For me, the measure of a great fiction read is found in the corresponding decline in my sleep.
With The Maze Runner series, written by James Dashner, I spent 3 days, 1 day, and 2 days respectively on each of the three books. As I am kept thoroughly occupied during the day (and usually, part of the evening), this reading mostly took place in the late hours of the night and early hours of the morning. And even as I suffer through a long work day after only a few hours of sleep, I can say unequivocally that it was worth it. This was the best series I have read since The Hunger Games.
The first novel begins with a boy, Thomas, waking up in maze without any memory of who he is or where he came from. Along with sixty some other boys in the maze, Thomas is thrust into a situation of imminent peril, carefully and ominously monitored by an organization known as WICKED. Only a fraction of the boys survive the maze, only to find themselves (in the second book) thrust into another controlled survival scenario, this time in the real world (or what's left of it). In the final book, the handful of remaining friends rebel against those who control these experiments, as well as fight against an infected and increasingly-depraved humanity.
Throughout the incredible physical and mental ordeals throughout the series, there is a vibrant and thought-provoking ethical ordeal: Does the end justify the means? Should a person kill his/her friend if that person is descending into murderous madness? Should a governmental agency peform sickening experiments and slaughter innocent children if could aid the survival of the human race? And who has the authority to make these moral decisions affecting the lives of others?
These questions, especially the central one, are both timely and important in a society increasingly swayed by utilitarian ethics, where individuals are often swallowed by the ambiguous concept of the "greater good," which seeks to maximize pleasure and minimize pain for the masses.
For society:
1) Can an unborn life be experimented upon to enhance medical research and perhaps save other lives? (Though most studies show that umbilical cords are just as useful for such research.)
2) Should destructive economic programs be implemented if it will reduce global warming and arrest the rise of the oceans? (Though the polar ice caps grew 60% last year and the global temperature went down during the last 15 years, which is why it's now called "climate change" not "warming.")
3) Should individual control and moral decisions over health care be minimized in order to provide more substantial health care to the whole of the populace? (Though such health care, where demand always exceeds supply, will inevitably involve rationing and moral decisions, just by bureaucrats.)
4) Who is to decide when such greater moral goods should subsume individual moral goods?
For the church:
1) Should difficult doctrines of Scripture be toned down if it results in more conversions or greater church attendance? (Though diluting the truths necessary for salvation and governing the Christ seems to undermine true conversion or growth.)
2) Should discipline not be exercised in a church so as to prevent offense? (Though allowing a heretic teacher of egregious, unrepentant sinner to persist inflicts great harm on the flock.)
3) Should churches shift their focus from the Gospel to cultural transformation in order to affect greater societal change? (Though with decreasing legitimacy, relevancy and loss of fidelity.)
Does the end justify the means? This great ethical question is worthy of a generation of discussion and will determine the course for generations to come. As the great sociologist Robert Nisbet once wrote, "Ideas have consequences." The Maze Runner provokes such discussions and shows the embattled consciences of adolescents at work in real life crises--crises that demand answers to these questions, not mere theoretical abstractions. This ethical dimension alone makes the books a worthwhile read, especially for those young adults working to develop a sophisticated conscience.\
But these books are more than bland ethical narratives. They are action-packed, with love, sacrifice, compassion, heroism, betrayal, and tragedy. Part of what makes these books more engaging and enduring is the pervasiveness of death. For me, great fiction requires the death of great figures. This is one of the few flaws with the Harry Potter series--few substantial figures die, and none of them in the great, final battle of good against evil. In reality, our lives are part tragedy, as all whom we know and love will die. Books, including fiction, should be true to life.
Great fiction, especially that involving life and death battles, should not only leave the reader with a sense of delight in a final victory, but a sense of irretrievable loss at the lives lost along the way. This is what cements the Maze Runner books as enduring works for me--Dashner does not spare many of his most beloved characters from the most cruel of fates. This is true to the real world. This is especially true of war. And it painfully exposes our most desperate need for a Savior from sin and death, who can and will enshroud tragedy in victory and eternal peace for those who believe in Him.
4.10.13
Marital Imposition vs. Introspection
If I had enough paper to list all the times when my pride was involved in decisions I made regarding my marriage and whatever difficulties we faced as a couple...
