When the status quo no longer results in the status quo

Jeffrey Simpson has an interesting column in today's Globe, citing the work of economist Pierre Fortin in suggesting that by 2020, it will cost the federal government about $40 billion more than present to deliver the same standard of programming, simply as a result of the changing demographics.

I intend to dig deeper into Prof. Fortin's work but the conversation dovetails with some of the concerns I intend raise during my remarks at the release of Cardus' paper on investing in Canada's civic core on Thursday. At the heart of the debate is that the fact that we are deluding ourselves if we think that sticking with the status quo will provide us a status quo standard of living; we need to rethink the roles of various social institutions in Canada (including those of the charitable sector) if Canadians are going to continue to enjoy the standards of living we take for granted today.

Harper's Secret Agenda

In politics, little can be taken at face value. In part, it's the nature of the beast. The currency traded in the political arena is power and influence and like the more traditional type of currency, you can only do things when you have currency in your bank account to spend. Everything you do in the political arena either increases or spends this political capital, so it makes sense to analyze political actions in this context. And given that people don't like to be manipulated nor do most voters enjoy politics, it is the pundits and bloggers who cynically analyze everything in terms of political currency, even as politicians try to talk policy. The old political adage is true - "Talk policy, do strategy."

A quick glance at the opinion columns today, as summarized by Nationalnewswatch headlines Jeffrey Simpson's "The Tories Secret: They want an Election" followed by Lawrence Martin's column in the same vein. There are also several columns documenting some of the Liberals internal woes. The following quote from Martin provides the flavour:

Stephen Harper keeps insisting he doesn’t want an election. He repeated it yesterday when delivering an economic update in New Brunswick.

But down deep, is that what he is really thinking? The way the scales have tipped in his favour the last few weeks, he finds himself in position to make a good run for a majority government.

We shouldn’t be surprised, given his craftiness, if he brings forward measures that make it extremely difficult for the New Democrats — the only party propping up his government — to continue to support him.

So putting it all together, the upshot is that the Liberals say they want an election but really don't. The Conservatives say they don't want an election but really do. Both are saying what they are because to tell what they really want will be painted as weakness and failing to do their job as either the government (which is to focus on the economy in these times) or as opposition (who are supposed to provide an alternative to the government.) Really it all amounts to a sad commentary on our political discourse and the way the partisan game is played. I suspect it has most always been so.

On that note, it's time to head for the airport and fly to Ottawa for a series of Cardus meetings, but also the benefit of spending some time with political friends where dissecting these games becomes a popular pastime.

A Marriage Like your Parents?

Amidst my readings this weekend, I came across a stat (admittedly dated since the book was published in 1991) that startled me. It was a quote from

Douglas Coupland's Generation X: Tales for an Accelerated Culture

which indicated that 55% of American 18-29 year olds responded No to the question "Would you like to have a marriage like the one your parents had?" There are of course various ways to interpret this. Perhaps it reflects the idealism of youth, hoping that their generation will improve on those of the previous one. Perhaps it reflects a generation which places a greater value on marriage than their parents did. I fear, however, that it speaks to a generation in which many homes showed little evidence of the joys of a healthy marriage. It reminded me of that proverb I remember seeing on a wall-plate as a kid which ran something like, "The best way a father can show his love for his children is to love their mother." Worth pondering....


PS. blogging has been a bit sporadic last week and will continue that way this week as I am travelling again, this time to Ottawa for an exciting series of Cardus events. If opportunity arises I will update this page but my weekly target of at 3-4 posts is unlikely to be met.

Quick Hits....

In the midst of deadlines so not a whole lot of time to read the papers carefully, much less develop thoughtful blog responses, so a few quick thoughts on items that I noticed in the news today....

John Geddes in Macleans provides an analysis consistent with what has appeared on these pages over the past few years. With Quebec opting out of choosing which party takes office, majority governments are much more difficult to achieve. The battle lines for the next election will see an explicit appeal for a majority on the part of the Conservatives, which means trying to run against a Liberal-Socialist-Separatist coalition. The Tories are going to turn the "secret agenda" table on their foes.

Speaking of Quebec opting out, Chantal Hebert highlights how this may result in Quebec losing influence in the rest of the country and threatening our social union. Her analysis is very consistent with what Michael VanPelt and I predicted might happen in our Replacing the PanCanadian Consensus piece, published in Policy Options in 2006.

