Stewardship of “God’s Economy” – Reverent Discernment of His Word and World

The Greatest Teacher often pointed to His creation to illustrate important principles or to reveal God’s nature and purposes.  To his anxious followers, Jesus said, “look at the birds” and “consider the beautifully arrayed flowers” (Matthew 6: 26, 28).  He pointed to the vine (John 15: 5) and the fig tree to teach fruitfulness (Matthew 21: 19-20).

Today, there are plenty of reasons to be anxious and pout about our circumstances, or point fingers at Washington or our parents or spouses or pastors rather than take individual responsibility.  But we often face a second challenge – stewarding the Earth at a time when we seem to have limitless power and ability to alter creation from the ocean depths to the atmosphere above.  We use technology’s tools to mine the treasures of God’s creation in search of a satisfaction that material pursuits alone cannot deliver.  Instead, God is calling His stewards to “mine” His creation and His special revelation in the Scriptures with a disposition of reverent discernment that we might learn and exercise our individual responsibility toward Him, toward our neighbor, and toward His creation.

Won’t you join me in an exercise of “mining” creation-- thoughtfully considering it as Christ, the Creator, commanded?    Respectful contemplation of creation is warranted because creation belongs to God and is meant to reveal His wisdom and glory. 

 

Let’s get acquainted with three creatures and consider what lessons they might teach us about real stewardship, or oikonomia (hence, our word, “economy.”)  Stewardship in this context is management of a human economy within God’s created order, or Economy (Berry, 1987) with due respect for the laws that govern this Economy for the good of all and the glory of God.  Our panel of three creatures includes Spring Draba, Skunk Cabbage, and Black Bear.  Later, we will meet “Mr. Hourly Wage Earner” who resides in many different cultures.   

Spring Draba is an early-blooming spring wildflower which the 18^th century botanist, Linnaeus, named Draba verna.  In March in SW Ohio, the alert observer can usually find Draba growing in the hard soil of paths or trails, or in the bear spots that interrupt an otherwise smooth, green lawn.  Best if we get on our knees to look carefully-- a good posture for reverent discernment of God’s Economy.  There, you may see Draba, barely the height of the toe of your shoe.  Even then, she reaches this height only when her delicate, white flowers are hoisted on slender, leafless stalks to attract pollinators.   Until flowering time, Draba is only a lowly rosette of tiny leaves covering the otherwise bare soil. 

Spring Draba, Draba verna, with fruits (Fr) developing from the flowers.

Usually by mid-April, tiny Draba has already completed her annual life cycle.  Seeds from the previous year have sprouted and the ground-hugging, leafy rosettes have captured sunlight necessary for growth, flowering, fruiting, and production of new seeds that will be shed to lie dormant until the next Spring.  How does such a tiny flowering plant survive, being relegated to the hard-packed soil and expected to bloom on cold, windswept, March days?

Pretending to understand more than we actually do, botanists claim that Draba is “adapted to its niche,” or “occupation,” through natural selection.  However, some of us would credit a Divine Designer for originating the genetic blueprint which then has passed down through succeeding generations with minor changes through natural selection to become what we call Draba verna. 

Although Draba’s origin is debated, there is no debating the “do or die” situation that Draba faces each year.  Survival depends upon germination of tiny seeds in bare soil each Spring.   The tiny leaves unfold at ground level, the warmest place on blustery March days, to soak up the sunshine necessary for photosynthesis of food to support growth, flowering,  and seed production for the following year.  While still on our knees, we can consider how Draba teaches us individual responsibility to live in harsh places.  But Draba is not the earliest-blooming plant in the Midwest.

In February, long before Draba blooms, I make my annual pilgrimage to a nearby fen (alkaline wetland), often while it is still blanketed with snow.  Careful examination will reveal the pointy, purplish mottled spathes of Skunk Cabbage, Symplocarpus foetidus, poking through the snow.   Each spathe is like a sheltering shroud that protects a fleshy, thumb-sized spike of tiny flowers within what amounts to a “warm room” in which pollination can occur. 

Skunk Cabbage:  Spikes of tiny flowers are surrounded by a hood-like "spathe"

What you won’t see on a cold, February day is the massive Skunk Cabbage taproot anchored deep within the wetland soil beneath each pointy spathe.  Here, soil temperatures average 55^o F year-around.  Within the taproot are rich stores of “heating fuel” in the form of carbohydrates stored there during the year before.  When Skunk Cabbage flowers are ready to display mature pollen to insects for pollination, the flower hikes up its “thermostat” and burns stored “carbs” that flow up to the spike from the taproot.  Environmental physiology students and I have measured temperatures as much as 15^o F warmer within the flower spikes than temperatures in the surrounding winter air!   Result?   Apparently, insect pollinators are attracted by the warmth and by the odor that is dispersed by the heat into the surrounding air.  By April, new cabbage-like leaves have emerged and their photosynthesis enables the production of many large seeds and the replenishment of taproot “fuel” for the following year.

Whereas, the Draba’s economy depends upon year-to-year production and germination of tiny seeds, the Skunk Cabbage economy is based on long-term savings and investment in underground energy reserves.   From these reserves it generates heat to accomplish pollination in the winter when there is little competition from other plant species for insect pollinators.   No matter to Skunk Cabbage if a bad year occurs; its taproot will have sufficient energy assets to “hold its ground” until a better year comes.

The Skunk Cabbage reminds me of another creaturely example, the Black Bear, Ursus americanus, common in western North America.  Like Skunk Cabbage, the economy of the Black Bear is based on large energy reserves formed during the summer by a diet that includes storage roots and tubers of plants, nuts, plant shoots and buds, large and small mammals, insects, honey, and salmon.  [Humm!  Would a Black Bear feed on a Skunk Cabbage taproot?] 

Like Skunk Cabbage which overwinters underground with its stored energy in a huge taproot, Black Bears also “go underground” in a den for the winter.   As days become shorter, bears prepare for winter’s food scarcity and cold by extensive foraging which leads to the addition of hundreds of pounds in body fat.  Pregnant female black bears have the additional challenge to their economy.   They must nurture two or more baby bears within their uteri which are then birthed in late winter.  To conserve energy, the Black Bear enters a suitable den to reduce body heat loss; and then, sharply reduces its metabolism to lower body temperature.   Denning and lowering metabolism conserve energy reserves for the bear just like a human family in a well insulated home that lowers its thermostat to save on their energy bill.

