92 Sermon Illustrations on Accountability

An upright farmer, giving a reason for his liberal measure, said, "God has permitted me but one journey through the world; and, when I am gone, I cannot return to rectify mistakes."

The late Rev. Robert Hall of Bristol was much grieved with the want of economy in managing the finances of some of our public institutions. "When you consider, sir," said he, "the sources from which these monies

# 18. AM

When Latimer resigned his bishopric, Foxe tells us that as he put off his rochet from his shoulders he gave a skip on the floor for joy, "feeling his shoulders so light at being discharged of such a burden." To be relieved of our wealth or high position is to be unloaded of weighty responsibilities, and should not cause us to fret, but rather to rejoice as those who are lightened of a great load. If we cease from office in the church, or from public honours, or from power of any sort, we may be consoled by the thought that there is just so much the less for us to answer for at the great audit, when we must give an account of our stewardship.

The spectacle of a $100,000,000 “trust” unable to get hay for its horses on credit was seen recently in Sault Ste. Marie, where the Consolidated Lake Superior Company went into liquidation. The liquidation resulted from the failure of the directors of this big concern to raise $5,000,000 to pay a loan from the Speyer syndicate.

Here is a corporation which was paying seven per cent dividends, and which began two or three years ago with a capital of $102,000,000, so destitute of liquid assets or working capital that it can not pay a loan of $5,000,000, for which its very existence was pawned. Nothing appears to be left.

Lake Superior Consolidated, like all the other trusts, was organized under the Connecticut corporation act, which, like that of West Virginia, New Jersey, Delaware, and other States, was expressly drawn to relieve all concerned of responsibility. No one was responsible for anything in the prospectus. No one could be held, in the promotion or direction, for any statements, promises, or representations. The sidewalk vender is more responsible for the razors and remedies that he sells in the flare of his gasoline lamp than the promoters or directors of an American trust to which millions of dollars flow.--New York _American_.

When King George the V was in the navy, he associated on terms of perfect equality with his messmates, among whom he was known. As an illustration of the indifference of his messmates to his royal birth, and of the spirit of equality with which he was treated by them while at sea, an incident may be related.

One night he declined to turn out, as he should have done, to go on watch. His fellow middy, whom he was designated to relieve, and who wanted to turn in, endeavored to arouse the prince. The latter, on receiving two or three shakings, opened his eyes, swore picturesquely, but refused to turn out. He hit the man who had called him one blow on the eye and went to sleep again.

The young fellow made no response, but returned to his post, resumed his watch, and thus did duty for the prince. Now, if there is one offense that is heinous, according to midshipman ethics, it is the shirking of a watch.

On the following day, the lad who had done double duty, reported the case to his comrades. It was immediately decided to hold a drumhead court-martial in the gun-room. Prince George was brought before it, found guilty by unanimous count, and sentenced to be spanked by the middy who had done his work.

The royal culprit was seized by four of the seniors and held face downward, while the middy with the disfigured eye, his sleeves rolled up to his elbows, carried out the sentence of the gun-room court. When the prince was released he was furious with rage and mortification, and threatened all sorts of things. But a few hours after he thought better of it, came to his messmate who had spanked him, and apologized for the blow he had given him, as well as for making him do double duty.

Current crisis of TV religion is forcing closer look at accountability. Mother Teresa is good example of how should be done - doesn't ask for money, uses wisely what is given. Dangers: they hurt their own ministries, invites gov't interference, affects local church members, gospel is obscured and church is embarrassed.

Biblical Accountability:

1. In Jesus, God has held himself accountable for our sins.

2. Our response is to acknowledge our accountability to God.

3. Interpersonal and institutional accountability follow.

Basic pattern in 2 Corinthians 8 - exegesis given. Trust, open disclosure,

conservative and prudent. Mutual responsibility of donor to ministry and

ministry to donor.

Contrasted by Ananias and Sapphira. Allured by money. Divine judgment on

fraud. Lack of full disclosure was their sin. (Acts 4:32-37) Church was

disturbed, but Spirit used it to strengthen church.

Danger of appealing to natural man, using cheap grace: "Because of its direct access to the homes and hearts of viewers, only television can say, 'You're forgiven," millions of times in a milli-second - and without any hint of nurture or follow-up or accountability relationship or community of worship."

TV may be too big for genuine Christian accountability. Comments by Tim Robertson on isolation of his father Pat from sound advice.

Examples and statistics of international terrorism. Spiritual forces of evil work in the same way. Many Christians are destroyed by sin: money, sex, pride, and power.

Principles:

1) Everyone will eventually fall victim to spiritual terrorism; no one

escapes it.

2) Spiritual terrorism is a deadly serious attempt to destroy us.

Not just harass us.

3) It is time to finally take responsibility for our own spiritual maturity.

Most of us are undisciplined, lazy, weak, and inexperienced.

If attacked, we would be overwhelmed.

4) We will not obtain battle strength in a day.

Spiritual discipline takes years.

Author committed herself to accountability with a friend.

Set up a timetable to develop prayer muscle.

Kept a journal, but hadn't been working at it.

Fasting, one day a week.

Control over thought-life.

Jeremy Levin taken hostage in Beirut, escaped. According to Detroit News, February 1985, he thought he was going crazy. Marked beginning of an inward spiritual journey that ended with belief in God. Conversion was April 10, 1984. Instant tranquility. Helped him think clearly. (Probably Jewish belief, though wife is Episcopalian - CT 11/17/89, p 51.) Christians must be prepared for spiritual battle.

Christianity Today, 4/5/90, p 45: Jerry Levin was an agnostic and grandson of a rabbi, and came to Christ during his 11-month captivity. Sis Levin, his wife, is an evangelical Christian.

