Foundations bree kenneth simon, center for american studies. We welcome to the b. Kenneth Simon Centers 2023 russell kirk lecture featuring. Bishop Robert Barron of the diocese of winona, rochester, minnesota. I have the task of introducing bishop bear in the night a task made difficult by the fact that his publications media, teaching and leadership exemplify faith and reason, courage and humility, along with tremendous insights. Our cultural situation and how we might best engage it. What is true for me and, i know for many of you in attendance tonight, is that his writings and lectures and and podcast and interviews have become our regular companions instructing us in the gospel as the Old Testament prophets catholic social thought the meaning of great literature and philosophy, contemporary culture and of course the finer points of doctrine. So tonight Bishop Barron will address the topic of, the breakdown of the talk pavilion prior to his 2022 appointment as the bishop of winonarochester. He had served for seven years as auxiliary bishop for the archdiocese. Los angeles Bishop Barron, also the rector of mundelein seminary, chicago, where he taught for several but most him as the foremost evangelist of roman catholicism in america globally, even he is the founder of word on fire catholic ministries, which uses, quote, media both old and new to proclaim the gospel of christ. On that front, Bishop Barrons work is nothing short of spectacular. His Award Winning ten part series, catholicism offers an amazing presentation of the church through its sacraments. Saints Church Architecture history. He is a number one amazon bestselling author. He has published numerous books and articles on theology and the Spiritual LifeBishop Barrons website word on fire dawg reaches millions of people each year and is one of the most followed catholics on social media. His youtube have been viewed over 90 million times, but what is noteworthy this regard is the quality and manner of his engagement. He is at the forefront of the effort to reconnect socalled nones are persons of no religious faith. Christianity, a segment americans that grows every year, a phenomenon not limited roman catholicism and, one that is slowly changing our and not for the better. What Bishop Barron stresses is that the most significant cause of the growing of nones that were never taught seriously their faith begin with translation. This is an important business in an age of unbelief, not hostility towards christianity. Bishop barron urges the recovery of the Church Fathers the bible, the lives of the saints classical philosophy and literature, and the record of learning in the church stretches over centuries. Bishop barron responds to the new atheists that he agrees with them in terms of the god they dismiss and their arguments. He too doesnt in a god who is merely highest being or the top most item in the universe, a god that succeeds by making us his puppets or demanding irrational god, Bishop Barron argues, is transcendent the creator through whom everything comes to be in the world. The god is the sheer act of being itself. The fear is that god wants to dominate us and diminish us to controlling us. He asks, what if its the exact Bishop Barron repeatedly quotes the second century saint saint erroneous of the owens observation quote the glory of god is man fully alive. We become what we love and what we praise, right . Praise manifests itself in a wellordered, joyful and flourishing. In a recent with jordan peterson, Bishop Barron was repeatedly asked why so many in countries continue to fall away from religious belief, including catholicism. Why are you in . Peterson inquired. And bishop responded that his sense of mission in life was fired for him at an early age. The culprits were Thomas Aquinas cosmological argument for the existence of god and Thomas Mertons wonderful seven Storey Mountain. In their own way, these authors had some at him, too a profound mission for his life. The third part of Bishop Barrons offered the example of father walter chiswick, the Young American who spent 20 years in soviet prison camps. 15 of those years in siberia as a young seminary student heard pope pius the 11th call, quote, for heroes to go under russia. And he decided to train for mission. But following call led to severe for him. And his book with god in russia. Father chozick said that the two decades he spent in prison involved accepting gods will and doing what good he could. He decided to quote, be christ and bear the sufferings around. Me. He blasted russia when he was finally evacuated. But we too need heroes to go into many areas, pursue and disciplines to save our country to recreate the world with the seeds of renewal. And there is no one better to instruct us in that call. Bishop barron. Welcome. To what god bless you all. Thank you for that lovely introduction. Thanks for reading me so carefully. The years and drawing out the themes that really are central. I think to my to my writing and teaching. I want to apologize in advance for my somewhat scratchy voice. I mean, what hope are the last stages of a bad cold. And i just got through an all day meeting the usccb. We started at 830. We ended at five. So this is a relief from that experience of now that im bishop of diocese especially, i dont have time to prepare more serious lectures. I, i try to take maybe one or two a year that i can really sink my teeth. And when i received this invitation, i said, thats what i really want to do. Because of my respect for the Heritage Foundation and my deep respect for russell kirk someone that ive studied and whose writings used for many, many years. So it inspired me to do some work on this, on this paper. As everybody in this knows, the issue of the relationship between liberal democracy and the Catholic Church has long been a vexed one. If one consults catholic leaders in the 19th century very much including the popes who dominate the second half of this century, namely pius the ninth and leo the 13th, more refined, vigorous condemnations of and the liberal order. Moreover, if one surveyed the writings of leading figures within the american policy of that same century, one would discover sharply worded critiques catholicism as a system alien