Proof that the Economy is Bad

Peter Enns on C.S. Lewis

from his website

Audio Sermon 03.29.2009

"The Journey into Hope" (Romans 4:13-20)

Lenten Levity-- The Fifth Sunday

On the outskirts of a small town, there was a big, old pecan tree just inside the cemetery fence. One day, two boys filled up a bucketful of nuts and sat down by the tree, out of sight, and began dividing the nuts.

"One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me," said one boy. Several dropped and rolled down toward the fence.

Another boy came riding along the road on his bicycle. As he passed, he thought he heard voices from inside the cemetery. He slowed down to investigate. Sure enough, he heard, "One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me."

He knew just what it was. He jumped back on his bike and rode off. Just around the bend he met an old man with a cane, hobbling along.

"Come here quick," said the boy, "you won't believe what I heard! Satan and the Lord are down at the cemetery dividing up the souls."

The man said, "Beat it kid, can't you see it's hard for me to walk." When the boy insisted though, the man hobbled slowly to the cemetery.

Standing by the fence they heard, "One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me."

The old man whispered, "Boy, you've been tellin' me the truth. Let's see if we can catch a glimpse of the Lord."

Shaking with fear, they peered through the fence, yet were still unable to see anything. The old man and the boy gripped the wrought iron bars of the fence tighter and tighter as they tried to see the Lord.

At last they heard, "One for you, one for me. That's all. Now let's go get those nuts by the fence and we'll be done."

They say the old man made it back to town a full five minutes ahead of the kid on the bike.

A Prayer for the Fifth Sunday in Lent

Father of light, in You is found no shadow of change but only the fullness of life and limitless truth. Open our hearts to the voice of Your Word and free us from the original darkness that shadows our vision. Restore our sight that we may look upon Your Son who calls us to repentance and a change of heart, for he lives and reigns with You and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever.

The Methodist Blogs Weekly Roundup 2009.10.189

Submit your post to umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com by noon EST on Saturday to guarantee that your post is included.

*Rules for Inclusion

The week in review in the Methoblogosphere:

Dale Tedder offers key ideas for future men.

Joseph Slife comments on the the proposed constitutional amendments that would decimate connectionalism in the UMC.

Craig L. Adams asks, "What's in a name?"

Bishop Robert Schnase reminds us that we are people of promise.

Ponderments from John Lomperis on the under-explored angle of the Anglican sex fights.

Why is the church slow to change? Read Jeremy Smith.

Brian Russell reflects on what blogging has meant to him over the past four years.

Joseph Yoo ponders how we view worship.

Mark Winter posts on his mission trip to Colima, Mexico.

A second look at the legal status of marriage from Daniel McLain Hixon.

Sky McCracken wonders if the UMC can no longer afford guaranteed appointments.

Are you morphing into a servant like Jesus? Read Andy Bryan.

Beth Quick has been blogging for five years!

Guy Williams presents his case for staying in the United Methodist Church.

Spring sunshine from Olive Morgan.

"A Different Place and a Different Time"-- A sermon by Tony Mitchell.

Kim Matthews expresses a regrettable fear.

Henry Neufeld posts some thoughts on liberal illiberalism. Best of the Methoblogosphere!

A sermon by Jim Parsons on dying to self.

Andrew Stoddard has a new blog address.

Steve Heyduck posts random thoughts inspired by bluebonnets.

Reflections on foolish spending from Richard Heyduck.

Deb Spaulding is having a fish fry!

A reminder from Steven Manskar that it is not what you know; it's who you know.

Greg Hazelrig posts his thought for the day on James 4:13-16.

Sally Coleman is stepping out of her own tradition.

Church mail made easy from Kevin Baker.

Gavin Richardson is printing green business cards.

A happy St. Patrick's Day from Art Ruch.

Ken Hagler has some things to say about clergy leading the way to help clergy.

Dave Camphouse wonders if the church should employ headhunters.

Keith McIlwain cogitates on the problems with "contemporary worship."

Our screwed up priorities according to Matt Kelley.

Some thoughts from Lorna Koskela on authenticity.

O beans! It's the battle over the potatoes warns Questing Parson.

David Hallam has mixed feelings about some good news.

