Of Moral Compasses and Society

In the Garden of Eden, one of the choices which faced the first humans was a choice between what is good for the community and what is good for the individual. Adam and Eve faced a moral choice to either obey God’s community standards or obey the voice of selfishness personified in a snake. We know very little of the thought processes of Adam and Eve in that prehistoric garden, only the vignettes God reveals in the words of Genesis 2, 3, and 4, and we do well to learn what God seeks to teach us through their lives.

Genesis 1 begins with the Creator as a community of persons creating a marvelously interwoven interdependent biosphere.[1] The emphasis is on the blue planet, third from the sun in our solar system, but of course the entire universe is God’s creation and humans are asked to care for it all. The Creator, in his first instructions to humanity, gives them the task of caring for all that has been created.[2] There are a couple of clues that this is a community task and not the individual responsibility of one couple. First, we get an indication that the creation is so large that two would not be able to care for it all. Secondly, Adam and Eve receive the instructions to be fruitful and multiply so that there may be more people to join in the care of the garden, the planet, and all of creation. There is much more that could be said of the plan God has for the care of his creation, but most of it comes down to the fact that humans are created in the image of God and are designed to care for what he cares about. Thus, humans must care for God’s creation, which of course includes other human beings. The task God gives humans is daunting: take care of a whole planet and indeed a whole universe, but the Creator makes the planet (and the universe) remarkably self-sustaining and self-renewing.[3]

Then, going back to the Garden of Eden, we read of that first choice: to do what is good for the community of humans and for the creation, or to do what enhances personal knowledge and personal power. The temptation that is offered is devious and enticing for any human: trust that what God has said is right for his creation or take control and do things our own individual way. Listen in to the insidious temptation: “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden?’ … You will not certainly die, … when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Confusing words for any listener. “Wait, what did God say? What did the snake say?” Ultimately, a choice is made between following the instructions of the One who knows how the universe works (following the manual – so to speak) or choosing to do what enhances the individual.

Ever since that first inflection point of choice, we have seen humanity come to similar places of decision over and over again. When tribal families in geographic areas face a new group of families with similar or different lifestyles, they must decide whether they will fight against them for the resources of that place or collaborate together in an expanded community. When the great empires and kingdoms of the world rise up, the individual must choose between obeying the community/kingdom laws or choosing what is good for themselves/their small family. When democratic governments rise to the forefront and recognize the tensions and balances between the individual, the society, the family, and world cultures, the individual must again make choices between personal pursuits and the pursuits of the society at large. In current vernacular, the individual must ask, “Should I work to ensure there is enough hand-sanitizer to meet the needs of the community or stockpile the product and sell it for a profit?”

Keith Boag, an opinion columnist for CBC News, recently wrote an article which describes the tension in our world today: the right of the individual to pursue happiness and the obligations of those who live together in society. Boag’s examples are taken from recent incidents in the United States of America but are written as a caution to all people and particularly to Canadians. His words are more political than theological, but I would suggest that the roots of the tensions go back to the moral choices of the Garden of Eden.

Boag gets to the heart of the matter when he quotes Christopher Beem, director of the McCourtney School of Democracy in saying that “… Americans need to challenge the idea that everyone is just pursuing their own happiness as individuals…. When we live together in society, we depend on each other. And therefore, we have obligations to each other."[4] Truly, this is a very old tension: the good of the individual and the good of the society. The article gives several examples of the bad behaviours that can occur when individuals take advantage of the society in which they live and pursue their own happiness as individuals (read the entire article and be prepared to be angry). Of course, the article also exposes our own hearts and our own susceptibility to making the wrong choice in any given circumstance. Both of Boag and Beem challenge us to reconsider the importance of the society or societies within which we live. They are suggesting that the happiness of a society as well as the individual is something to be pursued.

From the very beginning, God knew that we would face the choices we are facing today. He knows how societies, cultures, and planets work best and has given us his guidance. He knows that we are susceptible to the temptation of individualism, tribalism, and selfishness and yet he allows us to choose our own paths forward. Like Adam and Eve, we get to choose where we will find our moral compass.