to the american way of life. For a particularly good example, take a look at. Ulysses s grants appraisal in 1875 that catholicism prove more divisive in america than the confederacy itself had been. And if one harbors any doubts whether, this attitude survived well into the 20th century. When he look further than the ruminations of Woodrow Wilson and the warnings of a slew of cultural at the prospect of a catholic president in 1960, at the end of the beginning of the 20th century, a number of catholic ecclesiastic, including james gibbons, the archbishop of baltimore, john ireland, the archbishop of saint paul, commenced to advocate for rapturous between catholicism and american democracy. Subsequently, toward the middle of the last century, catholic academics such as john murray and john ryan began articulate in a more rationally manner the points of contact between classical, catholic, political philosophy and the principles of modern liberalism. The ruminations, both ecclesiastical and academics, often around the importance of tolerance and religious liberty and. Indeed, the vatican to document dignity. This humanae largely penned by cortney murray, made the american to the rapport between objective religious truth and freedom of conscience, part of the official teaching of the catholic. Then, in the years following vatican two, a plethora intellectual players within the Catholic Academy in the United States emerged to continue and deepen this line of thought. One thinks of george weigel, michael novak, George Robert sirico, and perhaps especially of richard john neuhaus. Their influence upon saint john paul. The second became unmistakably in the great popes 1991 encyclical letters a. Z. Moss, which was simultaneously celebration of leo the 13th groundbreaking rare novarum and a thoughtful consideration of the of 1989. In the course that letter, john paul enthusiastically endorsed the market economy and form of liberal democracy that obtained generally in the west. Now if we look more deeply into the arguments presented by this school of thought, refer todays fusion ist since it appreciates the tight connection, catholicism and political modernity. We notice a number key themes. First, the insists that the liberal democratic emphasis upon the dignity of individual is unintelligible from biblical assumptions. Thomas jefferson implied much when he said in the prolog to the declaration that all people are quote endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights. If rights are granted by the state. They can be withdrawn when its convenient for the state to do so. If theyre a function of cultural consensus, they can disappear when that consensus even essos history. Of course provides numerous examples of precisely those moves. Furthermore, equality, one of the most foundational liberal political principles is similarly grounded in a theological vision of things. For as the ancient political theorist with such clarity, we human beings are in almost every regard, radically unequal in size, strength, beauty, moral virtue, etc. Point of fact, the political systems proposed by both plato and aristotle are predicated upon the assumption of irreducible among the members of the polis. For plato, everyone in the city falls into one of three altogether distinct social classes. For aristotle, only a small of property intelligent males are permitted to partake of authentically life. Once again, jefferson gives away the game when claims as selfevident. The assertion quote all men plea to they were producing classes and aristotle a small contingent of properly intelligent males were permitted to public life. Once again jefferson gives away the game when he claims the assertion quote all men are created equal. Despite our enormous inequalities in every respect we are indeed all equal the children of. Created by his choice to share eternal life with him. Take on the future becomes difficult to defend this principle of the democratic polly. In the a little upon the notion of limited government typical inspiration. Thymic and the profits remind israelite kings of their obligation to follow torah and those potentates stand whether they like it or not under the judgment of. This means the law is over the whims and private designs of anyone including especially kings. The severed tip that applies to scope and the power of any earthly rule are strictly limited hemmed in by the demands of moral law. You might refer to this context to make in at the same criticism of the corruption of kings in a speech given by the profit samuel. True, indeed i think it is, why did so many reflective people . Am i . Do just bigots . I mean, there were plenty of bigots, both sides of the divide. But there are also a lot of reflective people who felt that the two systems, the catholic and americans, were incompatible. Well, to provide a fully adequate response to that question would take me far beyond the confines of this paper. But permit me to explore just a few angles. Antiliberal catholic theorist would have drawn attention to the roots of liberalism in thought of Thomas Hobbes and john locke, and would have remarked how those thinkers represented a radical rupture from the classically catholic understand ing of both the political and moral orders. In this regard, of course, hobbes particularly instructive, consciously breaking with the long tradition of political philosophy that preceded him. Hobbes endeavor to articulate a science of politics like inform and purpose to the physical sciences that were beginning to emerge in his time. This amounted to a setting aside of causality and questions of moral aims in an embrace of efficient causality alone in the political order. Accordingly, set out to explore what actually motivates beings to act as they do in reductionistic conclusion was that the efficient cause of our behavior is at bottom, i should say the efficient causes of our behavior are at bottom. The accompanying the desire to preserve and to avoid violent death. This quotation from chapter 11 of leviathan signals the sea change that hobbes represents. Im quoting directly from this the original english of leviathan, the felicity of this life not in the repose of a mind satisfied, for there is no such finish ultimate, ultimate