I once knew a Chinese man who said “The God” instead of saying “God.”
I thought this was insightful; even more so after reading a comment from Arthur Pink.
He wrote, “The original Saxon meaning of our English word God is “The God.” God is not only the greatest of all beings, but the best. All the goodness in any creature has been imparted from the Creator; but As God’s goodness is underived, for it is the essence of His eternal nature. As God was infinite in power from all eternity even before He displayed any of that power, so He was eternally good before He made any expression of His bounty.”[i]
[i] Arthur Pink. "Gleaning in the Godhead." Chicago: Moody Press, 1975 in Steve Halliday & William Travis. How Great Thou Art. Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Publishers, 1999.
Friday, July 21, 2006
St. Alban vs. St. George
The headline of a story in The Sunday Times made me smile.
“St. Alban is holier than St. George”
The article is about an upcoming debate within the Church of England. Some folks are lobbying to replace St. George with St. Alban as England’s patron saint.
St. Alban advocates claim St. George was too militaristic and is offensive to Muslims.
I smile because I’ve been a member of St. Alban’s Anglican Church and St. George Anglican Church. I thought the headline was appropriate, because St. Alban’s was orthodox and conservative, and St. George was unorthodox and liberal.[i]
[i] Christopher Morgan, “St Alban is holier than St George” The Sunday Times. 2 July 2006. Accessed 3 July 2006. Available:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2252738.html
“St. Alban is holier than St. George”
The article is about an upcoming debate within the Church of England. Some folks are lobbying to replace St. George with St. Alban as England’s patron saint.
St. Alban advocates claim St. George was too militaristic and is offensive to Muslims.
I smile because I’ve been a member of St. Alban’s Anglican Church and St. George Anglican Church. I thought the headline was appropriate, because St. Alban’s was orthodox and conservative, and St. George was unorthodox and liberal.[i]
[i] Christopher Morgan, “St Alban is holier than St George” The Sunday Times. 2 July 2006. Accessed 3 July 2006. Available:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2252738.html
Thursday, July 20, 2006
So what’s your religion again?
A recent newspaper article profiled a growing trend of non-traditional secular weddings.
A comment from a bride-to-be is telling. “I think he's a Lutheran, and I'm a Baptist, technically,” Jessica Briddle said before the ceremony.[i]
Apparently for this couple, religion is a topic to be saved for after the wedding. Am I naïve in wondering if they also chose to save physical intimacy until after they wed?
I also wonder what makes someone “a Baptist, technically.”
[i] Daniel de Vise. “More Couples Choose to Wed Their Way.” The Washington Post. 2 July 2006. Accessed 3 July 2006. Available:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/01/AR2006070100687.html
A comment from a bride-to-be is telling. “I think he's a Lutheran, and I'm a Baptist, technically,” Jessica Briddle said before the ceremony.[i]
Apparently for this couple, religion is a topic to be saved for after the wedding. Am I naïve in wondering if they also chose to save physical intimacy until after they wed?
I also wonder what makes someone “a Baptist, technically.”
[i] Daniel de Vise. “More Couples Choose to Wed Their Way.” The Washington Post. 2 July 2006. Accessed 3 July 2006. Available:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/01/AR2006070100687.html
Wednesday, July 19, 2006
Singing in the Library
I generally avoid secular music and I don’t dance. But recently I’ve been listening to a dance music video on youtube called ‘Everytime we Touch’ by Casacade.
In the video the singer traipses into a library to visit her boyfriend and winds up dancing on a bookshelf. Other library patrons are initially annoyed, but then join in the party.
And while the lyrics are as deep as a birdbath, the beat is catchy.
Ideally she would be wearing a long skirt and tone down the bum wiggling. But then the video probably wouldn’t have logged 4.8 million views.
What I find most refreshing about the video are the dance extras. They are average looking people that one might actually see in a library. I also like the video because I love spending time in libraries.
In the video the singer traipses into a library to visit her boyfriend and winds up dancing on a bookshelf. Other library patrons are initially annoyed, but then join in the party.
And while the lyrics are as deep as a birdbath, the beat is catchy.
Ideally she would be wearing a long skirt and tone down the bum wiggling. But then the video probably wouldn’t have logged 4.8 million views.
What I find most refreshing about the video are the dance extras. They are average looking people that one might actually see in a library. I also like the video because I love spending time in libraries.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
Appearance Fit For a King
I generally like Christian music. Some CCM songs are sappy; others are brilliant.
Yet, I’m often baffled at the photos Christian artists and groups select for their CD cover, and promotional material. So many of them look pained. Others, in trying to look reflective and pious, come across sour and condescending. Few appear joyful. Even fewer are smiling.
While baffling, if that’s the image they want to convey, then fine.