So 73% want to see Elizabeth May in the debates? Who cares? It was a farce for her to be in the last one and to put her in the next one will be even more of a farce. I do not agree with everything Tom Axworthy suggested in his Globe and Mail piece suggesting reform of the debates last week but items like this prompt me to agree that something radical is needed.

The Leader-Post today attempts to sort through the chicken-egg argument as to whether voters become uninterested because of today's duplicitous, self-interested politicians or did uninterested voters create today's duplicitous, self-interested politicians?" The issues are of course a bit more complex but it does remind me of what I am presently working on - a paper on Canada's civic core which I will be presenting next week in Ottawa. Among other things, I will be raising a different argument regarding how voter apathy might be addressed. Can't spill the beans now, but you are invited to join us if you are in the Ottawa area; details are on the Cardus website.

On October 1, 2009 we are pleased to present Renewing Canada’s Civic Core, an event presenting Cardus’ latest discussion paper looking at a strategic response to flagging volunteerism, philanthropy and civic participation.

The event will feature a presentation by Ray Pennings, Cardus Director of Research and Senior Fellow, and responses by:

• David Stewart-Patterson, Executive Vice-President, Canadian Council of Chief Executives
• Marcel Lauzière, President and CEO, Imagine Canada

Worth Pondering....

A few items I marked on the weekend as deserving further reflection....

From Os Guiness, Prophetic Untimeliness: A Challenge to the Idol of Relevance (Baker, 2003) p16:

"According to traditional wisdom, the past is the easist and most important part of time to understand, the present the most difficult, and the future quite impossible. But under the infulence of the modern world we have reversed this wisdom -- generally ignoring hte importance of the past, exaggerating our knowledge of the present, and presuming to speak accurately of the future when quite simply we can't."

From Gerald McDermott, One Holy and Happy Society: The Public Theology of Jonathan Edwards (Penn State Press, 1992), p 62:

"Jonathan Edwards spent his life pursuing the good and the beautiful, both of which he found in the union of intelligent beings devotged to being-in-general. All existence, he proposed, is based on proportion, which is the relations between two things, and beauty on proportions that exibit agreement--if you will, union-- of some sort. All earthly beauties are simply mirroros of the archetype of beauty, the heavinly union of beings in common consent to being-in-general. Union, therefore, is a signal quality of both teh beautiful and the good. Edwards even maintained that all true happiness-- even God's -- depends on affectionate union in a society: 'The happiness of the deity, as all other true happiness, consists in love and society.' (quote taken from Edwards' Treatise on Grace)"

From Pastor Hans Overduin, preaching on Phillipians 1:1-8 on Sept 20 in the Calgary Free Reformed Church (wording mine based on notes, and not exact quotes):

"Paul's letter to the Phillipians is one that drips with love and care and has the fragrance of Christ....(The opening verses) demonstrate his Christ-focused, thoughtful, thankful, prayerful, hopeful, and helpful attitude....The story is told of a group of missionaries attending their first mandarin class in preparation for going to China. The instructor entered the classroom and without saying a word, slowly walked up and down through the rows and then left the room. Shortly later, he returned and began by asking his students if they noticed anything as he first entered the classroom. Finally, one timid student answered that it seemed the instructor was wearing some sort of strong perfume. "In missions," the instructor replied, "your fragrance will be noticed before you speak a word of Chinese. 'Be imitators of me even as I am of Christ." (I Cor. 11.1)

The Whole and Heart of the Gospel

Comment today is publishing a piece which I have written which is a redux of a co-authored chapter that I have just submitted with Dr. Beeke for inclusion in a book that I expect will come out next year. This section provides a summary of various perspetives on the relationship between the church and culture that are expressed within Reformed circles today. Click here to read the entire Comment article.

So to summarize the discussion within Reformed circles today: The neocalvinist says the fundamental presuppositions underlying the debate need to be changed if we are to have meaningful engagement. The two kingdom perspective responds that it won't happen; when we try to engage in discussion, we end up calling things Christian that really aren't, resulting in pride and a misrepresentation of the gospel. The neopuritans say that that is why we should avoid a systemic approach; we should focus more on the individual needs of our neighbors and show them, both in ministries of mercy as well as by positive examples, that faith makes a difference. The Old Calvinists say that in all of this activity, we are losing our focus and getting dirty as we dig around in the garbage cans of culture to retrieve a penny or two of value from the bottom. We and our culture need heart-surgery, not band-aids.

