Living Grace to the World

The study sessions are most excellent, especially since I am learning in areas I know virtually nothing. So I get to indulge my curiosity bump fully in areas like limited government, economics and Catholic Social Thought. You can see more about Acton and hear recording of some of the lectures here.

In a sin marred world, things always go bad. So who limits the badness? God ultimately, but within the limits He sets, is it government regulation or free market forces? The State is to punish wrong doers (Rom. 13:4) but who limits the evil state? Acton and I believe that the better force is people as a whole (market) than government officials. For example, should government or the market set prices? I remember 1979 when the government tried to set gasoline prices. It was a disaster. But I also remember the situation a couple of years ago when gas went to $4.00 per gallon and people were calling for government intervention. It didn’t happen and the prices in Portland are around $2.70 per gallon now. 

Limited government means the state should not do everything, should not be the agency responsible for social services. Other agencies, church, family, business have areas they do better than the state. When people get to places of power, they tend to lose contact with the ordinary people, lose the common good as a top value, and serve people of power and influence. BTW, Michael Miller defined common good as “the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or individuals, to reach fulfillment more fully and more easily.” Of course that begs the question of what fulfillment really means, but the direction is right on. Examples of things the government is not the best agency is feeding the people or converting the people to Jesus. 

One question that made me think: should all immoral things be illegal? Should all things that are morally wrong also be against the law of the state? What of adultery? It is surely immoral, but should it be illegal? I absolutely want it limited. Do I want the state watching and punishing that behavior? If so the state has to watch lots of behavior to see if it’s adultery. I find myself thinking I’d rather not have the state doing that. Ditto with lies. Some lies are illegal: contract fraud for example. But what if a father lies to his children about his porn addiction?

In the area of economics, should we develop our thinking from the concept of scarcity (distribution of limited goods) or the basis of maximizing exchange of goods, many of which are not scarce. Information and grace are examples of non-scarce goods. The goal is win win where both parties are better off after the trade than before. So the limits are that there can’t be fraud, exploitation and private property which is to say, I must have ownership of the thing I trade.

Does justice mean equal distribution of goods (think Robin Hood and take for the rich to give to the poor) or does it mean all people work under the same law? I’m inclined to the latter. It frustrates me that government employees have PERS and we have Social Security and our 401K programs.

Are economics explained by seeing people maximizing their material well being? In part, but certainly not exclusively. Think of all the gifts that are given and non-material oriented activities like parenting, church, and such.

There’s lots more and I still have two days to go!

My friend Rob Schwarzwalder is Senior Vice President at Family Life Council. He notified us that the Gay Lesbian Activists Alliance just updated their 2010 agenda. So rather than debating whether there is a "homosexual agenda" or not, it is better to read it for yourself. It is here.   Among its many policy proposals (some of which already are in place) are:

** Legalization of prostitution
** Permitting "adult" entertainment (e.g., strip clubs and pornography centers)
** Requiring libraries to carry "gay friendly" books
** Elimination of educational vouchers (which enable many minority families to send their children to decent schools)
** An official police policy toward "transgendered" individuals
** Ending the Catholic Archdiocese of Washington’s historic adoption and foster care relationship with D.C., since the Archdiocese would not place children in same-sex "families."

From many years of working in the offices of senators and representatives, he knows the agenda for homosexualization of mainstream culture and socio-political life is purposeful and aggressive.  I like his conclusion: "Let’s always pray for those committed to a same-sex lifestyle, that the Lord would deliver them even as He has delivered those of us who know the Savior.  But let’s also never compromise our dedication to standing for the protection of our children, the sanctity of marriage, and the dignity of human sexuality as ordained by our Creator.”

400 of us are at The Acton Institute, which has as its mission to promote a free and virtuous society characterized by individual liberty and sustained by religious principles. So I’m sitting in lectures all day for three and a half days. It’s a role I’ve not been in for a long time! So far I’ve heard lectures on Christian Anthropology, Limited Government, Basic Economics, and Natural Law as Foundation for Government.

I suppose it is typical that I’m often impressed by the two lectures where I know nothing than the ones I do a lot with. I have basis to assess where I’ve done a lot of thinking. But then I learn a lot less too. For example, the lecture on Christian Anthropology got to humans as embodied persons with reason, will, creativity, fallen, and both individual and societal is very good. But, good as it was, not even mentioning the image of God just seems wrong to me, I have to say.