Their selection of clothing bothers me even more. There appears to be two camps. One camp dresses casual – they look like they are ready to play basketball or enjoy a picnic after the photo shoot. The other camp wears odd and distinct clothing that is worn by no one except other band members.
Perhaps that’s why their clothing bothers me. While Christian groups sing about the Lord of the universe and secular groups croon about lording over their own little world, they look the same.
A Christian singer’s appearance should be fit for a King.
That is why I was pleasantly surprised to see the CD cover of Brian Littrell’s recently released gospel CD.
He’s wearing a suit and looks very dignified.
And he’s smiling.
Well, semi-smiling.
Yet, I’m often baffled at the photos Christian artists and groups select for their CD cover, and promotional material. So many of them look pained. Others, in trying to look reflective and pious, come across sour and condescending. Few appear joyful. Even fewer are smiling.
While baffling, if that’s the image they want to convey, then fine.
Their selection of clothing bothers me even more. There appears to be two camps. One camp dresses casual – they look like they are ready to play basketball or enjoy a picnic after the photo shoot. The other camp wears odd and distinct clothing that is worn by no one except other band members.
Perhaps that’s why their clothing bothers me. While Christian groups sing about the Lord of the universe and secular groups croon about lording over their own little world, they look the same.
A Christian singer’s appearance should be fit for a King.
That is why I was pleasantly surprised to see the CD cover of Brian Littrell’s recently released gospel CD.
He’s wearing a suit and looks very dignified.
And he’s smiling.
Well, semi-smiling.
Monday, July 17, 2006
Queen’s Admin Adventures
The administration at Queen’s must think I am dense or dishonest.
It started before I arrived in Kingston. What strikes me the most is that in each incident it was assumed I was the one at fault.
I was assigned the same student number as my twin brother. That had to be changed.
Shortly afterwards, I received an e-mail from the residence admissions coordinator. She was seeking permission to change the name on my application to my brother’s name.
Now. Perhaps students submitting pseudonyms in their residence application is a common problem at Queen’s. But I doubt it. That we might be twins, apparently never occurred to anyone.
Several weeks later, I received another e-mail. This time I was told that I had submitted a wrong address. The package was sent to my Ottawa mailbox. I was (and still am) confident that I clearly identified my summer mailing address on my application form.
Shortly afterwards, a guy called to yell at me for illegally downloading movies in residence. He was sheepish when I told him I had yet to arrive in Kingston. He quickly realized he had called the wrong number.
The year ended as it started. I received a letter informing me that a $48 fee was added to my account because I moved out two days after my designated departure date. Yet, I moved out on the day I was told I should leave.
Oh well!
It started before I arrived in Kingston. What strikes me the most is that in each incident it was assumed I was the one at fault.
I was assigned the same student number as my twin brother. That had to be changed.
Shortly afterwards, I received an e-mail from the residence admissions coordinator. She was seeking permission to change the name on my application to my brother’s name.
Now. Perhaps students submitting pseudonyms in their residence application is a common problem at Queen’s. But I doubt it. That we might be twins, apparently never occurred to anyone.
Several weeks later, I received another e-mail. This time I was told that I had submitted a wrong address. The package was sent to my Ottawa mailbox. I was (and still am) confident that I clearly identified my summer mailing address on my application form.
Shortly afterwards, a guy called to yell at me for illegally downloading movies in residence. He was sheepish when I told him I had yet to arrive in Kingston. He quickly realized he had called the wrong number.
The year ended as it started. I received a letter informing me that a $48 fee was added to my account because I moved out two days after my designated departure date. Yet, I moved out on the day I was told I should leave.
Oh well!
Sunday, July 16, 2006
Avoiding Apathy
The excitement expressed by a classmate on exchange from China was unmistakable. She had recently taken a bus trip from Kingston to Ottawa, and was amazed by the open vastness of trees, rocks and water.
I’ve driven the route she took many times, and think it is terribly boring. On the other hand, I love looking at photos of skyscrapers and city skylines. Chinese cities are among my favourite cities to look at. Yet, when I told her that, she replied that an endless expanse of skyscrapers is boring, because every street looks the same.
I imagine that if my classmate drove to Ottawa as often as I have, and I spent a few years in Beijing, that our views would change.
How novelty quickly wanes into familiarity and apathy! Things once appearing fresh and glorious become frumpy and gaudy.
Without diligence, my Christian walk can swiftly descend into indifference. Some of my most soul-enriching personal devotions were early in my Christian walk. I vividly recall being enraptured by God’s goodness and glory. But in time, my awe and reverence would wane, then reignite and dull once more.
However, as I have matured in Christ, my faith has become surer; more trusting; and more solid. I take to heart Jeremiah 6:16, which says, “Thus says the Lord: ‘Stand by the roads and look, and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls.’”
