Friday, April 27, 2012

Charles Colson, White House "Hatchet Man" Turned Christian Leader, Dies at 80


Charles Colson, White House "Hatchet Man" Turned Christian Leader, Dies at 80

The Wired Word for April 29, 2012


In the News


Charles (Chuck) Colson, once notorious for overseeing "dirty tricks" in the administration of President Richard Nixon, and later even better known for his turnaround to follow Jesus, died last Saturday at 80.

Colson, who was a key player in the abuse-of-power scandal known widely as "Watergate" that toppled Nixon from the presidency in 1974, served seven months in prison for related obstruction of justice. Shortly after his release, he said that he had become a Christian. Many observers were skeptical -- prison "conversions" that bear no fruit after release are common -- and even Colson himself, shortly after his release in 1976, said, "There is something pompous and self-righteous even in saying I have been converted." But he added, "I do know that in my heart I have accepted certain truths."

What convinced most skeptics, however, was not what Colson said, but what he subsequently did, including founding Prison Fellowship, a ministry to the incarcerated that is now in place in prisons across America and in more than 115 countries around the world. Later, he also formed the Colson Center, a teaching and training center focused on Christian worldview thought and application. He spent his post-conversion life advocating for prison reform, speaking out on social and political issues of all kinds and seeking to apply the principles of Christian faith in all aspects of life, both private and public.

He often spoke out about foreign policy matters. Writing after Colson's death, William Inboden, Distinguished Scholar at the Strauss Center for International Security and Law, wrote, "Indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to say that the State Department offices of International Religious Freedom, Trafficking in Persons, Global Aids Coordinator, Special Envoy for Sudan, and North Korea Human Rights would not exist today without Colson's work in generating support for their creation. In the process, Colson and his cohort helped raise the awareness of American evangelicals about a broader set of global issues beyond their traditional domestic social concerns."

This was a dramatic change from his intentions and methods before accepting Christ. Colson was an attorney for Nixon's 1968 election campaign and, after Nixon was elected, joined the administration as White House Special Council, soon becoming one of the most hated Nixon loyalists. He assembled an "enemies list" -- people the president didn't like -- making those on it liable for special attention from the Internal Revenue Service. Colson also helped form a special operations unit (dubbed "plumbers") to plug leaks from the White House. This unit operated clandestinely and outside the law, in one case to discredit Vietnam War whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg and in another to burglarize the Democratic National Committee at the Watergate complex in Washington, D.C.

After the Watergate scandal broke, Colson eventually plead guilty to charges in the Ellsberg case and was sent to prison. During his legal troubles, a friend gave him a copy of C.S. Lewis' book Mere Christianity, which became instrumental in leading him to Christ. His time behind bars also opened his eyes to the spiritual needs of the incarcerated, which became a call to mission for him.

Colson's Christianity was evangelical and his social outlook conservative, but the consistency of his positions and his lack of bombast won him respect not only in evangelical circles, but also in many Catholic, mainline Protestant and other circles.

More on this story can be found at these links:
 
Watergate Figure, Christian Leader Chuck Colson Dies. CNN
Setting Captives Free. World
The Watergate Dirty Trickster Who Found God. TIME
Chuck Colson and American Foreign Policy. Foreign Policy
Chuck Colson Found Freedom in Prison. Washington Post
Prison Fellowship website
 

The Big Questions

1. Are you in general skeptical of celebrity conversions? How do you decide if someone's claimed conversion to follow Jesus is real? What signs do you look for?



2. Why does a surrender to Christ not seem to "take" in every case? Why do some people appear to be soundly converted while others who turn to Christ seem to be unchanged?



3. What is the meaning of redemption as it applies to human behavior? As it applies to one's standing before God?



4. Some Christians have no memory of a point of conversion, having accepted the way of Christ as it was taught to them while growing up in the church. Some other Christians also have no memory of their conversion, being infants when receiving Christ in the sacrament of baptism. Others do remember a definite point of conversion. Is a point of conversion necessary to be fully a Christian or is it primarily for those who started out in rebellion against God? Explain your answer.



5. Colson's Christianity is usually identified as "evangelical," a term that in modern parlance, is often used to distinguish it from "mainline." Both are expressions of Protestant Christianity, but division along these lines is rather simplistic: What are some nuanced distinctions? What understandings does each have to contribute to the other? In your opinion, are both evangelical and mainline positions authentic expressions of Christianity? Do you think that one position negates the other? Why?


Confronting the News with Scripture

Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

John 3:3

"I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again." (For context, read 3:1-21.)

Colson titled his first book after his conversion Born Again, a title he took from this biblical passage. We've quoted this verse from the New International Version, which has a footnote on "born again" that says the underlying Greek can also be translated as "born from above." Both translations are helpful in understanding what Jesus is saying, but in Colson's case, the "born again" term especially applies, for his earlier life gave evidence that he was one kind of man, while his  post-conversion life showed him to be a very different man, almost as if he went back into the womb and came out a different person.

The "born from above" phrase adds an additional helpful dimension to Jesus' words, however. It implies that whereas we may once have made life decisions based on what was convenient or expedient, we now try to use the values of God himself as our guide. Born from above means that we try to pattern our lives according to what the Leader at the top urges upon us.

Questions: Which term, "born again" or "born from above," seems a more useful description of your relationship with God? Why?


