’

he Gadfly is an independent journal of Philosophy,

T
Politics, and Economics at The King’s College, New
York City. Through a combination of elevated dis-
course and incisive journalism, we hope to inspire,
and when necessary goad, the students and faculty of the Col-
lege to insightful scholarship. To that end, we are committed to-
ward critical engagement, journalistic integrity, academic
excellence, and Socratic inquiry.
Critical engagement. By publishing insightful commen-
tary and elegant prose, we will embody the culture we wish to
inhabit, and so foreshadow the seeming impossibility of a Chris-
tian liberal arts college that rivals the Ivy League.
Journalistic integrity. We hold our contributors to rigor-
ous standards of ethics, thoroughly checking their submissions
for accuracy, and thus taking care to protect the reputations of
our authors, editors, and advisors.
Academic excellence. We are zealous for excellence in our
education, and that means we advocate rigor within and without
the classroom. We love a challenge, and we love anyone who
shares that passion. Academic seriousness should be the founda-
tion of our common identity, and it is the focal point of much
of the Gadfly’s commentary. We take theology seriously and allow
the Gospel to inform our political and economic thought.
Socratic inquiry. “The unexamined life is not worth liv-
ing.” In the tradition of Socrates, we will follow the facts where
they lead. In our constant examination of our community life,
we will be a gadfly to The King’s College even as Socrates was
to Athens—though, we hope, with better results.

ere it not for our love of this institution, you

W
would not be reading this now. Many late nights
and long hours were invested in the pages be-
fore you, all out of a desire to call The King’s
College to the fullest realization of its audacious vision. Until
that vision comes to pass, the Gadfly will remain committed to
pestering, prodding, provoking, and cajoling students, faculty,
and staff to “live lives worthy of the calling with which they have
been called,” and thereby to be a force for change in the strategic
institutions of our nation and world.
A Hymn to God the Father

Hear me, O God!

A broken heart
Is my best part.
Use still thy rod,
That I may prove
Therein thy Love.

If thou hadst not

Been stern to me,
But left me free,
I had forgot
Myself and thee.

For sin's so sweet,

As minds ill-bent
Rarely repent,
Until they meet
Their punishment.

Who more can crave

Than thou hast done?
That gav'st a Son,
To free a slave,
First made of nought;
With all since bought.

Sin, Death, and Hell

His glorious name
Quite overcame,
Yet I rebel
And slight the same.

But I'll come in

Before my loss
Me farther toss,
As sure to win
Under His cross.

- Ben Jonson (1572-1637)

 News & Features.
Nick Dunn 6 No King’s Student Left Behind
A report on TKC’s controversial new retention initiative

Brendan Case 9 The Eternal Dance

An introduction to trinitarian theology

J.M. Hundscheid 12 The Eucharist

Lay presidency examined

Azy Groth 14 Title IX

Affirmative Action and the sciences

Bryan K. Nance Jr. 16 Concepts of Liberty in Europe

A senior thesis excerpt

Ethan Campbell 20 Enough For Me that You Are Here Somewhere

A critical analysis of Dostoevsky’s “The Grand Inquisitor”

Opinion & Editorial.

Editorial 24 The Death of Difficulty
Academic rigor and the future of

Editorial 27 Free Market Theology

The clash of economic and theological orthodoxy

C. David Corbin 28 Out of the Wilderness

Obama, Europe, and the exile of conservativism

William Brafford 32 The Exile

The Benedict Option
 O Captain! My Captain!
Dear Reader,
Welcome to the first iteration of what we hope will become a
mainstay of the academic community at The King’s College.
For the past few months, the editorial staff at the Gadfly has been
working hard to bring you a publication worthy of this unique
college, and we’re quite proud of this first edition. As you can
read more about in our “Manifesto” (Page 1), the Gadfly exists to
be to the King’s community what Socrates was to ancient
Greece. It is our intention to critique, advance, and refine the
academic discourse at our school towards the lofty ideals we
espouse—by encouragement when possible, by indictment when
necessary.
A brief perusal of the contents of this magazine should be a
testament to the depth and intellectual diversity of the King’s
academic community. One of the issues we will be continually
examining is that of academic standards at this institution. Over
the past few months, there has been much discussion about what
an academically rigorous Christian school looks like, and
whether or not we are one. Some have argued that standards
have dropped significantly; others swear that the school is as dif-
ficult as it has always been. Some welcome a “lowering of the
bar” as a laudable development; a remnant resents this. Hybrid
theories such as “leadership school,” “standards v. rigor,” and
“quality of engagement” have sprung up, but never really caught
on. We find that the discussion thus far has been inconclusive
and as such disappointing.
In this month’s lead editorial, “The Death of Difficulty” (Page
24), we add our voice to the noise and examine this perceived
relaxing of standards in recent years through a number of
benchmarks and policy shifts. In the feature “No King’s Student
Left Behind” (Page 6), Nick Dunn (PP&E ’12) and I further
examine how some of these recent shifts have already resulted in
the dilution and impairment of the King’s vision.
On page 16, senior Bryan Nance (PP&E ‘09) offers an excerpt
of his thesis, which traces the concepts of liberty in Europe from
John Stuart Mill’s harm principle through modern-day pluralism
and the “millennium ahead.” A full copy of Nance’s thesis is
available on our website.
Along with elucidating all things political, philosophical, eco-
nomical, and controversial, The Gadfly will have recurring
theological features as we work towards a King’s community that
is as conversant in theology as we are in capitalism. This month,
John Hundscheid (PP&E ’11) and Brendan Case (PP&E ’10)
weigh in on issues as diverse as the Eucharist and Trinitarian the-
ology.
“O Captain! my Captain! our fearful trip is done / The ship has weathered every rack, the prize we sought is won
The port is near, the bells I hear, the people all exulting / While follow eyes the steady keel, the vessel grim and daring”
4 The Gadfly
In our Culture section, recent King’s grad Mike Toscano (PP&E
‘08) offers a review of The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, a riveting film
adaptation of John Boyne’s novel depicting the bond of friendship
forged between the young son of a Nazi officer at Auschwitz and a
Jewish prisoner who lives “on the other side of the fence” (Page 29).
We also offer an exclusive interview with Zach Williams, an up-and-
coming artist who recently headlined the King’s Fall Concert (Page
31), and a review of the Roundabout Theater Company’s revival
of Robert Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons (Page 30).
I am also terribly excited to announce that the Gadfly has given
our monthly back page column over to our old friend, William
Brafford. In the first installation of “The Exile,” William wrestles
with Stanley Hauerwas’s argument that “the political task of Chris-
tians is to be the church rather than to transform the world”
through ideas such as the Benedict Option and New Monasticism.
Throughout this magazine, you will also find poems and short
fiction from some of the most creative and thoughtful minds in the
King’s community. This month, we’re proud to feature original
works by Stephen Wesley, Amy Leigh Cutler, Professor Ethan
Campbell, and Dr. David Corbin.
We are quite pleased with the wealth of talent we have amassed
for our first issue, but we also know we have only scratched the sur-
face thus far. If you share our excitement for incisive journalism,
thoughtful commentary, and captivating creative writing, send us
your story ideas.
Additionally, it is not our intention to lecture the academic com-
munity at this school but rather to engage it. To that end, we
encourage you to join in on the debate. Agree with what we say
and want to build on it? Disagree and care to show us where we
went wrong? Undecided and want to ask more questions? E-mail
editor@gadflymag.com with your comments.
Many of us were drawn to King’s by its infectious vision of a
Christian school that could compete with the Ivies. Going forward,
I am reminded of the words of Socrates, who said, “The way to
gain a good reputation is to endeavor to be what you desire to
appear.” We aspire to compete with the Harvards, Yales, Oxfords,
and LSEs of the world. For forty-some-odd pages a month, we
hope that lofty aspiration will appear to be a tangible reality.
Daniel Hay
 Lorem Ipsum
Correspondence
Submissions can be sent to submissions@gadflymag.com. The Gadfly is currently
accepting poetry and short fiction, entertainment reviews, editorials, and articles of an
academic nature. The Gadfly
an independent magazine of
Letters to the Editor can be sent to editor@gadflymag.com. Philosophy, Politics, & Economics
at The King’s College,
Subscriptions can be purchased for $50 per year (10 issues): subscriptions@gadflymag.com New York City

Contributors Editorial Board

Brendan Case
William Brafford is a former PP&E student at The King’s College. He currently attends Lucas Croslow
the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where he majors in Philosophy and Nick Dunn
Mathematics. His blog, www.williamwrites.blogspot.com, was recently cited by Andrew Daniel Hay
Sullivan of The Atlantic. His column, “The Exile”, will appear monthly in The Gadfly. He can John Hundscheid
complete a Rubik’s Cube in under one minute.

Ethan Campbell is an assistant professor of English at The King’s College. He received

Art
his Bachelor’s degree in English Literature from Yale University, and is currently a Ph.D.
Sara Blum
candidate at the City University of New York. He recently authored Teen Challenge: 50 Years
Betsy Brown
of Miracles.

C. David Corbin is an assistant professor of Politics at The King’s College. He has served
in the New Hampshire State Legislature, and was a candidate for governor in 2002. He Online
received his Ph.D. in Political Science from Boston University in 2006, and recently co- Website: www.gadflymag.com
authored A Reader’s Guide to Aristotle’s Politics, which will be released in May 2009. Blog: www.gadflymag.blogspot.com

Azy Groth (PP&E ’09) is a student at The King’s College, from San Diego, California.
This summer, she interned for former provost Peter Wood at the National Association of The Gadfly (ISSN 1944-3714) is pub-
Scholars, in Princeton, New Jersey. She graduates this semester and plans to take a trip to lished monthly by Gadfly Media
Guatemala in January. Partners (GMP), 90 Church Street
Suite 200, New York, NY 10014.
Bryan K. Nance, Jr. (PP&E ’09) is a student and Founder’s scholar at The King’s College.
Born and raised in North Carolina, he spent much of his adolesence touring as the lead
singer and guitarist with the bands Phat Chance and Stereo Motion. He graduates this Copyright ©2008
semester and plans to continue to work as an Admissions Counselor. Gadfly Media Partners
All Rights Reserved
Mike Toscano (PP&E ’07) is an alumnus of The King’s College. He currently resides in
Harlem and is a former film student. His areas of interest include writing short fiction and
novels, and reading the works of Tolkein and Bunyan.

Miscellany
Poetry appears throughout this publication. Student contributors to this issue include: Amy Leigh Cutler (“To be so subjective”—Page 19),
Prof. R.L. Jackson (“A Sonnet for the Teacher”—Page 32), Stephen Wesley (“Product Placement”—Page 15). The following poems have
been printed with permission: John Donne’s “Holy Sonnet XII”, George Herbert’s “Love-Joy”, Ben Jonson’s “A Hymn to God the Father”.

Sketches appear courtesy of the Art team: “The Death of Socrates” (Inside Back Cover), “The Rose” (Page 1), “Pilgrim Rolls Down the
Hill” (Page 26), “Dumbo” (Page 30), William Brafford Caricature (Page 36), Floral Background (Inside Back Cover).

