Consistent Conservation -- Part 3: Lifestyle to Match Words

Spring sprouts and buds are bringing new life from the cold ground here in Ohio.  Choruses of songbirds are greeting our daffodils as they burst into bloom.  March still offers chilly and snowy days.  But we find hope in God whose sovereign control over creation guarantees that Spring flowers and birdsongs will be right on time.  He is perfectly consistent in both spiritual and physical realms.  Jesus’s half-brother James writes, in Him there is no variableness or shadow of turning (James 1: 17).  In all His ways, God is and does only what is perfectly consistent with His holy nature. 

In contrast, our lives are often marked by “inconsistency.”  This claim is very evident in the realm of conservation of natural resources.  The word “conservation“ is derived from Latin con + sevare meaning to “serve with” or keep intact, preserve, protect.”  This derivation when applied to the Judeo-Christian stewardship ethic calls us to be stewards who “serve with” or “serve in harmony with“ the created order. 

“Consistent conservation” shows respect for the Earth and its creatures while also showing love and respect to our neighbor.  When our lifestyle is contrary to what promotes the flourishing of our neighbor and creation, our conservation is “inconsistent.”  Consistent conservation is characterized by integrity, an effort to be genuine and not hypocritical.

In late 2022, we posted two blogs addressing “consistent conservation.”  In Part 1, “Following the Right Recipe” we defined “consistent conservation” (See HERE and click on text box on left.).  In contrast, “inconsistent conservation” is characterized by moral relativism, misplaced priorities, and a spiritually darkened view of humankind.  This mindset divides us from our neighbor and dislocates us from our position as submissive stewards under God who calls us to exercise dominion over creation.  

In Part 2, “Following the Right Vision” (See HERE.), we traced how two very different philosophies influenced conservation approaches to the growing human population and its demands upon planet Earth.  The results of this “history lesson” give clear testimony in favor of consistent conservation.

Calls for a Conserving Lifestyle
In Part 3 of our series we now offer a third principle:  Consistent conservation calls for a new lifestyle.  This call is based on a series of logical realities in regard to energy and material resources as follows:

PHYSICAL REALITY #1:  We cannot produce energy.  We can only convert energy from one form to another.  According to the First Law of Thermodynamics, energy can neither be created or destroyed.  Example:  Conversion of solar energy to electrical energy by using solar panels.

PHYSICAL REALITY #2:  No energy conversion is 100% efficient.  Even “green energy” is not totally “clean.”  There is always release of heat, a more random, diluted form of energy that has more limited uses in our technology.  Example:  Internal combustion and nuclear energy conversions produce usable energy.  But engines and reactors must be cooled to prevent overheating.  Even manufacture of engines, reactors, solar panels and wind turbines requires energy, releases heat, and generates waste products some of which are hazardous.

ECOLOGICAL REALITY #1:  Other factors being equal, and because of physical realities #1 and #2, switching from fossil fuels to “green energy” will not produce a more Earth-friendly society unless green energy technology is more efficient in energy conversion and produces less waste from mining, refining, and manufacture than a fossil fuel-based society (See Part 1 of this series.)  In order to justify the switch from fossil fuel to “green energy,” a “green energy”-driven economy must demonstrate a decrease in “external costs”--ecological, economic, social, and cultural.

ECOLOGICAL REALITY #2:  Because both fossil fuel and “green energy” technology come with significant external impacts on the Earth, those who are genuinely concerned about conserving energy, material resources, and biodiversity must do more than switch from fossil fuel-based to green energy-based lifestyle.  We must adopt a more resource-conserving lifestyle.  Application:  Understanding this ecological reality motivates us to consider our personal ethical responsibility.

ETHICAL REALITY:  The Judeo-Christian stewardship ethic offers an objective basis for the practice of consistent conservation because it is based on the objective revelation of inspired Scripture (2 Peter 1; 20-21) and properly places humankind under God’s authority as stewards who are responsible to rely upon “good science”—science that correctly represents the physical and ecological realities that define the properties of energy and how it can best be utilized within the created order of Earth.

ETHICAL RESPONSIBILITY:  Influence leaders, policy makers, and nations must base their calls for energy and material resource conservation upon “good science” and match their calls with demonstrated changes in their personal lifestyles (i.e. per capita consumption) and support for wise policies.  Leaders who fail to support consistent conservation will appear to lack sincerity. 

