Wisdom from Ancient Words
It was said of Author Matthew R. Petrusek,
“Within the Church, Petrusek takes a “back to basic” approach to catechesis in an effort to recover an orthodox, pastorally-nimble yet intellectually-robust approach to faith formation and evangelization, using Scripture, the Catechism, and the great minds of the Church’s tradition as a foundation. His ultimate goal is to present the Church’s theological and moral doctrines with as much clarity as possible, believing that great ideas, if allowed to speak freely, will naturally draw people in.” [1]
As I read the book, Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the Political Culture, I was profoundly impacted by the “back to basic” approach that seemed to lift off the page as Dr. Petrusek described foundations for debate, locating sources of political disagreement, the anatomy of ideology and the mention of several current ideologies, as well as practical advice for evangelists within the culture. Initially, the book aims to demonstrate that employing effective tools in political discourse can persuade individuals to embrace a morally sound conception of the common good. This conception establishes a moral political framework, enhancing the likelihood of fostering a civil environment conducive to both individual and communal flourishing within the constraints of an imperfect world. [2] One of the tools that Petrusek offers considers the anatomy of an argument. Illustrated in the text are two maps, one of the concentric circles which spelled out each of the “-ologies”.
The tool for moral dialogue that I found most helpful is the conceptual map, showing a conceptual hierarchy, that includes questions in each domain of inquiry. In this illustration, a reader can understand how the concepts are interdependent on one another. Remove a person’s ontological belief and the anthropological piece of a person’s understanding collapses. The layers of the hierarchy are interdependent and do not exist in a void. As Petrusek states, “if you were to pull out one of the “floors,” everything above it would collapse while everything below it would stay intact.” [3] The visual can assist a person in understanding the anatomy of an argument, through isolating the argument being made, breaking it into parts, and critically examining each component individually and in relation to the other components. [4]. Simply put, the fundamental question when evaluating any issue, be it political, moral, epistemological, anthropological, ontological, or theological, is What is truth and on what grounds do I believe it to be true? [5]
Some of the ideological statements or attitudes that are tossed around in culture, either expressed openly or through questions, that I would love to do a deep dive (maybe dissection) into using Petrusek’s conceptual hierarchy map include. . .
You do you. . .
Your truth is your truth. . .
Where is the non-binary bathroom?. . . (from a Kindergartener)
I don’t feel like a girl, so I. . .
I don’t feel like a boy, so I. . .
It’s an embryo, not a human. . .
That doesn’t make me feel happy, so I. . .
I define who I am.
Love the sinner, hate the sin.
History is a tale of oppression, not a source of contemporary wisdom.
Being a biological human is a scientific fact. To be a person is an ethical concept, defined by what we value.
My values are subjective choices, not grounded in facts.
The value of a person’s life depends on their ability to exercise autonomy and control.
Church is for my consumption. . . “I didn’t get anything out of church today.”
I’m “shopping” for a church with a coffee shop, band, and entertaining pastor.
I have the right to. . .
There are many more ideological slogans, mantras, and phrases tossed around. Petrusek’s two maps may be a helpful tool for cutting through the noise of political conflict and diagnosing the source of the dispute, putting the natural process of moral reasoning into a helpful visual form. In my research on how to promote the development a deeply rooted faith amongst young adults, the number one factor over and over, interview after interview, has been relationships with a mentor who they can engage in conversations with about these and other moral issues. They desire to have Christian mentors who will engage in conversations of moral reasoning, directly rooted in the Scriptures. They desire to know the Truth.
As I think about all the layers of thought and moral reasoning, I find comfort in the Proverbs as they cause me to reflect on wisdom, from the third chapter. [6]
“My child, don’t reject the Lord’s discipline, and don’t be upset when he corrects you. For the Lord corrects those he loves, just as a father corrects a child in whom he delights.” (verses 11-12)
“Joyful is the person who finds wisdom, the one who gains understanding. For wisdom is more profitable than silver, and her wages are better than gold. Wisdom is more precious than rubies; nothing you desire can compare with her.” (verses 13-15)
“Wisdom is a tree of life to those who embrace her; happy are those who hold her tightly.” (verse 18)
“My child, don’t lose sight of common sense and discernment. Hang on to them, for they will refresh your soul. They are like jewels on a necklace. They keep you safe on your way and your feet will not stumble. You can go to bed without fear; you will lie down and sleep soundly. You need not be afraid of sudden disaster or the destruction that comes upon the wicked, for the Lord is your security. He will keep your foot from being caught in a trap.” (verses 21-26)
How can these ancient words influence our search for wisdom, and the cultivation of it within us, as we desire to love God and love others better each and every day?
