Hydroxychloroquine: “Good Science” Challenges Politicized Science

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), for over 60 years a familiar antimalarial drug, has fast become one of the most popular subjects in daily news surrounding the COVID-19 virus pandemic  allegedly caused by Chinese Communist mismanagement of a lab in Wuhan, China.  Like any drug, the safety and efficacy of HCQ as a treatment for a new disease, ought to be thoroughly investigated.  However, in spite of numerous favorable reports of the life-saving benefit of doctor-prescribed HCQ, many influential people including Dr. Anthony Fauci continue to oppose its use.  Are there legitimate reasons for this opposition to a potentially life-saving drug?   Or are we about to see just how many lives will be lost simply because “good science” is being ignored or silenced by selfish political and economic agendas? 

So-called “good science” has been a frequent subject of my blog writing in Oikonomia (Greek = “household management; or, stewardship”).  To me, “good science” is an inquiry into the workings of the “household of creation” by those who recognize the necessity of and abide by a faith-based ethical foundation for their pursuit of truth [See “The Conscience of Science: Part 1 Ethics & Accountability.”]  A faith-based ethic enables the scientist to see that his or her pursuit of truth is good stewardship of his or her God-given intellectual gifts.  Scientists who view their science as a stewardship are more likely to contribute in ways that promote the flourishing of God’s creation.  In so doing, they bring benefit to all mankind.  Above all, “good science” ought to be guided by honesty in its inquiry and in reporting of conclusions.

We can only hope that current debate over the safety and efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) will be governed by “good science” and later remembered by the thousands of lives it saved.  Therefore, I am encouraged by an article authored by Dr. Harvey Risch, a Yale epidemiologist, published May 27 in the Journal of Epidemiology.  In it, Dr. Risch refutes an earlier article published in The Lancet which had caused the World Health Organization to halt trials of HCQ as a treatment for COVID-19 infections.  Dr. Risch’s critique is a classic lesson in careful scientific analysis of published results.  It also illustrates the importance of peer review in verifying scientific methodology and correct application of results.  I encourage you to read the article.

In order to provide context for this stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Risch estimates that over 1.6 million Americans have been infected and up to 10 to 50-fold larger numbers of people carry antibodies to the virus.  In spite of “flattening the curve” through mask-wearing, social distancing, etc., Dr. Risch believes that over time

…very large numbers of people in the US may eventually get the infection.  The great majority of infected people are at low risk for progression or will manifest the infection asymptomatically. For the rest, outpatient treatment is required that prevents disease progression and hospitalization.  Exposures will occur as isolation policies are lifted and people begin to mix, even with various degrees of public isolation such as mask usage and physical separation still in place.

Dr. Risch also recognizes that, while we are averaging an estimated 10,000 COVID-19 deaths per week in the US, we are facing a greater risk of deaths due to policies that have created an unsustainable economic and social condition with over 36 million Americans out of work and disruptions in many essential services necessary to maintain our physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being.  He concludes: “We are rapidly reaching a breaking point in the ability to maintain the status quo; states have begun the process of lifting their restrictions, and we thus need to evaluate what evidence we do have for promising outpatient treatments.” 

Dr. Risch’s COVID-19 treatment recommendation may be summarized as follows (emphasis mine):

… the key to returning society toward normal functioning and to preventing huge loss of life, especially among older individuals, people with comorbidities, African Americans and Hispanics and Latinos, is a safe, effective and proactive outpatient treatment that prevents hospitalization in the first place.

Based on Dr. Risch’s analysis of the results of numerous treatments in which COVID-19 patients were given HCQ in combination with the antibiotic azithromycin (i.e. HCQ+AZ), his recommendation is as follows (emphasis mine):

HCQ+AZ has been directly studied in actual early high-risk outpatient use with all of its temporal considerations and found empirically to have sufficient epidemiologic evidence for its effective and safe employment that way, and that requiring delay of such general use until availability of additional RCT (randomized controlled trial) evidence is untenable because of the ongoing and projected continuing mortality. No studies of Covid-19 outpatient HCQ+AZ use have shown higher mortality with such use than without, cardiac arrhythmias included, thus there is no empirical downside to this combined medication use.

The strong support for the use of HCQ+AZ from Dr. Risch was accompanied by two other endorsements of its therapeutic value.  Last week, President Trump announced that he has been using a prescription of HCQ, demonstrating that he is willing to put his health on the line to support his belief in the safety and efficacy of HCQ.  Then, this week, Breitbart reported that HCQ will be administered by Britain’s National Health Service (NHS) to as many as 10,000 health workers representing up to 20 hospitals as part of a clinical trial.