aim nor suman bonhomme greatest good as is spoken of in the books of the old moral philosophers, close quote the complete relative izing of truth and goodness in the hobbesian program. Clear. Furthermore in this passage from the sixth chapter of the violent and im quoting again whatsoever here is the object of mans appetite or that it is which he for his part, call with good and the object of his hate and aversion. He call it evil, close quote. Whereas classical politics was predicated upon keen sense of objective, moral value and indeed a highest good which all people aspire by nature. Hobbesian politics was predicated upon the preservation of biological life. Now, any collectivity of individuals, all motivated, a selfish desire to live and to avoid violent death will necessarily come into conflict. And the result will be, in hobbess famous phrase, a life that is, quote, solitary nasty, brutish and short. Close quote. It is to avoid this intolerable situation that human beings resolve to enter a social contract by which they surrender their rights and prerogatives to the leviathan and state the practically Unlimited Authority granted to the sovereign. Paradoxically, in the selfinterest of each party to the contract that was at least hobbess assumption. Once again, hobbes would insist that the sovereign remains utterly indifferent to matters of moral excellence or, spiritual attainment. Rather his purpose is to protect warring individuals from one another. And this touches upon a deeper matter, namely hobbes, is unambiguous assumption that patchy practically the entire tradition of political philosophy that came before him we are not by nature politico or social. We are only artificially and by means of a contractual contrivance. Relatedly, were not natural, good or ordered to friendship. Just the contrary, the entire hobbesian program rests upon the conviction that our natural state is one of utter selfinterest and hostility to our neighbors. Thus, in his pithy formula, the state of nature is the state of war. Now, hobbes, his program was in essentials adopted by john locke. The locke softened it in many. For instance he opined that a kind of natural moral law even in the pre political state of nature. And he held that one exert that state by means of two contracts. Not one is in harms, thus allowing, for the possibility of rebelling against a corrupt state without reverting ipso into the state of war that was decisive for jefferson. But the amoral 90 teleological conception of life remained in place. Thus, for locke, rights are. But a function of our desire to preserve life, avoid violent death. It is language. We have the right to those things that we cannot not desire. Namely, life itself. And its necessary covenants, liberty and property. Any of a transcendent good to which human life is properly or of a common good that goes beyond the mere physical wellbeing of the members. The Political Society is the hobbesian manner missing . The government, which secures these rights, remains if i may put it this way, protective rather than directive the citation from letter on toleration is apposite. Im quoting now from locke. The commonwealth seems to to be a society of men constituted only. And thats his his own italics. Only for the procuring, preserving, advancing of their own civil interests. Civil interests. I call life liberty and health of the body and the possession of outward things such as money, lands, houses furniture and the like. Close. The lockean suspension of the metaphysical good becomes even clearer when we venture of lockes explicitly political writing and turn to his epistemological masterpiece, an essay on human understanding. In this text he lays out revolutionary idea of will as primarily an active power of selfdetermination. Whereas, on the traditional a good outside will prompts that faculty respond, unlocks the will, has primacy, and remains undetermined by anything outside of itself. Heres his account and quoting again for that was determines the general power of to this or that particular direction is nothing but the itself x exercising the power that it has in particular way. Close quote in a radical departure from the standard interpretation, locke holds that the direct object, the will is not a thing but an action, namely its own. Rather than appreciating the will in the to mystic manner as extending itself into reality, the being lured by the good locke effectively shrinks its area of concern. Heres his own extremely clear and illuminating formulation quote the will or power of volition is conversant about nothing but our own actions terminates there and no further close quote. So concerned is he to maintain the control that the will has over itself. Locke argues that the self quote that only begins its act of will from itself alone. But that movement likewise ends exclusively in the self as the wills proper object. Close quote. Were a continent away from from someone like aristotle aquinas in that whatever connection eventually obtains with the world outside of the dynamics of the will remains secondary and extrinsic subordinate the sovereignty and sufficiency of the choosing self. No, this treatment of the thought of locke me to quote the man for whom this lecture series is named. Throughout his russell kirk remained disquieted by the manner in which locke departed from the classical political tradition. Instead being created in the image of god. Man is unlocks interpretation simply. Economicus. And his purpose is not to do the will of god or pursue the common good, but rather to protect his property. Im quoting kirk. There is, he concluded. No warmth and lock and sense of consecration. And utility. Not love is the motive of lockes individual ism. Close quote. Thats russell kirk. So what was concerning to many catholic theorists of the 19th century. And again, not just anti modern, you know, the bigots was precisely this hobbesian lockean reductionism regarding political life which they saw on display in the most important of the founding documents of our country. Now, without for a moment, the observations made above regarding biblical overtones is difficult not to see that the prolog to jeffersons remains a distinctively modern text. First, the conventional