Front Cover designed by: Matthew Von Herbulis

December 2008 5
No KiNG’S
STudeNT
LefT BehiNd

By Nick Dunn & Daniel Hay

M
onths before the 97-student Class of 2012 arrived at The King’s College in late
August, it was billed as the brightest ever to matriculate here—poets, musicians,
athletes, and models, all committed to making the big move to the Big City. They
were met with excitement as staff, faculty, and returning students looked forward to the po-
tential of these students to re-shape King’s, as each new class does. Few considered the equal
possibility of these students to change the school in ways many would oppose. The now-
prevalent concerns about the class of ’12 fall into two categories: the academic quality of
the students, and their dedication to the Mission Statement and Honor Code. In a survey
administered to students, upperclassmen opined that many freshmen came to King’s more
for the city than the school. Some described their young brethren as “partying” and “rule
breaking,” citing the mandatory Residence Life meetings, presumably unnecessary in past
years, as an example of the perceived qualitative difference in the new class.
How did everyone’s high hopes prove so misplaced? It turns out the enthusiastic reports
of the new class’s quality were rather exaggerated. As the oft-quoted Benjamin Disraeli quip
so succinctly reminds us, “there are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.”
6 The Gadfly
F
or example, while the average SAT score of the class of ’12,
at 1880, is indeed higher than last year’s 1850, the range is
wider, meaning the top scores are higher, but the bottom
scores are lower, and possibly much lower. The more meaningful
metric in this case would be the median score, since a few great
scores or a few awful ones could significantly skew the average. The
college does not make
the median score
public, and represen- “If a student wants to be here,” says
tatives would not di-
vulge the number
Humphries, “we are going to do every-
when asked.
In any case, the
thing it takes to retain them.”
academic crisis of the
class of ’12 is now well known. Halfway through the fall term,
reports emerged of an unacceptable number of students failing or
in danger of failing one or more classes. Provost Marvin Olasky and
his assistant, Kiley Humphries, PP&E ’07, went to work on the
problem right away. Olasky, formerly an advisor to then-Texas Gov-
ernor George W. Bush, took a page from his onetime boss’s book,
developing a color-coded hierarchy of King’s students sorted
according to their academic status. The colors are the same as in
the Homeland Security Advisory System created by the Bush
administration: a “green” student is considered “low-risk,” while a
student on red-alert is “at-risk.” The internal nickname for the pro-
gram is another Bush allusion: “No King’s Student Left Behind.”
“Every college has an at-risk list,” said Humphries. “Everyone goes
through college shock … [and] there are a good number [of stu-
dents] struggling with school this year.” The question, she
suggested, is not whether to help our struggling students, but rather,
“how much do we help?” The New York Board of Regents, by
whom the college is currently accredited, and the Middle States
Commission on Higher Education, from whom the college is seek-
ing accreditation, require King’s to offer support services to its
students. The nature and extent of these services varies from year
to year, with a well-prepared, academically-inclined class requiring
less support from the school than a lackluster group.
This year King’s has had to provide more assistance than admin-
istrators expected, and certainly more than was offered to last year’s
freshman class. The most visible manifestation of this fact is the
study sessions which have been started for most freshman-level
courses. These tutorials, as they are known, are not just “a test prep
or a cheat sheet,” says Humphries. Rather, she says they are “a time
to rehash the subjects” for students who need more attention than
is given them in the
confines of the class-
room. As for the students who do not meet
Kyle McCracken,
PP&E ’11, is one of “Kingsian” standards, Bennett
three students leading
a tutorial for Prof.
says, “I would encourage them to leave.”
Peter Kreeft’s Logic
course. Early in the semester, McCracken was approached by
Humphries, who told him that “many of the freshmen are strug-
gling and we want to provide any help that we can.” A typical
tutorial session conducted by McCracken includes a review of the
most recent weekly Logic quiz, a discussion of the current week’s
reading, and questions from those in attendance. Thus far,
December 2008
Humphries says, “students have been attending [the tutorials] and
it has been helpful.”
The advent of the tutorials is one factor among many that have
caused doubts about the academic quality of the class of 2012. Sev-
eral professors have begun to distribute study guides, a practice
formerly forbidden by the Department of Academic Affairs.
According to several
sources within the
college, not only are
many freshmen fail-
ing, but the grading
curve is actually an
“inverse bell,” mean-
ing instead of a few
students earning high marks and a few earning low ones, with the
rest concentrated in the middle, the opposite is occurring. Few stu-
dents are receiving average grades of B, C, or D; most are either
failing or passing with flying colors.
The data present the administration with an unsettling choice.
On the one hand, the students at the bottom of this inverse bell
curve need all the help they can get, from tutorials to more-gracious
professors to the gradual grade inflation that is common on college
campuses. On the other hand, academically serious students on the
higher end of the curve want to be challenged. That is why they
came to King’s in the first place. Unfortunately, an institution of
TKC’s size cannot satisfy the demands of both groups. King’s must
choose whom it will serve.
S
even years ago, when King’s hired Eric Bennett to create the
Student Services department, the college’s retention rate was
a dismal 53 percent. Nearly ten years after re-opening, the
college had no academic requirements for admission. Now led by
Assistant Provost Jody Paul, Student Services today looks much as
it did then: four Peer Advisors help the administration identify “at-
risk” students—those struggling academically, emotionally, spiritu-
ally, or otherwise—in order to provide them with support and
hopefully improve retention.
The results of Bennett’s campaign were dramatic. By the fall of
2003, two years after Bennett started, the retention rate had risen
to nearly 71 percent, climbing further to nearly 78 percent the fol-
lowing year, 2004. More incredible still, an astounding 84 percent
of the class of ’11 returned to King’s this fall for their sophomore
year, besting the national average by two percentage points.
A high retention rate is essential to the future of The King’s Col-
lege, but equally
important is recruit-
ment, and this is the
job of the Admissions
department. There is
an undeniable eco-
nomic aspect to
recruiting: Vice Presi-
dent of Admissions Brian Parker says his department “lives at the
corner of tuition revenue and academic quality.” His goal, as he
sees it, is to find a balance between the two. Even not-for-profit
businesses must generate enough revenue to keep their doors open,
and for colleges, revenue comes either in the form of tuition or
donations.
7
 It is a poorly-kept secret that King’s loses money every year. The
business model developed for TKC by former CFO Gary Latainer
calls for around 800 students before the college breaks even. Until
then, it is the responsibility of W. Lance Covan’s Department of
Institutional Advancement to raise enough money to bridge the
“gap” between operating expenses and tuition revenue.
Last fall, when Admissions enrolled only 56 students, the college
lost even more money than usual. This year, with 97 freshmen, the
damage was less severe, but the school must now play catch-up to
meet its annual admission targets and reach the break even point
by the specified date, around five years from now, according to
sources. This presents a dilemma: it would seem that quality and
quantity of students admitted are inversely proportional. In other
words, admitting only students of quality sufficient for the rigor of
the King’s curriculum means sacrificing tuition revenue, but admit-
ting enough students to meet revenue targets means sacrificing high
admission standards, and, in the interest of retention, academic
rigor.
“What kind of student succeeds at King’s? What kind of person
is a good fit?” These are the questions Humphries says we must ask
ourselves as the college continues to grow. The danger in answering
them is that King’s could too narrowly define itself, turning away
students that otherwise would have contributed positively to the
school’s development. Yet, failure to answer these questions, or
answering them too broadly, will result in increased speculation over
whether certain students “belong.”
Humphries believes that, “every year brings a unique group of
students, [and] this year we got a fun group of people who have a
lot to offer [in terms of] art and the City.” Bennett called the class
of ’11 an “anomaly” in terms of academic quality. Yet there is a
significant correlation between recruiting and retention: the greater
The mission of The King’s College, old and new.
A side-by-side demonstration of TKC’s evolution.
2005—2006
Through its commitment to the truths of
Christianity and a Biblical worldview, The King’s
College seeks to …
… prepare …
… students for careers in which they will help to
shape and eventually to lead strategic public and
private institutions: …
… to improve government, commerce, law, the
media, civil society, education, the arts and the
church.
8 The Gadfly
the number of students who are, as Bennett put it, “on board” with
TKC’s mission, the higher the retention rate. Or as McCracken
said, “anyone is a good fit at King’s if they are willing to own the
honor code and give their all in school.” Still, Humphries was
emphatic: “we have been really encouraging students to work
hard…. If a student wants to be here, we are going to do everything
it takes to retain them.”
While a 100 percent retention rate would reflect well on the
school and perhaps make everyone feel good about their job per-
formance, retention is not necessarily a barometer of academic
quality; in fact, it can be exactly the opposite. It is not enough to
simply recruit and retain students—the school needs to recruit and
retain students who know and understand the vision of the school
and are able to balance a rigorous course load with the distractions
of city living. As for the students who do not meet these “Kingsian”
standards, Bennett says, “I would encourage them to leave.”
A
t a recent Inviso weekend, President Andrew Mills reflected
on the future of The King’s College. “One of the toughest
challenges we will face,” he said, “is staying ‘on vision,’
making sure that what we’re talking about here is being carried out
in the classrooms.” Staying “on vision” can be one of the toughest
challenges for any new institution, especially one whose business
plan demands faster-than-sustainable growth. The college is in a
season of growth, and growing pains can be expected. But as any
King’s student knows, denying the existence of a problem is coun-
terproductive to its eventual resolution. Unless TKC is a college
both capable and willing to rise to the necessary level of self-evalu-
ation, many students and faculty members fear that the final verdict
on the once-dynamic King’s vision will be the tragedy of a college
left behind.
2007—Present
Through its commitment to the truths of
Christianity and a Biblical worldview, The King’s
College seeks to …
… transform society by preparing …
… students for careers in which they will help to
shape and eventually to lead strategic public and
private institutions, …
… and by supporting faculty members as they
directly engage culture through writing and
speaking publicly on critical issues.
 The Eternal Dance
An Introduction to Trinitarian Theology
By Brendan Case
T
his is a short piece on the central doctrine of the Christian
faith. Of course, the centrality of the Trinity does not stand
over against the doctrines of God’s goodness or justice, or
of the Incarnation, or the Resurrection, but rather is the height to-
wards which all doctrine ascends, the vantage from which the entire
expanse of creation, fall, and redemption displays the richness and
variety of its meaning. Thus, though the fullness of the Trinity in-
deed exceeds its every articulation, it is the one doctrine about
which we must never cease to speak, for in speaking of it, we cannot
fail to tell the whole wondrous story that is the gospel of the king-
dom. In an attempt to allow this essay to imitate, and thus convey
as fully as possible the richness of the Godhead, I have struc-
tured it according to (what I hope is) a Trinitarian logic,
dividing it into three distinct movements that, while in-
dependent and singular, nevertheless form a unified
whole, such that the full interpretation of any one
part requires the other two. The essay thus consists
in an admittedly crude imitation of God’s perichore-
sis, the mutual indwelling of the individual in the
whole, which results, not in the immolation of
the part, but rather its achieving new depths
of meaning and beauty in the glow of its
fellows’ radiance.
B
efore attempting a discussion
of the Trinity itself, we must
pause to consider, not
merely the peculiarity of this doc-
trine, but rather its astonishing his-
torical uniqueness. Countless religions or
philosophies (the distinction between which is in this regard more
subtle that one might imagine) offer discourses of radical transcen-
dence: consider Platonic idealism’s opposition of eidos and simulacra;
or, perhaps Aristotle’s metaphysics of substance and accident, orig-
inating in the vastly transcendent Unmoved Mover, with its more
palatable cousin, Islam’s Allah, still exalted beyond true apprehen-
sion, though softened somewhat by Islam’s genesis from Christian-
ity. Likewise, there are countless variations on utter immanence,
which prevails not only in every flavor of pantheism, whether
Hindu, Buddhist, or Stoic, but also in what David Bentley Hart
identified in The Beauty of the Infinite as “the ancient pagan narrative
of being as sheer brute event…against which must be deployed the
various restraining and prudential violences of the state, reason,
law,” a narrative adopted and reinvigorated by Nietzsche in his op-
position of Apollonian innocence to the terrible depths of
December 2008
Dionysian mystery, or by Heidegger, in his evocative explication of
“the world” as “fourfold: the heavens, the earth, the gods, the mor-
tals.” Ultimately, either results in what John Milbank in Theology
and Social Theory named “an ontology of violence,” whether
within a dialectic of being and beings whose very grammar is di-
remption and alienation, or within an indeterminate chaos sur-
mounted only by force.
Within that tangled skein of tragedy and desperate longing, how-
ever, was woven a lone, brilliant thread; a tribal, near Eastern
people kept alive the whisper of a radically different ontology, one
that insisted upon a God who, though “heaven and the highest
heaven cannot contain [him],” (1 Kings 8:27) nevertheless
“elects Israel as his bride, and tabernacles among his peo-
ple.” This is the God of transcendent Wisdom, who
creates the world the by word of his mouth; yet, the same
God comes to walk in the Garden with his creatures.
He is the God who “stretches out the heavens like a
curtain” (Is. 40:22), but who also knows the numbers
of hairs upon man’s head, (Lk. 12:7) the God both of
Creation, and of Election, at once transcendent,
and immanent. The revelation of such a God
propelled Israel to develop a set of “various
symbols and ideas”—explored at length
by N.T. Wright in Jesus and the Victory of
God—with which to speak of this
immanent transcendence, among
them “Shekinah, or Presence, Torah,
Wisdom, Logos, and Spirit,” through
which Israel spoke of her God as
“continually active within the world, and
specially active within her history,” by means of an analogical oscil-
lation between tentative metaphor, and trembling reality.
After the long disjunction of the Exile, when the flickering spark
of Israel’s “ontology of peace” threatened to vanish entirely, a per-
son erupted within history with such force as to interrupt and
destabilize, not only the philosophers’ cold metaphysical hierar-
chies, and paganism’s overwhelming chaos, but even the analogical
categories of Jewish thought, such that centuries of reflection and
adoration could only begin to comprehend the meaning and mys-
tery of his presence. Which is to say, of course, that Jesus arrived as
not merely the bearer of a triumphant proclamation, but also its
content, “announcing, and embodying, the return of YHWH to
Zion.” Or, to assume the still bolder style of John’s Gospel: “The
Logos became flesh, and dwelt among us” (1:14); the transcendent
Creator immanently assumes the nature of his creatures, in order
9
that they “may become partakers of the
divine nature,” (2 Pet. 1:4) thus effecting the
redemption of creation from its “subjection
to futility” (Rom. 8:20).
A
ll Trinitarian theology departs
from, and must ultimately return
to, the Incarnation, deriving from
the “economy of salvation…as a truth
made manifest in the life, death, and resur-
rection of Christ.”
However, out of this
reflection the church
All Trinitarian theology departs from,
recognizes that God’s and must ultimately return to, the
saving work in Jesus,
and—by the Spirit—in incarnation, deriving from the
the life of the church
constitutes precisely "economy of salvation…as a truth
the redemption of cre-
ation from that “ontol-
made manifest in the life, death, and
ogy of violence.” resurrection of Christ."
Though irresolvable
alienation seemed to reign over a broken
creation, its force and warrant are utterly
shamed in the Incarnate union of the infi-
nite with the finite, which opens a new tra-
jectory within the distortions and despair of
fallen history, such that “this perishable
body” might “put on the imperishable” (1
Cor. 15:53), and thus cross the great rift
opened by metaphysics within the nature of
being, into a realm where difference is me-
diated by a peace deeper than strife. The
saving work of Christ disproves both the di-
alecticians of totality and the “philosophers
of chaos,” by asserting with triumphant fi-
nality that “there is no substance to creation
apart from…variations on God’s outpour-
ing of infinite love,” that being is not funda-
mentally estrangement or violent
willing-to-be, but rather the elaboration of
an already infinitely varied and delightful
theme into a polyphony of joy, in which dif-
ference is ever given from God to his crea-
tures, and ever offered back to him in the
abandon of doxology. In short, the resurrec-
tion—in keeping with his Father’s declara-
tion, “Behold I make all things new” (Rev.
21)—effected a revolution within our under-
standing of the very nature of being itself,
which forever marginalized the claim of
evil, violence, or pain to primacy, because it
revealed, beneath the tarnish of fallen time’s
wear, the ontological goodness of a creation
whose knowledge, act, and being participate
in the life of a “God [who] is love,” (1 John
10
4: 16) which is to say, a God who is Trinity.
But, more to that end anon.
The strangeness of the Trinity makes it
advisable to emphasize once more that the
doctrine originates, not in a set of a priori,
“Hellenistic” accretions upon a simpler Jew-
ish kingdom-theology, but rather in the
necessary reflections towards which the
work of Christ on the cross, and of the
Spirit in the church, led the early Christians.
Hart summarizes Basil the Great: “As only
God can join us to God…the Spirit who
unites us to the Son (who bears us up to the
Father) must be God.” In On the Holy Spirit,
Basil the Great, reflecting on Christ’s com-
mand to the disciples in Matthew 28:19,
wrote,
“We are saved…because we were regen-
erate through the grace given in our
baptism. How else could we be? And after
recognizing that this salvation is established
through the Father and the Son and the
Holy Ghost, shall we fling away that form
of doctrine which we received?”
Paul (more implicitly, for reasons of
chronology) develops a similar argument in
the first part of Romans, which culminates
in the climactic vision of the Spirit’s role in
the redemption of the church, and the
renewal of all creation. The very opening
of Romans insists that it is the Spirit who
declares Jesus to be “the Son of God in
power,” (1:4) and by whom “God’s love has
been poured into our hearts” (Rom. 5:5).
Having been set free from the law by
Christ’s victory on the cross, Christians now
“serve in the new way of the Spirit” (7:6). In
fact, the Spirit’s “dwelling within” the
church constitutes their redemption from
the corrupted nature of the fallen world in
“the flesh,” (Rom. 8:9) and indeed, “sustains
the church in the interval of eschatological
suspense between Christ’s resurrection and
return,” so that we might truly say, “Those
who are led by the Spirit are sons of God”
(Rom. 8:14).
The Spirit illuminates and glorifies the
Son for those he comes to save, extends the
love of the Father to the world in that salva-
tion, and unifies and comforts (and so
constitutes) the church in their awaiting the
final redemption of all things. Still more, it
is the Son himself who “sends the Advo-
cate,” who, however, “proceeds from the
Father” (John 15:26). Per-
haps the clearest picture
of the intricate dance
(chorein) that is the mutual
indwelling (perichoresis) of
the Trinity comes in
Matthew 3, in the iconic
display of the life of the
Trinity at Jesus’ baptism.
Jesus, obedient to the
Father’s will, and in order
“to fulfill all righteous-
ness,” submits to his immersion in the
waters, which surely reverberate with the
harmonizing echoes of the cold clutches of
the grave, and even of the primordial keno-
sis by which the Son faithfully enters the
world to image the Father, and so restore
the tarnished Imago Dei. In that moment of
submission, the “heavens are opened,” and
we are permitted a glimpse of being in
truth, for the moment unveiled from the
Fall’s clinging folds: the Father expresses his
delight in the Son’s humble descent, and so
exalts him in the heights of praise, while the
Spirit descends in the form of a dove
(which, as Jonathan Edwards notes in his
unpublished “Essay on the Trinity,” is very
often “an emblem of love or a lover” in
Scripture, cf. Song Sol. 1:15, 5:2) to bestow
his radiance upon the love of the Father,
and the obedience of the Son, thus framing
their fellowship in a nimbus of glory, and in
the same moment diverting it outward, in
his sending the Son into the wilderness, into
the wastes of a broken world. Basil wrote,
“In the creation bethink thee first, I pray
thee, of the original cause of all things that
are made, the Father; of the creative cause,
the Son; of the perfecting cause, the Spirit”
: God is pleased in his every act to submit
and exalt each divine Person within the
Godhead in his turn, and so the Son
delights to carry out the will of his Father,
while the Spirit ever dances among his
Companions, arraying their company in
The Gadfly