In conclusion, the debate continues between those who favor and those who oppose the use of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin (HCQ+AZ) for early treatment of high-risk COVID-19 patients.  However, the May 27 publication of Dr. Harvey Risch’s thorough analysis as summarized here ought to make the prescription of these drugs the centerpiece of our COVID-19 treatment strategy.  

It remains to be seen which voices will have the most influence on policy makers and medical health professionals--the voices of "good science" or the voices of those with political agendas that seem to care little about either “following the science” or protecting individual lives.   Meanwhile, I am siding with the voice of “good science” and can only hope HCQ+AZ will be available to me in the event that I am infected with COVID-19 and require medical intervention.  

Bring a Speedy End to the Pandemic Shutdown

Some baby-boomers like me remember a stressful part of our childhood:  having to get a penicillin shot, or waiting in line for “the needle” for vaccinations.  I’m not sure which was worse, the anticipation or the needle prick itself.  But afterwards, my fear and pain were eased by a warm feeling that I was protected from becoming ill.  Today, the results affirm the success of antibiotics and vaccines.  The anxiety and pain were a small price for a good outcome.

But what if, in order to protect us and our nation from a mortal enemy, we were required to surrender freedoms that we hold dear?  Such a request or demand would have a much more pervasive affect on our lives than the requirement to stand in line for a vaccination? 

Our COVID-19 Conundrum – Looking Back
As you know, my “what if” became a reality on March 15 of this year—the day that 65 Coronavirus deaths were reported in the US.  On that date, Dr. Anthony Fauci and the White House Task Force instituted a 14-day “national shutdown” with “social distancing” and limitations on our coming and going.  The purpose was to “flatten the curve” of daily hospitalizations and viral infections so that hospitals would not be driven beyond capacity.  But 14 days of shutdown was gradually extended to 1 month.  By that time, many voices in the medical and epidemiological fields were questioning the wisdom of this policy.

With all due regard for any loss of life due to the Coronavirus, many of us asked whether the national shutdown was actually saving lives.  Or, was it simply flattening the curve of infections and hospitalizations and delaying inevitable exposures and infections with uncertain future consequences?   By mid-April it had caused thousands of small businesses to close, millions of people to be unemployed, delays in scheduling of medical procedures, disruption of church worship and other human social interactions, and resultant mental stresses and suicides due to social isolation. 

Because of my own personal skepticism, I began to research the science and statistics related to the COVID-19 pandemic and shutdown.  At the same time, I wanted to assess my own attitude and faith in response to the pandemic threat on my life and family.  About this time (April 17), after one month of national shutdown, the US was approaching 40,000 deaths almost half of which originated in New York state.  I wrote a blog article entitled “Considerations for Our COVID-19 Conundrum” which outlines how I was personally responding to the pandemic and shutdown.  [I believe this article still contains valuable recommendations for readers who want to maintain their “health” in body, mind, and spirit.]

One week later (April 24), I had posted another article on COVID-19, entitled  “COVID-19 Policies &  Outcomes: Learning Online.”  Here, I cited experts who were concerned that the indirect effects of social distancing and the economic shutdown were having more devastating long-term effects than the COVID-19 virus itself.  The primary goal of “flattening the curve” had been reached in most parts of the US.  So, the rationale for remaining locked down shifted to a seemingly trumped up fear based on questionable predictive models and a philosophy that we ought to remain shut down until a vaccination is developed.  Fortunately, in spite of these dire warnings, several state governors began to aggressively follow the phase-in plan offered by President Trump and the White House task force. 

It’s Time to End the Shutdown
During the next two weeks, it became more and more obvious to those who followed objective media sources that the economic, social, and even medical costs of prolonged partial lockdown were exceeding the benefits in saving of lives.  Everywhere, hospital capacity and equipment to treat COVID-19 patients were all much in excess of demand.  As I wrote in “COVID-19 Policy Ignores ‘Good Science’,” “some experts such as Dr. Dolores Cahill called the lockdown policy “anti-scientific” and “anti-nature” because it has ignored the importance of the human immune system and how we need to beef up our immunity through good nutrition and vitamins.”  [Dr. Cahill’s informed logic is featured in a video interview accessible in my article, “COVID-19 Policy Ignores ‘Good Science’.”]