Martin Luther apparently said, “I feel as if Jesus had died only yesterday.”
May this be my rallying cry as I seek to crush apathy and indifference by feasting on soul-rejuvenating truth!
I’ve driven the route she took many times, and think it is terribly boring. On the other hand, I love looking at photos of skyscrapers and city skylines. Chinese cities are among my favourite cities to look at. Yet, when I told her that, she replied that an endless expanse of skyscrapers is boring, because every street looks the same.
I imagine that if my classmate drove to Ottawa as often as I have, and I spent a few years in Beijing, that our views would change.
How novelty quickly wanes into familiarity and apathy! Things once appearing fresh and glorious become frumpy and gaudy.
Without diligence, my Christian walk can swiftly descend into indifference. Some of my most soul-enriching personal devotions were early in my Christian walk. I vividly recall being enraptured by God’s goodness and glory. But in time, my awe and reverence would wane, then reignite and dull once more.
However, as I have matured in Christ, my faith has become surer; more trusting; and more solid. I take to heart Jeremiah 6:16, which says, “Thus says the Lord: ‘Stand by the roads and look, and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls.’”
Martin Luther apparently said, “I feel as if Jesus had died only yesterday.”
May this be my rallying cry as I seek to crush apathy and indifference by feasting on soul-rejuvenating truth!
Saturday, July 15, 2006
Reading Intelligently
I decimated a Pop Tart several months ago. The tasty treat melted on the plate, shrivelling up and leaving an unusual yellow residue. As I chipped the inedible block of paste into the garbage I was confused. I had, after all read the instructions.
Or so I thought. The box instructed 3 seconds in the microwave. I saw 3 minutes.
I believe there are two lessons to be learned.
Firstly, it reminded me of the importance in reading intelligently; actually processing the words, instead of glancing at them. Secondly, the necessity of approaching a text – any text – whether it is instructions on a box, a science textbook, or novel – without preconceiving what may or may not be there.
So used to heating food in the microwave for three minutes, I assumed the instructions were the same for pop tarts.
A spoiled pop tart isn’t a big deal. But, I fear that many people approach the Word of God in the same manner I recklessly treated the pop tart instructions.
A sermon I recently heard illustrates this point. The minister, who also works as a family counsellor, preached on Genesis 27. His message: The story of Jacob and Esau shows us that children like to receive blessings from their dad.
Instead of explaining the significance of patriarchal blessings, the connection between blessings and God’s covenant, the folly of depending on fallible senses rather than upon spiritual understanding, etc, he gave two lists of advice for why parents need to be more sensitive to their children’s needs.
The preacher interpreted the text through the lenses of his career. And while drawing from personal expertise is useful, interpreting Scripture though one’s worldview is problematic.
Or so I thought. The box instructed 3 seconds in the microwave. I saw 3 minutes.
I believe there are two lessons to be learned.
Firstly, it reminded me of the importance in reading intelligently; actually processing the words, instead of glancing at them. Secondly, the necessity of approaching a text – any text – whether it is instructions on a box, a science textbook, or novel – without preconceiving what may or may not be there.
So used to heating food in the microwave for three minutes, I assumed the instructions were the same for pop tarts.
A spoiled pop tart isn’t a big deal. But, I fear that many people approach the Word of God in the same manner I recklessly treated the pop tart instructions.
A sermon I recently heard illustrates this point. The minister, who also works as a family counsellor, preached on Genesis 27. His message: The story of Jacob and Esau shows us that children like to receive blessings from their dad.
Instead of explaining the significance of patriarchal blessings, the connection between blessings and God’s covenant, the folly of depending on fallible senses rather than upon spiritual understanding, etc, he gave two lists of advice for why parents need to be more sensitive to their children’s needs.
The preacher interpreted the text through the lenses of his career. And while drawing from personal expertise is useful, interpreting Scripture though one’s worldview is problematic.
Friday, July 14, 2006
Moonlighting with a Whistle
The players usually get most of the attention at the World Cup. But this year, some of the attention was diverted to the referees, especially those accused of poor performance.
It got me wondering about the referees. Who are they? Well, they are, in large measure, people with regular jobs who referee in their spare time.
The roster of referees and assistant referees at this year’s World Cup included a pilot, maritime inspector, hospital manager, public relations director, teacher, a dentist, computer scientist, lawyer, electrical engineer, journalist, electrician, salesman, accountant, banker, car mechanic, insurance broker, financial advisor, vascular surgeon, military policeman, graphic designer, prison superintendent, customs officer and an evangelist.
So what is it like to go from a daily work routine to refereeing matches under the intense scrutiny of millions?
