Read it all.

"Done is a battle on the dragon black,
Our champion Christ confoundit has his force;
The yetis of hell are broken with a crack,
The sign triumphal raisit is of the cross"
– William Dunbar (c. 1500)

Art: Albrecht Dürer, "The Harrowing of Hell" (1512) pic.twitter.com/FnneczvWUw

— Matthew H. Young (@matthenryyoung) March 30, 2024

You may download it there or listen to it directly there from Saint Philip’s, Charleston, South Carolina.

#Easter the day of the Resurrection. My favourite painting in #Venice about this subject can be admired in the church of San Francesco della Vigna in the chapel Badoer and is by Paolo Veronese. Wonderful colorful contrasts. https://t.co/Gzb0yJ9Kwu #librarytour #virtualtour pic.twitter.com/7iIQjCDgd3

— See Venice Guided Tours – Luisella Romeo (@luisella_romeo) April 4, 2021

Daniel Kahneman, an Israeli American psychologist and best-selling author whose Nobel Prize-winning research upended economics — as well as fields ranging from sports to public health — by demonstrating the extent to which people abandon logic and leap to conclusions, died March 27. He was 90.

His death was confirmed by his stepdaughter Deborah Treisman, fiction editor at the New Yorker. She did not say where or how he died.

Dr. Kahneman’s research was best known for debunking the notion of “homo economicus,” the “economic man” who since the epoch of Adam Smith was considered a rational being who acts out of self-interest. Instead, Dr. Kahneman found, people rely on intellectual shortcuts that often lead to wrongheaded decisions that go against their own best interest.

These misguided decisions occur because humans “are much too influenced by recent events,” Dr. Kahneman once said. “They are much too quick to jump to conclusions under some conditions and, under other conditions, they are much too slow to change.”

Read it all.

Daniel Kahneman, who changed psychology and economics forever, dies at 90.

Thanks for everything.

We remember him in 10 great quotes: pic.twitter.com/kiyhC2kCo3

— Wisdom Theory (@wisdom_theory) March 27, 2024

I had not read Thielicke for many years until I recently discovered a book of his that I had never heard of: Nihilism: Its Origin and Nature, with a Christian Answer. This work is stunning, for it identifies the problem at the center of our contemporary culture: a collapse in the cultural consensus about what it means to be human. The book’s context is the anthropological challenges posed by Nazism and Marxism in the twentieth century, but its argument offers insights for today.

At the heart of the problems of his day Thielicke saw the rejection of two basic principles: the idea that human beings had an end, a telos; and the notion that limits were good. In short, what it meant to be human was up for grabs. In practice, this made human beings anything that their will could achieve, given the technological possibilities available in any given time or place. And that was a key component of nihilism.

We have witnessed amazing technological advances since the 1940s. The transformation of humanity from a given, limited, teleological essence to a potency whose limits and ends are merely technical problems to be overcome is now complete (at least in the cultural imagination). Ironically, human technical brilliance has served to make human beings into nothing of any great significance. We are the only creatures on the planet who are intelligent and intentional enough to have abolished ourselves.

Read it all.

This is fantastic from @firstthingsmag https://t.co/IS26rEGPG6

— Scott Howard (@ConservaMuse) March 18, 2024

A team led by Google scientists has developed a machine-learning tool that can help to detect and monitor health conditions by evaluating noises such as coughing and breathing. The artificial intelligence (AI) system, trained on millions of audio clips of human sounds, might one day be used by physicians to diagnose diseases including COVID-19 and tuberculosis and to assess how well a person’s lungs are functioning.

This is not the first time a research group has explored using sound as a biomarker for disease. The concept gained traction during the COVID-19 pandemic, when scientists discovered that it was possible to detect the respiratory disease through a person’s cough.

What’s new about the Google system — called Health Acoustic Representations (HeAR) — is the massive data set that it was trained on, and the fact that it can be fine-tuned to perform multiple tasks.

Read it all.

Google AI could soon use a person’s cough to diagnose disease

Machine-learning system trained on millions of human audio clips shows promise for detecting COVID-19 and tuberculosis. @marilenharo https://t.co/SyYt96CPk1

— Ashis Basu 🇨🇦 (@BasuAshis) March 22, 2024

We must transfer our collective faculty for care and compassion from thwarted or struggling adults to those children who need us. This need not be a matter of cruelty or stigma, but rather of reordering our priorities to what we know to be true. This is urgent: If we can’t even mount a normophilic defense of a baby’s need for his or her mother, we will have few resources left to defend our own organismic fundamentals in the face of the seemingly endless ambitions of biotech. Some are already preselecting IVF embryos based on genome analysis. Others propose the accelerated “evolution” of humans by means of in vitro gametogenesis. Others again propose gene-editing embryos. Just recently a breakthrough was announced in the synthetic creation of human embryos: in theory, children wholly without ancestors.

