Chapter 79 Section 6 Virtues in Fighting Evil

The first, most important, and most difficult area is morality and cultural ethos. A functioning free society cannot be without values.The most learned thinkers of all ages have acknowledged this.I think Edmund Burke has summed up this question more clearly than anyone else. How much civil liberty men are able to enjoy depends on how much moral restraint they can have on their desires, on how much their love of justice outweighs their greed, on how much their reason and sober understanding outdo their How far vanity and arrogance go, depends on how much they are willing to listen to the counsel of the wise and good, rather than the flattery of the wicked.Society cannot exist unless somewhere there is a force controlling will and desire, and the less such force is within it, the greater will and desire are reflected.The eternal constitution of things is determined, and the intemperate man is not free.Their strong desires constitute their shackles.

In the same way, while those who framed the American Constitution chose lust over virtue to restrain strong desire in order to preserve liberty, the early fathers of the republic knew full well that virtue would have profound effects.As the great American patriotic anthem states: Secure your soul with self-discipline and your liberty with the law The character of the citizens reflects the character of the country, and the character of the country reflects the character of the citizens.This is an encouraging fact, because it reassures us—as it assured me in the 70s—that changing government can unearth undiscovered resources if the people are better than its government. talents and reveal undreamed-of possibilities.But it's also a caveat.For even the well-established institutions of a free government are susceptible to profound changes in the views and minds of the people in general, and in politics in particular.Character, whether individual or collective, is naturally formed in many ways, at home, at school, at church, at work, and in our leisure time.Tradition holds that the good and useful habitual characteristics formed in these ways are called "virtues".While these virtues are always good by definition, their utility depends on the situation.For example, some of the virtues that Jesus extols in the Sermon on the Mount may help us get to heaven, but may be less applicable in our work or civilian life.So when we urge a restoration of those traditional virtues—such as thrift, self-discipline, responsibility, pride and duty to one's community, and what are sometimes called "Victorian" virtues—we do not necessarily mean that only Re-proclaiming the Gospel on a massive scale will hold Western societies together.It was the ancient Greeks, after all, who were transhumanists, who originally affirmed the primary or "basic" virtues of abstinence, fortitude, practical wisdom, and justice.

Having said this, I find it difficult to imagine anything other than Christianity that could re-enrich most people in the West with these virtues, which are necessary and very practical means of reorganizing the morals of society, whereas These solutions are again needed to solve many practical problems.Although I have always resisted the argument that a Christian should be a Conservative, I have never lost my conviction that there is a striking agreement between my political economy and the deep meaning of Christianity. . I tried to explain this connection in a speech I gave at the Synagogue of St. Lawrence in the City of London in March 1978:

Liberty destroys itself if it is not exercised within a moral framework, within a shared conviction, within a spiritual heritage transmitted through church, home, and school.If freedom has no purpose, it also destroys itself.There is a famous prayer that regards God's service as "perfect freedom".My wish for the people of this country is that we be "free to serve". ... It seems to me that the New Testament brings to us two very general and seemingly contradictory concepts about society.On the one hand there is the great Christian teaching that we are all members of a society.The idea that the church on earth is the body of Christ expresses this idea.From this teaching we recognize our interdependence and this great truth: that we are not isolated from each other, but as members of society we earn happiness or salvation.

This is one of the great truths of Christianity that has shaped our political thinking.But there is another, which is that we are all responsible, moral beings who choose between good and evil.In the eyes of the Creator, human beings are infinitely precious.You could almost say that all political wisdom consists in getting these two ideas into a right relation to each other. I generally disapprove of politicians preaching, but with so many clergy preaching politics, it seems like there should be no restrictions in this regard.So I returned to this theme from time to time, and 10 years later, in May 1988, I spoke something similar to the General Assembly of the Scottish Presbyterian Church.I upset some of those present by emphasizing that collectivism was not particularly blessed by Christianity.

(We) must not profess Christianity and go to church simply because we want social reform and welfare or a better standard of living - but because we accept the sanctity of life, the sense of responsibility that comes with freedom, and the final sacrifice of Christ ... As I step down as Prime Minister, I am increasingly aware of, and interested in, the relationship between Christianity and economic and social policy.I discovered that my former parliamentary private secretary, Michael Allison, and the head of my policy group, Brian Griffiths, both devout Christians, were as fascinated by these matters as I was.The discussions I conducted and the articles I prepared for them formed the basis for a number of essays and a book titled "Christianity and the Proposition and Policy of the Conservative Party."I wrote the preface to it.It was published in 1990 when I was about to leave Downing Street.

Not so long ago it seemed at least unrealistic to conceive of the re-emergence of an intellectual and moral climate conducive to the enforcement of traditional virtues.Now, however, such matters have become the focus of serious discussions of social issues. Religious leaders, at least some of whom are now reconsidering the good effects of state regulation and intervention, must be relied heavily on in reshaping perceptions, such as Pope John Paul II in his Encyclical "One Hundred Years" says: By its direct intervention and by depriving society of its sense of responsibility, the state of social assistance leads to a loss of human energy and an uncontrolled increase of public institutions.These institutions are governed more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by serving their recipients, which also drives up expenditures substantially.In fact, it appears that their needs are understood and best met only by those closest to these needy households and their immediate neighbours.

Roma never seemed so close to Grantham. Today, the outcome of the so-called "culture war" in the United States is still uncertain.As with so many other developments, the clash of ideas and opinions that shows no sign of abating on the other side is bound to affect England and Europe.This makes sense.For Conservatives must win the battle of ideas on social policy as well as on economic policy. Without this, the chances of even a limited campaign of victory are slim.But in the other three areas of social action where I started—crime, welfare dependency, and family breakdown—there had to be this kind of initiative.