Thursday, April 28, 2016

Ringling Retires All Its Elephants

Elephants, which have been a feature of the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus for 146 years, will present their last performances this month, the circus has announced. All 10 of its current traveling pachyderms will be retired to Ringling's 200-acre Center for Elephant Conservation in central Florida, bringing to 42 the number of Asian elephants at the preserve.
The move comes after years of battling with animal rights groups who maintain that the circus abuses the large animals to control them and make them perform.
While groups such as People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and the Performing Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) welcomed the announcement, they say it is only a step in the right direction. These and other animal rights groups say the Ringling conservation center is a "concentration camp" for the animals and want the all of the elephants sent to sanctuaries where they can live out their lives undisturbed.
Ringling's center is different from a sanctuary, which the circus describes as a place for the elephants to "march to extinction." In contrast, the center is a place where the animals continue to be bred and produce progeny and thus add to the population of the endangered species.
According to recent estimates by the World Wildlife Fund, only about 32,000 Asian elephants remain worldwide, with about 250 in the United States, most at zoos. No more will be brought here due to a 1975 international treaty that prohibits trade in Asian elephants.
The animal rights groups insist that the elephants shouldn't be bred since there's no chance that their offspring will ever be in the wild.
Ringling's herd has produced 26 babies since the early 1990s, making it one of the most successful captive elephant breeding programs.
Regarding the demand that the animals be sent to sanctuaries, Janice Aria, director of animal stewardship at the Ringling center, told a reporter from The Boston Globe, "There is a misconception that we are running a puppy mill here. Our enemies say our elephants are better off dead than in captivity."
The elephants at the Ringling center may also make a significant contribution to human longevity. Ringling permits Joshua Schiffman, a pediatric oncologist at the University of Utah, to use blood from its elephants to study why the big mammals rarely develop cancer. Schiffman is looking for a genetic protector in the elephants' DNA in the hope that it might one day prevent cancer in humans.
Kenneth Feld, CEO of Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey says such a discovery is "potentially the greatest thing ever in my life, and may be the greatest thing ever in everyone's life."
More on this story can be found at these links:
Applying the News Story
Long before the expression "the elephant in the room" entered American vernacular, pachyderms had an idiomatic place in our language in the expression, "Seeing the elephant and hearing the owl." This strange juxtaposition of images was sometimes used in the 19th century to describe an encounter with some insurmountable obstacle (hence "seeing the elephant") that threatened the very existence of the individual (hence "hearing the owl"). It was a phrase that settlers roaming the American wilderness and soldiers fighting in the bloody conflicts of the Civil War found occasion to use with some frequency.
The earliest likely use of the saying goes way back to the third century B.C., when Alexander the Great's soldiers defeated King Porus' elephant-borne troops in the Indus Valley. But it continued after the Civil War as well. TWW team member Mary Harriet Talbut has a clipping about her grandfather who fought in World War I. Its headline is "Paul Mueller Has Seen the Elephant."
Another use of "seeing the elephant" comes from the California gold rush in 1849, before the Civil War. While some fortunes were made on the gold fields, many of those who actually got there and staked a claim returned home with nothing to show for their efforts but the experience of having gone. They came home with empty pockets, but some seemed to accept their failure philosophically. Though tapped out and with no prospects on the horizon, they'd shrug and say, "At least I've seen the elephant!"
In that usage, the phrase may have been borrowed from a folk story about a farmer who was carting his vegetables to market but who, on the way, turned aside to watch a circus parade. His horses were spooked by some circus animals, causing them to bolt and dump his produce on the street, where it was trampled. The farmer, however, refused to cry over his loss. In fact, he appeared to be oddly happy, saying, "At least I have seen the elephant!"
Between the gold fields and the battleground, the meaning of the phrase seems to have gotten a little more severe, but in both cases, it referred to some kind of trouble that a person experienced but survived.
Perhaps the closest modern cliché with a similar meaning is "That which doesn't kill you makes you stronger," but that doesn't quite equal the intent of "seeing the elephant." The elephant expression implies that though we've gotten through some great difficulty, all we have to show for it is that we aren't dead. Whether we are better off or stronger remains to be seen. In fact, sometimes, that which doesn't kill us leaves us weaker or broken.
That's one kind of ground on which our faith in God helps us find a way forward.
The Big Questions
1. When have you seen the elephant and heard the owl, but come out on the other side if not quite intact, at least still standing? What role did your faith play during that episode of your life? What, if anything, did you learn?
2. What are some "elephants" you face today and how does coming to church help you deal with them?
3. How might the modern question and answer "How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time" help you with those difficulties? What Bible verses might you apply?
4. What "elephants" have you sent into retirement? Which ones have bred new problems? What does it mean for you as a Christian that you've had to face such difficulties?
5. When, after a significant loss, have you rejoiced in what you had left? What gave you the perspective to do that?
Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
1 Samuel 17:10-11 
And the Philistine said, "Today I defy the ranks of Israel! Give me a man, that we may fight together." When Saul and all Israel heard these words of the Philistine, they were dismayed and greatly afraid. (For context, read 17:1-11.)
The "Philistine" in the verses above is Goliath, the giant whose challenges struck fear in the hearts of Israel's soldiers in the Valley of Elah, but who was eventually slain by David with his slingshot.
We could say that in facing Goliath, David saw the elephant, but he was victorious. But think also about the soldiers in both armies. Before David confronted Goliath, the army of Israel was cowering on their side of the valley while the Philistine soldiers, relying on Goliath's intimidation of Israel, were acting brave. But in truth, both sets of soldiers were nervous and uneasy about going into battle. Once David killed Goliath, the Philistine soldiers turned and fled in terror, with the Israelite army in hot pursuit. By the end of the day, the men of both armies had seen the elephant, but many did not live to tell about it.
