Grab the feed below for the latest CHN, The Longing, and Briefing Issue updates.
If you prefer the full text of the article to be included use the following feed.
An online survey of issues, events and ideas
An email from the Word-a-Day people reminded me of important wisdom for all those who aspire to home ownership (especially those based in Sydney).
The word ‘mortgage’ derives from Old French mort (death) + gage (pledge).
You have been warned.
The death penalty has always been a controversial issue. Now, two states (South Carolina and Oklahoma) are pushing the issue further. Proposed legislation calls for the execution of repeat child sex offenders (source).
Most proponents of such legislation are social conservatives in the Republican party who align themselves with traditional Judeo-Christian values. It is quite easy for Christians to jump on board with whatever social issue a Republican endorses. However, I think this is an issue that is a bit more complicated than blindly backing a political party that has historically aligned itself with Christians and Christian values.
There are three differing views of what the goal is for the punitive system. One view sees it as the rehabilitation of the convicted person. Another view is deterrence—to discourage other people from committing similar crimes. And the other for retribution—to justly pay back the person for the crime committed. Of course, it isn’t as tidy as that. Most believe the punitive system should accomplish a blend of the three.
The problem with this legislation is that it doesn’t line up with the traditional arguments for capital punishment. Many Christians would argue that the government has the right to properly engage in retribution via capital punishment. “An eye for an eye” and Genesis 9:6 are usually cited. However, it isn’t the case with this proposed legislation. No life was taken. Of course, that is not denying the seriousness of the crime. “Raping a child is as horrific as taking a life,” said South Carolina State Senator Kevin Bryant (Republican). Indeed, it is as horrific but it still isn’t the same. This isn’t retributive justice.
The other argument for this legislation is based more on the deterrence view. Such a stiff penalty for this crime will help deter people from committing it, so the argument goes. Unfortunately you could always justify a harsher penalty than what is just in order to meet the greater goal of deterrence. You could start executing people for stealing, perjury, assault, etc. However, this is all unjust. It is quite unfair to issue a punishment that exceeds the scope of the crime.
Of course, no one is arguing that this legislation will help rehabilitate the convicted person. It may rehabilitate others who are considering committing such crime, but that would be considered deterrence. In fact, backing such legislation is giving up on the idea of rehabilitation. This legislation implies that these people are unable to be rehabilitated at all and therefore deserve not to live. Again, such a view could be used to justify execution for serial thieves, liars, adulterers, etc.
Of course, the problem (as noted in the article) with coming down against such legislation is that one could be viewed as being on the side of the convicted child sex offender. No one is disagreeing that these people should be punished severely. The question comes down to what extent can a government go without losing its “just” identity? I am not sure a Christian can argue from the Bible in a definitive way favorably about this legislation as with the case for retributive capital punishment. That doesn’t mean that Biblical ethics would rule against such legislation either. What it does mean is that Christians should always be wise and sensitive when dealing with such issues.
I have a confession to make: back in my dark adolescent past, I used to have a subscription to Dolly magazine. My friends and I would talk about the articles on love and relationships, gag over Dolly Doctor, and try the quizzes on each other in the schoolyard. The subscription only lasted for a year; after that, I think I grew out of it.
But recently, when I was looking at some women's magazines for a project I'm working on, I noticed that in magazines aimed at the demographic between teens and mums, although most of the content was essentially the same, the articles on love and relationships were curiously absent. Instead, there was an awful lot of material on sex, e.g. “Become a Sex Rebel: 67 lusty moves he'll crave 24-7”; “News Flash: Sex Gets Better With Age” and “Sex Tips from Gay Men”.
Perhaps people have got couplehood sorted and they no longer need advice on how to stay together. Perhaps meeting someone and going out with him or her isn't as complicated as it was when I was 16. Or maybe Dolly, Cleo and Cosmopolitan (to name but a few) have just shifted with the times, recognizing that people have become more like consumers than contributers—they use others purely for their own pleasure and discard them without qualm when they're done. They're not interested in what makes a good relationship work because they're not after good relationships, just gratifying ones.
Okay, I'm over-generalising. But I wonder whether there's a golden opportunity here for Christians to fill the gap and counsel not just the kids in our youth groups, but some of those poor confused teens, twenty-somethings, thirty-somethings and above. After all, we have a distinct advantage: we understand God's plans and purposes for human relationships, and how and why they work. Would it be helpful, I wonder, to have some sort of online site with articles like “Crush or Crushed? I really like him but what if he doesn't like me?”, “How Far is Too Far?” and “The Real Love Rules (and meet the guy who made them)” written by Christians?
Psalm 1 is focused on the individual. It is one man (or woman) who is the blessed individual that the psalmist is talking about. At the heart of the blessing, the enviable state of being loved by God and cared for by him, is that this person both hears God's law and lives it out. Indeed, this hearing of God's word is the only meditation that the Bible recognizes as Christian.
“His delight is in the law of the LORD,
and on his law he meditates day and night.” (Ps 1:2)
It is one of the best verses in support of daily Bible reading that I have ever come across. But notice two things: firstly, it is not daily but twice-daily! The meditation happens “day and night”. Quite likely the psalmist, consistent with the rest of the Old Testament, means that we should pay attention to God's word all the time, not just in the five minutes before breakfast or the five minutes before bed.
And the idea of meditation, together with the rest of the psalm, means that we aren't just skim-reading. Reading God's law is just the first step in understanding what it says, thinking about it, delighting in it, giving thanks for it, and letting it shape our lives.
Sometimes those who are supposed be heralds of truth and wisdom speak in a profound way, without even understanding the truth of what they are saying.
For example, there’s the biblical example of Caiaphas, high priest at the time when Jesus was crucified, who said to his colleagues: “You do not realize that it is better for you that one man [ie. Jesus] die for the people than that the whole nation perish.” The Bible says he was prophesying about Jesus dying for the sake of the forgiveness of mankind when he said this, even though he didn’t mean it that way. (See John 11:49-52)
In a similar vein, there’s my local newspaper that ran with two headlines on it’s front page today: “Easter Greetings!” and, rather unfortunately placed directly under this, the headline for the big local news story: “We’re in the poo!”
Truth be told, the Easter message does indeed begin with the message that we are "in the poo"—up the creek without a paddle; rebels on the losing team and facing a humiliating defeat.
Of course, the idea of being a “rebel” is kind of a romantic notion to many of us. Perhaps we’ve seen so many exciting movies where the underdogs of the resistance movement courageously battle against the evil authoritarian regime, and claim, if not ultimate victory, significant wins in minor skirmishes—at least enough to sustain hope.
But in our rebellious battle against God, where we seek to overthrow him and install ourselves as masters of our own destiny, there is ultimately no hope of victory—and nor, in our better moments, would we actually be sure that we would want victory.
No, we’re rebels on a losing side, facing sure and humiliating defeat. And perhaps with more than a hunch that we probably ought to be fighting for the other side, but either too proud or too foolish to change.
But the second part of the Easter message is as positive as “We’re in the poo!” is negative. The message of Good Friday and Easter Sunday is that God has made it possible for us to return to the victorious side, completely pardoned for our previous rebellion, and now with the hope of sharing in the great new kingdom to be established when the victory is completed.
As Caiaphas rightly said, one man, Jesus, dies so that men and women need not perish.
To find out more about this great message of Easter, click here.