Acts 9:5-6

"He asked, 'Who are you, Lord?' The reply came, 'I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. But get up and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.'" (For context, read 9:1-19).

This is a line from the story of the conversion of Saul, who was an active and committed persecutor of Christians, "breathing out threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord" (v. 1). On the  way to Damascus, a great light suddenly shown on him, and a voice asked, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?" The line above gives Saul's response and the voice's reply to that. The voice, Saul learns, is from Jesus. Afterward, Saul was unable to see until Jesus sent a disciple named Ananias to lay his hands on Saul.

Colson reports that when reading Mere Christianity,  C.S. Lewis' discussion of the sin of pride struck him as similar to his own haughty know-it-all attitude. He realized that he had been blind to his own intellectual hubris and imperfections. Like Saul, Colson had to become aware of his own blindness before gaining spiritual sight.

Saul was born again -- so much so that he is remembered not primarily as Saul the persecutor, but as Paul the apostle. We expect that Colson will be remembered more for his post-conversion activity than for his pre-conversion dirty tricks.

Questions: Why might conversion be described as "learning to see"? When have you had your eyes opened regarding your own faith? Regarding the faith of others? Was it a gentle "light bulb" moment or were you overwhelmed by your increased perception?



Romans 3:22-25

"For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith." (For context, read 3:21-26.)

In this passage, Paul uses three significant words related to conversion. They can be defined as follows:

Justification: The free acceptance of sinners into God's favor and the forgiveness of their sins on account of the sacrifice of Christ, appropriated by faith. Justification grants the unrighteous person the standing of righteousness before God. Often stated as "justification

by grace through faith."



Redemption: The process of buying back, ransoming, recovering something by paying a price. In conversion, redemption is the deliverance from the enslavement of sin and release to a new freedom in Jesus Christ



Atonement: The restoration of harmonious relations between God and a forgiven person. It comes from a contraction of the words "at one" and refers to being at one with God.

Sometimes defined in shorthand as "at-one-ment."


While the separate definitions make conversion sound like a multi-step process, in effect, all three are intertwined and happen simultaneously when one is born again.

Questions: Which one of these words seems most significant to your own experience? Why? If one has never been a conspicuous sinner, what other terms might seem more significant to describe your awakening to the call of Christ?


Hebrews 13:3

"Remember those who are in prison, as though you were in prison with them; who are being tortured." (For context, read 13:1-6.)

In Hebrews 13, the preacher-author, having given his main message about Christ in the early chapters, turns to some applications of the Christian faith in daily life. He mentions five specific things Christian should do. Two of these are remembering prisoners and those being tortured -- as though those things were happening to us. (The other three are being hospitable to strangers, maintaining the sanctity of our marriages and keeping ourselves free from the love of money by being content with what we have.)

Both remembering prisoners and those being tortured apply to Colson, who founded a prison ministry and devoted much of his post-conversion life to its work, and who spoke out about human-rights abuses.

The difficult requirement of this verse is that we should remember those who are in prison and those who are being tortured "as though you were in prison with them" and "as though you yourselves were being tortured." That's tough to do. Many of us are uncomfortable giving much thought to prisoners, people who have done things we do not condone, or even abhor. What most of us "remember" about these people are the stories we've seen on the evening news, complete with mug shots that convince us that we should fear and shut out these people. But those who work with people in prison discover that the mug shots tell only part of the story. Beyond the news stories, people in prison are, in many ways, like us: daughters, sons, sisters, brothers, cousins. They have feelings and aspirations like everyone else. Many persons incarcerated in the United States today have committed nonviolent offenses. Many people in prison have themselves suffered abuse or treatment from others whom most of us would abhor. When we are urged to "remember those in prison," we are invited to realize that even criminals are made in the image of God. As Chuck Colson helped to remind us through his ministry with prisoners, God's love extends to these persons, too.

It's no wonder that when Jesus talked about how we show our love for him, he included visiting those in prison as one of the ways. "I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me" (Matthew 25:35-36).

Questions: Since both Jesus and the writer of Hebrews urge visiting those in prison, does that mean it's a duty for every Christian? Are there other ways to take this instruction seriously? Explain your answer.

 
Matthew 7:17-20

"In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits." (For context, read 7:15-20.)

This brief metaphor from Jesus is deceptively simple. It suggests that a tree is either good or bad. If this were always the case, we would know what to do with them. We would cut down the bad ones and throw them into the fire. This would be easy.

But the example and work of Chuck Colson illustrates that it's not so simple. Was Colson a "good tree" or a "bad tree"? Was he a "bad tree" when he was involved in the activities for which he was imprisoned? Or do we make that judgment based on his later work, which would suggest that he was a "good tree" based on the good fruits of his prison ministry and other work? If a murderer is converted to Christianity while in prison and subsequently leads others to Christ and serves in various ways, can we see that murderer as a "good tree"?  

Jesus used this metaphor in the context of a warning to beware of false prophets (v. 15). The way to distinguish a false prophet from a true one is by their "fruits" -- what they do or don't do. Should we understand Jesus to mean that distinction to apply to all of us who profess Christ?

Questions: What about you? Have you always borne good fruits? Or has there been bad mixed with the good? If we can see evidence that we ourselves have changed as we walk more closely with Christ, can we extend that same reasoning to persons who have committed heinous crimes? Do you believe that people can change?



