Letting Your Conscience Be Your Guide

Excellent column from Craig Westover today, “Rx for Conscience Clauses.” These clauses in state laws allow individuals or institutions to opt out of providing (or paying for) medical services on the basis of religious or moral beliefs.

Craig’s take is a response to Ellen Goodman’s column on the same topic and is, as always, calm and well-reasoned. One of the highlights for me was his observation on the irony of the state “granting” these rights:

Bottom line, morality is always an individual choice. “Conscience clauses” are good things, but it is ironic that the state passing a conscience clause restores to individuals the right to exercise moral judgment that government never had the authority to take away in the first place.

Application to Date My Daughter

Some readers may have gathered that I have a teenage daughter. A few days ago I posted my theories on dating and requirements for friendship. The reactions I’ve had from this post – and ensuing discussions – have reminded me of something that Joe Soucheray read on his great Garage Logic radio program several years ago: his “Application to Date my Daughter.”

I’d love to link you this useful and intriguing document, but it doesn’t appear to be on the Garage Logic site any more. I did, however, have the foresight to download this years ago for future reference and I include it here as a follow up to my previous post and in appreciation for the great job Mr. Soucheray does. If dating were an option for my daughters, this application would be the one I’d use.

I repeat – I did not write the following; I only wish I had. (Format altered to fit this blog, but text is as it originally appeared.)


“This is the end – but for me, the beginning of life.”

Those were not the words of Pope John Paul II, but of German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, executed 60 years ago today by the Nazis in the closing days of World War II.

I thought of these words this week as the world honored the Pope and I listened to commentators in every media try to put their political spin on what a life of faith should look like. And when I thought of their words in the context of this anniversary, I could only shake my head at the subtleties of God and offer a bitter smile. Bitter at the foolishness and presumption, but a smile nonetheless in order to share in the laugh God must have been having.

Bonhoeffer is one of my heroes. Supremely talented and perceptive, he saw spiritual truth in a clear light and threw himself into writing it down and vigorously living it out in total commitment to the lives of those around him, yet he was also capable of the loneliest touch of inner doubt. He was one of the earliest and most unyielding voices in opposition to Hitler as far back as 1933 and struggled to shine a light on Hitler’s co-opting of the German church and to reconstruct Christian ethics.

Fearing for Bonhoeffer’s life, his friends arranged a position for him in America ahead of the coming war, only to have him turn around and return to Germany almost immediately, saying:

I have made a mistake in coming to America. I must live through this difficult period of our national history with the Christian people of Germany. I will have no right to participate in the reconstruction of Christian life in Germany after the war if I do not share the trials of this time with my people.

A pacifist, he ultimately saw the need to try and throw a spoke into the wheel of the Nazi war machine and was arrested in 1943 and accused of being part of a plot to kill Hitler. Over the next two years Bonhoeffer wrote prodigiously and powerfully, cramming each paragraph with stunning clarity and revelation almost as if he sensed his time was short (he was 39 – younger than I am now – when he died). As he watched the German church crumble around him and embrace the unbiblical tenets of Nazism, he exhorted his followers and his country that obedience and belief were bound together, saying “Only he who believes is obedient, and only he who obeys, believes.”

You can find out much more about his incredible and courageous story here on the pages hosted by the United States Memorial Holocaust Museum, but let me return to the present and the spirit of our age so much in evidence the past few weeks, and what Bonhoeffer might wryly refer to as another example of

“the vigilant religious instinct of man for the place where grace is to be obtained at the cheapest price.”

What he meant was that we all too easily fall into iniquity by trying to determine for ourselves and by our own standards what pleases God. Today there is a lot of easy talk about spirituality as we boomers age and find that our first commandment – “Love thyself” – doesn’t sustain. Christian or otherwise we seek to set our own standards for what is “good enough,” forgetting what it cost those who came before us to raise God’s standard. Journalist David Brooks calls it “building a house of obligation on a foundation of choice,” or, “orthodoxy without obedience.”

You can be thought to be spiritual merely for acknowledging there is a need for spirituality without admitting that you have any responsibility to live up to it in any way. It is a spirituality that honors teachers but not a Messiah. It is what Bonhoeffer called “cheap grace” and described as being the greatest threat to the Church. The threat, however, wasn’t from the world but rather from within the Church.