Profile on a recent counseling case:
1) Basic issue: Ongoing dispute between deployed husband and his wife over whether he should seek an add-on deployment that will keep him from home for an additional 3-9 months.
2) Positions on basic issue: The wife (with kids) misses her husband greatly and believes she will become much more depressed if he stays longer. The husband believes that he should stay longer in order to fully pay off the new home that they have purchased.
3) Background: They recently purchased a home at the instigation of the wife, which the husband agreed to, though he hated the idea of accruing any sort of debt. They also have communication issues, with the husband dismissing his wife's emotionalism as irration and the wife dismissing her husband's persistent use of logic as cold-hearted.
4) Deeper issues: It sounds like they both base their happiness on life circumstances, rather than the Gospel (which they both believe in). The wife believed the new home would make her happy (it hasn't), and that having her husband home would solve her loneliness issues (it won't). The husband believes his anxiety over debt will be eliminated if he pays off the house (it won't) and that greater financial security will bring greater peace to the marriage (it won't).
5) Theological issues: While he denies it, the husband basically considers the taking on of debt to be sinful. He takes Biblical warnings against debt to be prohibitions, and thus believes that this is a sin issue rather than a wisdom issue. It is likely that he is cloaking his anxiety over finances and God's provision in the matter of debt. He also believes that his current dilemma is a result of God giving him over to his foolish decisions--a dilemma he can partly rectify by absolving himself of the debt. Finally, he scantly talks of God's grace and persistent providence as the Father of all good and perfect gifts. There is no perception of his house as a gift, nor that even decisions tainted by sin (as all decisions are!) are used by God for our good and His glory.
6) Relational issues: Even though he takes responsibility for making the decision to buy the house, he not-so-secretly blames his wife. She offered him the apple and told him to eat. He seems to view his wife as a competitor rather than partner and they largely fight against each other rather than for each other, let alone together against sin, Satan, and the flesh. He also speaks of his decision regarding staying out here as a done deal. Such a unilateral pronouncement diminshes his wife's role in the marriage and devalues her as a person worth more than such casual dismissal.
7) My issues: Obviously, judgment is at the forefront. Even with my own selfishness toward my wife, I can't stand it when spouses show so little deference toward one another. I especially struggle with men who are unwilling to lead their wives by sacrificing for them--who care for and teach their wives of Jesus Christ by washing their feet and caring for their hearts. As much as I love my calling to the Army, if my wife tells me that she wants me out, or if I can tell it is doing damage to her or our military, the choice is easy.
So, of course, when I speak of the need to sacrifice to this soldier, I use myself as an example and express disbelief at his position. Pretty ugly of me, right? He asked me at one point, "Don't you see my side at all?" I had to apologize. Even so, I was still judging him in my heart. I identified myself more as a chaplain to sinners than as the worst of sinners. This is why I'm currently enjoying Paul David Tripp's book, Dangerous Calling, as it provides a shot across the bow of the pastor's pride. That's why I also enjoyed Love's Executioner, by Irving Yalom, which showed how the most prestigious psychologists grow frustrated, impatient, and judgmental. We are sinners!
And last night, as I considered the difficulty of the counseling appointment and the frustration I still feel toward this soldier, I considered my own sin. What if the Judge of the world, Jesus Christ, regarded me as I regard this soldier in my heart? He would have every right to, as He is the holy King and I am a rebel of the worst sort. Truly, He is justified in His judgments. I imagined Him coming on the clouds to take hold of me and condemn me. Then I imagined Him casting down His crown of glory, taking upon Himself the crown of thorns, and bearing the cross. I wanted to cry. I deserved and still deserve what He bore in my place. How can such infinite love and sacrificial grace not touch my heart? May the God who showed me mercy grant me mercy toward this soldier!
Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died--more than that, was raised--sits at the right hand of God and makes intercession for us. (Rom. 8:34)
Profile on a recent counseling case:
1) Basic issue: Ongoing dispute between deployed husband and his wife over whether he should seek an add-on deployment that will keep him from home for an additional 3-9 months.
2) Positions on basic issue: The wife (with kids) misses her husband greatly and believes she will become much more depressed if he stays longer. The husband believes that he should stay longer in order to fully pay off the new home that they have purchased.
3) Background: They recently purchased a home at the instigation of the wife, which the husband agreed to, though he hated the idea of accruing any sort of debt. They also have communication issues, with the husband dismissing his wife's emotionalism as irration and the wife dismissing her husband's persistent use of logic as cold-hearted.