artificial of the political enterprises defended, as well as fundamentally hobbesian view of the rights that government is invented to defend. To be sure jefferson is adjusted the lockean of life, liberty and property to liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But that adjustment only confirms the manner in which jefferson departs from classical political thought for the Great Western philosophic tradition. The determination of what constitutes objective happiness was perhaps the preoccupation. Think aristotles treatment of virtue in relation to us monia in the near conviction ethics. Think of platos subtle phenomenology of the good in a variety of his dialogs. Think of aquinas as exhaustive analysis of beatitude or happiness at the commencement of the previous a good day of the summa. In all three of those thinkers, the object of good was construed as the determining factor in the establishment of a just social order. But in jefferson, a typically modern way, all this left to the selfdetermination of the individual subject, the pursuit of happiness rather than happiness itself. Taking pride of place. These worries of 19th and 20th century figures are taken up. Several catholic scholars today who question the philosophical underpinnings of the american founding. One thinks of, among others, formule, patrick, deneen and dc. All these philosophers that the distinctively modern or metaphysics informs the political speculations of the founders compromises, the practical arrangements that they put in place. So the question naturally arises who has this at least relatively the right . The fusion whom i was praising earlier with complete. Or these neo integrals who might be more sensitive. The issues ive just been raising is american style liberalism with or repugnant to catholic christianity. No adequate answer to that question would. Take me again far beyond the confines of this presentation. But at the risk sounding a tad facile, i would venture to respond both. My position is that the american polity is fundamentally moderate in form and inspiration, but remains conditioned by certain deeply held religious assumptions. Its a hobbesian lockean system, but with overtones of the christian worldview that still haunted the minds, the founders, and perhaps more importantly shaped the souls of the First American citizens, said odds are equilibrium between a modern conception and but. But yet this religious undertone, which leads me to the person im i name this lecture for. Its almost a cliche to point it out, but no one managed to pick his way. This intellectual thicket more precept tively or creatively than the 19th century french diplomat and political philosopher alexis talk show. After an extensive tour of the jackson United States in the mid 1830s, tocqueville shared what he had discovered about the peculiarly american manner of reconciling liberalism with an ardent religiosity. His conclusion, in a word, is that the latter effectively makes possible the former or better provides it with an animating purpose. A handful of citations will sum up his argument. Heres a first one quote the americans combine in the notions of religion and liberty. So intimately in their minds that its impossible to make them conceive of one without the other. Close quote and next quote it must never be forgotten that religion gave birth to angloamerican society. In the United States, religion is commingled with all the habits of the nation and all the feelings of patriots, whence it derives a peculiar force. Close quote. And third. So religion which among the americans never directly part in the government of society must be considered as the first of their political institutions. For it does not give them taste for liberty. It singularly facilitates their use it. Close quote as a very to me, i that last quote is the most illuminating for articulates the idea of ordered liberty or freedom not an end in itself which you see in the epistemology and anthropology as directed to a moral good meal. A sip of water. Was there a water . Poets over here the table tonight. I called, keeping it a little bit. Tocquevilles saw that the proposal of the moral good is the business of a liberal government, which retains its typically modern in that regard, but is offered to the society, the administrations of the churches and religious institutions that pervade commonwealth. We might say that, in his view, the vibrant of america served as a corrective and complement to the hobbesian nature of the liberal project, rounding its pointed edges. Though there are many concrete examples, this dynamic that could be cited. Suffice to say that the two greatest social transfers in american history, namely the end of slavery and the end of racial segregation, were both prompted. Religious people drawing their moral inspiration clearly from the text of the bible. The suggestion of the good in both cases did not come as. It were from above, from the secular authority, but from below, from a religious least saturated culture. Now all these reflections bring us to us. The most significant cultural phenomenon of our time. What i would characterize as the collapse of this tocqueville in equilibrium the last roughly 60 years have witnessed a disturb unraveling of the political the religious texture of our society unprecedented in american history. And indeed, i would say in all of history as Charles Taylor is indicated, it would have been unthank bowl for some to say in 1500 to believe that happiness could be had. Apart from a reference to god. But now nonbelief god and the acceptance of a completely this worldly frame of reference for Human Flourishing are widespread. The mainstream protestant in the us are in freefall and cathar ism, to be frank, is not far behind its numbers, relatively strong, only due to immigration. In 1970, roughly 3 of americans would have described themselves as having no religious affiliation. But today, that figure has risen to 26 . It still higher to 40 . Among those 30, though, these trends were emerging 30 years ago. Commentator was at that time tended to reassure us that though fewer and fewer people were church services, the basics of religion, belief in god, the afterlife, existence of the soul, basic