Use of a spiritual inventory on visits can help deepen the spirituality of a church. Typical questions are:

1. What's one joy and one struggle you're experiencing in your life or ministry?

2. How would you describe your walk with God this past year?

3. Where do you feel you would most like to grow as a Christian?

4. Could you give me a thumbnail sketch of your spiritual history?

5. How did you first come to believe?

6. In your devotional life, what's one thing you've recently discovered?

7. How would you finish this sentence: I feel good about my walk with God when....

8. What have been some of the ups and downs of your spiritual life since you came to faith?

9. How has our church helped you in your spiritual development?

10. What do you need from me as a friend and fellow believer to go on to maturity in Christ Jesus?

To use it, people must feel open with you, you must have a relationship with them, and a soft approach works better than a hard one, and it is better to be an encourager than a judge. An hour long call can cover it.

Joe Kong, a Cambodian Christian, was saved in Bubna's church and discipled. He used this technique to plant over a dozen Cambodian churches. He said, "Pastor, the way you developed me spiritually is how I'm developing leaders for the Cambodian churches. It is a biblical pattern, and it works."

Christians need to rediscover intimacy and closeness. The desire for it does not mean the believer is self-centered.

1. Our need for intimacy.

Theology behind intimacy. Verses given.

2. We must seek intimacy.

3. Three fallacies about intimacy:

a. Mistake frequency for intimacy.

b. Marriage is only full human relationship worth developing.

c. Intimacy and sexuality are somehow inevitably intertwined.

4. Marks of an intimate relationship. (used 11/18/90)

a. Intimate friends can share openly about themselves.

b. There is a sense of acceptance by one another.

c. There is a sense of reciprocity in the relationship.

d. Times of sharing about past events in their lives.

e. Seem to include the freedom of not worrying about making sense.

f. Includes accountability.

g. Allows people to disagree and get hurting angry, with the expectation

the other person will stick around.

h. Results in a willingness to share the other person with others.

What about the heathen in Africa who have never heard of Christ? What is their eternal destiny?

1) They will be judged on what has been revealed to them.

2) They are not condemned for rejecting Christ if they have not

heard of him.

3) Can they be saved?

Romans 1:18-20 deals with judgment, not salvation. [Further discussion in book]

*

[Date is incorrect - see Biblical Evangelist, May 1, 1989, p. 22 bottom right.]

Neff says three realities set sexual immorality apart from other sin:

1. It destroys trust.

2. It brands a leader.

3. It destroys a leader's image.

#836

*

Sermon on 1 Corinthians 5:1-13.

1. Modern examples of excommunication. (RCC and abortion)

2. Situation in 1 Cor 5.

a. Pride of the Corinthians.

3. Proper reaction.

a. Grieve over sin.

b. Deal with sinner.

c. Goal is restoration.

4. Sin in church compared to leaven in bread.

a. Purge sin in church.

b. Purge sin in personal life.

5. Application to modern day.

a. Sin is not just a private matter.

b. Our goal should always be restoration.

6. Prepare hearts for communion.

*1216

A friend in A.A. tells Yancey the meetings are much like the early church. The group conveyed warmth and intimacy. People treat each other with respect. Wisdom is passed down in oral tradition. The Christian founders of A.A. included a conscious commitment to God as a mandatory part of their treatment. The 12 principles acknowledge total dependence on God for forgiveness and strength. It is not, however, Christological.

To many alcoholics, the Christian church seems irrelevant, vapid, and gutless. They expect “guilt trips.” A local church is the last place they would stand up and declare, “Hi, I’m Tom. I’m an alcoholic and a drug addict.” No one would answer back, “Hi, Tom.”

Free will/determinism: admit full and complete responsibility for all acts. Original sin: they constantly admit its validity.

A.A. often means salvation in the most literal sense. God helps them through each minute. The one quality missing in local churches that A.A. provides: dependency. “None of us can make it on our own - isn’t that why Jesus came? Yet most church people give off a self-satisfied air of piety or superiority. I don’t sense them consciously leaning on God or each other.”

Yancey’s friend concluded: “It’s a funny thing. What I hate most about myself, my alcoholism, was the one thing God used to bring me back to him. Because of it, I know I can’t survive without him.”

________

Version used in sermon:

Philip Yancey knew an alcoholic friend in A.A. The “12 steps” led his friend back to faith in God. For someone struggling with addiction, waiting is a fine art. A.A. friends have responded to his calls at 4:00 a.m., finding him in all-night restaurants where he has been sitting for hours filling a notebook with the sentence, “God help me make it through the next five minutes.”

The following item appeared on the editorial page of The Wall Street Journal, Thursday, Aug. 27, 1998, written by Franklin Graham.

“CLINTON’S SINS AREN’T PRIVATE”

Few people have lived a more public life over the past 50 years than has my father, Billy Graham. I can assure you that the Billy Graham you see in public is the same one we children have seen at home. He has spent a lifetime making sure that his public ministry in confirmed in his private behavior.

The topic of private vs. public behavior has emerged as perhaps the central moral issue raised by Bill Clinton’s “improper relationship” with Monica Lewinsky. Much of America seems to have succumbed to the notion that what a person does in private has little bearing on his public actions or job performance, even if he is the president of the United States.

Last week Mr Clinton told 70 million Americans that his adulterous actions with Ms. Lewinsky were a “private” matter “between me, the two people I love the most — my wife and our daughter — and our God.”

But the God of the Bible says that what one does in private does matter. Mr. Clinton’s months-long extramarital sexual behavior in the Oval Office now concerns him and the rest of the world, not just his immediate family. If he will lie to or mislead his wife and daughter, and those with whom he is most intimate, what will prevent him from doing the same to the American public?

Private conduct does have public consequences. Some of Mr. Clinton’s defenders present King David of the Bible, one of history’s great leaders, as an example as they call on us to forgive and forget the president’s moral failings. Since God pardoned David’s adulterous act with Bathsheba, the reasoning goes, we should similarly forgive Mr. Clinton.

But forgiveness is not the end of David’s story. Huge consequences followed immediately. The prophet Nathan confronted David with the news that while his life would be spared, the life of his child would be extinguished after just seven days on earth. Bathsheba’s husband and others were killed in an attempt to cover up the illicit affair. David, who confessed his sin when confronted by Nathan (perhaps God’s special prosecutor), also witnessed a bloody coup attempted by his own son, Absalom. He was never the same king.