For Further Discussion

1. Referring to Chuck Colson and others involved in the abuse-of-power scandal in the Nixon White House, we might, with tongue firmly in cheek, quote Nehemiah 8:1 -- "... all

the people gathered together into the square before the Water Gate. They told the scribe Ezra to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the Lord had given to Israel." Admittedly, this "Water Gate hearing" of 445 B.C. was somewhat different from the "Watergate hearings" of the 1970s. But seriously, it's worth noting that when the people of ancient Judah gathered before the gate in the Jerusalem wall near where the spring of Gihon flowed -- thus the "Water Gate" -- what they heard was a reading from the Scriptures. They heard it and were moved to tears because of how far they were from the righteous ways the Scriptures called for. Nehemiah, however, told the people to celebrate because the Scriptures also revealed that "the joy of the Lord is your strength" (Nehemiah 8:9-10). In what sense do the Scriptures contain what is needed to experience the joy of the Lord in our lives?



2. Consider the following comments by one member of our editorial staff, who is the pastor of a prison congregation -- an actual congregation based inside the walls of a women's prison in Iowa. This congregation does the things any congregation does -- weekly worship, missions, evangelism, Christian education, pastoral care and the like. The difference is that the members of this congregation are criminals, with sentences that range from several months to life. This pastor says, "When we are inclined to wonder at the choices these women made that landed them in prison, we need to realize that these choices usually didn't start from stable homes, healthy relationships and economic opportunity. These women typically came from situations that included things like abusive relationships, addictions, mental illness and limited opportunities. When you see their physical and emotional scars, you wonder less about why they would make the mistakes that brought them to prison, and you wonder more how they can still be standing

after everything they have been through.  The biblical commands about caring for those in prison remind us to hold these women in our circle of care, as our sisters and as our neighbors. They are closer to us than we think."



3. What structures are in place in your denomination to provide ministry to prisoners? What structures for prison ministry are in place in your congregation?



4. Respond to this, from another member of the TWW team: "I conduct a weekly Bible study in our county jail and I've learned you can't measure success as you would other ministries. You have no idea if any effect is long term -- yet you suspect that there's no telling when the seeds you plant might be watered and grow. It's no use trying to figure out which conversions are real, whatever that might mean, or which aren’t. All you can do is be faithful. It's not about feeling good about what you do, but doing what Jesus expects you to do. Since I began this Bible study about nine years ago, I often think about Colson and his faithfulness to this ministry. And I think what kept him grounded is all the hard work he put into political positions that I might not share but which were certainly fueled by his faith."



5. Keeping in mind that none of us can truly judge another person, name and talk about claimed conversions of public figures that may not have proven genuine as time went by. If you can say about yourself that you were converted later in life, how did people react to you? Can you speak about conversion stories in your experience (and/or in your own circle of family and friends) about which you were skeptical at first? How have they worked out over time?



6. How is individual salvation related to social holiness? (Social holiness is sometimes defined as individual Christians acting in concert with others to hold social institutions accountable -- whether government or private -- to the common good.)


Responding to the News

 
Colson's life can be viewed as a model of one who paired deep personal commitment to Christ with a strong and ongoing effort to love his neighbor as himself, including those in prison, those suffering from human rights abuses and others. It's a good occasion to consider whether your commitment to Christ is yielding good "fruit," and if not, what might be the call of God you in that realization.
 
Other News This Week


This week, new theater releases finally bumped The Hunger Games out of its number-one box office position, but it remains a talked-about phenomenon on the American scene, particularly among teens and young adults. On this subject, we thought we'd share the comments of Timothy Merrill, who is both the editor of the preaching journal Homiletics and a member of the TWW editorial board. His comments are from his blog, found at http://tmerril.blogs.com/. (Scroll down to "Religious Themes in 'The Hunger Games'?" He also has an entry about Colson.) Merrill writes:

"If you're over 30, you can't get excited about The Hunger Games, and there's a chance you don't even know what I'm talking about. A new dieting reality show? A charity event for starving children in Africa?

"If you're under 30, especially under 20, you know exactly what The Hunger Games is about and you think it's pretty cool, and you're chatting about it on FB and tweeting all over the place about it.

"The book series, a trilogy, by Suzanne Collins, first published in 2008, has become something of a phenomenon and now is a box office hit, setting records for opening weekends or something like it.

"Inevitably, I say, inevitably, when you have a big hit movie, people stop to consider whether there are religious or spiritual themes afoot. This movie is no exception.

"Full disclosure: I started to read the book, and found myself yawning. So I stopped. Have not seen the movie. I'm over 30.

"But I've done some much more interesting reading ABOUT the book and movie and my conclusion is that it's ridiculous to think of the protagonists, either one of them as being Christ figures, even though one sacrifices this or that, and the other goes in the place of someone else. Sacrifice and substitution do not make the movie or the book religious -- these are common literary themes. Moreover violence, starvation, oppression and abusive power, retribution and injustice are not exclusively religious themes. They are humanitarian themes. They are issues that
should concern everyone: Christians, Muslims, secular humanists, Wiccans, vegans, atheists and even [members of the 'other' political party].

"Another reason I can't get hyped about the so-called religious implications of the movie is because the author apparently had no intention of inserting overtly religious themes in her books, and that's important. C.S. Lewis and Tolkein are different cases. Yes, let's talk about the symbolism in The Narnia Chronicles, or Lord of the Rings, etc. But not in The Hunger Games.