“It wasn't anything new to me. If you're in a game in the park with five people watching or at Manchester United you just accept it.”[i] That’s a comment from Jack Taylor, the referee at the 1974 final World Cup.
“I literally did swap my butcher's apron for the whistle to take charge of the World Cup final,” he said.[ii]
Such a dramatic change reminds me of the process of conversion, or effectual calling.
The Westminster Confession (1647) describes this process as follows:
“All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased, in His appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by His Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by His almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by His grace.”[iii]
It involves illumination, regeneration and the transformation of the will. The editors of the Reformation Study Bible wrote, “Original sin means that all human beings are by nature ‘dead’, or unresponsive to God. Through the effectual calling, God gives life to the dead.”[iv]
They continue, “When once regenerated and having the will set free to choose God and the good, a sinner turns away from the former pattern of living and receives Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, to start a new life with Him.”[v]
Of course, unlike the referees, there’s no return of a regenerated soul to the old-self. John 10:28 makes this clear. “I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.” Paul describes the gifts and calling of God “irrevocable” (Romans 11:29).
Thomas Watson wrote, “When God calls a man, He does not repent of it. God does not, as many friends do, love one day, and hate another, or as princes, who make their subjects favourites, and afterwards throw them into prison. This is the blessedness of a saint; his condition admits of no alteration. God’s call is founded upon His decree, and His decree is immutable. Acts of grace cannot be reversed. God blots out His people’s sins, but not their names. Let the world ring changes every hour, a believer’s condition is fused and unalterable.”[vi]
The headline of the story containing the quote from the former referee is "World Cup Final ‘changed my life.’" Indeed it did. But it hardly compares to the transformation induced by God when, out of mercy and for His glory, He converts a dead soul into a new creation.
[i] Neil Aitchison, “World Cup Final ‘changed my life’. BBC News. 6 July 2006. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/5126076.stm
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] The Westminster Confession of Faith. 1647. Accessed 14 July 2006. Available:
[iv] RC Sproul et al. ed. The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version. Orlando: Ligonier Ministries, 2005, p. 1747.
[v] Ibid.
[vi] Thomas Watson, A Divine Cordial. 1663 Accessed 14 July 2006. Available:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/watson/cordial.xml
It got me wondering about the referees. Who are they? Well, they are, in large measure, people with regular jobs who referee in their spare time.
The roster of referees and assistant referees at this year’s World Cup included a pilot, maritime inspector, hospital manager, public relations director, teacher, a dentist, computer scientist, lawyer, electrical engineer, journalist, electrician, salesman, accountant, banker, car mechanic, insurance broker, financial advisor, vascular surgeon, military policeman, graphic designer, prison superintendent, customs officer and an evangelist.
So what is it like to go from a daily work routine to refereeing matches under the intense scrutiny of millions?
“It wasn't anything new to me. If you're in a game in the park with five people watching or at Manchester United you just accept it.”[i] That’s a comment from Jack Taylor, the referee at the 1974 final World Cup.
“I literally did swap my butcher's apron for the whistle to take charge of the World Cup final,” he said.[ii]
Such a dramatic change reminds me of the process of conversion, or effectual calling.
The Westminster Confession (1647) describes this process as follows:
“All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased, in His appointed and accepted time, effectually to call, by His Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation, by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God, taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and, by His almighty power, determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ: yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by His grace.”[iii]
It involves illumination, regeneration and the transformation of the will. The editors of the Reformation Study Bible wrote, “Original sin means that all human beings are by nature ‘dead’, or unresponsive to God. Through the effectual calling, God gives life to the dead.”[iv]
They continue, “When once regenerated and having the will set free to choose God and the good, a sinner turns away from the former pattern of living and receives Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour, to start a new life with Him.”[v]
Of course, unlike the referees, there’s no return of a regenerated soul to the old-self. John 10:28 makes this clear. “I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand.” Paul describes the gifts and calling of God “irrevocable” (Romans 11:29).
Thomas Watson wrote, “When God calls a man, He does not repent of it. God does not, as many friends do, love one day, and hate another, or as princes, who make their subjects favourites, and afterwards throw them into prison. This is the blessedness of a saint; his condition admits of no alteration. God’s call is founded upon His decree, and His decree is immutable. Acts of grace cannot be reversed. God blots out His people’s sins, but not their names. Let the world ring changes every hour, a believer’s condition is fused and unalterable.”[vi]
The headline of the story containing the quote from the former referee is "World Cup Final ‘changed my life.’" Indeed it did. But it hardly compares to the transformation induced by God when, out of mercy and for His glory, He converts a dead soul into a new creation.
