What to Do with Atlas Shrugged?

Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged has been an incredibly influential book since its publication more than fifty years ago. Rand raises a vigorous argument for the economic justice of capitalism and a blistering, withering rebuke of socialism. With the first installment of the movie version coming out recently, it will be interesting to see what impact Rand's ideas make on our culture.

Most Americans, trained in a liberally biased education system, often do not know conservative arguments on key issues such as evolution/creation, deism/atheism, or socialism/capitalism. This is what bothers me. People whose education has been so constrained by one-sided arguments might get very excited as they discover Ayn Rand for the first time.

Her criticism of socialism will be empowered by a "prophet effect." I don't see how anyone can read Atlas Shrugged and not see her predictions coming true today. Price controls, elimination of competition, onerous regulations, and cronyism have the same devastating effect on the economy that we see today and that we have seen in all centralized economies. Above all Rand condemns socialism's resistance to ingenuity, invention, and improvement. Socialism does not move the culture forward but backward.

So then, what's so wrong with Rand? I will start with her reply to William F. Buckley when she first met him, "You are much too intelligent to believe in God." Rand was an atheist, and a mean one at that. There was no room in her world view for compassion or mercy. These Christian virtues are evil as far as Rand is concerned.

One of the really weird things about her book is that there are no children, no handicapped, no aged, no sick people in Rand's economy. There is no family. There are only intelligent, aggressive, hard-working people contending with lazy, dishonest, and foolish people. But the word "economy" comes from the Greek word for "household." Any argument for economic justice has to begin with a real economy. This is where Rand's ideas break down.

I would agree with much of Rand's criticism of socialism. But her solution to enthrone selfishness as king of the economy and the guiding principle of life is not any better. Pure selfishness will inevitably be just as destructive as socialism.

Jesus said, "To whom much has been given, from him much will be required" (Luke 12.48); and Paul urged "... you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, 'It is better to give than to receive'" (Acts 20.35). These words were spoken to the church and not to governments. How we apply the principle of mercy in public government is an important debate. Some would see the need for more, others less. Some would say that is the realm of the private sector only. But Rand sees no need for mercy at all.

What to do with Atlas Shrugged? Read it for a good critique of the lazy, stifling, self-destructive nature of socialism. But avoid the enthronement of selfishness and the sinful nature. There is a better approach to life and to economic justice.

Luther on Sex "IN" Marriage

I am working on my notes for Adult Bible class this Sunday based on 1 Corinthians chapter seven. The first verse includes this statement: "It is good for a man not to touch a woman."

Centuries ago St. Jerome attacked a Catholic monk named Jovinian, who had the audacity to say that married people and celibate people have an equal standing before God. Jerome argued that if Paul said, "It is good for a man not to touch a woman," then "It is bad to touch one." (1 Corinthians: Interpreted by Early Christian Commentators p. 104, by Judith L. Kovacs). This led to an ugly teaching and tradition in the church that sex was bad even in marriage. This teaching and practice reigned supreme for a millenia until Martin Luther came along.

Did Paul actually say "It is good for a man not to touch a woman"? We also have to read the sentence that comes before it: "Now concerning things which you wrote to me..." With this introduction it is clear that Paul is addressing a statement put to him by the Corinthians. Paul does find some merit in the statement as long as two important conditions are met. First, those who choose not to marry must have the spiritual gift for celibacy. Luther pointed out that it was a sin to challenge our God-given nature for sexual relations and marriage. Secondly, any sexual abstinence within marriage needs to be temporary and agreeable to both spouses.

Luther had some VERY strong words about this latter condition. Refusing conjugal rights is a serious problem. I agree completely with Luther. I said this early in my ministry, and I have never backed away from it: There is way too much sex outside of marriage in the form of movies, magazines, jokes, internet, prostitution etc., and way too little in marriage where it belongs. Luther also urged moderation in marital sexual relations. Like Paul, Luther taught Christians to avoid unnatural restraint as well as selfish, carnal lust.

I look forward to the discussion we will have on this Sunday. May God support all Christian marriages and families and by His grace lead us faithfully in the blessed estate.

Staying Awake in the Afternoon!

Do you ever have trouble staying alert and focused in the afternoon? I sure do.

My old remedy was to drink a diet coke, but that never seemed to do any good. Here two things that really work for me.

1. Get up and do some exercises for a few minutes every hour or so. I march in place lifting my knees as high as I can or run up and down the stairs in our building a couple of times.

2. I'm not a big coffee drinker, but I've read that this works for either tea or coffee drinkers. Drink a little grapefruit juice with your tea (or I guess with your coffee, yuck!). Apparently there are some chemicals in grapefruit juice that inhibit the body's metabolism of caffeine. The caffeine circulates longer and has a greater impact.

Hope

Satan deceives. Satan uses. Satan destroys.
(Friendships, Marriages, Families, Churches, Life itself...)