Of course, as the victors, the army of Israel came home celebrating. But what about the Philistines? The Bible reports that the Israelites pursued them for a long way, so that many of them fell and never made it home. So of course, there was no victory party in Philistia. We can imagine that among those who did get home, shell-shocked and suffering from the horror of the massive and vicious bloodshed they'd just witnessed, these were low moments. They came home in terror and defeat. All they had to show for their efforts was the experience itself. They'd seen the elephant and heard the owl call some of their comrades. But surely there was at least some thanks that they personally had survived.
Questions; How might each of these experiences be "elephants": major surgery, death of a loved one, heavy debt, broken relationships, caring for someone whose disabling condition is permanent, job loss? When have you been able to help someone else corral their elephant?
2 Corinthians 4:7-9 
But we have this treasure in clay jars, so that it may be made clear that this extraordinary power belongs to God and does not come from us. We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed ... (For context, read 4:7-15.)
This is from Paul regarding the troubles he and his coworkers had faced. They had seen the elephants, but were still standing.
Questions: What do you think enabled Paul and his colleagues to make this declaration? What scars do you think they were bearing? Was Paul saying they were just as good as new? If not, what was he saying?
Isaiah 43:2 
When you pass through the waters, I will be with you; and through the rivers, they shall not overwhelm you; when you walk through fire you shall not be burned, and the flame shall not consume you. (For context, read 43:1-7.)
God said this through the prophet to the people of Judah who were in exile in Babylon.
Questions: How do you think the exiles, considering that they had by that point been in captivity for years, heard these words? How do you hear them? Where do you need to hear them now?
Romans 8:28 
We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. (For context, read 8:18-30.)
We need to look at that verse carefully, for it is often misunderstood. It is not saying that everything works out for the best no matter what. In fact, the verse is not about our circumstances; it is about God's sovereignty, his total independence of humankind. His purposes, the verse says, will be accomplished through any means God chooses. God's purposes cannot be overridden by anything we do. "We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose." God's intentions will be fulfilled, regardless of actions or inactions on our part, because God is in ultimate control.
Still, as we cooperate with God's purposes -- or, to use the language of the verse, as we "love God" -- there is likely to be an overflow of that goodness from which we will benefit. We don't always know what God's purposes are, but we have a clear enough view from the Bible and the teachings of Jesus to understand some of them. Aligning ourselves with those things about him that we do understand and trusting him for the ones we don't is a big part of what the Christian life is all about, and of seeing things in our lives work out for good.
Questions: What confidence, if any, does this verse give you about the occurrences in your life? When has the truth of this verse been plain in your life?
Might this verse somehow apply to finding a cure in elephant DNA for cancer in humans?
For Further Discussion
1. Respond to this: In England there is a chain of stores named Lewis'. One of the largest stores is in Birmingham. At one point, Lewis' in Birmingham wished to extend their premises, but right in the path of their proposed extension was a little Quaker meeting house. Accordingly, Lewis' Board of Directors sent a letter to the Friends Society saying: "Dear Sirs, We wish to expand our premises. Your little meeting house is right in the way. We are so determined to expand that we are willing to pay you whatever price you want for your building so that we may demolish and extend. Yours faithfully." 
     Not long thereafter, they got a letter back, which said, "Dear Sirs: We notice the intention of Lewis' to expand, we notice your willingness to buy our building at a price we name, but we wish you respectfully to know that we have been on this spot longer than you have been on yours, that we are determined to stay where we are, and if it would help, we are willing to buy Lewis' at any price you are to name." It was simply signed "Cadbury." Cadbury is the greatest maker of chocolate in England and they are Quakers.
     If you look at the big firm of Lewis', and you look at the little Friends' meeting house, you would draw some immediate conclusions about who would win this battle. But the winner in this case is not determined by the size of a building, but by who signs the letters. We may sometimes look at the world and feel greatly overwhelmed by its problems. But the thing to remember is it is the Lord who signs the letters.
2. Comment on the parable about the blind men who each try to describe an elephant based on their individual experience with a part of the animal. The one who had hold of the tail said the elephant was like a rope. The one who touched the elephant's side described the animal as a wall. The one who felt the elephant's ear thought both of his friends had it wrong; obviously, the elephant was like a fan. The one who had his arm around the animal's leg laughed at them, saying the animal was most like a tree trunk. Meanwhile, the blind man who had hold of the elephant's trunk shook his head in amazement, claiming the animal was most like a snake. Each had part of the truth, but none of them had a lock on the whole truth about the elephant's real appearance.
     Where might you apply this parable in your life?
3. Discuss this: In his book of short stories about God's grace {ITALIC}New Mercies I See, TWW team member Stan Purdum tells one titled "Still Standing" about a minister conducting a funeral where the arrangements had been made by a friend of the deceased who was angry at God because of his wife's death to cancer some years back. After the graveside committal, this man approaches the minister. Here's the rest of the story, told from the point of view of the minister:
     "Uh ... Just a minute, Reverend."
     I turned around. "Yes?"
    "What you said -- about my forgiving God -- that didn't make sense. I thought your religion says we need God's forgiveness."
     "We do. But sometimes we need the healing that comes from forgiving him."
     "I don't understand."
     Feeling suddenly weary, I exhaled deeply. "I'm not sure I can explain it any better than that. A lot of us would like to know why loved ones suffer as they do -- and there are Christians who say that someday, from the perspective of eternity, it will make some kind of sense. I don't know if that's so or just wishful thinking. But either way, that doesn't help us here when we are in pain."