Framing the camps in this way can emphasize the gaps and overlook the significant overlap that in practice one finds as people seek to balance their response to the practical tension that can emerge between gospel proclamation and seeking the peace of the city. I think more work needs to be done in developing a coherent public theology. I believe such a theology needs to be rooted in orthodox doctrine (truth matters, and cultural engagement that focuses on activity without core content inevitably leads astray); have a robust worldview that answers the questions our neighbours are asking (in other words, is less concerned about an agenda than responding to the needs and questions of those around us); has an ethic of integrity (our example is an important part of our witness and the institutional church with her offices must be as a bright light and example); and is lived with a pilgrimage spirit (which probably means more emphasis on the doctrines of providence and eschatology as everyday realities in the life of the believer.)

The NDPs About Face

So it appears the election is averted, at least for now, as the NDP's self preservation instincts prompt it to do a rather remarkable about face. While I have argued repeatedly on this page that self-interest politics on the part of all parties will coincide to delay the election until at least next spring, I thought the NDP had boxed themselves into a corner they could not with credibility get out of. As Chantal Hebert rightly observes in her column this morning, they may have got out of the corner but the amount of credibility they have retained is certainly in question.

Still, what should not be underestimated is the Conservatives self-interest in giving the NDP a chance to recover. There are many Conservative seats that can only be won with an appropriate Liberal - NDP vote split. Ironically, the funding formula which at least provides some motivatione to NDP voters in ridings which they never can win provide some incentive to vote NDP over the temptation to vote Liberal just to get rid of Harper. Providing some movement on policies that the NDP identify with, as EI, allows the NDP some time and cover to recover their standings. This of course will need to be done without any private deal to allow the Conservatives to continue their appeal for their majority by trying to run against a coalition of the opposition, but that is a job that is made easier by an NDP leader who has demonstrated the flexibility of his principles.

Dr. Cooper to Join Hamilton's Gallery of Disctinction

The Hamilton Spectator is reporting this morning that Dr. Justin Cooper, who has served as the President of Redeemer University in Hamilton, Ontario, has been one of six persons named to be inducted into the Hamilton Gallery of Distinction this fall. The Gallery, which is located in the Hamilton Convention Centre, displays a portrait of each inductee and is a permanent record and acknowledgement of the outstanding achievements of these very special people.

I first met Dr. Cooper in the late eighties and our paths have crossed many times since. In the past few years, we have been priviledged to work closely with each other in our respective capacities at Redeemer. There is little doubt that Dr. Cooper has played an instrumental role in helping Redeemer establish its academic credibility and take a respected place in Ontario's post-secondary community, not an easy climate at all for a Christian university. Dr. Cooper has also been extensively involved in the Hamilton community.

Congratulations Dr. Cooper. It is a well-deserved honour.

Friends as a Benefit of Service

For over twenty-five years, I have served continously on at least board or committee, and usually in two or three positions simultaneously. These have ranged from community groups (such as a minor baseball association, a community editorial board, political parties and campaign groups) to educational groups (at an elementary, secondary, post-secondary, and sectoral level); work groups (government agencies, department committees, industry assocation groups, event planning committees, and boards of corporations) and church groups (from a local church to a synodical level). It's quite a range and given that some of the groups are quite large (the Redeemer board on which I presently serve numbers 30; the FRC Synod of which I serve as clerk numbers about 45 at its meetings) and given the turnover every year, my guess is that I have served with well over 500 people over the years.

There is obviously quite a range in such a group and it would be misleading to imply that all those you serve with on boards become life-long friends and acquaintances. Still, having just spent the weekend hosting friends who I came to know as a result of a shared board experience 20 years ago, and who have been close friends ever since, it is remarkable to reflect on how such friendships develop. Having "done stuff"together, we learned about each others' passions and strengths (and yes, we also learn about the others' dislikes and weaknesses) and even though it has been a half dozen years since we worked on a project together, we were able to connect on such a wide range of issues prompted by the shared passions that brought us to the same organization in the first place. The result is we can talk comfortably about faith and family, vocation and volunteering, our passions and pleasures with a comfort level that defies the differences which one might ordinarily expect to divide us.

