Efficiency and Subsidiarity

There has been a significant effort in recent years in industry to improve efficiency in organizations. This has largely focused on improving clarity, measurement, and accountability.

View fullsize

Image used via creative commons license in unaltered form. http://ow.ly/WlbiJ 

On paper, this emphasis seems to make sense. People need to know what they are expected to do. We should have some means of telling when they do it. And folks should be held accountable for how well they do their jobs.

In reality, however, the means that are used to drive improved performance and increase efficiency sometimes produce exactly the opposite the intended result.

In many cases, as Yves Morieux argues in the video below, this is because better cooperation is the solution instead of more rules and structures.

Pursuit of Efficiency

I have survived the efficiency initiative of a Fortune 500 company. I was one of the people who helped lead events that were designed to improve unit performance.

In some cases, I actually believe this was successful because we looked at many forms of waste in our processes. At other places we probably missed the boat.

While there were times that the processes under consideration wasted resources in redoing or triple checking work, there were other times they wasted our human capital by creating rigid processes to keep people doing things the same and prevent errors. Sometimes those checks were considered a necessary part of the process and remained after the streamlining process.

Rigid processes make sense when work is repetitive, but many times it encourages people not to think about their jobs but just to mindlessly follow the directions. Sometimes in nuclear power simply following the directions is a good thing. However, in much of what we did outside of the plant, such rigidity had the effect of stifling creativity and sometimes making people bored.

Cooperating to Prevent Boredom

Bored people are generally unproductive. They end up disengaging from the processes they’ve been assigned and often do their work sloppily or with more errors than if they are engaged.

Cooperation, as Morieux describes it, requires thinking and engaging with the people around you. Bored people don’t cooperate very well. Bored people often use the rules designed to help prevent errors as a shield. (I witnessed this often among union workers in the shipyard.)

Cooperation is one way to end boredom, as is creativity.

The Danger of Creativity

Creativity is dangerous. When new methods are tried, they may fail. To be creative in performing a process is to risk failure.

Failure often wastes time. When someone tries something and it doesn’t work, there is the risk that the work will have to be done again in another way.

Sometimes people celebrate sloppiness and disorganization as being creative. Often this is just a cover for bad habits.

The danger in the creative process also keeps people engaged. There is something in the thrill of potential failure that sharpens instincts and helps people focus.

This means that sometimes, the risk of failure may be justified by the improvements in engagements that are achieved. This depends on the application.

Humanization

The processes of cooperation and creativity are part of the human experience. Allowing these, instead of focusing on increasing repetition, are helpful in celebrating the humanity of the workers in the process. 

Cooperation requires viewing the others in the process as fully human. It requires looking out for their best interest and the interest of the greater whole.

Allowing creativity (in subordinates, peers, and superiors) requires accepting the variegation that is possible in the human experience. It allows people to express their personality, within boundaries, which is important in recognizing the God-given character of the individuals. 

Dehumanization due to Efficiency

This means that the good of improving productivity by creating rules and standardizing processes ends up being at odds with the human expression at times. The rules that are set up to improve outcomes are often designed to reduce the human uniqueness of the individuals involved in the process. As Morieux notes, it sometimes leads to more concern for the process than the product.

In some situations, such standardization may be good for a company; it certainly is useful in bringing production costs down in an assembly line.

But what can get lost in the process when the human becomes machine and disengages his or her brain? Often what is lost is innovation, because the disengaged human is satisfied to do the same thing over and over, punching a clock and earning a paycheck.

A more human result seems necessary where cooperation and creativity are facilitated.

The problem with this is that in a large organization, if everyone gets to be creative without limits there will be a lack of cogency. Cooperation will be limited in groups too large because no one knows the person on the other end of the line.

Subsidiarity

Within Catholic Social Ethics the principle of subsidiarity is the idea that the people closest to the problem will be more likely to come up with the best solution than people removed from the problem.