No one is coming to save us. We cannot wait for the “silent majority” to rise up and demand a return to common sense, or mumble about postponing action until we’ve re-Christianized the West, or until we’ve devised a fully worked-out post-Christian metaphysics of human nature. We may lament the Christianity-shaped hole in our discourse, but just because much of modern culture is post-Christian doesn’t mean we no longer have a nature. All we’ve lost is our common framework for naming that nature. We must speak the truth anyway. And wherever possible, we must redirect law and policy from the abolition of human nature to its flourishing.

Should this project be accused of oppressing or stigmatizing “the vulnerable,” we must recall that in reasserting the necessity of norms we are not attacking the most vulnerable. We are defending them. Normophobia imposed on babies and children an obligation to sacrifice their needs for the sake of our wayward desires. We must lift this burden from their little shoulders.

Read it all (registration or subscription).

Of Note: "Children’s needs have not changed just because adult desires have grown more unruly." https://t.co/awSIeT6jFW @moveincircles

— Inst. Family Studies (@FamStudies) March 13, 2024

ZENIT spoke with Father Tarcisio Giuseppe Stramare of the Congregation of Oblates of Saint Joseph, director of the Josephite Movement, about Tuesday’s feast of St. Joseph the Worker….

ZENIT: What does “Gospel of work” mean?

Father Stramare: “Gospel” is the Good News that refers to Jesus, the Savior of humanity. Well, despite the fact that in general we see Jesus as someone who teaches and does miracles, he was so identified with work that in his time he was regarded as “the son of the carpenter,” namely, an artisan himself. Among many possible activities, the Wisdom of God chose for Jesus manual work, entrusted the education of his Son not to the school of the learned but to a humble artisan, namely, St. Joseph.

Read it all.

Joseph the Carpenter
Georges de La Tour, c. 1645
Saint Joseph Feast – 19 March pic.twitter.com/KieTrGQgFH

— Marysia (@marysia_cc) March 18, 2024

Pressure is growing on Pope Francis to rethink a doctrinal declaration, Fiducia Supplicans, allowing Roman Catholic clergy to bless same-sex couples…, after the largest Christian denomination in the Middle East responded by halting its dialogue with the Vatican.

“We affirm our firm rejection of all homosexual relationships, because they violate the Holy Bible and God’s law in creating mankind as male and female — we consider any blessing of such relations, whatever its type, to be a blessing for sin,” the Coptic Orthodox Church’s governing Holy Synod, chaired by Pope Tawadros II, said in a statement released last week.

“After consulting with sister-Churches of the Eastern Orthodox family, it was decided to suspend theological dialogue with the Catholic Church, re-evaluate the results achieved by this dialogue from its beginning 20 years ago, and establish new standards and mechanisms for the dialogue to proceed in future.”

Read it all.

Pressure is growing on Pope Francis to rethink a doctrinal declaration, Fiducia Supplicans, allowing RC clergy to bless same-sex couples, after the largest Christian denomination in the Middle East responded by halting its dialogue with the Vaticanhttps://t.co/lki87tr36O

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) March 18, 2024

Kali Gaddie was a college senior when the pandemic abruptly upended her life plans—and made her part of a big and deeply unhappy political force that figures to play a huge role in the 2024 election season.

Her graduation was postponed, she was let go from her college job and her summer internship got canceled. She spent the final months of school taking online classes from her parents’ house. “You would think that there’s a plan B or a safety net,” she said. “But there’s actually not.”

Today, Gaddie, 25, works as an office manager in Atlanta earning less than $35,000 a year. In her spare time, she uploads videos to TikTok, where she’s amassed thousands of followers. Now, that’s at risk of being taken away too. All of this has left her dejected and increasingly skeptical of politicians.

Young adults in Generation Z—those born in 1997 or after—have emerged from the pandemic feeling more disillusioned than any living generation before them, according to long-running surveys and interviews with dozens of young people around the country. They worry they’ll never make enough money to attain the security previous generations have achieved, citing their delayed launch into adulthood, an impenetrable housing market and loads of student debt.

Read it all.

Young adult Gen Z voters are more disillusioned and pessimistic than any before. More here, including charts from *Generations*:https://t.co/bU8xNjCd9j

— Jean Twenge (author of GENERATIONS, iGEN) (@jean_twenge) March 15, 2024

Ezekiel lays much blame for the Israelites’ deserving punishment on the moral failings of their leaders. More directly, however, it was the political failings of their leaders that sealed the fate of all their people. The Judean kings could have heeded the call of the prophet Jeremiah and surrendered to King Nebuchadnezzar; they decided otherwise, and everyone endured the consequences. The political solidarity of a nation compels them to share the same fate. Even when only soldiers are targeted, noncombatants will die alongside them.