     "So what good does faith do then?"
     I noticed a bird hopping on the top of a nearby tombstone, and cast my eyes in its direction. "I can only tell you that faith ... sometimes ... well, sometimes it gives something we need to go on without ... without being poisoned by what has happened." I glanced toward Drake. "And our refusal to forgive God interferes with that."
     "So you're saying I need to forgive God for taking Jane from me?"
     "It's a place to start," I said, continuing to watch the bird.
     Drake didn't say anything to that, but stood there eyeing me intently for a moment. Finally he said, "You've had to do that too, haven't you? You've had to forgive God."
     I looked back at Drake. "Yes," I said quietly. "We lost a daughter."
     Drake and I stood there silently together for a long minute, both watching the bird as it hopped on the granite marker to some unmetered rhythm only it could hear.
     Finally, Drake reached over and gripped my shoulder. 
     I nodded.
     Then he turned around and walked back to rejoin his friends still standing around the open grave.
Responding to the News
Sing together the hymn "How Firm a Foundation" and talk about where its words speak to you.
Prayer (from Psalm 69:1-2, 13-14, 30, 32-34)
Save me, O God, for the waters have come up to my neck. I sink in deep mire, where there is no foothold; I have come into deep waters, and the flood sweeps over me.
But as for me, my prayer is to you, O LORD. At an acceptable time, O God, in the abundance of your steadfast love, answer me. With your faithful help rescue me from sinking in the mire; let me be delivered from my enemies and from the deep waters.
I will praise the name of God with a song; I will magnify him with thanksgiving. … Let the oppressed see it and be glad; you who seek God, let your hearts revive. For the LORD hears the needy, and does not despise his own that are in bonds.
Let heaven and earth praise him, the seas and everything that moves in them. Amen.
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, April 21, 2016

Archbishop of Canterbury Learns His Biological Father Was Churchill's Private Secretary

© 2016 The Wired Word
www.thewiredword.com

"I know that I find who I am in Jesus Christ, not in genetics, and my identity in him never changes."
That's a good testimony that many faithful Christians would affirm for themselves, but it had unusual significance when it was issued earlier this month by Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, who had just learned that his biological father was not Gavin Welby -- the man who married his mother -- as both he and his mother had always believed, but was in fact Sir Anthony Montague Browne, Winston Churchill's last private secretary, during Churchill's second time as prime minister, 1951-1955.
Welby, 60, is the leader of the Church of England and spiritual head of the Anglican communion, with about 85 million members worldwide.
The discovery came about after Welby submitted to a DNA test that compared that of Welby with DNA from hairs in a brush used by the late Browne, who died 2013 at the age of 89. The archbishop agreed to the test only after The Daily Telegraph, a British newspaper, pieced together evidence that suggested that Browne and Welby were father and son and presented it to the archbishop. He agreed to the test only to disprove the newspaper's claim.
But after the test showed a 99.9779 percent probability that Browne was Welby's parent, the archbishop accepted the information and shortly thereafter issued the statement. He also said his true paternity came as a "complete surprise."
It has not been reported why The Daily Telegraph decided to investigate the archbishop's paternity.
Upon learning the news, one of Welby's first thoughts was for his mother, Jane Williams, 86, now Lady Williams of Elvel. She too had been a secretary to Churchill and confirmed first to her son and later in an online statement that she had had a brief liaison with Browne just prior to her "very sudden" and short marriage to Gavin Welby, a whiskey salesman and son of a Jewish immigrant. But since her son had been born "almost nine months to the day" after the wedding, she and her husband had assumed the child had been conceived during the honeymoon.
Lady Williams explained that during the affair and marriage, she had been "drinking heavily at times" and said that it eventually developed into "serious alcoholism," which only ended in 1968 when she entered rehab. She and her son both confirm that she has not drunk alcohol since. In his statement, the archbishop said he is "enormously proud" of his mother.
Welby acknowledged his early years were difficult since both his mother and Gavin Welby were alcoholics.
His mother's marriage to Gavin Welby ended in 1958. She occasionally met Browne after that, but, she says, he never indicated that he thought he might be her son's father. In 1975, she wed Charles Williams, a marriage that continues to the present day. She went on to become a magistrate and a deputy lieutenant for Greater London as well as a probation officer, prison visitor and member of the National Parole board. She was also involved in penal reform.
Lady Williams concluded her statement by saying, "I have watched Justin, from an almost impossible childhood (Gavin was alcoholic as well), grow into what he is today, marry his beautiful wife Caroline in 1979 and see his children and now grandchildren grow up around them. As a family we are truly blessed. But none of this would have been possible without our firm Christian faith and a determination never to relinquish hope. God has given us so much and my gratitude knows no bounds."
In Welby's statement, he said that his discovery about the identity of his biological father "is typical of many people. To find that one's father is other than imagined is not unusual. To be the child of families with great difficulties in relationships, with substance abuse or other matters, is far too normal."
He went on to say that as archbishop, he is "constantly aware of the real and genuine pain and suffering of many around the world, which should be the main focus of our prayers."
He also said, "This revelation has, of course, been a surprise, but in my life and in our marriage Caroline and I have had far worse." (Though he didn't mention it in his statement, the couple's first child, Johanna, died in a car crash in 1983, when she was seven months old.)
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph following the DNA announcement, Welby said, "There is no existential crisis, and no resentment against anyone. My identity is founded in who I am in Christ."
