Big World Small World

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/apr/23/population-how-many-people-can-the-earth-sustain-lucy-lamble?CMP=share_btn_link

This article looks at the dilemma of the world's rapidly growing population. It touches on two possible futures, albeit indirectly, one where we use technology to reduce population growth, and another thwhere we embrace a big world where the growing population produces a bouyant economy for all.

My first reaction was that we need to shift our spending from keeping old white people alive to keeping young black people alive. Let's put out effort in where it is most needed. Let's give every one an equal chance at lifel. You can see what a huge change in our global mindset that this would need, and you can imagine the philosophic discussions it would generate.

The deeper question it later provoked was this: If God has a future for our world, what dues it look like? Is it one where the system God had set up checks itself by reducing the population as we approach the capacity of the earth. In this scenario we aid God by contraception and population control in general. Ethical dilemmas like who do we could in population control quickly emerge.

The second option is much more bold. It says the population of the earth is essentially limitless.  It says, as we learn to live with each other we will find ways to use the world's resources more economically, drawing from them a lifestyle for all which we can't currently imagine. Reduced consumption, more efficient production and better sharing would be it's hallmark. In this scenario how we live together rather than population control is in focus.

There is of course the possibility that there is a third scenario that I haven't thought of. The point is really that if God expects us to work for charge in this world, as God does, there must be a sustainable end point toward we were are working, this side of heaven. Then there is another discussion about where the boundary between here and heaven is.

Rocky Road

Craig McLachlan got the raunchy role of Frank-N-Furter because he "steps out far beyond what most other performers can do".  His presentation of promiscuous and sexually exploitative behaviour is what audiences want.  Now we are telling him that in the acting workplace as distinct from the acting role, this kind of behaviour is not ok.  There is a fine line there.  This is not to excuse Craig, should a court find him guilty.  It is however to remind ourselves that as shapers of our culture we all have some responsibility for allowing things that are not ok to be seen as ok.

Why you should give a goat this Christmas

I think David Sanderson would see himself as a supporter of those who are poor in our world, but his article "Why you shouldn't give a goat this Christmas" adds confusion rather than support to their case.

The goat of course is the quintessential Christmas gift from an Australian NGO. Your donation goes to a project which includes goats and your friend receives a card letting then know of you very practical love for them and for someone far away.

Firstly, David points out some of the things that can go wrong with aid and assumes that the goat is a victim of these. There have been some bad mistakes over the years, But the NGO community puts a high value on learning from them. If the NGO behind the goat is a member of ACFID, they will be carefully examining the goat project to make sure that locals get good value out of it. The goat, for example, would be sourced as close as possible to its new owner. This will stimulate the local economy adding to the benefit the recipient, who will probably be required to return a kid to the program within two years, kept accountable and encouraged to see the wider picture of positive change for everyone.

Secondly, David conflates at least three types of aid: bilateral - from government to government, private aid - from NGO to NGO, and emergency aid, which is delivered response to a crisis.

It is bilateral aid which has the worst reputation for importing goods rather than stimulating local markets. Plenty of Chinese product is going into African infrastructure right now, and Australia has also insisted use of Australian goods and services. Governments like to stimulate their own economies. NGO's on the other hand really need to justify importing goods, and there are times when this is necessary, for example, if the technology is just not be available locally, or in an emergency, where some essential supplies may have been wiped out.

As David says cash handouts are increasingly being used as an efficient form of emergency aid. The goat, however will be part of a longer term community development project which is aiming to change the opportunities of a community.

There are good reasons to buy a goat this Christmas. If it is from an ACFID member NGO you can be assured that their operation meets a high standard. The goat money will get there. The first thing it will do is stimulate a struggling local economy with demand for the essentials of life, Then the goat will arrive at someone's humble door, communicating a message of solidarity. The wealthy people across the sea do care. Finally, two years down the track a family will have a new income stream which will help them send their kids to school and put food on the table where there was none. That's a lot more like Christmas than another gingerbread house for Aunty Flo!

Celebrating the King of the Universe

What would celebrating a universal King that was born in a manger look like? We are nervous defaulting to familiar practices of our culture, decorations, feasting, and gift giving. We know how these have been corrupted. And we are are nervous doing something special, because the subjects of the universal King know that honouring Him can only be a full-time and lifetime pursuit.

The Bible nevertheless makes a big place for celebration and they are celebrations that use the cultural forms of their time and place. Celebration is central for the servants of the King. It re-cements critical events and their significance into our psyche. In that way it helps us be better subjects of the King throughout the year.

So what would celebrating the coming of the universal King to a manger look like? It would have to use the forms of our culture, and it would tell the story of the King's great deeds - how he entered human time and space humbly and purposefully - to bring all things back to the rightful King. And it would lift up the lowly (Lk 1:52).

Essential to the reign of the King is the righting of human imbalances. Those who are left out are to be included (Lk 2:29-32). Those who are poor find new resources (Lk 1:53). These values challenge our culture. Over all our celebration they pleas restraint from the wastefulness and self-indulgence and we are so accustomed to. Most of all they challenge our practice of gift giving.

It is in giving gifts that we most easily forget the poor (Gal 3:10). It is too easy to give generously to those we know will give generously to us (Lk 6:34). This is not really generosity at all! Living in a world where material things are scarce for so many we really need to direct our giving to those with little first of all, not just at Christmas.

So here are my tips for a holy but Australian Christmas.

Decorations
1. Have them! But focus on telling the story of the King - mangers, stars, magi. Drop the man in the red suit completely. The King is not honored by praise for impostors.
2. Have them but moderate your consumption. Put a limit on how many you will buy or how many you will have. Don't compete with the guy across the road on volume or your message will lose its credibility.