The private acts of any person are never done in secret. God sees and judges all sin, and while He seeks to restore the offender with love and grace, He does not necessarily remove all the consequences of sin. As a boy I remember my mother telling me of the consequences of sin. Like a boat, whose wake can capsize other boats, sin leaves a wake. Just look at how many have already been pulled under the wake of the president’s sin: Mr. Clinton’s wife and daughter, Ms. Lewinsky, her parents, White House staff members, friends and supporters, public officials and an unwitting American public.

Mr. Clinton’s sin can be forgiven, but he must start by admitting to it and refraining from legalistic double speak. According to Scripture, the president did not have an “inappropriate relationship” with Monica Lewinsky – - he committed adultery. He didn’t “mislead” his wife and us — he lied.

Acknowledgment must be coupled with genuine remorse. A repentant spirit that says, “I’m sorry. I was wrong. I won’t do it again. I ask for your forgiveness,” would go a long way toward personal and national healing.

The scandal of Mr. Clinton and Ms. Lewinski has forced us to examine morality of public and private behavior with new intellectual and spiritual vigor. There needs to be no clash between personal conduct and public appearance. Throughout my life, I have seen consistency of two in the Graham house. I pray this will also be in the White House.

________________

Mr. Graham is president of Samaritan’s Purse, an international relief agency, and first vice chairman of Billy Graham Evangelistic Association

#1592

*

People who are accountable usually have four qualities:

1. Vulnerability -- capable of being wounded, shown to be wrong, even admitting it before being confronted.

2. Teachability -- a willingness to learn, being quick to hear and respond to reproof, being open to counsel.

3. Availability -- Accessible, touchable, able to be interrupted.

4. Honesty -- Committed to the truth regardless of how much it hurts, a willingness to admit the truth no matter how difficult or humiliating the admission may be. Hating all that is phony or false.

Bruce Larson and a few friends once covenanted to live by the following:

1. To keep a one-half hour of devotion at a set time daily.

2. To pray continually through the day, offering up flash prayers for self

or others, or situations, and to give thanks.

3. To share life in a small group.

4. To make a personal retreat two hours monthly.

(This means two hours alone with God for inventory, confession,

intercession, thanksgiving, future plans, re-reading of marriage

vows, ordination vows, etc.)

5. To express my Christian vocation in specific social action (such as: care

of, or service to, needy, sick, orphans, intercultural groups, etc.)

6. To tithe consistently.

7. To offer grace at each meal.

8. To share worship daily with my household, weekly in church.

9. To live frugally, practicing simplicity in my spending, eating, keeping

fit, sleeping enough, using my surplus for others.

10. To grow intellectually as a Christian, reading a solid book at least

monthly.

[From ASK ME TO DANCE, Word, p. 30]

How to do the right thing, and face the sin in your life:

1. Ask God to reveal to you how He feels about the sin in your life.

2. Confess your sin to Him and turn away from it.

3. Using a concordance or study Bible, do a word study on the sin and its opposite.

4. Try to find an “accountability partner.”

5. Realize that although sin continues to challenge us, Christ has overcome the world.

#3073

*

If any Promise Keepers participants this year hail from Southern Baptist churches without organized men's ministries, it won't be for lack of Brotherhood Commission resources to start them.

And it won't be because Promise Keepers isn't encouraging them to do just that.

These two facts came through loud and clear at the Midwest Regional Legacy Builders Rally sponsored by the Southern Baptist Brotherhood Commission March 29-30 at First Baptist Church, Ferguson, in St. Louis. Approximately 200 men gathered for a Friday night/Saturday program that combined inspirational messages, information sharing and music.

Glenn Wagner, vice president of the Denver-based movement, said the 22 Promise Keepers rallies this year -- which will draw an estimated 800,000 men to stadiums, coliseums, domes and two motor speedways across the country -- are simply a tool. The "critical event," he explained, is "one man making and keeping his promises in and through the context of the local church."

Wagner used terms such as "catalyzing agent," "jump start" and "igniter" to describe Promise Keepers' role in men's spiritual lives. Though many find the rallies a "mountaintop experience," God never had anyone live on a mountaintop permanently, Wagner said. "You can build a strategy off of that, but it's not the whole thing."

Many times, Wagner said, what happens among men as they travel to and from a stadium rally in a van is more significant than what happens at the rally itself. Relationships are built.

The New Testament is presented in relational terms, Wagner noted. Men tend to avoid relationships by turning to tasks, he said, and yet a man's Christian walk needs to be lived out in relationships.

Wagner, who was a pastor for 20 years, offered suggestions for starting men's ministries in the local church, beginning with a profile of the men's interests, needs and desires. This can be done through focus groups or similar means, Wagner said. If, for example, no one golfs, it would be pointless to organize a golf outing, he said.

With a core group of men with a vision for reaching the community, Wagner advised, have them spend three or four months doing nothing but praying for the men in the church.

Next, develop a mission statement, Wagner said, commenting that the chief complaint he hears about men's ministries in churches is: "I don't know where we're going." Men are target-driven, Wagner said. "Develop that statement and make it fully yours."

Keep the group focused on relationships, not programs, Wagner said. The mark of success is not the number in attendance, but whether men deepen in their relationships with other men and with Jesus Christ, he said, explaining out of the overflow of these deepening relationships comes involvement in the church's ministries.

It is not chauvinistic to have men-only activities, Wagner stated; women in churches have been meeting that way for years. Men enjoy being together and they share more freely with other men, he said.

A men's group should have the pastor's support but should not be pastor-led, Wagner said. Pour Ephesians 4 into the men, he advised the pastors present, then release them to do their work.

Wagner proposed making the group flexible, varied and creative. Budget need not be a major consideration -- a fathers-and-sons spaghetti dinner could bless families for a total cost of $25, he said, cautioning against trying to do too much too soon.

As a final word, Wagner reiterated the importance of the local church in reaching and discipling men for Christ. "Promise Keepers will come and go, but the church will stay forever."