There are a good many of those who my wife and I count as friends today who we really came to know through one or the other of us working on a committee or board. Many of them come from very different perspectives, cultural and religious backgrounds, than we do (often a barrier to friendship). Shared passions and joint service translate into friendship that lasts much longer than the board term. Doing research on Canada's shrinking civic core in preparation for the release of a major Cardus study later this month, I could not help reflect that in a society in which loneliness seems often complained about, joining a board or committee not only is an avenue to work together for good on a worthwhile project or cause, but also a way to build relationships and friendships that are likely to extend far beyond.

9/11 memories and St. Paul's Chapel

Like most people, I can vividly remember September 11 eight years ago. I had already been in my office in Mississauga, working for a bit when one of my colleagues came into the building (which was practically adjacent to Pearson Airport in Toronto) telling us of the news reports that a plane had just flown into the World Trade Center. We turned on the TV in the office and the rest of the morning was spent learning together what might have been, being introduced to people and organizations we had scarcely heard of like Bin Laden and al Queda, and panicing along with everyone else about everyone we knew who worked in New York downtown (which it turns out even in an office of 20 or so people in Toronto, was quite a few people.) By noon we decided there was no point in staying at work and we all went home to our families and I drove the 65 km amazed at the empty skies and trying to sort out in my own mind what this all meant. I knew it was significant but truthfully, hardly understood its significance that day.

As I sit down to write this, two stories connected to 9/11 jump to mind. Todd Beamer was just a few years younger than I, travelled regularly as I do and when the details of his family relationship became public, had many aspects about him that caused me to identify with him. I suppose it was his story which brought home to my mind in a poignant way "It could just as easily have been me" -- something we all realize at a certain theoretical level but can hit home at a very different level. When at a conference at Wheaton college a few years ago, my wife and I ended up sharing a cafeteria table with a faculty member and, when asking about how the events of 9/11 were experienced on the campus, heard some first hand stories that reinforced the reality of the impact in ordinary lives. It is easy to read about the coverage today and think of the event in political or social terms, but it is important to remember the many families today who are not grieving the political events but the sudden loss of a father or sister, parent or child from their lives.

The other is the story of St. Paul's church. I heard of it at the time but my colleague Peter Menzies brought the story to life for me in a talk he gave in Hamilton a few years back. Manhattan's oldest church across from the World Trade Center, miraculously spared from destruction, becomes a base for volunteers, a place for rest in the midst of the chaos, and provides many cups of cold water to those who need it. I can't find an on-line account of the story with the inspirational details that Peter provided, but even National Geographic catches something of it in the following piece:

Opening the door to enter St. Paul’s was an extraordinary experience; except for a layer of ash and soot, the building survived unscathed. Many proclaimed that “St. Paul’s had been spared.” It seemed clear to me that if this was true, it was not because we were holier than anyone who died across the street; it was because we now had a big job to do.

Part of my to-do list for today includes writing a short piece for an upcoming publication Cardus is doing in our Stained Glass Urbanism project. Much of the work we have done in this project has drawn attention on the good for others that the church provides in our modern city -- good which frequently go unnoticed and unappreciated. However, as I think of St. Paul's standing amidst the rubble, I think of the power the church has just by being there. Whenever I see a skyline with a steeple penetrating through, I am reminded to look up, that earthly calculations are not all matter, and that one cannot make sense of life just looking horizontally.

The church has an important place in society not just by what she does (although a healthy church will do a great deal that impacts society for good) but by what she is. As the NG writer notes, it isn't because church members are holier. Sadly and to our shame, we aren't. Spend any time in religious circles and you discover that your high expectations are often disappointed, and at their best, you will find a community of sinners saved by grace, but sinners still.

The churches critics will often point out the hypocricy that one can find in religious circles and sadly, there is plenty of evidence for them to point to. But as the sudden spike in attendance after 9/11 provided evidence, human beings need something more than earthly explanations to sort out the challenging issues of life. (Attendance the week after 9/11 spiked to 47% of Americans; four months later it had reverted to pre-9/11 numbers also proving how short lived our spiritual attention spans can be.)

The continued existence of the church is a testimony of the grace that continues to exist in the world. And while the church understood as the body of believers cannot really be seen, church buildings are a symbol representing and reminding society of their existence. In a sense, every steeple is a reminder of grace. And so, when I think of St. Paul's standing across from the rubble of 9/11, I think of a powerful message of grace in the midst of brokenness, something that provides perspective as we reflect on the events of eight years ago and how it has changed the way we live.

