The StuDev Exchange

Theology of Leisure - audio available now

2008-02-07T10:14:00.000-08:00

All of the "Theology of Leisure" audio messages are now available. Presenters include Drs. Rosalie de Rosset, Bryan O'Neal, Bryan Litfin, Jerry Root (of Wheaton College), and Rev. Ken Myers (of the Mars Hill Audio Journal).

You can also subscribe to the MBI chapels podcast using iTunes- search for "MBI Chapels" within the iTunes music store. We will continue to upload chapel messages throughout the year.

Founder's Week- Reconnecting with Tradition

2008-02-04T14:15:00.000-08:00

Hello MBI Student Body,

Founder's Week is a great time to learn and reflect on MBI's rich legacy. Here are a few ways to "value tradition" this week:
- Introduce yourself to the Moody alum in your midst, and ask them about their Moody experience and what they have learned since.
- Use post-session hangouts to reflect with your community of friends. Process the inspiring, frustrating, and challenging parts of your FW experience with them. Be a supportive listener, as well as an honest discloser, for your peers.
- Create your own time capsule by taking pictures and keeping a journal. Don't worry about taking furious notes; you'll take more away by writing down 1-2 takeaways from each session.

A few reminders:
- You need to be physically present at Moody Church in order to count yourself present; listening to the session on the radio or watching on TV does not count. The only exception is when there's an overflow because Moody Church is full. In that case, follow instructions of where to watch the session.
- Dress code is in effect for the morning & afternoon sessions.
- Download the attendance form now so there's no suprises at the end of the week.
- Other questions? Call Student Programs at x4206.

To the best student body in the world,

Residence Life

2008-01-17T12:58:00.000-08:00

*Hooded sweatshirts are OK*

Dear MBI Student Body,

After Wedensday's chapel announcement about dress code, we needed to send everyone a clarification. Hooded sweatshirts, even with writing, are allowed. However, they should be zipped up if you do not have a collered/ribbed/knit shirt underneath. We sincerely apologize for the confusion/frustration this caused. Stay warm!

With deep respect,

Residence Life

2006-10-11T09:50:00.000-07:00

Theology of Leisure, Part 1
Rosalie de Rosset

LEISURE: A CONDITION OF SOUL
August 24, 2006

Nobody was bored on September 11, 2001. On that day and for several weeks afterward we were all transfixed by the terrible unfolding drama at the Twin Towers and at the Pentagon. The casts of Broadway shows wondered whether they should and could continue their performances. It felt wrong to go to a movie or a concert. For the first week after the attacks, many events were canceled or postponed. People stayed at home, afraid to take risks in the threatening world outside and remained glued to the news.
The culture of entertainment seemed to shrivel and become redundant overnight. [Even]David Letterman and Jay Leno were more serious than they had ever been. It was hard to laugh at much except a brief temporary relief from the hundreds of tragic stories that filled the news.

At first, people seemed more open to serious discussion about issues like good and evil, the meaning of life and the importance of spending time with family. Our cultural heroes changed within a few hours from entertainment and sports figures to firefighters and police officers.

BUT

It took only a few months until, we were used to the new realities and the entertainment industry had regained its stride.

With those words Richard Winter opens the introduction of his interesting book called
Still Bored in a Culture of Entertainment.

It’s a little like that isn’t it even on a lesser scale in our lives. We suffer a loss, a reverse, a disappointment. Suddenly much of the content of our lives seems insignificant, our choices mundane, and we cut to the chase of what is important.

Too quickly, however, in the words of Neil Postman, we’re back to entertaining ourselves to death. In his book which many of you have heard me refer to many times before, Amusing Ourselves To Death, an analysis of the culture of entertainment which we are presently in, a culture symbolized perfectly by the city of Las Vegas, Postman compares prophetic novelists who were looking at an age in the future.

Orwell: feared those banning books
Huxley: feared there would be no reason to ban books
because no one would be wanting to read.

Orwell: feared those who would deprive us of information
Huxley: feared we would be would be given so much information we would be reduced to passivity and egoism

Orwell: feared truth would be hidden
Huxley: feared the truth would be drowned in a sea of irrelevance

Orwell: feared we would be a captive culture
Huxley: feared we would be a trivial culture preoccupied with feelings

Orwell: feared what we hate would ruin us
Huxley: feared what we love would ruin us

Orwell: In 1984, people were controlled by inflicting pain
Huxley: In Brave New World, people were controlled by inflicting pleasure.

As long ago as 1962, the following question was posed to a group of distinguished CBS-TV news commentators on an end-of-the-year roundup program.

WHAT IS THE GREATEST CRISIS FACING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE IN THE YEAR AHEAD?
One person suggested heightened cold war tensions.
Another thought Latin America and its fickle governments.
A third felt Berlin would provoke the gravest crisis.

Finally, Mr. Severeid, a well-known journalist at the time, spoke. He stated that he thought the most dangerous threat to American society was the rise of leisure and the fact that those who have the most leisure are the least equipped to make use of it.

I repeat, THOSE WHO HAVE THE MOST LEISURE ARE THE LEAST EQUIPPED TO MAKE USE OF IT.

That was 1962. ..when America was standing on the threshold of a revolution in leisure….when the most significant characteristic of the American scene, next to the abundance of things was the abundance of free time. A century ago the industrial work-week was 70 hours. Since then we have become a new leisured society.
Our busyness today is chosen…not essential to our survival. And…the concern becomes that the masses are over-indulging in stultifying, unedifying or moronic pastimes.

