Discipleship's Simple Requirement: An Open Handed Approach to Life

The brush fires in California, and the accompanying reports of homeowners who refuse to evacuate at the risk of perishing in the flames and smoke, are an apt metaphor of Christian discipleship's simple requirement: Living with an open hand.

In Luke's Gospel, Jesus is recorded, after a brief discourse, as saying: "So then, none of you can be My disciple who does not give up all his own possessions." (Luke 14: 33, NASB)

The early 20th Century Christian missionary Oswald Chambers opined that this didn't mean that one could not be saved, as if from the peril of hell (which complements our original metaphor), but that he or she would not completely belong to Jesus. (Please click here for the referenced quotation.)

The point is that it is impossible to completely belong to Jesus if one is holding any of his own possessions. Discipleship, you see, is a zero-sum game. John the Baptist understood it as such: "He (Jesus) must increase, but I (John) must decrease." (John 3: 30, NASB, parenthetical notes are mine)

Holding one's own possessions is not the same as being a caretaker (steward) for the possessions of someone else. In life, we will have things, but the aspiring disciple of Jesus regards all that is under his or her stewardship as such, and not a personal possession.

One of the best illustrations of this occurred to a disciple named Clarence Jordan, who in 1942 began an experiment in racial reconciliation on a farm near Americus, Georgia, which drew the ire of some of its white neighbors. In the mid-1950s, Jordan's "experiment," Koinonia Farms, was the a frequent target of gunfire, bombings, arson, and the beating of its people.

In a letter to a friend, written in 1959, Jordan wrote: "I remember the night Harry Atkinson and I were on our way over to the roadside market after we had received word that it had been bombed and was burning. When we came over a hill we could see the fiery glow on the horizon, and this ignited a burning in my heart. I was scorched with anger, and I'm sure if I had known who had committed the act, there would have been considerable hatred in my heart. At that time I doubt that I could have distinguished between anger and hate.

"But as I had occasion to think, I realized that the hate was rooted in a consuming possessiveness. . . Later I had the same reaction when various ones, including myself and my children, were shot at. The so-and-sos were trying to take our lives from us!

"The solution to this soul-destroying condition came only upon the recognition that neither property nor lives were ours but God's. They never really had been ours in any sense of the word. We hadn't even 'given them back to Him' -- they were His all along. And if this was he way He wanted to spend His property and His people in order to accomplish His purposes, why should we pitch a tantrum?" ("Theology in Coveralls," Sojourners magazine, December 1979)

As Jordan notes, our possessiveness provokes all manner of negative emotions within us, and will eventually destroy the core of our being -- our soul.

I have always been in awe of people who live life with an open hand. Those rare folk who will work hard for something, but will also walk away from it or give it up because, I think, they have realized as John the Baptist did in Jesus' time; and Clarence Jordan has in ours, that it all belongs to God and it is God's to use (however peculiar or wasteful it may, at the time, seem to us) for His purposes.

Too many of us, for far too long have lived our life with a clenched hand. We grip what we have grasped. We are loathe to let go; and heaven help anyone who dare take what we hold from us. Yet, the truth of the matter is this: While no one may not be able to take what you have, neither can someone give you something better.

To give away all that one possesses is the first step toward gaining the gifts of God!

Magazine Review: Mapping the Seven Deadly Sins

The latest issue of "Wired" magazine maps the Seven Deadly Sins. (Click here to see the article and accompanying maps.)

If you've never read this magazine, it is worth your time. And it's not just a magazine for geeks (although persons with less than perfect eyesight will need reading glasses). As you might have assumed, you can also find "Wired" on the Web.

I began subscribing to this magazine because I thought it would help me to better understand the technology that has become a part -- for better or worse -- of interpersonal communication. Preaching, if nothing else, is interpersonal communication on a large scale; and I thought that a better understanding of the communication technologies would help me to be a better preacher.

So, if you've wanted to learn about Craigslist, how to throw a knife, or discover what's really in a Slim Jim snack, "Wired" is your ticket. And, you'll also see where the big "sinners" live!

The Redeeming Power of Poverty

"I've been rich, and I've been poor. Rich is better," said Beatrice Kaufman more than 70 years ago.