In contemporary social justice movements, there is an emphasis on listening before implementing aid programs. This approach requires asking people what they need instead of simply trying to apply the solution from outside without assessing the local needs accurately.

There seems to be room to balance the expertise and experience of those who have succeeded in solving a problem in one place with the unique contours of the local situation. 

The principle of subsidiary has room for bringing expertise to bear, while balancing the local situation. It is worthy of consideration.

Conclusion

The TED talk did what it was supposed to do. It got me thinking. 

Bigger may not always be better. Of course, I already recognized that with my aversion to mega churches.

However, the real good that clarity, measurement, and accountability do in organizations should not be ignored. There must be a balanced response.

Whatever we decide to do, we need to hold maximizing productivity in tension with celebrating humanity. This will help us make sure we are celebrating the best parts of humanity and not just the bad habits that we deem to be creative. 

Our Only World - A Review

Reading Wendell Berry is always interesting, whether it is his fiction or his essays. The man has a way with words and the recent essay collection, Our Only World, is no exception.

The ten essays in this volume were written between 2010 and 2014. Some of them are the text of speeches. Others were published in various magazines. All of them are worth reading, even if you don’t agree with where Berry lands on issues.

If you haven’t read Berry before, do it. It may be better to begin with some of his novels, but they are worth the time, whatever you read.

He’s an advocate for rural life in Kentucky. His writing focuses on establishing a sense of place where you live, putting down roots, and being part of the community. There is wonder in what he writes and a quiet power.

He is a Christian of sorts, though he often stands on the liberal end of spectrum on social issues. He’s personally opposed to abortion and thinks it is wrong, but he admits in this collection that he’d help someone else get an abortion. He also argues that marriage precedes government, so he wonders aloud if the government has any business defining it. Many people wonder that, but Berry argues that since the government shouldn’t define it, marriage should mean whatever people want it to. At the same he argues for an order to creation and bases his environmental ethics on it. His single essay on this topic is perhaps the least convincing in this collection, but whether you agree with his logic or not, he writes well and makes his readers think.

Berry's Environmental Ethics

Berry’s bread and butter is in his arguments for taking care of the land. When he writes about his sustainable farming practices it makes me want to get a team of horses and farm. There is a sense of beauty in Berry’s description of life on his small acreage farm. His writing evokes a desire for a sense of place, a sense of belonging somewhere and to a group.

Even in the first, somewhat disorganized essay, which is aptly called “Paragraphs from a Notebook” there is a sense of beauty and balance in the writing. Though there is no direct link between the blocks of text that splash in sequence across the page, there is a cohesion of thought to it.

Berry writes, “We need to acknowledge the formlessness inherent in the analytic science that divides creatures into organs, cells, and ever smaller parts or particles according to its technological capacity.” This idea is the link between his paragraphs. It is the idea that animates his worldview.

Integrity, perhaps, is the theme of much of what Berry presents to the world. Beware artificial divisions, even between humans. He offers, “The phrase ‘be alone’ is a contradiction in terms. A brain alone is a dead brain. A man alone is a dead man.” Humans need one another. We are part of something greater, and should seek to be part of something greater than ourselves.

For Berry, conservation is the pursuit of integrity of the land, a search for wholeness. The farmer becomes part of the farm, not its master. He is part of the dirt that he walks on. The citizen is part of the community and should not strive to be somewhere else. Place is important because it is part of being integral. Integrity is the way you are, not just a sense of moral character.

Berry’s essays call the reader back to the sort of world that is coherent and whole. It feels like he’s describing a day and age that has been gone for generations and perhaps only ever existed in novels that romanticize country life. But for Berry such an integral sense of belonging is an eschatological hope, and one that he hopes for many more to realize in this life. Maybe some folks can.

In one essay about a trip to visit a forest in Pennsylvania Berry describes logging practices that he argues respect the goodness and integrity of the forest. The work is done by horse, which is a common theme for Berry, and it is done with a view to leaving the forest healthier, not for maximizing short term profit. The owner of the forest is part of the forest and loves it. He wants to use it wisely, and profit from it reasonably, but still leave it intact for another generation.

