In Respectable Sins: Confronting the Sins We Tolerate, Jerry Bridges gently focuses our attention on widespread sins in the church. Not only are they common, but they also go unchecked.

Bridges’ confession

Before expanding on these sins, though, he makes a confession to his readers: He’s not perfect, he has committed many of these sins over the years and he doesn’t pretend to be any better or holier than the rest of us.

He makes this confession right at the start, helping readers to understand his humble attitude while writing this book, which ultimately helps us to accept what he has to say about these sins.

Seasoned Christians still have room to grow

Next, Bridges walks us through those familiar Bible verses about sin, salvation and grace. He knows he’s talking to people who’ve heard these things a million times, but he reframes them to help us see ourselves—that is, lifelong Christians who think we’ve got this faith thing all worked out—in the centre of God’s plan of salvation.

Even now, as seasoned believers, with years of Sunday services under our belts, countless worship songs sung, who knows how many prayers said, devotions read and volunteer hours logged, we're still sinners in need of God’s grace who have lots of room left to grow.

Down to the nitty-gritty: Sins Christians tolerate

Bridges covers everything from anger, judgmentalism, anxiety and impatience to worldliness, pride, selfishness and lack of self-control.

Sometimes we Christians purposely ignore these 'respectable' sins. Sometimes we just don't take them seriously. Gossip and materialism are a couple examples of this.

Other times these sins are winked at or they’re the subject of jokes. I can think of a few, but I’m curious which sins you (reading this review) would file under this category?

Bridges hits the mark

I’ve grown up in the church and consider myself to have been a believer most of my life, (You know, the ‘asked Jesus into my heart at age 6’ story), and I’ve seen each and every one of these sins in myself and in most ‘mature’ Christians around me.

Some of them, like materialism and selfishness, are shied away from in sermons, Bible studies, devotionals and especially in conversation with one another. We’re so hardwired from birth to practically idolize individualism, privacy and a citizen’s ‘rights’ to do whatever he wants with his money that we hardly distinguish them from the true sins of materialism and selfishness that God’s Word tries to guide us away from.

Other sins, like anger, are sometimes wrongly interpreted. I’ve been angered by serious sin in the church (e.g. putting personal comfort over helping a neighbor in need), and for that I have been accused of the ‘sin’ of anger. We Christians don’t know the difference between good anger (e.g. at cruel injustice) and sinful anger.

Bridges also missed a few biggies

Bridges really does justice to most sins that we Christians often let slide. He invites the reader, after reviewing each issue, to consider instances in our own lives where we have committed those sins and how we can return to a belief and a lifestyle more reflective of God’s desire for us, His Bride.

There are a few sins, though, I wish he had mentioned.

Love your neighbor: We don’t do it
The second commandment, to love our neighbor as we love ourselves, seems like a biggie in Scripture. And yet, growing up I’ve witnessed countless times when Christians have refused to help a fellow Christian in need.

Not helping one’s neighbor is often made to seem acceptable with the false teaching that people must suffer in silence, without asking for help, in order to prove that they’re trusting God. Scripture, on the other hand, is full of commands and examples of Christians tangibly helping one another and that this is linked to proof of our salvation. (See John Piper’s sermon on this.)

Church: The old boys’ club
I’ve gotta be honest. Sometimes the church resembles an old boys’ club more than a family of mature, caring believers who actually live by integrity. I’ve seen ‘mature’ Christians cover up fellow Christians’ sins and paving the way for that sin to continue. They also attacked anyone who brought those sins into the light.

Take the sexual abuse of children by clergy and other church leaders, for example. Consider the lengths to which ‘mature’ Christians have gone to cover up those sins, regardless of the fact that known pedophiles were free to continue abusing children because of the community’s collective will to keep it all quiet.

Accountability: Who's it for anyway?
Often the church patriarchs and matriarchs consider themselves above accountability. Their age and status in the community gives them a kind of immunity from it.

Jesus and Paul’s clear instructions to deal with sin and conflict in the church (Matt. 5:23-24; Matt. 18:15-17, 1 Cor. 5: 11-13) are only applied to hot button sins (e.g. divorce, premarital sex, challenging ‘authority,’ etc.). These sins are loudly preached against and the people who committ them are publicly disciplined, cast out, or otherwise raked over the coals.