Far more seriously, the moral problem is that of drift, of a “group think” mentality which merely follows a leaderless crowd. It is one of forfeiting the right of choice, of emptiness in what should be life’s satisfactions. The problem is triviality but even more the great emptiness that haunts postmodern man as he or she drifts along by chance or by circumstance. The inner impoverishment of the individual in our age and the pervasiveness of boredom (ennui) are symptomatic of our inability to cope with leisure,
of our failure to think about it. Even for Christians.

While Christians have developed a sizeable body of literature to provide guidance with respect to work or vocation…we lack any such doctrine or direction for our leisure or avocation, almost any theology of leisure

We have
-a work ethic,
-a work morality which is a curious compound of Puritan and middle class values,
but when it comes to a morality or ethic of leisure, we face a vacuum.

Harry Blamires, writing as long ago as the 1950’s put it another way:
We no longer have a Christian mind. There is still, of course, a Christian ethic, a Christian practice, and a Christian spirituality. As a moral being, the modern Christian subscribes to a code other than that of the non-Christian.
As a member of the Church, he or she undertakes obligations and observations ignored by the non-Christian. As a spiritual being, he or she tries to cultivate a dimension of life unexplored by the non-Christian.
But…as a thinking being, the modern Christian has succumbed to secularization. He accepts religion—its morality, its spiritual culture, but he rejects the religious view of life, the view that sees all earthly things within the context of the eternal, the view that relates all human problems—social, political, cultural, [leisure] to the doctrinal foundations of the Christian Faith, the view which sees all things here below in terms of God’s supremacy and earth’s transitoriness. (3-4)

Nobody, he adds, is reading and reflecting on a book like Joseph Pieper’s classic Leisure, the Basis of a Culture. Preachers don’t preach about, teachers seldom talk about it.
He adds, There is no public pool of discourse fed by Christianly committed thought on the world we live in and what it is doing to us.- (13)
The thinking Christian is profoundly lonely after all is said and done (14).
The Christian mind, by cultivating the eternal perspective, will bring a totally different frame of reference to bear upon all that touches human life…all including our leisure.

I want to say to you with some emphasis that we cannot afford to be casual about the content of our lives…it is leading to a kind of distraughtness. The distraughtness that disturbs contemporary men and women is expressed in the revealing phrase “killing time” in discussing leisure. It implies that we find leisure difficult to face. To kill time is to kill leisure—ultimately as we shall see, to deny God. Killing time may lead to over work, escaping into a world of feverish activities or indulging in idleness in order to fill the void.

Some of the manifestations of idleness (television, movies, mass entertainments, thoughtless socializing, too much e-mail, too much Ipod, too much music listening, too many video games, too many movies, too much indirect contact with the world through things like facebook ) The fact is that. . . the endless electronic assault obviously leaves its marks all over us. …we grow up knowing that everything in the media is disposable. Everything on television is just for the moment…everything on computer is just for the moment…[we] have.devalued time giving ourselves the subtle sense that nothing matters (Winter 51).

But, before we go forward, I want to ask : What comes to mind when you think of the word leisure?
How do you define leisure?
And once you’ve defined it, what do you do with it as a Christian?

George Lundberg has defined leisure as follows:
The time we are free from the more obvious and formal duties which a paid job or other obligatory occupation imposes upon us.

QUESTION: Does that impress you as a very good definition? What is missing?

Not complete—

We gain a clue from the etymological derivation of the word. In Greek the term for leisure is skole and in Latin skola—from which we derive our word “school.”
Leisure thus conceived is an aspect of the educational or learning process.

The spirit of leisure is the spirit of learning, of self-cultivation. Leisure provides the climate for the growth of man’s whole being—for contemplation of man’s ultimate concerns, for activities
that enrich the mind,
strengthen the body,
restore the soul.

Like education, leisure takes
discipline,
training,
cultivation of habits and tastes,
discriminating judgments.

It is not something one drifts into- or dare I suggest, one becomes a drifter.

QUESTION: How much have we drifted in our lives? Into present-day culture?
Again, I ask? What do you do in your leisure?

Leisure is the time for discovery—or better—self-discovery. …the occasion for the development of broader and deeper perspectives and for renewing the mind, body, and spirit. ..a kind of self-learning and self-understanding which forms the basis of true selfhood and of the person’s involvement in society.

Joseph Pieper underscores this viewpoint in his important work, Leisure, The Basis of Culture. He maintains that leisure is a mental and spiritual attitude not simply the result of external factors, such as spare time, a holiday, a weekend, or a vacation.

Leisure is, in fact, the basis of a culture. If leisure goes wrong, everything goes wrong. It’s not seizing the day; it’s opening yourself to the day, it’s letting go of ourselves in an affirmation of our God-given lives. . .not something done for duty, profit, or by compulsion…but relaxing, in a way, into the delight of all God has given us to enjoy.

It is in the first place an attitude of mind, a condition of the soul….Leisure implies an attitude of non-activity, of inward calm, of silence. The occasion and the capacity for steeping oneself in the whole of creation. Thus conceived leisure is concerned with the edification of one’s total being. It is not limited to intellectual cultivation, but embraces the mind, body, and the soul of a living person.

A CONDITION OF SOUL: Think about that.

Leisure is not idleness, just passing time, doing what you want to do.
Idleness is actually one of the seven capital sins….(capital meaning head…source)….
From idleness, so the old teaching goes, comes restlessness and an inability-for-lesiure which leads to despair. We can become rattled at doing what we think is relaxing.
Idleness leads to restlessness which leads to despair…an inability to have leisure.

John Piper in his book on fasting writes that the greatest enemy of hunger for God is not poison but apple pie. It is not the banquet of the wicked that dulls our appetite for heaven, but endless nibbling at the table of the world. It is not the X-rated video [because by that time one is on the way to a kind of ruin] but the prime-time dribble of triviality we drink in every night. For all the ill that Satan can do, when God describes what keeps us from the banquet table of his love, it is a piece of land a yoke of oxen….the everyday things of life. The most deadly appetites are not for the poison of evil, but for the simple pleasures of earth. For when these replace an appetite for God himself, the idolatry is scarcely recognizable and almost incurable (A Hunger for God, 14).