"Does this mean that The Hunger Games can't be the focus of a youth group discussion? Of course not! Of course the book has very interesting themes worthy of discussion, but I'm saying they're not specifically or narrowly theological. I.e., you would have no trouble discussing the book in a public school classroom.

"Sounds to me as though the book is a postmodern version of the pre-postmodern Lord of the Flies by Golding some 50 years ago or so.

"Nevertheless, if you want to explore the religious angle, some resources are emerging, one of which is 'The Gospel According to The Hunger Games Trilogy.' It's written by the Rev. Andy Langford and his daughter, the Rev. Ann Duncan, and is a study for pastors and church members alike. For more information, click here.

"For another response, see April Allbritton's article in The Daily Runner, called 'The Hunger Games: A Christian's Response.' You can read it here."

Closing Prayer

 
Thank you for your grace, O Lord, that extends forgiveness, justification, redemption, atonement, salvation, deliverance, reconciliation and more to us, to save us after we've gone astray. Make prompt to accept your grace-filled offer and also quick to apply our redemption to how we live simultaneously as citizens of this world and of your kingdom. In Jesus' name. Amen. 
 

Copyright 2012 Communication Resources

Friday, April 20, 2012

Secret Service Scandal Eclipses Summit News

(NOTE: Tony and Dave are out of town.  They encourage you to take a few moments to reflect on and comment about this week's story.)




Secret Service Scandal Eclipses Summit News

The Wired Word for April 22, 2012


In the News

 
Eleven U.S. Secret Service agents and 10 military personnel in Colombia to set up security in advance of President Obama's visit to that country have been relieved of their security clearances and called back to the United States following charges of partying with prostitutes and bringing 20 or 21 female foreign nationals back to their hotel.

This episode happened prior to Mr. Obama's arrival with about 30 other world leaders in Cartagena, Colombia, last weekend for the sixth Summit of the Americas. The event was intended to focus on trade in the Western Hemisphere and the U.S. relationship with Latin America, but allegations of misconduct among some U.S. personnel who were in Colombia to provide for the president's security is the main news story.

The partying of members of the advance security team apparently became known when one of the prostitutes complained to local police that after servicing two U.S. agents in a hotel room, the men wanted to split her price instead of paying for two encounters. (Prostitution is legal in much of Colombia.) The police investigated and then called the U.S. Embassy. Officials from the embassy arrived and established that 11 Secret Service agents had brought women back to their rooms in a hotel that was set up as a secure zone. The officials contacted Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan, who immediately ordered the agents to fly home.

It was later learned that 10 members of a security detail of U.S. armed forces had also brought women to their rooms. They too were relieved of duty.

Director Sullivan has requested that an independent government investigator pursue the matter of the Secret Service members' behavior. The Pentagon is investigating the conduct of the military personnel.

Apart from issues of personal morality, the behavior of the men involved could have compromised the president's safety. Historically, women, and especially prostitutes, have been used to infiltrate opponent groups to obtain secret information. If the women involved in this incident had been part of a drug-dealing, terrorist or anti-American group, the president could have been put at risk.

The investigation so far has not found the women to have any such links. Investigators are also checking to see if any of the women were minors, but none have been shown to be thus far.

The men involved are telling different stories. While some are admitting that the women were prostitutes, others are saying they were women they met at the hotel bar.

Asked about the matter, President Obama said, "If it turns out that some of the allegations that have been made in the press are confirmed, then of course I'll be angry. We're representing the people of the United States. And when we travel to another country, I expect us to observe the highest standards."

The White House praised Director Sullivan for acting swiftly to launch an investigation and says that the president remains confident in him.

Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the incident has left the military "embarrassed." Referring to Mr. Obama, he said, "We let the boss down."

As of Thursday morning, three of the Secret Service agents involved in the scandal have been ousted from the service.
   
More on this story can be found at these links:
 
Scandal Ousts Three Secret Service Personnel. Washington Post
Conflicting Stories Emerge in Secret Service Scandal. USA Today
Prostitute's $50 Fee for Two Agents Triggered Secret Service Scandal. NBC News
Colombia Prostitution Scandal Prompts Military Investigation. San Francisco Chronicle
 
The Big Questions

 

1. Personal morality is sometimes defined by what you do when you believe no one is watching. Is that an adequate definition? Why or why not? What else would you add to that definition? How does the belief that God always sees you affect your conduct?



2. Where are the foundations of personal morality found? Where do the definitions of right and wrong come from? What makes them binding on individuals? 



3. Is it a human need to have times when we are "off the morality clock" and can "let down our hair"? Does a "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas" mentality serve a mental health purpose or is that an excuse? What does it do to one's spiritual life? Explain your answer.



4. Do you sometimes feel that you are missing out on something because you avoid behaving immorally? How do you deal with that notion?



5. What things help you live up to the commitments you have made to others? What personal safeguards have you put in place to keep you from succumbing to temptations to which you know you are susceptible?


Confronting the News with Scripture

Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

Exodus 20:14

"You shall not commit adultery." (For context, read 20:1-17.)