Application:  A policy of “rules for thee but not for me” tends to distance leaders from the people and undermine precious freedoms.   Regardless of whether it is Socialism, Communism, Fascism, or another totalitarian form of government, tyrants generally maintain a lifestyle quite different from that of their oppressed masses because, in heart, they are simply corrupt, greedy, selfish human beings.

Challenge of Being Consistent
Having stated what we believe is a logical case for the ecological and ethical realities of conservation, we must confess our tendency to ignore these realities in favor of social or political expedience.  In individual efforts to create a favorable image, make a profit, or gain power are really “symbolism over substance.”  The same temptation affects institutions.  Cases in point are the current failures of certain banks, due in part to the irresponsible oversight by decision makers who were more focused on supporting woke ideology than doing reliable banking. 

Some of us may doubt the sincerity of members of the World Economic Forum (WEF) who boast of an intention to control Earth’s climate and “save the planet.”  But many of these same WEF members added much more carbon to the atmosphere by flying in their private jets to the Annual Meeting 2023, in Davos, Switzerland than of they had flown commercial or arranged to meet by online conferencing.  In fact, many would argue that corporate efforts and government programs to promote conservation cause more problems than they solve.  Consider the unintended negative consequences of government “help” to our banking system, education, and health care.  In each case, government interference through injection of tax dollars has elevated costs with little or no success.

We can see from the failed efforts of corporations and government programs to promote conservation, education, health care, banking, etc. that lasting gains ultimately depend upon individual responsibility and commitment.  Therefore, it is important that everyone who claims to be a consistent conservationist demonstrate a consistency between their public claims and their personal lifestyle decisions related to energy and resource consumption.  The masses will follow leaders who demonstrate a sincere commitment to the cause through their lifestyles.

Before we address practical lifestyle strategies for conservation, we should consider another principle:  Consistent conservation as we have defined it depends upon the discipline of stewardship at both the more obvious material level and the less obvious spiritual level.  We will consider our responsibilities at the material level first.

Material Responsibility
Sources of practical conservation ideas are readily available online.  For example, Conservation International offers a typical online resource consisting of an array of “sustainable living tips” from which one can choose in order to develop a more conserving lifestyle.  Please note that we do not endorse every aspect of the philosophy or recommendations of Conservation International.  Like any source, we need to be discerning about the philosophy and science behind the information presented.  More on that point below.

Our purpose here is to provide examples and a philosophy to illustrate how readers can adopt a more conserving lifestyle.  Please note that we are not always consistent in our conservation.  We are still learning and growing in commitment.  We invite readers to share your own practices—or areas where you struggle with conservation and need suggestions.

Our approach has been based on the familiar 3-R slogan:  REDUCE, REUSE, and RECYCLE.

RECYCLE is perhaps the most popular slogan in support of resource conservation.  At our home, we recycle all unused paper, glass, plastic, and metal.  Consequently, we carry only a small container of waste to the curb each week.  Recycling reroutes already-refined wood products as well as petrochemical, mineral, and metallic products back through the refining and remanufacturing process, requiring less energy than if they were manufactured from startup raw materials.

When we REUSE containers and other products we give the refined product “another life” of usefulness.  For example, carrying our own cloth grocery bags reduces the demand for the more fragile plastic bags that have a very limited “lifetime.”  [We are not always consistent in doing this.]  Glass containers are superior to plastic because the former can be more readily reused on a large scale.  We conserve energy and material resources any time we purchase a good quality object, appliance, or machine and then commit to maintaining it well to promote its longevity. 

For example, by God’s grace and our regular maintenance of our push mower, we have enjoyed its services on our 0.4- to 0.6-acre lawns for 30 years.  Admittedly, we have replaced the mower’s gas tank, rotary blade, and wheels.  We have added to the useful life of tools by careful maintenance and replacement of defective parts.  The aluminum scoop shovel we have used for decades came from a previous owner who had discarded it because its handle was broken.  All it needed was a new handle.

Any time we can REDUCE consumption we have gone one better than to RECYCLE or REUSE.  This claim is true because reducing our demand for energy and material resources reduces the volume or mass of material flowing through the energy-requiring recycling process (or making it into waste without recycling).  Lowering air and water temperatures in our home, taking shorter showers, and drying with a face towel versus a large bath towel, and drying laundry on our “wash line” using solar energy and fresh outdoor air are examples of ways to reduce energy consumption.