In the decades since Kaufman -- and in the centuries before -- few have disagreed. Poverty is as limiting as it is humiliating. Most people, I think, would prefer to encounter poverty by a rare and fleeting accident, than by even the most carefully crafted design.

The "rich is better" axiom is challenged in today's selection from the devotional guide, "My Utmost for His Highest," which is a year's worth of daily readings excerpted from talks and sermons given by early 20th Century missionary Oswald Chambers (pictured).

"The underlying foundation of Jesus Christ's kingdom is poverty; not possessions; not making decisions for Jesus," Chambers says, "but having such a sense of absolute futility that we finally admit, 'Lord, I cannot even begin to do it.' Then Jesus says, 'Blessed are you. . .'" (Click here for the full reading.)

Regarding the power of poverty, the media are on a pendulum: Publishing the story of a man who finds purpose through poverty on one day; and the next day publishing another man's struggle to regain his lost prerogatives and financial status. From such even-handedness, it would seem that either state is equally preferable, equally sustainable, and equally moral. They are not.

It is said that of all subjects, Jesus talked most of the subject of money. (The same could be said, of course, about The Wall Street Journal newspaper.) However, Jesus' approach to the subject was different from what many of us might take, which is to regard money as a "necessary evil." Jesus did not say that money was necessary (something The Wall Street Journal might say); and He did not say that money was evil.

To quote St. Paul, money is not the root of all evil; rather, it is the love of money that is the root of all evil, and the source of much human misery. (Click here for Paul's quote.)

The doorway to the rule of God in one's life is poverty. It is there -- and there alone -- where one finds freedom from the tyranny of fear, competitiveness and selfishness.

NIMBY at Work in Proposed National Health Insurance Plan

The phrase, "Not in my back yard" (a. k. a. NIMBY), is commonly used to identify an attitude of individual benefit at the expense of someone else.

One need not wait long to see this attitude displayed. For example, while many folks are eager to close detention camps, such as the one in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, few are willing to have Guantanamo detainees imprisoned in their home state. NIMBY.

The financing of universal health care coverage for Americans is the latest example of NIMBY. According to recent news reports, a couple earning more than $350,000 a year would suffer a surcharge amounting to between 1 percent and 5.4 percent of their income to raise funds for the health care plan. It is estimated that this plan would affect approximately 1.2 percent of all households, and would raise one-half of what would be needed to fund the scheme, with the other half coming from savings in Medicare and other health care programs.

I don't think much of this idea, and it is not because my wife and I earn more than $350,000 a year. We don't. I resist this idea because it requires only 1.2 percent of the population to contribute to a benefit received by the remaining 98.8 percent of the nation.

One definition of fairness is whether -- all things being equal -- you would continue to like a particular idea if the roles were reversed. In this case, government proposes to take more from one, small, segment of the population for no apparent reason other than it has the political and legislative muscle to do so without a fight from its victim. On the street, that is called "strong-arm robbery," and it is as illegal as it is morally wrong.

I do not mind paying taxes, whether of the general variety, such as income taxes, which support a variety of programs for our corporate benefit; or the specific variety, such as gasoline taxes, which go toward road maintenance and are more or less tied to how much one uses the streets and highways. "Render to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. . ."

What I see in the proposed plan is an attempt to pass a greater share of the cost of of a general benefit -- in this case, universal health care -- on to a sliver of the citizenry presumed to be more able to carry the load. For the higher tariff, I don't think that those who pay more will receive a greater benefit or more generous amenities, such as a priority line for medical appointments or expedited prescription drug refills. Nope. They will receive the same level of service that 98.8 percent of their fellow-citizens receive, except they will pay more for it.

In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus talked about fairness in a maxim we today call "the Golden Rule": "Do unto others as you would have others do to you." (Matthew 7: 12a)

Selecting a burden for others that we ourselves would not willingly bear may, by act of the Congress, be legal, but it can never be right.

Two Examples of Using What is Nearest to Bless Others

Two recent articles -- one in a daily newspaper, and the other in a magazine for aviation enthusiasts -- served as a good reminder to use what we have to do the Lord's work.