What about extreme sins, like when missionaries and elders and pastors rape children? No, we’re told, we must pray for those leaders and do nothing more. If we break the code of silence, we’re accused of the sin of judgmentalism, vengeance, anger and so forth.

You know in some ways, the Church is seriously screwed up. That’s why these are some of the very deep and dangerous sins I wish Bridges had covered in his otherwise stellar work.

4.5 out of 5

Overall, the book was a huge encouragement to me, in that Bridges’ gentle treatment of these common sins paints a bright, uplifting picture of what the Church can become if we simply want to. All we need is to humble ourselves—I mean totally forget our privilege, status and years of service—and decide that our lives will not be a breeding ground for these sins anymore.

No sin is respectable.

Speaking of respect, it isn’t easy taking on the attitudes of overly comfortable Christians. I respect Jerry Bridges for the courage to share this unpopular yet urgently needed message with us.

--- Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from NavPress Publishers as part of their Blogger Review Program. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commision's 16 CFR, Part 255: "Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising."

I was first introduced to this woman over the radio, CBC Radio One, to be exact. Several days ago I was on the road running errands, and was listening to the CBC as I normally do when news of her passing, due to cancer, and an excerpt of her very last interview caught my attention. She was June Callwood, a famous Canadian author and activist, and the interviewer was George Stroumboulopoulos of CBC television's The Hour. I really was moved after listening to their interview on the radio; some of June's thoughts weaved their way in and out of my mind as I completed my errands, and came back to me when I returned home. So, I found the video version of this interview at YouTube and have posted it here because I'm really interested in your reactions to it.

In their conversation June and George touch on the nature of death, on preparing for it, and what lies next. Their interaction is so touching and involves issues so personal that I almost feel I'm eavesdropping on a private conversation between close friends. Watch the sensitivity in his eyes, and watch her eyes as well; I find that certain aspects of a person's soul just can't help but be revealed in their eyes as they consider human mortality.

Neither June nor George seem to have any religious beliefs beyond that postmodern ideal of subjective, personal 'spirituality', as far as I can tell, which makes the conversation all the more interesting to me. I honestly have to say, death isn't something I've thought to discuss with too many people, but it might be more interesting and less morbid than it seems.

June believes in 'dust to dust', and seems ready to move on. She speaks of planning for her death, and her 'to do lists' as she gets ready for it; she seems to have an enviable amount of humour left in her, especially for someone who is very aware of standing on death's doorstep. What really touched me was their conversation about her relationship with her husband of many decades, of the tenderness and special intimacy that enters marriage in the later years, of the priceless value of sticking to a marriage through thick and thin, and of having each other's well being at heart all the while. "Who's going to take care of him?" she wonders, thinking of her husband once she has passed away - it seems to have broken her heart, and it breaks mine as well. At the same time I wonder, why aren't more Christian marriages like hers?

"There's nothing next," she whispers thoughtfully, "and that's alright" she says, when George asks her about the afterlife. This really caught me off guard, actually. Asked whether she believes in God she responds, "I believe in kindness." I think back to C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity, (my recollection of which has become lamentably foggy since reading it 12 years ago), and wonder how anyone can believe in goodness, in conscience, and in right and wrong without taking that next logical step (in my mind, anyway) to finding the source of these things. I wonder what would lead someone to the conclusion that kindness will 'save the world'. Does the world really need saving if no God exists and everything is relative? What motivated her, as an agnostic or atheist, to spread kindness, love, and charity as far and wide throughout society as she possibly could? If she had met Jesus in person here on earth would she have recognized this - now personified - Kindness of which she spoke? ...And why did she evade his question about choosing not to have a funeral?

"Find out how much God has given you and from it take what you need; the remainder is needed by others." — Saint Augustine

There's no doubt each of us defines "need" differently, but Saint Augustine's sentiment can still inspire us to reconsider our 'needs' and 'wants' from day to day. An old conversation about money was recently revived at an online community at which I'm a member, which forced me to further evaluate my take on the matter. The member who originally started the topic wrote:

how & what did your parents teach you about the value of money?