Reducing consumption reduces our demand upon resources at the point of input into our homes and lives.  Reducing waste of water, food, clothing, and energy means we are assured of getting the most out of what we receive.  For example, when we are careful not to waste food either in storage or on our plates, and are careful to empty all containers, we are assuring that as much as possible of the commodity is being used while reducing demand.

The choice to reduce is a fruit of consistent efforts to distinguish our wants from needs.    Although the words “economy” and “stewardship” are both rooted in the Greek word, oikonomia, meaning “management of a household,” today a tension exists between good stewardship of resources and a thriving economy.  This tension occurs because our economy depends upon advertising that appeals to consumer wants rather than needs.  Our wants and needs ultimately reflect the degree of our dependence upon the temporal-material realm versus the spiritual realm of life.  As we will now propose, a person’s motivation to REDUCE, REUSE, and RECYCLE is ultimately determined by his or her spiritual values and the disciplines that are nourished within the soul.

Spiritual Discipline
A consistent conservation ethic is ultimately motivated by spiritual values and discernment.  We believe that simply “going green” because it is popular or woke without considering a solid ethical basis for conserving causes us to miss a great benefit.  Instead, when our commitment to REDUCE, etc. is rooted in an objective stewardship ethic we realize something more-- that reducing consumption and living simpler not only conserves resources but also can make our lives richer physically, emotionally, and spiritually.  Instead of being the end in itself, our handling of temporal and material resources becomes a means to a greater end—namely, to become good stewards who find joy and satisfaction in pleasing God who is the Owner and Creator of all.

The Institute for Faith, Work, and Economics outlines four principles of stewardship:
1)  God is the Owner of His creation (Psalm 24: 1)
2)  Mankind is called to manage responsibly (Genesis 2: 15)
3)  Each of us must give account of our stewardship (Matt. 25:14-30)
4)  The faithful steward will be “rewarded  incompletely in this life, but
      fully in the next” (Colossians 3:23-24).

Today, instead of submitting to God’s plan as our Creator and Lord over creation, many of us act as if we can take God’s place as ruler of the Earth.  We must all admit that while we can be “good” at times, we cannot be “consistent,” either in our conservation or in any area of our lives.  In our January Oikonomia, we addressed this struggle of “trying to be good” in the context of the curse of sin on us and all of creation [See “More Than ‘Just Being Good’ in 2023,” Click HERE.].

The Scriptures clearly support the doctrine of the curse of sin and the fall of creation because of human rebellion (Genesis 3).  The result is death, eternal spiritual separation from God, and the return of our material bodies to the dust of the Earth.  Many who reject this doctrine may be very committed to caring for the Earth.  But although their deeds are commendable, without receiving Christ and God’s atonement for sin, their bodies will return to the dust of the Earth from which they came, and their souls to eternal separation from God (Matthew 25: 45-46).  But if we follow the spiritual discipline leading us to REPENT, RECEIVE, REVERENCE, and REPRESENT, then our lives and our handling of material resources will acquire eternal significance for God’s glory.

REPENT/RECEIVE:  When we confess our pride and smugness, we see ourselves as God sees us and we humbly admit that our deeds no matter how well intended, have been for the benefit of self and temporal ends rather than for God who created us and His world for eternal purposes.  To REPENT of these attitudes and values is to turn about-face to a new direction in which we learn to give God first place.  Elsewhere in Oikonomia, we have addressed in detail the importance of REPENTANCE, of “stopping on RED,” the blood of Christ that leads repentant souls to RECEIVE the gift of salvation and eternal life, before “going on GREEN” (See “Creation Care– Doing It Our Way?” by clicking HERE.”

REVERENCE:  The person who has repented, having followed “Steps to Peace with God,” becomes alive spiritually (Romans 8: 6).  He or she can now worship God “in spirit and in truth” (John 4: 24).  When we worship God in a spirit of REVERENCE in our thoughts, words, and work, we magnify Him as Lord over all of creation (Matthew 6: 33).  Our anxiety over getting and managing things gives way to reverent trust in our Father God’s provision (Matthew 6: 25-34).  We are motivated to exercise consistent conservation as stewards in order to honor and please God (1 John 3: 22), the One to whom we will give an account (#3 above) and be rewarded for our faithfulness (#4 above). 