4) Deeper issues: It sounds like they both base their happiness on life circumstances, rather than the Gospel (which they both believe in). The wife believed the new home would make her happy (it hasn't), and that having her husband home would solve her loneliness issues (it won't). The husband believes his anxiety over debt will be eliminated if he pays off the house (it won't) and that greater financial security will bring greater peace to the marriage (it won't).
5) Theological issues: While he denies it, the husband basically considers the taking on of debt to be sinful. He takes Biblical warnings against debt to be prohibitions, and thus believes that this is a sin issue rather than a wisdom issue. It is likely that he is cloaking his anxiety over finances and God's provision in the matter of debt. He also believes that his current dilemma is a result of God giving him over to his foolish decisions--a dilemma he can partly rectify by absolving himself of the debt. Finally, he scantly talks of God's grace and persistent providence as the Father of all good and perfect gifts. There is no perception of his house as a gift, nor that even decisions tainted by sin (as all decisions are!) are used by God for our good and His glory.
6) Relational issues: Even though he takes responsibility for making the decision to buy the house, he not-so-secretly blames his wife. She offered him the apple and told him to eat. He seems to view his wife as a competitor rather than partner and they largely fight against each other rather than for each other, let alone together against sin, Satan, and the flesh. He also speaks of his decision regarding staying out here as a done deal. Such a unilateral pronouncement diminshes his wife's role in the marriage and devalues her as a person worth more than such casual dismissal.
7) My issues: Obviously, judgment is at the forefront. Even with my own selfishness toward my wife, I can't stand it when spouses show so little deference toward one another. I especially struggle with men who are unwilling to lead their wives by sacrificing for them--who care for and teach their wives of Jesus Christ by washing their feet and caring for their hearts. As much as I love my calling to the Army, if my wife tells me that she wants me out, or if I can tell it is doing damage to her or our military, the choice is easy.
So, of course, when I speak of the need to sacrifice to this soldier, I use myself as an example and express disbelief at his position. Pretty ugly of me, right? He asked me at one point, "Don't you see my side at all?" I had to apologize. Even so, I was still judging him in my heart. I identified myself more as a chaplain to sinners than as the worst of sinners. This is why I'm currently enjoying Paul David Tripp's book, Dangerous Calling, as it provides a shot across the bow of the pastor's pride. That's why I also enjoyed Love's Executioner, by Irving Yalom, which showed how the most prestigious psychologists grow frustrated, impatient, and judgmental. We are sinners!
And last night, as I considered the difficulty of the counseling appointment and the frustration I still feel toward this soldier, I considered my own sin. What if the Judge of the world, Jesus Christ, regarded me as I regard this soldier in my heart? He would have every right to, as He is the holy King and I am a rebel of the worst sort. Truly, He is justified in His judgments. I imagined Him coming on the clouds to take hold of me and condemn me. Then I imagined Him casting down His crown of glory, taking upon Himself the crown of thorns, and bearing the cross. I wanted to cry. I deserved and still deserve what He bore in my place. How can such infinite love and sacrificial grace not touch my heart? May the God who showed me mercy grant me mercy toward this soldier!
Who is he that condemns? Christ Jesus, who died--more than that, was raised--sits at the right hand of God and makes intercession for us. (Rom. 8:34)
3.10.13
My GINGER!bread Man
So it looks like my boy found every recessive gene he could find and turned himself into a ginger (red hair and likely freckles to come). So far, his nicknames are Carrot Top, Pumpkin Head, and Cheeto Fro (he gets some crazy cowlicks).
The following is what happens when Cheeto Fro tries to eat real food. First, he thinks it's kind of yucky. Second, he respectfully disagrees with himself. Third, he goes Cookie Monster on the plate.
2.10.13
Here I Stand!
For orthodox/historic/evangelical/Bible-believing Christians (pick whichever moniker you like), there must be occasions of unequivocal repudiation of prominent errors within the Church, including from those presuming to be leaders, like Francis of Rome.