Coming soon to a Ballot Box Near You

The attack lines are being tested for the upcoming campaign and both the Conservatives and Liberals will be running against the scariness of the other guy winning. The Conservatives have not been coy about raising the coalition as evidence of the Liberals wanting power at any cost (even joining up with the socialists and the separatists if that is what it takes.) Given the reality of poll number which suggest that without a dramatic change, the Liberals will have a hard time finding the seats for even a minority, look for Harper to make the issue a prominent one and directly appeal for a majority, as he did to a Conservative crowd in Sault St. Marie last week.

However, the Liberals obviously still think that there are enough Canadians who are afraid enough of Mr. Harper and the prospect of him having a majority, that they are prepared to run against him having a majority, hoping to benefit from strategic voting on the left at the expense of the NDP. The very fact that they leaked a speech of Harpers video to the CBC in which the "controversial" newsworthy line was that Harper outrightly said he needed a majority demonstrates they think there is traction in raising the possiblity of a Conservative majority as a reason to vote Liberal.

So it is shaping up to be an "Vote for me to keep the other guys from getting power" campaign. Not exactly inspiring stuff. Greg Weston suggests this morning it all may lead to another record low voter turnout. I hope not, but he may be right.

Election Silliness

It seems that a federal election is inevitable, given the positioning of the various parties, although I remain convinced that the only person who will gain from the exercise is likely to be Gilles Duceppe. The BQ numbers in Quebec (and more importantly, the negative numbers towards both Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff) will likely result in an increase in Bloc seats, which by defination, makes a majority for either the Conservatives or Liberals less likely. The person in the worst position right now is Jack Layton who stands to lose seats, and is vulnerable to the "strategic voting" appeal by the Liberals who will be calling on all progressives to join with them and get rid of Stephen Harper who they genuinely do hate. The downside of this appeal is that most of them do not really care for Ignatieff either.

The Conservatives are gearing up to run against the coalition while the Liberals are testing their "think big" and global themes but at the end of the day, in English Canada the ballot question is likely to come down to a variation on "who do you want to be the PM" question. Predicting the outcome seems foolish as we have learned from previous campaigns that the five week writ period does really make a difference. But admittedly, for both Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff, it is a big risk. If voters blame either for putting their selfish and partisan ambitions ahead of the country (and the Liberals will certainly claim that last fall's move to cut party financing was such a move, just as the Conservatives will claim the calling of this election is such a move), there is a potential for a tide swing of momentum and an en masse decision on the part of the "mushy middle" of the electorate to vote for a majority. The leader who is on the wrong end of that is going to have a very short post-election career.

So it ends up being an election whose call will almost certainly advance the cause of the Bloc, end the career of either Mr. Harper or Mr. Ignatieff (although if Jeffrey Simpson is right this morning, intellectuals can't make it in politics without compromising themselves anyway), and lessen the political process in the minds of most every Canadian. The only out I see to avoid the election is the Conservatives putting together a EI package that Mr. Layton can sign on to and avoid the election. Apart from a variation of that scenario, it is hard to see how we can avoid going into a fall campaign, as silly and pointless as it seems at this time.

All Education is Public

Another academic year is starting. I suppose my interest in education mirrors that of most parents. From kindergarten through high school, our son was enrolled in various forms of Christian education and in addition to the personal parental involvement of helping with homework, meeting with teachers, etc., both my wife and I have been involved in the operations of the schools with which we were associated, both of us having served on boards and committees. In my wife's case, it also includes having volunteered extensively during the school days and in the past few years, serving in a paid administrative capacity at the school. In our family, school was not just an institution to which we subscribed for the provision of certain educational services but rather a community in which we became members of and took part in.

Our son is now enrolled in university so it might seem that I no longer have personal "skin in the game" when it comes to the issues of elementary and secondary schooling. However, I take issue with that conclusion. While parental choice and involvement is an essential part of education -- and I would argue the comparative lack of parental skin in the game is a real downside of general public education -- education is a public good and deserves the interest, support and involvement of all citizens, whether they have school age children or not. Unfortunately, the terminology "public" and "private" schools is understood in reference to the funding structures of the schooling and, as a Calgary Herald editorial rightly pointed out on the weekend, the debates surrounding this issue are usually based on faulty logic and facts.