The complacency of cheap grace allowed Nazism to subvert the gospel in the German church, and the spiritual complacency of America in the 50s and 60s germinated the seeds that bear so much bitter fruit in our culture today. (Btw, you might find it an interesting study to compare the origins, thinking and actions of the original Nazis with the origins, thinking and actions of those who are the first to label others as Nazis today.) It is this “cheap grace” with which we try to cover a multitude of sins while projecting a rich aura of tolerance and enlightenment. As Bonhoeffer wrote in his classic, “The Cost of Discipleship”:

This is what we mean by cheap grace, the grace which amounts to the justification of sin without the justification of the repentant sinner who departs from sin and from whom sin departs. Cheap grace is not the kind of forgiveness of sin which frees us from the toils of sin. Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves.

Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without Church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without contrition. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the Cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.

Costly grace is the treasure hidden in the field; for the sake of it a man will gladly go and sell all that he has. It is the pearl of great price to buy which the merchant will sell all his goods. It is the kingly rule of Christ, for whose sake a man will pluck out the eye which causes him to stumble, it is the call of Jesus Christ at which the disciple leaves his nets and follows Him.

Costly grace is the gospel which must be sought again and again, the gift which must be asked for, the door at which a man must knock.

Such grace is costly because it calls us to follow, and it is grace because it calls us to follow Jesus Christ. It is costly because it costs a man his life, and it is grace because it gives a man the only true life. It is costly because it condemns sin and grace because it justifies the sinner. Above all, it is costly because it cost God the life of His son: ‘ye were bought at a price,’ and what has cost God much cannot be cheap for us. Above all, it is grace because God did not reckon His Son too dear a price to pay for our life, but delivered Him up for us. Costly grace is the Incarnation of God.

In what I have read of the life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and – though I am not a Catholic – what I have seen in the life of Pope John Paul II, I sense they both understood that their own lives were not too dear a price to pay for the sake of future generations. As Bonhoeffer wrote in one of his letters from prison:

“The ultimate question for a responsible man to ask is not how he is to extricate himself heroically from the affair, but how the coming generation shall continue to live.”

Notes: For anyone interested in gaining a deeper sense of Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s life and vision I highly recommend “The Cost of Discipleship” and “Letters and Papers from Prison” as a start (don’t expect to rush right through these, however). “Ethics” and “Life Together” go further into what a thriving life in the spirit and in fellowship with others is about for those who want more. There are also two excellent DVDs available. Especially moving is “Hanged on a Twisted Cross,” surprisingly and effectively narrated by Ed Asner and Mike Farrell, and the very polished “Bonhoeffer” from Martin Doblmeier.

Filings: Love, and the Difference Between Being a Friend and Being Friendly

Sandy from the MAWB Squad was asked to opine yesterday on the lessons that could be learned from the highly publicized celebrity marital crack-ups that are keeping the tabloids in business. Of course she delivered admirably in “Advice to the Lovelorn.”

This got me to thinking, however, about the far less titillating but every bit as devastating romantic tragedies that happen all around us. Even, dare I say, in our own lives. My wife and I have been very blessed and happy in our 17-year marriage, but we both experienced emotion-searing, even mind-altering damage in our single days (stories for another day, but don’t count on it).

As we look to what may be ahead for our daughters, we’ve come to realize that the dating culture of serial monogamy and mini-divorces is not a good way to find a mate for life. And that’s based on our experiences from 20 and 30 years ago in the more idealistic days of the sexual revolution. With our oldest being of “dating” age, my wife and I naturally want better for our daughters than what we subjected ourselves to when we were their age.

Back then, at least, the culture expected couples to adopt the appearance of having a relationship. Now even the minimal commitment to someone else needed to simply make a date is optional in today’s hook-up culture among teens and older singles as reported here and in the New York Times, and even among ninth-graders. Somewhere along the line “Wham, bam, thank you, ma’am” went from being the height of selfishness to the point where merely throwing in the “thank you” passes for gentlemanliness. The glorification of sensation has ironically desensitized a significant part of a generation, and I can’t even picture how much “enlightenment” is required to make this look like a good thing.

Even in evangelical circles the challenges are severe for parents with an eye to preparing their youth for healthy, happy marriages. The book “Best Friends for Life” by Michael and Judy Phillips includes several case studies of kids who grew up in “churched” families and dated other “churched” youth and eventually married – and then crashed and burned. Though each example had different characteristics, the common thing I saw in each was the parents really had no vision of what they wanted for their kids or what was acceptable – or if they did, they didn’t communicate it. In many cases they gave in to the predominant dating model and were simply glad that their son or daughter was dating another Christian. As a result, the youngsters also fell into self-centered relationships in which they may have been physical, but they were far from intimate.