splendor, and carrying their tidings outward; he is light that displays
the love of God to the world, and so is the movement within the
Trinity which “always breaks the bonds of self-love, the person who
from eternity assures that the divine love has no single, stable center,
no isolated ‘self.’”
A
nd, of course, “In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God,” (Jn. 1:1) and
likewise, the Spirit has from all eternity “proceed[ed] from
the Father,” (Jn. 15:26) so we must insist that “the theophany at the
Jordan” was in fact a revelation of the eternal life of God, which
consists in the utter unity comprised among the nevertheless also
the infinite “interval of appraisal, address, recognition, and pleas-
ure” that is perichoresis; the Trinity is an infinity of desire and de-
light displayed and reflected in the manifold possibilities of
particularity, in which Being has from all eternity disclosed itself in
the joyful relationships
among several Persons,
and so displays no ten- The Trinity is an infinity of desire and
dency within itself to delight displayed and reflected in the
regress from the realm
of created particulars manifold possibilities of particularity, in
into unreachable tran-
scendence, or to dissolve
which Being has from all eternity
into a Nietzschean “Sub- disclosed itself in the joyful relationships
lime” before the mani-
festation of becoming.
among several Persons.
No, this God is the God
of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the God who walks in the Garden
with Adam; the God who displays his beautiful glory in the “form
of a slave” (Phil. 2:6), who takes on flesh and dwells among his peo-
ple. This is a God who enjoys matter, who delights in conversation
(Is. 1:18), a God who is in fact entirely aesthetic, pure surface , but
who is thus likewise entirely surfeit: the infinity of the Trinity con-
sists in the limitless variety, supplementation, and embellishment of
the fellowship of the Persons, so that in its very nature, “being al-
ways already differs.”
God thus is not at all the transcendent “high” set against the
refracted or emanating “lows” of existence; in fact, Hart insists, all
such transcendent ‘gods’ are merely finite beings within some dis-
December 2008
Photo courtesy of www.xkcd.com
course of totality. Rather, “the entire terrain [of being] belongs to
the infinite distance in which God exceeds and is present to cre-
ation” ; He “is the infinite act of distance that gives high and low a
place.” The infinite difference always present within the life of
Trinity provides the opportunity for all the difference of creation,
both from God, and from itself, but in so doing, also provides the
basis for true relationship: it is only because of the infinite dis-
tance—infinitely crossed from all eternity—dividing Jesus from the
Father that Jesus can pray, “That they may be one, even as we are
one” (Jn. 17:11). God already comprises an infinite, and ever dif-
ferentiating, difference that nevertheless subsists in perfect peace, in
which his creatures may situate their own encounters with differ-
ence.
Jesus’ prayer that the church “may all be one, just as you, Father
are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us,” (Jn. 17:21) is
among the most profound expressions in Scripture of the coinci-
dence of salvation-hope
and Trinitarian theology,
perhaps rivaled only by
its reflective exposition
in 1 John: “God is love,
and whoever abides in
love abides in God, and
God in him,” (4:16)
whose truest meaning
and interpretation is in
fact the doctrine of the
Trinity, which posits the
very being of God as donation and delight, as the flight of desire
towards the beloved , and so likewise posits the being of creation as
“an ontic ecstasy ex nihilo,” a gratuitous gift bestowed needlessly
(but thus magnificently) in the “Let us make” of Genesis. In the
vision of being disclosed in the Trinity, no room remains for any
necessary tension between an alienated transcendence and imma-
nence, any more than for the stale uniformity of a
hermetically-sealed immanence , for being exists in the loving, par-
ticular relations of several persons, in the eternal dance of the
Trinity from grace to grace, and so creation is merely the opening
of this dance to others, the invitation of still more variety and
embellishment into the beauty that is being itself.
11
The Eucharist
and the issue of Lay Presidency
By J.M. Hundscheid
F
or forty years the Diocese of Sydney
in the Anglican Communion has dis-
cussed the issue of lay presidency at
the celebration of the Eucharist. There have
been reports, debates, and several votes, but
never any substantial action. That appears
to have changed with a vote at the Sydney
Synod last October. The diocese voted to
allow lay presidency, taking a decisive step
towards removing the requirement of ordi-
nation to the Presbyterate for administering
the Eucharist.
The case put forth by the Sydney Angli-
cans begins with the biblical evidence.
Nowhere in the New Testament is there an
explicit requirement that someone who is
ordained perform the administration of the
Lord’s Supper. Then again, the New Testa-
ment never mentions ordination and
therein lies the dilemma. Scripture only
provides so much guidance on the issue of
the sacraments. Our understanding of them
is formed by thousands of years of tradition
and historical Christian thought. It is
impossible, therefore, to divorce the inti-
mate bond of scripture and history.
The Australians claim that restricting
administration of the sacrament creates
superstitions in the life of the church. Sev-
eral influential churchmen from down
under authored a series of essays entitled,
“The Lord’s Supper in Human Hands:
Who Should Administer?” One of the main
contentions of the book is that the Lord’s
Supper is not essential to the ministry of the
church. After all, the Book of Common Prayer
doesn’t even prescribe that it be adminis-
trated regularly.
Sydney must consider how their actions
will be perceived in the communion at-
large. The diocese was instrumental in
organizing the GAFCON conference in
Jerusalem this summer and continues to be
a vocal critic of The Episcopal Church’s
12
blatant disregard for church process and
order.
It will become difficult for the Sydney
Diocese to exercise leadership among con-
servative Anglicans if the Archbishop signs
the resolution presented to him by the
Synod. The GAFCON coalition consists of
Anglo-Catholics who will consider lay pres-
idency a significant barrier to cooperation
in forming a new Anglican province should
the need for one arise. The marginalization
of Sydney would be a loss to the commun-
ion. The biblical emphasis and gospel
message of the diocese are helpful contribu-
tions to Anglican thought.
There isn’t a uniform Anglican Eucharis-
tic theology. A plethora of opinions exist
within the communion that span the theo-
logical spectrum. However, from low to
high church, Anglicans have held for cen-
turies that Eucharist needs to be
administered by a priest ordained via the
The Eucharist is the ultimate rejection of the
Gnostics; it is the Father insisting that His
world will not remain fallen.
episcopate. This isn’t to make Sydney’s sug-
gestion seem historically heterodox; they are
not the first or only group to raise the issue
of lay leaders presiding over communion.
The difference in opinion regarding the
Eucharist is mainly a result of one’s a priori
assumptions. Our starting place and
method will influence the conclusion that
we will reach. Do we assume a stringent
Sola Scriptura mindset? Or do we acqui-
esce to tradition and the weight of history?
Is it possible to build a middle road between
the polar dogmas?
The paradigm for evaluating how the
church should conduct the Eucharist needs
to be a theological framework. Theology is
vital because it can contain all the processes
necessary to develop an informed opinion.
It is scriptural, rational, and historical in
and of its nature. It prevents us from proof-
texting and appealing to undue authorities.
The starting place must be to assess the
nature of the sacrament. To consider lay
presidency a memorialist view must be
adopted. Such a view is devastating to the
mission and ministry of the church. Jesus
tells his disciples, “This is my body” not
“This is like my body.” Ironically, the same
proponents of a literal interpretation of
scripture must make our Lord’s words in the
gospels a metaphor.
Such a “spiritualization” of communion
undermines the potency of the event. The
Eucharist is fundamentally about the good-
ness of creation. Rowan Williams, the
Archbishop of Canterbury, eloquently artic-
ulates the importance of the bread and
wine: “The material, habitually used as a
means of exclusion, of violence, can
become a means of communication. Matter
as hoarded or dominated or exploited
speaks of the distortion and ultimate sever-
ance of relationship, and as such can only
be a sign of death...The matter of the
Eucharist, carrying the presence of the
risen Jesus, can only be a sign of life.”
This is what Jesus meant when he told
the disciples that they must eat his flesh and
drink his blood. Christ, our Passover sacri-
fice, has given us the bread of life. The
Eucharist is the ultimate rejection of the
Gnostics; it is the Father insisting that His
world will not remain fallen. At the Lord’s
Table divine grace and material reality
overlap. Our bodies are temples that now
contain the Holy of Holies, the body of
Jesus Christ.
In his first letter to the Corinthians, Paul
The Gadfly
tells the Christians in the city that as often as they participate in Ordination, it seems, is a natural requirement arising from the
communion as the church they “proclaim the Lord’s death.” Paul nature of the Eucharist. The Book of Common Prayer cautions those
views the sacraments as means that the church can actively live out who approach the table: “For, as the benefit is great, if with penitent
the life of Jesus. He links the remembrance of the Son’s death to hearts and living faith we receive the holy Sacrament, so is the dan-
certitude about our future resurrection. In Romans 6:4, Paul writes, ger great, if we receive it improperly, not recognizing the Lord's
“We were buried therefore Body. Judge yourselves,
with him by baptism into therefore, lest you be judged
death, in order that, just as by the Lord.”
Christ was raised from the The question of
dead by the glory of the Product Placement authority is found through-
Father, we too might walk in out the New Testament. The
newness of life.” Dear Coca-Cola Corporation, Jews ask Jesus by what
I am writing to suggest some new advertisements authority he does signs and

T
he Eucharist is a to promote your fine array of products. wonders. Jesus responds that
continuation of the he possesses his Father’s
incarnation. It is a One features Wang Ji Dong, the Buddhist monk, authority, since he and the
sign that the Word became moments before he immolated himself in Tiananmen Square, Father are one. The Son
flesh and dwelt among us, but in protest of the Chinese Government. then endows the church with
it is more than mere sign. A his authority. After Peter
sign points towards a signified He is standing by the great North Heroes Statue in the ad, confesses his faith to Jesus,
object, but the Eucharist is with small brown eyes as graceful as the flight of cranes, our Lord instructs him to
both the signifier and the sig- as he looks out on the growing ring of onlookers. “feed my lambs.” The
nified since it indicates the importance of the sacramen-
Lordship of Jesus while con- His enrobed arm moves in the frame, tal ministry should not be
taining his body. In the and his hand arcs in a sweep of orange linen to his pocket minimized; we continue the
Greek, Eucharist means with a gentleness that would make Buddha weep. tradition of Passover at every
“thanksgiving.” The sacra- Eucharist. The authority of
ment is a means of grace and With what he has taken from his pocket he begins the church lies in the fact
a celebration of the goodness rinsing his skin, as if he were bathing that it is a conduit of the
of creation. It is not a memo- the old statues on the fó dàn. incarnation. Hence, ecclesi-
rial of Jesus’ death, but rather astical and divine authority
a testament to his risen life. And you can tell from the deepness of his gaze are convertible. The Father
Every service we relive Easter. that he is thinking of his brothers for a moment, exercises His authority via
The tears we shed in contri- the way they ran their sea sponges and rags the church. St. John
tion become joy. We become over the cool marble and jade and flesh. Chrysostom wrote on the
keenly aware that we are liv- nature of this relationship:
ing in the world as gift. Standing there, Wang Ji Dong, perfect in the moment, “It is not the power of man
Implicit in the account of splashing gasoline on himself which makes what is put
the Eucharist that I have pro- from a green, plastic Sprite bottle. before us the Body and
vided is the assumption that Blood of Christ, but the
there is a deeper reality in - Stephen Wesley power of Christ Himself
play then what can be ration- who was crucified for us.
ally observed. I am The priest standing there in
indifferent about the termi- the place of Christ says these
nology used to describe this words but their power and
phenomenon: transubstantia- grace are from God. 'This is
tion, real presence, etc. There are technical philosophical My Body,' he says, and these words transform what lies before him."
distinctions to be made, but they aren’t essential. What we need to To fence the table and insist on oversight is not an act of totali-
be wary of is the danger is John Updike identifies in his poem tarian control, nor is it a denominational power grab. We protect
“Seven Stanzas at Easter.” Updike writes to those who would deny the Eucharist out of reverence and love. We cannot approach the
the physical resurrection of Christ, “Let us not mock God with table of our Lord lightly and on our own volition. The Eucharist is
metaphor, analogy, sidestepping, transcendence; making of the not a human meal, but a divine creation. Every time we receive the
event a parable, a sign painted in the faded credulity of earlier sacrament and hear the words of institution, we pause and reflect
ages.” on our neediness. The Father has offered us a participation in the
If the sacrament represents something more than just symbol- body and blood of His Son. We accept the gift with a broken spirit
ism, then it needs to be a ceremony that is carefully guarded. and a contrite heart.

