On Ascent

Jeremiah observed that "every man is brutish in his knowledge" even that "the pastors (leaders and shepherds) are...brutish."

"Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches. But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the Lord which exercise lovingkindness, judgement, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the Lord" (Jeremiah 10:14, 21; 9:23-24)

Without light and knowledge from God, we are brutes. Leaders or groups who deny, reject, and/or offend God will become brutes and will cause civilization to become brutish.

When spiritual darkness prevails, the brutish ascend. This ascent affirms them. And they affirm their mentors. Together, they reason: "are we not ascendant?" "Surely, as cause for our ascendancy, we must have done something right, done something worthy?" Without proper attributions to God and His enlightened purposes, the ascendant attribute their ascendancy to their own cleverness. What's more, they attribute the relative servility of others to some deficiency. But isn't it really presumptuous, even deluded, to omit to consider dumb luck, or inheritance, or one's professions (and etc.) as the source of one's ascent--especially in an increasingly politicized environment?

It is interesting that the word profession arises from the word profess and is related to the word professor. In history, what one professed generally determined one's profession. Professing allegiance to a tyrant, one might become his counsel. Professing opposition to a tyrant, one might expect imprisonment. Isn't it still true that what we profess influences or determines our profession (for other present parallels see my post entitled "Is Justice Alive and Well?")? After all, isn't it exceptional to find a self-declared conservative among professors (ie. economics professors)? Isn't it rare to find a self-declared conservative among trial lawyers? Perhaps one prerequisite to these professions is professing progressivism? And for their professions they are richly compensated. Perhaps one impediment to employment in these professions, and some other very high-profile professions, is a failure to profess what has been deemed "progressive"? Is there an economic penalty for failure to profess what is "progressive"? Economic research might consider that topic. And do some of the less fortunate in America then wrongly attribute their relative economic misfortune to fate or God--and fault Him for it in ignorance? Philosophers might consider that topic. And what is progressivism?

Progressivism is a political philosophy advocating economic, social, and political reform. During the era of trusts and sweatshops, some reform in America was self-evidently necessary. But I think you will agree that reform ought to have some constraints. Are all reforms progressive? Must we reform everything to be progressive (ie. our calendars, our language, our conception of religion or marriage)? Shall we remake our society on an economic ideal--purged of literalism and moralism (see the post entitled "Is Justice Alive and Well?")? What if we don't want our Constitution to be reformed? What if we don't want to be purged of literalism and moralism in favor of economic liberalism? Are we then consigned to low-wage professions because we professed what was not progressive? Without constraints on reform, what is the end of progressivism?  For example, would it be progress, for all humanity to be subjugated under a unified economic world order? Would the means to that end be "progressive" or would it be depraved? How would the end then differ from the means?

In any case, we should follow leaders who seek counsel from God--not those who seek to counsel God or deny God.