Who’s really running the church?
March 20, 2006
Christians believe that the church was ordained by God and represents the presence and influence of Jesus Christ on earth. The casual observer may be excused for looking askance at that assertion. Christians also believe that the church members are not exempt from human failings, an attribute commonly ascribed to the influence of the Devil.
How the Devil Wants to Run Our Churches - byFaith Online
If Jesus is Lord, then He runs the church. The trouble is, though, that Satan is always grabbing at the controls. What is the devil trying to do?
My concept of a Devil is strongly influenced by what C.S. Lewis wrote in his delightful little book, The Screwtape Letters. It’s all so believable to anyone hanging around churches.
Bounds begins by asking this question: What is the truest measure of a church’s strength? His answer is, “True strength lies in the vital godliness of the people. The aggregate personal holiness of the members of each church is the only true measure of strength. Any other test offends God, dishonors Christ, grieves the Holy Spirit, and degrades religion.” To put it another way, the strength of any church is the work of the Spirit in conforming its members to the life of Christ.
The going gets pretty heavy here. The quest for personal holiness gets bad press, even from within the church, but I think my Free Methodist friends are on to something important here. Anyway, the article and the attendant Holiness Manifesto should be required reading for anyone seriously interested in the church.
Dave, pursuing holiness but never quite catching it.
Ephesions 3:1-7
March 19, 2006
Paul’s Relationship to the Divine Mystery
3:1For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for the sake of you Gentiles– 3:2 If indeed you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace that was given to me for you, 3:3 that by revelation the divine secret was made known to me, as I wrote before briefly. 3:4 When reading this, you will be able to understand my insight into this secret of Christ. 3:5 Now this secret was not disclosed to mankind in former generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit, 3:6 namely, that through the gospel the Gentiles are fellow heirs, fellow members of the body, and fellow partakers of the promise in Christ Jesus. 3:7 I became a servant of this gospel according to the gift of God’s grace that was given to me by the exercise of his power.
These are words of quiet strength, written by Paul from his imprisonment in Rome to Gentiles who may not even have known that the Apostle was under house arrest for their sake. He talks about a divine secret, now revealed: that his Gentile readers are equal heirs in the promise of Jesus Christ. It may not sound like much of a revelation to present day readers, but it was a very big deal for first century Gentile Christians. I think Paul wanted to be sure that the Ephesian Christians understood and appreciated that they were on equal footing with Jews before God. I am thankful that I am also the recipient of such grace. -sdg-
A nation of non-readers
March 18, 2006
During my snootier moments I am tempted to think that the U.S. is a nation of non-readers. But take a look at one of our Southern neighbors:
Brazil | A nation of non-readers | Economist.com
But Brazilians’ indifference to books has deeper roots. Centuries of slavery meant the country’s leaders long neglected education. Primary schooling became universal only in the 1990s. Radio was ubiquitous by the 1930s; libraries and bookshops have still not caught up. “The electronic experience came before the written experience,” says Marino Lobello, of the Brazilian Chamber of Books, an industry body.
The article goes on to say that Brazil may be shaping up to be a big book market for publishers. Conventional publishers, perhaps, but it might be a bigger opportunity for electronic publishers and e-books, whose ship has yet to come in, even in the developed world. I hope I live to see this happen. It’s an exciting prospect.
Dave, who loves his books, regardless of form.
Corporate Social Responsibility
March 17, 2006
My past life as a small-time corporate CEO wasn’t overly burdened by pressures from do-gooders and reformers, for which I am grateful. Since my shareholders were mostly employees and friends, it seemed obvious to me that my responsibility was to help create an ethical and viable business model and then do everything I could to make us all rich. While I couldn’t quite pull that off, the company did finally generate a modest spray of cash. The idea of corporate “stakeholders” never did make much sense to me, although I confess there was a period when I gave some lukewarm lip service to it. I think that was when I was briefly exposed to Harvard Business School for a few years in the 1980s. I got over it.