The first article featured a retired Navy physician, Anthony Martinez, who spends his days tending to the physical and spiritual needs of Washington, D. C.'s homeless. (To read this article, click here.)

The second article featured a Denver businessman, Jeff Puckett, who uses his helicopter -- dubbed "Prayer One" -- to get local Christian, Jewish and Muslim clergy; and local gang members into a place where they can begin to see the world from a different perspective. (To read this article, click here.)

These articles reminded me that we each have skills and abilities that the Lord can use to bless others. The shame of it is that we fail to be available; or we fail to be creative; or we devalue the worth of a gift shared with others in the Lord's name. (I am reminded of the account of Jesus' feeding of the multitude with a little boy's lunch, as recorded in John 6: 1 - 14, and in the other Gospels, too!)

Sometimes, what is nearest us is a possession, such as our checkbook. Sometimes, it is a tool we use in our work, as is the case for Jeff Puckett. Sometimes, it is a skill used in one setting that is transferable to another setting, as is the case with Anthony Martinez.

Today, consider what it is that you have nearest you. Then, consider how it can be used to bless others in the name of the Lord.

Piracy: The Devil's Hand is Tipped (Again)

Easter Sunday was a bad day for piracy.

With the rest of the world, I watched last week's events unfold 230 miles off the coast of Somalia in the Gulf of Aden.

Tuesday: A band of Somali pirates in a small boat hijacks the U. S.-flagged container ship MV Maersk Alabama. The crew resists; the ship's Master, Captain Richard Phillips (pictured), surrenders himself to the pirates as he orders his crew to a safe compartment in the ship. The pirates leave the ship in a life boat with Captain Phillips as a hostage.

Wednesday: The warship USS Bainbridge arrives on the scene. Negotiations begin to secure the release of Captain Phillips.

Thursday: Captain Phillips attempts an escape by jumping into the water, but is quickly recaptured.

Sunday: While under tow by USS Bainbridge, and in the fading daylight, it is determined that the pirates in the life boat are about to harm the captain. Three U. S. Navy sharpshooters positioned on Bainbridge's stern are ordered to shoot the pirates, which they do almost simultaneously. Three pirates are felled. The captain is rescued, unharmed.

A bad day for piracy, indeed.

Almost immediately, the usual collection of pundits and experts emerged to point out that the killing of the pirates would immediately transform what had been an ordered, purely commercial enterprise into something a lot more complicated -- and bloody.

Hold, for a moment, the compelling reasons for piracy: For nearly 30 years, Somalia has been a near-lawless nation; many of today's pirates were yesterday's fishermen -- before overfishing by Europeans and Asians made it nearly impossible for a Somali to make a living from the sea that didn't involve firearms and million-dollar ransoms; and the shipping industry was all to willing to play along as long as the cargo was safe and the insurance premiums didn't rise too sharply.

As before (see my blog from March 1, 2009), the devil's hand is tipped. The devil wants only to focus on the price of something; never on its value. So, it becomes okay to steal -- or even to be the victim of theft -- as long as it doesn't (pardon the metaphor) "rock the boat," or disturb the business model. Never mind that theft, kidnapping, false imprisonment, extortion, and bribery are always wrong -- and a cancer on society, commerce, government, and the human soul.

In the aftermath of Sunday's events, life in the sea lanes in and around the Horn of Africa may become more complicated for all mariners. Pirates may seek revenge on U. S. citizens. Other nations may attempt rescues as we did, with less rosy outcomes. But these are risks that must be taken for all who value some things -- such as freedom from fear and intimidation -- above its costs.

Easter Sunday -- which has its own narrative on the sacrifice of one for many; freedom from fear; and the elevation of value over price -- was, indeed, a bad day for piracy, in all of its forms. But it is a bright day for those who have seen the devil's hand (again).

A Test of Principle: Slot Machines at the Mall

The 18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant's gift to Western Civilization was a way to test the strength of one's moral beliefs.

One of Kant's "Categorial Imperatives" is to “act only in accordance with that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it become a universal law.” In other words, do to others only as you would have it done to you.

Through a twist of circumstance, some folks in the northern part of my county (Maryland's Anne Arundel County) are enduring the Philosopher's test vis-a-vis the possibility of slot machines being placed in a nearby shopping mall. (Click here to read the newspaper article.)