[1] https://catholicspeakers.com/profiles/dr-matthew-petrusek
[2] Matthew R. Petrusek, Evangelization and Ideology: How to Understand and Respond to the
Political Culture (Park Ridge, IL: Word on Fire Institute, 2023).13
[3] Ibid, 59.
[4] Ibid, 31.
[5] Ibid, 51.
[6] Proverbs 3:11-26, New Living Translation
About the Author
Cathy Glei
Cathy Glei serves as an instructional leader and pastor with over 27 years in education and ministry. She is dedicated to discipling others as they grow in their relationship with God, others and the world. Cathy has facilitated numerous professional development sessions, trainings, and workshops in both education and ministry. Passionate about supporting others in uncovering the Creator's design within them, Cathy lives in Michigan with her husband, Steve, and their eight-year-old Springer Spaniel, Otis. Cathy is a mother of three daughters and "Gooma" (grandma) to two adorable grandsons (emphasis on adorable 😊). She enjoys listening and exchanging laughter and stories with others, hanging out with friends, both old and new, as well as being outdoors, enjoying activities such as cycling, camping, hiking, and kayaking.8 responses to “Wisdom from Ancient Words”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I too focused on Petrusek’s conceptual hierarchy as a major take-away from this book. I am not at all good at constructing logical arguments or identifying inconsistency in an argument, but I was inspired to at least try as I read through his explanations.
That said, I’ve experienced a number of conversations recently that make it clear that most people are not really basing their beliefs (in God or their political ideology) on logic and reason as Petrusek would seem to hope. It seems (and I include myself in this) that everyone has a sort of lens or set of lenses through which they see the world and anything that contradicts their viewpoint gets thrown out. I’m actually not lamenting this, just stating that it seems to be how our psychology works. So persuading someone to change their vote or to change their faith has to be about more than constructing a great logical argument. There has to be a more fundamental change in worldview.
Hi Cathy,
Thanks for addressing the concentric circle map and the pyramid map. I found it fascinating but hard to digest at first. Your thoughts helped me break it down ever further.
I especially liked your list of mantra’s/truisms/whatever. As I read through the list, some struck a chord, some didn’t, but all were easily identifiable as current thoughts.
I have acted on your suggestion for an immigrant speaker at my immigration symposium. James Sang from Myanmar (who is now working on his Ph.D at Texas Christian University) is speaking right after the Deputy Chief of Staff for Congresswoman Maria Salazar. Again thanks for the suggestion.
Shalom.
So glad that the speaker from Myanmar has been secured. Praying for the symposium outcomes!!!
Hi Cathy,
I appreciate how you unpacked the concentric circle map and the pyramid map. I love how you are considering a deeper dive into some of the ideological questions you raised using the maps. As an educator, do or should these type of maps or other tools have a place in educating K-12 students to foster “a civil environment conducive to both individual and communal flourishing”?
Thank you for the question. I think that there may be layers that are not fully developed at various stages of spiritual development (especially for the younger ones). However, as teachers and staff, I could see how the bigger picture of digging deeper into the “why” of how a person believes and the influencers of that belief are beneficial.
Hey Cathy! As always, you’re definitely on to something. In fact you’re on to a lot. I like how you intertwined searching for wisdom and being disciplined by the Lord. By remembering I was disciplined by the Lord because I did, said, or thought something wrong helps me to remember that I can be wrong quite often.
I need to keep this in mind as I engage with someone who disagrees with me and not jump to conclusions since I have been wrong before, I can be wrong again. This will definitely help me to love others well. And that’s what being a leader is all about.
Hi Cathy!
Thank you for your insightful writing.
You write, “The tool for moral dialogue that I found most helpful is the conceptual map, showing a conceptual hierarchy, that includes questions in each domain of inquiry. In this illustration, a reader can understand how the concepts are interdependent on one another. Remove a person’s ontological belief and the anthropological piece of a person’s understanding collapses. The layers of the hierarchy are interdependent and do not exist in a void.”
When you discovered Petrusek’s concept of “destroying” the ontology of one’s beliefs, to what extent would it be effective in presenting the message of the Gospel that brings God’s peace to the world, especially in the context of your life/ministry?
Thank you
Dinka,
Listening to others share their background and experiences, when it comes to faith and the gospel, can be an opportunity to consider the layers of their belief and ask questions to engage in further dialogue about faith.