There are different ways to see people. The standard trichotomist system sees humans as spirit (God connecting faculty), soul (mind, will, emotions, etc), body (world connecting faculty). But why does the Bible only use that particular breakdown once (1 Thess. 5:23) and even Jesus uses others (e.g., heart, soul, mind, strength in Mark 12:30)? I am inclined to see people as whole persons with both material and immaterial essences which may be distinguished, but cannot be divided until death. Thus everything we are and do, work and worship, is both spiritual and physical. People are unrepeatable individuals as well as social beings. While all humans are unique, there is a commonality of humanness that is true of all humans. When I do a breakdown, I see people as Spiritual (related both to God and other spiritual beings), Intellectual, Emotional, Physical, Volitional – Moral (thus free and responsible), Vocational, Social (related to friends, state and church), and Familial (“nuclear” family as well as family line) beings. Lots to say here!

Stephen Grabill’s work on natural law is another area I know about. I was applauding most all the way, but didn’t learn much of anything. I fully agree with him on the concept of natural law, a common morality available to all humans can serve as a good foundation for government and public policy. It is not sufficient, of course, but if we were to follow the results of the research, we will know that criminal acts come from criminal character. Environment and economics are not sufficient reasons for crime. The recent data that major crime fell dramatically after the economic collapse fall of October 2008 makes that abundantly clear. You can see that FBI data here and New York City here and Chuck Colson’s commentary here and here. People who refuse the data do so for philosophic not evidential reasons. While general revelation and natural law is a good source of moral information and can be the basis of good moral law, it cannot bring about right action. I agree with Stephen that many who dismiss natural law because it is not enough give up what should not be given up, especially as we enter the public arena. Waving our Bibles as authority source won’t work on the campus of Grand Valley State University (where we are meeting) or the campus of Intel.

More to come!

I asked you to pray for Carl’s May 18 prostate cancer surgery. It went well and his post-surgical recovery continues to go well. I am in full agreement with Carl’s assurance that I don’t want to experience life with a catheter! The good news is that they found no cancer in the tissue surrounding the prostate. If you want to send him an email, he is at jclaney@westernseminary.edu.

My May 25 surgery to repair a Zenker’s Diverticulum (a pouch in my esophagus, described here) was also routine. I am glad to say I have been both pain free and phlegm free. I will be very glad to get off the liquid diet. It is good for promoting healing in the incision in my throat, but not for fine dining.

The very sad news is from Katharine Sweeney. Jim’s note to his prayer team is so good I want to forward it to you:

For the past several years you have joined so many other dear friends who are praying for Katharine on her journey with cancer. You will never, never know what your care and your prayers have done for our lives. God has used you in such a powerful way on our behalf, and our gratefulness knows no bounds. We have kept uppermost in our minds and hearts His Word: "Trust in the Lord, and do not lean on your own understanding. But in all your ways acknowledge Him and He will guide your steps." Just yesterday [May 25], we learned of the next step God has ordained. Her chemo treatments ended in March (chemo no longer able to fight back the cancer). She entered a clinical trial two weeks ago. But within the past three weeks she has become increasingly weak, with dizziness and difficulty walking on her own. She was treated for pneumonia at first, but things didn’t improve. Yesterday a scan revealed that the cancer has migrated from her lungs to her brain. That, of course, was the news we dreaded, but we had long been informed that it might come at some point. She has been in the hospital since yesterday, and they are continuing to watch her. While weak, she is certainly alert and the one who is encouraging all her family. She will be coming home in two or three days.

We were made aware that radiation treatment might well shrink the brain tumors, giving relief and improvement for an extended time–she’ll regain some of her strength and mobility. So tomorrow she will begin a series of 10 radiation treatments over 10 days. Of course, to the doctors this is an offer of temporary help–a longer survival time with a decent quality of life. Just how long, they can’t say.

Has this shaken our faith? Absolutely not. God has not changed; neither His power nor His faithfulness is diminished. We are confident that the powerful prayers of so many dear friends like you have not been wasted or ignored by the Father of mercies. God simply seems to be saying, Katharine, my perfect plan all along has been to call you home to be with me–and only He knows when. We have sought His will and His time, and when God’s will is discerned and embraced He will be glorified in that. Does it hurt? Of course. But He gives strength for that, too. And . . . who knows fully just what He still might have in store?

Our family is so very grateful for your prayers. We are now praying that God will grant Katharine an extended time with sufficient strength to enjoy her family and friends in the days just ahead. We’d be grateful to have you join us in that prayer.

In His strength,

Jim and Katharine

On a final note: I am going to write a series of short biblical theological pastoral papers on topics ranging from Genesis 1 to election to divorce and re-marriage. If you would like to join me in thinking through such issues, shoot a reply back to me and I’ll include you on the list. Being in the list does not obligate you to respond or interact, I hasten to say.

Jesus bless you!

Gerry

I blog at www.breshears.net. My seminary email is gbreshears@westernseminary.edu. I still use gbreshears@compuserve.com as well as gerry@breshears.net. Western’s blog is http://westernseminaryblog.wordpress.com, the Th.M. blog at http://westernthm.wordpress.com and the alumni blog is http://westernalumni.blogspot.com/