That’s another major theme in Berry’s essays. Take the long view. Don’t maximize profits today, but look for ways that a reasonable profit can be had for years to come. Both in forestry and farming, Berry is lobbying for a long term outlook.

Conclusion

Even though I disagree with Berry about many things, he makes me think well to figure out why he isn’t right. I’ve not met the man, but he seems like the sort of person I could enjoy a cup of coffee with even as we heartily debate an important topic. Reading Berry is learning how to argue well and graciously. Maybe someday he’ll win me over to more of his ideas.

Pick up this book and read it. It’s worth the time. But don’t rush through the essays. They are worth taking slowly and enjoying along the way. Our Only World is a volume that deserves to be considered and appreciated. Each of the essays is a little gem that can be appreciated on its own. Though perhaps Berry would argue the essays deserve to be held together with a sense of integrity.

Our Only World: Ten Essays

$12.11

By Wendell Berry

Buy on Amazon

Note: I received a gratis copy of this volume from the publisher with no expectation of a positive review.

Passing Along Thick Christianity

Most people try to pass along their beliefs to their children. Even the atheists that claim that all religious education is child abuse are, by virtue of making such a claim, demonstrating a dominant worldview claim that they hope their children will latch onto.

Used by Creative Commons License. Via Flickr: http://ow.ly/YEqPy

The rationale for this is simple. If someone actually believes his religion is true in an objective way, then it follows that he will hope his child will also believe that the same religion is true. This is because truth about the world tends to make the world easier to live in.

For the sincere Christian believers, the content of their belief may be passed to their children either as thick belief or as thin belief. Surely there is room on the spectrum between these points for degrees of each, but the ends of the scale are useful to illustrate my point.

What is Thick Christianity?

Thick Christianity is a doctrinally sound, ethically rich, gospel saturated faith. This is not to say that it is overflowing with systematic theology (though it may be), or that every choice made is moral (which it certainly won’t be), or even that conversion will occur in the children. Conversion is the work of the Holy Spirit, thus even when thick Christianity is communicated some children may never be born again. However, children who have been exposed to thick Christianity will be able to explain the content of and rationale for the Christian faith whether they have personally accepted it or not.

I have heard it said, though I no longer remember by whom, that in one generation the gospel is loved and known. In the second it is assumed. In the third it is forgotten and abandoned.

This pattern can be witnessed in the fall of once boldly Christian institutions into a malaise of unbelief within a few short generations. A prime example of this is Oberlin University in Ohio. Once it was a robustly Christian institution, but a search of the website now reveals that the gospel is no longer central to their mission. The same phenomenon can occur in churches and denominations. A congregation that was once vibrantly faithful can so easily fall into cultural Christianity in a few years if the central message of the gospel is assumed for a while. Later it will likely be neglected and changed or forgotten. At that point a church becomes a social club and a university becomes just another non-profit educational establishment. There is still some value for society in these mediating institutions, but the transformational power of the gospel is lost.

Thin Christianity is more subject to this sort of generational attenuation than is thick Christianity because thin Christianity lacks the substance that would sustain it. We should expect this, because early in Scripture we get evidence of the importance of living thickly for the propagation of faithfulness between generations.

In Deuteronomy 6, which is part of Moses’ farewell to the Israelites, he affirms the important theological truth of the oneness of God. (v. 4) Then he commands them, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart.” (vv. 5-6) In other words, theological truth must result in right ethical action for the believer. The oneness of God led to worship both through adoration and through action. This is part of living a thick Christianity and not merely being a hearer of the word. (cf. Jas. 1:22)

But there is more to the story. Immediately after this Moses gives another command to his audience, “You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.” (v. 7)

The significance of verse 7 is not that teaching should be done when sitting, walking, lying down, or rising, but rather that all of life is teaching opportunity for communicating a thick Christianity to our children. Teach them not just the “what” of Christianity, but the “why.” This is what makes a Christianity thick. It is a form of Christianity that is lived, authentic, and grounded in substance. This is the sort of Christianity that has a hope of being sustained across generations.

