Energion Direct

Author: empower

  • The Greatest Sermon Ever Preached 

    by David Moffett-Moore

     
    ManifestoMuch has been written about the chaotic changes we are living through in the church. In The Great Emergence Phyllis Tickle writes about the massive rummage sale the church has every five hundred years. In The Next Christendom Phil Jenkins writes about changes on a millennial level. Bishop Spong writes Why the Church Must Change or Die. There is no question we live in changing times.
    One point all these books make is that we have lived through changing times before. In fact, the church was born in chaos. The gospels were written in the late first century CE. Jerusalem was laid siege and destroyed in 73 CE, ending Judaism as it had been practiced for a thousand years with the destruction of the temple and therefore the collapse of the priestly class. Judaism had to reinvent itself and one of the outcomes became Christianity. In the midst of this tumult, the gospels were written. Recalling and celebrating the life of Christ, they were also faith documents written by and for that early church. In remembering who Jesus is they also described what it means to be Christian. This is perhaps nowhere more apparent than in Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount.
    Matthew 5-7 has been called The Sermon on the Mount since St. Augustine. It is the longest monologue ascribed to Jesus in the New Testament, and has long been held as the essential core of his teaching. Leo Tolstoy based his massive The Kingdom of God is Within You on it, John Adams declared “The Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount are my entire religion.” Harry  Truman proposed, “There is not a problem in this country or the world that could not be solved by the principles of the Sermon on the Mount.” Mahatma Gandhi confessed “The Sermon on the Mount went straight to my heart.” Martin Luther King Jr. found it a source for many of his great sermons. Dorothy Day declared “Our entire  manifesto is the Sermon on the Mount.”
    “Manifesto” is the right word. A manifesto is a public declaration of motive or intention, policy or goals. We think of a manifesto as a bold statement of purpose or vision, “this is what we are about,” a defining statement. This is exactly what the Sermon on the Mount is, a decisive directive from our commander in chief on what we are about and how we are to live. It is not “‘pie in the sky by and by” hopes or dreams; it is very much in the here and now. It is exactly the focus we need for the changing times within which we live.
    This is why I was pleased to write The Jesus Manifesto, a participatory study guide to the Sermon on the Mount. I hope it may have a practical impact on our life today. Dr. Chris Suber describes it, “in changing tumultuous times, Dr. Moffett-Moore reminds us that we need a reflective return to the basic manifesto of a 1st century rebel to find a renewed vision for following Jesus today.” Rev. Shauna Hyde describes her response, “David crawled into my soul and put on paper the truth I claim as my faith.”
    I invite you to consider The Jesus Manifesto for your next Bible study.
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2755′]

    For more information, or to order, click on any picture

  • Our Challenge to Overcome Prejudice

    by Bill Tuck
    www.friarsfragment.com

    Untitled
    Prejudice is deep-seated. It has a long history in our world. The Egyptians enslaved the Israelites, and Moses stood before Pharaoh and challenged him: “Let my people go.” Later when Israel became a nation, it showed great prejudice toward other nations. In fact, they declared that everybody else was a Gentile, not as worthy as they were in the sight of God. The Greeks proclaimed that they were the superior people of the human race. The Romans saw others as inferior, especially the Syrians, whom they looked upon as dogs. The Chinese erected a wall to separate all of the heathen devils from them. People on our nation’s west coast often show prejudice toward Orientals. Those in the southern borders of our country often are prejudiced toward Mexicans. Many in the Southern states are still prejudiced toward blacks. Northerners are often prejudiced toward Southerners, and Southerners are prejudiced toward Northerners. Prejudice is an awful reality in our world, but it is real.
    Albert Schweitzer often mentioned the impression that stuck in his memory as a young child on seeing in the town’s square on many occasions the statue of a black man burdened down with heavy chains. Later Schweitzer went to Africa to minister as a medical doctor to the black man. He knew that he did not put that black man in chains, but nevertheless he felt a sense of responsibility to help ease the burden placed on him by the white man.
    Oh, I know you can say: “Well, I have never burned a cross in anybody’s yard. “I have never thrown a rock at a person of another race.” “I haven’t expressed hatred toward a person of another race.” But that does not mean that you and I are free of prejudice. Too often we prejudge another person by his or her education, background, social status, appearance, or skin color. [ene_ptp] The Church declares boldly that God is the Creator of all persons. God created man and woman in God’s image. Paul daringly asserted that we are all one in Jesus Christ. He declared that “there was neither Greek nor Roman, slave or free, Jew nor Gentile, male or female in Christ.” We can also confidently say that there is no black or white in Jesus Christ. In him we are all one. At the foot of the cross the ground is level. God’s love reaches through the crucified Christ to all persons. Jesus reminded his disciples: “The one receiving you receives me, and the one receiving me receives the one having sent me” (Matt. 10:40). Even a cup of cold water given to someone in need is to minister in Jesus’ name. When we reject our fellow man or woman, we are rejecting our Lord. The writer of 1 John reminds us: “If anyone says, ‘I love God’, and hates his brother, he is a liar, for he who does not love his brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen” (1 John 4:20).
    As Christians, let’s acknowledge that we are all one in Jesus Christ. Our Lord clearly taught that we are one in God’s sight. When you read the gospels, it is clear that Jesus Christ began to break down all the barriers which society had erected. He called Simon the Zealot to be one of his disciples and broke the political barrier. He reached out to minister to a woman who had been caught in the act of adultery and ignored the reputation barrier. His conversation with a Samaritan woman at the city well transcended the sexual barrier. His nighttime talk with the aristocrat, Nicodemus, whom he told must be born again, and his eating a meal with Zacchaeus broke the class barrier. He told a parable which praised the prayer of a publican over a Pharisee and disregarded the religious barrier. He reached out to the poor and outcast of society and broke the poverty barrier. He made a Samaritan a hero of one of his parables and challenged the racial barrier. He praised the faith of a Roman centurion and transcended national barriers. Again and again Jesus broke the barriers which had been set up to separate persons from each other.
    Remember, Jesus was not crucified because he said: “Behold the lilies of the field, how beautiful they are.” He was crucified because he attempted to break down these barriers. He taught that man and woman, whatever their status in life, were loved and welcomed by God. Like its Lord, the Church is challenged to go into the world with a gospel that breaks down all barriers as it calls all men and women to become the sons and daughters of God, saved by his grace. As members of the Church, you and I are to be the salt and light in the world as we reach out to all persons to lead them to redemption in Jesus Christ.
    What can we do as Christian people to combat the problem of racism? First, we can acknowledge that we are prejudiced. Every single one of us can acknowledge that he or she has some kind of prejudices. I have them. You have them. None of us is free of them. They are still a part of our life, heritage, sectional background, training, community mores, and regional values. Let’s acknowledge our prejudices. They are, unfortunately, a part of us. Then, let’s seek by God’s grace to overcome them.
    Secondly, we need to acknowledge that God is the creator and redeemer of all persons. Let us celebrate our diversity. Let us rejoice in the wide variety of gifts and heritages that are in the world. Let us remind one another that we are one family under God, and in Jesus Christ we are one in his Church. We are created in God’s image. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him, male and female he created them” (Gen. 1:27). Let us love and respect all persons regardless of their race or color.
    In an address before the joint session of Congress, former president John F. Kennedy said: “I ask you to look into your hearts, not in search of charity, for the Negro neither wants nor needs condescension. But for the one plain, proud, and priceless quality that unites us all as Americans: A sense of justice. In this year, the Emancipation Centennial, justice requires us to ensure the blessings of liberty for all Americans and their posterity, not merely for reasons of economic efficiency, world diplomacy, and domestic tranquility, but above all because it is right!” It is right! All persons are God’s children. God is creator and redeemer of all. So let us begin by acknowledging that we are prejudiced, that diversity is a part of our created world, and learn to glory in that diversity as we see the variety of gifts in all persons.
    Thirdly, we acknowledge that the Church is called to be the transforming element in society. It should be the showcase for the world of brotherhood, justice, and righteousness. There can be no “Check Point Charlie”, no Berlin Wall, and no barred doors at the church’s entrance where persons are not allowed. Anyone to whom Jesus Christ extends his hand is my brother and sister.
    I wish we could say that because a person has committed his or her life to Christ, he or she is free of prejudice. But we know that is not always true. Peter is a good example of this. Even after Jesus had commissioned him to preach the gospel to all nations, he was still prejudiced against the Gentiles. In a vision on the rooftop of Cornelius, Peter was made to see that he was to call nothing common or unclean which God had created. He saw the barrier of his racial prejudice crumble. Then, he was able to preach the gospel to all persons.
    Fourthly, we need to be bridge builders. We are called by Jesus Christ to be his servants in building bridges to men and women. We are to tear down fences of hatred, injustice, oppression, and hostility. It has seldom been easy to be a bridge builder. We rarely recognize the great prophets as they walk among us. Today you and I can look back and talk about how great Amos, Micah, Hosea, and Jeremiah were, but the people of their day despised or misunderstood them. History will show that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was one of the great prophets of our age. He worked and died to bring justice and righteousness for minority races in our country. The struggle for racial justice still continues.
    The denial of any person his or her God-given rights is an affront to God and a denial of the creation and redemption of God. In Christ there is no north or south, east or west, slave or free, male or female, black or white, Jew or Gentile, all are one. After Cain slew his brother Abel, God asked him, “Where is your brother?” Cain responded by asking: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” No, Cain. You and I are not our brother’s keeper, but we are our brother’s brother. We are our brother’s sister. We are sisters and brothers to each other in Jesus Christ.
    Let all barriers be broken. We are to be bridge builders, not fence contractors or wall builders. Let us lift up those who are in need and not hold them down. Let us encourage and not discourage. Let us remove the “Keep 0ut” signs and erect signs that say, “Welcome.” What we need is less bullying and more brotherhood. We need less platitudes and more performance. We need less arguments and more action. We need less rhetoric and more righteousness. Let our walk match our talk. Let there be an end to discrimination and the beginning of a greater practice of brotherhood. Let there be an end to bigotry and a greater practice of harmony in the world. Let there be and end to provincialism and a greater practice of freedom.  Let there be an end to isolationism and a greater practice of communion. I hoped and prayed that the inauguration of President Obama would usher in a new day of racial harmony and good will among all persons of all races. Unfortunately, that has not happened.
    There is a legend that will not die from postwar Germany. During the Nazi regime in Germany, Hitler gave an infamous edict that had to be read from all church pulpits. The edict declared that no Jew was welcome in any church and had to leave. One day a Nazi officer entered a Christian church and announced that anyone who had Jewish blood on his father’s side must get up and leave. Several on the main floor got up, one in a side balcony, and one from the choir loft rose and left. Then the Nazi soldier instructed those who had Jewish blood on their mother’s side to leave. This time about half a dozen more left. The legend then says that the figure of Jesus Christ the Jew, who was hanging on the cross over the altar, came down and walked out of the church.
    Whenever we attempt to bring bigotry, prejudice, and racism into his church, he walks out of it and goes into the world. He came to destroy such barriers not erect them.
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2745′]