In another train-wreck of an interview, Francis (who has admirable humility and compassion) offered more comments of at least an ambiguous nature, if not tending toward heretical: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/pope-francis-stirs-debate-yet-again-with-interview-with-an-atheist-italian-journalist/2013/10/01/9e7a6790-2acb-11e3-97a3-ff2758228523_print.html
Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say that his quotes were taken out of context or misunderstood. Even so. As someone claiming to represent the Church, he must clearly take a stand for the truth of God's Word, especially as it concerns our one hope of salvation: the person and work of Jesus Christ, the God-man. The Rev. Russell Moore of the Southern Baptist Convention offers a helpful response to Francis' latest remarks: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/pope-francis-stirs-debate-yet-again-with-interview-with-an-atheist-italian-journalist/2013/10/01/9e7a6790-2acb-11e3-97a3-ff2758228523_print.html
Some might suggest that we leave Francis and his remarks alone. Shouldn't we claim the mantle of unity and help people "know we are Christians by our love, by our love. Yes they'll know we are Christians by our love?" No, we shouldn't. Unity is itself means nothing. Several million Rwandan Hutus were united in their desire to massacre over a million Tutsis. There are two types of spiritual unity--that of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or that of Nebuchadnezzar and his unholy, antichrist anthem to the glory of man (Dan. 3). Jesus' call for unity amongst believers and the witness of love to a watching world had the Gospel and its explicit proclamation and embrace at the core (John 17:23). As Luther was reputed to have said when standing against the antichrist-like teachings and coercion of the papacy (paraphrased): I cannot sin against my conscience. Here I stand.
Others might suggest that such issues are not even worth our time. Francis presumes to sit upon a throne that can only be occupied by Christ alone, who sits at the right hand of God as Head of His Church (Col. 3; Eph. 4). Knowing that, why bother to engage him? The reality is, however, that for better or worse (definitely worse), when Francis speaks, much of the world thinks he speaks for the Church. In coming days, people may rebut your claims to the Lordship of Jesus Christ by saying "Why should I believe you over the pope?" To which we must be ready to reply "God's truth is revealed in Scripture, not the pope, and if he doesn't adhere to its teachings, then he does not represent orthodox Christianity." Even so. Because of the pope's undue influence, he can and likely will do great damage to the testimony of the Church.
I am sure that many nominal believers in Daniel's day were willing to submit to paganism in order to avoid the wrath of Nebuchadnezzar. But what is man's wrath compared to that of a holy God? It is one thing to be civil, charitable, and loving. We should all do that. But when we obscure man's problem with God and the only hope for salvation, we betray love. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were willing to endure the flames of this earth for the sake their true Savior and King, knowing that He would walk at their head through the flames that truly matter and deliver them unscathed by His own blood and righteousness. By God's grace, we should do no less. Here we stand.
In another train-wreck of an interview, Francis (who has admirable humility and compassion) offered more comments of at least an ambiguous nature, if not tending toward heretical: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/pope-francis-stirs-debate-yet-again-with-interview-with-an-atheist-italian-journalist/2013/10/01/9e7a6790-2acb-11e3-97a3-ff2758228523_print.html
Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and say that his quotes were taken out of context or misunderstood. Even so. As someone claiming to represent the Church, he must clearly take a stand for the truth of God's Word, especially as it concerns our one hope of salvation: the person and work of Jesus Christ, the God-man. The Rev. Russell Moore of the Southern Baptist Convention offers a helpful response to Francis' latest remarks: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-faith/pope-francis-stirs-debate-yet-again-with-interview-with-an-atheist-italian-journalist/2013/10/01/9e7a6790-2acb-11e3-97a3-ff2758228523_print.html
Some might suggest that we leave Francis and his remarks alone. Shouldn't we claim the mantle of unity and help people "know we are Christians by our love, by our love. Yes they'll know we are Christians by our love?" No, we shouldn't. Unity is itself means nothing. Several million Rwandan Hutus were united in their desire to massacre over a million Tutsis. There are two types of spiritual unity--that of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego and the Gospel of Jesus Christ, or that of Nebuchadnezzar and his unholy, antichrist anthem to the glory of man (Dan. 3). Jesus' call for unity amongst believers and the witness of love to a watching world had the Gospel and its explicit proclamation and embrace at the core (John 17:23). As Luther was reputed to have said when standing against the antichrist-like teachings and coercion of the papacy (paraphrased): I cannot sin against my conscience. Here I stand.