In a referendum last November, Maryland voters approved the placement of slot machines. It is reasonable to assume that many of those who voted "yes" might have voted "no" had they known the gambling devices would be installed at a shopping mall instead of a track for horse racing. The assumption, which proponents of gambling generally deny, is that slot machine parlors are the thin edge of the wedge for more coarse forms of entertainment, such as prostitution and strip clubs; and a clientele that is more transitory and sketchy than the current patrons at the popular mall.

Through a series of happenings that turned the slot machine plan on its head, the favored horse racing venues -- having financial problems of their own -- failed to post the money required to get a shot at the slots, which opened the door to the long-shot: The shopping mall, which is now in line to receive the lion's share of the machines the law permitted, because few other venues qualify.

There are, of course, the voters -- I mean, the neighbors -- who reportedly feel as if they are the victim of a "bait-and-switch," which they are. Had they thought a slot machine operation could show-up in their neighborhood, they likely would have voted against the proposition in last fall's referendum. Who knew?

That is the point. Maxims, rules, laws, commandments -- if we follow or obey them -- save us from having to live under our own bad decisions.

Long before I became acquainted with Immanuel Kant, I was taught a similar maxim: The Golden Rule, which says, "Do unto others as you would have them to do unto you."

It works, even today. You just never know when the casino you thought was a great idea, when you thought it was headed to the next county, will be breaking ground at the neighborhood shopping mall.

The Devil's Hand is Tipped

Are people charitable only when it benefits them?

Do people work hard only because they are paid well?

These questions came to mind as I monitored the public discussion about the effect a tax hike on those earning more than $250,000 would have on charitable giving; and the necessity of so-called "retention pay" to motivate highly-paid Wall Street executives.

In the first case, persons earning north of $250,000 a year would not be able to deduct as much of their charitable giving as someone earning less than $250,000 a year. The harm of such a change in tax law, the critics say, would be a drastic reduction in the flow of money to the needy through one's favorite charity.

In the second instance, so-called "retention pay" is deemed essential to keep productive Wall Street brokers from seeking work at financial firms with looser purse strings -- even firms clinging to federal bailout money to stay afloat.

For just a moment, the devil had tipped his hand. If we, indeed, give only because it benefits us; and if it is size of the paycheck that determines the level of our loyalty, or our enthusiasm for the task at hand, then it is time to man the life boats. Civil society is headed to the depths.

Money is a hard task master. When asked, "How much money is enough?," 19th century industrialist John D. Rockefeller replied, "Just a little bit more."

A similar answer, it would seem, is hidden in the devil's hand.

Yet, we need not despair so long as there are those who give as Jesus said we ought: In secret. Not for the recognition of the recipient, nor for the praise of one's peers, not even for the tax break, but only for the secret affirmation of God.

We need not despair so long as there are those who work for the things that money cannot buy: A legacy that lives on in the lives of others; a good conscience before men and before God; a hope that one has truly given to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and to God the things that are God's.

Not Only the "Heathen" Got Burned

One lesson of the Washington National Cathedral (see photo) that was lost on several other Washington-area churches is the wisdom of pay-as-you-go.

According to this morning's Washington Post newspaper, more than a few local congregations are in a bad way because of partnerships with property developers that -- in this challenging economic time -- have delivered far less than was promised. (Please click here to see the Post story.)

On a recent visit to the Cathedral, I was reminded that its construction was never permitted to get ahead of its financing. It may have taken 83 years to complete the job, but there is something to be said for both having a great house -- and no house payments.

I am more sympathetic than was one reader to the plight of the property-rich, but cash-poor, congregants featured in the newspaper story. Posting a comment in the online version of the story, "Bill," quoting Psalm 7:15, said: "He has dug a pit and hollowed it out, and has fallen into the hole which he made."

This story also reminds us that the current economic reckoning is adversely affecting even the kindest, best-intentioned, of souls, and that not only the "heathen" have gotten burned.

A Picture's Worth: Taxes

Wichita, Kansas -- I saw this particularly appropriate message for the tax filing season over the weekend while visiting relatives in Kansas.