None of this means that one should target enemy noncombatants. The realities and obligations of our shared collective fate, however, dictate that one prioritize one’s own soldiers and citizens while worrying less about those who share another people’s destiny.

These two primary factors—our obligation to protect our own citizens and our filial duties to our brethren—come together when addressing the dilemma of involuntary human shields. If, at the end of the day, an army won’t attack certain legitimate targets because of collateral damage, then the terrorist group will use human shields to prevent their defeat. It’s hard to achieve a decisive victory when you cannot—or will not allow yourself—to destroy the enemy. Yes, guided missiles and other advanced technologies allow for greater precise targeting. Nonetheless, in the fog of war, it is impossible to achieve “immaculate warfare,” especially when the defenders are daring you to kill their human shields.

Ultimately, the defeat of these terrorist groups is the primary ethical imperative. This will benefit not only Israel but also the Gazan civilians who suffer longer under their terrorist leaders and the continuous warfare that they breed. There is a moral cost to not acting decisively, and a strategic cost to forgetting the moral justification for killing in war.

Read it all.

The West Has Forgotten Why Collateral Damage Is Morally Justified https://t.co/wfD6JfYre8

— Public Discourse (@PublicDiscourse) March 15, 2024

I want to make a threefold response to what Bell says in these two paragraphs.

First, creating a new provincial structure for the Church of England to provide for the differing positions of conservatives and liberals is not a ‘fundamental threat’ to the Church of England’s ecclesiology.

What CEEC is asking for is internal differentiation within the Church of England by means of a re-configuration of the Church’s current provincial system. This could take the form of a new province for conservatives alongside Canterbury and York, a new province for liberals alongside Canterbury and York or a re-working of the two existing provinces to cover the whole country with conservatives in Canterbury and liberals in York. [1]

The key point to note about this proposal is that it is in line with the existing ecclesiology of the Church of England. The Church of England has historically consisted, and continues to consist, as a combination  of two separate provinces, each their own Archbishop (both of whom have metropolitical authority within their own province and neither of whom is subject to the other), and each having its own provincial synodical structure consisting of a provincial Convocation made up of the two Houses of Bishops and Clergy, and an attendant House of Laity.  A meeting of the General Synod is simply a joint meeting of these two provincial synods, and the two Convocations retain the power both to veto legislation proposed in the General Synod and to make provision for matters relating to their province (see Canon H.1 and Article 7 of the Constitution of General Synod).

Adding another province into the mix, or reconfiguring the two existing provinces, would not alter this ecclesiological structure in any fundamental way.[2] What it would mean is that the two (or three)  provinces of the Church of England could continue to meet together in General Synod to debate and legislate on matters of common concern, while their provincial synods could legislate to either maintain or change the Church of England’s current teaching and practice with regard to marriage and human sexuality, thus allowing both conservatives and liberals to have what they are looking for  within their own province or provinces.

Each province would hold that the other province or provinces is (or are) part of the Catholic Church and the Church of England, and there would be transferability of ministry without re-ordination between them subject to a minister being prepared to accept the doctrine and discipline of the province to which he or she was transferring.

The Church of England could thus stay together, but in a way which respected the conscientious convictions of both sides and would prevent the Church of England breaking apart entirely.

Read it all.

Martin Davie–A response to Meg Warner ‘Does the Bible really say … that sex outside marriage is wrong? https://t.co/tYzlpsnfpt #christianity #sexualethics #marriage #bible #anglican #anthropology pic.twitter.com/qdQI0oGk5j

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) May 30, 2019

Betsy Sumner always knew she wanted to be a teacher. She came from a family of educators and took a class in high school for aspiring teachers. She began teaching straight out of college in 2009 and loved it.

But last summer she left her job teaching family and consumer sciences, the subject previously known as home economics, at a high school in northern Virginia. With four children of her own, juggling the demanding workload was no longer worth it for the pay.

“It’s almost like preparing for a circus or a theater performance—every day you have to show up and do a show,” she said of preparing for class each day. “It’s just not really sustainable.”

Public-school teachers like Sumner are still leaving the profession in higher numbers than before the pandemic, a Wall Street Journal analysis of data from 10 states show, though departures have fallen since their peak in 2022. The elevated rate is likely due to a combination of factors and adds one more challenge to schools battling learning loss and frequent student absences.

Read it all.

Teachers are still quitting the profession in high numbers, as schools continue to be shaken by political discord, learning loss and chronic absenteeism https://t.co/ckIsXq00Ij https://t.co/ckIsXq00Ij

— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) March 4, 2024

In a statement, the Roman Catholic lead bishop for life issues, the Rt Revd John Sherrington, an auxiliary bishop in the archdiocese of Westminster, welcomed the committee’s decision “not to recommend the legalisation of assisted suicide”.

He continued: “As highlighted in the Committee’s report, experts have noted that there have been major problems in safeguarding the vulnerable and those without full mental capacity when assisted suicide and/or euthanasia has been introduced in other jurisdictions.