John Piper tells the following story:… he. called his people to fast for a 24 hour period once a week (breakfast and lunch on Wednesdays if possible) during the month of January prior to facing huge issues in leadership. He then got a note in the mail that read:

“I’m behind this. I think God is in it. But that kind of fasting doesn’t work for me. I believe there are a couple of things I need to fast from more than food. I thought not watching television for a week, or for a month, or a night of the week when I normally watch it, might be more of a fast than food. Instead of watching my favorite television program, I might spend the time talking and listening to God.”

The issue is not food per se…it is anything and everything that is, or can be, a substitute for God. It is a test to see what desires control us. What are our bottom-line passions?
As Richard Foster says, “We are prone to cover up what is inside of us…[we chase our demons with food, activities, obsessions.]
If you fast from those things controlling you, you are going to have to deal with the unhappiness or restlessness inside of you.

Leisure, then, is an inner absence of preoccupation, a calm, an ability to let things go, to be quiet. As Pieper puts it, leisure is a form of that stillness that is the necessary preparation for accepting reality.
Only the person who is STILL (think of that word still) can hear.
Whoever is not still, cannot hear, not mere soundlessness or a dead muteness but a dis-position of receptive understanding, of contemplative beholding and immersion which helps us be in touch with the history of the world, one who opens him or herself, who lets go.

In the Book of Job (35:10) we read, "God gives us songs in the middle of the night"
(not while we are doing face book, or surfing the net, or talking on the phone to whomever we are in heat with). The greatest, most blessed insights, the kind that could never be tracked down, come to us above all in the time of leisure, of letting go.

Leisure is the condition of considering things in a celebrating spirit. “And it is written in the Scriptures, God saw, when "he rested from all the works that He had made" that everything was good, very good (Genesis 1, 31)…so we too must have time to approve, linger…gaze on the reality of creation.

"As God, Who made things, did not rest in the things He made, but rested from them, in Himself…just so should we learn to rest not in our things or in His things, as if they were the goal, but rather in God Himself, in Whom our happiness consists. This is the reason why man should work for six days in His own works, in order to rest on the seventh day, and be free for the worship of God."

I want you to ask yourselves some important questions, ones any thoughtful Christian must deal with if he or she is to have life truly given to God.

QUESTIONS:

1. What is your theology of leisure? Do you have one? Based on what?
2. What philosophical or theological presupposition governs the way you use your free time?
3. What makes you decide whether or not you do the things the culture offers you so readily. Does prayer or consulting God or talking to wiser people or reading philosophical treatments figure into the equation? Some of the activities that seem benign are as follows.

Watch a movie (watch at all not to mention which movie)
Use Internet (how often, for what purpose)
Use e-mail (how often, for what purpose)
Use facebook (or similar venues) and for what purpose
Play video games (how often, for what purpose, what kind of game)
Listen to music (how often, what setting, for what purpose.

How do these activities limit other activities or relationships?
What would you do if they weren’t available?
How necessary have they become to your life? Can you live without them?
Can you defend your leisure theologically?
How much solitude or silence do you include in your life?

T.S. Eliot writes the following words in his essay on reading calle “Religion and Literature.” The principles certainly apply to all activities.
Now, do people in general hold a definite opinion, that is to say religious or anti-religious; and do they read novels, or poetry for that matter, with a separate compartment of their minds? The common ground between religion and fiction is behaviour. Our religion imposes our ethics, our judgment and criticism of ourselves and our behaviour toward our fellow men. The fiction that we read affects our behaviour towards our fellow men, affects our patterns of ourselves. When we read of human beings behaving in certain ways, with the approval of the author who gives him benediction to this behaviour by his attitude toward the result of the behaviour arranged by himself, we can be influenced towards behaving I the same way.

What we read does not concern merely something called our literary taste, but it affects directly. . . the whole of what we are.

We can be inundated by the personality [of what we do in our leisure…by the stronger personality of the culture] until we are completely taken over.

What we do “purely for pleasure” may have the greatest and least suspected influence upon us. It is [what we do] with the least effort that can have the easiest and most insidious influence up on us. Hence it is that the influence of popular novelists [popular past-times and cultural idioms] that requires to be scrutinized most closely.

His most thought-provoking words are as follows:

"It is our business, as readers of literature,[as choosers of activities] to know what we like. It is our business as Christians as well as readers of literature [or choosers of activities] to know what we ought to like.

It is our business as honest men and women not to assume that whatever we like is what we ought to like, and it is our business as honest Christians not to assume that we do like is what we ought to like."

American Protestants have negotiated a seemingly fundamental antipathy between their religious lives and their ever-expanding opportunities for leisure and recreation.

YET it has frequently been argued that religion is the mother of leisure pursuits in view of the inspiration it gave to the arts, drama, dance, music, and literature in the Middle Ages. Indeed, the influence of religion on leisure is clearly discernible in primitive man whose ritualistic festivities aimed at propitiating the gods through dance and music, contest and combat. Holidays…were originally all organized as holy days in the ancient world and were a chief source of leisure during the pre-industrial period.

Which brings us to the Sabbath. The Sabbath was set apart as the pivotal day of the week which gave meaning and purpose to the rest of the days. The holiness of the day of rest was a special reminder of the wholeness or integrity that characterizes all of life, of the necessity of ceasing…resting…letting go. It was to be a time of rest of heart. Sabbath keeping was and still is to be a preparation for the final rest of God’s reign, a foretaste of eternity, a way to stop our enslavement to Chronos, chronological time, and enter a bit of Kairos, the time of opportunity and fulfillment which will mark eternity, a genuine ceasing from the madness and frenzy of our society.
It is being present to the moment in the presence of God.