TCS20Daily20-20Speaking20in20Tongues
Professor Elaine Sternberg of Tulane University made a solid case against CSR. She argued that, by giving a hazily defined class of “stakeholders” a say over corporate decisions, “CSR would deprive owners of their property rights.” She noted that, “Business ethics is about conducting business ethically,” [emphasis added] not about pursuing goals extraneous to the company’s mission. And, because business ethics derives from the very nature of business, owner value is enhanced over the long term by ethical business behavior.
Vogel and some subsequent panelists emphasized the need for corporate America to tackle the alleged problem of climate change, a position that presupposes certain conclusions that are far from settled. He said that, while useful in helping tackle some social problems, “There are some cases in which CSR is simply a band aid.” In such cases, government regulation becomes necessary “to change the incentives of business.”
Another way to describe this strategy is for government to intentionally distort the market. And for what? The Kyoto Protocol, one such attempt to “change incentives” to address climate change, is unraveling as you read this, along with many of the scientific assumptions behind it. To argue that businesses must tackle climate change as an impending problem is specious to the point of being, well, irresponsible.
I’ve never met Professor Sternberg, but I think I would like her.
Dave, still wondering how he survived the corporate scene.
Tailard
March 16, 2006
One with a tail. An opprobrious epithet; on the continent, tails used to be ascribed to Englishmen generally.
It happened in an English village where Saint Austin was preaching, that the pagans therein did beat and abuse both him and his associates, opprobriously tying fish-tails [called Kentish Long-Tails] to their backsides; in revenge whereof an impudent author relateth (reader, you and I must blush for him who hath not the modesty to blush for himself) how such appendages grew to the hind-parts of all that generation.
–Thomas Fuller’s Historie of the Worthies of England, 1662
Dave, sure, and a tip o’ his hat to his Forgotten English Calendar
Bitter medicine
March 15, 2006
Writing by Tim Harford: Bitter medicine
Here’s a mission impossible answer to the question I raised in my last post:
Ann Marie Rogers is in a tough spot. She has an aggressive form of breast cancer, albeit at an early stage. It may kill her, and so she has been through surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and a legal battle which, so far, she is losing.
Ideally we should have a system that would cocoon Rogers from the cruel unpredictability of illness without removing her autonomy. That’s possible, at least in principle: when Rogers’ condition was diagnosed, the government could simply have written her a cheque for GBP100,000 - or whatever was the likely cost of a standard treatment. She would have discussed with her doctor how best to spend it on the open market for healthcare - guided by advisory books, magazines and websites. Nice could concentrate on the easier (if still hugely difficult) problem of how big the cheque should be.
It should be clear that there are answers to our health care mess that are economically sound and possible in every sense but the political.
Dave, flirting with incurable cynicism.
Poison Pill
March 14, 2006
Marilyn and I are a pair of septuagenarians busy at costing you taxpayers a bundle of money.
Citizens everywhere desire unrestricted access to state-of-the-art technologies. Increasingly, they insist on choice and control, too. Yet they are unwilling to pay what those things cost. People demand as a right the best health care money can buy, delivered in the way that best suits them, expense be damned. All that, and the price must be affordable. Nowhere can this self-contradictory demand be satisfied.
Is it politically possible to design a health care system that would make us think twice before we sign on to yet another expensive treatment? As it now stands, I don’t even know what our care is costing someone, and that’s not right. History suggests that major changes usually come about only as the result of a crisis containing a lot of unpleasantness for everyone and that demand change - or else! That hasn’t happened yet, and for the sake of our children and their progeny I dread the prospect.
Dave, hanging on to his health at your expense.