My parents taught me to be responsible, not to put something on credit if we can't already afford it (that's assuming one isn't in a desperate situation with no other option), to treat ourselves once in a while without going overboard, to keep the cheque-book balanced and to pay bills on time, that extravagance is waste (i.e. *our* definition of extravagance, which is still very subjective), to tithe regularly, to be generous in helping others while saving for the future... My Grandpa actually taught me that last point by example too - he owned his own business for many years, and as a result he would often pay people above and beyond their fee for services (i.e. if they did a great job) and did on occasion offer someone a job specifically because he knew that person was in need. :)

However, through my parents' situation of long-term illness and subsequent unemployment over the last three years I've learned a whole *new* batch of lessons about money, possessions, and materialism. It's a new time of growth for me, because it's really the first time I've taken a good, long look at my beliefs on this. My family has recently learned to live without many things that we used to take for granted (e.g. cable tv, vacations and travelling, heat to keep us warm during Canadian winters, renting movies, expensive groceries like cheese and honey, new CDs, going to theatres, eating out at restaurants, and more). Sometimes we weren't able to pay our monthly bills, and during those dark days I had times where I felt as though I was drowning or almost as if I was being squeezed and was running out of oxygen. Very frightening at times. :(

Meanwhile, we heard how wealthier Christians were spending their money and I wondered: If they could just be happy with what they already have, pass up buying that next new whatever, and gift those savings to my parents instead... they have no idea how they could reduce my family's anxiety, restless nights, and tears.

I've been forced to face my own views on spending, and have slowly come to the decision to live with less - not to feel morally superior, but to prevent others from feeling as though they're drowning or running out of air in a situation they cannot escape on their own. Unfortunately these thoughts have taken a long time for me to learn, but I'm glad to have the chance to learn them at all!

Back to the original question, the same member asked us:

how do you view:
money - in general,
opportunities in which much money is earned,
ambition...what's healthy?

Considering everything I've learned over the years, especially through the hand my family has recently been dealt, my answer would have to be:

a) money is a gift and a tool we've been given, which is to be used wisely

b) opportunities to earn money - great! go for it! work hard, earn the big bucks (Schillings, Pounds, Euros, Yen, or whatever the case may be), take what you need, as St. Augustine wrote, and be generous with the rest

c) regarding ambition, if God gives us skills, knowledge, and opportunities to use them - then go for it! Dedicate them to work and to *other* pursuits as well (e.g. volunteering), and keep Love as the primary motivation behind it all.

“I do not believe one can settle how much we ought to give. I am afraid the only safe rule is to give more than we can spare. In other words, if our expenditure on comforts, luxuries, amusements, etc., is up to the standard common among those with the same income as our own, we are probably giving away too little. If our charities do not at all pinch or hamper us, I should say they are too small. There ought to be things we should like to do and cannot do because our charitable expenditures excludes them.” — C.S. Lewis (1898-1963), English author and scholar

My family's disability and unemployment dilemma has forced perpetual growing pains on us over the last three years, and the growth spurt seems to be going strong. The first year challenged my parents to come to accept that mental illness had indeed changed our lives forever. After much struggle they came to accept that unemployment would be be an indefinite reality in Dad's life. Meanwhile, my brother made the decision to sacrifice his own immediate goals in order to financially support my family. All four of us were faced with heavier stress than we had ever experienced, and began the long hard road through depression, fear, conflict, anger, grief, and illness - learning stress-management the hard way.

The second year brought into focus our family's fear of reaching out for help, even to friends and other family members. Our path took us to the verge of emotional breakdown before that line was finally crossed. I'm still scratching my head over it, actually, wondering why anyone in our situation wouldn't immediately seek support from family and friends! Maybe the problem has been passed down to us through our heritage: Families with a Mennonite background come from a tradition of hardship and hard work, and therefore might resist asking for help within family, friends, and church groups because it could be perceived as challenging tradition; it may lead people to allow pride or shame (or both) to prevent them from seeking tangible assistance. Or perhaps the problem is rooted in our political hang-ups: While there is a contingent of Mennonites across North America who espouse social justice ideals, there is also a contingent espousing economically conservative views who are vocal in their distaste for individuals or families who require any kind of social assistance, both formal and informal. This may prevent those in need from asking for help because they fear the ways in which they might be perceived or stigmatized as being lazy, abusers of the system, moochers, or thieves. A third possibility may be a distorted understanding of ‘humility’ and 'self-sacrifice' within our belief system that prevents those in need from asking for help, even in times of mounting distress. People may experience guilt from the act of help-seeking, believing that they must ignore their problems in order to help others. Well, whatever the reason, it's a problem that my family finally overcame last year, albeit painfully and under a heavy sense of defeat and failure. The road to accepting our current situation with grace has been a gradual one.