Feasting
1. Do it! Have food that you enjoy and don't usually have. If there is nothing in that category you have been indulgent all year round - try something simple! Put a limit on you consumption. Buy only what you can eat in one day.
2. Share it! Seek out people who are alone on Christmas day and invite them to your celebration.

Gift-giving
1. Make giving to the poor the major focus of you giving. Local and international mission agencies will give you plenty of options. For every gift you give your family, give a gift of equal value to those of lowly estate.
2. Limit your giving. Set a dollar limit together for your extended family. For the over 18's, put the names in a hat and each just buy a gift for one family member. Publish a list of what you would like so the gift isn't wasted.

Setting up tables and flipping them over

The Abbott government's overseas aid policy encourages engagement with the private sector.  For agencies following Jesus this means grappling with whether their role is to challenge business or to foster it.  Are they to follow Jesus in upturning the tables of the money changers in the temple (Mk 11:17), or in some less conspicuous example (Lk 14:13 for example) by boosting the livelihoods of the poor with business development and development by business.  Good governments, like thoughtful Christians, wrestle with the tension between these two competing calls for justice.

 

Jesus' most colourful and obvious interaction with business is his violent upturning of the money changers tables in the temple (Mk 11:17).  Entrepreneurial people had turned the need of worshippers into selfish business.  Jesus is quick to take them to task.

 

This incident reflects the churches role in challenging business when it is exploitative or inappropriate.  Campaigns for fairly traded products are a current example.

 

Jesus is also supportive of legitimate taxation (Mk 12:17), a challenge to both individuals and business today.  Churches and both sides of politics have taken up this challenge.

 

That people will engage on productive business to sustain themselves is the backdrop of the whole Bible (eg Ez 27:13,17,19,25; Mt 11;160.  Working for a living is the New Testament norm (2Th 3:10).  There is nothing intrinsically dirty about being involved in business.  Dishonest business dealings, of course, are called to account like every other unjust behaviour (eg Ho 12;7).
 

That churches find themselves amongst the poor (Jn 12:8), helping people get started in businesses is as it should be.  It is recognition that the goal is not to give people health and education and other services but to enable them to provide these for themselves and their families - even more - to have the resources to pursue their own hopes and aspirations, whatever these are.
 

"But what if a business we helped start turns into a greedy, exploitative monster!?"

Firstly, we need to recognise that this is completely possible in the most perfectly planned and executed project.  Development projects are like lighting a fire - you never know where they will spread because they are about freeing people to pursue their own hopes and aspirations.  We hope they free people to be more of what God has created them to be (Jn 10:10), but we know that freedom can be misused (1Co 8:9).
 

Secondly, Christians engaging in this space are challenged to build a better breed of business - one that makes profits but values people.  With what is often a long partnership to helping small businesses get started they have an ideal opportunity to do just that.  There are some of these out there and a few examples at home, but we could do with a lot more models of profit making, people valuing businesses.

So set up trading tables and flip them over, followers of Jesus and leaders of good government, but don't think that you can do only one or the other.  The deeper challenge is creating something that builds wealth and honours people.  Jesus says this is possible with a proper alignment of the heart (Pv 14:34), not merely choosing one side of a dilemma.
 

God is not your bell boy

A respected Christian leader once told the story of how God had helped him. It went something like this...

He was busy at work and was really pushed for time to go and secure a house that he wanted to buy. He barely had time to get to the auction and back but he jumped into the car anyway.  Anyway God was good and interested in the details of his life he said, because he prayed for a parking spot and God provided one wonderfully close to the house. He was able to put the winning bid on the house and get back to work in time. God was his saviour.

Well of course God is interested in the detail of our lives but he is not a convenience service to call in when you need things to go your way little bit more. God is not your bell boy, waiting patiently at your door for your next self - indulgent command. God is not there for your convenience.  Sure, talk to him about everything that concerns you but in the context of putting the Kingdom first.  Does God want me to buy another house? How does God want me to use my money? Ask these kind of questions before you ask for s parking spot.

God the controller?

At the start of a new year we are assured from the pulpit that, "God is in control".  Well yes, but there is something disturbing about this familiar assertion.

Now the word "control" is used of God 's relationship to the cosmos, eg Hebrews 2:8, but our picture of how this works is not always realistic or healthy. Often Jeremiah 29:11,"For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord , plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope." (ESV),  is quoted as a rationale for believing God has our every moment scripted, a blueprint in scrupulous detail of exactly how our lives will play out.

This verse of course lies within the prophetic tradition -  the place of possibility, of "if" and "then", of choices for good or for evil (e.g. Jeremiah 12:16-17). Straight away there are two possibilities for the future. Which one is God's blueprint?

As well as not dealing well with choice and the possibility of sin, the blueprint approach gives a distorted picture of God's character. God is not intent on squeezing us into a preconceived plan. God is much more a god of possibility, a god of opportunity, one who wants us to use the gifts and opportunities before us. In particular he is not the god who is in control so that we can stop worrying but carry on doing what we were going to do anyway. He is not the god who is in control so that we can muddle along trusting that he will work it out in some meaningful way despite us. He is not the god who is in control so that things will work out the way that we would like them to.

The image of God that I want to suggest is of a master chess player. The end of the game is assured; not because every individual move is known beforehand, but because of the skill and creativity of the master.
We choose how to join God in the game, based on the position of the pieces at the time, rather than trying to second guess the detail of a universal plan. We make our move, not fearful of missing the perfect move, but enthusiastically contributing the skill and creativity that we have been gifted. We make our contribution alongside the master and contributing to his purposes, knowing that his skill and power is completely adequate to use our offering and bring about the final outcome.