That is supported by his online statement, which he concluded by referencing his inauguration service into the office of archbishop. As part of the ritual, a member of the Canterbury congregation, said, "We greet you in the name of Christ. Who are you, and why do you request entry?" Welby responded, "I am Justin, a servant of Jesus Christ, and I come as one seeking the grace of God to travel with you in his service together."
Welby said that the new information about who his biological father is changes nothing. He is still a servant of Jesus Christ.
More on this story can be found at these links:
The Big Questions
1. Who are you in relation to who Christ is? To what degree do you consider your identity to be rooted in Christ? Why?
2. What effect do you think it would have on you to discover that one or both of your biological parents are not whom you thought they were? Why? What help might your faith in God be at such a time?
3. To what degree do you think your genetic makeup influences the sort of person you are? How much of that is enhanced or overridden by Jesus' call to follow him?
4. In what sense does your identification with Jesus Christ give you "a place to stand" in this life?
Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Matthew 10:37-38 
Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever does not take up the cross and follow me is not worthy of me. (For context, read 10:34-39.)
This has to be considered one of the more difficult requirements Jesus laid on his followers. Yes, he does not say "Don't love your parents and children," but he does insist that following him has to be higher on our priority list than family loyalties. It's a hard expectation, but there it is.
In the context of Welby's recent discovery about his biological father, however, it seems from his response like it is no contest; Christ is first in his loyalties.
Question: How do you deal with this requirement from Jesus in your life?
John 1:12-13 
But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God, who were born, not of blood or of the will of the flesh or of the will of man, but of God. (For context, read 1:1-5, 10-18.)
Clearly, John is here saying that the parent who matters most is our heavenly Father, and that receiving Christ is more important than being a member in any human family.
Questions: What things in life make you aware of your membership in God's family? What duties does that membership bring with it? What privileges and joys does it bring?
Philippians 3:5, 8-9
I [am] a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin … I regard everything as loss because of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and I regard them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him …. (For context, read 3:4b-11.)
In this statement, Paul declares his accomplishments and his lineage (mentioned in vv. 4b-6) "rubbish" -- that is, he regards them not worth anything when compared to the "surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord."
Questions: At what points, if any, do you connect with Paul's comparison here? If you would not use the word "rubbish" regarding your lineage, what term might you use to express its importance in relation to your "knowing Christ"? Why?
2 Corinthians 5:17 
So if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation: everything old has passed away; see, everything has become new! (For context, read 5:16-21.)
Before receiving Christ, Paul's knowledge of Christ was as an outsider, and was hostile. But once he was converted and became "in Christ," everything was changed. He himself became a new creation. Thus, his new identity was from Christ. That's what he's saying here.
Questions: In what sense can this verse be your testimony? What might you want to add to it or subtract from it? Why?
For Further Discussion
1. Other than your name, in what ways does your family of origin (whether by birth or adoption) give you identity? How does it affect who you are today?
2. What surprising news have you received that caused you to rethink who you are?
3. Regarding our identity, respond to this: As an older woman entered a country church, the usher asked her where she'd like to sit. When she indicated that she wanted to sit in the front row, the usher said she shouldn't sit there because they were having a boring preacher that morning and she might want to slip out. The woman, bristling, asked, "Do you know who I am?" When the usher said no, she said, "I am the preacher's mother!" The usher responded, "Do you know who I am?" When the woman said no, the usher replied, "Thank God!"
4. Comment on this, from TWW consultant James Gruetzner: "In Welby's story, there is no doubt that the sexual relationship of his biological father and his mother was, at least in some sense, wrong or sinful, rather than a moral expression supporting the 'if it feels good, do it' philosophy. I think that many in the current popular culture have lost that distinction. And that is a distinction which makes a difference: the difference between repentance and forgiveness on the one hand, and rebellion and embracing destructive behavior on the other."
Responding to the News
Meditate on the hymn "Solid Rock" and talk together about what ways Christ serves as a solid rock in your life.
Prayer
We thank you, O Lord, for the identity you give us as members of the family of God. Help us to so live that we are a good reflection upon that family and you as our Father. In Jesus' name. Amen.
Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, April 14, 2016

Bonhoeffer Remembered 71 Years After His Execution

© 2016 The Wired Word
www.thewiredword.com
If Dietrich Bonhoeffer had been born in another place and time, perhaps we might never have heard of him. But his books and the witness of his life and death continue to influence subsequent generations decades after his death in a Nazi extermination camp.
Born in Breslau, Germany, in 1906, the sixth of eight children in an upper-middle class family that attended church sporadically, Dietrich knew he wanted to become a minister by the age of 14. His neuropsychiatrist father was less than pleased. But Dietrich was undeterred.
Hitler's rise to power in his native country forced the young theologian to consider the radical implications of the gospel. Two days after Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in January 1933, Bonhoeffer warned his fellow citizens in a radio broadcast not to idolize the führer (leader), lest they find out that he was actually a Verführer (mis-leader, or seducer).
Three months later, Bonhoeffer went on record against governmental scapegoating of Jews, stating that the church must not simply "bandage the wounds of victims beneath the wheels of injustice, but to jam a spoke into the wheel itself." When the government barred non-Aryans from serving in state churches, he declined a position in one of those parishes as a protest against such racist policies.
Bonhoeffer opposed Nazi pressure on churches to pledge allegiance to the nation first rather than to Christ. With like-minded pastors and theologians like Karl Barth and Martin Niemoller, he helped organize the Confessing Church in 1934, which released its Barmen Declaration affirming their loyalty to Jesus Christ as Lord, before any and all other commitments.
