These two excellent morning readings of late are on very different subjects, consisting of multiple contributors, and both enriching.
The overwhelming criteria for my reading plans is that a particular book is close at hand. I could wish that I had a drive to master particular topics and could read with a greater goal in mind. But I accept my gadfly reading program and often surprise myself at how themes and commonalities crop up in spite of my non-intentions.
I have been repeatedly made aware of how deficient my own education has been due to a lack of philosophy studies. I have majors in history and English, but was never required to study philosophy. It is inescapable for both of those fields. I have also been involved in studying the Bible and theology since my late teen years. I served as a pastor in the past and am still a teacher in a classical Christian school. While philosophy and the Bible are not equal, any serious student of the Bible and theology must, as in MUST, study at least some philosophy.
This is not a case where one must go on a difficult journey to find someone, somewhere, who has written something on the connection between the history of philosophy and the history of the Church, or philosophical issues and theological issues, or of philosophers who were also Christians. You want to get books on philosophy and Christianity? Better get a large bookcase and a big budget.
The great thing about Paul and the Giants of Philosophy is its accessibility. Each chapter takes one of the philosophers of the Greco-Roman world and presents their views on a topic and then contrasts those views with Paul’s writings. There is more interaction between Paul and the philosophers in the Stoic tradition rather than examinations of Paul’s writings viewed in the light of “The Big Three,” meaning Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. Certainly, more in-depth, scholarly, weighty, academic books can and have been written.
But this book is readable, enjoyable, and geared toward the non-expert. I firmly believe that my philosophy professor and student friends and son would find reading this book profitable, but it is geared toward those of us who read Paul a lot and Stoics rarely. But, for those who wish to know more, each chapter ends with suggested readings giving both primary and secondary sources for the more serious pursuit of the topics. And each chapter has some discussion questions as well.
I believe that this would be an excellent book to use in a college philosophy survey. It could also be used in any course studying Paul in his historical and cultural context. Some groups would enjoy this for a series of Sunday school lessons or as a book club read. And, with strong, hot, black coffee, it is wonderful for morning reading.
I usually begin with some readings related to the Bible and theology, and after that, I like to read something that fits into the broader Christian worldview perspective. This is what led to my reading of America and the Just War Tradition.
This book is like a long trip for a child. What was overwhelmingly attracting me was the chapter by chapter survey of the various wars that the United States has fought in, beginning with the War for Independence and going up to current engagements in the War on Terror, meaning Iraq and Afghanistan.
But before one can get into the fun stuff, there is a long chapter written by the editors, Dr. Hall and Dr. Charles, titled “The Just War Tradition and America’s Wars.” These 50 pages constitute what could be a short book on its own. We all have a sense of certain wars or aspects of wars being just or unjust. We all have a list of do’s and don’t’s about what is allowable in war. On the one extreme, we would find pacifists who would eschew all wars. There is within the Christian tradition a great amount of history and theology to support such a view. As one whose military “experience” consists only in teaching about war, I have a heart-felt desire for pacifism. But it is not easily sustained in light of real world conditions.
On the other hand, you would find extreme nationalist views which would justify any and every war that America or some other country of one’s origins has fought. I find a certain sympathy with that position as well. We honor the military men who, as we say, fought for our liberties and right to be free. But exactly what liberties and freedoms for us were they fighting for in the War of 1812, the Mexican-American War, the Spanish-American War, and possibly some or all of the others?
The weighing out of justice or injustice in war is not merely a matter of gut reactions or simplistic patriotic urges. The Just War Tradition largely grew out of the context of Western Civilization, or we could even say Christendom. The greatest philosophers and theologians have thought seriously about the ethics of conflict on both a personal and nation-wide level. Growing out of the thinking of such people as Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, philosophers have agreed (always a slippery word to use) on what constitutes justness before, during, and after war. The Latin phrases which permeate this book and topic are Ius ad bellum, Ius in bello, and Ius post bellum.
Ius ad bellum, justness before war, begins with just cause, which is followed by just authority, and right intention. Ius ad bello, justness in war, hinges on discrimination and proportionality. Ius post bellum deals with how the results are handled, what happens to the people and countries that were defeated, and what follows from that war.
As might be guessed, a war could be started for wrong reasons, conducted honorably (according to the criteria), and ended well. Or you can mix and match the ingredients in a wide variety of ways. As helpful as the criteria are, such things are not always clear cut. War is so horrible that it sometimes seems insane to try to make it a subject of calm, reasoned discourse.
I majored in history in college. I have taken courses that have included or primarily focused upon the wars of the United States. I would guess that I have a thousand books dealing with war. But this book revealed how little I actually understood or had been subjected to understanding the historical, philosophical, and traditional views of Just War. That is the long journey that the reader has to take before getting to “the answers” in the chapters on America’s wars.
To quickly comment upon the wars, each chapter has a different contributor. I honestly think there is not a bad or weak essay in the lot. Part of the delight in this book is the cases where I was surprised or even shocked by the views of the authors. I would tend, for example, to find the American War for Independence just and defensible, but Dr. John D. Roche thinks not. Amazing argument, this chapter didn’t convince me, but it did humble me a bit. Many chapters later, I thought that there was little or no way to defend the American experience in Vietnam, but Mackubin Thomas Owens’s chapter blew me away.
As indicated in the review above regarding the Bible and philosophy, history teachers must study philosophy. Just War is a philosophical and ethics related tradition and a theological concern as well. Studying this book will not give you the set of pat answers to why this war and not that one was right or wrong. But it will give perspective.
History teachers, read this book. As a further note, it is chocked full of other reading suggestions on both the specific wars and on the topic in general. I am convinced that I must acquire Michael Walzer’s book Just and Unjust Wars. Also, I am confirmed in my conviction that Mark David Hall is one of the best resources for serious historical and political studies in our time. I learned of him last year from political theorist Koty Arnold just after Hall’s book Did America Have a Christian Founding? was published. I am now on a quest to obtain and read all that Dr. Hall writes.