Today, opposition to the lockdown from professionals is being joined by an increasing chorus of Americans who want to get back to work.  Dr. Scott Atlas, MD. and senior fellow and experienced policymaker of the Hoover Institute, argues that there is no reason not to move more quickly to reopen our society with proper precautions for the elderly and other at-risk individuals.  In his op ed article published May 18, in The Hill, Dr. Atlas wrote,

The total lockdown may have been justified at the start of this pandemic, but it must now end — smartly, without irrational, unnecessary requirements contrary to medical science, common sense and logic. The goal of the strict isolation was accomplished in the overwhelming majority of places. We have direct data on risk and extensive experience, individually and as a nation, with managing it, even as new cases arise. We know that gradually relaxing total isolation will lead to more infections, but that’s acceptable, given that we know whom to protect and this disease is not harmful to the vast majority of infected people.

What Do COVID-19 Data-by-State Suggest?
Yesterday, I devoted many hours to pouring over data from multiple sources.  I chose 15 states that represent 62% of the US population but which are responsible for approximately 85% of the COVID-19 deaths in the US to date (see Table).  The data by state is ranked according to “% Recovery” from lowest (top) to highest—i.e. the percentage of individuals who were “Reported Cases” who recovered and were not tallied in “Deaths.”  Note that Michigan currently has the lowest percent recovery at 90.5%.  All other states range above this percentage and reach as high as 98.3% recovery in Tennessee.

The 7 states that make up the upper-half of the table account for just over half (51%) of the total reported COVID-19 cases in the US to date but account for 67% of the total US deaths.   It is also noteworthy that nearly all of the 7 states in the upper half of the table have governors who have been slower in opening up their state than most of the 8 states in the lower half.  This suggests that governors who have been more aggressive in opening their state have not been unwise.  Both % recovery and mortality rates are lower in these more aggressive states.  More comments on my Data Table will come below as they relate to several claims by Dr. Atlas.

Supportive Data But Poor Communication
Dr. Atlas argues that neither policymakers nor the public have received several key messages that are both critical in alleviating public fear and valuable as a guide to safe reopening of society.  In his article Monday, in The Hill, Dr. Atlas lists four policy failures at the state level, each with scientific data from the CDC and other sources to support his claims.  The four policy failures he lists are as follows (emphasis mine):

1.  There has been a failure to remind everyone that the stated goal of the policy — total lockdown and whole-population isolation — has been accomplished in most of the United States, including the epicenter of New York.

2.  There has been a failure to reassure everyone that we fully anticipate more cases will occur, whether we test or not, with continuing relaxation of today’s isolation.

Many Americans are gripped in fear when they hear that more reported cases of COVID-19 are appearing daily with even more cases reported in some areas.   But remember, we are doing more testing—more testing means more reported cases!  But notice from my Data Table above that 90 to 98% of reported cases recover. 

3.  There has been a failure to educate the public that the overall fatality rate is not only far lower than previously thought but is extremely low in almost everyone other than the elderly.

Allow me to elaborate on failure #3 as it relates to the relatively large percentage of COVID-19 deaths among the elderly.  According a New York Times article, May 11, one-third of all US deaths to Coronavirus (est. 26,000, May 18) are from nursing home residents and workers.  Notice from my Data Table that nursing home deaths vary widely in percentage of total deaths by state.  

It is now believed that the large number of deaths of nursing home residents and workers in several states including NY, MA, and PA was due at least in part to the negligence or incompetence of state government officials and nursing home administrators.  The unfortunate higher number of nursing home deaths in some of these states is reflected in their higher “Mortality” rates (#Deaths/100K) (see Data Table).  The clear implication is that we dropped the ball in protecting our high-risk seniors while focusing instead on social isolation of the rest of us who are at low-risk.

4.  There has been a failure to clarify to parents the truth about the extremely low risk to children, and that has accompanied a gross failure to offer a rational medical perspective regarding schools reopening.

The #4 failure on Dr. Atlas’s list is the unfortunate lack of clear information provided to parents of young children—information which might have relieved much anxiety, and hopefully still can.  According to a Journal of the American Medical Association article cited by Dr. Atlas, “Of the critically ill children with COVID-19, more than 80% had significant long-term underlying medical conditions. Overall survival and outcomes from critical illness in infants and children with COVID-19 in this series was far better than reported for adult patients.  At the present time, our data indicate that children are at far greater risk of critical illness from influenza than from COVID-19.” 