Jim Burton, Men's Ministries director for the Brotherhood Commission in Memphis, Tenn., outlined the options and materials available to men's groups through the agency. The list includes four traditional ministries -- team builders, prayer teams, mission action teams and evangelism teams. Three newer areas -- career support teams, recovery ministries teams and encouragement teams -- complete the selection.

Unemployment is a critical issue in many men's lives, Burton pointed out. Don Aycock, Men's Ministries special projects editor for the Brotherhood Commission, led a workshop at the Legacy Builders Rally on starting a career support ministry in a church.

Recovery ministries include alcohol and substance abuse ministries, along with divorce recovery. "Have you ever noticed how few Alcoholics Anonymous groups are in Southern Baptist churches?" Burton asked. The Brotherhood Commission encourages such ministries using Baptist Sunday School Board materials that define the "higher power" -- Jesus.

Encouragement teams are an up-and-coming area of ministry. "This is where we intersect most with Promise Keepers in the local church," Burton noted. Bob Carey of the Brotherhood Commission led a workshop on how to start such teams. They often are called "accountability groups," said Carey, editor of Missions Today magazine, but he prefers to emphasize affirmation.

He stressed the need for confidentiality -- a man must be confident that something he shares with the small group won't be voiced in the following Wednesday's prayer meeting. Also, men must be honest and transparent with each other.

Men in churches want materials that are short, simple and bite-sized, Carey said -- things they can start and finish. He recommended a pair of four- to five-week studies called Friendship Course and Home Run Course. Both were developed by the Little Rock, Ark.,-based organization Dad the Family Shepherd, which has been in a partnership with the Brotherhood Commission since 1994. That partnership formed when the Brotherhood Commission adopted the Dad the Family Shepherd conference as part of its Men's Ministries Journey curriculum, which includes Legacy Builders and a series of similar weekend events focusing on men's issues.

Carey said pairing some type of mission action with the encouragement ministry improves a team's prospects for success. "When you put the two together, they tend to keep afloat a lot longer," he said. "Men are doers, and it keeps them interested."

The small group should not be so locked in to a study that it fails to meet its members where they are in their struggles, Carey said. "There is no set pattern to an encouragement team."

Missions Today magazine contains curriculum for the team builders and prayer teams options of Men's Ministries, as well as for encouragement teams. In an interview, Burton acknowledged some frustration that more Baptist men do not know about and take advantage of such Brotherhood Commission resources.

Some men go to the Promise Keepers stadium rallies and develop an instant "brand loyalty" to Promise Keepers, Burton said. After that, they only want to use Promise Keepers' materials, even though -- as Wagner noted -- the organization has deliberately avoided publishing curriculum.

It is technically illegal for a group within a church to call itself a "Promise Keepers group," Wagner added, because the organization has declined to license its name or logo. "We didn't do it because we want the men in your church to identify with your church."

The marriage of Promise Keepers enthusiasm and Brotherhood Commission know- how can be seen in First Baptist Church, St. John, Mo. Cliff Harlow, Brotherhood director for the St. Louis-area church, said men's work there had been foundering before men started going to Promise Keepers stadium rallies in Indianapolis and Dallas the past two years.

This spring, besides having some men at the Promise Keepers rally in Kansas City's Arrowhead Stadium, the church is conducting a Legacy Builders weekend retreat -- another Brotherhood Commission resource -- at Windermere Baptist Assembly. Associate pastor David Iannacone said such fellowship opportunities allow men to get to know one another beyond "Hi, how are you doing?" when they see each other Sunday mornings.

Iannacone used "sleeping giant" to describe Baptist men. Burton compared them to "latent images" on a roll of film that has been exposed but not processed. When Iannacone attended the first Promise Keepers pastors rally in February in Atlanta, a man from another denomination asked him, "What's with you Southern Baptists? You're everywhere!"

He told the guy, "Southern Baptists have been doing men's ministries all along." More men are doing them across the SBC, said Brotherhood Commission President James D. Williams when he addressed the Legacy Builders rally. According to Annual Church Profile records, Brotherhood enrollment climbed by 100,000 in the last church year.

The question that will be answered in the weeks, months and years after each Promise Keepers rally is: Will more Baptist churches see more Baptist men doing ministries and missions through their local churches? It is a question the men who plan to attend might want to ask themselves before they go. For information on Brotherhood Commission or Dad the Family Shepherd materials, contact the Brotherhood Commission at 1- 800-727-6466.

Copyright (c) 1996 Baptist Press

RNbp6410mrjB410g6411

#3716

*

Keep your passion for Christ alive amid the demands of ministry.

1. A separate devotional time.

2. Accountability.

3. Solitude.

4. Activities where you are not in charge.

5. A proper perspective on success.

On February 26, 1995, Barings, the oldest bank in Britain, announced it was seeking bankruptcy protection after losing nearly one billion dollars in a stock gamble. At the time Barings went under, the bank held assets for Queen Elizabeth, some $100 million according to Time magazine.

In late 1994, the chief trader at Barings's Singapore office began betting big on Japan's Nikkei market. Then disaster struck. An earthquake hit Kobe, Japan, and on January 23, 1995, the Nikkei plunged more than one thousand points.

Barings Bank lost big money. But instead of cutting his losses, Barings's Singapore trader doubled his investment, apparently hoping that the Nikkei would rebound. It didn't. As the Nikkei continued to plummet, Barings's London office put up nearly $900 million to support its falling position on the Singapore investments. Finally Barings ran out of capital and declared bankruptcy.

How could one twenty-eight-year-old trader in Singapore lose nearly a billion dollars and ruin a 233-year-old British bank? According to Time, the problem was lack of supervision.

London allowed [the Singapore trader] to take control of both the trading desk and the backroom settlement operation in Singapore. It is a mix that can be - and in this case was toxic.... For a trader to keep his own books is like a schoolboy getting to grade his own tests; the temptation to cheat can be overwhelming, particularly if the stakes are high enough.

Without accountability, temptation becomes all the more tempting. Accountability protects us from ourselves.

________________________

Contemporary Illustrations For Preachers, Teachers, & Writers, Editor Craig Brian Larson, Baker Books, p. 10.