    Click on any picture for more information or to order

  • Minimum Wage

    by Elgin Hushbeck, Jr.

     
    living wageThere is a growing movement on the left to increase the minimum wage, or as it been relabeled, a living or in even some cases a just wage. As the relabeling makes clear, this is often seen, not just as an economic issue, but as a moral issues in which greedy business owners are pitted against the oppressed and exploited workers (On the labels, see my previous post).
    As Christians we are after all exhorted to “stop expressing love merely by our words and manner of speech; we must love also in action and in truth” (1 John 3:18 ISV). So our duty would seem clear, to take action and stand with the oppressed.
    But John’s exhortation is not merely to love through our actions, but also in truth, and herein is the rub. Simply relabeling something does not change its nature.  Calling something a just wage, does not make it just.  The wages for any particular job are part of a complex web of economic relationships.  Employers have work that needs to be done and are willing to hire employees to do that work.  Employers are not completely free to set wages at whatever they want.  If they pay too low, they will not find people willing to do the work, if they pay too much, workers will be easy to find, but customers are likely to find the prices charged too high. Thus like so many things in the economy, wages are a balancing act between completing forces.[ene_ptp] Often the charge is made that employers are hoarding huge piles of money while they exploit workers.  This is belied by the simple fact that most business fail.  It is also belied by the fact that workers must be paid first, and many a business owner has had the “privilege” of going without because after paying wages and bills, there was nothing left for them.
    Thus it should not be a surprise to anyone that when cities like Seattle raised the minimum wage, many small businesses closed.  When San Francisco raised its minimum wage likewise many business closed, including a historic bookstore that was beloved by the community.
    Why? It is simple, government can demand that employers pay more, but aside from Obamacare, they cannot demand that customers pay increased costs.  In Seattle the average restaurant spent 36% on labor, and made about 4% in profit, the difference going to food and other costs.  Without a price increase or labor cuts the increase in the minimum wage would drive labor cost up to 42% – 47%.
    It is just math; something has to give.  Increase prices too much and customers stop coming.  Let employees go and service declines and again customers stop coming.  Even before the increase owning a restaurant was not an easy business to be in, so it should not be a surprise that many owners just gave up and closed.
    Nor is this restricted to just restaurants.  Twenty Two top Retailers have profits of $34 billion dollars, which sounds like a lot. But they also employ 5.8 million people for an average profit per employee of about $6000.  Not a lot but a good return on investment that allows these companies to remain in business. Not all of these are minimum wage positions, but increasing the minimum wage tends to shift all wages up so increasing the minimum wage to just $12/hour and this changes the profit into a loss of over $1000 per employee. Increasing this to proposed $15/hour and instead of making $34 billion, these retailers would be losing $34 billion.
    To stay in business, they would have to increase their prices, though given customers resistance to price increases that can be difficult. The only other option is to reduce the workforce, which raises the question, what good is a $15 minimum wage if it costs you your job?
    In recent years, an additional result of increasing the minimum wage is to accelerate the push to automation. Fast food restaurants are already experimenting with automation both at the counter and back in the kitchen. The higher the minimum wage the more cost effective such automated machines will become.
    Thus increasing the minimum wage will have some short term benefit for a few workers, those lucky enough to still be employed when the wage kicks in, but the benefit will be offset by some increase in prices, and this benefit will decrease over time as the economy works itself out to the new higher price level.  Others will see their wage drop to $0/hour as they lose their job.
    The worst off however will be those trying to enter the job market for the first time.  This is the real insidious damage done by the whole concept of a “living wage.”  Minimum wage jobs are not supposed to be jobs one can live on. These are entry level positions, positions many if not most people start at, only to move on to better paying positions once they develop job skills and experience.  According to government figures in 2014 of the 131.5 million people in the workforce, only about 1% or 1.3 million, earned the federal minimum wage, which demonstrates that virtually all do move on, that is if they can get into the workplace to begin with.
    The truly tragic part of such increases, is that it makes these entry level positions even harder to get.  Without the entry level positions it can be very difficult for people to learn the job skills needed to get and hold a job. These are skill most of us take for granted, such as showing up on time, acting professional,  working hard, etc., but for those who have hired first time employees, sadly for many these are skills that do need to be learned. With chronic unemployment at levels not seen since the Great Depression, now is hardly the time to be further restricting the job market making it even harder for people to get their first job and learn the skills that will allow them to succeed in life.
    So while at first blush raising the minimum wage may seem like a compassionate thing to do, it is hardly loving in truth as it causes far more harm than good.   Perhaps that is why the new bill passed in California only raises the minimum wage $0.50 per year until the end of Jerry Brown’s term, but $1.00 per year after that until the new minimum is reached, leaving the next Governor to deal with the consequences.
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2411′]

    Click on any picture for more information or to order.