Others might suggest that such issues are not even worth our time. Francis presumes to sit upon a throne that can only be occupied by Christ alone, who sits at the right hand of God as Head of His Church (Col. 3; Eph. 4). Knowing that, why bother to engage him? The reality is, however, that for better or worse (definitely worse), when Francis speaks, much of the world thinks he speaks for the Church. In coming days, people may rebut your claims to the Lordship of Jesus Christ by saying "Why should I believe you over the pope?" To which we must be ready to reply "God's truth is revealed in Scripture, not the pope, and if he doesn't adhere to its teachings, then he does not represent orthodox Christianity." Even so. Because of the pope's undue influence, he can and likely will do great damage to the testimony of the Church.
I am sure that many nominal believers in Daniel's day were willing to submit to paganism in order to avoid the wrath of Nebuchadnezzar. But what is man's wrath compared to that of a holy God? It is one thing to be civil, charitable, and loving. We should all do that. But when we obscure man's problem with God and the only hope for salvation, we betray love. Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego were willing to endure the flames of this earth for the sake their true Savior and King, knowing that He would walk at their head through the flames that truly matter and deliver them unscathed by His own blood and righteousness. By God's grace, we should do no less. Here we stand.
1.10.13
Chaplain's Library: The Overcommitted Reader
Checking to see if a Liberty email account had been set up for me, I discovered that it had not only been set up, but there was an email indicating that I had been accepted into the D.Min. program. I am grateful to God for the opportunity to learn and grow. As I prepare for that workload, I need to trim down on the books I'm currently reading.
1) Flight of the Eagle by Conrad Black. I have been working on this 800 page monster for a couple of weeks now. While not as engrossing as the WWII series, it provides an accessible look at US history, tracing its rise as the lone super-power. It is refreshingly apolitical, while the writer makes decisive judgments upon particular figures and events. With a bias toward those who propelled American self-identity as a superpower, he tends to be too generous toward some (Woodrow Wilson) and too stingy with others (Calvin Coolidge). If you want to rediscover the genius of the American experiment, this is a good place to start (and continue for a while).
2) Shepherding a Child's Heart by Ted Tripp. This is a modern day parenting classic, and perhaps the first I'd recommend to new or established parents. Tripp literally gets to the heart of the problem by recognizing the heart of a child as the object of parenting, not simply behavior. Children must be confronted on why they sin, not merely how they sin. This requires engagement as much as discipline, and grace and much as law. It lays down a challenging call upon parents--one worth meeting for the sake of their children.
3) The Maze Runner by James Dashner. The most imaginative fiction of the present generation (i.e., Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, etc) almost exclusively belongs to the domain of young adult fiction. And like The Hunger Games, the Maze Runner is another worthy dystopian series that challenges its readers to imagine a future ravaged by human nature. The main character awakes, without memory, in a hemmed-in compound of teenagers, joining them in their quest to traverse the maze outside the compound and the grizzly creatures found within and escape to freedom. A haunting question lingers behind the action: Is the world outside the maze any better than the horrors within? This book is being made into a movie and will likely follow the young adult classic-turned-movie, Ender's Game, as a blockbuster success.
4) Constitutional Conservatism by Peter Berkowitz. A decent treatise on what the title means, this book explains ideological conservatism through the work of the legendary British parliamentarian, Edmund Burke, through the American Founders, and into the modern era when traditionalist, libertarians, and foreign policy hawks coalesced around a Burkean-styled ordered liberty. The greatest trait of this book is its stress on political moderation alongside ideological conservatism. Conservatism has historically been a moderate movement. Simply consider the structured revolution (really, reformation) in America against the radical, utopianized revolution in France. The former was inherently a conservative quest, seeking to re-apply and constitionalize historic principles of virtue and liberty; the latter was inherently a progressive quest, seeking to overturn a culture, history, and timeless principles as well as a form of government. This book offers a humbling rebuke to conservatives who eschew conservative methods as betrayal and unacceptable compromise.
Soon to begin: Dangerous Calling, by Paul David Tripp, with my ministerial-bound Christian friend. This book is a soul-probing look at the wonderful and terrible call to the pulpit. Vintage Jesus, by Mark Driscoll, for my No BS BS, which contrasts the claims of Christ against the predominant worldviews of this age.