Education is for life and we all benefit when our neighbour's child is educated, better equipping him or her to be a contributing member of the economy, an informed and responsible citizen, and someone able to engage in civil society. When an educated person is able to contribute to a scientific discovery, write a thought-provoking article, or work alongside me as a valued team member or as a friendly neighbour, my life is enriched by their education.

At the start of a new school year, let's applaud and support all those who are involved in educating children and value what they do, recognizing that our shared life together is being shaped by what happens in classrooms today.

Labour Day Thoughts on Vocation

On this labour day, I thought I would share some reflections on vocation and calling. Answering the question "What work should I be pursuing?" is not simply a question to be asked by young people considering their careers but is, I believe a question that should be asked throughout life as we seek to serve and find positions in life which utilizes our gifts, provides meaning and satisfaction, and glorifies God.

It should be noted that I have presented / published variations on the attached five questions in several settings over the years. My thoughts on this subject were immensely helped by a presentation I heard Gordon Smith present fifteen or so years ago.

1. What are my gifts?

An honest self-assessment of one’s gifts is the logical place to start in sorting through sort of work God would have you do. Paul warned Timothy to “neglect not the gift that is in thee” (I Timothy 4:14) and spoke of himself that he “was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God” (Eph. 3:7). We should not just think of gifts as spiritual. Our so-called “natural gifts”, be they physical, mental or social, and need to be cultivated. Sometimes they are not immediately evident and can be more clearly seen by others than by ourselves. It is evident from Exodus 31 that Bazaleel and Aholiab were called to be the lead craftsman on the tabernacle and had been equipped with special aptitude for his assignment. This calls for honesty, and sometimes-difficult conversation, as we need to discover ourselves as we really are and not what we wish we were.

2. What is my passion?

Our passions – those things we love – are also gifts of God and need to be considered as we seek to discern our calling. One person may see the beauty of the apple tree while another is caught up with the mystery of the raven’s flight. God, being infinite and all knowing, derives pleasure and satisfaction from both, but He has given different people different passions, just as he provides a different beauty to the tulip than he does to the oak tree. For the tree-admirer to become an arborist and the bird-watcher an apiarist is not a failure on the part of either. It is an acknowledgement of the passions which God has given to each of his creatures, and it brings glory to God, for us to pursue our respective passions.

One of the principles guiding our view of work is that we need to derive satisfaction and see meaning in our work. Following that principle suggests pursuing areas about which we can get excited and express love and passion.

3. What is my temperament?

In addition to gifts and passions, one needs to assess their temperament. Our personalities suit us to some vocations over others. Someone who has difficulty dealing with diversity well is not likely to successfully practice conflict management; no matter how skilled they are in mediation or how much satisfaction they can derive from achieving reconciliation between former adversaries. Someone without patience is not likely to be a successful medical researcher, no matter what their understanding of biology or their passion for fighting disease. The Lord equips his people with the abilities, passions, and temperaments to suit their callings.

4. How is the Lord opening and closing the doors of providence?

But neither should we reduce the issue of calling to a matter of personal analysis. The Lord provides opportunity, sometimes in the most unexpected manners. David may have thought his accurate slingshot was evidence of his calling as a shepherd, but God was in fact preparing him for leadership. Joseph, on the other hand, thought his calling was that of leadership. Hadn’t God himself made this clear through dreams in his youth? Yet for many years, we can only imagine what went through his mind as providence placed him as a servant in a foreign household or a prison guard. The doors of providence open and close in ways we cannot always make sense of, yet we know that our calling takes place within this context.

Few would describe Israel’s exile in Babylon in positive terms, yet Jeremiah writing to these exiles writes: “Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, unto all that are carried away captives, whom I have caused to be carried away from Jerusalem unto Babylon; Build ye houses, and dwell in them; and plant gardens, and eat the fruit of them; Take ye wives, and beget sons and daughters; and take wives for your sons, and give your daughters to husbands, that they may bear sons and daughters; that ye may be increased there, and not diminished. And seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the Lord for it: for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace.” (Jeremiah 29:4-7).

5. What are the needs of the kingdom?

Choosing a career (which in our times is usually shaped by the preceding decision of choosing an educational path) should not be made based only on an assessment of ourselves. We are not on this earth to serve ourselves or maximize our own position in life but to serve God. Although God often aligns our own passions and to lead us, we must also take into account the broader needs of the church and community in which we are live. Is there a shortage in a particular occupation in which you have gifts? Are there occupations which provide opportunity for strategic influence in society in which you might be used by God for greater good? It is to be feared that sometimes when opportunities to serve the Lord in difficult places like Nineveh come up, we rationalize our ways out of like Jonah to find a more comfortable assignment. If our eating and drinking is to be done to God’s glory (I Cor. 7:10), then the full array of vocations are ones which Christian young men and women should consider serving as the Lord equips them.