Ultimately, God does the work of salvation in our children. However, if our Christianity is true, it makes sense to live it in such a way that our religion cannot be reduced to a weekly routine or a set of prohibitions.

What is Thin Christianity?

Ethics and Culture RSS

Despite what some might expect, a thin Christianity is not necessarily unorthodox. Someone can be a faithful Fundamentalist with (mostly) biblical doctrine and live a thin Christianity before their family. There are many faithful Christians that have the right doctrine, but they often do not know why. In other cases, they do understand the basis of their doctrine, but fail to communicate it effectively to their children.

The difference is the depth of living in Christ. Our kids are with us all the time and they can tell when we’re going through the motions. Thin Christianity may have all the right motions, but it is often missing the most important emotion: joy.

A Call to Live Christianity Thickly

Thankfully, sometimes God takes thin Christianity and uses it to make Christians that live thickly. Grace is a wonderful thing.

But it is a much better thing to pass on a thick Christianity to our children. That way they get the benefit of doing the right things for the right reasons, of being faithful and experiencing the joy of knowing Christ richly, and of being able to reference a heritage of thick Christianity when they live well before their children. And by living well I don’t mean getting everything right, I mean pursuing the joy of the Lord in all things.

This is, I think, what Paul was getting at when he wrote Colossians 3:12-17:

Put on then, as God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassionate hearts, kindness, humility, meekness, and patience, bearing with one another and, if one has a complaint against another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive. And above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony. And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body. And be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, singing psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, with thankfulness in your hearts to God. And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

Secularism is not the Answer

NOTE: This is not a post about Islam. Although the story that inspired this post was about opposing Islam with secularism in France, this is not a commentary on the validity of various forms of that religion.

---

I listened to an NPR story the week before Christmas that piqued my interest. The story was about an important issue in light the contemporary debate about religion, terrorism, and the public square. It dealt with an attempt by one French woman to promote secularism to young Muslims in France. 

The whole thing is about four minutes long and is worth a listen.

While the author of the article, Eleanor Beardsley, doesn't provide overt commentary on the woman's activity, this is an article that is promoting a particular view of religion. The activist, Ziaten, is promoting secularism and Beardsley is implicitly lauding it.

Here is an excerpt from the transcript that illustrates the argument:

Amand Riquier, the principal of the high school Ziaten is visiting in the northern suburbs of Paris, says so far, no students have radicalized. But teachers are always looking for the signs, such as a sudden and zealous display of religiousness.

Secularism is one of France's most important values, up there with equality, fraternity and liberty. In French schools, neither students nor teachers can come to class wearing religious symbols such as the Muslim veil or the Jewish skullcap.

Riquier says Madame Ziaten's visit is important.

"She'll be able to explain to them that secularism in schools is not meant to constrain their faith, but is a necessary principle for us all to live together in harmony and equality," he says.

Ziaten tells the students how she moved to France from Morocco at the age of 17. She tells the kids this country gave her — and her French-born children — every opportunity.

She says boys like Mohamed Mehra, and those who attacked Paris this year, were abandoned by their families and society. She says they are utter failures who know nothing about Islam.

Islam is not at war with Europe, Ziaten emphasizes. She tells the students that some are trying to turn Islam into an identity. But it's a religion, she says, and it's a private matter.

"Your identity is French," she says. "And you have a future to build in France."

Enforced Secularism

Based on this worldview, religion is a private matter. It doesn't belong in the public square. 

The argument here is that banning religious expressions in public is necessary for living together. The signs of trouble are when students begin to live religiously.

Used in unaltered form via Creative Common License: http://ow.ly/WleKO

In other words, religion is ok unless you actually live like it's true. The only forms of religion that are acceptable, by this standard, are those that don't make a difference in the way that you live.