Scott McKay gives us a morning chuckle of a religious nature.

Richard Hall on Rowan Williams on climate change.

Mitch Lewis reminds us to be good.

John Montgomery is on the quest for the historical Passion Week.

Gerry Charlotte Phelps is celebrating a significant anniversary.

The dwelling place of God-- Reflections from Ken Carter.

Will Grady preaches on God's love and the challenge it brings.

Andrew Thompson presents his vision for church reform.

Kids, condoms, and common sense according to Michael Daniel.

Rick Mang makes notes of a survey of United Methodists.

Kevin Watson reviews Adam Hamilton's book, Enough.

Kathy James shares some thoughts on speeding Christian fish.

Are you slipping into Emergence? Read David Morris.

Preacher Jay Voorhees rants on weddings. Best of the Methoblogosphere!

Chris Roberts posts his two part (1 & 2) sermon on faith, politics, and Lent.

Matthew Johnson is serving the Bread of Life.

Wayne Cook is saying goodbye to the Methblogosphere... at least for now. Godspeed to you, Wayne.

Truth is Stranger than Fiction 2009.9

Toilet sausage chef causes prison unit evacuation

From Associated Press

March 26, 2009 3:30 PM EDT

CLALLAM BAY, Wash. - An inmate's attempt to heat up sausages in his toilet went up in smoke when the cooking fire forced a unit evacuation at a Washington prison. Clallam Bay Corrections Center spokeswoman Denise Larson says 130 inmates were evacuated to a dining hall when smoke was spotted coming from a sewer vent pipe Wednesday evening.

She says the smoke was traced to the inmate's cell and he admitted to trying to heat up snack sausage bought from a prison store in the stainless steel toilet. The inmate's identity has not been released.

The toilet chef has been placed in segregation pending discipline at the prison on Washington's Olympic Peninsula.

Opinion Central Poll 2009.14: Final Results

How often do you think about retirement?

How the Greatness of Life Is Measured

Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. "Teacher," they said, "we want you to do for us whatever we ask." "What do you want me to do for you?" he asked. They replied, "Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory." "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?" "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared."

When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John. Jesus called them together and said, "You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mark 10:35-45).

How inappropriate and how out of place for James and John to ask this of Jesus! Our first reaction is one of shock and dismay. Jesus' reaction appears to have been the same. "You don't know what you're asking," he says to them. "Are you able to drink the cup I will drink?" And along with the hymn, the two brothers declare boldly, "Lord, we are able." No doubt they believe that at the moment.

James and John seem to have ignored everything that Jesus had just said about his own suffering and death, and have jumped forward in time to focus on his coming glory. Then, they imagine they will be rewarded for having stuck by Jesus through troubled times. They talk to Jesus like politicians expecting rewards of patronage. They want cabinet positions in the new administration; "Grant us to sit, one at your right hand, and one at your left, in glory." Here is Jesus approaching his most troubled hour and James and John are competing for the positions of Secretary of State and Secretary of the Treasury!

James and John did not truly understand what it meant to drink Jesus' cup. It was a metaphorical way of speaking of his own suffering, crucifixion, and death. That is why it seems so strange that James and John could make such a request. Had they not been listening as Jesus spoke to them along the way and over the months? The disciples are not listening.

The main problem with James and John's request was that they wanted the rewards without the suffering. They wanted Easter without Good Friday. The wanted the crown without the cross. They wanted the gain without the pain. They did not realize that the two places at Jesus' right and left hands would soon be occupied by persons hanging on crosses! And so Jesus had to teach them. He said, "You know that those who are supposed to rule over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great leaders exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you" (10:43).

Yet down through the ages it has been so. The church has often absorbed the world's standards, almost by osmosis. We find it hard to accept Jesus' complete reversal of values. Basically what Jesus says is that the greatness of our lives will be measured by the amount of real service we render to others.

Jesus' teaching to James and John and the rest of the disciples is instructive for us as we have journeyed through another season of Lent approaching Easter; and Easter cannot become a reality in our lives without embracing and experiencing Good Friday.

Will Dick Cheney Go the Way of Jimmy Carter?