December 2008 13
Title IX By Azy Groth
Affirmative Action and the Sciences
In the name of equality, women have lost the freedom to
choose—that is, to choose whether they want to pursue Ph.D.s in
physics or not. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 was
renamed the Patsy T. Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act
in 2002 when Mink, the author, passed away. The revised moniker
may be symbolic of the law’s underlying purpose: to offer women
equal opportunity in education. Patsy T. Mink must be proud of
Title IX, but there are serious questions about this legislative decree
in action. The law was clearly passed with good intentions to elim-
inate discrimination, but when interpreted to its extreme, it
becomes oppressive in its own right.
As part of the 1972 amendment to the Civil Rights Act of 1964,
Title IX functions to outlaw sex-based discrimination in education.
Precisely, it states, “No person in the United States shall, on the
basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the ben-
efits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education
program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
While technically applying to all areas of education, Title IX
earned its household status by the vast changes it brought to many
rinks, fields, courts, and tracks. It made sure that women’s sports
teams were being fairly funded. Before 1972, women’s teams had
been neither as various nor as numerous as men’s teams.
It was difficult to enforce the legislation, so the U.S. Department
of Education created the following “three-prong test.” An institu-
tion is in compliance if it meets any one of the three prongs:
1) The intercollegiate- level participation opportunities for
male and female students at the institution are "substantially pro-
portionate" to their respective full- time undergraduate enrollments,
2) The institution has a "history and continuing practice of
program expansion" for the underrepresented sex, or
3) The institution is "fully and effectively" accommodating
the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex.
In practice, prongs two and three are hard to prove, so the first
prong is the default yardstick. According to the National Women’s
Law Center (NWLC), only 1 in 27 female high schools students
participated in sports before Title IX was passed. As of 2005-2006,
women made up 41% of high school athletes. While this is
progress, parity has not been achieved according to the first prong
(and NWLC) because women represent 49% of all high school stu-
dents. Only when the percentages match up will the fight be
finished, the battle won.
While perhaps it is a victory to see women’s rugby teams popping
up on campuses around the country, men’s teams are often cut to
make room in the budget. Unfortunately the men’s teams being cut
are usually more popular and have more participants than the
women’s teams that replace them. Tough luck for the wrestling
wunderkind. It borders on ridiculous when in 2002 Howard
University cut the men’s baseball and wrestling teams to make
room for women’s bowling, all in fear of violating Title IX. As
Wade Hughes, the former head coach of Howard’s wrestling team,
writes of the mostly-black university, enrollment of black men in
14
colleges and universities is dropping rapidly. Sports are one way to
attract male students, but if the higher percentage of females limits
the number of males allowed to participate, then do not expect the
percentages to balance out. Hughes says that “Historically Black
Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) have enrollment ratios
approaching 65 percent female to 35 percent male.”
Wrestling, waterpolo, swimming, and gymnastics have borne the
brunt of the butchering. According to ABC news, there were 107
NCAA men’s gymnastic teams in 1979 and only 20 in 2004. As
UCLA proves, track record has little to do with it. UCLA sent 4
male gymnasts to the 1984 Olympic Games, 1 to the 1992 Games,
and 3 to the 1996 Games. Nonetheless, the program was cut after
the 1993-1994 academic year. The program disappeared along
with men’s swimming, and women’s gymnastics. The following year,
women’s soccer appeared, and women’s gymnastics reappeared
shortly after that. If you consult a proponent of Title IX, they will
tell you that those sports are not cut for the sake of adding women’s
sports, rather, they are presented on a platter to the hearty appetite
of the football program’s budget.
In July of this year, John Tierney of the New York Times wrote
about a relatively new application for the legislation: science. The
physical sciences, including physics, architecture, and engineering,
have always been male-dominated fields, and women have not yet
entered the arena in any significant number. In universities, only
about 20% of Ph.D.s go to women. Women have, however, had
great success in most other fields—including the medical profession
and biology.
Many say that women are not represented in the physical sci-
ences because they meet with discrimination from department
heads and other scientists. Furthermore, the system and society
keeps them out by sustaining stereotypes that women are not as
good at math and science as men are. In 2006, in the quest for par-
ity, Congress asked the National Science Foundation (NSF) and
NASA to investigate whether women receive a sufficient welcome
into the physical science departments. Their conclusions are pend-
ing, but in 2005 the American Institute of Physics performed a
similar study and concluded that most women are not interested in
the physical sciences in the first place. That accounts for their
absence more than does discrimination.
Should the NSF and NASA’s study show signs of discrimination,
it is likely that either a three-prong test or quotas will be employed
to right the wrongs. If it was ever in the language of the Title IX
amendment to ensure equal numbers of sport teams, then I expect
it will not be difficult to find the language in the amendment to
equalize Ph.D. holders. Male-female quotas in science departments
have not officially been “seriously considered,” but many suspect
that that will change.
While there are fewer women in the physical sciences, women
account for “60% of Biology majors and 70% of psychology
Ph.D’s,” Tierney writes. Is anyone asking where all those men have
gone? They are being lost earlier than graduate school—most likely
they fall out of the race in high school. Women currently account
for 58% of college students. Conversely, Title IX proponents at the
NWLC bemoan that there are too many women in traditionally
women-dominated fields: “Sex segregation persists in career edu-
cation, with young women representing more than 90 percent of
The Gadfly
the students in training programs for the traditionally female fields ures intended to give women a boost will actually penalize them.
of health, teaching, graphic arts, and office technology.” While per- Clearly, women have the ability to succeed in the male-dominated
haps trying to liberate women from the imaginary chains of society fields of engineering, architecture, physics, etc., but it is not as clear
that “limit” them to teaching and healthcare, it sends the message why women are pressured to develop an interest in entering these
that those women made the unenlightened choice and are sustain- fields. Tierney’s Times article referenced Susan Pinker, a clinical psy-
ing sex-based chologist, who says
discrimination. They that women who excel
are the unwitting vic- in physical sciences in
tims of society’s high school often find
expectations. They themselves pressured
should want to be to pursue the career to
architects and physi- its very end, whether
cists, instead of they enjoy it or not.
“settling” for careers as Those talented women
nurses or elementary frequently find them-
teachers. selves in careers they
The implications of do not like—all in the

Linda Bartlett, National Cancer Institute

applying Title IX to name of trail blazing.
sciences are much The other conse-
weightier than apply- quence is one that I, as
ing it to high school a woman, find particu-
and college athletics. larly unjust. Women
Athletics are relatively who are right now in
peripheral to the the science profession
national interest. Science, on the other hand, is a more serious mat- fought their way in, countering the cultural norms. They are
ter. One letter to the editor of the Times said it so well that it bears women in a male-dominated field and they can be proud that their
quoting Tim Goncharoff of Santa Cruz: “We can no doubt survive achievement and merit have earned them a place there. If a quota
without college wrestling, but it certainly won’t help the competi- were in place to guarantee a certain number of positions to women,
tiveness of our nation to shut down science programs in the then the field would likely be flooded with under-qualified women.
misbegotten quest for an elusive social goal.” While the under-qualified women with a new job and a good salary
Suppose that researchers find that women are discriminated might not care, they should. They will be taken less seriously
against in the physical sciences. They discover that women who are because who knows whether that woman got the job because she is
as qualified as male applicants are not being hired because they are an exceptional scientist or because she is a woman? Similarly, the
women. In the twenty-first century, the American response is likely woman who earned her way in before the mandate will find herself
to be outrage. The media will pressure science departments to prac- receiving the same patronizing glance. Ms. Pinker said that “creat-
tice fair hiring, and the ing equal opportunities for
discriminators would be The true inequality would be if less qualified women does not mean that
appropriately punished women were hired instead of better-qualified they’ll choose what men
under the current anti-dis- choose in equal num-
crimination laws. For fear men. It would be like cutting a champion bers….The freedom to act
of being labeled sexist (an wrestling team to fund recreational bowling. on one’s preferences can
epithet that will sink your create a more exaggerated
boat as fast as “racist” or “homophobic”) departments would be gender split in some fields.” And that should be allowed. Certainly,
extra careful not to discriminate on the grounds of sex. While not there should be no discrimination in the sciences, but that does not
the quickest way to end discrimination, it would be more equitable mean that an equal proportion of women to men want to be phys-
in the long run than applying quotas. ical scientists. It is the same way that the proportion of women that
If departments were required to hire an equal number of male want to play high school and college sports is different from the pro-
and female hires, it would be to the detriment of science in the portion of men. The solution is not to cut men’s sports but to
United States. The fact remains that ---women are not as interested ensure that women’s sports are widely available regardless of the
in the sciences as men. I expect that more women will choose the number of men’s teams.
physical sciences in the future, but right now most of the applicants Women already benefit from affirmative action in college science
are still men. The true inequality would be if less-qualified women departments, and quotas are not a long a leap from there, says Dr.
were hired instead of better-qualified men. It would be like cutting Christina Sommers, author of Who Stole Feminism and a resident
a champion wrestling team to fund recreational bowling. scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “It’ll be devastating to
In addition to the concern that the overall quality of science will American science if every male dominated field has to be calibrated
decline, Title Niners ought to be wary of how drastic parity meas- to women’s level of interest.”

December 2008 15
Concepts of Liberty in Europe
From Mill to the Millennium Ahead
By Bryan K. Nance Jr.
T
he foundation of a democratic regime is its concept of lib-
erty, for, as Aristotle notes in the sixth book of his Politics,
“The basis of a democratic state is liberty.” Liberty, Aris-
totle says, “can only be enjoyed in such a state,” and enjoying liberty
is “the great end of every democracy.” Though a great end, for
Aristotle liberty is not the sole end of an excellent democratic
regime. Democratic states, like all states, must also be “established
with a view to some good; for mankind always acts in order to ob-
tain that which they think good.” If one is to know and criticize a
regime, then, one must have a mind disposed toward the good, ask-
ing critical questions of the way liberty aims that regime toward the
good. That a democracy is thriving and free says little about the
goodness of that regime.
Western Europe today is thriving and free. Its pressing challenge,
however, is its inability to articulate the goodness of democracy
within the confines of thriving nation-states. If it is to contribute
to solving the global challenges ahead while preserving its liberty, it
must undergo a philosophical restructuring.
Europe has a cultural problem. Observing through an American
paradigm, renowned Catholic public intellectual George Weigel has
labeled this the “European problem.” As Weigel has claimed,
“Europe’s approach to democracy and to the responsibilities of the
democracies in world politics seems so different from many Amer-
icans’ understanding of these issues. In the aftermath of
September 11, 2001, and particularly in the debate that preceded
the Iraq War of 2003, Americans became acutely aware that there
is a “European problem.”
Weigel has determined that Europe’s problem is that it has both
neglected its religious and predominately-Christian heritage and
has failed to produce a single western European country with a
replacement-level birthrate. Appalled that Europe’s mortality rate
is higher than its birthrate, Weigel charges Europe with “systemat-
ically depopulating itself ” by “committing demographic suicide.”
The very basic element of societal flourishing—procreation—is
dwindling in Europe. As an example of the dire straits Europe’s
democracy is in, Weigel notes that by 2050, “on present trends,
almost 60 percent of Italian people will have no brothers, sisters,
cousins, aunts, or uncles.” Civilization and the family structure is
in peril in Europe, and its democracy is in vital need of investiga-
tion and criticism.
Where Weigel argues that the problem in Europe resides in a cul-
tural struggle, however, French political philosopher Pierre Manent
points to a political problem. Manent claims that Europe’s problem
lies in the political “ambiguity of Europe.” Its democratic sensi-
bilities are strong, but Europe’s concept of the nation-state is weak,
Manent says, and the “practical political difficulty” of a weakening
nation-state is that “the democratic principle does not define the
framework within which it operates.” Democracy couched inside
an elusive and disconnected body politic is the great ambiguity of
16
Europe, for “Europe refuses to define itself politically.” For
Manent, Europe has become a political body that promises the ben-
efits of democracy, but to no one in particular. Except, perhaps, all
who claim to have a stake in the universal human community—
which would, in turn, be everyone. Manent says that as Europe
expands and makes its promises of democracy, it becomes “a
Europe of indefinite expression, a Europe contradictorily defined
as indefinite expression.” So he poses the question: “How many
nations, in fact, belong to it? Twelve? Twenty? Thirty? Does
Turkey, for example, belong? Why not? Or why? The European
political class has not even seriously begun to ask these questions,
let alone answer them.”
As Europe expands indefinitely, it becomes ambiguous: its “ver-
sion of democratic empire” has at its core “not a central nation but
what [Manent calls] a central human agency.” This agency,
“detached from any particular territory or people…is now occupied
with extending the area of ‘pure democracy.’” And pure democ-
racy in Europe is “democracy without a people—that is,
democratic governance, which is very respectful of human rights
but detached from any collective deliberation.” It is “a kratos with-
out a demos. What now possesses kratos is the very idea of
democracy.” If there is no demos, there can be no true democratic
character, for Europe neglects to define its citizenry.
If Europe neglects to define its citizenry, it neglects to follow
Aristotle’s advice for democratic education. Well-formed liberal
democracies require that citizens be educated for participation in
their regime, and “the neglect of education does harm to the con-
stitution.” Aristotle prescribes that in all excellent regimes,“the
citizen should be molded to suit the form of government under
which he lives. For each government has a peculiar character
which originally formed and which continues to preserve it. The
character of democracy creates democracy…and always the better
the character, the better the government.”
With Aristotle, Manent criticizes that the European Union,
Europe’s central human agency, has become an authority over an
ambiguous and weakly-defined Europe—a regime aimed at creat-
ing democracy, even before it seeks to educate a specific body of
citizens to enjoy the goodness of democracy.
Europe’s lack of political clarity has been transferred nearly
intact from one of its most articulate advocates for individual lib-
Europe has become a
political body that promises the
benefits of democracy, but to no
one in particular… It is “a kratos
without a demos.”
The Gadfly
erty, John Stuart Mill. Mill, a European himself and former Mem- families and villages in a perfect and self-sufficing life, by which we
ber of British Parliament, was a rare breed of both academic and mean a happy and honorable life.” Aristotle concludes by saying
social activist, passionately committed to the preservation of indi- “that political society exists for the sake of noble actions, and not
vidual liberty in mid-nineteenth century England through both his of mere companionship.” For Aristotle freedom is penultimate,
writings and his political involvement. His political contribution as nobility and goodness ultimate.
a British MP during the passing of the Reform Act of 1867, which Mill’s harm principle, therefore, reveals the great tension
expanded enfranchisement in England, was only the begin- between modern liberty (freedom from coercion) and
ning of the expansion of liberty in England. Mill wrote ancient liberty (freedom to participate in furthering the
in “The Subjection of Women” only a year after exit- good of society). French political philosopher, writer,
ing Parliament that even women—a group not and politician Benjamin Constant, whose influence
entitled to enfranchisement during his time—should on post-Revolution thought in France may have trick-
enjoy greater political liberty. “Exactly where and in led over to Mill’s England by 1859, illuminates this
proportion as women’s capacity for government have point. In “Liberty of Ancients Compared with
been tried,” he wrote, “in that proportion they have that of Moderns,” a speech delivered in 1816,
been found adequate.” Mill doubtlessly viewed Constant reflected on the French Revolution
expanded enfranchisement as a necessary and and the events that followed, arguing that the
just development for political society in Eng- law, in addition to securing individual lib-
land, and these arguments emanated from erty, must have a moral purpose.
him both in academia and in Parliament Constant’s philosophy elevated ancient lib-
where his political debates were ripest. erty—“an active and constant
Mill’s commitment to individual liberty participation in collective power”—to the
can be summed up by the harm principle: a forefront of a public square obsessed
person’s good is found in his free ability to with modern liberty—“peaceful enjoy-
choose the path he wills, uninhibited by ment and private independence.”
coercion from the state, and that the only Constant had observed at the time that
legitimate grounds for coercion is when freedoms “Individual independence is the first need of the
overlap and a citizen brings harm to his neighbor. He Sketch courtesy of www.utilitarianism.com moderns.” His contemporaries, living just after the
posits: “The sole end for which mankind are warranted, individu- Revolution, would be hard pressed sacrifice individual liberty for
ally or collectively, in interfering with the liberty of action of any the sake of the common good.
of their number, is self-protection… [T]he only purpose for which Constant, however, critiqued the modern obsession with indi-
power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized vidual liberty, arguing that institutions must not be constructed
community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own strictly for the private independence of each citizen. Institutions
good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.” must aim at ordered liberty, not liberty alone. In his concluding
As Mill penned “On Liberty,” he revealed his commitment to lib- remarks, Constant said: “Therefore, Sirs, far from renouncing
erty to be what Isaiah Berlin later called “the rigid limitation of the either of the two sorts of freedom which I have described to you
right to coerce.” Mill believed that a justly free citizenry was made [“modern freedom,” or freedom from coercion, and “ancient free-
up of a body of un-coerced individuals, limited only by their neg- dom,” or freedom to contribute to the common good], it is
ative responsibility to avoid necessary, as I have shown, to
harming their neighbors. Europe’s lack of political clarity has learn to combine the two
In his commitment to together. Institutions, says
negative liberty, Mill been transferred nearly intact from one the famous author of the his-
voiced a disagreement tory of the republics in the
with Aristotle, who
of its most articulate advocates for Middle Ages, must accom-
claimed that all excellent individual liberty, John Stuart Mill. plish the destiny of the
regimes contain citizens human race; they can best
who have commonalities and who must make sacrifices. A true achieve their aim if they elevate the largest possible number of cit-
state, Aristotle says, is “a community of families and aggregations izens to the highest moral position.”
of families in well-being, for the sake of a perfect and self-sufficing Constant would not praise a political institution unless it was
life. Such a community can only be established among those who aimed at some moral end for its citizens, for, even in modern times,
live in the same place and intermarry.” Contained within states, “Institutions must achieve the moral education of the citizens.”
then, are “family connexions [sic], brotherhoods, common sacri- Institutions must have some moral order at which to aim.
fices, amusements which draw men together.” Citizens, as One could see Mill’s harm principle as the direct antithesis of
members of families and, therefore, members of the state, are to be Constant. European leaders during Mill’s day were indeed asking
geared toward the virtue and flourishing of the state. Moreover, these foundational questions about liberty as the French Revolu-
“The end of the state is the good life, and [the connections and sac- tion’s dust had settled. On Constant’s side, the great end of
rifices] are the means towards it. And the state is the union of political regime was measured in terms of its citizens’ moral char-