The great English Puritan, Richard Baxter, nearing his death wrote his famous book called The Saint’s Everlasting Rest on this very subject…on finding rest as a condition of soul in anticipation of eternity. But, he said, it was harder for God to give the children of Israel Sabbaths of rest than to make them believe they could overcome the enemy (16). He also contended that our liveliness in all duties, our enduring of tribulation, our honoring of God, the vigor of our love, thankfulness, and all our graces, yea, the very being of our religion and Christianity, depend on the believing, serious thoughts of our rest (17).

Our work, like our Creator’s, is crowned with God’s rest, and our chief end is not to labor but to enjoy God forever, what Marva Dawn calls a “royal waste of time” never to be confused with entertainment or even duty.

In the book of Proverbs we find Wisdom saying, “The Lord possessed me in the beginning. I was set up from eternity…I was with him forming all things: and was delighted every day, playing before him at all times; playing in the world (8:22-23, 30-1.)

Leisure cannot be empty time…it must be fulfilled and redeemed
Mortimer Adler says, “The Good life depends on labor but consists of leisure.”

In a fascinating short story called “The World the Children Made,” written almost 90 years ago, Ray Bradbury presents a chilling scenario of a family who has let technology invade their lives just because it happens to be available. An upwardly mobile family, the Hadleys, have built a “Happylife Home,” a house which clothes, feeds, comforts and rocks them to sleep. Lights go on and off as they come near rooms; the house is sensitive to their wants. In the house, they have built a nursery, forty by forty by thirty, a nursery that has cost them half again as much as their house but “nothing’s too good for our children,” they tell themselves. The nursery or children’s playroom brings their son’s and daughter’s fantasies to life, a virtual technological paradise, full of changing scenery, elements of weather, sounds and odors, the result of whatever the children think and imagine.

Mr. and Mrs. Hadley, however, are bitterly unhappy and increasingly terrified of the images of the African veldt complete with screaming prides of lions and the smell of meat coming from the lions’ panting, dripping mouths that the nursery seems to display consistently.

One day, overwhelmed by the too-real texture of this virtual nursery, they decide to turn the whole house off for awhile, do their own cooking and spend time together as a family. They realize how nervous they have become. They also see that their children have become secretive, that they deny the images the parents have seen in the nursery.

In fact, when the parents lock up the nursery, the son turns deadly cold and says to his father, “I don’t want to do anything but look and listen and smell…what else is there to do?” The father finally gives in but consults a psychologist about the problem, one who agrees that the “nursery doesn’t feel good,” also warning the parents that “You’ve let this room and this house replace you and your wife in your children’s affections. This room is their mother and father, far more important than you….so if you change it…there will be hatred.”

In desperation, the parents switch off the room and decide to move away. On the day of the move, however, they allow their children to enter the nursery once more. After a little while, the children call the parents to come in the nursery. Upon entering, the door locks behind the parents, and they are alone in an African veldt with lions surrounding them threateningly.

The story ends with the children calmly eating a picnic lunch in the middle of the veldt…the lions feeding in a corner. When the movers ask where their parents are, they say, with innocent smiles, “Oh, they’ll be here soon.”

This is a dark vision of the world we may be making for ourselves by truncating our lives, by not thinking, by not developing a theology of leisure. We too, may be eaten alive by the lions of our culture or cause others to be eaten alive. John Piper is right—the first thing we may just have to do is to begin fasting, fasting from the things that bind us, that seduce us, that delight us, that keep us, finally from leisure as a condition of our souls.
Isaiah 58: 13-14 reads:
If you keep your feet from breaking the Sabbath and from doing as you please on my holy day,
if you call the Sabbath a delight
and the Lord’s holy day honourable,
and if you honour it by not going your own way
and not doing as you please or speaking idle words,
then you will find your joy in the Lord,
and I will cause you to ride on the heights of the land. . .

In the words of the Confession of Sin from The Book of Common Prayer:

Almighty and most merciful Father,
we have erred and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep,
we have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts,
we have offended against thy holy laws,
we have left undone those things which we ought to have done,
and we have done those things which we ought not to have done,
But thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us,
spare thou those who confess their faults,
restore thou those who are penitent,
according to thy promises declared unto mankind
in Christ Jesus our Lord;
and grant, O most merciful Father, for his sake,
that we may hereafter live a godly, righteous, and sober life,
to the glory of thy holy Name.

Amen

___________________________________________________
Works Cited

Baxter, Richard. The Saint’s Everlasting Rest. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,
1978.

The Bible. New International Version.

Blamires, Harry. The Christian Mind. Ann Arbor: Servant Publications, 1978.

Bradbury, Ray. “The World the Children Made.” In The Complex Vision Eds Kytle and
Kytle. Chicago: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1972: 248-260.
[Story is sometimes entitled “The Veldt”]

Gabler, Neal. Life: The Movie How Entertainment Conquered Reality. New York:
Vintage Books, 1998.

Pieper, Josef. Leisure The Basis of Culture. South Bend: Saint Augustine Press, 1998.

Piper, John. A Hunger for God. Wheaton, Il.: Crossway Books, 1997.

Postman, Neil. Amusing Ourselves To Death. New York: Viking Penguin, 1986.

Winter, Richard. Still Bored in a Culture of Entertainment. Downers Grove:
Intervarsity Press, 2002.

2006-10-11T09:39:00.000-07:00

The next series of posts will be transcripts from the "Theology of Leisure" chapel series.

The Theology of Leisure series is designed to help the members of our worshipping community think theologically about our lifestyle.