Lack of good information and its dilution with misinformation threatens to drive school and college administrators to consider delaying reopening of classrooms in the fall of this year.  Dr. Robert Hamilton, pediatrician and founder Pacific Ocean Pediatrics, stated in an interview on The Ingraham Angle that only around 1.7% of people infected with Coronavirus are children up to age 18.  The majority of these are asymptomatic and don’t even realize they have a virus.  Meanwhile, we are learning about the negative impacts of school shutdown on adolescents and on their parents as they adjust to online courses while being deprived of spring sports and traditional commencement observances. 

Conclusion
Every human life is of great value to our Creator.  Therefore, policies dealing with the pandemic should be designed to do the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people.  However, given that we live in a culture where the definition of “good” is so often rigorously debated, policymakers have a difficult time.  This is especially true when we allow our definition of “good” to selfishly dominate our political agendas to the point where we allow biased interpretation of data and media reporting to create an unreal world that is far from the truth.

While I have not escaped the world of pride, selfishness, error in computations, and bias, I have tried to deal accurately and honestly in compiling my Data Table and in presenting the arguments of notable scientists and policymakers.   Based on what I have gleaned from my study, I cast my small vote with those who recommend opening our culture as speedily as possible. 

Returning to my analogy of the anxiety I felt while waiting in line for my vaccination as a boy, I gladly remember that painful experience with no regrets.  However, I believe we will all have great regrets after our current painful pandemic if we don’t soon make it a priority to reopen and restore our economy, health services, family togetherness (especially with our beloved elderly), worship opportunities, education, and recreation.  Death from disease is a reality, but life and health depend on many aspects of our culture that have been restricted or ignored all too long.  As always, I welcome your “Comments.”

Acknowledgement:
This article is a joint effort between my wife, Alvadell ("Abby"), and I.  I thank her for her patience, helpful research, and critical suggestions in the writing.

“The Chosen” - Powerful Message on Film

Over the years, filmmakers who have chosen to portray the life of Jesus have always been challenged to achieve biblical accuracy while also framing the narrative and characters in a way that conveys the message and ministry of Christ in an understandable and entertaining way.  Usually a film will contain a disclaimer to explain how its creators have decided to portray the amazing life and ministry of Christ.  Even the inspired authors of the Gospel accounts included only selected aspects of the life of Christ.

The Apostle John paused near the end of his epistle to include a purpose statement for his Gospel (“Good News”) with an implied disclaimer.  He writes, Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.  But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name (John 20: 30-31).

The opening credits to Episode 1, Season 1 of Dallas Jenkins’ film production, The Chosen, includes a disclaimer that reads very much like the above disclaimer written by John:

 “The Chosen” is based on the true stories of the gospels of Jesus Christ.  Some locations and timelines have been combined or condensed.  Backstories and some characters or dialogue have been added.
However, all biblical and historical context and any artistic imagination are designed to support the truth and intention of the Scriptures.  Viewers are encouraged to read the gospels.

In her review of The Chosen in WORLD Magazine, Megan Basham notes that Jenkins “takes creative license by asking intelligent questions then imagining stories that might answer them.” For example, Episode 1 introduces viewers to a young man, Matthew, who will become one of Jesus’ disciples and eventually write the Gospel of Matthew.  But here Matthew is employed to do the Romans’ bidding and is hated by the Jewish people because he extracts exorbitant taxes from their meager incomes.

Four other future followers of Christ are introduced: Peter and his brother Andrew, and James and John.  They are among the Jews feeling the bite of taxation as they struggle to maintain their small business—fishing in the Sea of Galilee.  Jenkins uses the threat of financial ruin under heavy Roman taxation as a plausible backstory for why these rugged men had been toiling at their nets all night until Jesus told them to “put out into deep water and let down your nets for a catch (Luke 5: 1-11).”

But the first character we meet in The Chosen is an unlikely one to launch a crowdfunded movie series on the life of Christ.  She is Mary of Magdala, better known as Mary Magdalene, and she appears in the first scene in the middle of the night as a fearful little girl clutching her doll.  Her father comforts her with the promise from prophetic Scripture, written 500 years earlier, and they recite these words:

But now, thus says the LORD,
who created you, O Jacob,
And He who formed you, O Israel:
“Fear not, for I have redeemed you;
 I have called you by your name;
You are Mine. – Isaiah 43: 1

Fast-forward 28 years, and we find Mary Magdalene who goes by another name and is an abused, rejected, and demon-possessed woman.  To her, the promise of God in Isaiah now seems hollow and powerless.  Nor does Mary find assistance or hope from Nicodemus who represents the organized religion of his day.