  

---

[1] Granted, one must look closely for hints that the Creator is a community of persons in Genesis and one needs the larger arc of the entire Bible to understand the nature of a Creator who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (see for example John 1:1-3 and Colossians 1:15-20) but the seeds of this theology are definitely sown in the beginnings of our Bible and the beginnings of creation.

[2] Genesis 1:28 says, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue (or steward) it. Rule over (or take care of) the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”

[3] There are many examples of how the biosystem works in harmony. A simple example is the earth’s water cycle as explained in the article entitled “Water Cycle” in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_cycle

[4] “Coronavirus puts a spotlight on the moral compass of America,” Keith Boag, CBC News, March 23, 2020, https://bit.ly/3drSMjs

Sacrifices

I had lunch with a friend recently and he was wrestling with some difficult things in his life. (I will change some of the details so that you will not know who he is.) His wife had recently been diagnosed with cancer and they were in the midst of a significant transformation in their knowledge of all things “chemo,” “prognosis,” and “statistics.” To say the least, it was very disorienting. This led my friend to ask questions about his faith and what we might be able to expect from God. When God’s people pray, what happens? Does heaven move for us? Do we pull ourselves closer to heaven? What is the appropriate response when experiencing such things? My friend asked the question, “Should I go to church more often?” (This from a guy who, as best he can, makes it to a church service one to three times per month.)

It occurred to me that something like that was my usual response and the usual response of God’s people from time immemorial. The logic goes something like this, “God seems to be angry with us. He has a right to be angry at us; after all, we are sinners saved only by God’s goodness and grace. Maybe God wants more _________, insert the appropriate words: animal sacrifices, words of praise, acts of obedience, attendance at church, prayers, Bible verses read, ….” You see, I have a tendency toward legalism. I daresay, you have a tendency toward legalism. We think we can purchase God’s favour with a higher level of asceticism or praise.
It may surprise us to know that Hosea, from his ancient, Jewish, perspective saw through such ideas. He tells us in Hosea 6:6 that God does not want greater legalism:

I want you to show love,
    not offer sacrifices.
I want you to know me
    more than I want burnt offerings.
Hosea 6:6 New Living Translation (NLT)

At a later time in the history of God’s people, Paul, the great defender of the Law of God, a man who should have been more prone to legalism than any of us, had this to say to the church in Rome.

But the people of Israel, who tried so hard to get right with God by keeping the law, never succeeded. Why not? Because they were trying to get right with God by keeping the law instead of by trusting in him. They stumbled over the great rock in their path. God warned them of this in the Scriptures when he said,

“I am placing a stone in Jerusalem that makes people stumble,
    a rock that makes them fall.
But anyone who trusts in him
    will never be disgraced.”

Romans 9:31-33 (NLT)

So, going back to my own propensity and that of my friend, we can try to get right with God by “keeping the law,” or by reading our Bibles more, or by reading our Bibles with more thorough understanding, or by listening to more sermons, or by being more diligent in church attendance; and we will fail to draw any closer to God. What will draw us into close relationship with God? Trusting in him. Trusting his plan; trusting Jesus, the rock.

Trust in the Lord with all your heart; do not depend on your own understanding. Seek his will in all you do, and he will show you which path to take.
Proverbs 3:5-6 (NLT)

Can we say with Paul, “I will trust you, oh Lord.”? Can we say this when our lives are going well? Can we say this when cancer is present? Can we say this when we have enough to eat? Can we say this when we are in need?

With every bone in my body I will praise him:
    “Lord, who can compare with you?
Who else rescues the helpless from the strong?
    Who else protects the helpless and poor from those who rob them?” 
Psalm 35:10 (NLT)

Earning and Effort

Some of the most challenging passages in the New Testament are those related to “works” versus “grace.” Theologians have struggled to understand, and argued over, the meaning of these verses for centuries; and this debate is at the root of the greatest divides in all of Christianity. The spectrum of “divine predestination” on one side and, on the other side, “free will and its contingent response to God” have divided such denominations as the Reformed Churches and the Anabaptist churches, the Catholic and certain evangelical churches, and the Baptist and the Mennonite churches. Some denominations even have divisions among their churches related to the concepts of grace versus works. Passages like this one in Romans 4 are challenging to understand and, dependent on the lens through which we see them, are seen as evidence for one or the other side in the debate.

