Tuesday, January 30, 2007

A Screwtape Zeitgeist









BOSTON

IN THE Screwtape Letters, C.S. Lewis diagnosed a phenomenon that is today largely responsible for stunting the moral formation of this nation's youth.

In Letter 25 to his nephew Wormwood, a bombastic Screwtape declaimed, "The use of Fashions in thought is to distract the attention of men from their real dangers…we make it fashionable to expose the dangers of enthusiasm at the very moment when they are all really becoming worldly and lukewarm; a century later, when we are really making them all Byronic and drunk with emotion, the fashionable outcry is directed against the dangers of the mere 'understanding.'"

Proof of this -- that Zeitgeists have a penchant for deriding what might benefit society -- can be seen in the prevailing attitude towards morality these days.

In an America where single parent families, teenage pregnancies and teenage shooting rampages have become too frequent, the mere mention of God in a public forum evokes a guttural gasp and a frantic call to the lawyer. Talk of morality in public is uncouth and in your face; denuded women and gun-toting men, icons to a broad swath of culture, are not. As alcohol, sex, cars and money -- all elevated by culture as salve for the soul -- exacerbate its yearning once the evanescence of novelty dissipates, the idea of a transcendent remedy draws a haughty scoff.

Society rejecting its aegis is not a new phenomenon; these entreaties date back to the book of Jeremiah and beyond: "Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls." Jeremiah 6:16 (NIV).

Yet the symptoms of a broken soul still convulse our youth: alcoholism, drug addiction, anorexia, incarceration, truancy, gang violence -- the list goes on and on. Ironically, in what may arguably be the intellectual epicenter of hauteur towards morality, there is a law on the books that has the power to put a stop to it all. John Adams, the chief framer of the Massachusetts Constitution and 2nd President of our nation, wrote into that document a provision that requires public schools to educate for virtue. In fact, so certain was he that moral education engendered societal flourish, he once exalted it to rival representative government in importance. He once said, "Two things are to be indispensably adhered to,--one is, some regulation for securing forever an equitable choice of representatives; another is, the education of youth, both in literature and morals."

In his extensive writings, Adams defined virtue as, among other things, a principle of justice where one treats others as one wants to be treated at all times and in all circumstances. His unequivocal handling of the subject made circumvention by legislative progeny impossible. How, then, is public education in Massachusetts today constitutional when it omits character formation? Simple -- it isn't.

Many will parry that this is the responsibility of family, which is true, or that, since God can't be taught in schools, people of faith should take their ball and go home, which is false -- but neither recrimination addresses the real issue -- there is no safety net catching youth left behind by the dissolution of the family unit and concomitant moral erosion of society.

The Screwtape Zeitgeist churns. Lewis continues, "Cruel ages are put on their guard against Sentimentality, feckless and idle ones against Respectability, lecherous ones against Puritanism; and whenever all men are really hastening to be slaves or tyrants we make Liberalism the prime bogey." Today, observation of our great society compels the following addition: "An age of weary souls on guard against the way that provides rest."

Sunday, January 7, 2007

WAITING & WONDERING


ANDREW STATION














I wonder what "Skork's" real name was? I wonder how old he was when he died? I wonder how many young people looked up to him in his neighborhood? How many watched and imitated him? I wonder how he was doing in school? What were his dreams? Was he rich? Poor? I wonder what he died for? I wonder if the crosshairs and gang tags marked on the bench near his name mean more killings are on the way...


"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into the harvest field."

Thursday, January 4, 2007

BOSTON'S DANGEROUS MYOPIA


A few weeks ago, early morning gunfire dispersed a rare moment of Dorchester quiet outside my window. The next day, we frantically tried to locate emergency services in case any of the youth in the area were being targeted. Luckily they weren't being targeted (we hope -- it's hard to break the code of silence) because we learned after a week of searching that there are no services in Boston that relocate young people in danger -- even after a 10-year high 75 homicides in Boston in 2005 and 74 in 2006.

I sent a letter to the Globe after a 14-year-old was killed at 6am on New Year's Day:

A dangerous myopia

There is a disturbing trend occurring in Boston right now -- its homicide victims are getting younger and its tired strategies are getting older. In 2005, as the death toll trudged along, we heard the government call for more police and more prosecutions. Community leaders called for rallies, dances and events. Clergy called for more funding, programs and family involvement. At year's end we learned that, in spite of all of these efforts, the death toll was a 10-year high 75 homicides. In 2006, a similar approach to youth violence produced a similar result: 74 homicides.

In 2007, the first homicide victim was a 14-year-old killed leaving a house party at six in the morning. It comes just over a month after a Dorchester house party dubbed the "$hort $kirt Affair" saw two girls, ages 14 and 15, and two boys, 16 and 17, get shot at three in the morning. In October 2005, I wrote a column for this page ("
Virtue vs. violence" October 28, 2005) that said, "It has become painfully clear that police, clergy, and community leaders cannot rescue our kids by themselves. If Massachusetts does not begin to look for new ways to save young people from the streets, then they are going to continue to die senselessly." After another year of grisly killings of mostly young people, I renew this plea. Boston cannot afford to implement the same old thinking in 2007.

They didn't publish it, but they ran some good columns and a trenchant report:

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/12/31/homicide/

After reviewing the numbers, it's hard not to wonder if we are missing the point a bit. This past week, as thousands of folks prepared to rally outside the Statehouse in support of an an intangible thing -- albeit an important thing with many tangible benefits, but nevertheless, still an insentient institution without a beating heart or soul -- a 14-year-old full of life and breath was shot to death. It's hard not to wonder what would be the result if those thousands devoted their energies to the teenagers crying for help in the city? It's hard not to be reminded of another instance in history where humans exalted an institution over their fellow living and breathing human beings -- when they wanted to kill, and eventually did kill, a certain Servant for putting the sick and dying before another sacred institution, the Sabbath.

In 2005, we learned the hard way that our approach to youth violence was not working. In 2006, we tried the same approach -- 74 homicides reinforced what we already knew -- that our approach to youth violence isn't working.

It is clear that our young people are misguided; it is clear that families are struggling. So why aren't we doing more to step in? We have a criminal justice system that spends billions locking up the at-risk once they step off the ledge; why is there no system in place before they jump? Not just to keep them out of jail, but to save their lives? As the troubled approach the ledge, plain for all the world to see, our leaders sing the tired "no money, no money, no money" mantra. Yet the moment a 15-year-old pulls the trigger and kills a college-bound 19-year-old, as happened this summer, the millions it will cost to incarcerate him for life suddenly appear.


"They dress the wound of my people as though it were not serious. 'Peace, peace,' they say, when there is no peace."