Is there another option? Well, I admit that the locking them in a tower until they’re 30 plan has its strong points, but that doesn’t do anything to prepare them for a strong marriage either. Our plan is the opposite of isolation, both the isolation of the tower where they are separated from others and the passion-induced isolation of being a couple where they separate themselves from others. We’ve encouraged our daughters to have a group of friends they can count on and do things as a group. Boys can be a part of this group, and are even encouraged, but no pairing up. The idea is to determine who can be trusted to be a friend – and not who just wants to get friendly.

What are the standards for friendship? The Bible lists some good ones (New Living Translation):

— Friends are few (Prov. 18:24) – “There are ‘friends’ who destroy each other, but a real friend sticks closer than a brother.” We know the traditional concept of what a brother is, but think about what a brother is to a woman. A brother is someone who will stand by you and stand up for you because he wants the best for you, not because of what you can do for him.

— A friend lays down his life (John 15:13)”And here is how to measure it–the greatest love is shown when people lay down their lives for their friends.” A friend puts your needs and well-being above his own.

— A friend loves unconditionally (Prov. 17:17) “A friend is always loyal, and a brother is born to help in time of need.”

— A friend speaks the truth in love (Prov. 27:6)
“Wounds from a friend are better than many kisses from an enemy.” A friend will tell you what you need to hear, again because he wants what is best for you. Someone caught up in infatuation or what he thinks is love will keep quiet so as not to jeopardize the physical aspects of the relationship.

— A friend encourages you and is sensitive to your needs (Prov. 26:18, 19) “Just as damaging as a mad man shooting a lethal weapon is someone who lies to a friend and then says, ‘I was only joking.'”

If true friendships can be established in a safe environment where the emotional stakes are not as high, then the ground is prepared for a possible courtship with an eye toward marriage. In a true courtship, both partners learn to trust the other with more and more of their innermost thoughts, wishes and emotions. This relationship is the key to a successful marriage. Most modern marriages fall short of genuine intimacy due to a distorted cultural image of romanticism that expects immediate intimacy. Too many want to jump right to the courtship stage simply because the other person is cute or a “hottie.” This might make for lovely wedding photos (or great tabloid covers) but is not much of a foundation for a lovely marriage.

I may appear pretty smug and overconfident seeing as how our oldest is just entering this dynamic time, but the rules and expectations have been set down and discussed for several years prior to this, and we do have wonderful examples in the lives of other parents and young marrieds we know who have crossed these waters ahead of us.

Truthfully, I don’t expect it to be easy, but right now the relationship my wife and I have with our children is still the most important in their lives aside from the relationship they are developing with God. And part of our responsibility in this relationship is to prepare them for a relationship with God and for a loving and godly relationship with their spouse – and ultimately their own children who they, in turn, must train. It won’t be the easiest course, but given what else is out there, I know it is the safest.

A Fate Worse than Death?

Many are quick to bemoan the apparent callousness of our culture and characterize Americans as self-indulgent and self-interested. Yet when tragedy strikes, as in the recent tsunami or the Red Lake shootings, there is an immediate outpouring of concern, both spiritual and material, as we empathize with the victims and especially the survivors.

Given that, it has been interesting the past two weeks to consider the reaction of the American public to Terri Schiavo’s predicament. If the polls are to be believed – and there is a certain gut level resonance to the findings, despite the questionable wording of ABC’s version – a large majority of us thought Terri Schiavo should be “allowed” to die. While some might see this as a lack of empathy, I will hazard (and “hazard” is an apt word) a guess that it might be a matter of too much empathy.

One of Merriam-Webster’s definitions of empathy is “the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively explicit manner.” People considered Terri’s condition and had little trouble vicariously imagining themselves in similar straights – and didn’t want to go there.

Most tragedies, like Red Lake and the tsunami, happen suddenly and move quickly into the aftermath. We identify with the suffering and are moved to do something. The Schiavo situation on the other hand was more forward looking and slow developing yet with an ugly, predictable outcome. It was almost like watching a victim in a horror movie walk down a dark, foggy alley as the scary music mounts. It’s not that we, as viewers, necessarily want it to hurry up and be over, but confronting and empathizing with our own death or maiming is something we don’t like to invest a lot of time in. As someone who has spent years in the life insurance and disability insurance business, I know this for a fact.

Many people looked at the circumstances, pictured themselves there, and thought “I wouldn’t want to live like that.” And because it was unpleasant to contemplate, they preferred not to look too closely. Fair enough – that was pretty much my attitude three weeks ago. But is there, truly, a fate worse than death?

We can glibly say that there is, putting a premium on our intellect and dignity, yet at the end find our heart and organs stubbornly refusing to give in. I’ve also heard that philosophy from those arguing that it is better for a baby to be aborted than be born disabled or into a cruel life where it is unwanted. Yet Joe Ford(cited below), who’s doctor wanted to pull the plug on him when he was an infant, is one of many who would vehemently dispute that.