“Recognising the distress and suffering of those who are sick and vulnerable, I welcome the Committee’s recommendation that the accessibility and provision of palliative and end of life care needs to be improved — something the Catholic Church has consistently called for.”

Read it all (registration or subscription).

The Bishop of London @bishopSarahM has welcomed a report by MPs which calls for palliative and end-of-life care to be made more widely available https://t.co/5liE9iClCh

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) March 1, 2024

After losing at the appellate level, state officials turned to the U.S. Supreme Court. They asked the justices to consider the dismissals and determine whether they amounted to religious discrimination.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court declined to get involved, but Justice Samuel Alito published a statement emphasizing the importance of the issues involved.

Whether jurors can be dismissed based on their religious beliefs about sexuality is a “very serious and important question,” he wrote, one that he anticipated when the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage.

“In this case, the court below reasoned that a person who still holds traditional religious views on questions of sexual morality is presumptively unfit to serve on a jury in a case involving a party who is a lesbian. That holding exemplifies the danger that I anticipated in Obergefell v. Hodges, namely, that Americans who do not hide their adherence to traditional religious beliefs about homosexual conduct will be ‘labeled as bigots and treated as such’ by the government,” Alito said.

Read it all.

The Supreme Court won’t yet consider whether potential jurors can be dismissed based on their religious beliefs. | By @kelsey_dallas https://t.co/8yVvoH8BE8

— Deseret News (@Deseret) February 28, 2024

According to a new poll from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment organization, nearly a third of Americans, including similar numbers of Republicans and Democrats, say that the First Amendment goes “too far” in the rights it guarantees. More than half agreed that their local community should not allow a public speech that espouses a belief they find particularly offensive.

“Those results were disappointing, but not exactly surprising,” said FIRE Chief Research Adviser Sean Stevens in a Tuesday press release. “Here at FIRE, we’ve long observed that many people who say they’re concerned about free speech waver when it comes to beliefs they personally find offensive. But the best way to protect your speech in the future is to defend the right to controversial and offensive speech today.”

The survey, which was conducted in partnership with the Polarization Research Lab (PRL) at Dartmouth College, asked 1,000 Americans about their opinions on free speech and expression. The survey found that “when it comes to whether people are able to freely express their views,” over two-thirds of respondents said they believed America was headed in the wrong direction. Further, only 25 percent of respondents agreed that the right to free speech was “very” or “completely” secure.

Read it all.

In new poll, almost one-third of Americans say the First Amendment goes "too far." https://t.co/UoAuku9D3j

— reason (@reason) February 27, 2024

Read it all.

The Living Ministry study of clergy has been running since 2017. The latest report highlights that more than a third of the incumbents responding reported levels of mental health that indicate possible depressionhttps://t.co/roew8BtSId

— Madeleine Davies (@MadsDavies) February 22, 2024

No two ways about it: We are making ourselves wretched. We are more affluent than ever, but riches—and power, the only point in having riches—do not make people happy. Ask a psychiatrist. Or take a look at the face of Vladimir Putin, who has, alas, the power of life and death over millions of people and is the owner of the most expensive toilet-paper dispenser in the world. No, affluent as we are, we are also more anxious, depressed, lonely, isolated, and lacking in purpose than ever. Why is this? I suggest it is because we no longer have the foggiest idea what human life is about. Indeed, there is a sense in which we no longer live in a world at all, but exist in a simulacrum of our own making.

Leaving nuance aside, and condensing three decades of research and a vast body of supporting evidence into a phrase: We are now mesmerized by the least intelligent part of the human brain. For reasons of survival, one hemisphere of the brain, the left, has evolved over millions of years to favor manipulation—grabbing, getting, and controlling—while the other, the right, has been tasked with understanding the whole picture. So conflicting are these goals that in humans the hemispheres are largely sequestered, one from the other. Our seeming ability these days to hear only what comes from the left hemisphere does not arise from the brain’s having changed radically in the last couple of centuries, though it is indeed always evolving. It’s more like this: You buy a radio set, and you soon find a couple of channels worth listening to. After a while, you find yourself listening to only one. It’s not the radio set that has changed; it’s you. In the case of the brain, it would not matter so much if we had settled on the intelligent channel—but we didn’t. We settled on the one whose value has nothing to do with truth, or with courage, magnanimity, or generosity, but only with greed, grabbing, and getting. Manipulation.