  • Esther, Synchronicity, and Process Theology

      by Bruce Epperly

     

    For if you keep silence at such a time as this, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jewish people from another quarter, but you and your father’s family will perish. Who knows? Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this. (Esther 4:14)

    Esther bannerThe biblical book of Esther is a theological goldmine.  Although the Hebraic Masoretic version, adopted by Protestants and Jews, does not explicitly mention God’s name, God’s gentle providence is present in Esther’s discovery and embodiment of her vocation as her people’s savior.  God does not have to be named to influence our lives.  Divine activity is often subtle and goes unnoticed, acting through insights, inspirations, encounters, and persons.
    In the case of Esther (Hadassah), God’s gentle providence seems to be quietly working at turning points in her life.  With no intentionality on her part, Esther becomes the king’s favorite and leading lady, queen of the land.  Attempting to keep her ethnicity a secret, Esther is challenged by her mentor who reminds her that her position in the realm quite possibly reflects a hidden providence that has brought her to power “for just such a time as this.”
    Synchronously, Esther is the right person, at the right time, and receives the right encounter.  Within the events of our lives, God is [ene_ptp]quietly creating possibilities for personal and community transformation.  Every moment is filled with possibilities aiming at the highest good.  Though seldom we witness divinity in these possibilities, they constantly shape our lives, most particularly when we say “yes” to them.  Mordecai presents Esther with a provocative possibility that her current royal position is far from accidental, but reflects the interplay of divine providence, chance, and human decision-making.  Esther carefully weighs Mordecai’s counsel, and when she acts on it, she moves from hiddenness to agency, and sets in motion a series of events that save her people and undermine their nemesis, Haman.
    Although the author of Esther did not have today’s process theology in mind, the tenor of the book is processive and providential.  God is dynamically working in every situation, inviting us to move from passivity to agency.  God’s work is never unilateral or coercive but is embodied in a dynamic call and response in which God calls, we respond, and our response leads to further instances of God’s call in our lives.  God can’t save the Jewish people apart from human partnership.  In the interdependence of life, events lead to Esther becoming the primary partner in God’s quest to save the Jewish people.
    Esther has freedom and, like the majority of characters in scripture such as Jesus’ parents, Mary and Joseph, Abraham and Sarah, and the widowed Ruth, she can assent or turn away from God’s call.  Ruth becomes the great-grandparent of David as a result of her cooperation with God’s call to reach out to Boaz.  Esther is an agent of freedom and liberation as a result of her claiming her own power to change the world.
    Esther models for us – and inspires us – to open to daily synchronicities, often masquerading as secular events.  Most of the time, we are like Jacob, who, after dreaming of a ladder of angels, confesses “God was in this place and I did not know it.”  When we realize that God is “in this place,” the place where we are, remarkable energies are released and we become God’s partners in bringing health and beauty to the world.  We discover that we are here in this moment “for just such a time as this.”
    (For on the themes discussed in this essay, I recommend my Energion books, Ruth and Esther: Women of Agency and Adventure and Process Theology: Embracing Adventure with God.)
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2461′]