In fact, it appears that at least some disabled people view this attitude by able bodied people as being arrogant at best and bigoted at worst. Here’s an excerpt from James Taranto’s excellent commentary in today’s Wall Street Journal, asking “Who will remember Terri?”

What lasting effect will the Terri Schiavo saga have on American politics? Probably not much. However intense the emotions of the past two weeks, for most voters they’re sure to prove fleeting. But there’s one important exception: disabled Americans. Some of the most impassioned arguments against killing Terri Schiavo came from profoundly handicapped people:

– Mary Johnson, left-leaning editor of Ragged Edge magazine: “There isn’t a single disability rights activist I’ve heard from . . . who isn’t afraid that this will make liberals hate them even more than they now do.”

– Joe Ford, a Harvard undergraduate with severe cerebral palsy: “Like many others with disabilities, I believe that the American public, to one degree or another, holds that disabled people are better off dead. To put it in a simpler way, many Americans are bigots. A close examination of the facts of the Schiavo case reveals not a case of difficult decisions but a basic test of this country’s decency.” [See link below for more from Joe Horn. Ed.]

– Eleanor Smith, a self-described liberal agnostic lesbian, whose childhood bout with polio left her confined to a wheelchair: “At this point I would rather have a right-wing Christian decide my fate than an ACLU member.” Ms. Smith protested last week outside the hospice where Mrs. Schiavo lay dehydrating and starving.

I’m not willing to go so far as to call it bigotry (which may be a sure sign that I am a bigot, at least in this area) but it is worth considering what affect our attitudes about disability had in our feelings about the Terri Schiavo case. More importantly, if we have as a society put our foot on that infamous slippery slope, it’s worth considering what affect these attitudes may have on future care for those who appear to be profoundly disabled. It might be a good idea, then, to anchor our other foot in “Bigotry and the Murder of Terri Schiavo” by Harvard’s Joe Ford. I think you’ll find it both convicting and inspiring.

One Answer



The Answer
by Rudyard Kipling

A Rose, in tatters on the garden path,

Cried out to God and murmured ‘gainst His Wrath,

Because a sudden wind at twilight’s hush

Had snapped her stem alone of all the bush.

And God, Who hears both sun-dried dust and sun,

Had pity, whispering to that luckless one,

“Sister, in that thou sayest We did not well —

What voices heardst thou when thy petals fell?”

And the Rose answered, “In that evil hour

A voice said, ‘Father, wherefore falls the flower?

For lo, the very gossamers are still.’

And a voice answered, ‘Son, by Allah’s will!'”


Then softly as a rain-mist on the sward,

Came to the Rose the Answer of the Lord:

“Sister, before We smote the dark in twain,

Ere yet the stars saw one another plain,

Time, Tide, and Space, We bound unto the task

That thou shouldst fall, and such an one should ask.”

Whereat the withered flower, all content,

Died as they die whose days are innocent;

While he who questioned why the flower fell

Caught hold of God and saved his soul from Hell.


The Over 35 (a short story)

Softball sign-up sheets are up in offices and churches for the coming season. If you’ve ever played softball and felt like you’ve lost a step getting down the first base line, here’s a story of an important twilight game with play-off (and other) implications.



(excerpt)

…The Over 35, geez. We used to joke about that, and make fun of those guys at tournaments. We’d bitch about it when they were on a better field or playing at a better time than us as if the good fields and the good playing times should be reserved for the real softball players. “Over 35,” we’d say. “Is that their age or their waist size?” Of course, my own waist size is now closer to 40 than I am, and my double-knits have crossed over that fine line between snug and tight, but the Over 35? A cold, bony finger starts picking at something deep inside me.



I play first base now; the outfield literally and figuratively behind me. The green grass of youth replaced by the dirt and rocks where I now stand, the turf uneven from the footprints of all who have come before me.



In the outfield the other team is always just a distant threat, almost impersonal. You don’t see their faces, you just watch the ball and run it down and throw it back in while they either circle the bases or turn and jog back to their bench. At first base they come close. I see their faces, the fire in their eyes, the flare of their nostrils. I can hear them, smell them as they stand at my back, kicking dirt, waiting for the next play. When the throw and my stretch beat them to the bag they don’t act discouraged. They snort as if it’s only a matter of time. “Next time,” they seem to say. “Next time, old man…”



Heart of Lightness: Boston Globe Studies Evangelical Hottentots

Thanks to Hugh Hewitt, you may have already heard about the article in today’s Boston Globe where an intrepid reporter was sent into the wilds of an evangelical enclave in Ohio to explore the mysteries of a family that tries to live out its faith.