December 2008 17
acter. For Mill, however, the great end of a just democracy was contributor to the BBC, Berlin penned “Two Concepts of Liberty”
measured in terms of its citizens’ maximum moral irresponsibility. and in it articulated and carried forward, nearly verbatim, Mill’s
Mill immediately became a thinker to be both criticized and harm principle. What Constant called “ancient” and “modern”
acclaimed, but to two prominent British thinkers, Bertrand Russell liberty, Berlin calls “positive” and “negative” liberty. “I am nor-
and Isaiah Berlin, he was a philosophical father. Russell, whom mally said to be free,” Berlin writes, “to the degree to which no man
Berlin later called “Mill’s godson,” was a prolific writer, philoso- or body of men interferes with my activity. Political liberty in this
pher, mathematician, historian, logician, and social activist whose sense is simply the area within which a man can act unobstructed
writings emerged just a quarter of a century after Mill’s death in by others.”
1873. Russell’s writings were some of the most important in the Like Mill, Berlin believed excellence is found when individuals
twentieth century, and his commitment to individual liberty would freely choose their own ends, using liberty as a means to these ends.
later inform the European Union’s inception. Nearly transliterating Exposing Mill’s view of the “ends of life,” Berlin pointed out that
Mill’s harm principle, Russell wrote in Political Ideals: “Those who Mill “believed that all human progress, all human greatness and
realize the harm that can be done to others by any use of force virtue and freedom, depended chiefly on the preservation of [men
against them, and the worthlessness of the goods that can be of the Enlightenment] and the clearing of paths before them.”
acquired by force, will be very full of respect for the liberty of oth- Modern liberty is a prerequisite for justice, truth, and happiness
ers; they will not try to bind them or fetter them… They will not within a political community, and Berlin inherits directly from Mill.
condemn those who are unlike themselves; they will know and feel Berlin lauds: “It may need elaboration or qualification, but [Mill’s
that individuality brings differences and uniformity means death.” view] is still the clearest, most candid, persuasive, and moving expo-
Most succinctly, Russell summed up Mill: “Liberty demands self- sition of the point of view of those who desire an open and tolerant
government, but not the right to interfere with others.” Russell society… [Mill] is saying something true and important about some
anticipated that a commitment to individual liberty, and ultimate of the most fundamental characteristics and aspirations of human
deferral to private independence, would lead to some sort of global beings.”
cooperation and would “secure the reign of universal peace.” Long after Mill had passed, Berlin carried Mill’s harm principle
Hoping for a Kantian “perpetual peace,” Russell used Mill’s forward with accuracy and enthusiasm to both academics and polit-
harm principle to develop what would become the dominant wave ical leaders in Europe.
of European thought. Both George Weigel and American political Moreover, committed to Mill’s view of liberty, political giants
commentator Robert Kagan agree, however, that with an obsession such as Tony Blair have become an advocate of the European idea
with individual liberty comes of empire—a “kratos without
the false hope of progressive The Harm Principle: a person’s good is a demos.” Speaking to the
human perfection. Today, Economic Club in Chicago in
Kagan comments that only a
found in his free ability to choose the path 1999, Blair crafted the “doc-
couple of generations after he wills, uninhibited by coercion from the trine of the international
Mill and Russell had begun state. The only legitimate grounds for community” and titled the
writing in Europe,
“[Europe’s] economic and
coercion is when freedoms overlap and a speech after the doctrine.
Prefiguring Barack Obama’s
ideological determinism… citizen brings harm to his neighbor. “fellow citizen of the world”
produced two broad assump- speech to Berlin in 2008, Blair
tions that shaped both policies and expectations. One was an urged America to become more international. Blair boldly stated:
abiding belief in the inevitability of human progress, the belief that “We are all internationalists now, whether we like it or not. We can-
history moves in only one direction… The other was a prescription not refuse to participate in global markets if we want to prosper.
for patience and restraint. Rather than confront and challenge We cannot ignore new political ideas in other countries if we want
autocracies, it was better to enmesh them in the global economy, to innovate.” Though an occasionally ardent critic of the Euro-
support the rule of law and the creation of stronger state institu- pean Union, Blair’s view secures the EU’s position that, in the new
tions, and let the ineluctable forces of human progress work their body politic, all decisions should be multilateral.
magic.” Perhaps a more vivid example of a European leader adopting
Weigel agrees that this has been Europe’s logic since the Enlight- Mill is current President of the European Commission and former
enment: “Europe’s new mission civilisatrice,” he observes, “is to Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Barroso. In a St.
bring to the world the fulfillment of Immanuel Kant’s vision of Anthony’s College Lecture at Oxford in October of 2007, Barroso
‘perpetual peace.’” Europe’s committed liberalism secures individ- said, “On Europe, [Mill] is spot on. Europe’s unique strength is its
ual rights against the state, commits to the goal of securing world ability to combine unity with diversity.” Barroso cautioned the
peace, but hazily promises world citizenship without positing a Oxford crowd not to view the EU as a political agency wired as a
commitment to smaller communities such as the family and the super-state, but rather an institution securing Mill’s pluralism that
nation-state, long seen as the repositories for democracy. makes way for Europe’s “progressive and many-sided develop-
Isaiah Berlin, like Russell before him, was also a leading liberal ment.” As Europe expands, Barroso explains, it expands in its
thinker and active lecturer in the twentieth century committed to goodness because it expands in its diversity.
the spread of individual liberty in Britain. An Oxford lecturer and Ostensibily, the goal of European expansion is a Kantian “end

18 The Gadfly
of politics,” a hope that the political realm
will consist of common interests without
political ties. President of the European
Commission prior to Barroso, former Italian
Prime Minister Romano Prodi structured his
policies around this imminent end of politics.
Speaking in 2002 to the European Parlia-
ment, Prodi assured that the European
Union would succeed after taking its “share
of the responsibility for peace and develop-
ment in the world.” Prodi sees Europe as
For Aristotle freedom is penultimate, nobility
and goodness ultimate.
“an increasingly advanced supranational
democracy” that shall integrate across
national borders to cope with world strug-
gles. In a speech to the Florence European
University Institute in 2001, Prodi claimed
Europe’s goal is to form “a radically novel
and completely unique form of Union in
which sovereign States pool their sovereignty
in order to promote their collective interests.”
Mere weeks after his speech to the Florence
European University Institute, Prodi said, “in
relations between European States, the rule
of law has replaced the crude interplay of
power. After so many bloody conflicts, the
Europeans have declared their ‘right to
peace.’” And with a view of liberty that has
its most committed eye on individual liberty,
a “radically novel” Europe emerges—one
that pools sovereignty but somehow repudi-
ates power.
Mill has left Europe in a state where de
Tocqueville could now observe in Europe
what he predicted of America in 1835.
Europe’s equality of conditions produces “an
innumerable crowd of like and equal men
who revolve on themselves without repose,
procuring the small and vulgar pleasures
with which they fill their souls. Each of
them, withdrawn and apart is like a stranger
to the destiny of all the others.” Mill’s prin-
ciple promotes such political detachment.
Mill’s principle, however, leaves European
nations inept at articulating a common good.
Commenting on potential “soft despotism”
in America, de Tocqueville claims that the
modern democratic man “exists only in him-
self and for himself alone, and if a family still
remains for him, one can at least say that he
no longer has a native country.” Men in
such a soft despotism become unaware of
December 2008
the need for democratic education. As the
private sphere is divorced from the public John Stuart Mill (1806–1873)
square, Europe’s democracy ceases aiming at was a British political philosopher,
Aristotle’s “highest good.” credited with the development of
What Europe needs is the prescription Utilitarianism beyond its Ben-
from Aristotle and Constant: a moral educa- thamian conception, and the first
tion, ancient liberty. It must steer away from broad expression of the harm princple.
its Kantian aim toward universal peace and A passionate advocate of
give citizens, couched within autonomous human rights, Mill was ahead of
nations, the ability to achieve common his time in his abhorrence of slav-
goods. If Europe survives its skyrocketing ery and support of full
enfranchisement of women. Such
a position would be notable for
most figures of his era, but like
Mill's contributions to theoretical
philosophy, political economy, and
mortality rate and the influx of the Islamic British politics, it has been largely
East into Western Europe, it can solve these overshadowed by his far more con-
problems by reversing current trends and sequential work in the philosophy
neglecting its individualistic, hyper-tolerant, of utilitarianism.
open society. Society may remain open, tol- In his Utilitarianism, Mill dif-
erant, and respectful of individual rights fered markedly from Bentham.
within the confines of a national identity While the latter advocated a rather
because, when smaller communities educate simplistic "greatest-happiness prin-
their citizens for democracy, common goals ciple" (the greatest good for the
can be reached. If Europe preserves its greatest number), the former drew
national identity, sobers up about peace an important distinction between
throughout the world, and reaches common "happiness" and "contentment." It
goods through nations, it can face the fore- is possible for an animal to be con-
boding global challenges ahead and achieve tent; only a human being can truly
democratic excellence. be happy. Mill died in 1873 in Avi-
gnon, France. He is buried there
A complete list of endnotes can be found alongside his wife.
online at www.gadflymag.com
"To be so subjective"
and if there is no reason to stay
then why do you linger
if there is nothing worth fighting for
then lower your arms
let nothing guide your nowhere journey
and think nothing of anything in particular ever
and if there is no reason to love
then let go and fade into the walls
if there is no reason to change
then do not search for its fingerprints
let nothing take
what as always is
and leave no make with voice or movement
- Amy Leigh Cutler
from orange juice and rooftops
19
“Enough for Me that You
Why Everyone at TKC Should
Grand Inquisitor” than the one that appears in the packet. For
By Ethan Campbell copyright reasons, we have used an 1881 translation by Helena
Blavatsky, which, though translated faithfully, employs a somewhat
stilted 19th-century English style. Constance Garnett’s 1912 trans-

W
ithin the dark, unexplored pages of the 2009 Interreg- lation is better known, but has similar problems. A much better
num packet lies a potent, even dangerous work of liter- contemporary version, and the current scholarly standard, is
ature, a spiritual powderkeg whose fuse awaits only the Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky’s translation from 1990.
match of an unsuspecting reader. It is called “The Grand Inquisi- They stay just as close to the text, but allow the prose to flow as it
tor,” an excerpt from a central chapter in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s would in American English, capturing the madness and repetition
greatest novel, The Brothers Karamazov (1880). and informality of Dostoevsky’s prose. (A quick comparison: in
Left unread—as I suspect it has been by most of the student Blavatsky’s version, the Grand Inquisitor is “nearly four-score years
body—this ditty of 19th-century fiction poses no threat. But even and ten”—in Pevear and Volokhonsky, “almost ninety.”) I will
a brief perusal of the opening lines of Ivan Karamazov’s prose quote exclusively from this edition in the discussion that follows.
poem, with its “grand auto-da-fés” and the “fiery sparks” of the My second piece of practical advice—though busy students may
Grand Inquisitor’s eyes, and at once the reader is pulled into a for- not find it truly practical—is to read The Brothers Karamazov in its
eign, terrifying landscape, where characters confront the “eternal entirety, not just one chapter in isolation. Context is always an
questions” of God’s existence, sovreignty, justice, and love—not important consideration when analyzing an excerpt from a longer
obliquely, but head-on, and not in the safe confines of a Christian work, and in this case, “The Grand Inquisitor” comes at the end of
classroom, but in the face of naked, real-world suffering. Sigmund a three-chapter conversation in a café between two of the Karama-
Freud accurately called The Brothers K “the most magnificent novel zov brothers, the agnostic Ivan and the novice monk Alyosha. In
ever written,” and Virginia Woolf said that “out of Shakespeare the first two chapters, entitled “The Brothers Get Acquainted” and
there is no more exciting reading.” Pastors routinely quote from “Rebellion,” Ivan presents a sustained objection to the concept of
both its saintly characters and its sinners in sermon illustrations, and an omnipotent, benevolent God. He also forcefully rejects the
compare it to the Book prospect of eternal
of Job and Gospel of harmony at the end of
John. history, claiming that
So why would any
“The most magnificent novel ever written” any such harmony
serious-minded King’s - Sigmund Freud on The Brothers Karamazov would come at the
student want to keep expense of innocent
such a work of litera- children whose suffer-
ture untouched? I suspect, and hope, that the reason has mostly to ing went unredeemed. Alyosha counters his brother’s “rebellion”
do with factors unrelated to the text itself. There is no test over the by pointing out that Christ willingly shed his own innocent blood,
Interregnum reading this year, and thus little “practical” incentive and thus earned the power to forgive every sin, regardless of how
to read the packet. The Brothers K excerpt is long, and paragraph cruel or apparently “unredeemed.” After wondering why Alyosha
breaks are rare, giving it a more intimidating look than the pithy didn’t mention Christ earlier—“in discussions your people usually
sonnets of George Herbert or John Donne. And King’s students, trot him out first thing,” he says—Ivan remembers the poem he has
as we know, are constantly balancing dozens of priorities. Reading been composing, which features a Christ figure of its own, and asks
a chapter from a dense Russian novel may have slipped, under- permission to recite it.
standably, to the bottom of the to-do list. “The Grand Inquisitor” is thus the culmination of a long debate
An individual faculty member can do little to change these incon- about human suffering, with an emphasis on the torture of inno-
venient facts, of course. But perhaps there are other reasons for the cent children. In the preceding chapter, Ivan tells several horrific
general sense of apathy toward Dostoevsky—reasons that are stories of child abuse—a girl whose parents lock her in an outhouse
related to the text itself, to the complexity of its language or themes. to freeze to death, a boy whose master feeds him to a pack of hunt-
To that end, I would like to offer a few brief suggestions and com- ing dogs, Turkish soldiers who impale and shoot babies, etc. With
mentary for those approaching his work for the first time. these tales forming the backdrop of Ivan’s poem, Christ’s first mir-
To start, I would suggest finding a better translation of “The acle of raising a little girl from the dead takes on an added