And no, the difference between the hemispheres is not a myth that has been debunked, as I have explained at length elsewhere. What does need to be debunked is the old pop-psychology myth wherein the left hemisphere “does” reason and language, and is dull but at least reliable, like a slightly boring accountant, whereas the right hemisphere “does” emotions and pictures and is apt to be flighty and frivolous. All of this is wrong. We now know that each hemisphere is involved in everything and that, for the record, the left hemisphere is less emotionally stable, as well as less intelligent—I mean cognitively, as well as emotionally and socially—than the right. The right hemisphere is a far superior guide to reality; delusions and hallucinations are much more frequent, grosser, and more persistent after damage to the right hemisphere than after damage to the left. Without the right hemisphere to rely on, the left hemisphere is at sea. It denies the most obvious facts, lies, and makes stuff up when it doesn’t know what it’s talking about. And it is relentlessly, vacuously cheerful in the face of disaster.

Read it all.

If we are not to become ever more diminished as humans, we need to remain in control of machines, not come under their control. I am not talking about an apocalyptic future; I am talking about apocalypse now. | @dr_mcgilchrist https://t.co/2IQhsJYcEu

— First Things (@firstthingsmag) February 14, 2024

“The Lord of the Rings is of course a fundamentally religious and Catholic work; unconsciously so at first, but consciously in the revision”. So wrote its author, J. R. R. Tolkien, in a 1953 private letter as his magnum opus was being prepared for publication.

The extent to which Christian sensibility informs the work, however, escapes most readers. That perhaps helps to explain its enduring popularity not only in the secularised West, but in non-Christian cultures, such as that of Japan.

The gap in understanding, which this book addresses, arises partly because the narrative force of The Lord of the Rings (TLoR] engages readers of all backgrounds, and also because the overlay of Norse mythological elements distracts them. Holly Ordway’s reading of TLoR in dialogue with Tolkien’s documented spirituality, however, clarifies the picture.

Read it all.

“The extent to which #Tolkien’s Christian sensibility informs #LordOfTheRings escapes most readers”.

My review of @HollyOrdway TOLKIEN’S FAITH: A SPIRITUAL BIOGRAPHY (@WordOnFire ) in @ChurchTimes today.https://t.co/fTdiH0GIkU

— Alex Faludy (@AlexanderFaludy) February 16, 2024

There is a need for a feminism that sees women as more than “skin and bones” that can be transformed into men with the proper clothing and pronouns; a need for a feminism that works to keep women safe and honor them as daughters of God. Denying women certain fundamental rights leads to half the global population being denied the opportunity to flourish. When women aren’t given proper healthcare, financial opportunities, and protection from violence, they’re shut out from spaces of influence, which will lead to the world’s missing out on the many gifts women can offer.

Catholics, in particular, have recognized the need for this type of feminism. Saint John Paul the Great didn’t call for an end to feminism. He called for a new feminism, writing in Evangelium Vitae:

In transforming culture so that it supports life, women occupy a place, in thought and action, which is unique and decisive. It depends on them to promote a “new feminism” which rejects the temptation of imitating models of “male domination,” in order to acknowledge and affirm the true genius of women in every aspect of the life of society, and overcome all discrimination, violence and exploitation.

When Catholics surrender the term feminism to modern thinkers who rely on outdated stereotypes and a perverted sense of womanhood, we’re not answering Saint John Paul the Great’s invitation. We’re allowing our own bitterness and often justified disagreement to prevent us from recognizing the ways women are suffering. We let our culture twist words as it pleases. If Catholic women feel that they’re thriving, that is clearly a good thing. But many women aren’t, and those of us who are uniquely privileged are obligated to increase our aid.

Feminism, as it was originally intended, identified and honored the differences between men and women. It didn’t emphasize the stereotypical differences that both modern gender ideologues and Instagram #tradwives tend to emphasize—what a person wears, for instance, or what hobbies she enjoys. Feminism originally illuminated the fact that because women are life-bearers, and because of their innate capacity for care and serving, they were uniquely positioned to suffer discrimination.

Read it all.

Feminism has never been a phrase without its detractors—many men in the 1800s very much did see women as “skin and bones.” But today, Catholics seem to be split over the virtues and vices of the word “feminist” more than ever before.@claireswinarski https://t.co/wyqHeJOSqN

— Public Discourse (@PublicDiscourse) February 9, 2024

Some Democrats inside and outside of Biden’s bubble were privately anxious about what’s next for the campaign. The report came during a week when Biden made a number of high-profile flubs, confusing current and past world leaders. He didn’t help matters when he referred to the Egyptian president as the president of Mexico in his remarks on the counsel’s report Thursday night, and his decision to forego a high-profile interview ahead of Sunday’s Super Bowl has also drawn scrutiny.

“Anytime his age and capacity is front and center is bad for his re-election prospects. That said, it does provide an opportunity to more forcefully deal with this issue which they have to do,” said Brian Goldsmith, a Biden donor and a Democratic consultant based in Los Angeles. “The right response is that Biden is a better president because of his age and wisdom and experience, not despite his age and wisdom and experience.”

“They need to find a way to jujitsu this and turn it from a negative into a positive because it is not going away,” Goldsmith said. He added: “Avoiding the Super Bowl interview is a mistake.”