The Ten Commandments are among the foundations on which personal morality is built, because together, they help to define right and wrong. In that regard, we could have quoted any one of the commandments as a starting point to discuss personal morality. We chose this one, however, because it probably has direct application to the news. As of Thursday, the identities of the offending Secret Service agents and military personnel have not been made public, but it's unlikely that they were all unmarried. Adultery refers to violating one's marriage vows, so at least some of the men involved probably broke this specific commandment in addition to violating the trust placed in them in their official capacities.

Question: When has one of the commandments helped you to maintain personal morality?


1 Samuel 16:7

"... for the LORD does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart." (For context, read 16:1-13.)

To anoint the next king of Israel, God sent the prophet Samuel to the household of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who had eight sons. When Samuel saw the eldest, Eliab, who was impressive in appearance, Samuel assumed he was the one God had chosen. But God told Samuel not to be misled by Eliab's appearance or stature, "for the LORD does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart." Eventually, after Samuel had seen seven of the sons and heard no confirmation from God on any of them, the youngest son, David, was brought in. It was he whom the Lord had selected.

The verse above reminds us that God sees not only our potential, but also the intent of our heart. Thus, even when we think no one is watching, God is. Nothing is hidden from him.

Questions: How does the fact that nothing you do is hidden from God shape your daily decisions? Why does this fact not deter some people, even some Christians, from wrongdoing?


Jeremiah 25:3

"For twenty-three years, from the thirteenth year of King Josiah son of Amon of Judah, to this day, the word of the LORD has come to me, and I have spoken persistently to you, but you have not listened." (For context, read 25:1-7.)

Jeremiah had been preaching to his people for 23 years, and they had not heeded his warnings. Can you imagine working at something that was not succeeding for 23 years? And not just giving it an occasional try, but doing it persistently! How does anyone do that? How does a person get past the daily discouragement and disappointments? It is on the basis of commitments made previously, and on the daily renewal of them.

In the first chapter of his book, Jeremiah tells about his call to be God's prophet. One of the things God says to Jeremiah at that time is "But you, gird up your loins; stand up and tell them everything that I command you. Do not break down before them ..." (Jeremiah 1:17). Clearly Jeremiah committed himself to that call.

It wasn't, however, just the strength of this early call that kept him going, but the fact that he renewed his commitment each day. He said, "For twenty-three years ... the word of the LORD has come to me." In other words, Jeremiah stayed in daily touch with God, and that resulted in the daily renewal of his first commitment. Most likely, Jeremiah didn't resolve at the start to stick it out for his lifetime, no matter what. Rather, each day he sought the Lord's help to be faithful for that day.

Questions: What things do you do to intentionally refresh your commitment to God? If you don't do that in some form, what helps you to keep your initial spiritual commitment?


Mark 9:47

"And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into hell …" (For context, read 9:42-48.)

We don't think Jesus meant this statement about self-mutilation literally, but he certainly meant it seriously. He used dramatic and bloody imagery to make a powerful point about personal morality -- about how high the cost is of not living up to our higher values.

Questions: What actual things ought you to rip out of your life to be faithful to God and to your loved ones?


John 3:19

"And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and people loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil." (For context, read 3:17-21.)

One of the ways "darkness" functions in this verse is to mean "that which is hidden from sight." In other words, what you do when no one is watching. If you wouldn't want your friends or your spouse or your children or the general public to know what you are doing at certain times, then of course you love "darkness," and that ought to be a warning flag to consider whether the behavior involved is, as Jesus says in this verse, "evil."

We should note that in writing to the Corinthians, Paul says that one of the things the Lord will do when he comes is "bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and ... disclose the purposes of the heart" (1 Corinthians 4:5).

Questions: What is the difference between preferring privacy and loving "darkness"? What things in your life do you need to expose to God's light? What might happen to those things if you did?


Philippians 4:2-3

"I urge Euodia and I urge Syntyche to be of the same mind in the Lord. Yes, and I ask you also, my loyal companion, help these women, for they have struggled beside me in the work of the gospel …" (For context, read 4:2-7.)

We don't know anything about Euodia and Syntyche other than what the apostle Paul tells us here -- that they both labored with Paul in the work of the gospel. We also don't know what the argument between them was, and we don't even know the identity of the "loyal companion" Paul was asking to help these women; most likely, she or he was a member of the Corinthian congregation.

But what is clear is that Paul sees the need for someone to assist these women. It might be that Paul was setting up an "accountability group," where the third person was not simply a negotiator but someone to whom the women would talk periodically to report what progress they were making in solving the issue between them. The third person would hold each woman accountable.

Questions: Where have you willingly submitted to some form of accountability as a framework for moral living? Where have you not done so but could likely benefit from it? What accountability frameworks exist within your congregation of which you might avail yourself?

 
For Further Discussion

1. A few years ago, a minister who is in demand as a speaker at religious conferences and other events said that he never accepts invitations where he has to stay overnight unless his wife is available to accompany him. He does so not just because he likes her company, but also because he wants to avoid any opportunities for sexual temptation. There's never been even a whiff of scandal regarding this man, but it seems he intentionally works to keep it that way. How might some version of this plan be of benefit to you? Clearly this arrangement wouldn't be possible for Secret Service agents or military on assignment -- or even for most people on business trips -- so what are some other actions that might be taken to aid in not being led into temptation.



2. Comment on this: A man of faith we know who did yield to sexual temptation (and destroyed his marriage in the process) said that one reason he was susceptible was because he had large blocks of time and sufficient money for which he was accountable to no one. He's working now to rebuild his life and purposely attends a men's group at his church where the participants hold one another responsible for how each is living his life.