*

My Turn: The Question That We Should Be Asking

Is terrorism wrong? My generation may be culturally sensitive, but we hesitate to make moral judgments. By Alison Hornstein

NEWSWEEK, Dec. 17, 2001, issue - On the morning of September 11, my entire college campus huddled around television sets, our eyes riveted in horror to images of the burning, then falling, Twin Towers. By evening there were candlelight vigils where people sought to comfort and be comforted.

But by Sept. 12, as our shock began to fade, so did our sense of being wronged. Student reactions expressed in the daily newspaper and in class pointed to the differences between our life circumstances and those of the perpetrators, suggesting that these differences had caused the previous day’s events. Noticeably absent was a general outcry of indignation at what had been the most successful terrorist attack of our lifetimes. These reactions and similar ones on other campuses have made it apparent that my generation is uncomfortable assessing, or even asking, whether a moral wrong has taken place.

I spent 14 years at a public school in Manhattan with students who came from a variety of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds. I benefited immensely from the open-minded curriculum. In second grade we learned about the Inuit (who don’t like to be called Eskimos, our teacher taught us), and how, though they sometimes ate caribou hoofs and other foods that we generally did not find on our own dinner tables, they were essentially like us.

When my third-grade class read a story about one boy kicking another at a school-bus stop, our teacher talked about why the boy might have done what he did - maybe he was having a bad day or had had a fight with his mother that morning. The teacher stressed that the little boy had feelings that sometimes led him to do mean things. That these feelings did not necessarily justify his actions got lost in the discussion.

Later, in high school, my classmates and I learned about how women in some countries are circumcised and how, even though this seemed abhorrent to us, it was part of their culture. We discussed the pros and cons of imposing our standards on other cultures. And, overwhelmingly, we decided we should not.

We gained an important degree of emotional and psychological sophistication from looking at these issues. But being taught to think within a framework of moral and cultural relativity without learning its boundaries has seemingly created a deficiency in my generation’s ability to make moral judgments.

Just as we should pass absolute moral judgment in the case of rape, we should recognize that some actions are objectively bad, despite differences in cultural standards and values.

In a college seminar on Sept. 12 a professor said he did not see much difference between Hamas suicide bombers (who, he pointed out, saw themselves as "martyrs") and American soldiers who died fighting in World War II. When I saw one or two students nodding in agreement, I raised my hand. I wanted to say that although both groups may have believed that they were fighting for their ways of life in declared "wars," there is a considerable distinction. American soldiers, in uniform, did not have a policy of specifically targeting civilians; suicide bombers, who wear plainclothes, do. The professor didn’t call on me. The people who did get a chance to speak cited various provocations for terrorism; not one of them questioned its morality.

I had to drop the class.

The explanations students and professors give for the September 11 attacks - extreme poverty in the Middle East, America’s foreign policy in that region and religious motivation - are insightful, but they cannot provide absolution for wrongdoing. Even if a woman wears a very short, tight skirt, she should not be raped. Even if the rapist was abused as a child. Even if his wife just cheated on him. Even if the woman looked really, really good in that skirt. The rapist is still accountable. And he still did wrong.

Just as we should pass absolute moral judgment in the case of rape, we should recognize that some actions are objectively bad, despite differences in cultural standards and values. To me, hijacking planes and killing thousands of civilians falls into this category. Others may disagree. It is less important to me where people choose to draw the line than it is that they are willing to draw it at all.

Continuing to neglect the place of moral evaluations in discussing current events is not only philosophically problematic; it is also potentially suicidal. There comes a point where the refusal to take a stand on what is wrong results in its victory.

I am so glad that I learned early on not to judge people who eat things that might make me gag, like caribou hoofs or cow brains (which I traumatically encountered years later in France). I am a little less enthusiastic about the conclusions my high-school class drew over the issue of female circumcision. I do know that much of the discussion on this campus since September 11 has failed to address the question of whether an absolute wrong has been committed.

I think it should.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hornstein is a student at Yale University.

© 2001 Newsweek, Inc

=================================================

Michael Kelly

December 19, 2001

A non-judgemental Yale?

Not to be judgmental about it, but two cheers for Alison Hornstein.

Ms. Hornstein is a student at Yale University and she has written a column for the Dec. 17 issue of Newsweek in which she attempts to come to terms with what for her and her friends at Yale is the most troublesome question arising out of Sept. 11: Did somebody do something really bad here? This is not a question that most people have a hard time with, and that is Ms. Hornstein's point. She is surprised and bothered to find that, in the wake of the murders, many of her classmates had been unable even to address the question. Why? Because to address it would be to make a moral judgment, and to judge others is, for Ms. Hornstein's generation of properly educated young elites, the great taboo.

Ms. Hornstein writes that the initial response at Yale on Sept. 11 was one of horror: "But by Sept. 12, as our shock began to fade, so did our sense of being wronged. Student reactions expressed in the daily newspaper and in class pointed to the differences between our life circumstances and those of the perpetrators, suggesting that these differences had caused the previous day's events. Noticeably absent was a general outcry of indignation at what had been the most successful terrorist attack of our lifetimes. These reactions and similar ones on other campuses have made it apparent that my generation is uncomfortable assessing, or even asking, whether a moral wrong has taken place."

Ms. Hornstein is clear as to why she and her peers find it so difficult to judge: they were trained all their lives to be this way. Ms. Hornstein spent 14 years in a public school in Manhattan "with students who came from a variety of ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds" being tutored in an "open-minded curriculum." In second grade, she writes, she was taught that the Inuit of Alaska were "essentially like us," even thought they ate caribou hoofs. In third grade, a teacher instructed the class in a parable of violence -- one boy kicking another -- the moral of which was that the kicker "had feelings that sometimes led him to do mean things." In high school, Ms. Hornstein and her fellow students agreed that, although they personally found the practice of female genital mutilation to be abhorrent, they must accept it as part of the culture of other societies.