Unfortunately, that defies the very nature of religion. Every meaningful religion makes demands. Sometimes those are consistent with the standards of the world and at other times they are not. Telling people they can't live out their faith is telling them that their faith does not matter, and that their religion isn't true. That is problematic.

In this case, it makes the assumption that the values of secularism are superior to all other religions. 

The Values of Worldviews

There is no such thing as a neutral worldview. Every worldview has values.

Beardsley acknowledges this in her article, "Secularism is one of France's most important values, up there with equality, fraternity and liberty."

The naked public square isn't naked; it's filled to the brim with values that make totalizing demands on life. In this case, one of the most significant values is 'secularism,' which in this context appears to mean denying the significance of religion.

So secularism is making religious claims, but without the argumentation. This doesn't promote liberty, it promotes a tyranny of the mind and soul. It makes absolute claims on every part of life, but without the warrant for it.

Conclusion

I've heard it said that Europe is usually a generation ahead of the US culturally. Many people make moral arguments based on what Europe does, especially about social policies. The assumption appears to be that they are doing it right and the US is dragging behind. However, before we support the tyrannical secularism that France has, we need to consider whether true religious liberty should be sacrificed for that purpose. Not allowing people to practice their religion openly and being overtly hostile to public demonstrations of faith may make it easier to live together, but it may make it harder to live.

While France's anti-religious policies may limit the radicalization of Muslims in public, it may also override the basic right to a freedom of conscience. That seems a high price to pay for peace.

The Amazing Word of God

Old Bibles by Ken Rowland. http://ow.ly/X6uHX  Used in original form by CC license.

The word of God--the Bible--is an amazing thing. God has spoken through prophets, through poets, and through the pens of the people who wrote the Old and New Testaments by divine inspiration.

This is often difficult to prove from deductive arguments. If someone assumes that Scripture is not the word of God and thus not authoritative, then citing passages within Scripture that affirm the reliability, authority, and inspiration of Scripture is likely to have no effect.

But, the word of God is infused with life through the Holy Spirit. As the author of Hebrews writes in Hebrews 4:12:

For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

In Isaiah 55:10-11 we have been told that God's word will have an impact on this world, and that it will accomplish God's purpose on the earth:

For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven
    and do not return there but water the earth,
making it bring forth and sprout,
    giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater,
so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth;
    it shall not return to me empty,
but it shall accomplish that which I purpose,
    and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.

Of course, none of these verses mean much to someone who already doesn't believe, but for those of us who have, by God's grace, gained an understanding of his faithfulness they are encouraging. For those of us who have felt the light of God's love shining down on us like beams of sun through the clouds, we expect to see God's word do mighty works in us and around us.

The video below will take only a few minutes to watch, but it is worth your time.

The video is an account of how a seemingly chance interaction with Scripture led to salvation. The Holy Spirit works through his inspired word to bring about redemption even in the most unlikely circumstances.

Dimitrina Oprenova, associate minister of First Baptist Church in Sofia, Bulgaria, tells Robert Parham, executive editor of EthicsDaily.com, an unforgettable story about a gentleman who "smoked the Bible." Both are in Durban, South Africa, for the 2015 Baptist World Congress. See more about the Congress at bwanet.org/congress

Under Our Skin - Benjamin Watson Discusses Race in America

When Benjamin Watson, a Tight End in the NFL, wrote a Facebook post in the aftermath of the Ferguson, MO decision, some hailed it as a “race-baiting” others saw it as an attempt by at least one person to try to make sense of the racial tension in our world.

The thing is, whether we all like to admit it or not, race is still an issue in the United States. For the most part we’ve gotten over the biggest obstacles to living with one another: Jim Crow has been repealed, discrimination based on ethnicity is forbidden, and society doesn’t generally tolerate overt racists.

However, that doesn’t mean that the issue is settled. It isn’t. And the reason that we need to talk about it is so that we can identify and begin to root out subtler forms of bias against other races.