Central to our REVERENCE is our regular expression of praise and thankfulness to God in prayer during our daily activities.  Offering prayers of thankfulness before meals acknowledges our dependence on the Giver, His gift of our ability to earn income, and our responsibility to be good stewards of the food and all of God’s good gifts.  An attitude of REVERENCE offers the additional benefit of enhancing our emotional and spiritual satisfaction and well-being.

REPRESENT:  When our repentance and receiving of Christ as Savior and Lord is followed by reverent service as God’s stewards of creation, we are set free from being ruled by material pursuits to be those who can rule over and manage the material realm of Earth in a way that REPRESENTS our Creator, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will one day return to rule the Earth for 1,000 years (Revelation 20).  Shawn Lazar discusses “Fifteen Characteristics of Life in the Millennium According to Isaiah” (See HERE.).  Revelation 21 and 22 give us the Apostle John’s vision of the New Heaven and the New Earth in which eternal peace and righteousness will be established.  

Meanwhile, as stewards of God’s creation and the revelation of His plan of salvation, our lives bear the image of His Son, Jesus Christ.  God has left His followers here on Earth as stewards whose lives witness of His grace like signposts pointing toward His coming kingdom in which righteousness dwells.   Although God’s redeemed anticipate the New Heaven and New Earth, and new resurrection bodies, they also recognize their present stewardship of both the Earth and their bodies.  Together, these truths and God’s indwelling Spirit ought to motivate us to a lifestyle that honors and pleases Him by our stewardship of both the material realm and in our spiritual disciplines (1 Peter 3: 8-18).

Summary & Invitation
In this 3-article series we have emphasized that resource conservation ought to have “consistency” like a well composed and stirred recipe.  This claim applies to policies and programs of large institutions, agencies, and corporations; as well as within the passions and practices of individuals.  Ultimately, conservation depends on the ethics and practices of individuals—and we often struggle to be consistent.

Now it’s your turn.  We are far from knowing and doing what we ought to in regard to “consistent conservation.” So, by sharing ideas, we all benefit and God and His creation are served for His glory. What questions, additions, corrections, or objections will you kindly add using the “Comments” link below; or by e-mail to silviusj@gmail.com ? 

Valentine Hearts, Presidents, and Love in Action

February invites us to focus on Valentine’s Day, our sweethearts, and the blessings of love in personal relationships.  We focus our February Oikonomia blog not only on hearts and shared love but on one of love’s greatest evidences-- forgiveness. 

True love that is freely and unconditionally given must come from deep within our hearts.  Valentine hearts remind us of this heart-felt love.  Love is also symbolized as the “fruit” of a tree.  Both the fruit and the tree that produces it remind us that human love is a character quality, or virtue, that grows and develops over many days, both sunny and stormy, all of which serve to strengthen the tree and ripen its fruit.

February also invites us to celebrate the birthdays of four American presidents: 
Ronald Reagan - February 6, 1911, Tampico, Illinois
Abraham Lincoln - February 12, 1809, Hodgenville, Kentucky
George Washington (February 22, 1732, Westmoreland Co, Virginia
William Henry Harrison, born February 9, 1773 in Charles City county, Virginia, died in office after only a one-month tenure as president. 

At least two “February presidents,” Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan, have left us powerful testimonies of love and forgiveness.  By his example, Abraham Lincoln led a deeply divided America toward a spirit of forgiveness and healing after our bloody Civil War.  Many of us remember President Reagan’s unfailing love for his wife, Nancy; and, his heart-felt forgiveness of his would-be assassin, John Hinkley, Jr. 

Ordinary Men
You may think it strange to combine Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln into the same list of “great American presidents.”  Some view Reagan as a midget in comparison to Lincoln.  After all, wasn’t he just a Hollywood actor who leveraged himself into the White House through his skill with public speaking and humor?  Some believed that, without the help of Nancy and his advisors, Reagan would never have achieved even mediocre leadership.

Abraham Lincoln also had his admirers and detractors.  A writer in the Richmond Daily Dispatch described Lincoln as a man whose personal qualities are those of a low buffoon, and whose most noteworthy conversation is a medley of profane jests and obscene anecdotes… hardly a description that we would associate with the man so many have come to revere as a great American.

