Couldn't Help Noticing

Love your neighbour (and his pets)

(From Philip Cooney, one of our Briefing readers in Wentworth Falls, Australia.)

Last week, the President of the RSPCA, Dr Hugh Wirth, gave a talk entitled “Animal welfare in the 21st century” at the National Press Club in Canberra. He began his address by saying that there was no evidence in the Judeo-Christian tradition of principles for showing kindness to animals, and went on to talk about how while William Wilberforce was praised for his work in abolishing slavery and child labour, he fell short when he said that animals may be used by humans for any purpose, provided they are not mistreated.

The question is not just whether the President of the RSPCA has read God's instruction in Genesis 1:28 or the Sabbath commandment in Exodus 20:8-11; the question is what sort of job Christians have done over the years to make the Bible's teaching known.

Or is this just another case of our post-Christian society once again overlooking its Christian legacy?

Cleverness engineered

One Saturday, I was driving up the freeway from Sydney towards Gosford to spend some time with my family. I drove along the 6-lane freeway, surrounded on either side by the walls of rock through which the freeway had been forged.

After a while, I noticed that the barrier which divided the north lanes from the south wasn't the steel type of barrier I'm used to seeing. Instead, the freeway engineers had somehow managed to make the barrier out of the same type of rock that surrounded the freeway. Huh. Pretty clever.

Seriously. I certainly couldn't have done that. I couldn't even begin to think about how to do it. I mean, we're talking about very big rocks here. ‘Boulders’ is probably a more accurate term. Maybe, way back when they first built the freeway, they simply left that part of the rock there and cut around it so it was left behind as a barrier. Or maybe they only did it recently (it all looked kind of new), and they actually had to fetch boulders/rocks from somewhere close by. Either way, it's pretty clever.

I know, I know. ‘So what?’ I hear you ask.

Well, as I was pondering the cleverness of freeway engineers, I came over the crest of a hill and descended towards Peats Ferry Bridge, which crosses the Hawkesbury River. As I looked at the bridge, I had what you might call ‘a moment’. My eyes refocused on the water behind and around the bridge. It was a beautiful day, and the sun was glistening across the water. There were mountains covered with greenery off to my left, and some little islands off to my right. It's a very pretty part of Australia, and the view was stunning.

It reminded me how clever God is. He created mountains, rivers and islands, and people who are clever enough to build freeways and barriers. But at the same time, he cares about us so deeply that he engineered reconciliation by sacrificing his son for us. We certainly could not have done that.

The Lion, the Billionaire and the Roulette Wheel

(From Tim Vickers, one of our Briefing readers in the UK.)

Last year, the evangelical community in the UK saluted its latest superhero, the multi-billionaire business, Philip Anschutz, for his apparent desire to clean up the film industry by backing a new production of The Chronicles of Narnia. Anschutz met the challenge of being a good steward of his opportunities and resources, setting us a good example in that area, whether we be rich, poor or somewhere in between.

Now, however, in the wake of the Prescott scandal, it seems he has made a questionable choice of stewardship regarding his investment in London's Millennium Dome. Development of the site by his firm, the Anschutz Entertainment Group (AEG), in partnership with Kerzner International Ltd., is conditional on the granting of the license for Britain's only super-casino which will be built adjacent to the Dome to form part of a giant entertainment complex. This should deeply trouble Christians committed to morality in the public sphere and core family values—the very values which Anschutz so readily espouses.

Anschutz has been dubbed alternately a sophisticated self-made businessman and a corporate vulture, depending on who you listen to. There is no doubt that he has been momentously successful in turning failing businesses into successful ones. But there is some doubt about the way that he has done it. His telecommunications business, Qwest, was fined $250 million, with a further $400 million settlement to shareholders, after its Enron-like accounting escapades. Before the enquiry, employees had been urged to put their retirement savings into Qwest shares, but at the same time (according to the Orange County Weekly Newspaper in San Diego), Qwest executives were bailing out. During this period, Qwest's shares dropped from a staggering $64 to an equally staggering low of $1.95, leaving many of the firm's employees robbed of their pensions. Anschutz himself netted over $200 million through the sale of 6.1 million shares.