1) Flight of the Eagle by Conrad Black. I have been working on this 800 page monster for a couple of weeks now. While not as engrossing as the WWII series, it provides an accessible look at US history, tracing its rise as the lone super-power. It is refreshingly apolitical, while the writer makes decisive judgments upon particular figures and events. With a bias toward those who propelled American self-identity as a superpower, he tends to be too generous toward some (Woodrow Wilson) and too stingy with others (Calvin Coolidge). If you want to rediscover the genius of the American experiment, this is a good place to start (and continue for a while).
2) Shepherding a Child's Heart by Ted Tripp. This is a modern day parenting classic, and perhaps the first I'd recommend to new or established parents. Tripp literally gets to the heart of the problem by recognizing the heart of a child as the object of parenting, not simply behavior. Children must be confronted on why they sin, not merely how they sin. This requires engagement as much as discipline, and grace and much as law. It lays down a challenging call upon parents--one worth meeting for the sake of their children.
3) The Maze Runner by James Dashner. The most imaginative fiction of the present generation (i.e., Harry Potter, The Hunger Games, etc) almost exclusively belongs to the domain of young adult fiction. And like The Hunger Games, the Maze Runner is another worthy dystopian series that challenges its readers to imagine a future ravaged by human nature. The main character awakes, without memory, in a hemmed-in compound of teenagers, joining them in their quest to traverse the maze outside the compound and the grizzly creatures found within and escape to freedom. A haunting question lingers behind the action: Is the world outside the maze any better than the horrors within? This book is being made into a movie and will likely follow the young adult classic-turned-movie, Ender's Game, as a blockbuster success.
4) Constitutional Conservatism by Peter Berkowitz. A decent treatise on what the title means, this book explains ideological conservatism through the work of the legendary British parliamentarian, Edmund Burke, through the American Founders, and into the modern era when traditionalist, libertarians, and foreign policy hawks coalesced around a Burkean-styled ordered liberty. The greatest trait of this book is its stress on political moderation alongside ideological conservatism. Conservatism has historically been a moderate movement. Simply consider the structured revolution (really, reformation) in America against the radical, utopianized revolution in France. The former was inherently a conservative quest, seeking to re-apply and constitionalize historic principles of virtue and liberty; the latter was inherently a progressive quest, seeking to overturn a culture, history, and timeless principles as well as a form of government. This book offers a humbling rebuke to conservatives who eschew conservative methods as betrayal and unacceptable compromise.
Soon to begin: Dangerous Calling, by Paul David Tripp, with my ministerial-bound Christian friend. This book is a soul-probing look at the wonderful and terrible call to the pulpit. Vintage Jesus, by Mark Driscoll, for my No BS BS, which contrasts the claims of Christ against the predominant worldviews of this age.
30.9.13
Those Aussies!
Today, I had the privilege of accompanying one of my teams--half American/half Aussie--to their work site.
I enjoyed a fun culture shock as the American stoicism that I am used to on convoys gave way to an Aussie wit and playfulness that made that pothole-marked, stale air-infused journey much more enjoyable.
While one soldier played disco through our headsets, another in the turrett would make sure to waft sewages smells down to us so that we could share in her experience of the offending stench.
Once more, I am thankful for our allied friends. A high-ranking Canadian NCO told me the other day that much of their military was humiliated when they didn't join us in the Iraqi conflict. It didn't matter whether or not they agreed with the our involvement, when their "brother" goes off to fight, they feel a moral obligation to join us. Their is similar sentiment amongst the Brits and Aussies.
The closest analogy to this multi-party special relationship is that of brotherhood. When kids, if one brother gets caught up in a fight, his brother will get his back (no matter who is at fault). The bond of blood produces a fierce bond of loyalty.
So does the bond of ideals. Together, our countries for the last several centuries have formed the vanguard for freedom and the value of the human person. Together, these values have drawn us side by side in the trenches cutting through France, across the African desert, up the Italian peninsula, upon the beaches of Europe, back and forth along the 38th parallel in Korea, through the mountain passes of Afghanistan, and within the dust bowl of Iraq (the Canadians did unofficially have 120+ soldiers there which were already attached to American units prior to the conflict). Even when our countries squabble with one another, it is considered a quarrel amongst siblings.
This is especially true with our militaries. Our four countries have stood together for a century now. Our soldiers have fought and died alongside each other--sometimes for each other.