Black Bear, Ursus americanus

We have seen how one species, Draba, with relatively small energy reserves, and two larger species, Skunk Cabbage and Black Bear which depend upon huge energy reserves, each take responsibility to prepare for and survive harsh winters and rugged environments.  The energy economy of humans is not all that different from other creatures.  Each must have suitable nutrition, shelter, and social relationships necessary for procreation and nurture of offspring.  However, biblically speaking, humans have been created with vastly superior intellect and ability to enter into more complex social and political relationships that revolve around a monetary economy.

Let’s consider the laborer who earns an income based on an hourly wage or who is paid by contract when a particular task or job is completed.  The survival of many of the world’s workers and their families depends upon hourly or otherwise regular wage-for-work.  The plight of many laborers may be illustrated by the story once told by Ralph and Lucy, our family friends who once served as missionaries in Bangladesh.   Ralph had come upon a heated argument between several laborers, or coolies, along a riverbank.  It seems that at least one coolie was objecting to a request from his superior to unload bags of rice from a truck and onto a boat docked at the riverbank.  Why would a healthy, adult Bengali male refuse this opportunity for employment?

Upon inquiry, Ralph learned that the payment being offered to the coolie in rice grain for food in return for his labor was unacceptable to the man because it offered insufficient caloric value for his service rendered.  Amazingly, this man’s economy had taken into account the calories required to unload the rice from the truck, a task he was willing to do.  But, he refused to move the rice onto the boat in what would have been a smoother, more efficient operation.  Reason?   His payment in calories and nutrition would not have provided sufficient compensation for his bodily work plus extra calories and nutrition needed to feed his family.

This account illustrates the large cultural and economic gap that exists between Asian coolies and most people who read this blog.  The Bengali breadwinner’s economy required literally a day-by-day “balancing of the books” for him and his family to survive.  Few of us can even comprehend such an economy.  Like Draba with her “do-or-die economy” in the harsh soil and cold days of early Spring, many wage-earners must take day-to-day responsibility to support themselves and their loved ones.

We now return to our opening question:  If we agree that God calls us as His stewards to consider  His creation with a disposition of reverent discernment of our individual responsibility toward Him, toward our neighbor, and toward His creation; then, what can we learn from creatures so diverse as Draba, Skunk Cabbage, Black Bear, and a human laborer?   First, we learn the principle of God’s provision.  God provides for His creatures through the Economy of His creation.  All creatures must have a continual supply of energy and nutrition for sustenance.  Draba and Skunk Cabbage rely on sunlight to power their growth and reproduction from inorganic building blocks in the soil and atmosphere.  On the other hand, Black Bear and the human worker consume plants and sometimes meat as food.

Though they are diverse, the Creator has equipped each creature to obtain necessary sustenance according to their niche in the Economy of creation.  No creature can create and sustain life out of inorganic constituents.  Test tube experiments to produce even one living cell have failed, let alone efforts to create and sustain the economy of a whole ecosystem as attempted in the Biosphere 2 project in the Arizona desert in the 1980’s.

God’s special revelation in the book of Job underscores the necessity of His provision for His creation:

            But now ask the beasts, and let them teach you;
              And the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you.
              Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you;
              And let the fish of the sea declare to you.
             Who among all these does not know
             That the hand of the LORD has done this,
             In whose hand is the life of every living thing,
             And the breath of all mankind?  -- Job 12: 7-10 (NASB)

The second principle we learn from the natural revelation through these four kinds of creatures is the principle of individual responsibility for survival and reproduction.   Within the larger Economy of creation, in order to survive, each creature must operate within physical and biological limits that govern its own economy.  Thus, we see Draba being and doing what Draba is designed to be and do; namely, facing the rigors of cold, March days on hard soil to grow and produce seeds for the next year.  

Likewise, the Bengali worker must complete his task for a payment of food that is sufficient for his bodily sustenance with enough extra to feed his family.  On the other hand, the economy of Skunk Cabbage, Black Bear, and many of us includes a means of storing energy or monetary assets that provide a “cushion” against immediate life or death.  However, the principle of individual responsibility still applies in that all creatures must acquire energy and nutrients during the season of opportunity and save extra for an unfavorable season lest they die.

A third principle revealed in Scripture and in creation is the principle of reverent discernment in conservation and restoration.   Successful conservation of the diverse forms of life on Earth must respect the unique requirements and context upon which each species depends for its existence.   Our panel of four creatures can each testify that even well meaning attempts to promote their welfare often represent a violation of natural laws that govern their well being.  For example, let’s help Draba by tilling the soil in those hard-packed, bare-soil spots and then add some nitrogen fertilizer.  Result?   Many of her tiny seeds will be buried too deeply to germinate; and, the increased soil fertility will enable other plant species including lawn grass to invade and occupy the bare spots and make it inhospitable for Draba.  The harsh environment that Draba is designed and adapted to face is the very key to her survival.

Like Draba, both Skunk Cabbage and Black Bear naturally benefit from simply being left alone by well meaning caretakers.  There is a reason that the two plant species have been called “wildflowers” and that Black Bear is considered a “wild animal.”   Attempts to “domesticate” or otherwise alter their natural context have violated the very nature of what they were created to be.

Well meaning attempts in the late 1800’s to conserve the Black Bear in Yellowstone National Park while providing closer access for tourists to observe and feed them led to a conversion of this grand , wild creature from bear to beggar.  As Angela Reese reported in her masters thesis (2007) 

Yellowstone condoned the regulated feeding of bears at these “lunch counters,” and tacitly gave patrons permission to feed bears themselves. Later she adds: Roadside feeding transformed passive spectators into active participants and allowed the park visitor an opportunity for interaction with park wildlife. These visitors became shapers of bears’ lives and behavior (Biel, 2006).

The same well meaning efforts, sometimes in the name of “social justice”, without reverent discernment can be as demeaning and degrading to humankind as it is with wild creatures. Before developing this notion further we must remember both the uniqueness of humankind and the great cultural diversity within Homo sapiens.

The average American has more economic security than many lower-income workers around the world.  Like the Skunk Cabbage and Black Bear, many of us have reserves in our household economies.  Nevertheless, all humans have an individual stewardship responsibility to utilize time, abilities, and opportunities to care for themselves, family, and neighbor.  Responsibility to work is grounded in the Judeo-Christian Scriptures which reveal a Creator Who works and rests.  It follows that God has given mankind a weekly cycle of work (six days) and rest (a Sabbath day) (e.g. Exodus 20: 9-11).   The Apostle Paul wrote in 2 Thessalonians, Chapter 3, that Christians should not lead “an undisciplined life” (verse 6).  Paul’s own economy as a tentmaker underscored his teaching (verses 7-9) as well as his command that “if anyone will not work, neither let him eat” (verses 10-12). 