The article is actually pretty good and it doesn’t appear the reporter set out to try and make the family look foolish. Globe readers may find some of the revelations shocking but the family sounded pretty normal to me. Then again, I don’t live in Massachusetts.

Still, I do kind of wonder why the Globe sought out this story. It really had the feel of a National Geographic exploration of a foreign culture. I half-expected some Jane Goodall type of narration along the lines of “I carefully approached the alpha male, my head bowed in biblical submission…” or Marlin Perkins saying “I waited in the boat while Jim wrestled with the family over the Theory of Evolution.”

And now I’m picturing some Bostonian putting down his newspaper and saying, “Good heavens, Muffy, these primitives care more about what the Bible says than what Jacques Chirac thinks of us.”

Actually, the Globe wasn’t that original in this approach. I remember the Night Writer had this post earlier about an interview the Strib did with an author by the name of James Ault, Jr. who spent three years observing an evangelical community and made it back alive.

If this keeps up, people are going to start thinking Christians are nice people.

Norma Faith: No Union Now!

Today’s StarTribune reports that the United Food and Commerical Workers is targeting Target, in particular the new Super Target under construction in West St. Paul. The Super Target is going in on the site where a smaller Target stood – and where my oldest daughter, Faith, worked until the store closed to make way for the new building.

An international labor union that has launched organizing drives at Wal-Mart is now taking aim at Target Corp.

The United Food and Commercial Workers has been quietly laying the groundwork for a major organizing campaign at Target’s store in West St. Paul, which the union hopes will become the first of Target’s 1,330 stores to unionize.

Over the past five weeks, the union has distributed hundreds of leaflets to West St. Paul residents claiming that Target pays substandard wages and health benefits to its workers. And Monday, UFCW Local 789 in St. Paul issued a statement protesting the $731,000 in local tax breaks that Target received to redevelop the West St. Paul store.

The goal is to create a groundswell of opposition to Target before the West St. Paul store reopens this fall as a SuperTarget, said Bernie Hesse, a union organizer with Local 789 of St. Paul, which represents 7,500 workers in the Twin Cities area.

“We want to have people in those stores, organizing, on the day it opens and we want the [West St. Paul] community to support us,” he said.

Target spokeswoman Paula Thornton-Greear said that the company offers a wage and benefit package that is “among the best in the retail industry” and that workers don’t need a union. “We don’t believe that a union or any third-party representative would improve anything, not for our team members, guests or the company,” Thornton-Greear said.

Faith loved working there as a cashier and made a lot of friends among her co-workers, many of them teen-agers such as herself. From the stories she told around the dinner table it sounded like a place where they had a lot of laughs and she liked her supervisors. Whatever they put in the bug juice at the snack bar must have been effective because she now refuses to set foot in the new WalMart that opened just a couple of blocks away from the Target site.

Her starting pay for her first ever job: $7.25 an hour. (Well above the minimum wage, by the way, but that’s a post for another day).

No health benefits, but this wasn’t an issue since (as much as she may hate to admit it) she’s still a dependent and is covered under the benefits from my (non-union) job. She liked the flexibility of her part-time hours and says she thought the 401k plan was nice but not something she was interested in (her immediate goals were saving for her education expenses).

She was there to make some money, not to make a living, and I’d say she found her exploitation acceptable and a fair exchange that fit her current needs and interests – and probably those of many of her co-workers. Target understands this and offers whatever market-based wage and benefits package is required to attract employees. The key word there is “attract” employees, inferring that these workers are happy to accept the jobs rather than take them by force, which seems to be the attitude of the union.

You can use the link to read the entire story and see the adversarial approach the UFCW is already planning and its desires for “a groundswell of opposition to Target before the West St. Paul store reopens this fall.” Oh yeah, getting the local community upset with the store sounds like that’s good for jobs. And what do they think the community’s reaction will be if they have to pay higher prices out of the money left over from their paychecks when the politicians the unions support raise taxes? Did I mention there is a WalMart two blocks away?

Unlike my daughter, I’ve visited this huge WalMart several times and it usually seems to be full of shoppers unmortified by WalMart’s policies. I even have friends and neighbors working there, and they don’t appear as if they’ve been lobotomized. I think most folks around here can appreciate a fair wage and prices that make that wage go further, and aren’t looking for an international union interposing itself on local transactions.

Of course, that’s my long-winded analysis. When I asked Faith what her reaction to the thought of having “her” Target store unionized, I got one of those teen-aged snorts of angst and derision that I can’t even begin to spell for you.