20 The Gadfly
 Are Here Somewhere”:
Read The Brothers Karamazov
significance, and the Grand Inquisitor’s talk
of the “terrible burden” of human freedom
becomes more than an abstract philosophi-
cal concept, informed as it is by tangible
horrors.
Placing the chapter in its full context also
serves to make its complex ideas more
accessible—or at least more inviting. For
instance, we are reminded in the opening
paragraphs of the first chapter that Ivan
Karamazov is 23 years old, and Alyosha is
20. In other words, the participants in this
high-minded conversation are not PhD-
level experts. Rather, to put things in
modern perspective, a recent college grad-
uate is talking to a sophomore. Alyosha
takes note of their youth from the start,
when he observes that Ivan is “just a young
man, exactly like all other young men of
twenty-three—yes, a young, very young,
fresh and nice boy, still green, in fact!” Of
course, Alyosha knows that he is even
greener himself. His ability to look at his
own young age with humility, and an acute just how ordinary the brothers’ surround- utopian vision in which the Church has
awareness of his limited experience, is an ings are. They sit at a café table sipping tea, accepted the temptation of secular political
attractive quality in his character—an atti- with “beer bottles popping” and “billiard power and rules over the ignorant people
tude our own college sophomores would do balls clicking” in the background. Ivan wisely and kindly, but the vision quickly
well to emulate. orders cherry preserve, since he remembers becomes a lesson in why benevolent dicta-
For the debate-loving King’s student, Alyosha loved it as a boy, and in the middle torships never stay benevolent for long. The
Ivan’s response might also sound familiar: of making a serious philosophical point, he Inquisitor stays in power through violent
“Some people need one thing, but we green says, “Here, they’ve brought your fish intimidation, as we see when he burns hun-
youths need another, we need first of all to soup—help yourself. It’s good fish soup, dreds of heretics in the “splendid
resolve the everlasting questions, this is what they make it well.” Dostoevsky obviously auto-da-fé,” and the crowd “bows to the
concerns us. All of young Russia is talking intends us to view their conversation as ground” before him. The priests who con-
now only about the eternal questions . . . is more polished and significant than our trol every aspect of citizens’ private lives,
there a God, is there immortality?” “The roommates’ midnight epiphanies, but he allowing and forbidding behavior “depend-
Grand Inquisitor” is an incredibly compli- also intentionally makes the setting feel ing on their obedience,” start to look like
cated, even intimidating, work of informal and familiar. secret police, and the citizens who “submit
philosophical, theological, and political All of which leads into my third piece of to us gladly and joyfully” like the dupes of
speculation, but in the context of the story, advice for the first-time Brothers K reader— state propaganda. Worse yet, because the
Dostoevsky presents it as something akin to find a way to connect on a personal level whole system is built on a spiritual lie, a lit-
the rambling arguments of roommates who with the characters. Dostoevsky wrote eral “deal with the devil,” spiritual death
stay up late discussing God and the mean- “novels of ideas,” and the ideas in this one awaits them all. Over a century later, Dos-
ing of life. are his most mature. Ivan’s description of toevsky’s vision serves as a chilling prophecy
Dostoevsky also continually reminds us, the Grand Inquisitor, for example, is pow- of the Communist regime that would arise
in the opening chapters of the conversation, erfully ironic—he intends to present a just a generation later, with its mass execu-

December 2008 21
tions, tightly controlled propaganda machine, and state-enforced
atheism.
At the end, Alyosha points out that Ivan’s story could actually be
used as a defense of Christianity and personal freedom, despite
Ivan’s best secular-utopian intentions. “Your poem praises Jesus,”
he shouts in triumph, “it doesn’t revile him as you meant it to!”
Ivan, like any village atheist (think Christopher Hitchens), finds it
easy to poke holes in the religious dogma of others, but much more
difficult to construct a workable belief system, or even a workable
social system, of his own—the Grand Inquisitor has no choice but
to build his utopia on a lie.
But the story isn’t entirely about these abstract concepts—in fact,
the concepts themselves won’t fully make sense until the characters
come to life on the page. Alyosha’s shout at the end, for instance,
is the realistic response of his personal emotional state, not just the
author’s way of flagging the story’s central irony. In the same way,
his feelings toward his older brother, with whom he has been
reunited after a long childhood separation, largely determine his
reaction to the arguments Ivan makes.
great sorrow” at the end of Ivan’s story. He murmurs or sits in
silence when Ivan makes arguments he cannot counter (“I want to
suffer, too,” he says after the story of the frozen girl), and he blushes
and shouts “almost passionately” when he catches Ivan in logical
fallacies—not because he imagines an audience listening and eval-
uating their debate, but because his heart literally aches for his
brother’s salvation.
It is just as important to recognize, however, that Ivan loves
Alyosha, too, and is genuinely pained to see him in emotional tor-
ment. When Alyosha protests that it takes no special “intelligence”
or secret knowledge to deny Christ as the Grand Inquisitor does,
Ivan takes a step away from abstract speculation and describes the
Inquisitor as an individual, one quite similar to himself. The
Inquisitor, Ivan says, has lost his faith in God and transcendant
meaning, but “still has not been cured of his love for mankind.”
Ivan, too, feels an inexplicable bond of love with his family and fel-
low man—though without a genuine spiritual vision to impart to
them, he is left with only his utopian social ideas, built on lies.
The story in the Interregnum packet ends on a somewhat mis-

“So, Alyosha, if, indeed, i hold out for the sticky little leaves, i shall love them
only remembering you. it’s enough for me that you are here somewhere, and i
shall not stop wanting to live.” - Ivan in The Brothers Karamazov

Alyosha is often the character that Christian readers feel most
drawn to, with his childlike faith and pleasant demeanor, even in
the midst of moral ugliness. It might be helpful, therefore, to start
a reading of “The Grand Inquisitor” with a focus on Alyosha’s
emotional reactions, and build an interpretation from there. We
may notice right away, for instance, that Alyosha’s dominant emo-
tional tone throughout the scene is sadness. Why is he sad? The
explanation comes from Ivan, who notes that he has been avoiding
Alyosha since their renewed acquaintance because “there was a cer-
tain ceaseless expectation in your eyes, and that is something I
cannot bear.” A short time later, Ivan correctly guesses why his little
brother looks so expectant: “In order to ask me: ‘And how believest
thou, if thou believest anything at all?’ That is what your three
months of looking come down
to, is it not, Alexei Fyodor-
ovich?” Alyosha, we thus
discover, has for months been
genuinely mourning his
brother’s unbelief. Now that
they are talking at length about
weighty spiritual topics,
Alyosha is wounded afresh by
Ivan’s skepticism. “You don’t
believe in God,” he says “with
leading note, with Ivan laughing while Alyosha sits “despairingly.”
But this is not the end of the chapter—and Ivan’s laughter is not
necessarily directed at Alyosha’s misery, as the text’s cut-off sug-
gests. On the contrary, in the very next line, Ivan immediately
dismisses the entire story he has just told, in order to make his
brother feel better. “But it’s nonsense, Alyosha,” he says, “just the
muddled poem of a muddled student who never wrote two lines of
verse. Why are you taking it so seriously?” Ivan’s “incurable” love
for mankind extends first to his family, and his tenderness to
Alyosha demonstrates that he is not just mouthing the sentiment.
Alyosha’s and Ivan’s actions in the last two pages of the chapter
(again, unfortunately omitted from the packet) not only cast further
light on their relationship, but also prompt an interpretation of
“The Grand Inquisitor” that focuses not on the fantastical story
itself, but on Dostoevsky’s belief in the spiritual importance, even
necessity, of Christ-like personal relationships. Appropriately
enough for our Interregnum theme, the central character of Ivan’s
drama is Jesus—but he is a Jesus who speaks no more than two
words (“Talitha cumi”), and who performs only two significant
actions: raising the girl from the dead and kissing the Grand
Inquisitor “on his bloodless, ninety-year-old lips.” Of this last
action, Ivan says cryptically, “That is the whole answer.” He is not
the Christ of the real world, this figure whose response to Satan’s
temptations is a melodramatic kiss, but rather the Christ of Ivan’s

To order Fyodor Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov visit

www.gadflymag.com/BrothersK. A copy of Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky’s
1990 translation, recommended by Professor Campbell, can be purchased for $15.

22 The Gadfly
imagination. But Alyosha pays close attention to him for that very
reason, and looks for an opportunity to demonstrate Christ-like love
in a manner that Ivan will understand.
Near the end of the chapter, when Ivan briefly panics at the
prospect that Alyosha will disown him for his unbelief, Alyosha rises
and gently kisses him “on the lips.” With this imitation of the fic-
tional Christ, Alyosha assures his brother that, like the real Christ,
he has not rejected him. Ivan, for his part, flies “into some kind of
rapture,” overcome with the familial love he cannot escape.
Ivan does not abandon his agnosticism in this scene. Far from
it—he will cling to his skepticism to the end, though it drives him
insane. But as the brothers leave the café, he makes a final state-
ment that expresses just how profoundly Alyosha has affected him.
“So, Alyosha,” Ivan says firmly, “if, indeed, I hold out for the sticky
little leaves”—his poetic metaphor for the joys of life—“I shall love
them only remembering you. It’s enough for me that you are here
somewhere, and I shall not stop wanting to live.”
Ivan’s deeply moving confession, that he will not lose all faith in
the world, or all hope for meaning in his life, because the brother
he loves exists in it with him, recalls one of Dostoevsky’s biblical
inspirations, I John 4:12: “No one has ever seen God, but if we love
one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.”
Ivan cannot see God outside of his imagination, and even there his
vision is inaccurate, shot through with irony, perhaps blasphemous.
But he can see the actions of his brother, which provide him a more
tangible experience of God’s love than a philosophical argument
or literary representation ever could.
Many critics of the novel have observed that though Alyosha is
supposedly its “hero,” the sum total of his actions in the story is
slight. The novel opens and closes with him, just as this three-chap-
ter scene in the café does, but in both cases, he mainly listens to
other people talk. The few direct actions he takes are almost always
in response to actions or requests from other characters. In the
novel’s introduction, Dostoevsky himself anticipated a potentially
negative response for this reason: “I can foresee the inevitable ques-
tions . . . What is notable about your Alexei Fyodorovich that you
should choose him for your hero? What has he really done?” But
like the Christ in Ivan’s story, perhaps Alyosha’s inaction is precisely
the point.
The foundation of Alyosha’s personality can be traced in part to
his mentor, a monastic elder named Father Zosima. On his
deathbed, Zosima teaches that the antidote to spiritual doubt is not
more lessons or study or debate or penance, but rather an “active
love” that turns the soul’s relentless self-gaze outward, toward oth-
ers. Everyone else in the novel searches, argues, laments,
complains, and justifies their actions. But the saint is the young
man who is simply present in God’s world, who listens, obeys, and
mimics when necessary, all to keep others from losing hope. Philo-
sophical and political ideas are no doubt important—Alyosha does
study at his monastery, and Zosima makes an impassioned argu-
ment for biblical education—but more important than words are
the actions that demonstrate a loving concern for mankind.
A comforting thought, perhaps, for those of us who find Dosto-
evsky’s heady words a challenge in themselves.

Match the Professor to their review on RateMyProfessors.com

For answers, go to www.gadflymag.com

1. Dr. Corbin A. “I love ______________! He's so amazing! He makes me want to go to Israel and inspires
me every time he talks! And I love it when his voice cracks!!! Adorable!!”

2. Dr. Jackson B. “BEST PROFESSOR EVER!!! HE SHARES HIS LOVE OF FREEDOM AND THE
FREE MARKET. He came from ex-communist Bulgaria and gave a really awesome
perspective on the free market. I miss him. I think he is a professor at NYU now. By the
way, he truly idolizes Milton Friedman and battles the “dark arts” of liberalism in class.”

3. Dr. Kreeft C. “His love for poetry spills over to class and puts me at ease whenever I'm stressed for class.”

4. Dr. Tokarev d. “After sitting in his class for about ten minutes, you come to the conclusion that
_____________ is brilliant!”

5. Dr. Rabinowitz e. “_____________ is very challenging, well-informed and helpful. I learned a lot. He's got a
lot of good things inside that Canadian/Scottish head of his.”

6. Dr. Innes f. “I love his dry humor. He's nice to look at, easy on the eyes and the GPA…Hot! Just don’t
listen to him talk. =) Great arm trophy.”