    Click on any picture for more information or to order

     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

  • The Dangers of Being Healthy and Drug Free

    by Harvey Brown

     
    LBJIt’s been quite a little saga for me the last few years. If you were to ask me, “How are you?”, I would have said, “I’m doing great.” Maybe it’s my natural optimism. Or a built in denial mechanism. But most of the time I really do think I’m doing fine.
    I was a happy little kid who looked at the glass and saw it at least half full—and always chock-full of possibilities, some of which were, shall we say, creative. That creativity and inventiveness bugged my teachers to no end. From time to time my creativity landed me in the principal’s office. One of those trips almost kept me from graduating high school, even though I was in the top 5% of my class. But that story will have to wait for another time. You’ve already gotten the picture: I am a risk taker, creative thinker, and card carrying extrovert who is, on occasion, impulsive.
    Whenever we are together, the family Brown loves to regale ourselves—and anyone else who will listen—with stories of various falls, pratfalls, stumbles (physical and social), and other events which bring laughter to Marilyn, me, and our four adult children. The humor is often at my expense. And the extrovert in me relishes the attention even if there be personal cost involved. It’s just part of our family story and the way our family works.
    Having had a career in the military, physical fitness has been a regular part of my lifestyle for nearly forty years. Even during these (g)olden years, I have continued age-appropriate conditioning and exercise. However, I no longer take summer mountain bike rides in the Bavarian Alps, hurling myself down double-black diamond ski slopes from glacier line to valley below.[ene_ptp] When I reflect on the last few years, I’ve had some age-appropriate and lifestyle induced physical problems that limited my level of activity and conditioning. But don’t worry. For those of you old enough to remember, I don’t plan to pull an LBJ on you. (If you have no idea about this reference, I am thinking of when President Lyndon B. Johnson showed the press his scar from gall bladder surgery in 1965.)
    I’ll spare you my gory details. But when I attempt an unbiased assessment of how it’s been, I must admit I have struggled physically over the last three or four years. Reviewing my DayTimer, most entries begin with “Dr.” None of these were directly related to my Army career, although I did survive a military parachute malfunction. A couple of inches shorter than when commissioned in 1979, I have a lot to be grateful for.
    Most of these physical problems could have happened to any other baby boomer named Harvey. I had a knee “blow-up” late one spring. No golf that year. I also became very close to my urologist. I learned things I never wanted to know. For example, you can actually see the inside of your urinary tract. Some surgeons like to insert an entire television studio through a tiny opening so they can see what’s going on in there. And if you can open your wincing eyes long enough, you can see the monitor too.
    Once recovered from surgery, the next year I resumed conditioning and strength training to prepare for golf season and my national and international ministry travel. Only that had to stop because of two hernias I developed. Not run-of-the-mill hernias, but the “better-not-bend-over-and-tie-your-shoe” kind of hernias.
    Living in the Smoky Mountains, I am close to a well reputed University medical center. So my family practice provider referred me to “the man.” Young, dynamic, state-of-the-art arthroscopic surgeon, my hernia repair was scheduled as outpatient surgery. Twenty-eight days later, a few miracles, multiple units of blood, and several pounds lighter, I was back home. This was one of those “golly, that’s never happened before” moments for the surgical team. And another one of those learning events about things I never wanted to know. When my blood pressure dropped to 60 over 30, I told Marilyn that I loved her and was going to see the Lord. She became upset.
    “If you die, I’ll kill you!”
    That got me thinking abut how messy this whole thing had become. I really believed I was gone. Things were not working well up to that point. So I was rather looking forward to checking out of the hospital and joining the throng around the Throne. But after Marilyn threatened me I decided to become an ally in the fight to save me. And I discovered Father’s grace in all of this.
    Trust me. You do NOT want to be case-of-the-month at a University medical center. But a lot of physicians, interns, residents, and nurses came by my room as a result. So I was able to see lots of folk I would have never met. I told them of a Saviour who had—and was—saving me.
    Obviously I lived. About four months later the surgeon cleared me to begin a recovery regimen of strength and conditioning. I envisioned travel back to Africa. Playing golf (not in Africa). And being strong and “normal” again.
    So here I am, being a good boy, taking recovery cautiously, and following Mayo Clinic protocols for core strengthening. Then the strangest thing happened. Back pain. Lower back pain. Not run-of-the-mill back pain, but the “better-not-bend-over-and-tie-your-shoe” kind of back pain. A whole year-plus of back pain. The herniated disc in my lumbar spine had colluded with age and weakness to take me out of the game. Discouragement piled on like a bunch of sixth grade boys at recess jumping on whoever was brave enough to pick up the football.
    If you had told this frequent flyer that he would not step onto an aircraft for over two years, he would have thought you demented. But the longer I was grounded, the greater my sense of hopelessness grew. I had more to do. A Gospel to proclaim. Poor pastors in west Africa I could train. Grand-kids I wanted to get down and play on the floor with.
    Physical therapy didn’t work. Prescriptions couldn’t salve the pain. Skilled and caring physicians tried again and again to bring healing.
    Late last fall I began a series of tests that confirmed I was a candidate for a relatively new surgical approach. So I braced myself for a series of procedures, each one month apart.
    While I was preparing for this, I decided to wean myself off all prescriptions. I felt like I needed to really know what my pain levels were in order to gauge the effectiveness of what I would go through. Under supervision of my family physician I surprised the specialist when I announced that I was drug free. Most people escalate dosage as the efficacy of the pharmaceuticals wanes. But I was serious about being better. Really better.
    The day after the first procedure I was making coffee. We are true coffee snobs. We triple grind our German arabica beans. Sometimes the fine dust from our coffee grinder might cause me to sneeze, which is not a good thing. Since the herniated disc, sneezing caused pain that would literally drop me to my knees (well, at least one of them) six out of ten times.
    As I felt the sneeze start to build, I grabbed hold of the counter top with both hands and pulled myself against it. The violent explosion of my coffee sneeze echoed through the house.
    But there was no pain. It seemed too good to be true.
    The next day was a repeat of the previous, except I did my family-famous double sneeze. Same fear when I felt it coming, same gripping of the counter, same violent explosion x 2. And no pain.
    I called to Marilyn, and we stood holding one another in the kitchen as I wept and thanked the Lord Jesus for what had just happened.
    Two more procedures and four months of therapy later my doctor released me. I was declared well. Nurses hugged me as I left. Gurney drivers shook my hand.
    Back to the golf course, I started easy. A small bucket of balls and my wedge. Sore as all get out the next day, but only from unused muscles. The back was fine. Repeat the next day. Same results. Woo hoo!
    Marilyn and our children kept cautioning me not to overdo things. No problem. I’ve waited a long time to be where I am. Let’s start connecting with those declined invitations to minister. I should be strong enough for the west coast in a couple of months, Africa in five.
    So after church last Sunday I went into our storage unit to retrieve one of my travel cases that had lain dormant on the top of the stack in the back of the storage. On the very top. In the very back. You need to understand that I am well now. Therapy has made me stronger. I’m not full speed, but I am getting closer.
    After unlocking the unit, I raised the rolling door and looked up toward the back-right-top corner of the pile. So what’s going through my head? “Yep. There it is. In its box. Just like it was stored by my son. Hard to get to? Sure. Imposssible?  I don’t even know how to spell that word. I’m inventive, courageous, a soldier (once a soldier, always a soldier). I’ll just climb up there in my Sunday clothes and get that sucker.”
    Perhaps a little impulsive. Maybe bad judgment. Really bad judgment.
    I started climbing until I was standing, balanced on the top of a bed headboard that was leaning against the pile. “Just because I’m sixty-six years old doesn’t mean I have to live in a rocker on the porch. If I just stretch my next step over to the bag of camping equipment….”
    As I shifted my weight to take the next step, the headboard on which I was precariously perched gave way. I fell backwards, taking part of the pile with me. I landed against a maple-topped rolling kitchen island that was supporting an old cathode ray TV. My ribs (lower back right) crushed into the edge of the kitchen island as I pin-balled my way through stored items. The pain was excruciating. It felt somewhat like being struck in the back by a crazed construction worker wielding a 2×4, wildly clubbing anything in his path—which at this moment happened to be my back. Gravity again proved to be my master.
    From the car Marilyn heard me groaning and calling her name. She ran into the storage unit and eventually moved the stuff that had fallen on me. It took what seemed like an eternity to extricate myself from the wreckage of my personal earthquake. I couldn’t take a regular breath because of the pain. I could hardly crawl into the car. A mirror at home reflected a contusion across the bottom of my rib cage on the back right.
    “Can hardly take a breath. Probably broken, but nothing can be done about that,” I thought. “No need to go to the ER this evening. I know what emergency rooms are like on the weekend.” Having been injured before (remember the family stories), I knew to ice, take Tylenol, and call my doctor in the morning. Marilyn and I took communion together and prayed, and we texted a group of friends inviting them to commune with us in the Spirit and pray for me.
    My appraisal and self-diagnosis was confirmed by the x-ray. Broken ninth rib, right side, rear. Prescription medicine to help me bear the pain. A strong son who helps lift me from the bed in the morning. The pain is too intense to roll over or to sit myself up. A prognosis of three months of regular pain, six months to heal, and occasional twinges of sharp pain during the last three months of convalescence.