There is no contradiction in God’s Word between “love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 19:19) and “if anyone will not work, neither let him eat.”  We are called to help the helpless; but with a correct definition of helping, one that respects human dignity.  Marvin Olasky (WORLD, 2009) quotes Josephine Lowell, a 19^th century New York City charity leader, who wrote: 

the problem before those who would be charitable, is not how to deal with a given number of poor; it is how to help those who are poor, without adding to their numbers and constantly increasing the evils they seek to cure.  

Olasky further quotes an article in Charities Review, in 1900, in which Edward T. Devine called for charities whose goal was 

not "that poor families should suffer, but that charity should accomplish its purpose." Thoughtless generosity was akin to selfishness if it made charity misfire. Generosity plus discernment was key. 

Throughout history, there have always been people in need of help.  Good stewards are to use reverent discernment to rightly identify God-given abilities and opportunities both for meaningful work and to rightly discern the right ways to help our neighbor when he or she is in need (see Ephesians 4: 28).  Nowhere does the Bible teach that it is the responsibility of government to help of the poor and needy.  The 19^th century charity leader, Amos G. Warner, understood this principle and saw governmental welfare as necessarily more impersonal and mechanical than private charity or individual action (Olasky, 2009).

Today’s news is filled with reports of well meaning efforts by Washington to help the needy while challenging the more fortunate to “pay their fair share.”  Yet Washington’s distance from the diversity of American families, businesses, and local economies, and its “one-size-fits-all approach is like fertilizing Draba or providing food “dumps” for Black Bears.  Result?  A violation of the natural order in which human dignity is often lost and an ever larger percentage of Americans become dependent upon government.

In summary, we can discern from God’s created order that all creatures are dependent upon His Economy.  Second, God has equipped each species to respond by using its genetic and behavioral equipment to “be fruitful and multiply.” Fruitfulness depends upon both individual responsibility and the state of the environment and biotic community within which a given species lives.

Third, any human effort to “help” another species or a neighbor must be guided by reverent discernment of God’s natural and special revelations.  Our father Adam’s first lesson in stewardship was to become acquainted with the other creatures with such detail that he came to understand that his niche was totally different from any other creature (Genesis 2: 15-25).  Likewise, humble discernment is necessary for effective conservation and restoration human communities and local economies.   Conservation of wildlife such as the Black Bear requires more than provision of feeding “dumps” that convert them to beggars.  Likewise, restoration of human dignity and purpose among the needy depends upon short-term assistance that includes assistance and incentives to find meaningful work.  

Conservation and restoration of both mankind and fellow creatures requires knowledge of and attentiveness to the uniqueness of each biotic community and neighborhood; gaining a “sense of place” as described in Oikonomia, Sept. 31, 2011 .   These are the tasks best taken up by responsible members of family and church spheres of authority in cooperation with appropriate local community groups.  

Your comments are always welcome.  My sources and some additional references are listed below.

References:

Berry, Wendell.  1987.  Home Economics.   North Point Press, San Francisco.

Biel, Alice Wondrak. 2006. Do (not) feed the bears: The fitful history of wildlife and tourists in Yellowstone. University Press of Kansas. 186 pgs.

Olasky, Marvin.  2009.   Giving That Worked.   WORLD Magazine, March 14, 2009).

Reese, Angela.   2007.   Addressing Food Conditioning of Cascade Red Foxes in Mount Rainier National Park, Washington.   Masters Thesis, Evergreen State College, Olympia, WA.

What Does It Mean to Be “Pro-Life?”

Our current age of sound bytes, blogs, and slogans can easily distract us from thinking broadly, deeply, and biblically about complex cultural issues.  The combination of small bits, fast transmission, and high volume of information can discourage careful reasoning and the public discourse necessary to define, analyze, and resolve social, political, and ethical issues.

A case in point is the recent exchange between some pro-life leaders and the Evangelical Environmental Network (EEN) over what pro-life leaders see as a misuse of the term “pro-life.”   The latest objection came in response to the testimony by Rev. Mitch Hescox, President of the EEN, at a congressional hearing of the Energy & Commerce Committee when he stated:

Biblically, being ‘pro-life’ is far more than being ‘anti-abortion.’ Jesus said that he came to bring life and life in abundance (John 10:10). We believe that includes spreading the gospel, standing up against abortion, reaching the lost, helping the least of these, and being good stewards of God’s creation. In essence, to be ‘pro-life’ is to be ‘pro-whole gospel.’[i]

Rev. Hescox’s testimony was invited to inform the Energy & Commerce Committee as they discuss new emission standards for coal and oil-fired power plants that release mercury and affect fresh water sources.  The proposed “Utility Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MACT)” rule would address allowable levels of the toxic metal in the environment.  The Center for Disease Control estimates that at the time of birth, approximately 1 in 6 children in the United States carry threatening levels of mercury.

Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill) spoke on behalf of pro-lifers who object to the more comprehensive definition of “pro-life” expressed above by Rev. Hescox.  According to Shimkus,

Truly pro-life issues are issues of life and death” and “we in the pro-life community take great offense when an evangelical movement tries to usurp the meaning of ‘pro-life.’[ii]

Two notions of what it means to be "pro-life"

So, who is right?  Are members of the environmental movement unfairly usurping the anti-abortion/pro-life movement by expanding the meaning to the term “pro-life?”  Or, is there merit in rallying around a more comprehensive perspective of the sanctity of human life; one that calls for Christian stewardship of all of life, human and non-human?

Lest I contradict my earlier caution against finding quick answers for complex issues with a few sound bytes and blogs, I must acknowledge that this blog posting cannot be the final word.  Instead, I hope to lay out some considerations that will stimulate readers toward further reading, reasoning, and response.

First, I have an admission to make.  In 2000, during the close presidential race between Al Gore and George W. Bush, I attempted to expand Bush’s concept of “compassionate conservatism” to include what I called compassionate conservationism.  The main point of my essay published in Christianity Today was as follows:

Moral conservatives are successfully articulating a biblical worldview regarding sexual abstinence before marriage, sanctity of life, and the importance of moral teaching in our schools. Consistent with this, they must also articulate the case for a compassionate conservationism, an environmental ethic rooted in a biblical worldview. Such an ethic would redefine “environmentalists” as those who are concerned about the environment of all of life. [iii]  

My intent, both then and now, was not to gloss over the serious moral failure of our culture that allows the innocent lives of babies to be snuffed out by abortion.  I would oppose any individual or group that seeks to gloss over or otherwise diminish the moral tragedy of abortion by diverting attention from it to environmental issues such as climate change, habitat destruction, toxic pollution, or environmental and social justice.