Many of us can identify with Mary as we struggle against the age-old temptations of pride, power, materialism, depression, and addiction.  But just when she reaches the depths of despair, Mary hears a Man calling her by her real name, “Mary.” Then, He speaks those same words from Isaiah that she had recited in the warmth and security of her father’s arms—“…I have redeemed you; I have called you by name; You are Mine.”

We were deeply moved and impressed by the first episode of The Chosen.  So we purchased the first season and in so doing, are “paying it forward” to assist writer/director Dallas Jenkins and VidAngel in the making of eight additional episodes for Season 2.  I hope you will take time to view online the first episode, “I Have Called You by Name.”  Subsequent episodes are available at VidAngel.com.

COVID-19 Policy Ignores “Good Science”

Since my last article on the COVID-19 pandemic and policy entitled, “Growing and Groaning into the ‘New Normal’,” we are beginning to see various degrees of progress in opening up more of the essential services of our economy.  Our elected leaders are realizing the great cost and resultant damage that is resulting from having chosen a policy of locking down and socially distancing the human population.   Many now believe that we were wrong to isolate entire populations as opposed to isolating the vulnerable and the infected as was done in past successful handlings of outbreaks.

Still, there is much controversy.  We have taken different sides on whether the policies of the current administration and respective state governors are too lenient or too restrictive.  When evidence that contradicts a person’s belief is presented, the frequent response is, “It depends on who you listen to.”  And, this is certainly a good point.  So, I’ve been looking carefully at the credentials of those who are vocal and influencing policy.

In view of the ongoing uncertainties and controversy over policies to “open up the economy,” this article simply directs the reader to some points of evidence that ought to have been considered three months ago.  The evidence comes from an informative YouTube video, produced by Dave Cullen on Computing Forever, entitled “MUST WATCH: Debunking the Narrative (With Prof. Dolores Cahill).  I have anticipated that many readers will not which to take the time to view all of this long video.  Therefore, I have selected some important segmentsof the video and provided links where readers can "jump in" to hear specific points on COVID-19 science and  policy.  At each "jump in point," you will hear the jist of a key point within 3 minutes at which time, you can stop viewing.  

I present these key points as an example of what we all ought to be looking for as we listen to “authorities, then consider carefully in a spirit of prayer how we ought to think about the issue, and then decide whether or not to contact our elected officials.

Credentials and Connections of the Speaker
Dave Cullen's valuable interview is with Dr. Dolores Cahill, an Irish scientist with degrees in molecular genetics and immunology.  She also has decades of global scale experience in antibody research.  Dr. Cahill is also chairperson of the Irish Freedom Party which advocates separation of Ireland from the European Union.  Political connections?  Certainly, but who among major scientific voices doesn’t?  Please listen HERE to her background and then we’ll address her scientific integrity.

Are We Using “Good Science?”
["Good science" has been defined elsewhere.] Dr. Cahill’s research on antibodies worldwide has been scientifically validated, in part because of her own effort to establish standards of research integrity.  She explains that research fraud is regarded as a criminal offense in Germany, where it is reported to the police, the fraudulent scientist’s name is published, and then he or she loses funding for 10 years.  In the process of her discussion, we learn some of the basics of how the rampant rise in scientific fraud can be controlled.  Also, Dr. Cahill addresses how the lockdown policy was “anti-scientific” and “anti-nature” because it has ignored the importance of the human immune system and how we need to beef up our immunity through good nutrition and vitamins.  Listen HERE to her comments on the efforts to assure global progress, accountability, and valid publications of results in antibody research and research in general.

Will the Authority Take Responsibility?
Science naturally refutes false hypotheses as part of progress in pursuit of a true understanding of phenomena.  So, the claims of science can change.  However, scientists who speak through the media ought to “own up” when new research refutes their previous claims.  Of particular concern to many is the amount of seemingly unquestioned authority that has been granted to Dr. Anthony Fauci.  But recent media reports like this one by Tucker Carlson this evening point out how Dr. Fauci has changed his recommendations several times in ways that seem untethered to epidemiology and immunology.  In view of this point, you will be encouraged to hear Dr. Cahill place her scientific reputation on the line to make three statements about the COVID-19 virus.

First, the Coronavirus is not as dangerous as it is claimed to be.  Second, once a person has had the virus their immune system clears it after 10 days and they are immune for life and should be able to function in the world without isolation.  And third, Dr. Cahill is offering her recommendation to the Irish minister of health that the lockdown in Ireland be stopped within the next 10 days with appropriate provisions for protection of vulnerable individuals and instructions for all others as they return to their normal activities.  Listen HERE to her confident recommendations.