Bonhoeffer worked for the resistance to thwart the Nazi agenda in any way possible. During this time, he wrote the book The Cost of Discipleship, challenging a lackadaisical approach to Christianity that presumed entitlement to the grace of God without any moral demands or accountability: "Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves. Cheap grace is preaching forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession. … Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate."
A committed pacifist, he left Germany in 1939 to avoid conscription in the German army. He had thought that by lecturing and networking in America, he might still make a contribution to the anti-Nazi effort.
But within a month of his arrival, he wrote theologian Reinhold Niebuhr: "I have come to the conclusion that I made a mistake in coming to America. I must live through this difficult period in our national history with the people of Germany. I will have no right to participate in the reconstruction of Christian life in Germany after the war if I do not share the trials of this time with my people." He took the last scheduled ship back to his homeland as the threat of war loomed large on the horizon.
Eric Metaxas writes in his biography of Bonhoeffer, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy: "He had theologically redefined the Christian life as something active, not reactive. It had nothing to do with avoiding sin or with merely talking or teaching or believing theological notions or principles or rules or tenets. ... It was God's call to be fully human, to live as human beings obedient to the one who had made us, which was the fulfillment of our destiny. It was not a cramped, compromised, circumspect life, but a life lived in a kind of wild, joyful, full-throated freedom -- that was what it was to obey God."
As it became increasingly clear to Bonhoeffer that the brutality of the Third Reich would not be stopped by pacifist ideals, he concluded that other tactics might be unavoidable. Somehow he secured a post with the German secret service, became a double agent, helping Jews escape across the border, and eventually joined a plot to overthrow and assassinate Hitler.
Samuel Wells, in his commentary entitled "What Bonhoeffer Knew," wrote: "Bonhoeffer did not expect his life to be a tidy edifice of perfection. The great quandary of his life was whether he was right to join the plot to kill Hitler. It's a mistake ... to assume that faithful Christians always make the right decisions ... Returning to Germany put Bonhoeffer … in an impossible situation and exactly where God wanted him to be."
He was arrested in 1943 and imprisoned for two years. He declined a sympathetic guard's offer to help him escape out of concern that others, including family members, would be punished if he was successful. He spent much of his time in prison providing pastoral care to other prisoners and corresponding with friends and relatives on the outside.
On April 9, 1945, one month before Germany surrendered, he was stripped and hanged at Flossenburg death camp with six co-conspirators. He was 39.
More on this story can be found at these links:
The Big Questions
1. Bonhoeffer warned his people not to make the führer into an idol. Does your church display a national flag or perform rituals such as the Pledge of Allegiance at worship or in meetings? What do you think Bonhoeffer would say to that?
2. Bonhoeffer urged the church not simply to "bandage the wounds of victims beneath the wheels of injustice, but to jam a spoke into the wheel itself." Which type of action do you see most prevalent in the church today? In which type of action have you personally been engaged? Which action do you think takes more courage? Name ministries your church supports or sponsors that are directly involved in justice for the oppressed. Are these ministries popular? Do you or others speak out for or against these ministries? What is the rationale behind supporting or opposing such ministries?
3. Why is "cheap grace" so appealing? When have you realized that "cheap grace" is not the same as the "costly grace" of God in Christ? How did that realization change you?
4. In reflecting on Bonhoeffer's situation, Wells pondered: "I once faced an impossible choice and shared my quandary with a friend. He said, 'The point isn't the conclusion you come to: The point is, you're in there.' Bonhoeffer was in there, in that sense. Are we?" Is it enough just to be in there? What is the greatest quandary you have faced in life that challenged you to consider how to live out your faith? Did you resolve your quandary, and if so, how?
5. What does it mean to be "in an impossible situation and exactly where God wants you to be"? Why might God "want" us to be in "impossible" situations? For what purpose? What should you do when you are in a situation that seems impossible?
Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
2 Samuel 24:24-25
But the king said to Araunah, "No, but I will buy them from you for a price; I will not offer burnt offerings to the LORD my God that cost me nothing." So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver. David built there an altar to the LORD, and offered burnt offerings and offerings of well-being. So the LORD answered his supplication for the land, and the plague was averted from Israel. (For context, read 24:1-25.)
This record of David offering a sacrifice to God comes after he sinned in conducting a census of those able to serve in the military. The census took nine months and 20 days; 1,300,000 able-bodied soldiers were counted. We won't focus here on why the census was sinful (you can check out this website later if you are interested in that question. For this lesson, we want to focus on why David didn't want to offer a sacrifice that cost him nothing.
After David realized his sin, God gave him the chance to determine his own punishment. David chose a shorter punishment at the hands of God rather than men, since "God's mercy is great." The consequences of David's sins impacted others, including his infant son who died after his dalliance with Bathsheba, or in this case the 70,000 who died of the pestilence that followed his sin.
The Lord stayed his hand at the threshing floor of Aruanah, who offered David everything he might need for a sacrifice, at no charge. But David insisted on paying his way.
Questions: If David had accepted Aruanah's offer, what would that have communicated about how he understood what his sin cost? Why did David refuse to offer sacrifices that cost him nothing? How does Bonhoeffer's concept of "cheap grace" tie in here?
1 Chronicles 11:18-19
Then the Three broke through the camp of the Philistines, and drew water from the well of Bethlehem that was by the gate, and they brought it to David. But David would not drink of it; he poured it out to the LORD, and said, "My God forbid that I should do this. Can I drink the blood of these men? For at the risk of their lives they brought it." Therefore he would not drink it ... (For context, read 11:15-19.)