Ephesians 2:11-22
March 12, 2006
New Life Corporately
2:11 Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh–who are called “uncircumcision” by the so-called “circumcision” that is performed in the body by hands–2:12 that you were at that time without the Messiah, alienated from the citizenship of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who used to be far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 2:14 For he is our peace, the one who turned both groups into one and who destroyed the middle wall of partition, the hostility, in his flesh, 2:15 when he nullified the law of commandments in decrees. He did this to create in himself one new man out of two, thus making peace, 2:16 and to reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by which the hostility has been killed. 2:17 And he came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near, 2:18 so that through him we both have access in one Spirit to the Father. 2:19 So then you are no longer foreigners and non-citizens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of God’s household, 2:20 because you have been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the cornerstone. 2:21 In him the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 2:22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.
I suspect that the Gentile Christians yet new to faith didn’t yet appreciate the long journey traveled by the Jewish Christians to the point of recognizing their Messiah as the same Christ who drew Gentiles into the fold. For me, the central idea to retain from this passage is how Jesus Christ, on the cross, destroyed the wall of hostility between Jew and Gentile and made them together His bride, the church.
Within the church militant, I still see walls of hostility all over the place. When it is hostility against that which is ungodly within the church it would seem to be warranted, but when it is between fellow Christians it must be very offensive to God. So the lesson here is to look to Christ to free us from hostility where there should be unity in Christ Jesus. It’s all about Jesus. -sdg-
Emerging Peter: Heaven Hope
March 11, 2006
Thanks to Kruse Kronicle for pointing me to an interesting article, Emerging Peter: Heaven Hope, a paragraph of which says,
I was reared in a form of faith that was otherworldy and emphatic about its Heaven Hope. What I learned from it is the old philosopher’s gamble: if I lay my life on the line for Jesus Christ (which includes but is not limited to the Heaven Hope) and I’m wrong, I’ve lost only pleasure in this life; if I’m right, I’ve gained Eternity. That sort of Heaven Hope is inherent to the human quest, even if many want it suppressed. If there is an Eternity, shouldn’t we shape our life toward it? Yes, I say to myself. But, that Heaven Hope is a life of “worshipping fellowship” that fires a life that gives itself to others in this world. This world matters, it is the Stage of God’s Redemptive Work.
I had never heard the term “heaven hope” before. I certainly agree that Peter teaches “that hope and fidelity were carried on in the context of the community of faith” in 1 Peter. However, I wonder about the “old philosopher’s gamble.” I suspect that Pascal’s Wager was in mind, but the possibility of losing pleasure in life is not part of it, at least the way I’ve always understood it. In its simplist form, Pascal simply says that the unbeliever “should be much more afraid of being mistaken and then finding out that Christianity is true than of being mistaken in believing it to be true.” I like to quote Peter Kreeft, who says this about Pascal’s Wager in Christianity for Modern Pagans.
We can also be right in two ways: by wagering on God when there is a God or by wagering on God when there is no God. If we are right in the first way, we gain everything; if we are right in the second way, we gain nothing, for there is nothing to gain. Therefore the first is the world’s wisest wager and the second is the stupidist.
As far as we presently earth-bound Christians are concerned, I’ve always thought of us as sojourners and pilgrims, mucking our way through life struggling to manifest the love of God to our neighbors, all the while enjoying the certainty of future eternal life. One way I think this is manifested in many of today’s congregations is through increasing involvement in short term humanitarian mission work, here and abroad.
Dave, slogging away on his pilgrimage.
Stepney wheel
March 10, 2006
How would I ever learn important stuff like this without my Forgotten English calendar?
This Stepney wheel is an ordinary [automobile] wheel, fitted with flanges to fix on to the existing wheel, and carries a tyre already pumped up, and can be affixed to your car in less than ten minutes. . . . [It] should have the place of honor on a woman’s car.
—Dorothy Levitt’s The Woman and the Car, 1909
I also learned that St. Frances of Rome, a wealthy fourteenth-century mother of three, became a patroness of “pious motorists” in the early twentieth century, and now you know this too.
Dave, still looking for those pious motorists.
