A Time for honor
Glenn Beck says that this country must experience a return to honor. Bravo! But then he goes on to say that the only way that that can be done is through a return to God. What he says may be true for himself, but is it also true for everyone else?
If so, how do we return? By what path? As set forth by which religion?
Perhaps there’s a clue to be found in the old saying that “even a broken clock is right twice a day.” Maybe if the object of one’s quest is honor, honor is what one should seek, and religion — any religion — like the clock in the saying, is just an indicator of a particular reality, and not its source.
There is no religion that does not have its scriptures and its holy writ. All claim not only to be correct, but to be exclusively correct, and that all others are mistaken or misguided in anything from just a single small detail to their entire structure.
Even so, all religions – even religions like Buddhism, which has no actual deity, or Hinduism, with a pantheon of thousands – have standards of behavior; the ideas of right and wrong; and a concept of honor.
Is it possible that those things, like the correct time indicated by a broken clock, have nothing to do with the religion that describes them, but have an independent existence of their own? Perhaps that is what we should be looking for.
Honor can be described by reason, alone – no religion necessary: To be honorable is to freely accept and fully act upon one’s real obligations. How can it be that humanity is not capable of understanding that without divine instruction? Even its logical extension – nobility — the condition that Beck and all the rest of us would surely most like to experience, is possible to understand and even to practice without theological guidance or an eschatological goad: To be noble is to act honorably even when no real obligation exists.
Doesn’t that one concept embody all three of Beck’s spiritual ideals, Faith, Hope and Charity, without the need for either religious structure or religious mandate?
Surely it can’t be that without a clock there is no time, and given that, how can it be possible that without religion there can be no right, wrong, or honor?
All three of those are, in fact, aspects of just one single concept: that of righteousness or integrity, as viewed in the context of a social contract, whether formally stated or simply accepted as a “given.”
Social contract theory is not a regular subject of conversation today, but in 1762, when Jean Jacques Rousseau, following seventeenth century British philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, wrote of it, it was a bombshell, and contributed both to the American Revolution and to the structuring of this country’s Constitution.
The basic idea of a social contract is both simple and democratic: Society is a combination of individuals who come together not by royal or divine fiat, but by their own choosing and for their own mutual benefit, and agree, by whatever means, stated or tacit, to accept and enforce mutually-created rules of behavior. Under the Social Contract – truly a radical and dangerous concept in an era of kings and established religion — acceptance of Society’s rules provided both a standard of right and wrong and the possibilities of honor and nobility.
Not contrary to the teachings of the Bible, but not drawn from it, either, the Social Contract is a positive response to the question of Cain that applies to all who live by Society’s rules: Yes, we are indeed Society’s keeper, just as, within the bounds of its rules, it is ours, and how well we meet the obligations we have accepted towards Society is the measure of our honor.
That standard encompasses, I believe, all that Glenn Beck seeks in his drive for a return to honor, except for just one thing: reliance upon Divine Providence.
We remember and take comfort from something else: The truth that God helps those who help themselves.
Does that mean, though, that we reject religion or its teachings? Not in any way or to any degree. If God and God’s ministers here on earth can help us to be right more than twice a day, we’re all in favor of it. There’s always time for honor.
– END –
Email This
Posted by Roger E. Skoff on September 2, 2010 12:20 pm
» Filed Under Christianity, Constitution, Honor, Moral absolutes, News, religion
» Tags: Honor,Moral absolutes,Moral Relativism,religion
Trackback URL:
Comments
5 Responses to “A Time for honor”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
Beck is right. We know he’s right if nothing else, from the responsive hatred of the Godless, America-hating Left.
“Glenn Beck says that this country must experience a return to honor.” Which should cause peals of laughter from anyone who has ever watched Glenn Beck.
Russell, obviously you have never watched Glenn Beck, or if you have, only from an honorless, Godless, leftist troll’s POV.
Roger: thanks for this essay. Really made me think. As you may know, I was at the Beck rally and came away ebullient (as a RC Conservative Christian). But I also am starting to have concerns about Beck’s approach these days.
Philosopher friends of mine may find your analysis intriguing and I hope that they contribute a few additional comments.
TMH
If I understand you correctly, the “return to honor” doesn’t rest on any one brand of Christianity. What would that look like in terms of concrete legislation? Recriminalize all abortions and no gay marriage, I get that. But what else? The return of Sunday “blue laws”? The elimination of all divorce except for the biblical grounds of female adultery? The stoning of recalcitrant teenagers? How exactly will civil laws be changed to square with Biblical Law? Details, please!
Please read the article that will be posted to this site on Tuesday, September 7, 2010.
The body of content will address your questions.