Skip to main content

Life in a Broken World

Vaccines save lives!

But...they often have side effects that are worse than the diseases they prevent.

Processed food keeps millions of people from starving to death!

But...it's really unhealthy and is probably giving us all cancer.

Social media facilitates the dissemination of information and enables us to stay connected with friends and family!

But...it spreads misinformation and is probably dragging us all down into depression.

Technology opens up new possibilities and allows us to be more productive!

But...it also puts people out of work by eliminating entire industries.

On and on the story goes.

Every pro comes with a con.  Every advancement presents new issues.  Every solution the human race develops to solve the world's problems creates an entirely new and previously inconceivable set of problems.

Welcome to life.

Welcome to reality.

Welcome to a world broken by sin.

Nothing is ever perfect.  Nothing is ever resolved.  Nothing will ever exempt us from the realities of risk and scarcity, pain and death.

So what do we do about it?

Well, we survive.

We live our lives.

We do the best that we can to deal with what's in front of us.

We set aside our naive dreams of future utopias, where science solves all of our problems.

We let go of our nostalgic notions of idyllic countrysides where, we imagine, people lived simple, stress-free lives.

We maintain balance.

We hold onto traditions, those intangibles that make us who we are, while embracing innovations, those opportunities to be, to do, more.

We weigh the pros against the cons, the risks against the rewards.

We make our own decisions and we let other people make theirs.

We give and receive love, and leave the rest to God.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

4 Reasons I Affirm Paedocommunion

If you have interacted with me on social media, you know that I have always been outspoken on the issue of Paedocommunion .  It is a theological position and a liturgical practice about which I am passionate.  Having been raised, and having raised my children, at the Table, I cannot imagine attending a church that didn't allow PC.  I hope that when I am old and gray, I will still be an advocate for bringing little children to the Sacrament. Throughout the 12 years that I have had this blog, I have written scattered thoughts on the topic, but it appears that I have never written a concise summary of my reasons for affirming PC.  I was thoroughly convinced that I had, but I can't seem to locate it, so I guess I never did.  So, to rectify the omission, here are four reasons I hold to PC. 1) Paedocommunion is Biblical.   Any discussion of the topic should start here, and I would hope that both sides of the debate would make this assertion.  However, l...
Post a Comment
Read more

1 Corinthians, the Covenant Hermeneutic, & Paedocommunion

As an adherent to Paedocommunion  (hereafter PC), I have always found it painfully ironic that Credocommunionists use 1 Corinthians 11 to withhold children (among others) from the Table.  One can imagine St. Paul shaking his head as he watches theologians using his discussion of unity at the Table to divide the body at the Table.  You're missing the point! he would say in exasperation.  Not only does 1 Corinthians 11 not forbid PC; I would go so far as to say that there is no better defense of PC in the New Testament than the epistle of 1 Corinthians. Credocommunionist logic is pretty straightforward.  1 Corinthians 11:28 says, "Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup."  If, they argue, one is unable to fulfill the exhortation to examine himself, then he may not eat of the bread and drink of the cup.  This is a pretty logical deduction, right? Credobaptists would adamantly agree.  Acts 2:38 says, "Repe...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Real Presence & Paedocommunion: A Deeper Rift Between Reformed Churches

You're going back to Rome! Theological disagreements within the Reformed world, especially those of the last half century, often devolve into these sorts of accusations.  As controversialists like Doug Wilson and Peter Leithart began to break away from the larger conservative Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, it became clear that the rift was deeper than semantics and systematic minutiae.  Much like the Reformation four centuries before, the Table was a primary point of conflict.   What does it mean?  Who may partake?  What do we call it?    These questions, along with a few more, divided Reformed brethren as the physical elements of our religion reflected deeper conflicts.  Good men began to understand that the problem wasn't just in our logos, but in our pathos and ethos, as well. Paedocommunion (hereafter PC) has been one of the hottest points of contention.  PC has always been normal to me as I grew up with it.  I underst...
Post a Comment
Read more