    There goes the ministry trip to the Pacific Northwest. There goes Africa. There goes golf again this year. All so unnecessary. All casualties of the dangers of being healthy and drug free.
    Right now you may be saying, “Hold on just a minute, Harvey. It was your impulsiveness, your stupid decision that brought this on. It wasn’t being healthy and drug free that caused this catastrophe.”
    Alright. I’ll agree with you. But…
    There is precedence for people in recovery making ill-timed or unwise decisions—sometimes even catastrophic ones—when they are coming out of a dark or painful place. We all know folk who have been hurt through a difficult relationship jumping into a new, and possibly equally destructive relationship. It’s called “rebound.”
    Our local church has a year-long residential addiction recovery outreach modeled (to a great degree) on Teen Challenge. There are both men’s and women’s programs. The two are separate in all they do. “Students” even sit on opposite sides of the sanctuary during worship. But sure as the world, before you can say two Lord’s Prayers or three Hail Marys there will be a wedding of two recent graduates. And I’ve watched a number of these exuberant unions suffer because of impulsive loneliness and a deep longing to be needed and accepted. The couple may be “healthy and drug free,” but the dangers for repeat performances of brokenness and poor coping can be every bit as real as before. Enthusiasm from a sense of wholeness can fog vision in much the same way as impairment did before.
    Back to President Johnson (LBJ). Elected Vice-President of the United States in 1960, he was sworn in as President on Air Force One after John F. Kennedy was assassinated. This lanky Texan was a shrewd politician who well understood his role and the significance of the Office of President. Elected in his own right in 1964, he enacted sweeping legislation known as “The Great Society.” But it was during his Presidency that the Vietnam war escalated to the levels of the conflict we all associate with the word “Vietnam.”
    In the fall of 1965, President Johnson had surgery at Bethesda Naval Hospital. The famous photo seen in the graphic that accompanies this article had as its original caption: “10/20/1965-Bethesda, MD: President Johnson, in good spirits after a walk around the hospital grounds and buoyed by thought of leaving hospital, pulls up the tails of his sports shirt to show his surgical bandage and to illustrate just where it was that the surgeons ‘messed around’ in his abdomen.”
    His exuberance in the moment of renewed health led to a revealing and very unpresidential act. Johnson enjoyed his Texas persona, but editorial cartoonist David Levine “…created a powerful image of President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1966 by alluding to this almost trivial incident: Johnson exposing the scar on his belly from a recent gall bladder operation. But Mr. Levine turned the scar into a defining physical characteristic of the man. He also turned it into his defining political characteristic because the scar was an outline of a map of Vietnam. The caricature was accurate to the point of prophecy: it showed the wound that was to bring down the president.” (Note: This cartoon is in this article’s graphic.)
    Another example of the dangers of being healthy and drug free. Exuberance overriding judgment, resulting in a different kind of wound, enthusiastically self-inflicted.
    I’m also thinking of a famous biblical character—another leader—who had become healthy and drug free. In his exuberance about recovery, he made decisions which brought catastrophic consequences to his nation and his descendants. His name was Hezekiah. He reigned as King of Judah for twenty-nine years. You can read his story in three places in the Old Testament (2 Kings 18-20; 2 Chronicles 29-32; and Isaiah 36–39).
    Hezekiah was a good man. He was a God-follower who took seriously his role and responsibilities as King of Judah. These characteristics made him the polar opposite of his father and kingly predecessor, Ahaz.
    Among the many notable successes of Hezekiah’s reign were a cleansing and restoration of the Temple, the consecration and reestablishment of the Priesthood and Levitical worship responsibilities, and the destruction of various symbols and remnants of idolatrous pagan practices. He directed one of the most significant engineering projects in ancient Jerusalem, the digging of a six hundred yard underground aqueduct to channel water from the Gihon Spring into the Pool of Siloam in the city, thus making a water supply available for Jerusalem even if it were under siege. He hung out with Isaiah, the man considered by many to be the greatest Old Testament prophet.
    But fourteen years into his reign, Hezekiah became sick—not only sick, but deathly ill. Although details of the disease are somewhat obscure, we can gather from the text that he was in really bad shape…so much so that the Lord God instructed Isaiah to go to Hezekiah and tell him to write his obituary and get his house in order because he was about to die. (Okay, I made up the part about the obituary, but I’m a preacher telling this story and I know you didn’t stop to study the details of the Scripture references above.)
    Being seriously ill is bad enough. But having God tell you you’re about to die soon really sucks the goody out of your day. Hezekiah rolled over on his side, faced the wall, and began to cry fearful, bitter tears. He also prayed.
    There’s nothing quite like a genuine crisis to activate your prayer life. And for Hezekiah, this was a crisis of the highest magnitude. “Remember, Lord, how I have walked before you faithfully and with wholehearted devotion and have done what is good in your eyes.”
    Isaiah was reaching for the palace door knob when the Lord spoke again, telling him to turn around and deliver another message to Hezekiah.  “This is what the Lord, the God of your father David, says: I have heard your prayer and seen your tears; I will add fifteen years to your life. And I will deliver you and this city from the hand of the king of Assyria. I will defend this city.”
    This was Hezekiah’s last second three-pointer, his bottom-of-the-ninth home run. What looked like ultimate defeat was suddenly in overtime. Fifteen more years. Along with the prognosis of health came a bizarre but effective prescription drug: Fig poultice. Just what the Doctor ordered. The ailing king knew the outcomes would be good.
    No Tweets, texts, timeline posts, or Instagram. No MailChimp email blasts. No Apple tablets, just clay. All communication was face time. Yet news spread rapidly of Hezekiah’s miraculous recovery and the amazing movement of the Sun’s shadow. Sympathy cards were tossed in favor of “Congratulations.”
    It’s at this point that Hezekiah faced the dangers of being healthy and drug free. Sickness and poultice were gone. So was good judgment, thrown out the window because the presence of the Lord—that wonderful still, small voice which can lead, guide, rebuke, and comfort—was lifted. “But Hezekiah did not respond appropriately to the kindness shown him, and he became proud. When ambassadors arrived from Babylon to ask about the remarkable events that had taken place in the land, God withdrew from Hezekiah in order to test him and to see what was really in his heart.” (2 Chron. 3:25a,32 TNIV)
    What was revealed was neither humble, wise, nor godly. The envoys from the King of Babylon were well-wishers bringing personal greetings from His Majesty to His Majesty, along with appropriate kingly gifts. Here things started really getting sticky for Hezekiah.
    It was less than two years previous that Hezekiah was stripping all the gold and anything else of value from the Temple and Royal Palace to pay off the King of Assyria. Demanding “tribute” from a King was simply international extortion. If the weaker paid the stronger’s demands, the tribute bought a reprieve from attack as well as relief from possible annihilation. Because of the Assyrian extortion, Judah and Hezekiah were essentially bankrupt.
    To make things worse, King Sennacherib and the Assyrians double-crossed Hezekiah and marched against the city. Twice. Jerusalem was under siege, under manned, under armed, and under the bus. It would be only a matter of time until the city fell and Hezekiah probably killed. It was during this time that he struggled with his fatal/not fatal illness.
    I have a Pentecostal minister friend who specializes in deliverance ministry. He told me one day, “You know, brother, I’ve learned over the years that you just can’t cast out stupid.” If it were possible, I believe Isaiah would have tried a deliverance session with Hezekiah over this unbelievably stupid decision rooted in pride and insecurity. “Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.” (Proverbs 16:18 ESV)
    One factor in Hezekiah’s failure may have been related to the origin of his treasures. He had already surrendered Judah’s national wealth as tribute money to Sennacherib. The treasure he displayed to the Babylonians was newly acquired plunder remaining after the death angel spent a busy night among the sieging Assyrians. The treasure was abandoned in place after 185,000 had been killed. Sennacherib and the other survivors literally “decamped, departed, returned” (2 Kings 19:36).
    Kingly success was gauged by pomp, splendor and wealth. With Babylonian envoys on the scene for a state visit, an exuberant and healthy Hezekiah not only had opportunity, but now the means to impress the Babylonians. Since they were giving him special attention, he would give them something to remember—a guided tour of all the treasures of the nation (which he probably took personal credit for).
    Overall, God tolerated this failure of Hezekiah. Scripture testifies of him: “Hezekiah trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before or after his time. He remained faithful to the Lord in everything, and he carefully obeyed all the commands the Lord had given Moses.” (2 Kings18:5-6 NLT)
    If nothing else, this whole incident demonstrates that we are dangerous—to ourselves and others—when left to our own devices and the deeds of the flesh. Hezekiah, minus the heart/thought/action temperance of the presence of the Lord through the Holy Spirit, demonstrated the dangers of being healthy and drug free—and self-led. There is no substitute for the leadership and wisely restraining and empowering presence of God the Holy Spirit.
    I’m so grateful that God’s mercy and grace are not dispensed only to those who make good decisions. If that were so, I would be lost and without hope. As it is, I am only broken. But I am full of hope. For this same God who raised Jesus Christ from the dead lives in my mortal flesh. His blood covers my sin. His grace redeems me—even from the danger I am to myself when healthy and drug free. And I’m encouraged that his healing, mercy, and grace are extended not only to folk just like me, but all those who call on His name.
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2795′]