December 2008 23
 The Death of Difficulty
T
he year was 2006, and the theme, de jure and de facto, was "Difficulty." With Peter Wood in the
provost's office and Stan Oakes in the president's, we arrived in New York wide-eyed with wonder
at what lie ahead of us, consoled at each new challenge by one thought: our small Christian-
school-that-could had set its sights on the rarefied orbit of the elite colleges. Academic rigor was the engine
powering our heady ascent toward greatness, while rigid academic standards demarked our steady climb.
Today, the mission of The King's College is different, and so we must offer an awkward criticism to the
current administration. Awkward, for our criticism is that the administration responds too readily to stu-
dents' criticisms. King's students are a restive bunch, and it doesn't take much to provoke a petition
demanding the firing of this professor or reversal of that decision. Such protests once elicited a predictable,
maddening response: No. "No, you may not transfer Politics from a community college." "No, you must
re-take College Writing II just like everyone else who got a C-." "No, the professor's accent is not an excuse
for failing the course." Lately the response is, "Let's see what we can do for you," or, worse yet, "We don't
want your studies get in the way of your New York City experience." Business students may think this is
a great thing: customer service! We think it's more like the inmates running the asylum

24 The Gadfly
 If you doubt that standards have declined, consider the evidence:
Senior theses are no longer a graduation requirement. For a
school that claims to emphasize written communication, we are
making students do less of it. Keep in mind that the "elite" colleges
we are trying to compete with almost universally require a senior
thesis.
The school has dropped GPA requirement for receiving intern-
ship credit from 3.0 to 2.7. While we understand the value of
internships, we think the school cheapens the value of its credit by
lowering this standard, especially since it's difficult to assess the
actual value of each individual internship and the student's per-
formance on the job.
We have removed math from the course map. It has long frus-
trated a small group of King's students that more math classes
weren't offered. Now even the paltry core math requirement is no
more. The ostensible (albeit shallow) reason for this is our emphasis
on the liberal arts as opposed to the hard sciences. Yet math has
been a part of a liberal arts education since the concept was con-
ceived—arithmetic and geometry represented half the classical
Quadrivium.
TKC has amended its graduation standards to require a 2.0
cumulative GPA, with the former 2.7 requirement for courses in
your major dropped altogether. Some hasten to explain that "even
the Ivy Leagues did not require such unrealistic expectations." We
are still working out how the Ivy League could "require" an "expec-
tation," but we suspect the editors wish to convey that the Ivy
League doesn't have such high graduation requirements. This is
true. But keep in mind that around 90% of Harvard students grad-
uate with honors, meaning they have a GPA of 3.5 or above. A
standard everyone meets is superfluous.
Even the attendance policy, once ironclad, has been bent on
behalf of several students (some of whom had gone over their allot-
ted absences in several classes), as if asking a student to show up to
75% of his or her classes is unrealistic.
Courses such as Senior Fellows and Intro to the City—which stu-
dents freely describe as "GPA boosters" and "fluff
courses"—represent grade inflation, something King's has always
been opposed to. There are students with As in Intro to the City
who are failing their other four courses. "Easy As" shouldn't be part
of a rigorous education.
Not one incident of plagiarism has been reported this semester.
Even allowing for the possibility that every King’s student is over-
coming the temptation to cheat, it seems unlikely that accidental
plagiarism, so harshly punished in the past, has disappeard entirely.
In 2006 students who failed the Interregnum exam were required
to memorize pages of Pilgrim's Progress for recitation before their
peers. Now the Interregnum exam is gone, and with it the key moti-
vation of students to read the assigned texts. This on the heels of
last year's exam, which no one failed, and for which few seriously
studied.
Recently, the House scholars and the majority of the King’s
Interregnum Committee recommended that Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s
classic The Brothers Karamazov be required for this year’s interregnum.
The Brothers K has been widely heralded as one of the pinnacles of
Western literature, and is important enough to a liberal arts educa-
tion that Prof. Ethan Campbell, one of the foremost experts on
literature in the King’s community, argues that every King’s student
should read the book (Page 20). The proposal died a quiet death
December 2008
on the Fifteenth Floor. The reason? It is too long and difficult of
a read, and there’s a good chance students won’t read it.
Any of these examples taken individually would be scant evi-
dence of a general problem. Taken together, however, they
demonstrate a decline in standards matched by a decline in rigor
that is diminishing the value of a King's degree.
Our reversion toward
mediocrity is a betrayal.
T
o some seniors who still remember King's before Difficulty,
and to some students who actually think our school should
be easier academically, our regression toward mediocrity
is a positive development. To the rest of us, those of us who came
to a no-name school hoping it would someday be more than that,
it is a betrayal. We are backsliding down the hill of difficulty we
once so arduously ascended.
King's ostensibly has a mission, although we don't talk much
about that these days. Remember the rhetoric about influencing
strategic institutions? Remember President Oakes saying, "We're
gonna kick Columbia's ‘you-know-what’"? Remember thinking this
tiny upstart school was really going places? Remember thinking that
our school would soon represent the pinnacle of Christian aca-
demic thought? What is becoming of that King's?
Undeniable excellence is the only way forward; anything less will
propound our tendency toward intellectual sloth. If we trade aca-
demic excellence for such illusory qualities as "leadership" or
"city-engagement," we will soon discover that we have forfeited
both. It is precisely the students who earn high marks in class who
manage their time and energy with sufficient discipline to work at
the best firms, acquire the most prestigious internships, and enjoy
the heights of New York's culture.
So here's a new petition for the provost, the president, and the
administration they direct: make our lives more difficult. Challenge
us. Cater to our best impulses, not our worst. Educate us. We, like
pilgrim Christian, will grit our teeth and muddle through for the
sake of our rich reward.
And someday, we'll thank you.
Love-Joy
AS on a window late I cast mine eye,
I saw a vine drop grapes with J and C
Anneal’d on every bunch. One standing by
Ask’d what it meant. I (who am never loth
To spend my judgement) said, It seem’d to me
To be the bodie and the letters both
Of Joy and Charitie ; Sir, you have not miss’d,
The man reply’d ; It figures JESUS CHRIST.
- George Herbert (1593-1633)
25
 The Austrian Creed

We believe in one market,

Fair and just,

the creator and benefactor of all wealth;

maker of profits seen and unseen

We believe in the discipline of econometrics,

The holy Laffer curve,

and in the sacrament of deregulation.

We believe in the eternal price

which procedeth from the supply and demand

and together with the supply and demand is stressed over and manipulated.

It has been guided by the invisible hand and been spoken by the economists.

26 The Gadfly
 Free Market Theology
P
erfect freedom is not the exercise of choice, but the service prayer group? Or fund a trip for students to go on the Hajj?
of a holy God. For thousands of years such an assertion What the article attempts to articulate, however incoherently, is
would be uncontroversial for Christians. Today, however, that students aren’t required to attend worship events. This philos-
American evangelicalism has developed a hybrid strand of Chris- ophy might indeed be the best way to handle worship at the school
tian political thought. because of logistical issues, but the suggestion that we should cele-
Evangelicals have bred a pseudo-theology revolving around the brate the right to choose is moronic.
concept of “culture wars.” They seek to wed God to the state and The market is an efficient way of allocating resources, but it is
intertwine the beauty of grace with the bureaucracy of the nation not an ethic. When we act as if morality and the market are inter-
state. Certain political positions become an assumed part of ortho- changeable, we force ourselves into blind, sophistical defenses of
doxy. It seems as if these pure exploitation. Chris-
Christians think that tians may harness the
belief in the market was power of the market to
adopted into Nicene benefit society, but fol-
dogma. Consequently, lowers of Jesus must not
the language used to allow the scales we use in
describe the market the market place to
increasingly is applied to weigh justice.
the divine. The language of polit-
This thinking has ical Liberalism doesn’t
infected The King’s Col- reconcile with the New
lege. Economics has Testament vision of the
come to inform our the- church. Jesus never says,
ology. The theology “Believe in the Son of
department is the weak- Man…or not, I respect
est division of the school. your right to make
How many people do choices about your own
you know in the theology personal life.” As Chris-
concentration? Theology tians, we aren’t entirely
used to be called the free, nor should we desire
“queen of the sciences” to be. Instead of being
in medieval times slaves to sin, in our new
because it was under- life we have become
stood that no knowledge slaves of Jesus. His yoke
could be more important is light, but that doesn’t
than knowledge about release us from obliga-
God. We’ve slipped since tion.
then, relegating theology to the trash heap of the impractical. Liberalism is a viable option, but only if we speak from a humble
Consequently, the language we use to describe our religion position and acknowledge that it is a compromise. In light of reli-
becomes increasingly economical. According to an article on the gious wars, it is plausible to argue that Liberalism is necessary to
school’s website, “When it comes to worship services, The King’s prevent further bloodshed. However, one cannot argue for the tri-
College borrows a philosophy from famed economist Milton Fried- umphant Liberalism of the Enlightenment (see After Virtue). We have
man: Students are ‘free to choose’.” This language is inaccurate and been voting for hundreds of years now and the panacea has not
inappropriate. It leads our community into an idolatry of choice. occurred.
The article on the website glories about our “non-institutionalized” What is the way forward? At The King’s College, we can start by
spirituality. Without reflection, we simply assume that decentraliza- increasing the nuance of our discussions. Third ways are not roads
tion must be a beneficial development in our spiritual life because to economic slavery; Marxism and socialism are two different eco-
it has produced the vast economic wealth we now enjoy. nomic philosophies, and there is such a thing as market failures. We
But the church isn’t the economy. The grammar that treats it as would do well to realize that the dark art of centralization and our
such disintegrates under examination. What exactly are we “free to comfortable Liberalism stem from the same branch of philosophy,
choose?” Would the school administration support a Buddhist one that Christian thinkers from St. Jerome to Chesterton criticized.

December 2008 27

Out of the Wilderness
By C. David Corbin
D
id the 2008 elections show that America has become a cen-
ter-left country? The winners seem determined to govern
America as if it has. Meanwhile, Republican leaders remain
preoccupied with their red and blue maps, refining the tactics that so
richly earned their being chased into the wilderness yet again. The
American people, however, have no desire to be remade in the image
of Europe, according to the imagination of our haughty, self-serving,
incompetent ruling class. If conservative leaders worthy of the name
arise, they will not lack followers. What would it take to lead the Amer-
ican people out of the dark woods and take power from those who now
prepare to dictate our lives as no American ever imagined they had the
right to do? Whoever would lead us out of this mess had better be very
sure of how we got into it.
Wise hunters use landmarks to find their way out of the wilderness.
Wisdom comes from retracing, backward, the paths that led to error.
Our landmarks are written in victories that paved the way for defeats.
In our greatest victory, 28 years ago, Ronald Reagan overcame the “me-
too” crowd within his Party, took center stage, and made the love of
political, economic, and religious liberty popular again; he spoke Amer-
ican to Americans. Landslide elections followed. Unfortunately, Reagan
handed over the seemingly mundane task of governance to the best
connected in his Party—a group whose hearts were warmed by the fact
that his popularity increased their access to power, prestige, and wealth.
Bush I so squandered the Reagan legacy with tax increases and
granting the Left's premises—to him we owe environmentalism's choke-
hold on us—that he got only 38% of the vote in 1992 and gave us eight
years of Clinton. Then, in 1994, Americans signed up for another
American revolution. Republicans offered a “Contract With America”
28
and again spoke American to Americans. But they turned out to be
more concerned with who got the credit, got on “Meet the Press”, and
got on Air Force One. If one ever doubted how American Americans
are, note their patience with George Bush II, a leader who spoke Amer-
ican to Americans without understanding what he was saying. While
attempting to celebrate America's virtues, he misunderstood them and
handed America's business to the most incompetent administration in
recent history. To lead is to gain the trust of those whom you would lead.
Good credit in politics is built just like good credit in any other field. It
requires understanding the right thing to do and then making sure that
it is done. At minimum it means doing what you say you're going to do.
If you say you're going to cut taxes, regulation, and spending, then cut
taxes, regulation and spending. If you say you're going to leave Wash-
ington in 6 years, leave Washington in 6 years.
Even the most earnest and understanding American stops doing
business after the second or third bad check. Keeping hold of this ele-
mentary morality is difficult because, as the greatest wilderness survival
story of all time teaches us, it is all too human to fall for the temptation
to get something for nothing—to turn stones into bread. And for earthly
princes, it is even more tempting to pretend to God-like power, and to
want power to satisfy their limitless thirst for primacy.
Our first settlers rightly understood that the best way to turn a des-
olate wilderness into a promised land is to be mindful of these
temptations. Our Founders rightly understood that the best way to turn
a promised land into a Republic of Virtue was to do the same. Ever
since, America has been at its best when its people reject these tempta-
tions and demand its leaders do the same. Conservatives have recently
made the mistake of confusing support for Republican leaders who have
given themselves over to such temptation with what is right and good
for America. Today's Republican establishment is rotten. The way out
of the wilderness requires that we leave it to rot with its red, blue, and
purple election maps, and recognize that America is still made up of
Americans yearning to be spoken to and led in their mother tongue.
The Gadfly