“Good Science” Refutes Lockdown Policy
Finally, the main point of much of Dave Cullen’s video interview with Dr. Cahill is her reasoned interpretation of the epidemiological data on COVID-19.  In this segment, you will see a chart of U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) showing the percentage of hospital visits due to influenza-like illnesses during the past thirty weeks dating back into late autumn, 2019.  You will want to hear Dr. Cahill explain how these CDC data support her claim and the claim of an increasing number of epidemiologists that the lockdown was not necessary. 

Specific points Dr. Cahill makes are as follows:  First, our bodies house hundreds of thousands of different viruses and it is necessary for the well being of our “micro-biome” within our bodies that we naturally come into contact with viruses and bacteria.  Second, during the flu season this year, from December until April, there were three major viruses circulating the globe; and the third was COVID-19.  Third, COVID-19 had its peak in the US on March 22 and people were at peak infection ten days before.  Then, most of the population in America cleared the virus within 10 days and then the threat was essentially gone.  In Dr. Cahill’s words, “there was absolutely no need for lockdown,” even in the early weeks of the pandemic.  Listen HERE for a discussion of these data and the implications for policy decisions in the days ahead.

Thank you for reading, and I thank Brian, one of my former students at Cedarville University, for referring me to this video.  As always, I invite “Comments” as we continue to seek to be informed and share information and opinion in a reasoned and polite manner.

“Mom,” Mindy, and Mother’s Day

According to the National Geographic website, Anna M. Jarvis (1864-1948) is most often credited with her role in the establishment of Mother’s Day as a national holiday.  The first Mother's Day was celebrated in a church service on this day, May 10, in 1908 following Anna's request to honor her mother.  On May 8, 1914, the U.S. Congress officially declared the second Sunday in May as Mother's Day.

This year, Mother’s Day once again falls on May 10.  And, the observance is also very special in our family because we will celebrate both the motherhood of my wife, Alvadell (“Abby”) Moser Silvius, while at the same time remembering that she labored to give birth to our daughter, Melinda (“Mindy”) Maetta, on May 10, 45 years ago.  This means that today we can celebrate Alvadell as mother, and Mindy as her blessed "letter" written in her blood and sweat, and with much love from the pen held faithfully in her kind grasp for the past 45 years.  And so today, both Alvadell and I will celebrate our daughter Mindy’s birthday in the presence of her husband Steve and children as living evidence of her motherhood.

Although my blog’s have often addressed issues that are controversial, there is no controversy in today’s entry.  (This also means today’s blog can be much shorter.  Yea!)  All of us can celebrate Mother’s Day as a reminder of our mother’s who gave us life.  Some readers may not know their biological mother but can pause to thank the mother who chose to love, adopt, and nurture them.  Others may not have had the privilege to bear one or more children but who are mothers nonetheless because of their major role as a loving, tender “mother” to children—maybe many children.

Regardless of the person we remember today as “our mother,” we ought to remember that that person, and for me, Esther Silvius, was the living being through whom God gave us physical life.  In view of this fact, we can ask with the Apostle Paul as recorded in 1 Corinthians 4: 7, What do you have that you did not receive?  Yet because of God’s wonderful grace through the agency of our mothers, we were launched into the land of the living with opportunity to take what was not our own and to use it to live godly lives as faithful stewards of God's grace in its various forms (1 Peter 4: 10).

And so, today I can celebrate both my wife, the mother of our children, Bradley and Melinda, and the birth of Melinda.  I conclude with words written some 30 years ago by Mindy on behalf of her mother, entitled “In the Picture.”

Happy Birthday, Mindy!  And, Happy Mother’s Day to both Alvadell and daughter, Mindy.

Groaning and Growing into a “New Normal”

The month of May brightens our spirits with the greening of the landscape and the blooming of spring flowers.  Better weather is also motivating many Americans who have been isolated under the COVID-19 pandemic to want to return to “normal.”  Still, many deep concerns, anxieties, griefs, and questions remain.  Many of us wonder if life will ever be the same.

Meanwhile, I’ve been looking for reasons to be encouraged, and I think I have found two worth sharing.  First off, I’m thinking that while we’d like to see “normal” again, why not hope for a “new normal,” a “better new normal?”  And second, why not resign to the fact that the COVID-19 pandemic will not be the last “tribulation” we face.  Instead, why not seek to learn from this experience in ways that will build character and resolve in readiness for future tribulations?