Romans 4:16, 18, 20-22

¹⁶ So the promise is received by faith. It is given as a free gift. And we are all certain to receive it, whether or not we live according to the law of Moses, if we have faith like Abraham’s. . . . ¹⁸ Even when there was no reason for hope, Abraham kept hoping—believing . . . . ²⁰ Abraham never wavered in believing God’s promise. In fact, his faith grew stronger, and in this he brought glory to God. ²¹ He was fully convinced that God is able to do whatever he promises. ²² And because of Abraham’s faith, God counted him as righteous. ²³ And when God counted him as righteous, it wasn’t just for Abraham’s benefit. It was recorded ²⁴ for our benefit, too, assuring us that God will also count us as righteous if we believe in him, the one who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead.

Most theologians and denominations have found a place to rest on the continuum of views somewhere between the extreme ends. All traditions must come to terms with the relationship between the things we do to put ourselves in right relationship with God and the ever-reaching work of God that assures that some people will receive salvation and eternal life. Even as I write the words, “some people will receive,” I struggle with the word to use: “some,” “all,” “most,” “a few,” “some but not all.” I will let it stand with “some,” knowing that it will raise questions among specific readers from specific traditions of understanding.

Dallas Willard (September 4, 1935 – May 8, 2013) was an intelligent pastor to pastors, theologian, and author. Many of his books offer genuine help in the practical outworking of our understanding of these various perspectives on works and grace. His professional and private life were a living testimony to his understanding of grace. He understood his place of privilege in God’s household and still recognized the necessity of effort in all things. Because of years of study and writing, the right words regarding “earning” and “effort” were readily available to him when he was interviewed in 2002. 

“Grace is not opposed to effort, it is opposed to earning. Earning is an attitude. Effort is an action. Grace, you know, does not just have to do with forgiveness of sins alone.”[1] 

Several years before, Willard had expanded these themes further in his book The Divine Conspiracy. I would highly recommend this book to Christians, followers of other faiths, and followers of no faith. It is certainly one valuable work that helps to resolve the time-worn conundrum of works versus grace.

I conclude this entry by directing our attention to Psalm 121 which was originally written as a song that pilgrims would sing on their way to Jerusalem. As travelers walked the dangerous roads on their way to a time of reunion, celebration, and sacrifice toward their God, this song exemplifies the attitudes necessary for these brave travelers. “I look up to the mountains but my help does not come from there. My help comes from the Lord. He watches over his people: this people who move forward to take hold of this love and protection from God; this people who must walk, must praise, must offer sacrifice, must trust the Lord even as they rely upon him for their help. He watches over his people both now and forever.”

Psalm 121

¹ I look up to the mountains—
    does my help come from there?
² My help comes from the Lord,
    who made heaven and earth!

³ He will not let you stumble;
    the one who watches over you will not slumber.
⁴ Indeed, he who watches over Israel
    never slumbers or sleeps.

⁵ The Lord himself watches over you!
    The Lord stands beside you as your protective shade.
⁶ The sun will not harm you by day,
    nor the moon at night.

⁷ The Lord keeps you from all harm
    and watches over your life.⁸ The Lord keeps watch over you as you come and go,
    both now and forever.

New Living Translation (NLT)

---

[1] “Kingdom Living;” Interview with Andy Peck for Christianity + Renewal Magazine, Published by United Kingdom, May 2002.

Canada and the Nordic Model

Canada's Supreme Court has struck down most of the previous laws related to prostitution in Canada deeming them unconstitutional because they breach the Charter rights of vulnerable and marginalized people and their right to "security of the person." The present laws will stay in effect for one year giving  the Parliament of Canada time to draft better laws. If elected politicians fail to create laws which will withstand constitutional challenge prostitution will be legal and unrestricted in Canada.