[i] Neil Aitchison, “World Cup Final ‘changed my life’. BBC News. 6 July 2006. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/5126076.stm
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] The Westminster Confession of Faith. 1647. Accessed 14 July 2006. Available:
[iv] RC Sproul et al. ed. The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version. Orlando: Ligonier Ministries, 2005, p. 1747.
[v] Ibid.
[vi] Thomas Watson, A Divine Cordial. 1663 Accessed 14 July 2006. Available:
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/watson/cordial.xml
Thursday, July 13, 2006
Alcohol Recommendation
I mentioned in yesterday's post about a letter I sent to Carleton last year. It should be noted, the letter was in response to a request made by the school for feedback. As a member of the Peer Judicial Board at Queen's this year, I saw first hand how troublesome alcohol can be.
Here is my recommendation:
August 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
As a recent graduate of Carleton University I would like to submit comments regarding the school’s policy on alcohol. My comments are focused on 2 C, which outlines the alcohol policy for the residences. I lived in residence for four years - two in Russell House and two in Leeds House.
Although the policy is well meaning, and residence fellows are diligent in ensuring these standards are upheld, alcohol is unfortunately often abused in residence.
I am not suggesting a complete alcohol ban in residence. This is unrealistic, would be taxing to enforce and unfair to students who choose to consume alcohol legally and responsibly.
I am suggesting the designation of an alcohol-free zone for a specific area, perhaps a floor or building. A substance-free floor could be an option on the residence registration form. The consumption and storage of alcohol and drugs would be prohibited. Students who choose this option could sign a contract with the other residents to commit to upholding a substance-free environment. This way all residents would be held accountable not only to the residence fellow and senior resident, but to each other. I believe the designation of an alcohol-free floor is a good idea for several reasons.
Almost all first year students are too young to legally drink. Thus, most students who drink alcohol in residence are breaking the law. Maintaining an alcohol-free environment would help reduce temptation.
The consumption of alcohol affects everyone, even if students adhere to the policy and stay within their rooms, suites and bathrooms. Alcohol-saturated parties sometimes interrupt sleeping or studying. A study by the Harvard School of Public Health determined that students who live in substance-free residences experienced fewer secondhand effects of alcohol use by other students than residents of unrestricted housing, including vandalism.
It would exemplify Carleton’s commitment to diversity. For many Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus the consumption of alcohol is contrary to their religious beliefs. Further, many international students come from cultures that view alcohol with suspicion. The designation of an alcohol-free floor would be recognition of the diverse backgrounds and perspectives among the Carleton residence community.
All parents worry about their child when they move away from home, particularly for the first time, which is the situation of many residence students. An alcohol-free floor would reassure parents that their child is less exposed to peer pressure to drink alcohol.
There are health benefits too. The study by the Harvard School of Public Health mentioned earlier, found that students who live in substance-free residences were three-fifths less likely to engage in binge drinking, compared with students living in unrestricted residences. This is encouraging because binge drinking elevates the risk of alcohol poisoning, sexual assault and sexually transmitted diseases.
The study found additional benefits of substance-free housing. Students living in such environments were less likely to fall behind in their schoolwork, get in trouble with police or do something they regretted.
Other universities recognize offering a substance-free living environment is a viable option. It is estimated that three out of five American colleges maintain an alcohol-free area in their dormitories. Several Canadian universities, including Lakehead University, the University of Northern British Columbia, and the University of Lethbridge offer alcohol-free environments in residence.
Smoking is banned in all residence buildings at Carleton, so why shouldn’t alcohol also be disallowed? I encourage you to consider designating an alcohol-free zone for a specific area in residence at Carleton University. Carleton already recognizes the benefits of housing students together with common interests or lifestyles by maintaining four special interest floors. Please consider adding a fifth.
Thank you for your time.
Respectfully Submitted,
Trevor
Here is my recommendation:
August 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
As a recent graduate of Carleton University I would like to submit comments regarding the school’s policy on alcohol. My comments are focused on 2 C, which outlines the alcohol policy for the residences. I lived in residence for four years - two in Russell House and two in Leeds House.
Although the policy is well meaning, and residence fellows are diligent in ensuring these standards are upheld, alcohol is unfortunately often abused in residence.
I am not suggesting a complete alcohol ban in residence. This is unrealistic, would be taxing to enforce and unfair to students who choose to consume alcohol legally and responsibly.
I am suggesting the designation of an alcohol-free zone for a specific area, perhaps a floor or building. A substance-free floor could be an option on the residence registration form. The consumption and storage of alcohol and drugs would be prohibited. Students who choose this option could sign a contract with the other residents to commit to upholding a substance-free environment. This way all residents would be held accountable not only to the residence fellow and senior resident, but to each other. I believe the designation of an alcohol-free floor is a good idea for several reasons.