I do not believe Rev. Hescox or the EEN is seeking to unjustly usurp the “pro-life” movement or diminish the grave importance of respecting the sanctity of human life.  Rather, I believe they are seeking to challenge us to view it more broadly and biblically.  Before drawing your own conclusions, let’s consider what legitimate objections there are against an effort to reconcile the two major notions of what it means to be “pro-life.”  Allow me to briefly list and comment on three possible objections.

First, is the argument of “confused terminology” articulated by Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council when he stated,

The term pro-life originated historically in the struggle to end abortion on demand and continued to be used overwhelmingly in that sense.  To ignore that is at best sloppy communication and at worst intentional deception.[iv]

If we are concerned that the sanctity of human life cause might be jeopardized if terminology is confused, perhaps it will be necessary to abandon the more politically correct term “pro-life” in favor of the term “anti-abortion” or “anti-death.”  Clarification of terms is fundamental to discourse on any issue and should not be cause for division, at least among those who strive for the same goals.

Let’s call the second objection the argument of “confused theology.” Hescox and the EEN make a strong case for extension of the sanctity of life ethic to include “all of life” when Hescox stated last December:

We’re called as Christians to defend the sacredness of life.  As a pro-life community we have a biblical responsibility to protect the unborn and infants from pollutants that will prevent them from reaching their full potential.  There is no known safe levels of mercury which cause neurological damage to the unborn.  Jesus tells us to do nothing that would hinder our children. Mercury poisoning from their mothers eating contaminated fish threaten our children from such an abundant life.”[v]

On the other hand, I am sympathetic with the concern articulated by Rep. Shimkus and others who object to the notion that abortion should be added to a long list of environmental concerns that only indirectly affect human life.  After all, the abortionist’s tools directly kill an unborn baby; whereas, it is proposed that coal-fired power plants that release mercury can only indirectly affect the health of an unborn child when the child’s mother ingests mercury-contaminated fish.

So, the question becomes, are we ethically responsible to do all that is reasonably possible to protect the life of the unborn from both direct and indirect threats?  In this context, a command from the Torah may be instructive:

"If men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she gives birth prematurely, yet there is no injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman's husband may demand of him, and he shall pay as the judges decide. But if there is any further injury, then you shall appoint as a penalty life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, bruise for bruise..... Exodus 21:22-25 (NASB)

Many would interpret this passage as affirming the personhood and value of the unborn child[vi]   If this is true, and we agree that is was not the intent of the scuffling men to harm the woman let alone her unborn child, then this Scripture seems to affirm our accountability for indirect effects upon the unborn.

Returning to the concern about mercury poisoning, the science of ecology is providing a clearer understanding of indirect effects of this heavy metal which can move with food, nutrients, and toxic chemicals within the so-called food web of life.  Although few of us would directly ingest toxic mercury, or commit the act of poisoning his or her neighbor, the actions of anyone responsible for releasing mercury into water and poisoning fish or other creatures which are then eaten by his or her neighbor would seem to be in violation of the command to “love thy neighbor as thyself” if it is clear that harm or death resulted indirectly from the action.
 

Note also that the ecological food web that pictures the links between polluted water, fish, and mankind makes it harder for us to ignore our intimate linkage and responsibility to nonhuman creatures.  The Judeo-Christian theology that affirms humankind as the uniquely created image bearers of God does not give us grounds to treat other parts of God’s creation with disdain or as simply a backdrop in the human drama.  Instead, we are responsible to use our platform as image bearers to represent the benevolent rule and character of God to His creation (Genesis 1: 26-28; 2:15). Therefore, poisoning of stream water by mercury from power plant emissions that indirectly and unintentionally harms both fish and my neighbor who ingests the fish is a violation of two major biblical commands -- biblical dominion and stewardship over God’s creatures whom He created for His glory (Revelation 4:11); and, violation of the command to love our neighbor as ourselves (Matthew 2:39).

A third objection to a more comprehensive pro-life stand may be called the argument of “murky or confused science.”  The argument of the EEN that mercury poisoning, like abortion, “threatens and impedes life” must be substantiated by good scientific data.  In addition to Rev. Hescox’s testimony before the Energy & Commerce Committee on behalf of EEN, the committee heard testimony from Julie Goodman, a toxicologist (Ph.D. Johns Hopkins University) who stated that, although implementation of MACT standards for mercury is projected to “reduce the disease burden in America to such an extent that it will translate to tens of billions of dollars saved, …the largest benefits from [MACT] are derived not from reducing mercury, but from reducing fine particulate matter (PM2.5).”[vii]  Goodman then added:

Despite the vast array of peer-reviewed scientific literature on the topic, EPA based its calculations on only two PM2.5 epidemiology studies that reported statistical associations between PM2.5 reductions and health benefits and assumed a causal relationship.

I am aware of no rebuttal to this scientifically documented testimony which cautions against adopting an environmental policy based on an apparently biased selection of scientific reports, which furthermore, suggest benefits not from mercury reduction but from reduction in particulate matter.  It is still possible that additional scientific data may provide justification for lowering mercury emissions.  Although our technology allows us to detect minute levels of toxic chemicals, there is also need to identify what the threshold levels for toxicity in the blood are and whether or not these are being exceeded under current standards.

In conclusion, the arguments from “terminology” and “theology” do not provide strong reasons to oppose the EEN’s call to extend the pro-life boundary to include “… anything that threatens and impedes life, especially impacts on the unborn and young children.…”[viii] However, the argument from “science” suggests that the jury still needs further data and time to decide whether there is indeed a legitimate threat to life under current standards.  Meanwhile, I believe that Christians who are committed to the sanctity of human life should agree to respectful discourse with others who seek to raise awareness of our ethical responsibility toward the health and well being of both humans and the non-human creation which provides the context of human life and welfare.  