King David was holed up in a cave, unable to go back home to Bethlehem because of the presence of the Philistine army there. When three of his mighty men heard him express his longing for water to drink from the well of Bethlehem, they risked their lives to satisfy his thirst.
Questions: Have you ever received a gift that was so precious that you didn't want to use it? What was the gift? How did you feel about it and the person who gave it to you?
What was the value of the water the mighty men brought to David? What was the price of the living water Jesus promises to give those who ask him for it (John 4:10, 13-14)?
What happens when we treat the Lord's Table as something cheap because it is offered free of charge? How is that different from viewing the Eucharist as something priceless, precisely because it cost God everything?
Have you ever refrained from partaking of the Lord's Table because you suddenly glimpsed the great price God paid to ransom you from sin and death?
1 Corinthians 6:19-20
Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God, and that you are not your own? For you were bought with a price; therefore glorify God in your body. (For context, read 6:12-20.)
1 Peter 1:18-19
You know that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your ancestors, not with perishable things like silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without defect or blemish. (For context, read 1:13-19.)
Paul stipulates in 1 Corinthians 6 that our bodies do not belong to us, but rather to God by virtue of the fact that he bought us at great cost to himself; for this reason, we are to glorify God not only with our thoughts or words, but in our actions, in the way we live. Peter spells out that God paid the King of kings' ransom to save us, with the precious blood of Christ.
Bonhoeffer wrote: "Above all, [grace] is costly because it cost God the life of his Son: 'Ye were bought at a price', and what has cost God much cannot be cheap for us. Above all, it is grace because God did not reckon his Son too dear a price to pay for our life, but delivered him up for us."
Questions: If you had been kidnapped, and someone paid a monetary ransom to secure your release, how would you feel toward that person? What if someone sacrificed his life to win your freedom? What if you were a private in the army and the person who died for you was your commander-in-chief? What is your response to Jesus, knowing that the very God who created you gave his life to ransom you from sin and death and hell?
Luke 9:23
Then he said to them all, "If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross daily and follow me." (For context, read 9:21-25.)
Jesus issues this challenge to his disciples after describing the suffering, rejection and death he would experience at the hands of the elders, chief priests and scribes.
Bonhoeffer stated: "The cross is laid on every Christian. The first Christ-suffering which every man must experience is the call to abandon the attachments of this world. It is that dying of the old man which is the result of his encounter with Christ. As we embark upon discipleship we surrender ourselves to Christ in union with his death -- we give over our lives to death. Thus it begins; the cross is not the terrible end to an otherwise god-fearing and happy life, but it meets us at the beginning of our communion with Christ. When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die."
Questions: What attachments of this world have you felt called to abandon in response to Jesus' call to take up your cross daily and follow him? How have you experienced the "dying of the old man" because of your encounter with Christ? In what sense do new Christians "give over their lives to death" when they respond to the call of Christ to follow him?
Galatians 2:19-20
… I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. (For context, read 2:19-21.)
Bonhoeffer asserts: "Such grace is costly because it calls us to follow, and it is grace because it calls us to follow Jesus Christ. It is costly because it costs a man his life, and it is grace because it gives a man the only true life. It is costly because it condemns sin, and grace because it justifies the sinner."
Questions: What has it cost you thus far to follow Jesus? How have you discovered grace as you follow him?
For Further Discussion
1. Is it possible to take the demands of the gospel too seriously? How might the idea of costly grace weigh down a believer? Are there some who need "free grace" more than others? What is the difference between "cheap grace" and "free grace"?
2. Bonhoeffer was a dedicated pacifist but recognized the impossibility of living a perfect life with no contradictions. In Isaac Asimov's Foundation Trilogy, Salvor Hardin said: "Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right." What decision(s) have you made that feel counter to faith but honor Jesus? How did you arrive at your decision(s)?
3. The cross was an emblem of shame as well as horror. When have you needed to lose your dignity to serve friends, family and Jesus? When have you refused to lose your dignity in order to pick up your cross?
4. Comment on this excerpt of an Advent sermon Bonhoeffer preached in Barcelona in 1928: "It is very remarkable that we face the thought that God is coming so calmly, whereas previously peoples trembled at the day of God .... We have become so accustomed to the idea of divine love and of God's coming at Christmas that we no longer feel the shiver of fear that God's coming should arouse in us. We are indifferent to the message, taking only the pleasant and agreeable out of it and forgetting the serious aspect, that the God of the world draws near to the people of our little earth and lays claim to us …"
5. Choose one or more of the following quotes from Bonhoeffer's writings to discuss:
  • "One act of obedience is better than one hundred sermons."
  • "Only he who believes is obedient and only he who is obedient believes."
  • "Christianity stands or falls with its revolutionary protest against violence, arbitrariness, and pride of power, and with its plea for the weak. Christians are doing too little to make these points clear ... Christendom adjusts itself far too easily to the worship of power. Christians should give more offense, shock the world far more, than they are doing now."
  • "Judging others makes us blind, whereas love is illuminating. By judging others we blind ourselves to our own evil and to the grace which others are just as entitled to as we are."
  • "There is no way to peace along the way to safety. For peace must be dared. It is the great venture."
  • "A god who let us prove his existence would be an idol."
  • "If you board the wrong train, it is no use running along the corridor in the other direction."
Responding to the News
Reflect on the price Jesus paid for your salvation as you read the lyrics of the gospel song "Broken and Spilled Out" while listening to Steve Green sing it here. What is your response to Jesus' sacrifice for you?