3. While there is much behavior that people don't want others to know about, there is other bad behavior that people record on video and post on the Internet for all to see. What accounts for that? Are some people proud of their immoral escapades? Do some have difficultly connecting behavior with consequences?



4. Comment on James 4:17: "Anyone, then, who knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, commits sin."


Responding to the News

 
This is a good occasion to review our own behavior, consider whether there are any places where we prefer "darkness" and what that implies. Each of us benefits from accountability structures in our life. If we don't have such structures, this is a good time to establish and nurture them.

Closing Prayer


O God, help us to live faithfully as disciples of Jesus Christ -- all the time. In his name. Amen. 
 

Copyright 2012 Communication Resources


Friday, April 13, 2012

Syrian Government Agrees to Ceasefire

This week’s challenging news story is from Syria. We still don’t know how well the cease-fire is working, but it is certainly not likely to be any kind of lasting solution. This lesson poses some great questions about how we apply our resources, who we are responsible for, what does it mean to love your neighbor?  The Scriptures cited below show us that these questions have been around since the beginning, and that we’re often not very good at answering them. I was particularly struck by the Proverbs quote: if you say, 'Look, we did not know this' -- does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who keeps watch over your soul know it? And will he not repay all according to their deeds?" In these days of internet and 24-hour news, can we ever say “we did not know this?” Which of course raises the further question of how we can possibly respond to every situation that we know needs help.



I invite you to give special attention to further discussion question number 3. It’s framed in terms of our personal involvement versus the institutional church. You may want to ponder on the question of how we become involved by encouraging our government to do the right thing, versus how we can be involved through the church. An example of the first is the long and ultimately successful effort to change policy around Sudan. For the second, what partners in mission do we have that are helping in Syria? And how do we go about that in an area where doctors are arrested for giving aid to wounded people?
Syrian Government Agrees to Ceasefire
The Wired Word for April 15, 2012

In the News


By the time you use this lesson, you will probably know whether or not a ceasefire in Syria negotiated by former United Nations General Secretary Kofi Annan has been respected by both the Syrian government and the opposition. The ceasefire was to have begun on by 6 a.m. Thursday morning, Syrian time. While observers around the world hope the ceasefire will take hold, there is little in the history of that country or that region of the world to expect that it will.

The Syrian government is a dictatorship, headed by President Basher al-Assad, a British-trained physician whose father ruled Syria before him with an iron hand. While many hoped Assad would institute reforms, he has proved to be iron-fisted as well. When, in March 2011, residents of a Syrian town began protesting the torture of students who had posted anti-government graffiti, the Syrian military, under Assad's direction, responded with force. At that, protests spread more widely throughout the nation. These demonstrations had much in common with the wave of Arab unrest that began in Tunisia in December 2010 and quickly swept through the Middle East, toppling regimes in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen and resulting in civil uprising in other Arab countries. And, like in those countries, a wide variety of motivations and desires, not all of which are peaceful and freedom-loving, are present among the protesters.

Syrian forces have shown no hesitation to fire upon those opposing the government, and to date more than 9,000 people have died in the conflict and thousands more have been driven from their homes. But neither violent response from government troops nor Assad's offers of political reform -- which protest leaders reject as shams -- has brought an end to the unrest. In December, the United Nations said Syria was on the verge of civil war, an observation that is no less accurate four months later.

What's more, the split in the country appears to be along sectarian lines. Assad, many of the nation's elite and many military leaders belong to the Alawite sect of Islam, but only about 12 percent of Syrians are Alawites. Most of the rest are Sunni Muslims, and Sunnis are predominant among the opposition. The government has significant firepower at its disposal, but the insurgency has proved surprisingly resilient, striking back even in Damascus, the nation's capital.

The ceasefire brokered by Annan includes a six-point plan that does not require Assad to leave power. His government has agreed to the provisions, but many are skeptical that it will actually abide by it. Violent clashes increased in the days leading to the ceasefire date, indicating that it may be more of a tactical propaganda effort on the part of some of the combatants.

It's reasonable to ask why Americans should care what happens in a country on the other side of the world, with a culture and form of government unlike our own. Yes, there are humanitarian reasons to be concerned, as well as love-your-neighbor motivations for those who seek to follow Jesus, but there are are so many trouble spots around the world and so many people suffering that it is difficult to avoid "compassion fatigue." In addition, any and every possible action on the part of Americans or the U.S. government has its own limitations and undesirable side effects. But there are still reasons for Americans to care about what happens in Syria.

This week, CNN asked Hillary Mann Leverett, a Washington-based professor and leading expert on the Middle East and Syria; Joseph Holliday, a former U.S. soldier who is now a foreign policy analyst; and Robert Zarate, a geopolitical strategist, to explain why Americans should care about what happens in Syria. They came up with six reasons:

1. Geography. They said Syria is the core of the Middle East. When it's weak and destabilized, the whole area is negatively affected, and violence in Syria could quickly spill into bordering nations, including Iraq, Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon, they said. (TWW would add Israel to that list, as it, too, borders Syria.) If the conflict became regional, the United States would inevitably have to address it in some way.

2. Al Qaeda. The United States' primary enemy would have another failed state from which to operate in the Middle East, they said. (TWW comment: Even worse, Syria might have a regime that more actively supports the jihadist enterprise championed by al-Qaeda. But this is a two-edged sword, as indicated by the next point.)