The passage of time and the reflections of historians have combined to form more generous legacies for both Lincoln and Reagan.  In fact, many regard both men as being among the greatest American presidents.  What follows is our attempt to honor these men in the context of Valentine’s Day love and forgiveness.

Lincoln’s Love and Forgiveness
The character of Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865), our 16th U.S. president, was forged from humble beginnings, hard labor, and repeated failures both in his practice of law and in his pursuit of public office.  Lincoln’s wife, Mary Todd, was born into luxury but when she was only six, her mother died in childbirth leaving seven orphans of whom Mary was the fourth.  Her widowed father eventually remarried and Mary’s stepmother bore nine children whom she favored over Mary and the other stepchildren.  Mary’s eventual marriage to Abraham brought two individuals together, both of whom were prone to depression.

Abraham and Mary eventually saw the deaths of all but one of their four sons while Lincoln bore the additional pressures of the presidency during the terrible Civil War.  Kaleena Fraga writes that both suffered from periods of depression and melancholy, but “…although they suffered jointly during the worst years of the Civil War, Lincoln quite plainly loved his wife.  As president, Lincoln told a journalist: ‘My wife was as handsome as when she was a girl. And I, a poor nobody, fell in love with her, and what is more, have never fallen out.’”

The emotional trials of his marriage were compounded by the pressures of his war-time administration.  Upon Lincoln’s election to a second term, the Richmond Daily Dispatch found it appalling that the people of the supposedly civilized North had reelected a vulgar tyrant . . . whose career has been one of unlimited and unmitigated disaster… —a creature who has squandered the lives of millions without remorse and without even the decency of pretending to feel for their misfortunes; who still cries for blood and for money in the pursuit of his atrocious designs.”

Many historians and theologians believe Abraham Lincoln’s personal character qualities and greatness as a leader were formed by the refinement of his fiery trials.  Although he was born into a devout Baptist family, young Lincoln was a jokester who loved to disrespectfully impersonate the pastor of his church.  However, Lincoln’s faith in God and devotion to the Scriptures became an anchor for his often-troubled soul and a guide as he bore the weight of the office of President of the United States.  When a deeply divided America needed reconciliation and healing, who of all men could have led our nation as well as Lincoln did?  According to Michael Medved (See HERE and HERE), beginning in his early twenties and intensifying during the last five years of his life, Lincoln viewed himself as a divine instrument for a higher purpose.

“With Malice Toward None”
From his deep reservoir of compassion, even before the war had ended, Lincoln expressed love and forgiveness most notably in his Second Inaugural address, declaring (emphasis added), With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

Lincoln intended that the war should end “With malice toward none”—i.e. with an abolition of all ill will and any desire to inflict distress or pain.  Instead of pointing a finger at the rebellious southern states, Edward Achorn, writing in Time Magazine, notes that Lincoln delivered a mere “five-minute speech of about 700 words, short enough to run in a single column of a newspaper, [and] he argued that all Americans—North and South—shared culpability for the unimaginable horrors the nation had endured. This war of unexpected duration and ferocity, he posited, may have been God’s judgment on all of America for the evil of slavery.”

Achorn wrote that Lincoln was almost alone in seeing the war’s suffering as a verdict on both sides.  Perhaps it might be deemed an act of God’s justice, he argued, even if all the wealth piled up by 250 years of “unrequited toil” by the enslaved should be sunk into the war, and even if “every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword.”

In his second inaugural address, Lincoln applied the inclusive word “we” six times, and the word “both” four times to include North and South as responsible parties in the conflict:
“Both parties deprecated war… Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God and each evokes His aid against the other.  The prayers of both could not be answered… [God] gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came…”  As if to say that both parties, North and South, brought on this war, both have suffered greatly to fulfill the judgment of God upon the nation for the ills of slavery, and now it is time for both to strive together for reconciliation and healing.

Lincoln’s example of forgiveness is worthy of our consideration as we also live in a spiritually and politically divided America.  Achorn makes a helpful application of this principle as follows:  Lincoln, with his rare ability to step outside of the emotions that we all feel when we are attacked, believed that harsh words and acts of revenge rarely pay off; that we are all flawed human beings, all bringing our own motives and complicated understanding of the world to politics.