We are currently in Year Three, and our challenge this year has been to distinguish "need" from "want". We've sifted through our so-called needs, we've sacrificed, we've re-prioritized the usual commodities and self-indulgences that define the Western lifestyle, and we've learned to live on less. Even for a lower-middle class family such as ourselves there are things we can and will give up that will help those who live in extreme poverty. My brother and I have been especially challenged to re-evaluate Scripture's teaching on the lifestyle of charity and giving. We have a more intimate grasp of C.S. Lewis' statement above, that "If our charities do not at all pinch or hamper us, (...) they are too small. There ought to be things we should like to do and cannot do because our charitable expenditures excludes them." How terribly counter-culture that sounds, what a distinctly inconvenient, imbalanced, and extreme statement - not unlike Jesus' incitive teachings on love and sacrifice. ;) Lewis' conviction rings true in us regardless of how long or how deeply we may have bought into our culture's ideology of self-indulgence, because our conscience has always known the right and only way to love our neighbour. There's life in the pinch, especially if we choose to live without the extras so that others can have the basics to stay alive.

So, it looks like year three promises to bring another series of difficult, life-changing lessons. I think I'm looking forward to it.

Philippians 2:3b-4: "consider others as more important than yourselves. Everyone should look out not [only] for his own interests, but also for the interests of others."

Sometimes it feels as though a good 90% of our family and church communities are like the partiers inside this house: Engaged, included, comfortable, lighthearted and carefree. Because of my parents' financial and health situation, however, my immediate family cannot join in the festivities. Feeling somewhat isolated and lonely, we struggle through our challenges outside as we try not to peek through the window too often for fear that our feeble excuses for their distance and separation will begin to fracture, crumble, and crush our hearts in the process. Somewhere around 10% of those in our extended family and church communities take the time visit us outside, spend time with us, and shoulder our burdens with us now and then. Some of them actually connect with us on a regular basis and contribute quite a bit to our survival and well-being. The other 90% do know that we're out here; it's just that they don't have enough of a desire to come and see how we are doing, to shoulder our burdens with us, to find a way for us to join them...

I've recently been working on a paper for school about emotional, practical, and material support that is experienced by different ethnic groups from their extended family and church communities. One article outlines the experience of the African American community:

Historically, families and churches promoted and sustained Black community life, both during and following the period of slavery. (...) Currently, both families and churches perform a number of important functions that help to address several problematic issues facing Black families and communities. Family and church networks provide informal social support to address a variety of issues, including chronic poverty (Stack, 1974), coping with the loss of a loved one, providing assistance to those who are ill and disabled (Dilworth-Anderson, 1994; Dilworth-Anderson, Williams, & Cooper, 1999), the care and supervision of grandchildren (Burton, 1992; Burton, Dilworth-Anderson, & Merriwether-de Vries, 1995; Kivett, 1993; Minkler & Roe, 1993; Strom & Strom, 1993), and specifically, caring for the children of adolescent parents (Miller, 1994; Unger & Cooley, 1992).
Source: Chatters, L. M. et al. (2002). Patters of informal support from family and church members among African Americans. Journal of Black Studies, 33 (1), p. 66-85.

There are other ethnic communities out there that are very similar to the African American one when it comes to giving and receiving support within church and family circles. Mediterranean cultures are very similar in the way family and church combine to support one another in times of need - Greek and Italian cultures come to mind as an example. The culture of the American South seems to be similar. In the same way, Amish and Old Order Mennonite communities rally around each other through church and family networks. Chinese and other Asian cultures are usually more community-oriented as well. The main strength of these societies is that they seem to rally around each other without question - not just with the odd piece of advice, but with a true dedication to help each other through, or out of, any kind of challenging situation, whatever the cost. It's the kind of support that takes time, personal resources, energy, emotion, sacrifice, and hard work.