moral principles, etc. Remained in place. The sociological work of father Andrew Greeley from the seventies and 1980s is an extremely instructive, but in accord with the will hertzberg cut flower as principal. All of these convictions one depressed native from concrete religious practice and institutional affiliation, endured for a time, but then commenced very rapidly to dry up. And as tocqueville, excuse me, would have foreseen, this waning has had enormous political and cultural implications. Permitting, the more severe hobbesian structure of our polity to assert itself. One of the most conspicuous consequences the collapse of institutional religion, is joseph ratzinger, Pope Benedict 16th, called famously the dictate ship of relativism or conviction that there is no objective for morality and certainly no summum bonhomme, which would serve to regulate human thought and activity. See how like hobs that sounds doesnt it but reasserted today strongly absent this normativity, the freedom of the individual comes to generate value instead imitating and appropriating for oneself the objective goods of the natural and moral orders, the sovereign self creates a personal good and cultivates a personal truth. How familiar that sounds, in the words of karl truman. Mimesis imitation has given way to places creation instead of and incorporating the great objective values i now create them out of the sovereignty of my own. Again, that lockean overtones of the nature of the will that isnt lured by the good outside itself, but terminates in its own activity. Its reassert itself. One of the clearest artistic expressions of this viewpoint was the film that won the Academy Award for best picture a few years ago called the shape water. The plot of film. Because, believe it or not, was a young woman who falls, love and then has sexual relations with a creature half human and half fish. You remember the villain of the story, of course, was a believing christian, presented as a boorish hypocrite. But the title gives the game. The only shape there is is the shape of water, which has no form except the one that we choose to give it. Though this understanding held sway in halves and in a more mitigated in luck, it was largely covered by the widespread and deeply held religious convictions of americans prior to 1960. And though this is not immediately obvious to most the subjective assertion of value, conduce is automatically to the war of all. Against all. Why . For theres no common of reference, no transcend instead of norms to which all people in can submit themselves, but autonomous individuals atoms with no natural affinity. One another. If find yourself doubting whether the state of war obtained is go any time of the day or night on twitter or practically any social media site that allows for comments arguments about moral, intellectual matters have largely disappeared from these massively venues because authentic argument has to be based upon sense of shared assumptions and values. All thats left is insults at one another from opposing trenches as numerous studies indicated. This breaks my heart that young people who frequent social sites are so often beleaguered, depressed and suffer from something akin to post stress disorder. It further supported my thesis in the absence of religion, the hubs zionism of the american experiment is reassert itself. I would draw your attention to one of the principal preoccupations of young people today. Namely, safe spaces guaranteed by municipal or government authority. What seems to preoccupy many is once again the protective rather than directed purpose of authority. I mean, dont give me direction. Thats up to me to decide. You just better protect while i engage in selfdirection. Right. Its not at all surprising that many studies have indicated how young people in our country increasingly are suspicious of freedom of speech increasingly open to more powerful government regulation. Two basic tenets of hobbesian. So whats the solution. Its facile enough to say that we should go back. The cultural consensus that obtained prior to 1961, which was an instance created through a plethora of mediating. It would at the very take time to build back that structure if that was even possible. I might suggest the first step to recovery of the sense, especially in our young people of the objectively valuable opposed to the merely subjectively satisfying in using this language and borrowing the terminology of dietrich von hildebrand, one of the most significant catholic philosophers of the last century, is example of the merely subjective satisfying hildebrand, frequently proposed the receiving of an unjust to fide complement. Though kind words typically produce a rush of good feeling in the one who receives them. There is, in the case of such a complement nothing of substance behind them. They merely flatter the ego and leave it unchanged and unsure challenged those empty words. Simply find their place within the psychological structure, the ego, and do no significant spiritual work. But the objectively valuable. Confronts the one who perceives it and changes him really changing his psyche and subjectivity. Dantes comedy or beethoven, seventh symphony or shark cathedral or the moral of Maximilian Kolbe are not merely subject to the satisfying, ludicrous to say that. Rather, the sheer density of their objective value arrests us claims us, and sends us on as evangelists. Their truth and beauty. They they arrest the will. They lure the will, they direct and send it. How . But were stuck in the little welllighted space of our own ego. Created own value. What a dull space. Deliver the objectively valuable bricks breaks through the carapace of. That sort of selfregard in the presence of such values. Were like the great israelite prophets were placed in the passive voice. We dont so much speak our own truth, but weve heard word of the lord and connection to god im making here is not incidental, decorative for objective and the epistemic moral and esthetic orders arrange naturally in hierarchies. Which means as Thomas Aquinas saw so clearly they are named and understood in relation to that which is of highest possible value. The supreme truth, goodness and beauty. When paul introduces himself to