At some point soon after Sept. 11, listening to Yale students and professors offer rationalizations for the mass murders (poverty in the Middle East, U.S. foreign policy, etc.) Ms. Hornstein had an epiphany. Some things were just wrong. "Just as we should pass absolute moral judgment in the case of rape, we should recognize that some actions are objectively bad, despite differences in cultural standards and values. To me, hijacking planes and killing thousands of civilians falls into this category."

Hurrah! A breakthrough! A moral judgment! Yes, Ms. Hornstein, murdering thousands of people in fact is bad. But wait. A lifetime of instruction is not sloughed off quite so easily as all that; Ms. Hornstein's bold moral judgment is not quite so bold as all that. Look at her conclusion again: "To me," it begins. To me. Hijacking planes and killing thousands is not objectively bad after all. It is objectively bad only in Ms. Hornstein's opinion. Indeed, she rushes to reassure on this point: "Others may disagree." Others may disagree. And she adds: "It is less important to me where people choose to draw the line than it is that they are willing to draw it at all." Oh dear.

It is astonishing, really. Here you have an obviously smart, obviously moral person trying nobly and painfully to think her way out of the intellectual and moral cul de sac in which the addled mis-education of her life has placed her -- and she cannot, in the end, bear to do it. She cannot judge.

Ms. Hornstein, push on. Go the last mile. Go out on the limb of judgment. Mass murder is indeed objectively bad -- and not just in your opinion. Others may disagree -- but they are wrong. Indeed, they are (shut the door for this part, lest the hall monitors catch us) morally wrong. Ms. Hornstein, it is not less important where people choose to draw the line as long as they will draw it somewhere; that puts you right back with your silly professors.

Draw the line, Ms. Hornstein. Draw it where you know it belongs. Dare to judge.

©2001 Washington Post Writers Group

===============================================

Interpreting September 11: Perspectives on Terrorism

By Ron Benefiel

In the December 17 issue of Newsweek, Alison Hornstein, a student at Yale University, wrote a compelling article. She was dismayed by all the attempts of her fellow students and professors at Yale to understand terrorism by examining any of a number of social factors that may have contributed to the events of September 11. She argued that the question we should be asking in response to the terrorist attacks is essentially a moral question. Explanations related to the social or historical context are irrelevant, especially as they offer explanations that could be turned into justifications for terrorism. Presumably, we need go no further in our response than to condemn the acts and do all we can to bring those responsible to justice.

I am in agreement with Miss Hornstein on several points, beginning with the conviction that the events of September 11 were an unspeakable horror and can only be interpreted as evil. I agree with her able challenge of cultural relativism that would seemingly put so much focus on understanding the social context of those committing the atrocities that the immorality of their actions is undermined.

Furthermore, I strongly concur that those responsible should be brought to justice.

However, I am left with some unsettled and unsettling questions. Way down deep there are some things I still want to understand. I have a fear that if we don't take the time to listen, reflect, and pray, we will be left with merely reacting out of our psychological instincts that vary from revenge to patriotic protectionism. I hope that in the Christian community we are willing to dig deeper into the issue in a way that would help us to think theologically and Christianly, how to pray as the Spirit would lead us, and even how to preach from hard-to-hear Scripture passages in the wake of these events.

So, at the risk of asking unanswerable questions ... Why did this happen? What could possibly have motivated 19 young men to willingly sacrifice their lives in the name of religious conviction? Where did such zealous hatred come from? Why was it aimed at America? Why now?

I find some of the attempted answers to these questions quite troubling. Responses like, "This is God's judgment on America", or "This is God's way of calling America back to God." Don't get me wrong, I am thankful for the spiritual renewal that took place immediately following the tragedy and in some cases continues. But to attribute the events of September 11 to God's activity or God's will in any way violates everything I know about the character of God. Surely God has not ordained this. Surely God and the values of the Kingdom stand opposed to these acts of terror. As the people of God should we not be very careful about contributing to the potential confusion by linking these acts to the hand of God?

Another response I struggle with is the cosmic battle response, the idea that this is part of a much larger struggle between good and evil. The problem with this perspective is that it puts people into categories and lines everything up much too conveniently. Everything that is "us" and associated with "us" is in the "good guy" column. Everything that is "them" is in the "bad guy" column. From this perspective, the battle between God and Satan and between good and evil is played out in our world in the terrorist attacks and the subsequent war in Afghanistan. Lined up with God and "the good" are: Americans, Christians, and the U.S. and International Allied military forces. Alternatively, lined up with Satan and "the dark side" are those who too easily could be lumped into categories of enemies: Arabs, Afghans, Moslems, and all those who find themselves on the wrong side of the battlefield. In this vein, it is easy to see how God would be on "our" side in the just war "we" are fighting. Who is the "we" in this scenario? What does it mean when McDonald's signs carry messages that read "God Bless America" and sanctuaries of Christian worship are draped in red, white and blue? Is there the potential danger that "Christian" and "American" become so linked and lumped together that at least in our own minds we turn the Creator of the universe into a convenient servant of American economic and political interests? While there is an important and legitimate role for justice to be carried out in response to the horrendous terror, should we not be very careful in the process that we do not turn our understanding of God into an American god of war?

There are ideas from other perspectives (especially from the social sciences) that merit our consideration as well. While these ideas should not be used as an excuse to justify the terrible atrocities, they may help us in understanding the social contexts out of which such hatred and passion has emerged. For example, one particular political/historical critique looks at history as a dialectical process with power bases emerging only to be challenged by countervailing sources of power. From this perspective, most of the animosity can be explained in terms of a conflict between the powerful and the powerless - the economically, technologically and militarily rich being challenged by the underdogs of the world. This perspective does make some logical sense out of why some groups have resorted to terrorism. Terrorism becomes the tool of war, the equalizing variable, for those who are hopelessly outmatched and outgunned in their perceived struggle. It also makes some sense of what seems to be so baffling to many of us, the degree of support and numbers of ready recruits that the terrorist groups have been able to find among the poor and marginalized, especially in the Islamic world. If there is little in this life to live for, then the promises of a better life for those who are martyrs becomes significantly more appealing. After the fall of Communism, it was only a matter of time before the dominance of American culture in the world was challenged. The unique culture in some forms of Islam have positioned it to be the force that has all too willingly stepped forward to oblige.