Other areas of the world seem to be far more individualistic and isolated from one another. Northern Europe as well as much of Canada and the northern US, for instance, have always struck me as colder places, not in terms of temperature, but in terms of extended families' and church members' relationships with one another. There's some kind of overzealous, self-destructive need for privacy, the kind that shields others out in times of distress, whether you're on the potential giving- or receiving-end of the needed help.

I've gone through some major moments of pain in the past, during which time I felt as though I was terribly alone, whether I was hanging out with my extended family or sitting in church on a Sunday morning. I have to admit that on more than one occasion I've considered submerging myself in one of the 'warmer' cultures that I've often envied. It isn't that I just want to feel like I'm surrounded by open, compassionate people who are willing to go the second mile with me; I want to learn how to take up that lifestyle myself as well. I want to see what it looks like to do away with timidity and self-indulgence, to live a lifestyle of giving, caring, and always 'being there' for people in my church and family community.

One European-heritage woman shared about the close connections in her family. An extended family member had a permanent disability, and - without thinking twice - she offered to care for this family member when the current caretakers became too old and weak for the task themselves. Everybody in her family does things like this for each other, she said, and she has felt shocked to learn of other families aren't nearly as close as hers.

When I heard her story I couldn't help but think of my Dad. What if something were to happen to Mom, my husband, my brother, or to me... I wish I could say with confidence that our church and extended family networks would be just as willing to care for my Dad the way the woman above is willing to care for her cousin. But I can't. A handful would try to help, definitely, but the majority would make sure they put enough distance between themselves and my family's need in order to protect their lifestyle from unnecessary disruption.

Mom's health is fragile, always has been, but she's caring for Dad 24/7 and the circles under her eyes are sinking deeper every day. The roller-coaster of stress, anxiety, restless nights, and depression that we all go through here is more than enough proof that we can't do this on our own. Yet for the most part we are doing this on our own. To be sure, there is certainly a solid handful of people (that committed 10%) who make their love and concern known to us in ways that make a huge difference - but in the larger context of our church and extended family networks the silence from everybody else is deafening. ...Sadly we do not come from a background like the African Americans, the Mediterraneans, the Amish/Old Order Mennonites, or the Asians.

What we could really use is people - family, church members, anybody - to come over, help us cook and clean, and encourage to Mom get to bed on time. We need people to sit down with Dad to help him learn the simple things that dementia has wiped from his mind, such as how to open and use his email account (because that's something Mom ends up spending several hours on each week), how to work the VCR, or how to otherwise re-sharpen his observational and memorizing skills. We could use friends to watch movies with us, visit with us, call us more often to ask how we're doing, help us all laugh more often, help us get a break from the situation, and let us know that we don't need to feel isolated anymore. We could also use financial help so that we don't sink further into debt while we wait for Dad's pension disability application to be approved, and while we wait for my husband to receive his open work permit so that I can finish school and get a real job as soon as possible.

What we could really use is a more authentic relationship with our church and family, the kind that doesn't gloss over or shy away from the ugliness and despair that life sometimes throws at us, the kind that doesn't bury its head in the sand, doesn't put on airs or wear a mask, but a real kind of relationship that isn't afraid to roll up its sleeves and put a hand to this plough that is too difficult for us to push on our own.

Sonnet, To Thomas Clarkson,
On the final passing of the Bill for the Abolition of the Slave Trade, March, 1807.
by William Wordsworth

Clarkson! it was an obstinate Hill to climb:
How toilsome, nay how dire it was, by Thee
Is known,—by none, perhaps, so feelingly;
But Thou, who, starting in thy fervent prime,
Didst first lead forth this pilgrimage sublime,
Hast heard the constant Voice its charge repeat,
Which, out of thy young heart’s oracular seat,
First roused thee.—O true yoke-fellow of Time
With unabating effort, see, the palm
Is won, and by all Nations shall be worn!
The bloody Writing is for ever torn,
And Thou henceforth wilt have a good Man’s calm,
A great Man’s happiness; thy zeal shall find
Repose at length, firm Friend of human kind!