Prayer
We stand in awe, Holy God, at the magnitude of your grace toward us! Though we are unworthy even to touch the hem of your garment or to gather the crumbs under your table, you accept us as your beloved children because your Son shed his own precious blood for our salvation. Help us never to treat that sacrifice lightly or flippantly, but to honor and treasure this sacred gift by taking up our cross and following Jesus to Calvary and beyond. Amen.


Posted by at No comments:

Thursday, April 7, 2016

Mississippi Religious Freedom Bill Becomes Law

© 2016 The Wired Word
www.thewiredword.com


On Monday, the lawmakers in the Mississippi House voted 69-47 to send House Bill 1523, which opponents say will allow discrimination against LGBT people, to Gov. Phil Bryant for his signature. The Mississippi Senate had passed the bill the previous week. On Tuesday, the governor signed the bill into law.
The measure, officially called the Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act, but commonly called a religious freedom law, allows businesses, government workers and religious services providers to deny LGBT individuals such things as marriage licenses, wedding planning, adoption support, counseling, property rentals, employment and certain medical procedures if the objection is based on religious objection to the applicant's lifestyle, especially related to marriage, sexuality or gender. The law protects those who deny the services from punishment.
As far as can be currently ascertained, the new law does not prevent workers with no religious objections from offering those services.
In an interview with a local CNN affiliate a few days before signing the measure, Gov. Bryant said, "I think it gives some people -- as I appreciate it -- the right to be able to say, that's against my religious beliefs and I don't need to carry out that particular task."
This law "doesn't stop anyone from getting what they want from the state," said state Rep. Randy Boyd, one of the bill's sponsors. "I have a problem with the discrimination of Christian belief." He added, "I don't uphold discrimination but I believe the Christian belief is more discriminated against than other things. ... I'm trying to get a happy medium here where people get their rights and other people aren't pressured into doing anything they don't believe in against their religious beliefs."
(A recent poll by LifeWay Research shows that an increasing number of Americans believe American Christians are facing a growing amount of intolerance.)
State Rep. Steve Holland, who opposed the bill, described it as the most hateful one he has seen in his 33 years in the state legislature, and several human rights groups have come out against the legislation.
State Sen. Jenifer Branning told reporters that the bill was requested "by a number of ministers, foster care agencies, adoption agencies and a host of individuals across the state."
Before the bill was signed, several corporations that do business in Mississippi spoke out against it, as did the Mississippi Economic Council and the Mississippi Manufacturers Association.
State Sen. John Horhn, who opposed the bill, pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court has made same-sex marriage the law of the land, and that HB 1523 creates a "slippery slope" and "opens the door for other discriminations."
The Mississippi action comes on the heels of a somewhat similar bill in Georgia, which was passed by that state's legislature but was vetoed by Gov. Nathan Deal, and a bill in North Carolina that was vetoed by Gov. Pat McCrory, but whose veto was then overridden by the legislature.
For more specifics about Mississippi HB 1523, see especially the CNN article in the list below.
More on this story can be found at these links:
The Big Questions
1. In what circumstances, if any, should individuals, businesses or government workers be required to act in a manner that is antithetical to their religious beliefs? In what circumstances, if any, should individuals, businesses or government workers be free from coercion against their religious beliefs? Is there a reasonable limit to which one should be expected to serve the public? For instance, should bakers be asked to bake KKK cakes or should food servers be expected to serve neo-Nazi groups?
2. To what degree should religious conviction guide lawmakers? Why? Is a law that protects religious freedom in effect the establishment of a state religion regarding the matters the law touches upon? Is a law that forces a person to act against his or her religious beliefs in effect the establishment of a state religion regarding the matters the law touches upon? How do we distinguish God's laws from human laws today? How do we determine where human laws are a violation of God's?
3. What is discrimination? How is it different, if at all, from living by one's religious convictions? Is there a point at which practices arising from religious belief become sinful discrimination? Is there a point at which government prohibitions on others arising from religious beliefs become sinful discrimination? If we insist that our religious convictions prevent us from serving certain other individuals, should we expect to endure some measure of resistance or sanction as a cost of our conviction?
4. What kinds of events in recent years in the United States do you suppose triggered legislation such as this Mississippi law? Is this law the right kind of response? Why or why not?
5. To what degree is living the Christian life and applying it to real situations a matter of fresh thinking? To what degree is it the application of known principles to a specific situation? What are the risks of being static or monochromatic in our understanding of what it means to follow Jesus? What are the benefits?
Confronting the News With Scripture and Hope
Here are some Bible verses to guide your discussion:
Nehemiah 10:31 
... and if the peoples of the land bring in merchandise or any grain on the sabbath day to sell, we will not buy it from them on the sabbath or on a holy day .... (For context, read 9:38; 10:28-39.)
After the people of Judah returned from exile, Nehemiah led them in rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem. The people then covenanted together about how they would live in the land in ways that were faithful to God (see 9:38). As the verse above shows, one of the ways they agreed to live was to abstain from conducting commerce on the Sabbath.
But note that they didn't threaten harm to those who did business on that day, nor did they legislate against such persons. They simply said they themselves would not participate in commerce on that day.
Question: How might the principle in this verse be applied to a Christian who is in business or is a government worker or a provider of wedding-related services when that Christian does not agree with the lifestyle of a customer or applicant? Is it reasonable for anyone engaged in sales in a multi-cultural, multi-religious society to be able to pick and choose whom they will serve, if they are offering their services to the general public?
John 4:7, 9
A Samaritan woman came to draw water, and Jesus said to her, "Give me a drink." ... The Samaritan woman said to him, "How is it that you, a Jew, ask a drink of me, a woman of Samaria?" (Jews do not share things in common with Samaritans.) (For context, read 4:1-29.)