Another potentially interesting perspective from the social sciences comes from the sociology of religion and the way some sociologists view fundamentalism. From this perspective, fundamentalism, whether in Afghanistan, Iran or Texas, is not understood as primarily religious in nature, but rather as a psycho-social response to social change. For a variety of reasons, the natural homes for fundamentalism are ethnicity, politics and religion. As technology, globalization, and mass marketing bring increasingly rapid changes to the world, a natural human response is to react and resist. That reaction is, at its heart, self-protective as the forces of change threaten to undermine the way of life for the fundamentalist. The result is a sectarian spirit of withdrawal from the rapidly changing world. In a world that is becoming more complex, the fundamentalist tries to simplify the world and sees everything through dichotomous lenses: black and white, good and evil, good guys and bad guys. There are no shades of gray. This, in turn, frequently leads fundamentalists to exhibit high degrees of prejudice and anger toward other groups. The response is to lash out at the things they perceive to threaten their way of life.

At best, these perspectives from the social sciences may aid us in trying to understand the social and cultural context out of which terrorism has emerged and help us know better how to respond. But it is clear that even if there are social variables that have contributed to the rise of terrorism, this in no way diminishes the culpability of those who target innocent people or perpetrate acts of violence. The perspectives from the social sciences also have their weaknesses. For one thing, they offer little in the way of hope or help on what to do. Further, even if on the one hand we should be careful about linking God's activity to the terrorist acts, these perspectives generally remove any redemptive participation of God and the Church from the discussion.

So, where is God in all of this? And how should we be thinking and praying as the people of God? It seems to me that there are several biblical/theological concepts that are especially helpful in this discussion. Let me briefly suggest four: holiness, justice, peace and hope.

As God in His essential character is a God of holiness, we as the people of God, restored by grace in the image of God, exhibit the holy character of God in the world. Holiness depicts not only the purity of God, but also the love and mercy of God. Christian responses to terrorism or any other social situation are not rooted in our human psychological reactions, but in the character of God. So, to say what must seem obvious, our responses are to be godly responses -- Christlike responses. Whatever else may be said, let the character of God in His holiness, as it is most fully expressed in the life of Christ, be our example for response. This cannot overlook the Sermon on the Mount and Jesus' words that call us to love and forgive others, including our enemies. Our prayers should include petitions that the holiness of God be expressed through us.

God is also a God of justice. God stands with those who are wronged and oppressed and against those who wrong and oppress others. The faithfulness of God's love and mercy surrounds those who have lost family and friends in this tragedy. Our confidence in Immanuel is that His abundant grace is present with those in sorrow. God's care for those who have been victimized also extends to His passion for justice. God is as concerned as we are that justice be accomplished in response to the terrorism of September 11. As Christians, we should lead the way in seeking justice and support others who pursue justice. But God's sense of justice also extends to the social systems of the world that produce despair and hopelessness among the poor of the world. To the degree that there are social, economic and political systems that have unjustly contributed to the impoverishment of people anywhere, including the poor in Arab/Moslem countries, God stands against those systems and the people who have used their influence and power to create and sustain those systems. Our prayers should include petitions that God would help us be a people who stand for justice as God stands for justice.

And God is a God of peace. The One who calls us as sons and daughters of God to be "peacemakers" is not a warlord but is, Himself, the Prince of Peace. The peace of God is not only the peace we know in our souls as the Spirit of God fills us with His presence, but it is also His divine peace and reconciliation between and among us as His people. And further, as His ambassadors, we are ambassadors of His peace and reconciliation in the world. Our prayers should include petitions that God would help us be a people of peace and reconciliation.

And finally, as God's people, we are people of hope. This hope is not a mere optimistic spirit or the power of positive thinking, but it is a hope centered in the resurrection and return of Christ. It is a hope that thrives in difficulty and flourishes in the midst of overwhelming obstacles. For it is a hope that is not limited to the circumstances at hand but rather to the power of Christ's victory over death, the promise that we shall live and reign with Him forever, and the faith that all of Creation will be restored in the final day. It is this hope that enables us to live beyond fear and to resist temptations to flee or be unduly anxious in the midst of trouble. September 11 and much of what has followed has created a great deal of uncertainty and apprehension in our world. But our hope in Christ holds us steady in the storm. Our prayers should include petitions that God would help us to be a people of hope.

___________________

Ron Benefiel is president of Nazarene Theological Seminary in Kansas City, Missouri

*

Every person should seek to have three individuals in their life: a Paul, a Barnabas, and a Timothy.

A Paul is an older person who is willing to mentor you, to build into your life. Not someone who’s smarter or more gifted than you, but somebody who’s been down the road. Somebody willing to share their strengths and weaknesses -- everything they have learned in the laboratory of life. Somebody whose faith you’ll want to imitate.

A Barnabas is a soul friend, somebody who loves you but is not impressed by you. Somebody to whom you can be accountable. Somebody who’s willing to keep you honest, who’s willing to say, “Hey, you’re neglecting your spouse, and don’t give me any guff!”

A Timothy is a younger person into whose life you are building. For a model, read 1st and 2nd Timothy. Here was Paul, the quintessential mentor, building into the life of his protégé -- affirming, encouraging, teaching, correcting, directing, praying.

Do you have these three people in your life?

________

Howard Hendricks, Professor at Dallas Theological Seminary in MEN OF INTEGRITY, Vol. 1, no. 1; submitted by Malladi Murthy in India

*

[Original illustration at this number was a duplicate of HolwickID #5116]

He operated a small grocery store in the town of Sheridan, Arkansas,

in the 1940's. She was having company the next day so she went to the

store to buy what she needed for her meal preparation.

She told him she needed a "large chicken" since she was having a lot

of visitors. He pushed his hand down in the bin of ice where the

chickens were kept and came up with a chicken. When he put it on the

scale she stretched to see the weight and declared, "I need one larger

than that!"

So he put the chicken back down in the ice and fumbled for another. To

his chagrin he had no other chicken, so with that he pulled out the

same chicken and to the weight of it he added a hidden finger on the

back side of the scale.