Read it all.

Democrats’ anxiety over Biden’s age spilled out into the public this week after a special counsel report
https://t.co/g8V3TcFRAG via @WSJ

— Dan Whitcomb (@DanWhitcomb) February 9, 2024

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

[John Wyatt]….argues for the recovery of a biblically based understanding of friendship, and uses the relationship of Paul and Timothy, in particular, to spell out what this involves. This is a friendship rooted in our relationship with Christ, who called us friends, and who helps us to grow in Christ-like love. It is expressed in regular prayer for our friends and their true and lasting good. He argues that gospel-shaped friendships should be an important part of the Christian life, and that these can exist without exploitation or abuse.

In these friendships, there are clear boundaries, so that they do not slip into sexual or romantic relationships; but they can and do include hugs and physical gestures. For examples of this, he looks not just to Stott, but to Evangelicals round Charles Simeon (1759-1836), including people such as William Wilberforce and John Newton the ex-slave trader.

The title of the book, Transforming Friendship, is meant to indicate two kinds of transformation: first, the way in which such friendships can change our lives, halving our troubles and doubling our joys, as J. C. Ryle put it; and, second, the way in which our whole understanding of friendship in the modern world needs to be transformed. There can be such a thing as a healthy intimate friendship in which two people reveal to each other their deepest hopes and fears, and which is neither abusive nor potentially predatory.

Read it all (subscription or registration).

My new book, Transforming Friendship, is all about how the church can rediscover how to do healthy and safe intergenerational 'Paul-Timothy' friendships in an era of suspicion, abuse and mistrust. Find out how to get 25% off here:https://t.co/ekNvuuFVDV

— John Wyatt (@johnswyatt) December 13, 2023

Thousands of people now speak to their smart devices to make their grocery lists. Students are more likely to type out notes in class than write them down. And we often type or dictate calendar reminders into our smartphones instead of writing them on a wall calendar. In short, people across the globe and in a wide variety of settings primarily use digital devices to record the things they want to remember.

It turns out, that may not be a good thing. A substantial body of evidence demonstrates that handwriting stimulates different and more complex brain connections that are essential in encoding new information and forming memories.

Read it all.

Writing by Hand Is Good for Your Brainhttps://t.co/RlacwFcvJu

— HealthyMindHealthyLife (@HMHLUS) February 6, 2024

In this month’s interview, Public Discourse’s managing editor, Alexandra Davis, interviews Tara Isabella Burton, author of Self-Made: Creating Our Identities from Da Vinci to the Kardashians. The two discuss the development of the modern self-help movement and the less-than-desirable fruits of a culture whose consciousness has been shaped by the notion that reality is not discovered, but made.

Alexandra Davis: What initially sparked your interest in this topic?

Tara Isabella Burton: My doctoral research at Oxford was in theology, but specifically it was in the theology of Dandyism. So I was looking at nineteenth-century decadence, particularly in France, and the idea of the person who creates their life as art. I was looking at a particular nineteenth-century phenomenon, but I was particularly interested in the relationship between technological modernity and the idea of art and self-creation as something that was both seemingly a resistance to mass production and urbanization, but also very much a modern theological statement about the self vis-à-vis a natural world or a divinely created world that had meaning outside of what the self makes it. A lot of these later figures were also influenced by philosophical currents, Schopenhauer and Nietzsche, and so that dynamic was something that I really loved exploring.

After I finished my doctorate, I came to New York, where I’m from, started working for Vox.com as a religion journalist, and wrote my first nonfiction book, Strange Rites, which is much more about the “spiritual but not religious.” It’s more of a contemporary book. As I was thinking about what I wanted to do for a follow-up to Strange Rites, I thought about this idea that, particularly in the internet age, we think of ourselves as our own gods, we want to curate our own bespoke realities. And I realized that a lot of this historical material would be relevant to a much more contemporary story, and so that was the genesis of Self-Made.

Read it all.

https://t.co/3s6AXPhTOa As this idea of self-creation has become seen as the fundamental element of human life, that means those of us who participate more fully in self-creation are more human, and those of us who participate less fully are, in some sense, less human.

— Public Discourse (@PublicDiscourse) February 1, 2024

Elon Musk announced on Jan. 29 that his company Neuralink had surgically implanted its first computer chip in a living person’s brain. The chip is intended to allow people to use phones or computers simply by thinking about what they want to do on the devices.

In a fall 2021 Pew Research Center survey, we asked Americans about the prospect of computer chip brain implants that might one day allow people “to far more quickly and accurately process information.” Americans generally expressed cautious and negative views about the idea, but their opinions varied depending on how such chips might be used.

More than half of U.S. adults (56%) said that widespread use of brain chips to enhance cognitive function would be a bad idea for society. Only 13% said it would be a good idea, and 31% weren’t sure. A large majority (78%) said they would not want a chip implant for themselves, while 20% said they would want one.