Benjamin Watson’s book, which was co-authored by Ken Petersen, tries to bring gracious light on the issue from the perspective of one African-American. This is a book that will make you think, even if you don’t agree with all of the details. That is, it will make you think as long as you take the time to read it and try to see what Watson is really communicating.

Summary

The book includes an introduction and eleven chapters. The topics of ten of the chapters come directly from the bullets in Watson’s original, viral Facebook post.

Watson begins with anger, but he recognizes what it is and moves beyond anger to establish a gracious tone. He invites the reader in to his perspective on the status of race relations in general and the Ferguson decision in particular. This chapter shows that our starting point can shape how we view the justice of the ending point. Instead of arguing with his readers, he tries to show why he arrives at his perspective.

That’s really the point of the book. It makes the reader aware that there is another perspective and that it is rational. In the end, the reader chooses to believe it or not, but a fair reader should walk away with a better understanding of Watson’s view of race in the United States. Although he certainly doesn’t speak for all African-Americans, his perspective is authentic and winsome. It can’t hurt much to think about things from his point of view.

In much the same way, the remaining ten chapters examine emotions that Watson experienced in response to the Ferguson decision. Introspection, embarrassment, frustration, fearful confusion, and sympathetic sadness are among them. Add to these things feeling offended and hopeless, but at the same time encouraged and empowered. Watson walks through how all these emotions were a part of his response. He does this without giving into any of them or becoming so rational that he discounts the power of the emotions.

Reaction

This isn’t a book on theology with a linear argument that I can critique. Even if it was, that isn’t the point of the book. The point of the book is to get the discussion about race going. It is intended to get one side to see that there is more to the conversation than facts and figures; simply showing that overt racism has been banned is not the end of the story. It is intended to show the other side how to begin a discussion without so much anger that your words can’t be heard.

I think that Watson succeeds in providing a gracious beginning point for conversation.

Watson’s book helps me, a white man, to better understand what it’s like to see things from his perspective. He puts into gracious terms some of the bits and pieces of testimony I’ve heard from friends that are part of racial minorities. I can’t have ever experienced these things, but I can certainly appreciate his perspective better now because he presents his case so carefully.

It is shameful that for many people on the political right simply talking about race has become a divisive political issue. Of course, often that idea is intentionally promoted, as some try to use racial division to paint the other side into a corner. But the issue is too important to allow it to driven by politics.

When we are talking about race, we are talking about people made in the image of God. We are talking about how we treat one another and whether justice is being done. Those are gospel issues, not merely political issues. This is a conversation that we can’t afford to skip out on. This deserves a deep discussion and consideration of where we are as a society, not merely a cursory head nod to equality.

I am thankful for Watson’s book and that he took the time to write it. He’s making enough playing football that he didn’t have to take the time, and yet he did. I’m thankful for the way he engaged the question so that I could benefit from his perspective.

In the end, I’m hopeful that reading this book has helped me see things a bit more clearly and gives me the ability to have a bit more empathy. I’m hopeful that others will read the book and have a similar experience.

Under Our Skin: Getting Real about Race--and Getting Free from the Fears and Frustrations that Divide Us

$15.89

By Benjamin Watson

Buy on Amazon

Note: I received a gratis copy of this volume in exchange for an honest review.

Here is a video Watson did with The Gospel Coalition on this topic: 

Forty Names of Jesus - Day 5 - Light of the World

This is the fifth (and final) preview day of the series of Lenten Devotionals that my wife, Jennifer wrote. If you have found these beneficial, you may consider purchasing the e-book here. We both hope you've enjoyed them and have deepened in your love of Christ through them. There is another free day scheduled for Feb 16, 2016, but we were limited to 5 days free.

---

5. Light of the World

 John 8:12

 Again Jesus spoke to them, saying, “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”

 Optional – John 1:1-9, Matthew 5:14-16

When God created the world, the first thing he made (and the only thing on the first day) was light. Without light, you can’t see anything else! It makes sense that God made light first. Before that, there was no way to see. Do you think that would make you afraid? Being in total darkness without even light from stars in the sky or a neighbor’s house is very scary. Our eyes play tricks on us in the dark, and we think we see sparkles or colors. We lose our sense of direction and fall on something or run into something. So light is one of God’s wonderful creations and a gift to us.