This has opened a door for all of our elected officials to work together regardless of political parties and I pray that they will work together for the good of Canada and for the good of vulnerable and marginalized people who have used prostitution as a means of survival. It will be messy political work but it will be important for them to be willing to risk their political careers to do the right thing. The tendency in the past has sometimes been to simply despair of creating better laws and leave social issues largely unregulated. Doing so in this case would be a mistake. There are examples of other countries of the world which have drafted effective laws on prostitution and there are examples of countries which have tried the route of legalizing prostitution leading to dreadful consequences.

Joy Smith, Member of Parliament for Kildonan-St. Paul in Manitoba, is admirable in her willingness to step into the debate. On hearing of the Supreme Court ruling, she issued an immediate press release stating the importance of drafting new legislation. You can read it in its entirety here. In the release she states that "This ruling leaves police without important legal tools to tackle sex trafficking and organized crime and does not reflect a 1990 Supreme Court of Canada decision which stated that the elimination of prostitution through law was a valid goal." Thus, she encourages Parliament to have the will to use the rule of law to eliminate prostitution and protect people from human trafficking and organized crime. She further states that "prostitution as an industry . . . is inherently harmful to women and girls and therefore must be eliminated." Ms. Smith suggests, along with many others, that the way to solve this problem lies in the Nordic model of prostitution which targets the buyers of sex. The Nordic model criminalizes the buying of sex and the sexual exploitation of prostitutes and has been used effectively in countries such as Sweden and Norway. It also features a support program which aims to create strategies for those who seek to exit prostitution.

The position of the press release is summarised in these statements:

Prostitution must be eliminated because it dehumanizes and degrades humans and reduces them to a commodity to be bought and sold. Legalizing prostitution is a direct attack on the fundamental rights and freedoms of women, girls and vulnerable people. In the same regard, continuing to criminalize the women and vulnerable populations being prostituted creates barriers that prevent them from escaping prostitution and entrenches inequality. . . .
As a nation, we must ensure pimps remain severely sanctioned and prostituted women and girls are not criminalized and instead given meaningful escape routes out of sex work. Most importantly, Canada must focus on the real root of prostitution by targeting the buyers of sex.

Let's join together in prayer and effort to see that this ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada is a turning point in Canadian law. May we all work toward the implementation of a Nordic model of law regarding prostitution in this country. May we work to see people protected and work toward a just society in Canada.

Further Reading:
REED, Resist Exploitation, Embrace Dignity; http://www.embracedignity.org

"Legalizing Prostitution Will Harm Women – Canada Must Target Buyers of Sex," MP Joy Smith, Press Release, December 20, 2013, http://www.joysmith.ca/news.asp?newsID=761

"Supreme Court of Canada strikes down federal prostitution laws," The Star.com, December 22, 2013, http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/12/20/supreme_court_of_canada_strikes_down_federal_criminal_prostitution_laws.html

"Supreme Court strikes down Canada's prostitution laws," CBC News, December 20, 2013, http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/supreme-court-strikes-down-canada-s-prostitution-laws-1.2471572

New Law

I have been watching the comments on the blog of Professor John Stackhouse regarding Mark Driscoll. Some of the comments made me think of this song by Derek Webb.

New Law
(Lyrics and Music by Derek Webb)

don’t teach me about politics and government
just tell me who to vote for
don’t teach me about truth and beauty
just label my music

don’t teach me how to live like a free man
just give me a new law

i don’t wanna know if the answers aren’t easy
so just bring it down from the mountain to me

i want a new law
i want a new law
gimme that new law

don’t teach me about moderation and liberty
i prefer a shot of grape juice

don’t teach me about loving my enemies

don’t teach me how to listen to the Spirit
just give me a new law

i don’t wanna know if the answers aren’t easy
so just bring it down from the mountain to me

i want a new law
i want a new law
gimme that new law

what’s the use in trading a law you can never keep
for one you can that cannot get you anything
do not be afraid
do not be afraid
do not be afraid

You can listen to the song here.