Operation Iraqi Freedom was often criticized as being a "unilateral" engagement by the US. The truth is, we had an impressive coalition of dozens of nations, comprising a "Coalition of the Willing." And the core of that willing coalition were those British, Aussie, and Canadian brothers who have always responded to our call for help, just as we responded to theirs in the two world wars.
May this precious bond of ideals, forged and reinforced with blood, endure for generations to come.
I enjoyed a fun culture shock as the American stoicism that I am used to on convoys gave way to an Aussie wit and playfulness that made that pothole-marked, stale air-infused journey much more enjoyable.
While one soldier played disco through our headsets, another in the turrett would make sure to waft sewages smells down to us so that we could share in her experience of the offending stench.
Once more, I am thankful for our allied friends. A high-ranking Canadian NCO told me the other day that much of their military was humiliated when they didn't join us in the Iraqi conflict. It didn't matter whether or not they agreed with the our involvement, when their "brother" goes off to fight, they feel a moral obligation to join us. Their is similar sentiment amongst the Brits and Aussies.
The closest analogy to this multi-party special relationship is that of brotherhood. When kids, if one brother gets caught up in a fight, his brother will get his back (no matter who is at fault). The bond of blood produces a fierce bond of loyalty.
So does the bond of ideals. Together, our countries for the last several centuries have formed the vanguard for freedom and the value of the human person. Together, these values have drawn us side by side in the trenches cutting through France, across the African desert, up the Italian peninsula, upon the beaches of Europe, back and forth along the 38th parallel in Korea, through the mountain passes of Afghanistan, and within the dust bowl of Iraq (the Canadians did unofficially have 120+ soldiers there which were already attached to American units prior to the conflict). Even when our countries squabble with one another, it is considered a quarrel amongst siblings.
This is especially true with our militaries. Our four countries have stood together for a century now. Our soldiers have fought and died alongside each other--sometimes for each other.
Operation Iraqi Freedom was often criticized as being a "unilateral" engagement by the US. The truth is, we had an impressive coalition of dozens of nations, comprising a "Coalition of the Willing." And the core of that willing coalition were those British, Aussie, and Canadian brothers who have always responded to our call for help, just as we responded to theirs in the two world wars.
May this precious bond of ideals, forged and reinforced with blood, endure for generations to come.
29.9.13
Friends in New Places
I noticed a Tabletalk magazine on the desk of an Air Force lieutenant in my unit the other day. I told him I liked his choice of reading material, which has led to several subsequent conversations.
He is a young Christian, married for two years now, and like many believers his age, has been captivated by the beauty of Reformed theology. Like me, he grew up in MD in a loud, wild family while his wife grew up in the west in a much more subdued family. They are both in the Air Force, but they will probably both be leaving the service in order to start a family and start college ministries for ROTC students.
I am thankful for this brother as he provides my first young Reformed friend since my chapel buddy at the old post returned to VA. He is thankful for our friendship as well, as he has been sorely disappointed in most "Christian" chaplains that he has encountered. (Most young Christians do not know that there are many ministers out there who are cultural Christians but deny the core teachings of God's Word.)
We will start meeting once a week for coffee, fellowship, and to go through a book on a topic of his choosing.
Speaking of coffee, if anyone would like to buy a "Cup of Joe for a Joe," you can go to the Green Beans coffee website and sign up to buy coffee for soldiers. You can also become pen pals with them, as they make themselves available.
Msy God bless you each on this precious and gracious day of rest in Jesus Christ.
He is a young Christian, married for two years now, and like many believers his age, has been captivated by the beauty of Reformed theology. Like me, he grew up in MD in a loud, wild family while his wife grew up in the west in a much more subdued family. They are both in the Air Force, but they will probably both be leaving the service in order to start a family and start college ministries for ROTC students.
I am thankful for this brother as he provides my first young Reformed friend since my chapel buddy at the old post returned to VA. He is thankful for our friendship as well, as he has been sorely disappointed in most "Christian" chaplains that he has encountered. (Most young Christians do not know that there are many ministers out there who are cultural Christians but deny the core teachings of God's Word.)
We will start meeting once a week for coffee, fellowship, and to go through a book on a topic of his choosing.
Speaking of coffee, if anyone would like to buy a "Cup of Joe for a Joe," you can go to the Green Beans coffee website and sign up to buy coffee for soldiers. You can also become pen pals with them, as they make themselves available.
Msy God bless you each on this precious and gracious day of rest in Jesus Christ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)