All posts tagged: nature

The Formation of the Imagination

Robert Macfarlane, a Fellow of Emmanuel College, Cambridge University, has reignited the discussion on the connection between nature and the imagination. In Landmarks, his most recent book on the unique regional words used to describe English landscape, Macfarlane comments that “Our children’s vanishing encounters with nature represent a loss of imagination as well as a loss of primary experience.”[1] If Macfarlane articulates a concern for the disconnection between the decreasing number of experiences in nature and the imagination’s vigor in secular culture, is it such a great leap to question the connection between the imagination and the spiritual life? This very question was pondered by Father Conrad Pepler, O.P., a member of the English Dominican province, who addressed this topic some 60 years ago: There is a need of an imaginative response to life, a training of the imagination, not merely in a few cases of poetic talent, but as a common function in every member of society. Incalculable harm can be done to men generally by the perversion or deadening of this faculty. When …

3 Theological Reflections on Patrick Deneen’s Why Liberalism Failed

Patrick J. Deneen’s thesis in Why Liberalism Failed is clear and direct. “Liberalism has failed”, he writes in the introduction, “not because it fell short, but because it was true to itself. It has failed because it has succeeded” (3). He argues that liberalism stands on a faulty foundation, fractured from the start under the weight of its own hubristic self-certainty. The book has already been reviewed extensively including thrice in the New York Times (1, 2, 3), in the Wall Street Journal, in the Federalist, and elsewhere, and these reviews have covered a substantial amount of critical ground for Deneen’s project. Leaving the evaluation of his argument to others, I instead want to trace the theological consequences of what Deneen perceives so as to orient the calamity of liberalism’s inevitable end to three fundamental errors in its premise: the first is about the meaning of the (un)created world, the second is about the basic anthropological claim and the natural state of human beings, and the third is about the human project and what constitutes …