Read it all.

In a fall 2021 Center survey, we asked Americans about the prospect of computer chip brain implants. Americans generally expressed cautious and negative views about the idea, but their opinions varied depending on how such chips might be used. https://t.co/Jk6M5fehZY

— Pew Research Center (@pewresearch) February 2, 2024

First popularised by a 2017 article in Cosmopolitan magazine, it describes a casual romance between two people that has some of the hallmarks of a formal relationship but without the commitment.

Dating experts say situationships are the natural result of apps such as Tinder, which make it easier for those seeking convenience rather than commitment. And big brands are attempting to capitalise on the trend.

Ahead of February 14, the US makers of Sweethearts — a treat similar to the Love Hearts sold in the UK — released “Situationships” boxes with the usual loved-up messages such as “true love” and “only you” printed in a blurry font.

The Spangler Candy Company said it wanted to “speak to all the people out there in hard-to-read relationships”, and judging by the sales there are plenty of customers. A limited first run of the sweets went on sale last month and was snapped up in four minutes, while another batch made available on Thursday also quickly sold out.

Read it all (subscription).

'“The ambiguous territory that lies between friendship and a committed relationship offers a preferable alternative to the stark solitude of being entirely single and alone.”

Chan said this apprehension has led to the creation of new terms such as “hesidating” and “Foda” (fear…

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) February 5, 2024

This month, the Hartford Institute for Religion Research released a foundational report about the health of America’s churches and the leaders that serve them in the post-COVID-19 moment. The survey’s title, “I’m Exhausted All the Time,” will resonate with anyone who, like me, is leading a house of worship these days. But I wish the news were even that good.

The report, from Hartford’s Exploring the Pandemic Impact on Congregations project, documents the growing number of American clergy who are burned out and have considered leaving either their current congregation — 44% — or the profession itself — more than half (53%). The latter figure represents an increase of 16% since 2021. The percentage of those considering leaving their current congregations, meanwhile, has more than doubled.

This isn’t the time for U.S. congregations to be facing the type of leadership transition of this magnitude. Less than half of participants in the study reported that their churches had rebounded to pre-pandemic levels of attendance or giving. Congregations are also less willing to embrace change than they were pre-pandemic, according to study participants, reversing several years of pandemic gains that saw congregations embrace change in order to survive.

Read it all.

OPINION: "What makes the present moment so difficult is that, in addition to the strain of recovering from the pandemic, congregations are also contending with a larger crisis that has been approaching for decades."https://t.co/S5IwdoXnt3

— Religion News Service (@RNS) January 28, 2024

In this issue of The Century, theologian Katherine Schmidt writes about the role of the humanities in a world where AI is becoming increasingly powerful, generative, and autonomous. As corporations and policymakers grapple with the blurring lines between human agency and computer-generated agency, Schmidt argues that “ethical theory and ethics education” are vital. Further, she points out that theologians and philosophers are “uniquely qualified” to weigh in on the conversation, since they are skilled at addressing basic questions about truth, meaning, and agency.

Madry’s characterization of a bad actor in the AI world as someone who asks, “How can I be most ingenious in my evilness?” supports Schmidt’s argument. It’s one thing to have a team of technology experts devoted to squelching the plans of folks who deliberately deploy their evilness in ingenious ways. It’s another thing for the developers and disseminators of AI technology to consider the questions behind Madry’s hypothetical question. What exactly is “evilness”? Who gets to define it? Where does it come from? How intrinsic is it to human nature? Is it even possible to recognize it in ourselves? Can it spread from one person to another or multiply within a group of people? How can it be measured, and who does that measuring? To what extent might it be foiled by human effort?

Read it all.

“It’s not unreasonable to believe that AI experts will be better equipped to prevent catastrophes if they’ve spent some time considering theological questions—whether about evil, creation, incarnation, or agency.”

– the Christian Century editorshttps://t.co/R4r9LuWUB4

— theChristianCentury (@ChristianCent) January 26, 2024

Speaking at Mere Anglicanism, a conference sponsored by a diocese that ordains women to the priesthood, priest and conservative firebrand Calvin Robinson described women’s ordination as a “tool of entryism” for critical theories about race and sex. Organizers of the conference, sponsored by the Anglican Church in North America’s Diocese of South Carolina, had asked Robinson to address the topic “Critical Theory: Antithetical to the Gospel?”

In response to Robinson’s address, organizers removed him from a panel on the conference’s final day….

Mere Anglicanism’s director, the Rev. Jeffrey Miller, and Bishop Chip Edgar of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina, met with Robinson after his presentation. He compared the meeting to being called into a school headmaster’s office.