I've jumped into a discussion with my fellow Facebook-ers... Facebook-ians... Facebook-sters... whatever we're called - in a group calling itself "Christians for Social Justice". I had mentioned the need for social justice within the field of Social Work, after which someone else also pointed out the need for social justice within the Church. He mentioned the Church's habit of emphasizing God's judgement of sexual sins, while a complete reading of the New Testament seemed to emphasize issues of poverty, oppression, and justice instead. My thoughts on the matter seemed to combine well as a blog post, so here it is. I look forward to hearing your thoughts:

I have also witnessed this kind of judging and stereotyping of people who commit 'hot button' (i.e. sexual) sins, while other sins within the Church are either winked at or just ignored, such as materialism, hoarding, pride, gossip, vanity, self-centredness, and recklessly wasting our wealth rather than sharing our resources to alleviate the desperate poverty that begs for compassion day in and day out around the world. It's clear that we need social justice in our churches as much as we do in the secular field of Social Work.

It frustrates me to no end when often times conservative Christians interpret anything 'social justice' as mere 'liberal propaganda' which is to be discounted and even scoffed at rather than trying to understand social justice from a Biblical perspective. North American political paradigms are imposed on Scripture, which ends up twisting and deforming Christ's teachings in the Gospels. "We can't talk about helping the poor - that would be too liberal. Didn't Jesus say that God helps those who help themselves?" No, Jesus didn't preach North American conservative capitalist Christianity - he preached a Truth about poverty, corruption, and oppression that transcends earthly politics. So why don't more Christians recognize what's going on? Are we too pitiful and self-serving to apply a little critical thought to how our lifestyle fails to line up with Scripture?

Meanwhile, in the secular world of Social Work everything Christian or 'religious' is interpreted as 'conservative propaganda' which is also to be discounted or scoffed at. I came to Social Work hoping to find a group of people who collectively value equality and respect, and stand against discrimination of any kind. Instead, I've run into one instance after another in which politically correct issues are supported over and over again while un-trendy issues are entirely ignored. I'm told that at my school Christians are the target of discriminatory remarks on the basis of their faith, and that Christians have reported discriminatory course material that stereotypes and vilifies their faith.

I experienced this personally when a video was shown in one of my classes that completely lambasted Christians because of their beliefs on homosexuality. Granted, this is a point of conflict with several religions with similar beliefs about homosexuality, and my problem isn't with the existence of this conflict of beliefs. My problem was with the extremely insulting, stereotyping, and oppressive way that the video portrayed all Christians, and that this was being promoted in a Master of Social Work classroom. I raised this point in a follow-up discussion in class, saying that social workers ought to take a stand against discrimination and oppression targeted toward EVERYONE. I stated that as social workers we ought to fight discrimination in peaceful ways rather than discriminatory ways. Otherwise, why are we in school for social justice at all, if we're doing nothing more than dishing out kindness here and oppression there, depending entirely on our whims and personal agendas? One girl argued against me, stating that this insulting treatment of Christians was a positive kind of therapy for the homosexual community. The rest of the class remained silent, including the professor. I received absolutely no support except from one woman who quietly patted me on the back and whispered "Well said," after the discussion had ended. So, rather than genuinely working toward a model of community that is based on inclusiveness, unity in diversity, and shared strengths and goals, those in Social Work who scream and yell about discrimination and oppression end up discriminating against and oppressing Christians as well as anyone else who's opinion is significantly different from their own.

My life's purpose seems to be speaking out about these inconsistencies in Christian groups as well as in secular Social Work settings. If I don't speak out about it all I think I'll implode, or self-destruct, or just go bananas.

At the same time, though, I constantly feel like I'm in the middle of a battlefield trying to talk sense into both sides, which can be a lonely and even dangerous place from time to time. You are not guaranteed any allies, nor are you safe from being attacked by either side. I wish I knew of people (current or historical figures) who've been in this position before - it would be helpful to know how they handled the antagonism, the accusations, the labelling they must have received, as I sometimes do, from parties in both camps.

"For Christians to say to one another 'have faith, and trust' without helping each other is nothing more than Western self-interested individualism thinly veiled in spiritual cliché."

