I just don’t see local communities making better choices than those made at the state and federal level. This may happen in isolated pockets, but by the same token you could see vast swaths of places overturning the few gains the environmental movement has achieved on the level of federal and state policies and regulations, which is exactly what the Tea Party wants to do.
Because people can do the wrong thing, he is content to concentrate power in the hands of the few, because environmentalists, acting as the conscience of the public, will continue to labor to get them to do the right thing. Who is going to guarantee their continued "success"? We have to put our trust in another elite, in this case certain scientists, because they know through science what natural ecological limits are and such. There is no consideration of what is Constitutional.
While a wholesale, artificial approach won’t get us to this spot, there are nevertheless things we can do to help this culture along. Foremost among them is to foster real community—meetings of people in the flesh. These should center not simply around discussing ideals, nor the totally banal; they should incorporate objective human goods like food and music, and they should draw from the cultural tradition whence notions of “aesthetic” and “goodness” arose. They should be pockets of humanism, but with a new and very self-aware intentionality.
I had a brief exchange with a Blackfriar about evangelization after I claimed that the "old ways were best, too bad they're not being used now." What old ways? "A strong local Christian community with one-on-one outreach - the "early Church" model, with an emphasis on the word community since the word doesn't really apply to most parishes. I don't see the ideal being obsered in the big metropolitan areas in the U.S., at least. Granted, there are many obstacles to that ideal being realized, but it would be good for theses to be recognized and addressed, so that people are no longer comfortable with the status quo." He had initially posted the above Apple video as a possible model for new evangelization efforts. wage slavery makes great demands of our time and two income - less resources, etc.
Part of the problem with parishes as community is that we have much more mobility so that people don't just socialize within their villages or local communities as we once did. It is still evident and very important in more agrarian societies, but not in the urbanised modern world. As such, we have to use new ways to build community, to give a sense of belonging. The Apple video above shows that a community can be formed out of a desire for excellence. In a Christian context, this would mean a love of virtue, and indeed, a love of God who is the Most Excellent. Evangelization, then, would mean letting that excellence be shared and seen and enjoyed by others – acts of charity and of preaching.
Fellowship was to be sought in the pursuit of excellence - what Apple promotes in its company ethos should be adopted by Christians, who would form associations not on the basis of local proximity, but on a common task or work. I responded:
Mobility (and mass urbanization) is possible only because of cheap energy. I would prefer the Church be ahead of the curve than behind it when it comes to adjusting to the coming loss of cheap energy, but it may not happen. Community/communion/friendship should be based on excellence but it also requires that one live with the other --"quality time" doesn't make up for lack of time, just as in parenting.
He ended with the implicit claim that this was not being realistic: " So, are we going to preach to the world that exists, or do we need to create that ideal world before we preach? I go for the former..."
Catholic ecclesial movements of the 20th century seem to be a response vocational model - ecclesial movements I have mentioned before that Fr. Louis Bouyer asks this question in his The Church of God, and I think his answer, that the local geographic parish maintains its importance in the life of the Church despite changing times, is right. Those who have an apostolate to preach or teach or administer the sacraments may have to meet the people where they are; but what of the laity? What are they supposed to do? The thing is that in our false meritocracy, very few people stay loyal to the company. There is a lot of changing of jobs, and very few stable friendships that survive the transition to a new workplace. (Especially if one moves to a new city or state!) More often than not, the people at work keep you company while at work or lunch, but you see very little of them when you are off work. You may get to be close with some, but if you change companies, they will probably drop out of your life, sooner or later. The human heart seeks stability and permanence, but we ignore this because we have to provide for ourselves or our families, or we have to follow career opportunities.
The recent NYT article, Friends of a Certain Age, casts light on the predicament of many young adults.