God in Christ forgives. Heals. Strengthens. Makes wise. Leads. Improves. Renews.

"Son of Man... Prophesy over these bones... Lazarus, Come forth!"


Etching by Barry Moser - The Holy Bible

There Are Times...

There are times when I do feel like "Christian" in Bunyan's classic, The Pilgrim's Progress:

"Then Apollyon espying his opportunity began to gather up close to Christian and wrestling with him gave him a dreadful fall, and with that Christian's Sword flew out of his hand. Then said Apollyon, "I am sure of thee now," and with that he had almost pressed him to death so that Christian began to despair of life, but as God would have it while Apollyon was fetching of his last blow thereby to make a full end of this good man, Christian nimbly stretched out his hand for his Sword and caught it saying, "Rejoice not against me O mine Enemy, when I fall I shall arise," and with that gave him a deadly thrust which made him give back as one that had received his mortal wound. Christian perceiving that, made at him again saying, "Nay, in all these things we are more than Conquerors through him that loved us." And with that Apollyon spread forth his Dragon's wings, and sped him away that Christian for a season saw him no more."

"... I am sure of thee now... Nay, in all these things we are more than Conquerors through him that loved us."

Prayer: "Father, keep us nimble with Your Word, the Sword of the Spirit, and in Christ Deliver us from evil." Amen.

Admitting Mistakes is the First Step for Improving

Researchers at Johns Hopkins University are scouring the copious notes of Dr. Harvey Cushing, who practiced neurosurgery from 1896-1912. He kept detailed notes of his mistakes such as operating on the wrong side of the brain or dropping surgical instruments into a wound. One of the hardest things for any human being to do is to admit to our mistakes and failures. Yet, this is the key to our improvement.

God's word teaches us the same thing:

Proverbs 28:13 He who covers his sins will not prosper, But whoever confesses and forsakes them will have mercy.

Prayer: Lord, help me to be honest and to acknowledge my sins. Remind me and reassure me of Your forgiveness in Jesus. Help me to avoid the same mistakes and to improve in all that I think, say and do. Amen.

Worship: Chocolate or Vanilla?

I was involved in what people today call "Contemporary Worship" long before it was known by that name. In high school (1970s) our youth group asked the pastor if we could have a "Folk Service." He asked us what would be involved in such a service. All we could think of was playing songs on guitars. (Obviously we had no business planning a worship service.) He then asked, "Do you think it might be good to have a few Scripture readings?" "Oh yeah," we said. "How about the Apostles' Creed, a sermon, and prayers?" "That would be great." Little by little he had us back to the basic worship service!

As a campus pastor in the 1980s I came into a ministry that had been using contemporary worship. As a guitarist and singer, I looked forward to the freedom this gave me to explore different worship styles. However I found it increasingly difficult to find music that wasn't repetitive or would fit well with the themes of the Church Year. I also found myself spending a lot of time trying to develop these services, valuable time that could have been used going out to meet students.

For the last twenty years I've been serving in a church that uses very traditional worship.

I used to accept the idea that worship styles didn't really matter, but I've definitely had a change of heart about that. This isn't a chocolate or vanilla question. There are some major differences between the two styles of worship as they have developed to this point. Here are five that I find quite important:

1. Both contemporary and traditional worship can be emotional. But I believe that emotions take a primary role in contemporary worship. The music tends to focus on the mood of the worshiper more than the mind. Sounds are primary; texts are secondary.

2. Traditional worship tends to be more theological than therapeutic. Contemporary worship reverses those. Traditional worship focuses primarily on the person and work of Christ and then the new life. Contemporary worship tends to focus on the new life.

3. I will grant that contemporary worship may be more relevant to the unbeliever. After all I wouldn't expect an unchurched person to have any clue what "Here I lay my Ebenezer" means as it is sung in "Come Thou Fount of Every Blessing." But if our central worship service reaches low to be relevant, how does the church lift its members to relate more deeply to Christ?

4. Contemporary worship tends to be a much more passive experience for the worshiper. We tend to sit back and watch the show. This is certainly something our culture encourages. Traditional worship engages the worshiper in responsive readings, prayers and songs, creedal affirmations, standing, sitting, and kneeling. In this way traditional worship is counter-cultural.

5. Traditional worship is aimed to serve people of all ages. Yes, even little children often enjoy traditional worship, whereas the more contemporary the more likely the children will be dismissed. Contemporary worship loves to divide up into groups (Boomers, Busters, Mosaics, etc.) Traditional worship loves to unify the octogenarians as well as the eight day olds.

For these reasons (and more that I don't have time to go into) I am convinced that traditional worship should have and will always have a central role in the life of the church.

This doesn't mean that we can't have "lighter" or "age-oriented" worship experiences. As long as we fix some of the issues involved in #s 1 & 2 above, I think there can be a place for these in the life of the church. But their place must always be secondary and supportive of the main worship of the church. They should be designed to lead the worshiper toward the central worship experience of the church and not away from it.