Light is so important and good that it is also a way for Jesus to describe himself. Jesus says he is the “light of life.” He’s not just talking about daylight, or an electric light, to help us see with our eyes. He’s talking about light to guide us in how to live – how NOT to be lost and away from God forever.

When we don’t know what to believe or who to trust, that’s like walking in darkness. Things may seem fine for a while. But there are many dangers we can’t see, and it’s just a matter of time until there’s a big problem. Following Jesus in his light means we will never be totally lost. He will guide us to God in the end, through himself, and we will be saved. No darkness can ever be too much for him.

Jesus also told his disciples that they are lights in the world, and they should let their light shine by doing good deeds. But just like Jesus – the true Light – the disciples are to point people to God and bring glory to him. As Jesus’s followers, we don’t do good works to get other people to praise us. We do them so that others will see Jesus, the light for the nations, offering salvation to the ends of the earth (Isa. 49:6). Let’s praise him that he has made us walk in light!

 Key idea: Helps us to see

Forty Names of Jesus: A Lenten Devotional for Families

By Jennifer L. Spencer

Buy on Amazon

Forty Names of Jesus - Day 4 -

---

4. Immanuel

 Matthew 1:22-23

 All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel” (which means, God with us).

 Optional – Isaiah 7:14, Psalm 139:7-12

 Where does God live? God is everywhere – there is nowhere you can go to escape from God. Anywhere you can go, God is already there. But at times throughout history God has especially revealed himself in certain places. In the Garden of Eden, God used to walk with Adam. God had created a perfect home for the first people, Adam and Eve, and God himself would be there in that place with them. That is amazing, and something none of us have ever experienced.

But you know what happened. Adam and Eve sinned, and they had to leave God’s presence. They had to leave the beautiful, flawless garden, and nothing has ever been completely, totally right since then. Because of Adam’s sin, God said that everything would be cursed. That means things are broken and messed up. Nothing is the way God designed it, with no death or problems. God put this curse on the whole universe and everything in it, including nature, animals, and people. The brokenness reminds us that we need God to send a rescuer. So ever since that time, people have not been able to be with God in the way Adam and Eve could be with him before their sin.

Because people aren’t perfect and sinless anymore, it would kill them to be in God’s perfect and holy presence. It would be dangerous – and deadly! Moses had to be protected from seeing God’s face when God spoke the ten commandments and the rest of the law to him. When God’s glory was with the Israelites, the tabernacle and the temple had to be surrounded by courtyards and walls and curtains. God’s glory was in the center room, called the Holy of Holies, and his holiness would destroy any sinful people who came near unprotected.

Think about how sad it would be, to know there is a wonderful, powerful, awesome God that we have no chance of ever meeting. But we can be with God, because Jesus came to be Immanuel – the name that means “God with us.” He came as God in a human body, to live just like humans, with other people, living the same kind of life. And he promised to someday take all who believe in him to be with God, forever, with no more sin or brokenness or sadness. Immanuel is the name that reminds us God has been with us and will be with us again! Let’s thank him and tell him how we look forward to that.

 Key idea: God with us

---

To read day five, click here. 

Forty Names of Jesus: A Lenten Devotional for Families

By Jennifer L. Spencer

Buy on Amazon

Forty Names of Jesus - Day 3 - Redeemer

Today is the third day of the forty leading up to Resurrection Sunday. Here is another preview of Jennifer's devotional guide on some of the names of Jesus.

---

3. Redeemer

 Galatians 3:13

 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.”