Reagan’s Rock of Faith
Like Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan was sharpened by the trials of his early life.  Reagan’s father was an alcoholic with a low self-esteem, and it was not uncommon for young Reagan to hear loud arguments between his father and mother.  Because his father regularly moved from one job to another, the Reagan family never stayed long in one Illinois community and they never owned a home.

According to Paul Kengor, Moving took a toll on the young Ronald; it created a void in him—a hole that religion came to fill. In need of a rock of reliability, he looked to where his mom, his heart, and his desolation pointed him: upward.  There, he found what he perceived as a permanent friend—God, who was always in His place, accessible at any moment, who never moved on him.

In one of their homes, according to Kengor, The previous tenant left behind a collection of bird’s eggs and butterflies enclosed in glass. The curious first-grader escaped into the attic for hours at a time, marveling at the eggs’ rich colors and the intricate wings of the butterflies. “The experience,” Reagan remembered, “left me with a reverence for the handiwork of God that never left me.” These wonderments, said Reagan, were like “gateways.” The notion of a Creator was etched into the boy’s consciousness. He later thanked that previous tenant as “an anonymous benefactor to whom I owe much.”

Whereas, Reagan the young boy found a “gateway” of reverence toward the love and holiness of God; Reagan the high schooler found an added channel of expression.  In a fortunate turn of events, a new English teacher invited her students to try out for a theatrical production.  Young Reagan took advantage of the opportunity and his teacher/director taught him the importance of developing empathy for the character he was assigned to portray.

As an adult, Ronald Reagan faced many challenges including a near-death experience during his acting career, an emotionally upsetting divorce, and threats to his life from infiltrating Communist sympathizers while he led the Screen Actors Guild.  But perhaps Reagan’s greatest challenge came abruptly on March 30, 1981, only a few weeks into his first term as President.

Reagan’s Near Fatality and Forgiveness
The Reagan Diaries, published records from Reagan’s diary for March 30, record that he addressed the Building & Construction Trades National Council, AFL-CIO at 2:00 pm at the Hilton Ballroom, Washington, DC.  Reflecting back on this eventful day, Reagan later wrote:
Left the hotel at the usual side entrance and headed for the car-- suddenly there was a burst of gunfire from the left. S.S. Agent pushed me onto the floor of the car and jumped on top. I felt a blow in my upper back that was unbelievably painful. I was sure he'd broken my rib. The car took off. I sat up on the edge of the seat almost paralyzed by pain. Then I began coughing up blood which made both of us think—yes, I had a broken rib & it had punctured a lung. He switched orders from W.H. to Geo. Wash. U. Hosp.

By the time we arrived I was having great trouble getting enough air. We did not know that Tim McCarthy (S.S.) had had been shot in the chest, Jim Brady in the head & a policeman Tom Delahanty in the neck.

I walked into the emergency room and was hoisted onto a cart where I was stripped of my clothes.  It was then we learned I'd been shot & had a bullet in my lung.

Getting shot hurts.  Still my fear was growing because no matter how hard I tried to breathe it seemed I was getting less and less air.  I focused on that tiled ceiling and prayed. But I realized I couldn't ask for God's help while at the same time I felt hatred for the mixed-up young man who had shot me. Isn't that the meaning of the lost sheep?   We are all God's children and therefore equally beloved by him. I began to pray for his soul and that he would find his way back to the fold.

I opened my eyes once to find Nancy there.  I pray I'll never face a day when she isn't there.  Of all the ways God has blessed me, giving her to me is the greatest and beyond anything I can ever hope to deserve.

After 12 days of therapy, transfusion, intravenous, etc., back in the White House, Reagan recorded on April 11:  The treatment, the warmth, the skill of those at G.W. (George Washington Hospital) has been magnificent but it is great to be here at home.  Whatever happens now I owe my life to God and will try to serve Him in every way I can.

Reagan biographer Craig Shirley recounts (See HERE.) that two years after his near assassination, Reagan demonstrated his enormous capacity for Christian forgiveness.  Reagan asked Dr. Daniel Ruge, White House physician, to contact the Dr. Roger Peele, head of psychiatry at St. Elizabeth's Hospital where John Hinkley, Jr. was incarcerated.  During his conversation with President Reagan, Dr. Peele was struck by the modesty, “kindness and professionalism of Reagan and his staff, asking several times if he was being inconvenienced in any way.”  Reagan expressed his desire “to pardon Hinckley, not legally but ‘personally’ and ‘in private.’"  But the president also made it “clear he wanted to do what was best for Hinckley.” 