the romans in his famous epistle, he characterizes himself as quote called and sent to be an apostle, close quote. A higher power has claimed him and commissioned him. In a word, the objectively valuable gives the lie to the culture, selfassertion and selfaffirmation. The so dominates today. Therefore, i think if we want to restore Something Like the tocqueville in equal librium, which gives a liberal democracy its moral and spiritual, we have to resist the shape of water and must, with confidence, enjoy introduce our young people to the infinitely more interesting of objective value. God bless all. Thanks for listening. Thanks. Bishop barron. I think they like what you had to say. Yeah, i appreciate them much. No, thanks. Thanks again for being here at heritage for for your witness. And i want to home in on one of the key parts of your address. Have some questions for you that are only indirectly related, but ill be abusive later. Objectively valuable. We spend a lot of time at heritage in addition to the work we do in policy helping. Other institutions, not just policy institutions, get started, expand. You know, gail, as our friends like to say, the for you is does america a healthy enough institutional to cultivate what is objectively valuable . Well i worry about, especially with the educational institutions, because if if theyre predicated this sort of dominant subject of as of our culture, theyre not going to draw people into that world. Or if they just accept view that, you know, we we create value. I think a great teacher is someone that, again, breaks into your subjectivity and rearranges it and offers you something in the introduction you you made reference to to to thomas is a very important to me as a Young Thomas Merton seven Storey Mountain and Thomas Aquinas. Both of those represented me a breakthrough something new a novum you know in my consciousness that lifted me up out of the little world that i was in. Thats what our educational institutions have to do. And i think of all those mediating institutions. Im a great of that. You know, we shouldnt just think of government people, but as government, yes but then theres a slew of mediating institutes whose basic purpose is to inculcate objective value. You know, whether thats a local business organization, if its a local know, kiwanis club or whatever it is, theyre meant to inculcate value some to we have the strength to do it i dont know but thats what we have do. Ill press on that if you dont mind. Go ahead. Because we also like to think about when we have gatherings like this, people, theyre inspired, which i know they will be, because of your your comments. What we do as individuals. So i mean really pressing on tonight when. Our friends are home tomorrow morning when theyre up and theyre thinking bishop baron made these really good philosophical historical arguments. But this is what i have been tasked to do to revitalize institutional life. The press is what does that look like for us . Day to day but it parents i mean teaching your kids and being deeply aware of the i said the epistemic and the moral and the esthetic realms and to introduce them to those to make sure of your own, you know, boards make sure your schools are doing that. Vote for politicians, understand that dimension of public life and avoid a merely sort of that was pretty there a purely hobbesian of things so i think you know politically, socially, educationally address institutions youre part of and make sure that there are trade in real objective value. If i may ask a little bit of a hard question for any of us who care institutions are there institutions . Im thinking primarily about schools that are too far gone . No, it could be some of them not put you on the spot. No, there is actually. But there could be a friend of mine who founded schools, you know, and theres a whole movement in our country, i think, of the chester academies and the catholic world, people whove taken it upon themselves to invent new educational institutions and, have done a good job in it. You know, raise the money and hired the faculty, the administrators, and organize them institutionally. So admire that instead of complaining, you know, do something something and elect. I remember a Cardinal George of chicago who died, what, about seven years ago was sort of a mentor to me. And you know, is a major archbishop of this country. You get complaints all the time. You know why in the church do more than what going on and cant we . And he would say, well, you elected these people. Hed say to the hill, if you elected them, you know. So now take responsibility in your political life and get better people elected. If de tocqueville were here, he would remind us of that, too. Yeah. And speaking of him, i love your concept that really you pushed on ability equilibrium and it causes me to ask this question. It seems as if we we have two problems among others, the degradation of civic culture and the deterioration of of political life broadly, what we feel often here at heritage in scandinavia, audience people from in and around the Nations Capital doing political work in sort of an aristotelian sense, the collision of those two things are the combination of those things seem like were almost in a a helpless spiral and is the only answer out of that for. The first only answer out of that Spiritual Life. Is there anything in the secular world that that can initiate that revitalization . No. Its so when youre in touch, moral values. So people who are in the world of business or the world of finance or world of entertain in the in the cultural realm, what are moral values that obtain . So its just, you know, making money or its not just advancing my reputation. What are the moral values that obtain vatican two . You know, for catholics talks, the role of the laity is to sanctify the world. And so not the bishops job to do that business job is to teach and to sanctify and then to send, send great catholic business leaders, great catholic lawyers, great catholic writers, great catholic politicians. And were not incidentally, catholic, but theyre catholic at the heart of what they. And every time you make a moral choice john paul to said that i mean youre youre doing something good and youre also