These lectures are both pastoral and scholarly, a reminder that our daily existence should never detached from our Christian worldview, nor should our moral imagination function independently of our theological categories.

It is our hope that through this series, we might begin to embrace our human capacity for leisure in whole and holy ways.

2006-04-28T13:38:00.000-07:00

Mcduffee's updated post:
For Those Who Like to Watch, We Watch Best if Willing Not to…
Thoughts about Use of DVDs of MBI Campus
By mike mcduffee (April 25, 2006)

More so than any experience we might have had, true knowledge about how to live life begins with giving a moment of thought about death, an event none of us has yet experienced. Christ, having been raised from the dead, is never to die again; death is no longer master over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin, once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Even so, we should consider ourselves dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus (Rom 6:9-11). We know God’s love is perfected with us by our abiding in love that we may have confidence in the Day of Judgment, because as He is so also are we in this world. We rejoice in these sober truths, which orient our discussion this morning.

Our purpose until unto that Day is to reach the goal for our growth in the faith that we might be perfect and complete, lacking nothing. We grow through doing the work of ministry and by promoting godly development of character in one another’s lives (Eph 4:12-13). To culture this growth we imitate the faith of our leaders, we obey them, submit to them and seek to relieve them of unnecessary grief as they keep watch over our souls. We know they like us must give a personal account to God, although He will judge the leaders and teachers in the church with a greater strictness (Heb 13:7, 17; Jms 3:1).

We pray that our church leaders and elders may be sure they have a clear conscience in desiring to act honorably in all things (Heb 13:18).[1] Maturing in the faith bears the fruit of offering up such prayers. Within this ring of responsibility each of us does our best to rightly handle the word of truth (2 Tm 2:15), to be useful to the Master as men and women ready, equipped and competent for every good work (2 Tm 2:21; 3:17). I wonder how many of you have consistently prayed in this way for your respective spiritual leaders and teachers before approaching them to seek their counsel about where you should stand on the issue of changing the DVD policy here at Moody. I must tell you my reflecting on this DVD issue of late has reminded me of my responsibility to bring you before the Lord in prayer, as men and women who have come to study at Moody Bible Institute in preparation for serving Christ through His church in vocational ministry. I must confess this reminder was a sobering rebuke. It required me to repent of my negligence, which I trust the Lord will bless by changing how I pray for you from now on.

The decision before the student body about the use of DVD technology[2] on campus demands exercising mature discernment. Godly discretion develops only by learning to subject all of daily life to the light of the Scriptures, and by training our faculties of judgment to conform to the word of righteousness through constant practice in distinguishing between good and evil (Heb 5:14). What is the good life but to realize, internalize and exercise the wisdom of God so we might together strain forward toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus (Phil 3:14), that we might stand together mature and fully assured in the will of God (Col 4:12)?

If you decide favoring to allow or disallow resident use of DVDs on campus without considering these things, then what does it matter whether or not the course of action you select is profitable? If on the other hand, you commit yourselves to these things, then no matter what you decide, you will do well. I do not know what causes me greater dismay, that you should decline the responsibility such a change of policy will demand of you for fear of being too immature to bear it, or that your insistence upon being awarded the right of such a responsibility is only a cover for selfish indulgence.

Seniors, am I to judge you on the threshold of your commencement as incompetent in trying this trivial issue (1 Cor 6:2)? Juniors, should I commend you for your active role in selecting practical Christian ministries that correlate appropriately with your degree program training and yet admit you are not able to judge such a matter pertaining to this life (1 Cor 6:3)? Sophomores and freshmen, should I concede there lacks a quorum of upper class students around you wise enough for you to turn to in settling disputes over the appropriate use of this technology on your resident floors? The love of Christ in me refuses to believe this about you. I urge you not to believe this about yourselves, and to bear one another in Christ accordingly. Therefore, I support without stigma, coercion or the compromising of Biblical teaching on moral living a change in the DVD policy permitting their use in Residence Halls or in any other Institute building as designated by the administration. I am confident that community life at Moody Bible Institute is a model setting in which we may learn and practice together the discipline needed to maturely conduct the responsibility such a change of policy will require.

Our approval of this change of policy signals our willingness to work harder at striving together at upholding relations of ethical excellence here at Moody Bible Institute.

The issue of DVD use calls us to make clear to one another the moral standards we choose to hold up as the carriage of our community, our moral posture if you will, that is, the way we walk together in Christ here at Moody Bible Institute. Exercising our moral sense in conformity to this standard requires our deliberating over its normative content. We agree as a community that Scripture is our authoritative source for this task. Upon establishing standards conforming to biblical instruction our conscience should both bear witness to the soundness of this standard and serve us notice when we violate it.

The immature Christian is subject to a weak conscience. Such moral wiring prompts me to stress inconsequential matters in living the life of freedom Christ has given us. A weak conscience skews my sense of dependence, makes me weigh what is good by the false measure of appearances. It pulls my eyes away from looking to Jesus, whose Spirit teaches me through the Scriptures how to read well the situations in which I find myself that I may conduct myself in a manner worthy of the Gospel. If I lack the faith to judge for myself before my Father over how I should behave, then I turn in doubt by either an impulse of spiritual panic or by habit of spiritual slothfulness to others to follow in the flesh their lead. I use them as a short cut to or crib sheet on sanctification. I make myself a quick study of them about how to live the godliness my Father desires rather than stay connected to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God (Col 2:19). This increases the influence of others and not Jesus over what I do and do not do.