Hope for a “New Normal”
Have you been seeing signs of an emerging “new normal?” For example, haven’t many of us adopted better sanitation practices?  Aren’t we becoming more inclined to avoid coughing and sneezing around others?  And, speaking of social interactions, maybe we’ll appreciate more our gatherings with family and friends.  Or maybe we’ll realize how easy it would be for authorities to take away our First Amendment right of assembly to worship God, causing us to be more vigilant to protect this right as well as our freedom of expression.  I wonder if our greater thankfulness for small things will include the blessings like exchanging smiles unobstructed by masks, or the joy of eating together in restaurants and attending sporting events. 

Maybe, in the “new normal,” the humbling memory of when life as we knew it was upended by a tiny “invisible enemy” will help us realize how fleeting and frail our existence really is.  Out of a new sense of gratitude, maybe we will cherish the blessing of touching and conversing with one another—in short, to “love our neighbor as we love ourselves.”  Perhaps our conversations will become more respectful of differing opinions so that we can reach understanding on some issues and learn to respectfully disagree on others.  Maybe a new spirit of love toward our neighbor will be just in time as educational institutions seek to offer more the potentially more impersonal approach of “distance education;” and, our health systems trend toward more “telemedicine.”

In this “new normal,” I pray that we will see a renewed economy, amazingly propelled by what Adam Smith called an “invisible hand” as we see small businesses and industry make adjustments that will better position them for future challenges.  International monetary and trade policies may be altered to hold “bad actors” accountable and honor trade partners who want to participate in a spirit of good will on the global scene.  Perhaps we as consumers will alter purchasing habits as we become better at distinguishing our wants from our needs and focus more on things that really matter in life and for eternity.  For example, if I choose not to buy products from Communist China whose leadership was evidently responsible for the global spread of COVID-19, then I also want to invest financially and in prayer to support the efforts of that nation’s innocent citizenry to achieve the freedoms of worship and expression which I enjoy.

Finally, the “new normal” may see us showing greater appreciation for things that are so readily available by a simple phone call or accessible on a store shelf.  We have all known that our food doesn’t ultimately come from grocery stores or restaurants.  Now, we will be more aware of the “supply chains” that involve farmers, meat packers, fruit and vegetable growers, inspectors, truckers, and those who stock shelves.  Maybe we will choose to make better decisions to promote our individual health while being more thankful for first-responders, doctors, nurses, therapists, and other health care workers who labor every day for us.

Fundamental to the inauguration of the “new normal” will be our development of a “new disposition” that recognizes that we are not kings of the Earth but something much better.  God our Creator has appointed us as stewards with the spiritual, mental, and technological gifts to express His love for all of His creation by the manner in which we serve as its caretakers.  As stewards in the biblical sense, we are made aware of the moral and ethical implications of both our freedom and our responsibility.  For example, we recognize that food doesn’t ultimately come from either grocery stores or “supply chains.”  It comes from the good hand of God who sustains the global ecosystems including the soil, water, air, and biodiversity.  Together, these are necessary to support the efforts of farmers and ranchers who must “work within” the creation to produce food.  Stewards also recognize that their health and well being comes not only from physical food, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Matthew 4: 4).  Those who feast regularly on God’s Word will recognize that while God is the giver of every good and perfect gift that comes down from above (James 1: 17), God’s “good gifts” sometimes come in unpleasant wrappings.  This thought brings us to my second reason to be encouraged.

How Can Groaning Lead to Growth?
Although we can hope for a new and better “normal,” our future is not certain.  We may be moving out of the worst of the COVID-19 pandemic, but it is unlikely to be the last trouble we will face.  In fact, Jesus predicted to His devoted followers (those who obey by “abiding in Him”) that persecution would come in the future.  His reason for warning them, He said, was so that in me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation. But take heart; I have overcome the world.” (John 16: 33).  Notice, Jesus didn’t say, “might have tribulation,” but you will have tribulation.”  Here, “tribulation” is derived from the Greek word meaning “crushing pressure or affliction that causes anguish and groaning.”

You might be thinking, “Where is the sense of hope if inevitable tribulation is part of my “new normal?”  It doesn’t make sense!   If this is your response, you are absolutely correct.  But, in spite of inevitable “crushing pressures” and groaning that lies around the corner, there is bright hope for devoted Christ-followers.  But first, we must understand the context for “tribulation.” 