making yourself better. Youre creating your own character in a way. So do morally upright in whatever area of life youre in and. Related to that is we sort of forsaken philosophy and theology in the name of science. Yes, but the scientific disaster. Help us through that, bishop. Well, its been disaster. And i say that soberly, because i see it all the time in young people, a scientism obtained by which i mean a reduction of all knowledge to the scientific form of knowledge. I love the science of the sciences came id say the ecclesia. They came from the heart of the church. Ultimately, i love the sciences but the sciences can handle one dimension of reality. The Scientific Method address a swath reality, but it leaves huge of of experience on illuminate it. So i just cant tell you a thing about what makes a moral act good. The scientist cant tell you a thing about what makes a just they cant tell you a thing about why theres something rather than nothing. The scientists cant explain why there are objective intelligibility they based upon the assumption of objective. So i mean once you see that worlds open up and trouble of scientism is it locks you again into the into the buffer itself of the little world i can manage through the Scientific Method but thats where the spiritual the religious comes in religion is not a closing of the mind. Its an opening of the mind. Thats a great prejudice of a lot of young people say that to be religious means im super seditious. Im im turning away from im living in my own little fantasy. No, no. Oh, contraire. Its like religion is what opens you up. It opens you up to the to a transcendent dimension. So scientism is doing great damage to young people. I think its their souls in very serious ways. It sounds like you would encourage us thinking about our homework assignments to to make the distinction is were a specially speaking to people and that ever increasing category of not. Affiliated making the distinction between science and scientism which might open the possibility of a conversation to raise some your additional points. No, quite right. And i was people asked the meta questions why should the world be intels bible at all . Thats a really puzzling question. And theres not one science. Its quasi, if i can answer that question, because the science depends upon it. You have to assume world is radically intelligible. Where does that come from . How do you explain that . Einstein said the most incomprehensible thing about the world is that its no or its eugene vigdor, the famous article from 1960 and the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics in physical sciences. Vigdor was a secular , but in that article he used the word miracle like times because it just struck him as so odd. Why would high level mathematics work so well in the physical world . It clearly does. Unless theres Something Like like intelligibility, unless the one behind the world is Something Like a mathematician, you know, to me, those are really interesting questions. In my dialogs with with atheists online i find when you get to those questions they get really uninterested fast. Its just the way it is just the way is. Thats your answer. Its just the way it is. So i see religion is is what teases you to a wider higher perspective on things. Whats your greatest Success Story . You know, either or a larger group but with with with or with people who are religiously unaffiliated, a little more open your message. I dont know if i ever to pick out. Just today at the bishops meeting, i stopped by one of my a brother, bishop, huh . Yeah. Yeah, right. He was an atheist, and, you know hes a bishop. Are you . You give us such hope, bishop barrett. He told me about the. We have a ritual called the rite election. When people are coming into Catholic Church and theres this great gathering of humans who are coming in and said to me, i that three of the folks told me that they they atheists and they started listening to your and it brought them to the church. So things like that. Thats what makes me happy, gives me a sense of of achieving something worthwhile. Well, ill say genuinely and i know from from on behalf of plenty noncatholics who are here heritage and noncatholic friends in audience, they find and they would say this you know very gentlemanly bishop thank you for that and its motivated a lot of people to think that in addition to whatever theyre doing in their quote unquote day job what can they do in media or, social, social media to aid the cause. What what what encouragement, something some specific idea would give them. I would say get as much as you can help people out of this suffocating subjectivism that its its grown the course of my lifetime, but its just rampant today of i invent myself, i invent values. Its up to me. I decide, i choose. Dont tell me i will vaguely you and you vaguely tolerate me. And lets have a leviathan that makes sure we dont kill each other. I mean, what a what a horrid restricted view life. Thats why, as i end of the talk with objective value. Objective value. Fine, fine. But it is in the esthetic order, the epistemic order, the moral order that has drawn you out your own egotism has made feel alive and as has lit your own soul on fire, and then share that with people. Let them know about that. Introduce to the world of dante, the world of whoever you know, beethoven or whoever is made your soul thing and get help. Our young people out of this morass that this subjectivism is drawing them into. So as a follow up question to that, do you that this trend toward, a higher percentage of the american populace being religiously unaffiliated, will will continue apace . Or do you sense and sort of searching for some hopefulness here that that were going to turn the corner. Well i if i dont know about turning the corner any come on but but ill say this though you know i started doing that my evangelical work what, about 20 years ago and youtube just come into being at that time. Its like 2007 and people have little videos up of, you know, my dog jumped off roof and but but i had this idea of, well, if i just started talking about, you know, films or about books or ideas and and we didnt know. I had no idea if would watch. And in the beginning, we had