The powers of this age say, “So what? Who are the weak to dictate to the strong what they should be allowed? Let each driver on the road of life wipe his own windshield clean, what is it to me if my actions smear your windshield, making it more difficult for you to keep your car on the road?” To which the believer living by the power of Christ responds, “The strong should serve the weak to build them up in Christ to make them strong.” The mature in Christ remembers his or her carefree actions in Christ might serve as an obstacle to the weak. They remember their freedom might well carry me along to entice me into doing something I believe is wrong, which results in the defiling of my conscience (1 Cor 8:7) because I either fruitlessly condemn the action of myself or another in Christ. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves, but whoever has doubts is condemned…for whatever does not proceed from faith is sin (Rom 14:23).

The mature know the freedom Christ gives should not tempt another to submit to a yoke of slavery. What would be true, honorable, just, pure, lovely and commendable (Phil 4:8) in serving the living God (Heb 9:14) in this way? Is this the past we insist we have a right to plant in our heart today that we might remain loyal and faithful to what will haunt us tomorrow? Who would be so bold to take God-given confidence in Christ to use it for his or her preference or pleasure, giving no regard for the weak among us? How would this be the right way to keep clear a cleansed conscience? What arguments will I make before God the Father in justifying the choices I made to prove the things I have done are right in His eyes? Is this the way I should strive always to keep my conscience clear before God and man (Acts 24:16)? Is this how I have fellowship with the Lord of light in whom there is no darkness at all? Is this the way to walk in the light as He Himself is in the light? Will I believe, confess, teach, confirm and demonstrate that this is how to have fellowship with one another in Christ, whose blood cleanses us from all sin (1 John 1:5-7)? Is this how I shall be obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which I was committed upon being set free in Christ to be made a slave to righteousness resulting in sanctification (Rom 6:17-19)?

In this matter as in all others Lord, make it our proud confidence in your presence that our conscience testifies to this truth: we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially toward one another in holiness and godly sincerity, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God (2 Cor 1:12).

[1] I would understand it to be an appropriate application of this right ordering of relationships within the church relevant to community life here at Moody that I should not grouse over, gossip about or be a cause of grief for the administrative executives who exercised their authority to allow the Student Body to vote over the issue at hand. I am to faithfully embrace this decision, like all others, unless to do so would cause a crisis of faith. Then I should obey God rather than men and suffer joyfully the consequences, according to the Scriptures.

[2] My stance toward technology is influenced by the thought of Jacques Ellul (1912-1994), who defined technology as “the totality of methods rationally arrived at and having absolute efficiency (for a given state of development in every field of human activity (The Technological Society, 1964, p. xxv).” Correctly I believe, Ellul sees a dual axis of the false sacred at work in secular society, the force of one – false love of self - works through technology and sexual fantasy; the other – false love of neighbor & enemy - through nation-state allegiance and civil revolution. The two dialectics together make up our social world in which all that the Lord said comes out of us and defiles us (Mk 7:20-23) is amplified and expansively distributed through technology and propaganda.

2006-04-28T12:19:00.000-07:00

Thoughts from a recent Moody Grad:

I heard through the grapevine about Moody's new policy about going out to see movies, and the present discussion regarding televisions and movies in the dorms. Granted, I am no longer a student there, but I wanted to share about my own experience on 10W. I am sure that many students, especially the younger ones are voting to allow movies in their rooms. During my first years there, I also would have voted that way, because I didn't know just how big of an impact it would make. But in my last year there, and even now that I have graduated (2005), my perspective is so totally different.

There is something very special that happened on our floor on a weekly basis: the inevitable boredom and feeling in serious need for diversion from study. That, in itself, is no specialty at all, but what happened as a result most certainly is. We would migrate into each other's rooms and engage each other's minds and hearts, sometimes pertaining to the things we were studying, sometimes about random other musings. We would be creatively silly together, go and explore our city (and come to love the place!). We would read poetry together, go photograph the city's particular beauties, dream together, pray together, act out the crazy story we had just experienced only hours previous. These times with the girls from my floor are some of my most precious memories from my four years at Moody. So much of my personal growth came as a result of spending hours together philosophizing and wrestling with issues in life, talking on levels deeper than I ever had before.

So, why do I write these memories, you ask? This type of community and creative enjoyment of life I do not want to see lost by bringing in movies to the dorms. I love Moody so much and had an absolutely wonderful experience there. Time is one of the most valuable things we possess, espcially in the short time at Moody. I know that if watching a movie in a room had been an option, we would have watched them every weekend, simply because it is the easiest form of entertainment--but, it is not relational, it is not creative, and that was one of the best parts about Moody. We could have sat in a room together and stared at a screen whenever we wanted a break from life, but that would not have helped me explore their hearts and learn the volumes that I did from hour after hour of conversation and treasured memories. If people really need to see a movie, there are plenty of options (off campus, theater)--good. But I think that bringing them into the dorms will dilute community life and tamper with the precious, unique gathering of undergraduates in the dorms.

I know that I have a different appreciation for the rules now that I am removed and so deeply missing those times with 'my girls.' Moody is a very unique school...that's a very good thing.

Lindsay Mitchell

2006-04-27T12:03:00.000-07:00

The Habits of our Hearts
By Rosalie de Rosset

In another talk which probably many of you have heard, I give the following example. When I was in high school in the sixties, I went around with a little blue transistor radio glued to my head. I had discovered pop music, and it had its grip on me. As I moved from crush to crush, heat to heat, including my history teacher, band director and a boy called Eddie, I sang the songs that brought them to mind. I knew all the words—Johnnie Angel, how I love him, how I tingle when he passes by, every time he says hello, my heart begins to fly.