Virtually all press reports on Anschutz give him a double tag: he is a deeply religious, evangelical Christian, and a firm supporter of Republican politics. The latter tag is a political choice, but the former tag positions him as one of the most high-profile, wealthy Christians on the planet. But if Mr Anschutz is really committed to the reinstatement of Christian family values, how on earth can he justify his decision to license and encourage the thoroughly unbiblical and socially destructive habit of gambling? This, not Mr Prescott's visits to the family ranch, should be causing us concern, yet there's not a breath of it in the press.

Far from being the heroic rider on a white horse, Mr Anschutz may turn out to be yet another potentially great man whose commitment to Jesus was overshadowed by his commitment to profit. The billionaire should be putting his money where his mouth is—or his treasure where his heart is—not the other way round. Wouldn't it be better to see the Millennium Dome turned from a white elephant to a place of goodness and benefit to society? After all, it was built to commemorate the year 2000, the 2000th anniversary of Christ's birth. Let's pray that the influential Mr Anschutz puts his Christian values at the fore—even if that turns out to be a less profitable route.

Orderliness is next to Godliness

In 1 Corinthians 14:33, Paul says, “For God is not a God of confusion but of peace”. Does he mean something like, “Cleanliness is next to godliness”, except that order, rather than cleanliness, is his focus?

Previously in 1 Corinthians 11, Paul drew the link between the ordered being of God, and the way men and women are to relate (1 Cor 11:3-12). Here again in chapter 14, the nature of God is linked to the way men and women relate (1 Cor 14:33-35).

Who we are, and how we relate as men and women, and as Christians in congregations, is important. But here Paul seems to suggest that it is very important indeed, reflecting the very being of God.

So, instead of providing a definitive answer, my question is this: how is the character and nature of God to be reflected in human relationships, and in our relationship to God and to the world he has made? There is order apparent from the moment of creation—the way the world was made and the place of men and women in it. Sin overthrows this order, and even now within churches, our old sinful natures will assert themselves in overthrowing order in various ways—in authority, leadership and other practices. But a church in disorder doesn't reflect the character of God.

Look at 1 Corinthians to see how this is worked out in practice.

The horse and rider

I'm reading Exodus with my eldest daughter Matilda (aged 7). By the time we got to Exodus 14, she was very anxious about the fate of the Egyptian horses who had pursued Moses and the people of Israel to, and then into the Red Sea, while Moses and co. passed through on dry land.

Exodus 14 allows you to fudge the question. The waters of the Red Sea “returned and covered the chariots and the horsemen” (says verse 28). However, Matilda and I hypothesized that even though the horsemen and chariots were thoroughly drownded, it was just faintly possible that the poor horsies had managed to swim to safety.

By chapter 15, no such ducking and weaving was possible for this most quick-thinking of fathers. Matilda was upset to read, “I will sing to the LORD, for he has triumphed gloriously; the horse [“Uh-oh”—Dad] and his rider he has thrown into the sea” (Exodus 15:1).

We decided after a bit of discussion that it was Pharaoh's fault. If he hadn't disobeyed God and pursued the Israelites, the horses would have been just fine. One thing that we both couldn't help noticing, however, was that this was extremely similar to another drowning scenario not too far back in the Bible?the flood, as recorded in Genesis 6-9. It wasn't just horses but every manner of beastie suffered and died in that deluge. And again, it wasn't the fault of the creatures. The blame lies fairly and squarely with mankind.

The Bible shows repeatedly that the whole of creation suffers because of the disobedience and fall of man, the one that God placed as Lord over creation. It's there in Genesis, it's echoed in various ways in Exodus and then it pops up throughout the rest of Scripture.

I'm now bracing myself for the question of whether or not we will meet Pharaoh's horsies in heaven. There's another CHN in this for sure, if I can think of an answer fairly soon.