    Click on any picture for more information or to order

  • Of Process (not Theology) and Results

    by Henry E. Neufeld

     
    FactsOver the last few weeks U. S. Presidential candidate Donald Trump has complained a great deal how the rules of the Republican Party are unfair and he is thereby being denied delegates that are rightfully his. Despite the evidence that the rules may actually be helping him, many voters are convinced that Donald Trump is being cheated. They vote for him. He doesn’t get delegates. The system is somehow rotten.
    At the same time United Methodists prepare to gather for their general conference. The United Methodist Church has a relatively complex polity with delegates selected by churches to annual conferences and then by annual conferences to general conference. Sometimes the people in local churches feel that they are not represented, even though this process started at the local church, where members have many opportunities to participate and influence policy. Our church, they will say, has become quite distant from us, the church members.
    These two situations have at least one thing in common: People who participate in a process believe the process is in some way unfair because the results of the process are not what they desire..[ene_ptp] One solution we might consider is explaining the process to the people. If we try to do that, we’ll likely find that people have very little patience for an explanation of the process. If it gets complex, people begin to think it’s a conspiracy against them. Unless, of course, it is producing the results they want to see
    I recall once trying to explain to a group of people what they would need to do to change the direction of their local United Methodist Church. I’m not expert on the United Methodist Discipline, but I do know the basic outlines. Changing the policy of a church involves changing the people on committees, and much of that occurs over the course of at least three years. One needs to attend Charge Conference to be involved in electing the nominating committee. One needs to attend all the committee meetings. Yet even if one does this, the church will not turn on a dime. It’s more like steering a large ship than a car, and some would say it’s more like trying to steer a train. The tracks get in the way. The folks I was talking to basically gave up. If a year wouldn’t do it, they weren’t willing to make a move.
    The process of changing the process is even harder, because one needs to convince more people over more territory and over more time. To the shock of many, something that seems obvious in your local church may not seem nearly so obvious to someone in a church across the world—or even across the county! So more people have to be convinced of something that is more complex and will have uncertain results.
    Let’s consider another political issue: Filibusters in the United States Senate. Filibusters were, at one time, carried out most often by one senator who started to speak and refused to yield the floor. As long as he could stand there and talk without leaving for any reason, he could hold up everything. These days action is often blocked for anything that cannot muster 60 votes out of the hundred member body.
    This is a process issue. Is it a good idea to require 60 votes minimum to bring legislative actions to a conclusion? And here we have an example of how results tend to overcome process. When Democrats have been in the majority in the Senate, they have commonly opposed filibusters, and the Republicans tend to support them. When the situation is reversed, so are the positions on filibusters.
    Many people are simply impatient with a process, particularly a complex one that they don’t understand, and consider the results only. A good process is one that produces a good result, whatever I may think that is. Trump voters don’t like the Republican delegate rules and Cruz voters do for the simple reason that Senator Cruz’s campaign operation is getting a better result out of the rules.
    For a similar reason many people have little patience with the process of a trial. They decide based one whatever news they may have heard whether a person is guilty or innocent. A person commonly perceived as guilty “got off” if the jury finds them not guilty. They were railroaded if the jury finds them guilty against the assumptions of the crowd.
    But just like all the process for electing delegates to the Republican Convention or the United Methodist General Conference, or the process for considering legislation in the United States Senate, the process for carrying out a trial was created for the purpose of allowing real people to conduct business and give many participants an opportunity to have their say. Even the much-maligned filibuster is a way for a minority to prevent the majority from absolute power. All of those processes are important.
    I don’t mean that all of them are perfect, or even very good. They may even be unfair. They may be excessively complex. But general they have become that way as people adapt the process to the people it needs to serve. This can result in some very odd procedures that may seem completely without reason or merit. A process that has been adapted over and over, such as the combination of rules that result in courtroom procedure, may seem grotesquely complex. And indeed it may well need reform. But we do well both to remember that it grew up in response to needs, and that it would be a good idea to understand it before we tear it down.
    Now I’m not defending the particular processes I’ve discussed. They may all need reform. In fact, for every process I’ve mentioned, I can think of things that, in my opinion, would improve the process considerably. But having a set of rules and a process is critical to making decisions that will stand up over time.
    It is possible to like a process and dislike the result of the process. Or, the reverse, one can like the result, but dislike the process. Similarly, in our individual thinking we have a process of logic. We might not spend a great deal of time thinking about it, but we’re going to come to a conclusion somehow. If we do so with little thought, we may be headed for problems, even if we like our current conclusion.
    I encounter this in discussing biblical interpretation. “Just tell me what it means,” someone will say. I don’t think it’s very important for someone else to know what I think a passage means. What is important is to learn how to think about what it means. But often people have little patience for thinking about how a conclusion is reached.
    I often hear sermons in which the preacher invokes biblical languages. It’s particularly annoying to me when I hear someone make a good point and then try to back it up with a faulty understanding of the source language and even how language works. Some preachers have put me on the spot, realizing I read Greek and Hebrew. They try to get me to give the “Amen” to their comment. I try to dodge! In one church, after I successfully avoided commenting on the pastor’s sermon, he caught me during the Sunday School hour while I was giving a missions presentation and asked me outright. He made a good point, but when he invoked the language—discussed the process—he was in error. He didn’t leave me any option but to say so!
    That could be important. If the process is faulty, we can’t rely on coming to reasonable conclusions if we use the same process. We may need to align our compass, change our course, mend the sails, maybe even replace the rudder.
    You may be impatient about process. You may feel that the complexity is a conspiracy against you. But this is a case in which following your feelings could definitely do you harm.
    Take the time, have the patience, to consider how things have come to be, not just what has come to be.
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2364′]

    Clicj on any picture for more information or to order

  • Thoughts on the First Testament

    by Steve Kindle

    IlliteracyOne of my “Pastoral Theology” professors remarked, “You can never underestimate the biblical illiteracy of a congregation.” This has proven true in all of the congregations I have served from Fundamentalist to Progressive. (Yes, I was once a Fundamentalist.) It is a continuing problem.
    I just completed nearly a year leading a survey course of the Old Testament for the congregation I attend. We went from Genesis to Malachi, spending about one session on each book. The point was to familiarize the students with the overall content and meaning of each book, not to examine them in depth. In the Fall, we will do the same with the New Testament. The following represents some of the thoughts I took away from this.
    In graduate school, I was exposed to the many attempts to organize the Old Testament around a unifying theme. For Walther Eichrodt the Sinai covenant was the lens through which to interpret the canon. For Gerhard von Rad it was what he called Heilsgeschichte, or “Salvation History.” Bernard Ramm saw in the Old Testament a “type/antitype” that connects it with the New Testament, and John Goldingay looks at the thread of grace that runs through the Testament. Walter Brueggemann, on the other hand, eschews any effort to organize the Testament by means of a unifying theme. For him, there is none, and in fact, the pluralism of the Testament is its greatest asset, allowing interpreters the freedom to imagine new possibilities in the text.
    I think it is realistic to say that the search for a unifying theme is over. For Evangelicals unity of theme was based on the presumption of “one author,” that is, God. Therefore, it must have a single theme. However, the presence of different points of view, in fact, views that clash and jar against one another, make the notion of one author untenable. All one needs to confirm this is to look at how the Deuteronomic theology of “faithfulness to the covenant yields prosperity,” is undermined by Ecclesiastes and Job (among others). This lends credibility to the notion that the Old Testament is a compilation of attempts by Israel to make sense of their history, attempts that differ from one another in many respects.
    The humanity of the contributors comes through in many places, especially when terrible things are attributed to God, such as the several genocides recorded as God’s command. The flip side of this are the texts which overturn Mosaic excesses. One such is his ban that Moabites are not allowed to worship with Israel “to the tenth generation,” meaning never. Along comes Ruth, a Moabite who is the great great grandmother of King David, who then gives Jesus the distinction of carrying Moabite blood. Another is Moses’ command that eunuchs would also be excluded from Israelite worship. Isaiah overturns this beautifully by prophesying that eunuchs will eventually be given something better than progeny, something that will never be “cut off,” a new name. Interestingly, the first non-Jewish convert to Christianity in the Book of Act was the Ethiopian eunuch!
    If you are committed to the notion that everything in the Testament must conform to everything else, these not so subtle disagreements will escape you. Brueggemann’s pluralistic understanding of the texts opens up worlds of new possibilities of understanding if we have ears to hear.
    One other insight is worth noting here. Some things taken literally actually hide a deeper and likely better meaning. When the discussion of Adam and Eve is taken literally, people want to know things like where was the Garden located, where did Cain get his wife, where did all those people come from to populate the first city, and how come we can’t find the angel guarding the Tree of Life. The Bible doesn’t seem interested in answering these questions, so we shouldn’t get too exercised about them, either. That’s because taking this story literally obscures the natural meaning of a story—to tell truths beyond the details. In this case, if you substitute “humanity” for Adam and Eve, you will read about yourself, not about two primordial characters.
    I think the best thing about the time spent in this survey is getting acquainted with the flow of Israelite history. Once you get past 2 Kings, the rest of the Testament is hard to situate in a time-frame. Where do you locate Isaiah, for example, or Ruth? The Minor Prophets are jumbled among the pre-exilic, exilic, and post-exilic periods. It became clear that preaching from the Lectionary suffers because many people can’t put the text into a context, and sermons can’t take the time to do it, either. When we started, class members didn’t know the difference between primordial time and the Exile. They do now, and if anyone in addition to them is benefited, it will be the preacher.
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2356′]