Miller disputed Robinson’s account. “For the concluding panel discussion of the 2024 Mere Anglicanism Conference, Father Calvin Robinson was pulled from participating not because of his views on women’s ordination, but because he failed to address in his plenary presentation the topic that was assigned to him,” said the Rev. Jeffrey Miller, director of the conference, in a post-conference statement. “Father Robinson was not asked to leave the conference, but remained through its conclusion and was paid his full honorarium.”

In a pastoral letter issued soon after the conference, Edgar described Robinson’s remarks as “inexcusably provocative, and completely lacking in charity and pastoral consideration of the people in attendance — especially the many women clergy both of our diocese and others who attended.”

Read it all.

Latest #News: #ACNA leadership gathering devoted to “discipling, training, and educating lay and clergy leaders for the renewal of biblical and orthodox Anglicanism.”https://t.co/FTJUeLMu1g

— The Living Church (@Livng_Church) January 30, 2024

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

From there:

24 January 2024

Dear Brothers and Sisters of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina,

Grace and peace to you through God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Most of you will not have been at the most recent Mere Anglicanism Conference held in Charleston this past weekend, January 18-20. You might well have heard of it, however, and the controversy resulting from the presentation by Calvin Robinson. If you have, it is likely you have heard that the Revd Robinson was “cancelled” due to his position on Women in Holy Orders. I write to correct that notion, and to tell you that he was removed from the final panel because his talk was deemed to have veered substantively from the topic he was asked to address. Instead, he took advantage of the opportunity and opined on what he considers the exceeding evil of women in Holy Orders. Most importantly, he did so in a way which was inexcusably provocative, and completely lacking in charity and pastoral consideration of the people in attendance—especially the many women clergy both of our diocese and others who attended.

It might be said that more could have been done in the moment to address the situation, but I want to commend the Revd Jeff Miller, Rector of St Philip’s Church, and host of the conference, for the deft way he tried to diffuse the situation, and the controversial, but bold step he took in removing the Revd Robinson from the remainder of the conference. Any failure to address the situation in a more direct, up-front manner, is mine. And for that failure, I apologize. Especially to the women present who were deeply insulted by his remarks.

The Anglican Church in North America, and the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina, and I, as bishop, are deeply committed to the idea that both those who favor women’s ordination, and those who oppose it, do so in fidelity to scripture and are both welcomed and valued in our common life. We refer to this recognition of both positions throughout the ACNA with the unwieldy moniker, “dual integrities.” While that is a less than helpful designation, it points to the deep reality that both views ought to be held with integrity, are welcome, respected, and will be defended on either side.

I, as your bishop, believe that the ordination of women comports with the teaching of scripture, most importantly, and is not ruled out by the tradition of the church. I welcome and encourage women in all levels of ministry. At the same time, given my commitment to “dual integrities,” I will support any who disagree with me. There will never come a time when I require anyone to act contrary to their conscience and commitments.

I do require, as a matter of godliness among us, that we always treat those with whom we disagree with love and charity and kindness. The kind of demeaning talk that marked the Revd Robinson’s presentation will not be countenanced.

In my admittedly short experience as a member of the ACNA’s College of Bishops, I have seen that our willingness to commit to each other in the spirit of “dual integrities,” has brought us into deeper fellowship and love, not less. It is easy to love those with whom you agree. The great reward comes from pressing into relationships of love with those with whom you disagree.

It is my prayer that, throughout my episcopacy, this will mark the life of our diocese, as well.

Now, to him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or imagine, according to the power at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, forever and ever. Amen. (Ephesians 3.20-21)

+Chip Edgar, Bishop
The Anglican Diocese of South Carolina

We welcome our new Bishop, the Rt Revd Chip Edgar, who was consecrated March 12, 2022. Let's pray regularly for our new bishop, his wife and family and labor alongside him to produce fruit in the vineyard to which we're called. View the service: https://t.co/4dRKj3inei pic.twitter.com/ShByUuXRIk

— Anglican Diocese of SC (@anglican_sc) March 13, 2022

Americans’ ratings of nearly all 23 professions measured in Gallup’s 2023 Honesty and Ethics poll are lower than they have been in recent years. Only one profession — labor union leaders — has not declined since 2019, yet a relatively low 25% rate their honesty and ethics as “very high” or “high.”

Nurses remain the most trusted profession, with 78% of U.S. adults currently believing nurses have high honesty and ethical standards. However, that is down seven percentage points from 2019 and 11 points from its peak in 2020.

At the other end of the spectrum, members of Congress, senators, car salespeople and advertising practitioners are viewed as the least ethical, with ratings in the single digits that have worsened or remained flat.

Read it all.

Ethics Ratings of Nearly All Professions Down in U.S.: Nurses remain the most trusted profession.
(Megan Brenan & Jeffrey M. Jones, Gallup)
More, via Opinion Today:https://t.co/wHYJF1nkIV pic.twitter.com/ruCnvYuBTR

— Opinion Today (@OpinionToday) January 22, 2024