In a sermon on I Corinthians 10:31, “Let every man abide in that calling, wherein he was called,” the Puritan William Perkins described as “wickedness” the notion of someone using his vocation “for himself, seeking wholly his own, and not the common good. Every man for himself, and God for us all, is wicked, and is directly against the end of every calling or honest kind of life.”

No formula of questions is going to provide easy answers but prayerfully and honestly considered in light of God’s word, these questions provide a starting point. We must remember to not approach this subject with our predetermined answers based on earning potential, prestige, or other expectations but be prepared to serve God in corners of His wide kingdom you had not even imagined.

Rev. H. Overduin of Calgary

Last evening, our congregation was joined by friends from at least seven other Free Reformed Churches (Langley, Chilliwack, Monarch, Lacombe, Brantford, St. George, Mitchell) to witness the installation of Rev. Hans Overduin as our first pastor. The installation event was compared by several of the speakers to a wedding where a pastor and congregation are officially joined together.

The installation service was led by Rev. Jack Schoeman, our church's counsellor, who described his feelings as those of "the father of the bride," given his role in the establishment of the Calgary FRC. His sermon was based on Acts 18:9-10, " ⁹Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: ¹⁰For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city." A few notes on his sermon in outline form.

The Lord Encourages Paul at Corinth.

1. He Issues a Clear Command;

a. "Be Not afraid." Fear is human and a natural response to difficult circumstances. Paul was often afraid in the context of his ministry (cf I Cor 2:3)

b. "Speak and Hold not your peace." A positive corrollary focused on Paul's task of preaching. Preaching is essential in the work of gathering God's church and God says of Corinth, and it can also be applied to Calgary, "I have much people in this city."

2. He Provides a Comforting Assurance

a. Of His Presence, "I am with you." This is spoken by Jesus as Ascended King of Kings who has been given all power in heaven and in earth. His presence is a meaningful presence.

b. Of His Protection, "no man shall set on you to hurt you." God does not promise to prevent hardship from occuring, but promises protection in the face of hardship.

c. Of His Plan, "I have much people in this city."

3. He Elicited a Believing Response

Paul spent 18 months in Corinth ( a comparative lengthy time in the context of Paul's stays in cities during his missionary journeys) and his preaching was richly blessed. Although the church at Corinth had many difficulties, it was a true church of the Lord. The proclamation of the word of God had rich effect.

After the installation sermon, the Form for the Installation of Ministers of God's Word, a form which has its origins in the Synod of Dordtrecht 1618-1619, was read and Rev. Overduin answered the questions asked of him with "Yes, truly, with all my heart." The congregation sang from Psalter 431:1,2,4,5 and Rev. Overduin climbed the pulpit. I found vs 4 of this Psalter particularly moving as it is a versification of Psalm 81:10, "Open thy mouth wide and I will fill it," the text on which the earliest sermon I can recalling hearing the then Student Overduin preach in Hamilton during the late eighties. That sermon made a deep impression on me and I recall citing it once in a letter I sent at that time to a committee, urging perseverance in the face of challenging circumstances. I can no longer quote precisely but the image that stands out is that of birds in the nest, with open mouths, waiting to be fed. Such, urged the then Student Overduin, ought to be our expectation on God.

Last night, his sermon was on I Corinthians 16:9, "For a great door and effectual is opened unto me, and there are many adversaries." Speaking under the theme, "Tremendous Gospel Opportunity in the Context of Much Danger," Rev. Overduin used the first part of his sermon to explain the text in its context. This seems an unusual text to use in an installation service since Paul used this as an argument for staying in Ephesus rather than going to a new place, yet "whereever faithful gospel ministry takes place, this text is reality." There are many texts in scripture in which the door is used as a metaphor for opportunity, however the inevitable connection between that opportunity and adversaries should not be overlooked. "Wherever the work of God begins, there you can expect opposition. Satan does not sit still at the advance of the gospel cause."