Almost all first year students are too young to legally drink. Thus, most students who drink alcohol in residence are breaking the law. Maintaining an alcohol-free environment would help reduce temptation.
The consumption of alcohol affects everyone, even if students adhere to the policy and stay within their rooms, suites and bathrooms. Alcohol-saturated parties sometimes interrupt sleeping or studying. A study by the Harvard School of Public Health determined that students who live in substance-free residences experienced fewer secondhand effects of alcohol use by other students than residents of unrestricted housing, including vandalism.
It would exemplify Carleton’s commitment to diversity. For many Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus the consumption of alcohol is contrary to their religious beliefs. Further, many international students come from cultures that view alcohol with suspicion. The designation of an alcohol-free floor would be recognition of the diverse backgrounds and perspectives among the Carleton residence community.
All parents worry about their child when they move away from home, particularly for the first time, which is the situation of many residence students. An alcohol-free floor would reassure parents that their child is less exposed to peer pressure to drink alcohol.
There are health benefits too. The study by the Harvard School of Public Health mentioned earlier, found that students who live in substance-free residences were three-fifths less likely to engage in binge drinking, compared with students living in unrestricted residences. This is encouraging because binge drinking elevates the risk of alcohol poisoning, sexual assault and sexually transmitted diseases.
The study found additional benefits of substance-free housing. Students living in such environments were less likely to fall behind in their schoolwork, get in trouble with police or do something they regretted.
Other universities recognize offering a substance-free living environment is a viable option. It is estimated that three out of five American colleges maintain an alcohol-free area in their dormitories. Several Canadian universities, including Lakehead University, the University of Northern British Columbia, and the University of Lethbridge offer alcohol-free environments in residence.
Smoking is banned in all residence buildings at Carleton, so why shouldn’t alcohol also be disallowed? I encourage you to consider designating an alcohol-free zone for a specific area in residence at Carleton University. Carleton already recognizes the benefits of housing students together with common interests or lifestyles by maintaining four special interest floors. Please consider adding a fifth.
Thank you for your time.
Respectfully Submitted,
Trevor
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
SBC and Alcohol : A Response
Before I offer my view, I must provide a disclaimer. I dislike alcohol. I once left a restaurant when a friend ordered alcohol. Another time I refused to give directions to the LCBO when a customer asked me how to get there. As yearbook copy editor, I removed all references to alcohol in the graduate profile pages. In 2002, when Carleton University was seeking an alcohol license for Baker’s Grille I submitted a formal complaint. My complaint was dismissed, after a conference call with the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario.
I’ve become more moderate since them. Well, sort of. I turn my wine glass upside down at formal dinners. I do not eat food that is cooked with alcohol. I partook in communion with a dry wafer at the Anglican Church I attended in Ottawa for four years, refusing to drink the wine or dip the wafer into the cup. I prepared a report last August urging Carleton to consider designating an alcohol-free zone for a specific area (a floor or building) in residence.
But with that being said, I’m not fully supportive of the recent SBC resolution. I think it’s important to view this decision in light of historical developments, because debate over alcohol has featured prominently in evangelicalism.
There has been a fascinating interplay between alcohol and North American evangelicalism. Prohibition was one of the great social reform movements in the early 20th century- and it wasn’t the Catholics or Unitarians who pushed for it. It was evangelicals.
Even after prohibition ended, alcohol was a divisive issue – even splitting denominations. For example the Bible Presbyterian Church and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church were formed in 1937. There were two reasons for this schism. One was alcohol. Some leaders required total abstinence from alcohol as a prerequisite for church membership, while others insisted Christian liberty permitted moderate alcohol consumption.[i]
It must be noted that the SBC resolution was not, unlike the Presbyterians in the 1930s, demanding abstinence as a membership requirement.
I agree with Joel when he writes, “I think John Piper shows a wise understanding by recommending abstinence from alcohol rather then requiring abstinence like this resolution.”
I think parts of the resolution make sense. For example they “urge Southern Baptists to be actively involved in educating students and adults concerning the destructive nature of alcoholic beverages.” The New York Times recently published an article about the growing recognition among health researchers of the damage alcohol abuse has on teenagers. The article said, “Mounting research suggests that alcohol causes more damage to the developing brains of teenagers than was previously thought, injuring them significantly more than it does adult brains. The findings, though preliminary, have demolished the assumption that people can drink heavily for years before causing themselves significant neurological injury. And the research even suggests that early heavy drinking may undermine the precise neurological capacities needed to protect oneself from alcoholism.”[ii]
I also see nothing wrong with commending organizations and ministries that treat alcohol-related problems from a biblical perspective.
Other statements though are vague. I’m not sure what the authors of the resolution were intending when they “urge Southern Baptists to take an active role in supporting legislation that is intended to curb alcohol use in our communities and nation.”