---

[i]  Evangelical Environmental Network:  http://creationcare.org/view.php?id=513

[ii] Institute on Religion and Democracy,  http://www.theird.org/page.aspx?pid=2291

[iii] Silvius, J. E.  2001. Conservation: Protecting Bald Eagles and Babies.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2001/june11/42.93.html

[iv] Tony Perkins as quoted in WORLD,  February 25, 2012

[v] The Christian Post, February 21, 2012.

 http://global.christianpost.com/news/god-calls-pro-life-evangelicals-to-combat-mercury-pollution-64973/

[vi] Koukl, Greg.  “What Exodus 21:22 Says about Abortion."   Solid Ground , Jan./Feb., 2010

[vii] Goodman, Julie L.  1012.  EPA's Assessment of Health Benefits Associated with PM2.5 Reductions for the Final Mercury and Air Toxics Standards.  See http://junksciencecom.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/hhrg-112-if03-wstate-jgoodman-20120208.pdf

[viii]  Mitch Hescox as quoted in WORLD,  February 25, 2012

Greed, Charity, and Capitalism

The calendar of 2011 has unfolded with many Earth-shaking events.  Literally speaking, an earthshaking earthquake and tsunami traumatized Japan; another earthquake shook the Atlantic coastal states.  Meanwhile, socioeconomic tremors were registered in the European community while the Mediterranean region was embroiled in the “Arab Spring.”  Within evangelical churches, increased attention to social justice has coincided with the struggling economy and greater political and media attention to the apparent injustices of Wall Street financiers and corporate executives. 

Recently, the ire of many who are concerned about the growing gap between the rich and the poor was stoked by a comment from the golden microphone of conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh: 

Rush Limbaugh

“What has fed more people? ‘Freedom’ is not an option. This is a multiple choice question with two possibilities, greed or charity. That’s right.  Greed has fed more mouths than charity ever could.”

Limbaugh’s emphasis on greed expresses a way of thinking that makes capitalism an easy target for those who believe it is morally unacceptable.  After all, how can an economic system be moral if it is ultimately driven by the sin of greed?   But wait.  Does morality ultimately reside at the institutional level?

In a debate at Messiah College with Jim Wallis, founder of Sojourners, Arthur Brooks, president of the American Enterprise Institute, asked, "Is capitalism moral?”  Brooks answered his own question: “Of course not. Only people can be moral.  We're not asking the right questions."  Instead, we should ask what economic system is the most likely to produce moral behavior in us? 

Brooks is correct.  Greed is a flaw in the character of individuals, not in an economic system per se.  On the other hand, Jim Wallis views the American economy as “unfair, unstable and making people unhappy." He agrees with the Occupy Wall Street movement (What are they advocating?) and seems ready to throw in the towel on capitalism while turning to an even greater emphasis on wealth redistribution to narrow the gap between the rich and the poor. 

But will wealth redistribution bring happiness?  Not according to Brooks who cited data from studies of lottery winners and welfare recipients, and concluded. "If you don't earn it, it won't bring you happiness. True happiness comes from earned success.”  Instead of rejecting capitalism, Brooks challenged his listeners to reexamine the moral basis of the American political system as understood and applied by our Founding Fathers.  They believed that all humans are created in God's image.  Human rights come from God; namely, the “right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” as stated in our Declaration of Independence. 

Government’s role is not to insure “equal justice”, equal wealth, or happiness for all.  According to Jay Richards, author of Money, Greed, and God, history is littered with the corpses of millions that have died needlessly under the tyranny of those such as Lenin and Stalin who had promised social equality.  Instead, a government’s role, according to Richards, is to establish and maintain the rule of law, limit the intrusion of government into the economy, and secure free and just participation in the production and exchange of goods and services.  In a free society with a free market system, each person has the opportunity to define and pursue happiness in a moral sense according to his or her perceived goals and purposes. 

Although I believe our free market economy is threatened by a government that has misunderstood its role and has overestimated its ability to deliver “happiness”, it seems to me that capitalism is also being threatened by two other elements—(a) those who consider themselves poor and/or disenfranchised, represented by “Wall Street Occupiers”  and (b) the financially successful who have forgotten their responsibilities, represented by “Wall Street.”  Both of these elements have a moral and legitimate place in a free society.  Nothing wrong with a public assembly and protest within the bounds of the law; and, it is not wrong to become financially successful if wealth is gotten ethically. But both rich and poor may possess virtues that can be perverted.

First, those who are poor and disenfranchised are prone to envy and covetousness which can lead to anger and a life of crime.  The Scriptures teach the importance of assisting the poor (Matthew 5:42; Luke 6:34-38), but assistance that is not aimed properly can be demoralizing.   In his debate with Jim Wallis, ArthurBrooks listed four kinds of assistance to the poor:  “immediate relief, reward for work, education, and an improved culture where people can talk honestly about moral issues like children born outside marriage.”  Notice the progression designed to rescue, encourage, and equip human beings so that they regain hope and aspiration to use their gifts and abilities.  History is filled with many accounts of men and women whose generous giving and mentoring have transformed poor, hopeless people into highly successful workers and leaders.   According to Ephesians 4:28, He who steals must steal no longer; but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has need.

Second, the financially successful also have proneness toward habits that threaten capitalism. For the successful Wall Street financier or CEO, what may have begun with a well disciplined self-interest can become perverted to a life ruled by greed.  The Bible condemns greed as sin-- a rebellion against God’s righteousness.  The tenth commandment states, You shall not covet… (Exodus 20: 17).   Jesus warns in Luke 12:15, Beware, and be on your guard against every form of greed; for not even when one has an abundance does his life consist of his possessions.  This is a warning to us all.  One preventive measure is to heed Philippians 2: 3-4: 

 

Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others.

Notice that the passage does not condemn “self-interest.”  In fact, self-interest is an essential quality for anyone to observe the Great Commandment stated by Jesus Christ in Matthew 22: 37-39 as You shall love the Lord your God…and …love your neighbor as yourself.    Without “self-love” which Jeff Gates, my colleague at Cedarville University defines as “the proper attitude and behavior toward self in the Christian life,” it is impossible to properly love God or my neighbor.  Therefore, a person transformed by Christ’s sacrificial and unconditional (agape) love is free and empowered to love God and others.  He or she enters into a stewardship of the love of God by recognizing that love originates from God and is given freely as a trust to share for His glory.  “Stewardship of love” expresses itself in a reciprocal love toward God, a healthy love of one’s self, and a love for our neighbor.  This love, or “charity” can overcome selfishness and greed which are contrary to the interests of our neighbor.  

As Arthur Brooks noted, “what America needs is not less capitalism but better capitalists.”  The problem is not in the immorality of capitalism, but the immorality in the individual capitalists.  Perhaps Brooks would agree that people who are stewards of the love of God are “better capitalists.”  Such love overcomes the greed and selfishness to which all of us, rich and poor, are prone.  It helps us all to recognize that, at the very outset, it is God who is giving you power to make wealth… (Deuteronomy 8:18).