There is No Me Without You: One Woman's Odyssey to Rescue Africa's Children
by Melissa Fay Greene

Thank you, Judy, for drawing my attention to this book on the problem of AIDS. The quote from your blog (below) which presents the African AIDS issue through the lens of reality TV made me think of the role of human suffering in entertainment - hence the U2 quote as the title of this post. Some extreme, though lesser known, reality TV shows that were spawned out of Survivor's success did cross the line. They used physical and emotional pain as a basis for shocking and entertaining the masses, and ultimately for making money. I once read a book on this topic called Shooting People: Adventures in Reality TV, which explored the dark depths to which people will go to entertain or be entertained. It made me wonder whether the flavour of our reality shows was beginning to resemble the Roman Empire's famous Colosseum, which, as we all know, found its pleasure in human death.

Our other collective reaction to human suffering seems to be such deeply ingrained apathy and neglect that nothing less than a shocking reality TV show could cause in us an emotional or even a helpful response.

Consider the following scenario comparing African clinics to popular reality TV:

These programs are "reality shows."
In Africa, by the hundreds and thousands and millions, but one by one, a person sits in a clinic waiting room, jumpy or still, feeling fine or feeling nauseous, coughing or not coughing. Or she squats outside in the dirt yard, holding her head in her hand, occasionally looking up and calling to her children not to wander too far. Each waits to hear his or her name called. Inside the examining room, a doctor or nurse or nurse's aide examines a slip of paper and looks up. The eyes speak first.
Negative: You advance to the next round. See you tomorrow.
Positive: America has voted. Your journey ends here.
There are no television cameras.
No viewers at home are cheering or weeping.
No viewers at home phoned in their individual votes. Most never knew anything was at stake.
"I have heard there are treatments," a woman will whisper.
"Not in our country," the doctor will say with a sad smile.
"Does it mean I will die soon?" a man will ask.
"Yes, I'm afraid that is what it means."
"I thought perhaps I just had a cold."
"No, I'm afraid not."
"...I have heard that there is holy water which is effective?"
"No. That is a myth."
"As I supposed. Thank you, Doctor."

So this is MY preferred premise for a reality show on human suffering: Us rich folk in the West give up any one frivolous expense of our choice, and see how many lives we save overseas from preventable causes of death. Here are some examples of what families might choose to do:

- giving up 5 manicures or 10 movie tickets could save someone's life (e.g. by providing leprosy medication)
- giving up highlights/lowlights or gourmet coffee for a year could save several families (e.g. by providing these families with goats - a source of milk, food, and income)
- the excess cash from buying an economy car rather than a luxury vehicle or SUV could save an entire village (e.g. by providing a clean water well, which ultimately saves thousands of lives and dollars by preventing diseases related to water contamination)

TV crews would visit kind-hearted individuals and families in numerous wealthy nations around the world who'd decide which of their usual trivial expenses they'd be willing to give up, and how they would donate the extra cash. Then our TV crews could follow these donations right to the offices of the NGOs (non-government organizations) and onward to their intended recipients. In the end we'd be counting the smiles that would otherwise have been wiped out by illness or death. It would be like a World Vision telethon with an Extreme Home Makeover twist, and it would be fabulous! What's more, I believe it would educate and inspire a solid portion of the Western population to follow suit. So, when do we start?

~*~

Photo: Romeo Dallaire
Source: pbs.org


Knowing something of Romeo Dallaire's story, I know that his convictions are born out of a first-hand, 'in-your-face' kind of experience with the horrors that humans are capable of committing against one another. This is why I sense the sincerity of his recent pleas to collectively arrest yet another tragedy in the Third World. What got my attention was the urgency in his voice (for anyone who heard him on televised or radio news) which was significantly different in tone than the 'urgency' we hear from various politicians or radical activists. He's warning us not to commit the mistakes of our recent past; he knows we're capable of letting that happen, but he also knows that there is still a ray of hope. Although, it must be frustrating, even infuriating, to try to reason with some of the world's top governments about an issue involving life and death, an issue that has exposed their hypocrisy in the past, and one that may very well do so again.

Retired Canadian general Romeo Dallaire blasted the U.S. and Canada yesterday for failing to rally the world and provide the political will to save people in Darfur. The reason so many people have been allowed to die in Sudan already, Dallaire told a Senate subcommittee, is simple. "There's no self-interest. Who cares about Darfurians? They're sub-Saharan Africans. They're like Rwandans."