 Optional – Isaiah 43:14-15, Titus 2:11-14, Leviticus 25:47-49

 Did you know that God’s people were slaves at one time? You probably do, if you know about Moses and how God sent him to lead the people out of Egypt. The Israelites were slaves in Egypt. That means they could not choose how to live their own lives, and they were treated cruelly by the Egyptian masters. The Israelites felt hopeless, because they could not defeat the Egyptians themselves. In Exodus 6:6, God tells Moses, “I am the Lord, and I will bring you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians, and I will deliver you from slavery to them, and I will redeem you with an outstretched arm and with great acts of judgment.” Redeem means to buy someone out of slavery. The Israelites needed this, and God rescued his people using the plagues he sent on Egypt. Throughout the Bible, God is called Israel’s redeemer.

Another example of someone who was redeemed is Ruth. She wasn’t a slave, but she was poor. People who were poor were in danger of losing their family’s land and inheritance, and so very poor people could be redeemed as well. That is what Boaz did for Ruth – he redeemed the land of her husband who had died, and married Ruth, rescuing her from poverty. Ruth could not have done this for herself, and until Boaz redeemed her she was not free to live how she wanted because of her need.

Do you see what was similar in the stories? People who couldn’t help themselves and were not free to do what they wanted: these are the ones who need a redeemer. We are people who need a redeemer too. We aren’t slaves to another person, but we are slaves to sin and we can’t help ourselves. Our hearts are not free to do what we please but are full of sinful desires that we act on. This sin has us captive to it, and we keep on doing it even if we know it’s wrong and wish we could stop. Because we are sin’s captives, we are also facing the penalty of our sin – God’s judgment. A price had to be paid, to redeem us – to get us out from under the power of sin, and get us out from under the punishment for sin. Jesus died for us, in our place, to redeem us from sin and sin’s curse! The Bible tells us that he was rich, but for our sakes he became poor (2 Cor. 8:9). We can never thank him enough for this. We should worship him every day for giving up his riches and paying our price! Let’s do that now.

 Key idea: Pays the price to get us out of slavery

---

To read day four, click here. 

Forty Names of Jesus: A Lenten Devotional for Families

By Jennifer L. Spencer

Buy on Amazon

Forty Names of Jesus - Day 2 - Christ

This is the second of five preview days of Jennifer's e-book, Forty Names of Jesus. You can read Day 1 here. The idea is to allow folks to read it and use if with their families before they purchase it. 

The bigger idea is to get families into the Bible in this time leading up to Easter considering the person and the work of Jesus Christ as he is represented throughout Scripture.

This is a Lenten devotional in the sense that it can be particularly useful in building up excitement for Resurrection Sunday, not in the sense that it is a special means of grace or part of a religious duty driven by adherence to tradition. Use this anytime with your family. But when better than in the days before Easter?

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

2. Christ

 Matthew 16:15-17

 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.”

 Optional – Luke 2:11, John 1:41, Luke 24:44-49

 When people teach, or preach, or pray, have you ever noticed how many ways they can use Jesus’s name? “Our Lord Jesus Christ”, “Christ Jesus the Lord”, “Christ Jesus”, “Jesus Christ” or simply “Christ” are some of the ways people say his name. The reason that the word “Christ” can move around before or after Jesus is that “Christ” is a title. It’s not his last name, or his first name, but a title like King or Commander. That’s why people called him “the Christ” – Christ is the Greek word with the same meaning as Messiah. It means Anointed One, and to anoint someone meant to choose him for a special purpose, a special role.

God had promised through his prophets, like Isaiah, David, and Micah, that he was going to send his Chosen Messenger to rescue his people. By using the name “Christ” or “the Christ”, the disciples, angels, and Jesus himself were saying they believed God had kept his word – Jesus was the Promised One whom God sent. And we can worship him now and praise him for that – we recognize he is the fulfillment of God’s promises. He came once, to live among us, die, and rise again. He will come again to rule forever. We love and adore and serve him because he is God’s chosen one – He is Christ! Let’s worship him in prayer now.

 Key idea: Anointed one, chosen one (Greek)

---

To read day three, click here. 

Forty Names of Jesus: A Lenten Devotional for Families

By Jennifer L. Spencer

Buy on Amazon