I had a bit of a choice as to what to write about. There is the somewhat arcane metaphysical discussion I had earlier with a colleague from university on the resonances between two thinkers and how they defined “being” (analytic philosophers may recoil with horror). There is also the temptation to write about leadership changes that are happening in the Philippine Episcopal Church, changes that, to my knowledge, have not been made public elsewhere, yet. (And I will not bother to do so either, because it is best to await official word.) And then there are the books I have been reading, most notably These Three Are One, but that can wait for next week.
However, in connection with these leadership changes, I draw attention to an article from the New York Times. Scott E. Page of the University of Michigan has a book whose chief thesis is this: diverse groups tend to do better than homogenous groups in terms of productivity. Diversity encourages more creativity and flexibility. His argument is based on empirical data and mathematical modelling suggesting that diverse groups, far from being recipes for chaos, actually promise to be more exciting and innovative and decisive.
Why do I raise this point? It is becoming obvious to me and not a few others concerned with the state of Philippine Anglicanism that if the local church is to move forward, it has to make sure it does so with everyone on board. The best way to get rid of exclusivist tendencies is to present evidence that diversity is the way to go. I have at least one piece of evidence to back this claim.
Have a good weekend!