Here, Jesus is breaking down cultural, religious and gender barriers that were commonly accepted at the time, even though he apparently did not approve of this woman's lifestyle (Jesus said to her, "You are right in saying, 'I have no husband'; for you have had five husbands, and the one you have now is not your husband" [vv. 17-18]).
Questions: When are we to hold fast to long-cherished religious traditions, and when are we to relinquish them so that something more important might take root? How does Jesus' response to this woman challenge you? What rewards have you discovered when you crossed cultural, racial, economic or religious lines? Was your life enriched or damaged through such contacts?
Matthew 5:13-14
You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how can its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything, but is thrown out and trampled under foot. You are the light of the world .... (For context, read 5:13-16.)
Jesus said his followers should be "salt of the earth" and "the light of the world."
Questions: Since salt alone does not make a whole meal, and light is only one element of creation, what do you think Jesus meant when he applied these two terms to his followers? Does our call to be salt and light include a mandate to legislate religious freedom? Is it a call to strongly influence the world with a witness to the way of the kingdom of God?
What methods of working for good in our contemporary world are compatible with Christ's teaching? What methods are not? What persons or groups give a good example of Christ-infused behaviors that give light and salt to the unbelieving citizens of this world?
1 Corinthians 13:13
And now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; and the greatest of these is love. (For context, read 12:12--13:13.)
Although 1 Corinthians 13 is often read by itself, especially at weddings, it is really part of a larger "sermon" from Paul that includes chapters 12 and 14 as well. (That's why we have suggested that you start the context reading at 12:12, but if you have time, read all three chapters.) In these three chapters, as in much of 1 Corinthians, Paul is addressing divisions within the church, as expressed in arguments over whose spiritual gifts are the "best."
In chapter 13, Paul gets to his main point, that no matter what other gifts and talents people have received from God, the greatest gifts are faith, hope and love, and of those three, love is the very best. And it was the failure to love one another that allowed the partisan spirit to flourish and divisions to hurt the church.
The Greek word translated as "love" in 1 Corinthians 13 is agape, which is the word used throughout the New Testament to speak of the action of love by God, Christians and people of good will.Agape is not about feelings, but about actions. Agape does not require us to feel affection toward everyone or to like everyone. But it does require us to act with good will toward others, including those with whom we disagree, both within the Christian community and in society.
Questions: Where specifically should you be prepared to act with agape? How might agape apply to you when interacting with someone whose lifestyle you disapprove of? If biblical principles matter, how should we apply the words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount about loving our enemies (see Matthew5:44) to matters of serving those with whose lifestyle we disapprove?
For Further Discussion
1. Respond to the following from TWW team member Edward Hortsch: "Discrimination presents a major problem for Christians. I've always felt a business should be able to refuse service to anyone. Now I am questioning that right. In the past it was often used to justify racial discrimination. Today it is more often aimed at the LGBT community. As Christians we justify that on moral grounds. 
     "When I was in business I never questioned my customers on their beliefs. I repaired office equipment; I simply fixed their typewriters or adding machines. A Mormon Institute of Religion was one of my customers. When I was trying to sell Rainbow Air Cleaning systems, I'm sure I did a demo for a lesbian couple. Should I have done business with either one? At the time I didn't think of questioning it. Although I have to admit I felt a little strange helping the Mormons, not serving them would not have accomplished anything either. We are supposed to show the love of Christ to all people; it can put us in some peculiar situations."
2. Discuss the following, from TWW team member Frank Ramirez: "I cannot agree with those who insist that Christians face discrimination in the United States. We are all free to worship as we please. Those who are unable to attend worship are usually those who have jobs in law enforcement, the medical system, food industry and service industries that most Christians expect to have available to them on Sundays or (in the case of Sabbatarians) Saturdays. I belong to the Church of the Brethren. Our Brethren cousins in Nigeria experience true religious discrimination and persecution. They are murdered and tortured, their churches are burned to the ground and their young girls are abducted by Boko Haram. I would be more sympathetic to some of these laws (after all, would I want to produce a cake with a swastika for a neo-Nazi group?) if it weren't for the fact that these laws seem to advance a more political than religious agenda."
3. TWW team member Mary Sells says that the upshot of the Mississippi law is "Prejudice is fine; hide behind this law." Do you agree? Why or why not?
4. Respond to this, from TWW consultant James Gruetzner: "It seems to me that the current controversy is about much more than religious freedom -- although it is about that -- but it is also about freedom in general. In every case that I know of concerning same-sex weddings and the like, the Christian being challenged was willing to provide services and goods for homosexuals -- and in most cases, had already proved it. The specific problem was that they did not want to do something that endorsed homosexual actions, and the government forced them to do that or be fined or prohibited from working for others in a specific field. (That this specifically targets Christians is indicated, for example, in that no one is challenging Muslim-owned bakeries that refuse to bake wedding cakes for same-sex unions.) 
     "Perhaps the Mississippi law is a small step toward moving government back toward its purpose of securing the rights of 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,' rather than denying them."
5. Did God call us who follow Jesus to establish the kingdom of God or to live according to kingdom principles? If the latter, how does that apply to today's news story?
Responding to the News
Imagine yourself in line in a bakery where a gay couple is attempting to buy a wedding cake for themselves, and they are being told "No." The bakery owner and the gay couple all consider themselves to be active, faithful Christians. What, if anything, would you say, and to whom would you say it? Why?
Prayer
Keep us moving in our faith, O Lord, that we may ever be open to your direction and will. In Jesus' name. Amen.



Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)