If you can understand and agree with my line of reasoning, you will agree that Rush Limbaugh’s claim that “greed has fed more mouths than charity ever could”, while well intended, is an inaccurate and unbiblical comparison.  Perhaps it is better stated, “greed that is overcome by God’s love which overflows in charity toward our neighbor has fed more mouths than…”[you name it] ever could.  Such an economy, an oikonomia, is invigorated by the stewardship (oikonomia) of love—it overcomes the envy and helplessness of the poor with aspiration to push forward, especially with loving neighbors and “hands up” assistance; and it overcomes the proneness to greed of those who have been blessed with wealth and power.   Perhaps you know of CEO’s who understand their stewardship responsibility to their company and employees, a perspective that can lead to real job creation and fulfilled employees.

Thank you God for pursuing and rescuing me as a lost sheep, for bringing me into your fold as your child, and enlisting me in a stewardship of your love, abilities, time, and opportunities.   Thanks for giving me a biological family; and a spiritual family, the body of Christ, your church.  Thank you for giving me the ability to work for the betterment of my neighbor and your creation; and to support a family. Thank you for resources to support the ministry of a local church as well as worthy organizations aiming to provide emergency assistance as well as long-term assistance in education, community development, and ecological restoration.  In all of this, thank you for a nation and freedoms that allow individual hopes and aspirations to be achieved.  Grant wisdom to our church and community leaders, teachers, and government officials at all levels that they may apply principles of your Word as a guide to proper enforcement of the laws of the land so that our freedoms and justice for all may be protected and enhanced.   Amen.

Holiday Greetings and Reflections on 2011

We hope you are enjoying the Christmas Season with an attitude of celebration over God’s Greatest Gift, Jesus Christ.  As we remember the events of 2011, we hope you agree that we all have much to be thankful for in the midst of a year of unusual weather, political unrest, economic uncertainty, and trials faced by family and friends.  But in spite of these, we can rest in the faithfulness of Jesus Who is our Reason for hope as we look toward the New Year; for He Himself has said, ‘I will never leave you nor forsake you’” (Hebrews 13:5).

Steve, Mindy, John, Della, Alvadell ("Abby"), Brad, Raquel

Just one year ago, we decided that John would retire after 32 years as a biology professor at Cedarville University.  Careful thought and prayer had helped us to identify several priorities that led us to say “good-bye” to an era of blessed opportunity to serve with the best colleagues and students in the world.  Our new priorities are as follows:

Partners – allowing more time for each other while our health is still good

Parents with health needs;Abby’s mom in Carroll Co. and Mom Silvius in Tuscarawas Co.  We plan to move to Wooster, Ohio when our Cedarville home sells.

Progeny -- more time with our son, daughter, their spouses, and grandchildren; and time to keep in touch with colleagues and students who have become our friends.

Professing our faith through serving in our local church; working on land restoration (caring for creation with “earth-keepers” whose souls may not be restored); working toward an integrated theology of "creationism" as relates to “origins” and “creation care”

Having set these priorities, we are now learning the truth of 1 Thessalonians 5:24, Faithful is He who calls you, and He also will bring it to pass.  For example, only 16 days after the beginning of John’s retirement, or better, redirection, in August, one of our parents, Abby’s mother Marietta Moser, suffered a stroke that left her unable to use her left side.  Since then, we have been working as partners committed to assisting Abby’s six sisters in a rotation that has allowed us to be with "Mom Moser" in her recovery 24/7, first at Mercy Medical Center in Canton, then at Carroll Health Center in Carrollton, and now at her home in Kilgore.  Though it is challenging, we count it a privilege to serve “mom” and to encourage her in her faith at this time of need.

Kiara, Alvadell (Abby), Della, John, and Caleb

We have also enjoyed special times at the homes of our progeny this year.  Our son Brad is thankful for another year as Branch Manager with John Adams Mortgage Co. in Michigan. His Little Leaders DVD’s for children, available online, continue to provide a biblical, educational medium for young children.  His wife Raquel attained US citizenship this year and enjoys her creative work as Administrative Specialist at the University of Michigan.   Steve is finishing his eighth year as pastor at Northpoint Nazarene in Toledo.  The church is blessed to have the teaching and caring ministry of both Steve and Mindy in their midst.  Mindy has many full days as a pastor’s wife, mother of three, and nurse supervisor at Flower Hospital.  Our grandson Caleb (13, has found a good network of friends at church and at Stateline Christian School where he plays soccer and basketball.  His sister Kiara (9) is in the fourth grade at Mason Elementary, and is also athletic and enjoys her sister, Della Rose (3), who is learning how not to be the center of attention in the family.

We do not intend to retire from our profession of faith and practice which we hope will fit in well with our other priorities.  For example, while our redirection has allowed more time to encourage our progeny, their spouses and the grandchildren, it has also allowed us to expand our caring ministry to long-time friends and those in need at our church, Grace Baptist. 

East Liberty Street in downtown Wooster

Recently, after being with "Mom Moser" for nine days, we spent some time in Wooster and were encouraged when God allowed us to meet Ron and Ethel in a Wendy’s restaurant.   Ron is a long-time bluebird enthusiast, and has enjoyed exercising his faith among folks interested in land conservation in ways that John envisions for his future.  We were both encouraged that one of our first acquaintances in Wooster shares an interest in “creation stewardship.”

Thank you for reading this account of our transition to a new chapter of life under God’s gracious provision.  We apologize for not sending cards this year.  To those of you who have sent cards, we are looking forward to reading them now that we are home again.  We hope the message of God’s grace (unearned favor) and truth this Christmas will encourage you in the midst of uncertain times.   Like the Pawpaw tree given to John by his students last spring, which we have kept potted and ready to move, we are waiting to be "transplanted" by the divine Gardener to the location He has for us.

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.  – Isaiah 9:6

Sincerely,
 
 

Christmas Victories over Death

Christmas for many is a time of hope, joy, peace, and love in celebration of the birth of the Prince of Peace.  It is a time when Christians affirm their faith by considering again the humble advent of Jesus Christ whose virgin birth and sinless life enabled Him to become the perfect sacrifice for sin by taking the sinners’ place on Calvary’s cross. 

Christmas is also a time when many of us seek personal enjoyment on a “holiday” (holy day) through festivities and traditions.  But, sometimes we inadvertently leave no room for the lowly Jesus.  Still others may celebrate heartily while deliberately dismissing both the message and the gift of Eternal Life through the babe who came to restore fellowship between mankind and God (John 3:16).

Many who have experienced the joy of Christmas and the gift of Life have also encountered some of the most disturbing and depressing experiences during in the Christmas season.  What could be more disturbing and saddening at Christmas than the death of a beloved friend, spouse, child, or parent?   This is certainly not the kind of Christmas we anticipate.   But nevertheless, death can rear its ugly head.  Instead of excitedly counting the days until Christmas, the clock stops and we are frozen in silent awe while questions flood our minds. Has this really happened to us?   Why did he or she have to die?   What should we do?  To whom can we turn?  Who will understand and help us?   Does God even see our plight?   Does He even care?