In the end, Reagan and Peele agreed that a meeting would not be advisable because it would likely “empower the young man, whose ego was out of control and whose sense of guilt was nonexistent.”  Nevertheless, Reagan could rest in his conscience that he had already forgiven Hinkley personally.

Reagan:  Leading the World to Forgive
Ronald Reagan’s forgiveness toward his would-be assassin was personal and private.  However, as Divine Providence did for Abraham Lincoln, God granted Reagan a more public and international platform to demonstrate his great heart of forgiveness.  The year 1985 marked the 40^th anniversary of the liberation of Europe from the tyranny of Nazi Germany.  Reagan was invited by German Chancellor Helmut Kohl to address the German leadership, the German people, and the survivors of the Holocaust.  However, Reagan received strong pushback from many who still bore resentment toward Nazi Germany for the Holocaust.  Elie Wiesel, Jewish chairman of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Council, opposed Reagan’s plan to speak at the Holocaust site at Bergen-Belsen as did 53 U.S. Senators!   But Reagan insisted that “he had made a commitment to Kohl, and that 40 years of condemning the Germans for the Holocaust was obloquy enough.” 

Reagan’s Speech at the Holocaust site at Bergen-Belsen, May 5, 1985 (See HERE for text and video.) is regarded as one of his most moving expressions of compassion and forgiveness.  Here is his conclusion in which Reagan calls on the world to forgive and learn from the past, and to rise above such cruelty to hope and pledge, “never again:”

Everywhere here are memories -- pulling us, touching us, making us understand that they can never be erased. Such memories take us where God intended His children to go -- toward learning, toward healing, and, above all, toward redemption. They beckon us through the endless stretches of our heart to the knowing commitment that the life of each individual can change the world and make it better.

We're all witnesses; we share the glistening hope that rests in every human soul. Hope leads us, if we're prepared to trust it, toward what our President Lincoln called "the better angels of our nature." And then, rising above all this cruelty, out of this tragic and nightmarish time, beyond the anguish, the pain and the suffering for all time, we can and must pledge: Never again.

Following the Greatest Forgiver
Abraham Lincoln and Ronald Reagan lived and served in very different periods of history. Neither man was unanimously considered as “great” in his time; but both were men of great faith in God’s sovereign plan of salvation.  Both were confronted with evidence of the depravity of humankind:  Lincoln was faced with the deaths of over 800,000 in the American Civil War; Reagan spoke in memory of the deaths of 6 million men, women, and children in the Holocaust.  Yet both Lincoln and Reagan testified of a hope grounded in the providence of God. 

Reagan’s hope for America was framed in the metaphor of “a shining city upon a hill," a phrase he borrowed from the Pilgrim, John Winthrop, who foresaw a nation as a beacon of hope in Christ to whom the world would be drawn.  Reagan also shared Lincoln’s hope that humankind will choose to rise above the way of evil, violence, and death because of “the better angels of our nature.”  On March 4, 1861, only one month before Confederate bombardment of Fort Sumter which launched all-out war, Lincoln used the “better angels” phrase to close his First Inaugural Address.

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Lincoln and Reagan have left us with an example of strong leadership in the aftermath of  horrific wars.  But both pointed their countrymen and women toward goodness and enduring values that are attainable through faith and hope in God’s providence.  These are grounded in the Gospel message of the Bible: God so loved the world corrupted by the human sin of rebellion that He gave His only begotten Son (Jesus Christ), that whoever believes in Him should not perish by eternal separation from God but have eternal life (John 3: 16).  God’s sinless Son became a willing sacrifice to bear and take away our sin on a Roman Cross (Romans 3: 21-26; 1 John 2: 2: 4: 10).

Greatest Expression of Love
What is the greatest expression or act of love of one person toward another?  Jesus answered this question perfectly, first in words and then by two amazing actions:

WORDS – (to His disciples): This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.  Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (John 15: 12-13).  
ACTIONS – 1) Forgiveness:  He said, Father, forgive them
                          for they know not what they do (Luke 23: 34).
                     2) Propitiation:  This is real love—not that we loved 
                          God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as a
                          sacrifice to take away our sins (1 John 4:10 NLT)
                          – or, a propitiation for our sins (ESV).