    For more information or to order, click on any picture

  • The Concept of Authority

    by Edward W. H. Vick

     
    Authority 2(a) The term ‘authority’ refers to a relationship. It is a relational term. The term, like ‘revelation,’ points to a two-term relationship. Someone or something has authority over or for someone else. Someone reveals himself to someone else. Someone acknowledges the authority of another.  Someone understands what is revealed.
    The word ‘authority.’ The institution or the person that has authority has power over another. It has the capacity to influence that other, and it sometimes in fact has done so and does so. The authority may be charismatic or official. Authority may be the effect of the charm or persuasiveness of a person. It may be due to the social pressure of wide acceptance of power as legitimate. It is difficult not to be influenced by a widely recognized authority. We may accept it simply because there is no alternative. We are persuaded by the orator. We bow to pressures we cannot escape. Pressures and sanctions, or simply the threat of pressures and sanctions, can persuade us to act in one way rather than in another. The forces at work around us lead us to the acceptable behaviour. In this sense the term ‘authority’ refers to the effective influence which a person, a book, a custom, a belief, an institution has over people.[ene_ptp] (b) The term ‘authority’ is also used of the experts, the persons who know what they are talking about and who, because of this, deserve our respect when speaking. A person who does something competently may also be regarded as an authority when it is a matter of discussing how to do what he can do..
    To have authority is to have influence. Someone influences because he is a friend and we are trying to please him; or perhaps because he is an expert and we acknowledge the right he has to be respected. ‘Authority,’ ‘competence,’ and ‘recognition’ are thus all very closely related concepts.6
    They are closely related when we attempt to analyse the Bible’s authority. Here it is clear that the effective authority of the Bible is identical with the influence it exerts. It is also clear that an appropriate response on the part of the reader is necessary. One can acknowledge authority when one has experienced the influence of the writing in a particular way.
    (c) Authority is acknowledged power. When people recognize that a person, an institution, a class has the right to exercise power, authority is in evidence. ‘Power’ means the capacity to influence another, to get one’s purpose fulfilled, one’s ideas accepted and acted upon, to get one’s will done. Power can be exercised without being recognized as right and proper. Such power may lead someone to perform exactly the same act as the exercise of legitimate power might produce. If someone flourishes a revolver in my face, that will certainly provide me with an incentive to co-operate with the person flourishing it. But there are also legitimate ways of relieving me of—say—my money. I may recognize the structured power of bureaucratic authority and permit the taxman to claim some of my money. On this definition, ‘authority’ means both the exercise of power and the recognition of it as legitimate. Indeed, recognition is the defining element. This is the important element in our present considerations. Authority means recognition. Authority ‘is exercised only over those who voluntarily accept it’ (Juvenal).7
    (d). How and why do we come to acknowledge an authority? Does such an acknowledgment commit us to an automatic and uncritical acceptance of our authority’s pronouncements and demands whatever they are? What reasons can we give for our initial acceptance? Can a critical acceptance of authority lead to an uncritical following of its demands?
    (1) One reason for recognition of an authority is belief in the rightness of established customs and traditions. We are taught that we should adopt beliefs and behaviour patterns, and we never question them. They teach us, they train us, before we are able to reason. Later we may find reasons for believing what they have trained us to believe, and doing what they have taught us to do. They socialize us into a tradition of values, beliefs and behaviour, and having accepted that tradition we may never question its validity. We have our authorities handed to us. It is precisely because we have received them in this way, without engaging in a serious process of rational justification, that we feel greatly threatened when we are confronted with alternatives. Do we entrench or do we explore? Shall we give consideration to the criticisms or shall we dismiss them without further ado?
    (2) Max Weber8 recognizes another form of authority which he calls charismatic authority. An exceptional leader, endowed with outstanding persuasive qualities, gets a following. Such qualities as he manifests are seen as if supernatural, or superhuman. They set the leader apart from ordinary mortals, and make belief, loyalty, devotion and obedience easy and natural.
    (3) But we do not need to be impressed by such outstanding personalities to accept our beliefs on authority. Most of what we believe comes from other people’s testimony. We have not ourselves been in a position to test all the claims we accept. Nor ever shall. We are usually not inclined to test them. We simply accept them. Such acceptance works and we live together constructively. It was Bishop Butler who said that ‘probability is the guide to life’. We must act on the evidence we have. We can’t prove everything. In fact, we cannot prove much. We have to take things on trust. Our trust is shown to be reasonable in that when we act on probabilities things go right and not wrong. Many things we simply accept. We couldn’t get along if we didn’t.
    (4) But human beings, even the most exceptional of human beings, and even human beings under the influence of the divine, are fallible, limited and. suggestible. Suppose there were a human being who was infallible and at the same time was limited. Such a logical possibility is very relevant to the subject under discussion. We can think of an infallibility which extends to some matters and not to others, just as we think of an authority in some areas and not in others. I mean, it is conceivable that someone be infallible about some things but not about others. We can distinguish between total and partial infallibility. ‘He’s never wrong when he’s talking about such-and-such’ could be inferred from ‘He’s never been known to be wrong when he has talked about such-and-such.’ If we kept within the limits we could accept his authority.
    But if we began asking him questions beyond the limits within which he was infallible, that person would be of little help, indeed might even be misleading, if not irrelevant. That would certainly be the case if he were not infallible and we took him to be so, and it was important for us that he be right.
    (5) Authorities sometimes conflict. Which, if any of them, are we going to accept? When authorities conflict you have to decide between them. You can start with a high-sounding claim, ‘The Bible says so and so.’ And so it does. But one authority says that the Bible means this, and another says the Bible means that, and yet another says the Bible means the other when the Bible says so and so. When the authority, in this case the Bible, gives rise to such divergence in interpretation the individual will have to choose between the secondary authorities. I’ll choose my secondary authority, and repose my confidence there. But that only slides the issue along the corridor where I’ll meet it again. For why should I repose such confidence in that secondary authority rather than in another one? I have not settled, only shelved, the question of authority. This problem is acute when there is a conflict between interpretations, when for example contradictory doctrinal conclusions are constructed and presented as the biblical teaching. Of course, a passage may be set in different contexts and speak to different situations without providing the problem of conflict.
    (6) Religious believers sometimes combine authoritarianism with scepticism.9 They will sometimes say, ‘The authority is so sacred that we must not question it.’ Neither must we try to establish it, give reasons for it. It does not permit, nor require, proof nor even support.’ Such authoritarianism has its particular psychological appeal and that is the main reason why it persists. The intellectually timid or indolent are sometimes quite happy to let others do their thinking for them and believe what they are told to believe. They ask ‘What do we believe?’ and then demand, ‘Please tell me.’ rather than seeking the truth for themselves. They enjoy conforming and the freedom from responsibility such conformity brings. Such a person ‘may be more comfortable, for the search after wisdom often brings sorrow and disillusionment.
    ‘. . . Better to raise one’s eyes to the sky and seek humbly for the truth, even though the search result in failure and unhappiness, than to give our beliefs into the keeping of another.’10
    The sinister counterpart to such conformity is a belief in the virtue of conformity, That may lead to the opposition and persecution of those who quest for truth by those who are certain that they have found it. The will to dominate requires the will to conform. One psychological type supplements the other.
    The appeal to the sacredness of the text of Scripture is one example of this type of conformity, of this type of submission. One must not question a sacred text. But questions arise. Once admit the sacredness of the text and one is then free from the responsibility of answering questions that inevitably arise in relation to that text. It may then happen that the purported sacredness of the text gets projected on to the interpreter so that the interpretation is itself put beyond question.
    It is the initial step which must be questioned, the initial acceptance of the authority, in this case the text of Scripture, as untouchable, as beyond question. What if any is the rational ground for taking this decisive step in the first place? Or is it irrational? At what point does one refuse to give reasons for one’s belief?
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2645′]