Then there’s the sweeping statement that expresses their “total opposition” (as opposed to half-hearted opposition?) to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing and consuming of alcoholic beverages.
I can see the headline and story now:
“Budweiser Clydesdales Seek New Career”
The days of Budweiser’s Clydesdales trotting on your television screen flogging beer are over.
“Now what are they going to do?” exclaimed Anton Davis, Clydesdale trainer. “Maybe Disney World will hire them. The Southern Baptists officially declared that boycott dead.”
Under intense pressure from Southern Baptists, Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch) announced the closure of its brewery on Monday.
“We wish to thank our customers for their support over the last 130 years,” said Budweiser CEO Stan Hunter.
He added negotiations for the sale of the building are currently ongoing with Welch Foods Inc, but declined to comment on specifics.
“I’m not at liberty to disclose information until the contract is final,” said Hunter. “All I can say is that the grape juice market is growing.”
In all seriousness, I believe the SBC resolution is well intentioned, but perhaps over zealous and unrealistic.
[i] I stumbled across this anecdote twice this past week. Timothy George, “Evangelicals and Others.” First Things. Feb. 2006. Accessed 7 July 2006. Available:
http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0602/articles/george.html
W. Stanford Reid. “J. Gresham Machen.” David Wells. Reformed Theology in America. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1997. p 98.
[ii] Katy Butler, “The Grim Neurology of Teenage Drinking.” The New York Times. 4 July 2006. Accessed 5 July 2006. Available:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/health/04teen.html
I’ve become more moderate since them. Well, sort of. I turn my wine glass upside down at formal dinners. I do not eat food that is cooked with alcohol. I partook in communion with a dry wafer at the Anglican Church I attended in Ottawa for four years, refusing to drink the wine or dip the wafer into the cup. I prepared a report last August urging Carleton to consider designating an alcohol-free zone for a specific area (a floor or building) in residence.
But with that being said, I’m not fully supportive of the recent SBC resolution. I think it’s important to view this decision in light of historical developments, because debate over alcohol has featured prominently in evangelicalism.
There has been a fascinating interplay between alcohol and North American evangelicalism. Prohibition was one of the great social reform movements in the early 20th century- and it wasn’t the Catholics or Unitarians who pushed for it. It was evangelicals.
Even after prohibition ended, alcohol was a divisive issue – even splitting denominations. For example the Bible Presbyterian Church and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church were formed in 1937. There were two reasons for this schism. One was alcohol. Some leaders required total abstinence from alcohol as a prerequisite for church membership, while others insisted Christian liberty permitted moderate alcohol consumption.[i]
It must be noted that the SBC resolution was not, unlike the Presbyterians in the 1930s, demanding abstinence as a membership requirement.
I agree with Joel when he writes, “I think John Piper shows a wise understanding by recommending abstinence from alcohol rather then requiring abstinence like this resolution.”
I think parts of the resolution make sense. For example they “urge Southern Baptists to be actively involved in educating students and adults concerning the destructive nature of alcoholic beverages.” The New York Times recently published an article about the growing recognition among health researchers of the damage alcohol abuse has on teenagers. The article said, “Mounting research suggests that alcohol causes more damage to the developing brains of teenagers than was previously thought, injuring them significantly more than it does adult brains. The findings, though preliminary, have demolished the assumption that people can drink heavily for years before causing themselves significant neurological injury. And the research even suggests that early heavy drinking may undermine the precise neurological capacities needed to protect oneself from alcoholism.”[ii]
I also see nothing wrong with commending organizations and ministries that treat alcohol-related problems from a biblical perspective.
Other statements though are vague. I’m not sure what the authors of the resolution were intending when they “urge Southern Baptists to take an active role in supporting legislation that is intended to curb alcohol use in our communities and nation.”
Then there’s the sweeping statement that expresses their “total opposition” (as opposed to half-hearted opposition?) to the manufacturing, advertising, distributing and consuming of alcoholic beverages.
I can see the headline and story now:
“Budweiser Clydesdales Seek New Career”
The days of Budweiser’s Clydesdales trotting on your television screen flogging beer are over.
“Now what are they going to do?” exclaimed Anton Davis, Clydesdale trainer. “Maybe Disney World will hire them. The Southern Baptists officially declared that boycott dead.”
Under intense pressure from Southern Baptists, Budweiser (Anheuser-Busch) announced the closure of its brewery on Monday.
“We wish to thank our customers for their support over the last 130 years,” said Budweiser CEO Stan Hunter.
He added negotiations for the sale of the building are currently ongoing with Welch Foods Inc, but declined to comment on specifics.
“I’m not at liberty to disclose information until the contract is final,” said Hunter. “All I can say is that the grape juice market is growing.”