"(It's) the fear of casualties in a country that doesn't count in an area that doesn't count," he said. "Not one of us is more human than the other. [...] Why did the Yugoslavians count when we poured in tens of thousands of troops and billions of dollars? Why do others count and why do these Africans in Darfur not count?"

Dallaire also said it's not up to the United States to send troops to end the genocide in Sudan. "Why do you always want to set yourselves up?" asked Dallaire, who led the United Nations peacekeeping mission in Rwanda in 1994. "Why should you necessarily have to commit all those capabilities? Why can't the Chinese provide (soldiers)? They've got them."

Dallaire, who pleaded unsuccessfully for 5,000 UN troops to stop the Rwandan genocide that killed some 700,000 people, was hailed by Senator Dick Durbin as a 'hero.' "If more people had listened to him, maybe things could have been different in Rwanda. I hope people listen to him now." Durbin, a Democrat, chairs a new Senate subcommittee on human rights, a first for the country.

While U.S. President George W. Bush was quick to call the Darfur violence genocide, little has been done to quell it. The United Nations says more than 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million driven from their homes in four years of fighting, rape and plunder.

Durbin introduced legislation yesterday authorizing state and local governments to divest funds from businesses working in Sudan. He noted that Bill Clinton has said his inaction on Rwanda was the worst foreign policy mistake of his presidency. "Now that we have acknowledged for more than four years that this horror is happening on our watch, we must summon the courage and act to stop this carnage."
Canadian Press. (2007, February 7). Dallaire pleads to U.S. for Darfur. KW Record, p. ?.

~*~

There's nothing like grotesque images of the biological consequences of a bad choice to provide a personal epiphany. Why is it that we humans need to SEE the impact of our short-sightedness before changing our ways, when we've known better all along? Why do we need to hit rock bottom before choosing a better path? Why is it that so many of us walk until our toes just barely cross the point of no return (or perhaps until everything but our toes has crossed that point) before it dawns on us that we may have let things get out of control somewhere down the line?

We all know that this blind descent doesn't stop at smoking. Many precious commodities of our spoiled, western lifestyle consume our attention and our hearts daily: Poor eating habits, poor spending habits, hoarding, alcoholism, pride, poor anger management, poor time management, self-centredness, workaholism, an unquenchable thirst for entertainment, vanity, little white lies, uncritical thinking, unfaithfulness, poor work ethics, consumerism, materialism, and especially living a dull, pacified life - a life without vision.

We each have our own little tendencies, but it's never too late to learn from the mistakes of others (see photo above), and from our own as well (you know what those are)! The difference between an unexamined life and an examined life is like the difference between wading through a dark, murky bog and charging through the waters of a crystal clear lagoon. We don't need hideous images to shock us back into reality. The reality is that at any moment - this minute, even - we DO have the wherewithal to deeply and thoughtfully consider each choice we make, this road we're travelling, where it's taking us, and how we want our choices to influence the world once we're gone.

OK, so I tailored the title a little. You'll figure it out as you read the rest of the article below. This humorous examination of Old Testament laws intrigues me for a number of reasons. I wonder why many OT laws even existed, and why God and His Word are said to be unchanging when we clearly don't practise them anymore. I do happen to believe, after learning about the Jews' comparatively disease-free existence throughout much of history, that the guidelines originally given to Israelites regarding nutrition and hygiene have just as much relevance for our health today as it did for them throughout the centuries. But I also wonder why on earth we pick and choose sections of the Old Testament to preach about and follow (e.g. the Ten Commandments, or the nutritional guidelines) while ignoring those that seem absurd. I wonder whether Jesus followed each and every OT law while He was on earth, including the ones mentioned below. I have many questions! Let me know what you think, after taking a look at the following letter:

Dr. Laura Schlessinger is a radio personality who dispenses advice to people who call in to her radio show. Recently, she said that, as an observant Orthodox Jew, homosexuality is an abomination according to Leviticus 18:22 and cannot be condoned under any circumstance. The following is an open letter to Dr. Laura penned by a east coast resident, which was posted on the Internet. It's funny, as well as informative:

Dear Dr. Laura:

Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

Your devoted fan,
Jim