Trouble first came into God’s perfect creation when Adam and Eve sinned and brought judgment on themselves and all of creation as I explained recently in “Life Interrupted?” or “Life Inspired?”  As Romans 1: 21-22 explains (emphasis mine), although they knew God, they chose not to glorify Him as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools…  

The proof of our darkened, foolish thinking, is the fact that we find it hard to accept how “crushing affliction,” or groaning could bring about “good”—or, growth in character in us.  Yet, all over the world, even before the COVID-19 pandemic, people were already suffering great affliction.  Indeed, many victims of the COVID-19 pandemic already had been afflicted with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases; and many had suffered from emotional disorders that rendered their immune systems unable to fend off the Coronavirus.  Truly, the creation has been groaning as described in Romans 8: 18-23 waiting for the revealing of those who are led by the Spirit of God (Romans 8: 14).

Although persecution of Christ-followers in the US doesn’t usually rise to the level of physical abuse and martyrdom, the mental and emotional abuse is significant.  Janie Cheaney wrote an article entitled “Mind and Body” in WORLD Magazine on the subject of mental and physical illness among Christians.  She quotes a Presbyterian pastor who agrees that there are cases where Christians need seek to psychiatric treatment just as they would seek medical care for other health needs. The pastor stated, “a Christian may need treatment even more than an unbeliever because the life Christ asks us to lead is so fundamentally opposed to the way the world works.”

The Apostle Paul, in his early life as Saul the Jewish Pharisee, made a reputation of persecuting and jailing Christians.  When Christ appeared to Saul on the Damascus road, He addressed the persecutor with this convicting question, Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? (Acts 9: 4).  After Saul repented and received Christ as His Savior and Lord, he lived among the Christian outcasts and identified with their groanings.  Saul, after he was born again spiritually and renamed Paul, devoted over fourteen years to the study of the Scriptures and in communion with Christ through His Spirit.  Later, Paul would write the following testimony of his life commitment: 

I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death… (Philippians 3: 8-10).

Notice that Paul’s sufferings drew him closer and closer in personal relationship with Christ and His sufferings on the Cross.  Under the inspiration of the Spirit of Christ, Paul wrote the words in Romans 5: 1-5 which has become an encouragement to persecuted saints down through the centuries (emphasis mine):

Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.  And not only this, but we also exult in our tribulations, knowing that tribulation brings about perseverance; and perseverance, proven character; and proven character, hope; and hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured [into] our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.
also declared his primary life purpose and joy with these words:

Elsewhere, in 2 Corinthians 4: 18, Paul explains how he could be steadfast in the face of suffering and persecution.  He urges Christ-followers today to follow his example; namely, don’t focus on the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.  Not that Paul was oblivious to his responsibilities of earning a living (He was a tentmaker as noted in Acts 18: 3.) and being a responsible Roman citizen (Acts 24: 16).  But Paul focused his life continually upon the goal of the upward call of Christ (Philippians 3: 14).

Some years ago, Isaac Shaw, National Director and President of Delhi Bible Institute, presented a message at Grace Baptist Church, Cedarville, Ohio on the subject of the inevitable reality of Suffering in the Christian Life.  In this excellent message based on his experiences as a Christian in Hindu culture, Pastor Shaw recounts the testimony of an Indian journalist who had observed Christians being persecuted for their faith.  She had also privately studied the Bible, and eventually had given her life to Christ.  As a born-again believer, she said, “Pastor, it is absolutely illogical for anyone to be a Christian, and that is what has driven me to investigate; and, I have found that Jesus is utterly satisfying, and that Jesus is Lord.”

How About You?
Are you tired of the uncertainty, inconveniences, and isolation from the COVID-19 pandemic?  Are you finding yourself more thankful for basic requirements of life and those who make them available to you?  Can you envision a “new normal” that is even better than the present?  Or are you resigned that the current pandemic will not be the last “tribulation” you will face? 

Regardless, if you are not a Christian, may I recommend that you study the Steps to Peace with God which explains how you can become a devoted Christ-follower. If you are a Christ-follower and have questions about how you can grow in Christ through the struggles and persecution you may face, I hope you will dialog with me publicly using “Comments” below, or privately via my e-mail at silviusj@cedarville.edu.  Meanwhile, please take time read and meditate on the Scripture passages above.  Then, listen to the Pastor Isaac Shaw’s message, Suffering in the Christian Life in which he personally shares the experience of growing in Christ through sharing in the sufferings of Christ in India.