To draw meaning; a way of reading scripture

In Today’s Speaking to the Soul on the Episcopal Café’ web site Lowell Graham speaks about the differences in the resurrection stories we have in the Gospels. Near the end of his comments he says “I'm satisfied to read with devotion the various accounts … to draw meaning from it all, and not to get too exercised over the unknowable question of ‘what really happened’ in detail.” (Emphasis mine.) I’m pleased to see the author make this comment because both the literalists, on one side of the coin, and the atheists on the other side loose sight of this concept. In the Old Testament story of Jonah and the whale (fish), for example, the literalists will say that this actually happened as it is written and the atheist will look at both the story and the reaction of the literalist and say, “How can you be so gullible; this could not have possibly happened.” What both points of view tend to loose sight of is the truth that God wants us to take from the story; namely that when God tells us to do something we had better do it. This method of reading the scriptures “…to draw meaning from it all”; reading with the eyes of faith would be more productive than mounting the unnecessary and untenable defenses of taking all scripture literally. That and the more liberal Christians (echoing the atheists) would not have to say, “How can you be so naive.” and we could get on with the real work that needs to be done, loving God and people and all that that entails.      

Difference

This is a quote from Wikipedia about Mitt Romney and his time at Bain Capital:
"Bain Capital's leveraged buyouts sometimes led to layoffs, either soon after acquisition or later after the firm had left.^{[55][48][60][61]} How jobs added compared to those lost due to these investments and buyouts is unknown, due to a lack of records and Bain Capital's penchant for privacy on behalf of itself and its investors.^[66][67][68] In any case, maximizing the value of acquired companies and the return to Bain's investors, not job creation, was the firm's fundamental goal, as it was for most private equity operations.^[61][69] Bain Capital's acquisition of Ampad exemplified a deal where it profited handsomely from early payments and management fees, even though the subject company itself ended up going into bankruptcy.^[48][62][69] Dade Behring was another case where Bain Capital received an eightfold return on its investment, but the company itself was saddled with debt and laid off over a thousand employees before Bain Capital exited (the company subsequently went into bankruptcy, with more layoffs, before recovering and prospering).^[66] Bain was among the private equity firms that took the most fees in such cases."^{[57][62]... (Above emphasis mine.)}


By 2010 and 2011, Romney and his wife were receiving about $21 million a year from investment income, of which about $3 million went to federal income taxes (based upon the beneficial rate accorded investment income by the U.S. tax code) and about $3.5 million to charity, including to the LDS Church.^[76][77] In 2010, the Romney family's Tyler Charitable Foundation gave out about $650,000, with some of it going to organizations that fight specific diseases.^[78]" 
That works out to a tax rate of 14.3%. Most of us pay more like 35% on unearned income.


We will have a choice for President of the United States between a man, who after graduation from Harvard Law School, could go to a large law firm and earn "BIG BUCKS" but who decided instead to be a community organizer in Chicago and work in low income areas and assist those who lived there. Or we can choose a man who ... well see above.

By What Authority

   In today's Speaking to the Soul from the web site Episcopal Cafe the author of the meditation states the question that the religious authorities of Jesus' time asked him in Mark 11:27-33. The question in the Contemporary English Version of the Bible puts it this way, "They asked, 'What right do you have to do these things? Who gave you this authority?' "(v.28). The author sets the scripture in context of first century society but then goes on to explain how this scripture can apply to today's society. Contextualizing and applying a sermon or meditation to our current lives are two things that any good sermon or meditation should do.
   So what does this meditation say to us today? To find out got to: http://www.episcopalcafe.com/thesoul/by_what_authority.html#more

The Church and the World

In today's (March 6, 2012) Episcopal Cafe web site under the Speaking to the Soul section there is a piece of excellent advice for the church, "The church is not prohibited from entering the world; the world is prohibited from entering the church, says Paul." The author takes this from today's epistle of I Corinthians 5:1-8. It is advice Paul is giving the 1st century church at Corinth but it is also good advice for today's church. It has been said that when we enter the church (building) we are entering a different realm/country and that the things of that other country are left behind and new loyalities are adopted. The loyalities to flags and what they represent are left behind and a loyality to the Cross and what it represents are adopted. The church then becomes a safe haven to acquire a new understanding of how to proceed through life's journey. But one cannot stay forever in the physical structure of the church. The world in which we live as individuals is outside those doors and the values obtained inside the church can conflict with some of the values outside the doors of the church. What to do? Is there really a question involved here? With the help of the Holy Spirit we can make the choice of what to do in this conflict of values by reflecting back to that time spent in the church and remember the loyalities learned there and move on with our lives based on that learning.

As I read the words written above it occurs to me that this is really Christian Life 101; but how often do we remember and act on what we have learned while inside the church? With a nudge of a reminder from the Holy Spirit perhaps we can do better.

You can read all of today's meditation by going to:

http://www.episcopalcafe.com/thesoul/living_in_the_new_community.html#more

God Tells Joseph to Create a Federal Program

Today's (March 5, 2012) author, in the section Speaking to the Soul on the Episcopal Cafe site, speaks of God directing Joseph to develop a "federal" program to feed the people of Egypt during the upcoming famin that he predicted by way of a dream from God. Government, and religion mixed; can that be!? The author in today's meditation makes a good case for that. You can read what he has to say by pasting the following link into your browser:

http://www.episcopalcafe.com/thesoul/god_tells_joseph_to_create_a_f.html#more

The scripture reference is Genesis 41:46-57.

A Day in the Life

Yesterday's (Wednesday 2-29-12) meditation "A Day In The Life" from the web site The Episcopal Cafe under the section Speaking to the Soul had two ideas that were reinforced for me. One was how we could arrange our day; that is arrange it in the same way Jesus did. First by prayer in the morning and then to have the "... Father send us out to do the work you have given us to do..." in the words of the Post Communion Prayer.

The second idea that was reinforced was the, "... teaching message..." of Jesus. The author of the meditation says that Jesus' message was threatening to the religious and political authorities. He says, "He [Jesus] teaches of a society, culture and economy motivated by the virtues of compassion, love, generosity and equality --- a society that overturns all of the power and authority of the established orders."

The balance of Lowell Grisham's meditation is available at: http://www.episcopalcafe.com/thesoul/a_day_in_the_life.html

Subject to authority - really?

The attached commentary is from the web site Episcopal Cafe. It talks about that infamous section in Romans by Paul about being subject to authority. Although the post doesn't use the word context the author speaks to it as he sets what Paul has to say in context. I mention this because it is the Literalists who choose to ignore the setting of scripture when espousing the supremacy of civil authority.

The link to the article is here: http://www.episcopalcafe.com/thesoul/be_subject_to_the_governing_au.htm