3. Iran. Syria supports Iran, a country with which the United States already has a problematic relationship. "Syria is Iran's arm in the Middle East," Zarate said. "Iran has used Syria as a staging ground to train and support militants who have crossed into Iraq to hurt our troops and to train for other terrorist activities." And Iran has a nuclear program, perhaps with nuclear weapon capabilities. (TWW comment: The current three-way alliance of Iran, Syria and The-Party-of-God [Hezbollah] in Lebanon is arguably as bad as would be a Syria allied with al-Qaeda and the Islamic Brotherhood.)

4. Oil prices. Although Syria produces far less oil than some other Middle East countries, unrest there could affect global oil prices and, ultimately, how much Americans pay for gasoline.

5. The economy. Leverett and Zarate note that the Iraq war cost an estimated $1 trillion. (TWW comment: To put the financial cost in perspective, the cost of the Iraq war over eight years was almost two-thirds of the entire federal deficit [not total debt] in 2011.) Any military intervention in Syria, even if not directly involving the United States, will eventually affect the American economy.

6. Global reputation. "People around the world are looking for some kind of consistency in our foreign policy, and we've been criticized for not having that, not having anything close to consistency during the Arab Spring," Zarate said. The United States intervened, along with NATO, in Libya and lent moral support to the Egyptian revolution, saying those actions were in keeping with America's national values and responsibilities as a global leader. (TWW comment: Note also that neither of these have yet turned out as many had hoped, indicating some of the risks and uncertainties involved.)

More on this story can be found at these links:
 
Syria Promises Kofi Annan It Will Respect Ceasefire. Guardian
Syria News. New York Times
Why Syria Should Matter to Americans. CNN
 
The Big Questions
1. Does the United States have a responsibility to automatically support efforts of oppressed peoples around the world to secure political liberty? Why or why not? Who gets to define who is being "oppressed" and who the "oppressors" are? Are there any objective standards? If so, what might some of them be?

2. Given that there are so many trouble spots around the world, and given that no nation, no matter how much a global leader, can adequately solve them all, should we simply accept that our country cannot address every conflict? Should our government address only those where it is in our national interest to do so? Explain your answer. What is meant by "national interest"? What are some of the dangers of using military force when it is not clearly in the national interest to do so?

3. Jesus tells us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves, and his Good Samaritan parable suggests that our neighbor is whoever is in need, regardless of how different from us they may be. Given that, how do you think Jesus would want us to apply the love-your-neighbor-as-you-love-yourself command to places where we as individuals can have little direct effect? In what ways are the Syrians our neighbors? Is it acceptable for us to focus our individual love-your-neighbor efforts where we can have some impact and leave the other situations to our government or even to other nations? How might individual and governmental roles differ when addressing world "hot spots"?

4. Should we who are Christians try to combat "compassion fatigue"? Do we need to practice "spiritual triage" in order to preserve and focus our energies?

5. While most Syrians are Muslims, there are some Christians in Syria. What do you know about their status in the struggles there? Do you consider them brothers and sisters in Christ? If so, what do you do as a result?

Confronting the News with Scripture

Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:

Genesis 4:9

"Then the LORD said to Cain, 'Where is your brother Abel?' He said, 'I do not know; am I my brother's keeper?'" (For context, read 4:1-16.)

This question from the Lord and response from Cain after the latter killed his brother have haunted Christians for centuries, for we hear in God's question the implication that we, in fact, should be responsible for our brother -- with "brother" being broadly defined to mean not merely siblings, but "others." For many Christians, God's question is a call to caring ministry.
Questions: What are the limits on the implied meaning of God's question? Does it mean that we are all responsible for one another? How do we apply that to people with whom we have no contact? At what point can you legitimately say, "They are not my responsibility"?

Genesis 26:4-5

"I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven, and will give to your offspring all these lands; and all the nations of the earth shall gain blessing for themselves through your offspring, because Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws." (For context, read 26:1-5.)

Genesis 26:1-5 is the only biblical story in which Isaac is the main character, and it's an important one because it relates the passing of God's covenant promises from Abraham's generation to Isaac's. A key part of the divine promise is that all the nations of the earth would "gain blessing for themselves" through Isaac's descendants. That promise was part of what Christians think of as the "old" covenant/testament.
Questions: Christians understand themselves as parties in a "new" covenant/testament. How might we be the means by which nations of the earth "gain blessing for themselves"? Are there other nations that might bless themselves by our nation? Have we been a curse for some nations? Explain.

Proverbs 24:10-12

"If you faint in the day of adversity, your strength being small; if you hold back from rescuing those taken away to death, those who go staggering to the slaughter; if you say, 'Look, we did not know this' -- does not he who weighs the heart perceive it? Does not he who keeps watch over your soul know it? And will he not repay all according to their deeds?" (For context, read 24:1-12.)

Proverbs 24 opens with the admonition to not envy the wicked, and verses 1-22 are a development of that admonition. The passage above applies the admonition to difficult times, times when the wicked would easily turn their attention elsewhere, but when the wise person (vv. 3-7) sees that courageous action is called for. The wise should not "hold back from rescuing those taken away to death." Presumably this means those condemned to death not by judicial sentence, but because of political intrigue or the abuse of position by a person in power.

