international
security" and the faith community. The conference as a whole should be an
impressive gathering...
cheers,
Thad
At 01:30 PM 6/17/97 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Yesterday I posted a rquest for sources on the origins of religion (Marxist
>preferably) and got no response. Yet we now are having a discussion of
>religion. So let me repeat my request.
>
>Am I mistaken or has it been suggestd in recent posts that religion has an
>anti-consumerist bent? (somehow the discussion of shorter hours veered off in
>this direction). I don't see much of this. Go into any suburb. People are
>consuming like mad but they are surely, for the most part, religious. Teh
>people who buy addictively on the Home Shoppers Network no doubt go to
church on
>sunday. And so forth. In fact, religion is often used as a vehicle to sell
>things. A rich business man from Pittsburgh has the concession for selling
>facsimiles of the Vatican art treasures. Very devout fellow too. and an avid
>consumer. One of the tenets of protestantism is that faith (not
consumption) is
>what really counts, so go ahead and spend.
>
>The solace which religion allegedly gives people in a heartless world does
very
>little to keep religious persons from acting heartlessly. The solace is
often a
>very exclusive kind of thing.
>
>I became an atheist in college, circa 1964 ( a catholic college at that). I
know
>that there are exceptions but I doubt religion has caused very many people to
>take heroic stances in defense of the workers and the poor. quite frankly I'd
>rather make alliances with the godless communists than with the Berrigan
>brothers, who while they are cetrtianly bravea and in many ways admirable,
still
>think abortion is a sin and march against it. The hypocrisy of religion
and its
>own numerous and execarable sins against humanity helped me to become an
atheist
>and nothing I have seen since has made me even begin to doubt that I made the
>right decision.
>
>Michael Yates
>
>
Thad Williamson
National Center for Economic and Security Alternatives (Washington)/
Union Theological Seminary (New York)
212-531-1935
http://www.northcarolina.com/thad