Jesus spoke words of forgiveness; and then, willingly laid down His life through the brutality of Roman crucifixion.  He demonstrated God’s great commandment, “Love one another,” by His great love for mankind by words of forgiveness with His last breaths.  Then, Jesus poured out His life in sacrificial death, body and blood given in sacrificial love, as an atoning sacrifice for sin.

But how do we express love?  In 1 John 3: 16, the Apostle John wrote, This is how we know what love is:  Jesus Christ laid down his life for us.  And we ought to lay down our lives for our brothers and sisters.  While many of us are prepared to die for our loved ones, family, and brothers and sisters in Christ, what about our enemies, some of whom are unsaved and bound for eternity without God?  Romans 5: 7-8 answers this question:  For one will hardly die for a righteous person; though perhaps for the good person someone would even dare to die.  But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.  God loves both the obedient saint who serves Him and the sinner who rejects Him.  God’s forgiveness of sin as a result of Christ’s sacrificial death applies to all, both saint and sinner.

Romans 6 explains that each person who comes to Christ in repentance and accepts Christ’s sacrifice for their sin is “baptized (immersed) into Christ” (verses 3-7) and united with Him in His death.  Then, as Christ was raised to new life with the sin “done away,” so also are we raised to “newness of life” in Christ (v. 4-7).  As new creatures in Christ (2 Corinthians 5: 17), we are indwelt with His Holy Spirit.  As we abide in Christ (continue in obedience to His Word), His Spirit abides in us and we are able to “bear much fruit.”  John 15: 7-14 ties all of this reasoning together from abiding to fruit-bearing, and the fundamental fruit of the Spirit is—guess what?   Love!  (See Galatians 5: 22-23.)

What is our greatest expression of love toward God?
The answer ought to be obvious:  to accept the gift of salvation which His Son Jesus purchased for us.  If there is no greater expression of love toward us than Jesus laying down His life for us (John 15: 12-13), then our greatest expression of love to God is to accept His “love gift” of salvation and to abide (obey) in His commandments (John 15: 13-14).  “We love because He first loved us (1 John 4: 19).”  But there is a second human expression of our love—to love our neighbor through forgiveness without keeping a “record of wrongs.”

Love Keeps No Record
Shortly before the end of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln was asked by a reporter, “What are you going to do to those rebellious southerners after the war is over?  How are you going to treat them when they come back to the United States?”
Lincoln replied “I will treat them as if they had never been away.”

Lincoln’s attitude toward the South, and Reagan’s attitude toward Nazi Germany reflects an understanding of human depravity and need for mercy and forgiveness.  Romans 5: 1 declares, Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ…  I like to think of justification as a declaration (from God) that He sees me as “justified,” or “just as if I’d never sinned” based on my faith in Christ’s sacrifice for sin.  The record or accounting of our sins is declared as cancelled just as the master had cancelled the debt of the unforgiving servant (Matthew 18: 26-27).  Do we cancel the debt owed to us by our offenders by forgiving and then refusing constantly remind them of their offense?

Valentine Love and Beyond
A card? Candy?  A diamond?  Or, maybe sacrificially giving up something that brought joy to a loved one?  When we do acts of unconditional love (Agape love) on Valentine’s Day or on any other day of the year, we are acting, although imperfectly, in the spirit of God’s love toward us.  Few of us will face an occasion where we must literally “give up our life” for our loved one; but God’s love in us ought to cause us daily to “deny ourselves, take up our cross daily and follow [Christ] (Luke 9: 23).  As we “die to self” and yield to God’s Spirit, the love of Christ infuses our thoughts, words, and actions as Paul describes in 1 Corinthians 13: 4-8a:

Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth;  bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.  Love never fails…

Have You Found the "Greatest Love?
The sad news is, according to the Bible, we cannot find and experience the "Greatest Love" and true forgiveness apart from a personal relationship with "the Greatest Lover," Jesus Christ.  The Good News, or "the Gospel," explains how you can receive Christ and live forever in God's love.  This Gospel is summarized in an outline called Steps to Peace with God which explains God’s love, our predicament (sin and separation from God), what Jesus has done to address our predicament, and what you can do by faith to receive God’s righteousness (right standing with a Holy God). 

If you have questions or comments, we’d love to hear from you.  Just post a “Comment” below or e-mail to silviusj@gmail.com