Note, too, that a self-justifying excuse for not acting, such as "Look, we did not know this," does not deceive God, who sees our hearts.
Questions: We know about many more injustices and wrongs than we can possibly react to. What can help us decide where to apply courageous action? What personal price are you willing to pay to stand up for the oppressed? What are the limits you are willing to risk in terms of job security, personal and professional relationships, when it comes to standing up for the oppressed in unpopular situations?  

Luke 10:36-37

"'Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?' He said, 'The one who showed him mercy.' Jesus said to him, 'Go and do likewise.'" (For context, read 10:25-37.)

Most of us are quite familiar with the parable of the Good Samaritan. We know about the priest and the Levite who saw this beaten, wounded man by the road and passed by on the other side. We also know that when a Samaritan came by, he acted to help the victim, getting directly involved and even paying for his follow-up care. We even know that in telling this story, Jesus broadened the definition of who our neighbor is.

But notice the incident that caused Jesus to tell this story. According to Luke, a certain lawyer asks Jesus, "Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life." Now, you may recall from your reading of the gospels that this lawyer was not the only one to pose this particular question to Jesus. On another occasion, the man we call the rich young ruler asked Jesus the same thing, and in reading that account, we get the impression that the rich man sincerely wanted to know the answer. In the case of the lawyer, however, there is a devious motive involved. As Luke explains it, this man wants to "test" Jesus, put him on the spot, see how he will handle himself in a public debate.

Jesus responds by saying, in effect, "That's a good question. How would you answer it?" The lawyer then spouts the answer any Jewish schoolboy would have learned in the synagogue, a quote from the Old Testament: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself."

Yes, says Jesus, that's right. You know the answer to your own question. Then Jesus adds the kicker: "Do this, and you will live."

The lawyer has been trapped by his own words, but he doesn't want to accept that, so he now asks, "And just who is this neighbor I am supposed to love?" In response, Jesus tells this parable we have come to call the Good Samaritan.

From the point of view of human behavior, this lawyer's second question is interesting because it is quite clear that when he answered his own first question, he already knew what he should do. He just didn't want to do it. Luke says he wanted to justify himself. In other words, in posing the second question, this man seeks a loophole. The very fact that he asks this second question suggests that he has not been loving his neighbor, but only himself, and he wants to keep it that way.
Questions: When have you behaved like the lawyer, trying to limit your "neighborhood"? In what ways is the Good Samaritan parable a help when you hear news about people suffering in places far away, people whose "neighborhood" you will likely never visit?

For Further Discussion
1. If it is true that there is always a crisis somewhere in the world, how can we evaluate which ones should most concern us as Americans? How might that be different from which ones should concern us as Christians? Might individual Christians be called to different areas of concern, or should we expect every Christian to have the same level of concern?

2. Do Christians have an obligation to remain aware, as far as possible, of what is going on in the world? If so, why? If not, why not? Have you thought at all about Syria in the midst of national and local news? Is the price of gas at your local pump more of a story than the violence in Syria?

3. In his time on earth, Jesus refused to get involved in matters of empire and government (see, for example, Matthew 22:15-22). Why do you think that was the case? Would he want his followers today to do the same? Why or why not? Is there a difference between Christians becoming involved as people in the world -- citizens -- and the organizational church becoming involved? Are there different roles?

4. There are so many trouble spots in the world today that even to pray about them all would make one's prayers impossibly long. Is a "God bless everybody everywhere" type of prayer acceptable? Explain your answer.

Responding to the News


This subject can help us think about what it means to be both a citizen of God's kingdom and a citizen of the world. We may not arrive at any complete answers about that, but any exercise that asks us to apply kingdom principles to contemporary times is likely to help us understand or practice our faith better. 
 
Other News This Week

 
This Sunday is the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the Titanic. While the tragedy that befell that ship and its passengers can hardly be called a current event, the observance of the anniversary is. One result of the tragedy was the adoption in 1914 of the Safety Of Life At Sea convention, which 1) increased the number of lifeboats required and 2) mandated that a continuous radio watch be kept (radio was still fairly new). A willingness to respond to a ship in distress was not the problem when the Titanic was going down; it was that the RMS Carpathia, which did respond, had a radioman on duty and heard the distress calls, while closer ships did not. The SS California was actually in visual range and noticed Titanic firing flares, but interpreted them as non-distress signals (company signals or fireworks). The California attempted to contact the Titanic by means of a flashing light (still the main form of communication at night) several times, but the latter did not respond.  

Should your class wish to discuss the Titanic, you might use Mark 4:1-9, the parable of the sower, which ends with Jesus' comment: "Let anyone with ears to hear listen!" Consider also how the disciples understood the meaning of the parables only because they drew closer to spend more time with Jesus in their small group. As long as people remained on the periphery of Jesus' ministry, without committing themselves to him, they heard his stories but were unable to interpret their meaning, just as the ships near the Titanic saw the flares but didn't get close enough to understand what they meant.

The Bible also makes a big deal about remembering big events, setting up stones, markers, etc. (see, for example, Joshua 4:1-7).

There could also be an interesting discussion of the "icebergs" we have hit in our lives.

Closing Prayer


O God, we pray for your wisdom for those involved in conflict in Syria, that peace and meaningful political liberty might be found. In Jesus' name. Amen. 
 
 
Copyright 2012 Communication Resources





We look forward to your comments!