    Click on any picture for more information or to order

    1726

  • Jesus’ Life Offers a Model of Contentment

    by Drew Smith

     
    ContentmentWe live in a restless and discontented age. Each day we are confronted with problems and circumstances that test our peace and contentment. We worry about financial problems, health problems, and family problems. We are anxious about raising our children, succeeding at work, and maintaining a certain standard of living.
    Moreover, the pace of our daily lives, the demands of nanosecond technology, and the drive to outdo others are only a few of the factors that contribute to our anxiety and restlessness. We never have enough time or enough money to do and buy all we think we need. We are a discontented and stressed out generation.
     Why are we discontented? Why are we restless?[ene_ptp] Perhaps the most challenging obstacle to finding satisfaction in life is that we are constantly in want. We live in what someone has called the “prison of want”. We always want what is bigger, nicer, faster, and newer. We want a new job, a new car, a new house, a new gadget, and new clothes because we believe that such things will provide lasting contentment.
    We want because we live lives of comparison. We see what others have and we want something better. We see what others become and we want to become something better.  We are in a constant pace to keep up with and even out do our neighbors.
    We also want because the illusion of comfort convinces us that we will be happier with more stuff, with a new job, with a new car, and many other things we desire. We want possessions and prestige because we have the false impression that these will take away the pains and disappointments we experience in life. Yet, unhealthy wanting only leads to lust, jealousy, anger, resentment, failure, and sadly, a life that never finds contentment.
    So what is the secret of contentment?  How can we live lives free of anxiety and filled with satisfaction?  How can we overcome the desire to want?
    We find the answer in the model of living that Jesus gives to us. Never wanting or desiring that which was not given by God, Jesus, though continually living in the shadow of death, found contentment in his relationship with God and others. Three primary characteristics of Jesus’ life demonstrate this very idea.
    First Jesus found contentment through living in God’s presence. He was in constant communion with God, being led by God’s Spirit to do the will of God. Through living in the presence of God, Jesus found satisfaction and peace. The famous Psalm 23 captures the essence of what Jesus knew to be true; living in God’s presence and looking to God for the needs and blessings of life leads to a life of peace and contentment.
    Second, Jesus found contentment by living in God’s present. We are always looking past today to tomorrow, and we rush through life without appreciating the present that God has given to us. Jesus’ life, however, reflected his command, “Do not worry about tomorrow.” He embraced the present time that God had given him as an opportunity to embrace the will of God for him. In this he found peace.
    The psalmist of Psalm 118 reminds us that each day is “the day that the Lord has made” and we should “rejoice and be glad in it.” Instead of rushing through our lives of stress and strain, hoping that each day will be better than the previous one, we ought to live in the present that God has given us, finding God’s grace for today even if our circumstances are painful.
    Lastly, Jesus found contentment in relationships with others. Though spending much time alone in communion with God, Jesus was not insular. Indeed, we might say that his time alone with God resulted in his intentional act of creating relationships with others. In those relationships, though sometimes disappointing, Jesus found friendship, community, and contentment.
    To find peace and contentment, we must cherish our fellowship with others, whether they are family, friends, or even strangers. We must reject our relationships with things, and embrace the people God leads in our lives. The greatest gift we have is not the things, the possessions, the prestige, or the popularity we find in life. The greatest gifts we have in life are the relationships God has given us. Instead of replacing these relationships with busyness, superficiality, and isolation, we should ensure that we give priority to building loving relationships with the people God has placed in our lives.
    We will never find contentment in the things of this world that rust and decay. Nor will we experience peace through the things of this world that bring fleeting pleasure. True contentment is experienced through living in the presence of God, the present God has given us, and with the people God has led into our lives, even as we live in a world that is so discontented.
    [slideshow_deploy id=’2613′]

    Click on any picture for more information or to order

  • ADULT EDUCATION—A BIG NEED IN OUR CHURCHES

    by Rev. Dr. Bob LaRochelle

     
    EnergionWhat is Adult Education like in your congregation? How is the level of participation? Are the topics you study engaging, and does their complexity challenge you to think deeply? Do you find yourself surprised or even shocked by what you are learning?
    I have worked in various capacities in local congregations for a long time now, and in different church traditions as well—both Protestant and Roman Catholic. To be[ene_ptp] perfectly honest, I have found that one of the greatest and most often overlooked needs is worthwhile adult based religious education. Oftentimes, what is called Adult Education in local churches focuses in on Adult Bible Study. I am not suggesting that this is unimportant. As a matter of fact, most of the teaching that I do is teaching from and about the Bible.
    My conviction, however, is that local congregations have a great responsibility to offer adults the opportunity to explore, discuss and grapple with a wide variety of real life ethical concerns and profound theological questions. Sadly, in establishing strong programs for children in local churches, we have often conveyed the wrong impression that religious learning stops at a young age.
    The reality is that adults need a religious education that takes them deeper than the often surface, literal understandings about Bible texts they have received, or the remote catechism style answers that have shaped their doctrinal education. The good news is that there are great materials out there that explore real life issues and expose people to different perspectives.
    To be honest, I have been looking at developing some classes in my congregation based on some of the materials this publisher, Energion, offers. In reviewing the variety of titles in Energion’s collection, I am struck by how various, operative, and conflicting opinions on current church issues are available through this one company. It’s pretty incredible—progressive theological and conservative evangelical voices, as well as everything in between, all under one roof!
    So, my simple suggestion is that if you are at all involved in participating in or shaping programs in your local church, that you look to explore the development of relevant topics in which a healthy pluralism of voices can be read, studied and discussed.  While these materials certainly need not come from one publisher, I would suggest that this page you are on is a great starting point.

Energion Direct
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.