Perhaps some of these questions have occurred to our friends, Gary and Julie Olin, in recent days.  As a former teacher, and then, a software specialist at Cedarville University, Gary’s life has influenced many over the years including the lives of my wife, Abby, and I.  In his “retirement” Gary was training to become a nurse.  But Gary has also been battling cancer in the past couple of years.  Only God knows all the ways in which he has reacted emotionally and spiritually to this great trial, but his testimony toward us has been a great encouragement.  He has faced the up’s and down’s of chemotherapy, a period of remission, and then the return of the cancer this summer with optimism, courage, and a vibrant testimony of faith and hope in God.  Gary and Julie have also been a loving and godly example for their children and grandchildren.  As brother and sister in Christ, they have embodied the Holy Spirit’s calling to believers to not merely look out for your own personal interests but also the interests of others (Philippians 2: 4).

On December 2, Gary Olin (1947-2011) went to be with the Lord; and today, his body was laid to rest.  Our thoughts and prayers have now turned to Julie, to their son Nathan and his family; and to their daughter Erika and her family.  The death of Gary has bought separation from a husband, father, and grandfather; and the sting of death that will cloud their Christmas.  We pray that the God of all comfort will comfort each of them. 

Thankfully, God can be our comfort in death for the very reason that Christ came at Christmas.  It is  because of His coming, birth, and death on the cross that we can have “Christmas comfort.”  The Messiah came to confront and defeat sin and death, the great enemies of mankind since the first temptation and Fall in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3).  In fact, sin and death surrounded the conception and birth of Jesus as if to defeat and destroy the Deliverer. Recall the disbelief that Mary was pregnant by the Holy Spirit before she married Joseph.  Her assumed fornication would have led to her death and that of the unborn Jesus by stoning were it not for God’s protection through faithful Joseph.  In addition, Herod’s soldiers would have brought death to the infant Jesus soon after his birth were it not for the angel’s warning to Joseph who led his family to safety in Egypt.   The Gospel of Matthew records that Jesus, …remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfill what had been spoken by the Lord through the prophet: "OUT OF EGYPT I CALLED MY SON" (Matt. 2:15).

Although the first Christmas was clouded in darkness and death, the Apostle John writes in John 1, 

The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it (v. 5).  He [Jesus] came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him.  But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name… (v. 11-12).

As children of God by faith in the resurrection victory of Christ over sin and death, we need not fear death or how and when we will die…for we walk by faith, not by sight--we are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:7-8).

 

Therefore, when death rears its head, even in the Christmas season, we have reason to stand firm in our faith.  There is a time for being alone; time to pour out our grief to our Heavenly Father.  But there is also a time for being with family and friends as the Olin’s have done.  The gathering which we call a “viewing” and a subsequent memorial service allows us to face the reality of death and then to literally look into the faces of the grieving and their comforters with eyes of faith, faces of hope, and words of encouragement.  Thus, we do not forsake our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near (Hebrews 10:25).

Perhaps it could be said that death is like a wind blowing against glowing embers remaining from a fire; it can extinguish the weak, but will kindle the strong.  The life that has been fed (“fueled”) by the disciplines of Scripture reading, study, memorization, and application with the aim of running the race with our eyes upon Jesus (Hebrews 12: 1-3) can be ready to face the sting of death.   Not that we sail through the trial untouched by the deep sadness…but we draw upon the deep assurance of God’s love through an ongoing, disciplined walk with Him.

We grieve when death takes our loved ones, but not as those who have no hope (1 Thessalonians 4:13).  Indeed, we are looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus…(Titus 2:13).   As C.S. Lewis so eloquently writes,

At present we are on the outside of the world, the wrong side of the door. We discern the freshness and purity of morning, but they do not make us fresh and pure. We cannot mingle with the splendours we see. But all the leaves of the New Testament are rustling with the rumour that it will not always be so. Some day, God willing, we shall get in.                          From:  “The Weight of Glory”, p. 43 (Harper, San Francisco).

All of this because God sent His Son, born of a humble Jewish girl in a lowly stable in the shadow of death on that first Christmas.   Because of His supernatural conception, sinless life, and resurrection from the dead, believers can exclaim, 

Death is swallowed up in victory.

O death, where is your victory? 

O death, where is your sting?   (1 Corinthians 15:54b-55)

Thanksgiving and Black Friday: Invitations to Develop Contentment

Thanksgiving is a unique holiday—one that invites us to reflect on the blessings we have received during the past year.  Christians have the special blessing of knowing personally the One True God from Whom all blessings flow.  An intimate relationship with God is made possible by faith in Jesus Christ, and nurtured properly through the spiritual disciplines of prayer, regular nourishment from the Word of God, and fellowship with the people of God. 

A healthy relationship with God produces, among other virtues, the virtue of contentment (Hebrews 13:5).  Contentment is an attitude that flows out of a thankful heart.  Our Thanksgiving holiday can be an occasion to enjoy the blessings of family, friends, and food; but, it is also a time to nurture a heart of thankfulness and contentment by reflecting on the Person and provision of God.  

As a Christian, at times I have experienced the joy of contentment; but I have also experienced periods of discontentment.   For me, and perhaps for many, discontentment is a “default attitude.”  Contentment must be forged and refreshed daily in the midst of a culture that promotes discontentment through media and social pressures.   Under the guise of maintaining social status, improving efficiency, staying current, or “treating ourselves to what we deserve”, we are urged to buy the newest editions, models, or styles “while they last.”  

How does a person find contentment?  The Apostle Paul states, If we have food and covering, with these we shall be content (1 Timothy 6:8).  Paul indicates that in Roman culture, like our contemporary culture, contentment was not a default condition.   He testifies, Not that I speak from want, for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am  (Philippians 4:11).   Paul “learned contentment” by practicing submission to spiritual disciplines such as we have noted above.  This is not a contentment, as some have chosen to pursue, through an acetic lifestyle of abstinence from ‘pleasures’ that are seen as hindrances to reaching spiritual goals. 

So, how can we apply a Christian perspective to the holiday season? Traditionally, Thanksgiving holiday has been squeezed on either side by two commercialized holidays, Halloween and Christmas; but, at least the two adjacent holidays have been separated in time from Thanksgiving by a month or more.  However, with each passing year, increasing numbers of retail stores are opening earlier on “Black Friday” or in the late evening hours of Thanksgiving Day itself.   