like a couple of hundred people watching. And i was thrilled. You know, a couple hundred people watched my video but i a company know people would come in and i would i would answer and usually id come out with some, you know, sharply critical remark about me or my god or religion but all right, all right. I got a toehold. All right. Youre out there somewhere and you made an argument. So me try to answer that argument and its now what 125 million views later. And i think thats a hopeful sign that most people that use i mean, some are devout religious people that would watch, you know, my videos, a lot of them still would be, id say young people searching. And if you know, this is young fella like Christopher Hitchens junior, his name is alex oconnor and hes from oxford, a young guy very bright, very articulate and hes called the cosmic and hes just an arch atheist. Ive been at twice with him now. Love those conversations, you know. So i do think theres great hope if we can speak in a in a you know, rationally compelling and way about the things of god. I think will catch that fire with great cheerfulness. Right . Yeah. Be a happy warrior, you know, just fight the good fight. Thats what the lords given us to do. I think in our time. Thats the thats the call of our time is were up against this wave of secularism. You know, again, like when i was i cited, those statistics when i was a kid early 1970s, 97 of our country would have said, im, you know, 3 back then. So im not religious. 26 , 40 among young people. Well, that makes a huge difference in a society. And i think thats the call of our time is to fight that couple final questions before we wrap. The first is for the catholics in the audience, especially scan the audience. Nothing against the people who are perhaps a little bit older than us, but heavily young audience and many of them catholic. And they will often ask me and other catholics on the capitol, on capitol hill, why havent we been taught the tradition, the church, you know, if we understand that our catholic heritage is ever ancient, ever knew how we reclaim that and live that out . I know this is a question of great interest for noncatholics in the audience. Yeah, and honestly, i lived through that and it still remains a bit of a puzzle. We did it to ourselves to a large degree, you at catholic, even like sixth grade books of catechism or theology. There. Darren serious what they were teaching sixth graders in 1945. What i got i was the first generation after vatican. I got banners and balloons but i did. I mean religion. No one took it seriously. It wasnt a serious and it was presented that way to us math and science history. And they were kind of serious thing. I religions like gym or its like you know it just wasnt a serious subject. Well my generation took that in and. Then they grew up and they realized this kind of, silly, superficial banners and balloons, religion not going to sustain them. And they let go of it, i dont blame vatican two at all. Vatican two was written by the smartest people in mid20th century catholicism. And theyre marvelous. The vatican to document. I do blame the post Conciliar Church that trained me and you know god knows why they were trying to be irrelevant or they felt theyd lose the young people just the opposite happen. They lost the people. They taught that way. But were making a comeback. I mean, we really have theyre, i think, turned the significant corner in improving our religious instruction. But we i fight it to this day we dumb ourselves down and ive been railing against dumbed down catholicism for decades now. It was a pastoral disaster if you look at the surveys, the young people, why did you leave . You know, the number one answer is not the sex abuse scandal. The number one answer is, i dont believe i dont believe the doctrines they dont make sense to me. They were very poorly educated and thats on us. You know, we did that to us. We met the enemy and its us. So thats thats why im the drum all the time. Believe me. My brother bishops and i said it at the Big Los Angeles religious education congress, 40,000 people. And i said, stop dumbing it down. And they all cheered. And i said, well do something about it. It a it was a room full of and teachers. And i said, well do change it. You know, many people had a lot of faith in, you last last question for everyone in the audience. Of course, we have a lot people online. And thank you all for joining. And that is this is a group of folks who work on capitol hill. And even though theyre cheerful and hopeful, they sometimes can speak on their behalf, are the brink of despair, meaning they care deeply about this great republic. They care deeply about their faith. They care deeply, even about people with whom they have political disagreements on the best day. Its a grind and on the worst day, its a lot worse. Yeah. What encouragement do you give us . Remember why you got into it . I mean, remember the early, the earliest moment when you decided, this is why i want get into this life . Because i do i think Public Service is a is a beautiful form of life . And to shape laws that look im interested. I mean law shapes the will which shapes how choose law is always about morality. Thats sometimes about it. Its always morality. And so youre in the morality business. If youre if youre legislate eating, remember what, it was like like why you got into this for the first time and what youre discovering, i would argue if we pulled this thing all the way, youre discovering the call of god it. Was god summoning you to something . Oh, i call that when i have some day, theyre like a like a grind. So id say to everybody here, remember when god first called you into this form of life and then do something noble every do something morally, you know, noble every day and you get through. Thank you for that. Well, we will here momentarily. Ill just before we do that as we conclude thank you for being here thank those of you who have joined online. Its so great to look out in this wonderful and see every seat filled and then some. And if you would just permit us a moment of courtesy the bishop and i will head out and, just give us a moment to do that. But most importantly, please join in thanking bishop Robert Barron