When I sat in study hall, in Eddie’s line of vision, and he wouldn’t even look my way, I went home and agonized to the tune of Simon and Garfunkel’s I am a Rock, I am an Island, and a Rock never cries, and an Island feels no pain. In 1964, the Beatles arrived. By then, my longing was for a boy named Frank, and with the Beatles, I wanted to hold his hand. In youth group we sang some dumb songs: Do Lord, oh do Lord, oh do remember me. Kumbaya my Lord, Kumbaya. We sat around the campfire part of the time and cast our twigs into the fire and warbled, It only takes a spark to get a fire going. Not exactly poetic wonders. No one sings them now.

But the little blue radio was not ALWAYS on though I would have liked it to be, and in my home and in my church there were historians, keepers of the gate, guardians of my soul….those who understood that people my age (your age now) should not run the format of a church or institution exclusively or be the only measure of what is valuable. These were the people who understood that time teaches us the measure of what is best for us, and that modeling that restraint was crucial, that boundaries are not prison walls; in fact they may be controls for more creativity. These guardians made sure our inheritance was not forgotten or swallowed up by what seemed important in the sixties or at sixteen. The church and my parents were the keepers at the gate, the keepers of my mind, and finally of my soul. The job had been entrusted to them by God, and they took it seriously.

You also, are called upon to be keepers of the gate for the next generation of Christians, even of students who will follow after you. What will you leave them? Changes that simply felt good which didn’t count the cost. Patterns of taking what you wanted before you had a solid theological basis on which to found it since all of life is theological?

In the prophetic novel, Brave New World, Aldous Huxley paints a picture of a socially engineered society which values happiness, stability at any expense, and the new rather than the old. Huxley uses a character named John to point out the dangers of such a society. At one point in the story this character says to someone with whom he has been arguing, Yes, that’s just like you. Getting rid of everything unpleasant instead of learning to put up with it. Then he poses a question using Hamlet’s words: Whether tis better in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing them end them…But you don’t do either. Neither suffer nor oppose. You just abolish the slings and arrows. It’s too easy. What you need is something with tears for a change. Nothing costs enough here.

I have some questions for you today as you consider the issue at hand, an issue which is only a small part of a much larger philosophical question.

What is your philosophy and theology of leisure—and do you even have one? What we do in our leisure may affect us far more than what we do when we are self-consciously and purposefully studying our biblical texts and theology books. In leisure we are relaxed, inattentive and open.

What will be the ramifications of your decision for an institution such as Moody which has such a strong sense of mission and whose students are supposedly preparing for ministries which may be difficult and demand strong character? Are you operating as respectful guardians of what came before and what follows after?
Do you think you have the spiritual and intellectual maturity to engage in such substantial change?
Finally, do you understand the biblical injunction that we are our brother’s keeper? What is your responsibility for that group of students who genuinely can’t handle this rule change or are far too optimistic about their ability to handle it?

Christopher Lasch writes the following words in The Culture of Narcissism:

To live for the moment is the prevailing passion—to live for yourself, not for your predecessors or posterity. It is the waning of the sense of historical time—the erosion of any strong concern for posterity—that marks the end of the modern century and the beginning of the post-modern era. It hardly occurs to many of us to encourage ourselves and others to subordinate our needs and interests to those of others, to someone or some cause outside ourselves…at least not in our leisure…though we certainly preach it in our theology.
We tend to be in the business of changing things to meet our present needs, regardless of what that change may mean. And we do it with almost no sense of philosophical foundation. Low-church, evangelical Christians have little or no philosophy of leisure which makes us easily preyed upon and manipulated by the increasing exposure to popular culture which can lead us in Neil Postman’s words to “amuse ourselves to death.”
A student handed me a thoughtful, incisive paper recently which I thought deserved a place in this paper because he had said it so well.

FROM JAMES VENTRESS
There is so much more to this than merely DVD use or even the concepts of freedom and maturity although these are all part of it, he writes. He continues:. The first point to touch on is that of rules, since a rule change is the immediate and visible issue before us. Rules and laws are a form of discipline. All discipline comes in two forms: internal and external. This is a fact, from birth to death….Internal discipline is simply that rule that comes from within us. It is the power we have within to make us obey. The scope of this power and our resulting obedience is very limited, but it can be developed with practice and exercise helped along by rules.
The second form of discipline is external. This form exists as the laws and rules we live under in everyday society. We have laws in our nation, state, city, and family, and we here specifically live under the laws of the living Word of Jesus Christ and the rules of the Moody Bible Institute. The existence of this external discipline is one of the unpleasant facts of life. It is compulsory and usually non-negotiable even when we are allowed to participate in the democratic process that creates them. We live more easily with the internal discipline because this involves what we “ought” to do. This oughtness (as C.S.Lewis speaks of it) implies a suggestion to ourselves of a specific course of action or behavior that may be amended or wholly ignored. But external discipline often has the same good or desired result as internal discipline. The difference is that external discipline (because our will is not involved) is concerned with a “must” rather than an “ought.” External discipline demands a particular behavior precisely when the ought fails to do so. External discipline exists because internal discipline fails.

The relationship between internal and external, ought and must has direct relevance to our lives. The stronger our internal discipline is, the less we must rely on external discipline. In other words, the more our “ought” resembles the “must,” the better off we are, and the more superfluous the external law becomes for us
So what does this mean for us at Moody, asks this student? Some of you are clamoring to be given the freedom to do away with a rule, claiming to be mature enough to be able to live without it, when the most mature thing just may be to leave it in place. It is sometimes more character building to keep rules one does not agree with than to get rid of them. Especially if you do not have a philosophy of leisure, if you have not brought theology to bear on your thinking, have not considered the years ahead when you will no longer be here, but the change you made will. This sounds paradoxical, but there is wisdom in mistrusting our own ability to handle the freedom we give to ourselves. Any time people are given the ability to remove restrictions from themselves, they will invariably be tempted to do so. The easy road is a constant temptation. Why would we ever voluntarily make things hard on ourselves. The old Christian disciplines of denial and asceticism are strange to us; we do not even know the rich gifts they may impart, because we are not curious, nor have we paused long enough to consider just how they could change our lives for the better, perhaps in the words of Amy Carmichael, habits of the heart that make us mountaineers instead of picnicers on the lower slope.