Some are reacting to Black Friday by observing “Buy Nothing Day.”  Not a bad idea.  But, I wonder what the observers of “Buy Nothing” choose to do instead.   Maybe Maggi Dawn’s blog entry , “Black Friday: Buy Nothing Day” points us in the right direction.   She writes:

Last Friday, just before we began Reading Week at the [Yale] Divinity School, my team and I organized a Cafe Eucharist, the theme of which was Thanksgiving and Giving Thanks. One of the threads in the service was the disconnect between gratitude (thanks for what we have) and consumerism (the goal to get more, more, more). It feels somewhat urgent to me this week to resist the temptation to go shopping over the next few days. Half price practically everything is really tempting, especially just before Christmas. But I feel I would be paying with my soul, not just my dollars. We are going shopping today for the food we need, and firewood, and a tank of petrol/gas. No more. Then we are going to spend four days playing, watching movies, walking up some hills, visiting friends, eating enough but not to excess, reading by the fire, and enjoying the luxury of sleeping late in the mornings. And giving thanks.  Anyone want to join us?

How about you?  How have you spent Thanksgiving, and then Black Friday this year?  I have enjoyed being with our daughter and family, and precious time with our grandson, Caleb, and granddaughters, Kiara and Della.   Of course, they were gracious to allow me to finish this blog entry while watching the West Virginia Mountaineers defeat the Pitt Panthers in the “Backyard Brawl” 21-20. 

In our October entry, “Our Stewardship Is about God, Not Us,” we emphasized that godly stewardship is grounded in an awareness that The reverent and worshipful fear of the Lord is the beginning and the principal and choice part of knowledge (Proverbs 1:7, Amplified Bible).   Celebrating Thanksgiving affords us the opportunity to apply the important ingredient of “giving thanks” to the a life of “reverent and worshipful fear of the Lord…”   May God help us to use both Thanksgiving and Black Friday to develop lives that honor God in a consumer culture every day of the year.

Our Stewardship Is about God, Not Us

Stewardship is an increasingly common word that pops up in a variety of contexts. In church settings, of course, “stewardship” is often associated with a sermon to challenge the local body to fulfill its responsibility to give generously in support of the ministries of the church. Meanwhile, conservationists are now using expressions such as “land stewardship,” “water stewardship, and “Earth stewardship.” It seems that “stewardship” is one of those topics like “mother and apple pie.” Who can be opposed to it?

Yet, many who are familiar with the word "stewardship" may have only a vague understanding of its deeper meaning and significance. The Judeo-Christian Scriptures provide the only true basis for stewardship because they are based on objective revelation of God Who is Creator and Owner of creation and has appointed mankind to be stewards of creation (Genesis 1: 26-28; 2:15). The Bible also is rich with examples of godly stewards whose role it was to oversee the possessions and affairs of an owner. Joseph’s life in Egypt is recounted in Genesis 37-50, and Daniel’s life in Babylon and Persia is recorded in the book of Daniel.

The Apostle Paul states that “it is required of stewards (Greek: oikonomos) that one be found trustworthy.” The good steward is bound by duty to manage that which doesn’t belong to him or her, and does so out of a virtuous disposition characterized by trustworthiness, faithfulness, industriousness, and so on. The Apostle Paul, in Colossians 3, expands the concept of stewardship much beyond simply the act of placing money into the offering plate. He states in verse 3, “Whatever you do, do your work heartily, as for the Lord rather than for men...”

How then does a person become a faithful steward? From a biblical perspective, what are the elements of good stewardship in each sphere of our lives—at home, at church, at work, and in the local and global community (See Oikonomia, September 30, 2011)? Each of these spheres operates as a definable “system” of inter-working parts, like a household, or (in Greek) oikos. Along this line of thinking, it is necessary that we learn from spiritual instruction to understand our place and role as submissive stewards toward Almighty God as we serve within the household of His creation. Our stewardship of the physical world around us, is further informed through study of the natural science of ecology (oikos + logos: “the study of the workings of the oikos, house). In addition, the social science of economics (Greek, oikos + nomos) emphasizes the management and distribution of goods and services that are developed out of the rich stores of energy and matter of creation?

Recently, while pondering the elements of good stewardship, I was enlightened by a radio message by Chuck Bentley of Crown Financial Services. In his October 17, 2011 podcast of My MoneyLife, Mr Bentley, states that “stewardship is about God, not you. And specifically, it’s about fulfilling God’s purposes for your life.” In other words, the good steward has a God-centered perspective, not a self-centered one. Back in the 1970's, this God-centered concept was nicely illustrated by Bill Bright, now with the Lord, in his widely used “Four Spiritual Laws” tracts as part of the ministry of Campus Crusade for Christ.

To me, the Scriptural teaching that lays a good foundation for faithful stewardship is found in Romans 1. In verse 16, the Apostle Paul holds up the Gospel, the good news that Christ died for sinners (rebellious, self-centered stewards) and has the power to bring all who will acknowledge their sin and alienation back to God. Verse 17 states that the Gospel reveals the righteousness which is from God, and explains that we are made righteous not by works but by faith in the finished work of Christ on the cross. Verse 18-19 lament the denial and refusal of many to respond to the truth of the Gospel, being without excuse because of God’s clear revelation in creation. Finally, verse 20 points at the very element necessary for anyone to please God--i.e. be reconciled to Him and exercise faithful, God-centered stewardship. This verse states that,

Although they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks... – Romans 1:20a

As Bill Bright and Chuck Bentley emphasized, stewardship is not based on a self-centered perspective, but upon a God-centered perspective. The God-centered perspective begins as verse 20 states, with giving “honor to Him as God” out of a thankful heart. Honor begins in a daily prayer and walking relationship with God that is guided by our study and meditation in the Word of God under the teaching of the Spirit of God Who intercedes for us (Romans 8: 26). God’s Spirit helps us to apply the truths of Scripture [which] is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work (II Timothy 3: 16).”

So, we can see that godly stewardship requires that we honor Him as God; or, as Proverbs 1:7 states, The reverent and worshipful fear of the Lord is the beginning and the principal and choice part of knowledge (Amplified Bible). God will help us to develop a God-centered relationship which provides for further knowledge, wisdom, and obedience to His Word. To this foundation for stewardship there must be added additional elements necessary for the steward to live in obedience within the spheres of life noted above. One of these is the need to understand the context within which our stewardship must be exercised. This context includes both the authority structure ordained by God and God’s created order which we are called to study and understand (i.e. oikos + logos, or ecology) and to manage with honesty and integrity (oikos + nomos, or economics). We will discuss these aspects further in future blog entries.