In all seriousness, I believe the SBC resolution is well intentioned, but perhaps over zealous and unrealistic.
[i] I stumbled across this anecdote twice this past week. Timothy George, “Evangelicals and Others.” First Things. Feb. 2006. Accessed 7 July 2006. Available:
http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0602/articles/george.html
W. Stanford Reid. “J. Gresham Machen.” David Wells. Reformed Theology in America. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1997. p 98.
[ii] Katy Butler, “The Grim Neurology of Teenage Drinking.” The New York Times. 4 July 2006. Accessed 5 July 2006. Available:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/health/04teen.html
Tuesday, July 11, 2006
The Cross Centered Life (Part 5)
C.J. Mahaney offers several practical ways to remain mindful of the cross including memorizing Scripture, singing the Gospel and reviewing how the Gospel has impacted your life.
Last January I wrote about the repetitive and insincere ritual dance of greetings. Instead of the typical response when asked how he is, Mahaney replies, “Better than I deserve.” It is a wonderfully honest statement that shatters a sense of entitlement clung to by so many.
“I just understand who I am and where I deserve to be,” he writes. “I deserve God’s wrath.”[i]
He adds that understanding the gospel lets us marvel at God’s love. Mahaney’s book is a great back to the basics read that is both timeless and timely.
A recent article published in The Seattle Times exemplifies its timeliness. University Presbyterian Church in Seattle was profiled as an urban mainline congregation success story. The church is growing; thus bucking the trend of decline so common among similar churches across America. Even more remarkable is that the church is located in an area with one of the lowest church attendance rates in the United States. UPC describes its mission, in part, as encouraging its members to centre their lives on Jesus Christ and grow together in a Christ-centered community.[ii]
But according to another Seattle-area minister, the church is “preaching a false gospel.” The false gospel taught at UPC, according to Rev. Rich Lang, is not what the church is teaching, but what they aren’t. Namely, not mobilizing people to “resist the war or tax cuts to the wealthy.”[iii]
The gospel is not about war or taxation. The New Testament defines the gospel as, simply, Christ. More specifically, “the gospel of the glory of Christ.” (2 Corinthians 4:4)
Rev. Lang’s audacious comment is a stark reminder that the study of books such as The Cross Centered Life is critically important “to keeping the Gospel the main thing.”[iv]
[i] C.J. Mahaney, The Cross Centered Life. Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Publishers, 2002, p. 84.
[ii] University Presbyterian Church. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available: http://www.upc.org
[iii] Janet Tu, “Church finds strength in numbers.” The Seattle Times. 13 June 2006. Accessed 13 June 2006. Available: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html
/faithvalues/2002983854_eurochurch10.html
[iv] The book’s subtitle is “Keeping the Gospel the Main Thing.”
Last January I wrote about the repetitive and insincere ritual dance of greetings. Instead of the typical response when asked how he is, Mahaney replies, “Better than I deserve.” It is a wonderfully honest statement that shatters a sense of entitlement clung to by so many.
“I just understand who I am and where I deserve to be,” he writes. “I deserve God’s wrath.”[i]
He adds that understanding the gospel lets us marvel at God’s love. Mahaney’s book is a great back to the basics read that is both timeless and timely.
A recent article published in The Seattle Times exemplifies its timeliness. University Presbyterian Church in Seattle was profiled as an urban mainline congregation success story. The church is growing; thus bucking the trend of decline so common among similar churches across America. Even more remarkable is that the church is located in an area with one of the lowest church attendance rates in the United States. UPC describes its mission, in part, as encouraging its members to centre their lives on Jesus Christ and grow together in a Christ-centered community.[ii]
But according to another Seattle-area minister, the church is “preaching a false gospel.” The false gospel taught at UPC, according to Rev. Rich Lang, is not what the church is teaching, but what they aren’t. Namely, not mobilizing people to “resist the war or tax cuts to the wealthy.”[iii]
The gospel is not about war or taxation. The New Testament defines the gospel as, simply, Christ. More specifically, “the gospel of the glory of Christ.” (2 Corinthians 4:4)
Rev. Lang’s audacious comment is a stark reminder that the study of books such as The Cross Centered Life is critically important “to keeping the Gospel the main thing.”[iv]
[i] C.J. Mahaney, The Cross Centered Life. Sisters, Oregon: Multnomah Publishers, 2002, p. 84.
[ii] University Presbyterian Church. Accessed 11 July 2006. Available: http://www.upc.org
[iii] Janet Tu, “Church finds strength in numbers.” The Seattle Times. 13 June 2006. Accessed 13 June 2006. Available: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html
/faithvalues/2002983854_eurochurch10.html
[iv] The book’s subtitle is “Keeping the Gospel the Main Thing.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