When she eye-balled the scale she confidently declared, "I'll take

both chickens!"

To the day of his death his sons remembered the story. When told at

his funeral at their suggestion, the lady in the story, who happened

to be sitting next to my wife, shook the whole pew as she laughed.

The incident must have impressed him. As bad as the embarrassment was

that he did not have what the lady needed, it was worse that he was

caught trying to deceive her. Its a hard lesson; the truth is always

better the first time!

by Lawrence Barr

\reference{Gen. 43:12}{Genesis 43:12}; \reference{Lev.

19:35}{Leviticus 19:35}, \reference{36}{Leviticus 19:36};

\reference{Prov. 16:11}{Proverbs 16:11}; \reference{1 Th 4:11}{1

Thessalonians 4:11}; \reference{1 Pet. 2:12}{1 Peter 2:12}

Did you hear about the man who was accused of stealing a horse?

The judge was lenient and said to him, "Sam, you're acquitted."

"Aquitted?" replied Sam, not understanding legal terms, "Does that

mean I gotta' give the horse back?"

Some of us are like Sam. We fail to show responsibility and

accountability toward God, our Judge.

President Suharto was sworn in on Wednesday for a seventh term as leader of Indonesia's 200 million people, warning them in sombre tones of tough times ahead in overcoming the country's ravaging economic crisis.

“We are being subjected to very hard economic and financial turmoils... as a nation we must tighten our belts,” he said in a 15-minute acceptance speech on the final day of the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR).

The 1,000-seat MPR, the nation's top constitutional body made up largely of hand-picked members, was due to elect mercurial Research and Technology Minister Jusuf Habibie as vice-president later in the day.

As Suharto was being sworn in, thousands of university students demonstrated in the central Java city of Yogyakarta, demanding an end to his rule.

Witnesses said security was light however and there was no confrontation with police or troops.

It marked yet another day of student demonstrations and followed protest rallies on Tuesday when Suharto was re-elected with sweeping emergency powers.

Suharto offered no solutions to the country's economic problems during his inauguration speech, which he read in a firm voice standing before a small battery of microphones in the shell-shaped national parliament.

Although he looked weary, the 76-year-old former general appears to have fully recovered from an illness that struck him down late last year.

His sombre appearance, with dark suit and tie and a traditional black velvet Moslem cap, contrasted with the fairly cheerful mood of the MPR gathering, which applauded his speech several times.

A Moslem preacher held a Koran over his head as he took the oath of office.

Suharto told the assembly members and an audience of officials, dignitaries and diplomats -- including the Jakarta representatives of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank -- that he hoped to be at the same podium giving his accountability address in 2003.

“In five years' time from now, God willing, I shall stand on this rostrum to present the accountability of my leadership before the Indonesian people's representatives,” he told the MPR, quashing speculation he may hand over the reins before his term ends.

Indonesia has been in confrontation with the IMF and major industrialised powers over its performance on economic reforms agreed with the Fund in mid-January in return for a bail-out of more than $40 billion.

Suharto made no mention of the stand-off nor of a controversial proposal he is considering for a fixed exchange rate through a currency board system, which continues to keep financial markets in a state of confusion.

Brokers said Suharto's indication he would stay on for the full five years boosted shares in companies controlled by members of his family in an otherwise flat stock market.

Suharto's eldest daughter, businesswoman Siti Hardianti Rukmana, said after the inauguration it was time to allow more openness “to improve the economy, politics and other issues.

“Certainly it cannot be done at once, it has to proceed gradually,” she said.

“We are not expecting too much help from overseas. Hopefully we can settle the crisis with all the power we have in Indonesia,” added Rukmana, who is also a leader of the ruling Golkar party.

“However, we are not closing off the opportunity to obtain aid from overseas as long as it does not tie down the people and the nation or lower our dignity.”

The succession issue has preoccupied many Indonesians, and also foreign investors, with markets reacting negatively to the prospect Habibie might take over if Suharto was incapacitated.

A 61-year-old, German-trained aeronautical engineer, Habibie has come under fire for his unorthodox economic pronouncements and for his big-spending reputation as head of a number of state industrial firms, including a controversial aircraft manufacturer.

But he is a close associate of Suharto, and political analysts anticipate he will break out of the largely-ceremonial mould of previous vice-presidents and play a much more active role in state proceedings.

One analyst has suggested Habibie might act as a sort of prime minister, executing Suharto's policies.

The president is expected to name a new cabinet late this week or early next week, ahead of a visit by a senior economic delegation to Washington for talks with the United States and the IMF on Indonesia's economic crisis.

Fuad Bawazier, the director-general of taxes and tipped to be the new finance minister, told reporters on Tuesday Indonesia would send a top-level economic delegation to Washington next week headed by chief economic adviser Widjojo Nitisastro.

Diplomatic sources however said the IMF, the World Bank and the U.S. government had not been officially informed of the visit.

An authoritative source in Tokyo said Japanese Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto would visit Jakarta from March 14 and meet President Suharto on March 15 to discuss ways to overcome its economic crisis.

Industry and Trade Minister Tunky Ariwibowo said at the assembly building on Tuesday that Suharto was expected to name his cabinet late this week or early next week. He would not say whether he himself would be in the cabinet.

Financial sources said the current state minister for national development planning, Ginandjar Kartasasmita, was likely to become the cabinet's top economic coordinating minister.

Indonesia's rupiah currency has plunged around 75 percent to Wednesday's rate of around 10,500 to the dollar since the economic crisis struck last July.

The collapse of the rupiah sparked riots over rising prices in a number of towns across the nation in January and February. It has technically bankrupted many companies and halted trade.

Suharto faced unprecedented calls to step down in recent months, but diplomats say his fighting spirit has convinced him he must see the nation through its current crisis, which threatens a legacy of stability and development he built up over the past 30 years.

He came to power in the mid-1960s in a period of bloodshed and economic collapse, replacing founding president Sukarno as only the country's second president since independence in 1945.

By Ian MacKenzie, Reuters