In his second point, Rev. Overduin expanded on a three-fold application of this text for our present situation. First, the text allowed him to take up his ministry in Calgary with a joyful hope. "I come trusting that God will use HIs word to build up a faithful congregation as a bright light of witness here in Calgary." Second, the text provokes us as pastor and congregation together to a watchful care. The adversaries that will attack our young church include a loss of the first love and zeal that have characterized this congregation in its early days; divisions and strife, majoring in minors instead of the majors; losing our vision as a church and becoming content and comfortable with ourselves. The third application Rev. Overduin highlighted was a "steadfast diligence." He concluded: "Paul was not put to shame in his ministry where God had sent him, and neither will we, God helping us."

(Rev. C. Pronk and Rev. H. Overduin)

The sermon was followed by a series of addresses. Rev. Overduin began with some personal words and then Rev. C. Pronk, the "dean" of active FRC ministers addressed him on behalf of Synod. Rev. Pronk noted the encouraging and expectant way that Rev. Overduin began his ministry and asked whether sometimes in the Reformed tradition, we have too small expectations. Perhaps at a time like this, we should pray that "in addition to being known for the Stampede, Calgary may be known as the place where God was pleased for revival to break out! Let us have great thoughts of God!"

Rev. Pronk was followed by Rev. J. Lewis of the Lacombe FRC, Rev. H. Vanderwoerd of the Lethbridge United Reformed Church,; Rev. W. Koenen of the Fort Macleod Heritage Reformed Preaching Station and Deacon Marty Zylstra of the Chilliwack FRC, the church from which Pastor Overduin has just come.

The evening concluded with Pastor Overduin pronouncing the benediction on the congregation and the enthusiatic singing of Psalter 239:1,2:

Zion on the holy hills,

God, thy Maker, loves thee well;

All thy courts His presence fills,

He delights in thee to dwell.

Wondrous shall thy glory be,

City blest of God, the Lord;

Nation shall be born in thee,

Unto life from death restored.

Election Posturing?

So the Liberals are ready to force an election this fall, the Conservatives don't think it is a good idea, and the NDP are ready to deal. I've been too busy to read all of the op-eds on this matter but for what it's worth, my reactions and guess as to what the leaders are really thinking.

Mr. Ignatieff realizes that threatening an election and then backing off again, as they did in January and again in the late spring, is beginning to brand him a ditherer, and so figures risking an electi0n this fall that may not be ideal for him, is still a better option than allowing the ditherer label to stick. It is also his way to wedge between himself and the NDP. There is some room to grow on the left from both NDP and Bloc voters who truly hate Harper, and so by forcing the NDP to make a choice that has real consequences (as opposed to announcing opposition to a budget they had not read, realizing the Liberals held the cards anyway), he is betting Mr. Layton is going to get cold feet. I still hold to the conviction that rhetoric notwithstanding, Liberals can read polls as well as anyone and deep down do not want an election which all things being equal, is a crapshoot for them to win a minority government.

Mr. Layton realizes he needs to counter this Liberal assault on his support constituency. His preferred option was coalition government with more like-minded Liberals but since Mr. Ignatieff appears not to want to go down that path anymore, cutting a deal with the Tories and allowing the Conservatives to survive til spring 2010 (a) gives him some results to claim with NDP voters and shows he can make a difference with both Liberal governments (the 2004 budget deal with Martin as prima facie evidence) and Conservative governments; and (b) gives him a bit of time (including another budget year of party subsidies based on the 2008 election results) to get organized. Mr. Layton is running against a majority government for either party as he has more leverage in a minority house.

Mr. Harper would prefer to wait til the spring for an election to take further advantage of incumbency, the profile of the Olympics, and a chance for another budget in which various potential support consituencies can be lured. However, if everyone conspires against him this fall, he will not be that unhappy. He will campaign against the opposition coalition that has no respect for the voters, forcing yet another election less than a year after the last one having never really respected those results (a coalition attempt a month later) putting their own interests first, even in an economic crisis. Given the slow but generally positive economic news of late, a fall election for which the opposition is blamed is not the worst outcome and may provide him an opportunity to argue more explicitly for a majority government than ever before.

The reality is that there is no difference in the situation between last fall when we held an election and the present circumstance, except for a new Liberal leader. My guess is that if the opposition is willing to risk going to the voters arguing that we need another vote, only because the Liberals made a mistake last year in putting hte wrong leader on the ballot and therefore deserve another kick at the can, Conservative would be quite willing to take on that fight.