In RevIeW: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas
W
ith 145 Holocaust films made, what could the 146th,
Mark Herman’s The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, a film that
judges the Holocaust through children’s eyes, conclude
that others have not? That even while standing amongst the terror
of Auschwitz, extraordinary evil is cognitively impenetrable to a
child’s mind.
In both narrative and ideology, The Boy in the Striped Pajamas,
adapted from Irish writer John Boyne’s 2006 novel, finds motivation
in Rousseau’s assumption that evil is produced by defective educa-
tion and that children are born innocent. While Rousseau’s denial
of Original Sin is clearly at odds with orthodox Christianity, nearly
all Christians see children as most innocent. On this sentimental
level, the film finds tremendous success.
The story follows Bruno (played by Asa Butterfield), the eight
year old son of a high ranking S.S. Commander, affectionately
known as Father (David Thewlis). Both Bruno and Gretel, his older
sister enamored with maturity (Amber Beattie), are proud to dis-
cover that Father is being promoted. Unfortunately, the honor
comes with a family relocation to Father’s new command,
Auschwitz, where he will oversee the war’s most “vital” effort.
With the concentration camp cloaked from sight by dense woods,
Mother (Vera Farmiga) consoles Bruno, who immediately hates his
new home’s militaristic appearance—a far cry from his comfortable
childhood. The grounds are cordoned off to Bruno, especially the
wood, which only antagonizes his natural adventurousness. As
putrid smoke from the camp’s crematorium lingers above the man-
sion, the ruse quickly begins to break—Bruno spots the camp from
his bedroom and innocently assumes it is a “farm” worked by farm-
ers in “striped pajamas.” When Bruno asks Mother if he can play
with the farm children, he is saddened by her nervous, “No.”
When the children’s in-house tutor, Herr Liszt, begins teaching
December 2008
Photo courtesy of David Lukacs/Miramax Film Corp
“history”—at the expense of Bruno’s adventure books—the boy’s
restlessness is fully ignited As Gretel gives herself over to Herr
Liszt’s indoctrination, Bruno goes exploring, and heads for the mys-
terious farm. In a remote, temporarily unwatched corner, Bruno
finds Shmuel (Jack Scanlon), a boy in “striped pajamas” whom he
immediately likes. When Shmuel reveals he is Jew, Bruno’s world
becomes insurmountably complicated. How can my friend Shmuel
be one of Herr Liszt’s “Jewish vermin”, and Father’s mortal enemy?
With food for starving Shmuel stuffed in his pockets, Bruno visits
the Jewish boy daily. These meetings quicken within Bruno a moral
uneasiness that calls everything into question, including Father’s
ethical character. “Dad’s a good man?” Bruno asks Gretel in one
of the film’s most poignant scenes. Her “Yes,” cannot placate
Bruno’s natural indignation.
Unfortunately, the film’s successes are at times undermined by
artistic shortcomings. Simply, the production’s greatest weakness is
in its English dialogue, rather than German, the Holocaust’s native
tongue. This regrettable choice diminishes the film’s authenticity
and forces the audience to “suspend their disbelief,” which moves
them one step away from enjoyment. As a result, moments of
potential pathos are reduced to bathos.
Fortunately, Mother tempers the film’s over-dependence on
Rousseau. She too becomes disenchanted with Father, making
goodness a human capacity. Her story mirrors Bruno’s, with one
vital difference: she understands Auschwitz. Without the capacity
to understand extraordinary evil, Bruno and Shmuel are excluded
from their one hope: a realization that Auschwitz is a death camp.
Innocently, the two fly headlong into one of film’s most devastating
conclusions.
—Mike Toscano
29
 neighborhood Watch
Sunnyside, Queens
Droves of people, piercing noises, and
a profusion of activity often compel me
to retreat from Midtown momentarily.
This escape well suits my nature to
explore parts of the city that I have yet
to see. My latest expeditions have taken
me outside of Manhattan, to the bor-
oughs. One afternoon in particular, I
hopped on the 7 train at Bryant Park
with no more knowledge than my stop:
46th Street/Bliss Street.
As I exited the train, I emerged onto
a busy street: Queens Boulevard. A large
arch hung to my left. The quaint, color-
ful neighborhood that lay beyond, I
learned, is Sunnyside. A few blocks
north, Turkish markets, Irish pubs, and
Greek cafés line the Skillman Avenue
strip. In walking the streets of Sunny-
side, I became intrigued by the strikingly
residential nature of the neighborhood.
In addition to being the most ethnically
diverse neighborhood in New York City,
Sunnyside is the location of one of
America’s first planned Utopian com-
munities.
A few spots in particular have com-
pelled me to return to Sunnyside. de
Mole (45-02 48th Avenue at 45th Street,
718-392-2161) serves a delicious and
authentic Mexican cuisine, rivaling that
which I used to enjoy in Southern Cali-
fornia. Following the very affordable
lunch at this small, cozy place, I walk a
few blocks to Aubergine Café (49-22
Skillman Ave at 49th St, 718-899-1735).
Taking a seat in the back corner, I order
a large iced coffee and a corn muffin.
The atmosphere of Aubergine is perfect
for studying.
At dusk, I return to Midtown. From
the train, which runs aboveground in
Queens, I can see the Empire State
Building, lit at a distance. Just before the
train submerges to travel through the
East River and back into Manhattan, I
look back at a neighborhood that,
though equally part of New York City,
feels strangely disconnected from the
rest of it.
—Nick Dunn
30
A MAn FOR All SeASOnS
“I would give the Devil the benefit of the Ultimately, he was executed for his stand,
law, if only for my safety’s sake,” quips Sir transforming him into a symbol of the
Thomas More (Frank Langella) in the Counter-Reformation, and resulting in his
Roundabout Theatre Company’s revival of 1935 canonization as a Catholic saint.
Robert Bolt’s A Man For All Seasons. His This play is devastating tragedy, both for
words challenge the Lutheran firebrand More’s intense struggle to uphold his con-
Will Roper, flaming with zeal to banish all science (“when a man takes an oath, he is
evil—whether popish, holding his soul in his
or secular—from the hands, and if he opens
realm. More insists, them, and lets it slip
“England is planted away, he will have no
thick with laws, cov- hope of finding himself
ered in them from again”), and for his
coast to coast; if you ceaseless faith in the
cut them all down, how security of the law (“a
would you stand in the causeway upon which a
winds that would blow man may walk
then? As for me, I will unharmed, so long as
hide myself in the he keeps to it”), proven
thickets of the law.” illusory as the “investi-
The play follows the gation” led by the
career of More, a sinister Secretary
British canon lawyer and Image courtesy of playbill.com Cromwell quickly
political philosopher (perhaps best known devolves into an inquisition. Langella’s per-
for Utopia, an ironic narrative detailing an formance, which alternates between
idyllic polity), who eventually became Lord sonorous, deadpan irony, and thunderously
Chancellor in the court of Henry VIII. hoarse exclamations—“empty cupboards
However, shortly after his appointment, to scare children!”—perfectly complements
More fell into disfavor for his refusal to rec- Zach Grenier’s sinister Thomas Cromwell
ognize Henry as the supreme head of the (think Rahm Emanuel in a doublet), and
Church of England (a controversy originat- Patrick Page’s bombastic Henry VIII.
ing, of course, in his divorcing Catherine of
Aragon in order to marry Anne Boleyn). —Brendan Case
A Sonnet for the Teacher
At century’s close, as emperors failed to hold
the grip of Pax Romana in their vice,
a man who taught the craft, whose tongue was gold,
made Institutes a Western way precise.
Beginning with the nature of a child,
both capable and culpable at heart,
this master taught restraint upon the wild
animal that must be tamed by art.
Unlike the beast, whose instinct secures life,
man’s sole hope survives within the term
defined—precise and perspicacious knife
whose eloquence divides us from the worm.
Through imitation, noble and sublime,
Quintilian serves as Mentor for our time.
- R.L. Jackson
Associate Professor of Education and English
The Gadfly
 An Interview with
Zach Williams
Anyone who hasn’t yet heard of Zach Williams likely will in coming months. This shaggy-haired singer-songwriter from Park Slope offers a soulful blend of
twangy folk strains and foot-tapping rhythms playfully named “Fotown.” He is infectious in concert—leaping before the microphone, occasionally deferring to Rob
Ritchie’s wailing slide guitar, or Zach Loper’s rollicking bass-line. He is currently working with Trinity Grace Church, as well as touring the country with To
Write Love on Her Arms, a non-profit organization. He recently sat down for a short conversation with Brendan Case from the Gadfly.
The Gadfly: What inspires your work?
Zach Williams: Well, I write songs real quickly. I write them in
about five minutes, and when I’m done, they are whatever they
are. When I’m writing, colors are a big deal to me; I usually
bring emotions out in color. When I’m trying to explain to
the band what a song should sound like, I usually
use a color. You know, “This song is hunter
green.” My friends and enemies have a
big part in my music, and my wife,
Stacy… I don’t write songs all too
often, though. I write like one
song a month, maybe. They just
hit me: sometimes when I’m not
paying attention in church, and
the preacher’s speaking, or
sometimes I’ll wake up in the
middle of the night with an
idea, and just write it then.
GM: What’s the story behind
the song “Dirty Feet”?
ZW: I had just graduated college, and
my parents gave me one of those Apple
computers with GarageBand. I was on this two-
week tour with my band, and my drummer
started messing around with it while we were in
the band. He made this beat, he was all proud
of it, and I was like, “Man, I need to rap to this.”
We were driving to this little town in Georgia,
and I was just passing road signs, just writing
down whatever, so the first verse makes no sense
at all, it’s just whatever I saw on the road. I had all
the melodies from the new Gnarles Barkley album
in my head. As for the chorus, I think Brian’s feet
smelled really bad—we’d been making fun of
him—so that’s where “Dirty Feet” came from. So,
the second verse was after we had gotten to the
venue, and I was trying to make it make a little more
sense. That bridge, “barbecue stains”: Brian’s mom cooked out,
made a barbecue for us…That’s about it, I guess, it’s a dumb song.
GM: No, it’s really one of our favorites. What are some key themes
you explore in your music?
ZW: Well, the songs “Down to the Blood” and “The Names That
December 2008
Fell” are all about shame and redemption, about not falling into the
sins of the generation that came before us. I write a lot of story
songs, like “James,” which I wrote for [my friend] Caleb
about a month after his father Jim passed away. He
was an alcoholic, but no one really knew it. One day,
while he was at church, he stood up real awkwardly,
and told everyone. He went home and wrote this
creed to the Lord, basically saying that he was free
from it now, and that God could take him home
whenever he wanted. He died just a few days later.
So, “James, James, get out of the water,” they’re
telling him to get out, but it’s probably too late.
Then, of course, “Hospital” is kind of a random
thought I had while Stacy in the hospital, and
I had to leave at 9 pm every night. So, I
got home one night, frustrated, and I
wrote those lyrics in my journal,
then I figured out how to play
the guitar and sing at the same
time, and it turned into that
song.
GM: What do you think the next year
holds for you? What do you hope your music will
accomplish?
ZW: Well, this year’s a big year, because we’re having a baby.
I guess I’d love to get to the place where Stacy didn’t have to
work, and we could pay our bills, but that would be hard to
do. I’d like to record a full length album this year. I want to do
a 10-12 track record. I’d love to tour with the band somehow,
and do more stuff with To Write Love on Her Arms. I mean,
the trust and the conversations that come out at these shows,
every show is just stuff that I know I’m going to remember forever.
This dad came up to me the other night and said he was there
with his son who tried to kill himself the week before. “We found
out about this, and we just came out, and I’m so glad we came.”
I would love to do more stuff with them this year. I want to
bring people together, and I think music is a very tangible way
to bring about community. I want to keep telling stories.
GM: What are some of your upcoming shows?
ZW: Well, January 11th I’ll be at the House of Blues in Florida,
with the lead singers from Bayside, the Almost, and Thrice. And,
January 30th, I’ll be in Ottawa, but I don’t think I’m at liberty yet
to tell you who might be there.
31
The exile: William Brafford on ‘The Benedict Option’
O
n the Sunday evening after the election, I went to a short
lecture by theologian Stanley Hauerwas. He spoke about
how the church can both welcome and learn from its
mentally or physically disabled members. There was a very tense
moment in the question-and-answer section when a woman in the
last few rows stood up and in a trembling voice described her frus-
tration with a nation that had just rejected a disabled veteran and
a mother of a child with Down syndrome. Angry murmers rippled
through the politically mixed audience. Hauerwas, notorious for his
forthrightness, actually had to struggle for a response. After an awk-
ward minute, he found it, and proclaimed that we should care more
about the church than we do about America.
Such an answer is a version of a maxim that has been a major
theme in everything I have ever read by Hauerwas: “the political
task of Christians is to be the church
rather than to transform the world.” To
understand this statement, it’s impor-
tant to note that it is meant as an
alternative, on the one hand to those
who would have Christians take over
secular society, and on the other to
those who would have Christians sim-
ply melt into it. Hauerwas’s vision of
what it means to “be the church,”
broadly speaking, is that Christians
have a primary allegiance to the com-
munity of the church, not to the
nation-state. This is why it is more
important to care about the church
than America.
During this year’s campaigns, I saw
a number of articles about the Evan-
gelical Left, as represented by writers
such as Jim Wallis and Donald Miller.
It might seem like common sense that
a religious left is the significant opposite
of a religious right. But I think that in the next few decades the
question will not be with which side of the political spectrum Chris-
tians identify themselves, but whether Christians should be
identifying themselves by the political spectrum at all. In other
words, expect to see more Christians looking for alternatives to the
idea of the United States as a “Christian nation.”
Take, for example, Rod Dreher, a former writer for the conser-
vative magazine National Review. On his blog and elsewhere, Dreher
often writes about what he calls “the Benedict Option”: the idea
that traditional communities can draw back from the compromises
of modern life and let the rest of society go its own way, in the same
way that St. Benedict’s communities drew back from the failing
Roman Empire in order to plant the seeds of a new culture. Dreher
believes the key to the Benedict Option is self-sufficiency, and he
often writes about the possibilities of family farms, local economies,
32
and homeschooling. The name of the idea comes from the stirring
(or histrionic, depending on your perspective) final pages of the
philosopher Alasdair MacIntyre’s 1981 book After Virtue, in which
MacIntyre proclaims that traditionalists are waiting for a new St.
Benedict to find a way forward through the coming dark ages.
A related impulse can be seen in the “New Monastic” move-
ment, which is usually associated with Shane Claiborne, but is
really in continuity with the many Christian communities that have
devoted themselves to fellowship with and in the marginal parts of
society. Claiborne and other practitioners of the New Monasticism
have drawn the ire of religious conservatives for their outspoken
criticism of the Bush administration’s policies, but to simply con-
flate the New Monastics with the religious left is, I think, a mistake.
Their criticism is very often meant to point out that the nation-state
is not and cannot be the church. To
point out the ways in which the nation-
state fails to live up to the standards of
the church is a way of witnessing to the
ways in which the church is different
from the world.
I am convinced that Christians will
have to consider this inclination to
draw back. Sometime in the second
half of the twentieth century—I can’t
pin down exactly when—mainline
Protestantism lost its privileged place in
American culture. Short of a massive
religious revival among cultural elites,
no religious group is going to get to
claim this place of privilege, and Chris-
tians are going to seek different ways of
coming to terms with this. The Bene-
dict Option and the New Monasticism
are fascinating responses, very much
worthy of consideration. It’s important
to see that both responses distinguish
“drawing back” from “withdrawing”: Christian communities are to
be marked by their hospitality toward the people around them, tak-
ing the early church as a model.
This won’t be the only side in the conversation. There are other
powerful and sophisticated expressions of Christian political theol-
ogy that don’t place such an emphasis on drawing back. I am
thinking especially of Abraham Kuyper’s elaboration of “sphere of
sovereignty,” as well as the traditional Lutheran two-kingdom dis-
tinction. And there are of course several rich streams of thought
about church and government in Catholic theology. But in the
United States the proponents of these views are having to adjust to
a nation in which Protestantism has very recently lost much of its
hold on culture. In this situation, we stand to learn a great deal from
those who have thought carefully about what it really means for the
church to be the church.
The Gadfly
 Holy Sonnet XII

Why are we by all creatures waited on ?

Why do the prodigal elements supply
Life and food to me, being more pure than I,
Simpler and further from corruption ?
Why brook'st thou, ignorant horse, subjection ?
Why dost thou, bull and boar, so sillily
Dissemble weakness, and by one man's stroke die,
Whose whole kind you might swallow and feed upon ?
Weaker I am, woe's me, and worse than you ;
You have not sinn'd, nor need be timorous.
But wonder at a greater, for to us
Created nature doth these things subdue ;
But their Creator, whom sin, nor nature tied,
For us, His creatures, and His foes, hath died.

- John Donne (1633)

December 2008 33
34 The Gadfly