2006-04-26T15:04:00.000-07:00

Bryan Litfin’s argument for changing the DVD policy
April 26th, 2006

Shortly you will be faced with a choice. You will have the opportunity to vote on whether or not to allow movies in the dorms. Your resident supervisor informs me that all you are voting on is the general principle here. If the student body should decide to allow movie watching, the exact format it would take is still up in the air. Apparently there is room for compromise or a "middle ground" between the extremes of no movies at all, or a completely unfettered movie-watching environment. I think that is a good thing because in the real world, moral decisions are not always black and white. That's why there has been such vigorous debate on campus about this matter.
My purpose in being here today is to help you as much as I can in this decision-making process. Let me say up front that my sincere desire is to aid your thinking in that process, not to dictate an answer to you. I truly feel a pastoral love for you students. I am honored to be a teacher among you, and I want to provide counsel to you now if you are willing to hear it.
What are some of the arguments I have heard about the movie issue? Let me name a few, and comment on them.
First, we can dispense with the ridiculous argument that "People are secretly watching movies already." But since when do we make our ethical decisions based on the people who are disregarding the rules now in place? This argument simply says we should lower the bar to excuse the rule-breakers. Clearly, that's bogus.
A related form of this argument makes more sense: "We are already allowed to do this off campus, so why not on?" We should note here that MBI has recognized not all movies at all times are evil. So the issue is not movies per se, but the context in which they are watched. I think one could make a compelling case that we do have a reason to be distinctive in our behavior as a campus community. It does not automatically follow that our on- and off-campus requirements should be identical. At the same time, we should acknowledge that if movies can be good off campus, there might be ways they could serve a good purpose on campus as well.
Third, there is the argument that "People might watch bad or sinful movies." No question, if that were occurring it would not be good. But this argument highlights for me the crux of the matter, and that is: Each movie watching event must be evaluated individually. Some might be sinful, others not. These are exactly the kinds of things you, as young adults and ministry leaders, should be sorting through. In general we should not make blanket policies, but rather ask ourselves in each moment, "Does this particular action please Christ?" More on that in a moment.
Fourth, I have heard it said that "Movies will detract from floor community or intellectual life." I agree that this very well could be the case. But as with the previous argument, it will not always be the case. Again, my view here is that movies are not a "black and white, either-or" situation. Life is rarely like that. Movie night in a dorm room could be a great community builder which stimulates the mind (with the right kind of film); or it could result in some hermit hiding in a room wasting his or her time. I repeat: I think you're capable of wrestling through such choices with one another. I'm open to allowing some risk, and even failure, as you struggle to make your choices in a godly way.
Finally, there is the "weaker brother" argument. In other words, someone might have a conviction about movies, and you might cause them to stumble (1 Cor. 8). Once again, I agree this is a real concern. But my response would be that the solution is not, by policy, to exclude movies. Rather, you should handle each problem on a case by case basis. I can envision a time in which you might be given liberty to watch movies, but yet you choose to radically limit your movie-watching freedom out of respect for a weaker brother. Then, your moral choices would be being guided not by an SLG rule from above, but by biblical principles applied to a difficult decision in the real world. This, I suggest, is exactly as it should be.
No doubt there are other arguments, but these are a few I've heard. Now, you have to cast your vote, and so I should too. Today I will stand here and give you Litfin's view of the matter. The main thing I want you to hear from me is this: "We don't make moral choices based on rules, but on whether the action pleases our beloved, precious Savior and Lord." If we aren't passionate about loving the Lord, what good are the rules? It has to come from a soft heart. We will never go wrong if our spirits are so captured by the love of Christ that to do anything displeasing to him would be repugnant to us as well. Such sacred love and passion for holiness is what should guide our moral choices.
Therefore, I do not think there should be an absolute rule prohibiting movies. If you should vote to allow them in the dorms, I hope the policy you put in place will have as its centerpiece an explicit statement about your desire to honor the Lord Jesus. For example, I don't know that this would work, but if you were to genuinely open each movie-watching moment on the floor with a simple prayer that your hearts would be soft to the whisperings Jesus, that he would be invited into the room with you, and that the Spirit would convict you if necessary, I suggest no bad movie watching would occur on campus. With that aura of holiness, with that divine invitation, only good things would take place.
I want to close by saying one more thing. I'm not being idealistic or naïve, and I know there are exceptions to what I am about to say. But it is my true and heartfelt belief that you Moody students are some of the most godly, passionate, on-fire college students in America today. I believe you are the future of the church. And so I believe you are capable of making your own movie-watching decisions. I know your heart's desire (though we all squelch it at times) is to serve your Lord with exactly the kind of fervor I just described. I believe when people call you to higher things, you not only respond, you go further. In fact, often you are the ones doing the calling. I am proud of you, I am humbled by you, and truly, I love to work in your midst. I think that if the school gives you the freedom to watch movies, most of you will do so in a Christ-pleasing way. No doubt, some among you who have less maturity will do it wrong, and will experience detriment. But then others will come along side, and you will help each other grow.
Students, let Paul's words in Philippians 3 be your guide, not just in movies, but in everything. He writes, "I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish in order that I may gain Christ…that I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained it, or have already become perfect, but I press on in order that I may lay hold of that for which also I was laid hold of by Christ Jesus. Brethren (students!), I do not regard myself as having laid hold of it yet; but one thing I do: forgetting what lies behind, and reaching forward to what lies ahead, I press on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus." Thanks for letting me share.