This morning at church we sang the song Ever Be. Part of worship is leading people in reverent thought and attitude. The lyrics made me think. Particularly the verse that goes:
Your love is devoted
Like a ring of solid gold
Like a vow that’s been tested
Like a covenant of old
Your love is enduring
Through the winter rain
And beyond the horizon
With mercy for today
while there is a lot of symbolism in this imagery, the phrase like a covenant of old makes me wonder why the phrase of old is included.
Why is this not redundant information?Is it for the poetic effect of nostalgia? Or is it because the audience listening to the song needs to remember that there were covenants in an era not like the current era? This seems to indicate that covenants do not exist in and among the common populace of the current era.
If what we know about God is through analogy, and biblical texts, as divine inspiration are God’s way of communicating to us through things and experiences known to us in our culture then who is Jesus to a culture that has only a nostalgic connection to covenants? Particularly the theological view that Jesus is the fulfillment of a covenantal promise? Who is Jesus now?
Sanctity of life Sunday is a Sunday where the Christian church in the United States takes a day to remember, highlight, and acknowledge a cultural option in the United States for women to have abortions. Each church which celebrates sanctity of life Sunday will do it in their own way.
As I sit and think and respond to the things said at my Church, I have a few responses.
- I am glad that this is important to us
- A certain historical set of statistics were presented estimating the total number of aborted babies. Well, I wonder why are these statistics so accessible, but the number of people killed needlessly by police (or even just in the course of duty) are not accessible?
- At my church the focus is on women. (And this might be uncommon nationally, or this might be a result of my own perception bias.) In fact this emphasis might be appropriately placed. I don’t think the intensity at which services for women are offered should be abated; but where are the services for men? Life – pregnancy – takes male and female. (Even my male homosexual friends who adopt children do not create the life sans the male-female union.) So, this apparent set of services offered to women, I wonder if it ignores men and their needs in the process – these services are often professionally offered by organizations financed by Christians. That is, the service providers are not bound by some government policy or stipulation to offer services to only women. But is the state of the asymmetrical offerings of services a result or reflection of culture bias in the United States or is it a reflection of government services to women to help them terminate pregnancies? Not that the entire governmental approach to women has not also been biased. For instance, in divorce courts there is often a bias against males. And WIC stands for “Women, Infant, Children” – where are the services for the men?
David, as a leader was he approachable?
He had to ask a new question. It took a cost under responsibility to realize that the right question was not being asked. Even though he asked a new question, he did not change the approachability of his leadership position.
Location of sermon: UFC Eugene, Oregon.