In a recent interview with CNN's John King, former vice president Dick Cheney directly criticized Barack Obama and his administration on foreign policy. It would have been entirely possible for Cheney to defend the Bush Administration's record during the interview and state his perspective without having to take a direct swipe at the current president.

Contrast that with his former boss president George W. Bush, who refused to criticize his successor noting, "I'm not going to spend my time criticizing him. There are plenty of critics in the arena. He deserves my silence." Former Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice also would not jump on the "blame game" wagon on The Tonight Show noting how easy it is to get "chirped at" when those offering the criticism do not know the whole story of what is happening behind the scenes.

A sitting president has plenty of critics. In a free society this is a good thing. But I am bothered when someone who has stood in the very shoes of someone currently, can't resist taking "pot shots" when he or she knows what it is like to be on the receiving end. As a pastor, I have been appalled when some of my colleagues have publicly criticized their predecessor or successor in ministry. It is unprofessional and does not serve the ministries of the church and the purposes of the Gospel in the world. Such behavior is petty and unprofessional and reveals some serious character flaws in the person who is doing the chastising. And by the way, the response to the Cheney interview by the current press secretary Robert Gibbs (whose job performance continues to underwhelm me) was no more professional. The Obama Administration has every right to respond to vice president Cheney's criticism, but to react childishly by saying that Cheney was offering criticism because Rush Limbaugh wasn't available, was simply glib and unbecoming of a presidential administration.

I have told my wife on several occasions that one of the things I am looking forward to in retirement is getting actively involved in a church from the perspective of the pew and giving my unqualified and public support to my pastor. If I am asked for my opinion on something, I will express myself in private, but I will refuse to undermine the ministry of the pastor with public carping. After all, I have been on the receiving end of such criticism (some of it certainly deserved) for twenty-five years with several years yet to go. There will be those who are critical. I do not need to add to the cacophony.

Vice president Cheney would do well to take a lesson in professional behavior from his former boss and not go the way of another former president, Jimmy Carter, who for the past eight years has played the role of an amateur as he has often publicly criticized president Bush referring to him as the worst president in history, ignoring the fact that his own presidency will hardly go down in the history books as memorable.

It is true that former presidents and vice presidents are still part of the democratic process, and they should participate in those proceedings fully. They can still give their views and be influential people. And while there are no official "offices" for former presidents and vice presidents, they hold "office" in practical terms and they demean those "offices" and themselves and their continued influence when they publicly criticize those who hold the constitutional offices they once occupied.

Former vice president Cheney and former president Jimmy Carter should have no fear that their nemeses in politics will go unscathed. There are no lack of critics expressing their views each and every day, including those of us who are lowly bloggers. We don't need more critics; what we need are more people who know how to act professionally, who can stand above the fray, and whose silence is more profound than their opinions because they understand, unlike the rest of us, what it is like to stand in someone else's shoes.

+ + + + + + +

Cross-Posted at RedBlueChristian

Aquinas on Virtue #3 (The Moral Virtues)

For Aquinas, the moral virtues not only restrain the desires of the human soul, they perfect those desires. Thomas draws on Aristotle by building his discussion on the four cardinal virtues of wisdom (prudence), justice, moderation (temperance), and courage. The moral virtues are not like the intellectual virtues in that the moral virtues make the individual intrinsically good, and unlike the intellectual virtues the moral virtues cannot be used for evil ends. Since the individual acquires the moral virtues a change is wrought in that person's character. The display of the moral virtues in an individual is a matter of habituation. One lives virtuously because that is who one has become.

The four cardinal virtues specifically address the four cognitive and perceptual powers of the human soul that order it-- wisdom perfects the mind, justice completes the will, moderation develops an attraction only for what is truly pleasant, and courage cultivates the ability to face what is unpleasant and painful. These virtues cannot be misused for immoral purposes. Immorality demonstrates that the moral virtues are absent from the individual. Thus, for Thomas the ends of virtue are not only significant, the means by which the ends are achieved concern virtue as well. Indeed, for Aquinas actions themselves are ends. In perfecting the soul's desires, the moral virtues work together. Wisdom makes justice possible. Justice can only be just when seeking the good and restraining the desire for revenge, and courage makes the pursuit of wisdom and justice possible; for they can only be pursued when the soul confronts the averse.

It is important to note that Aquinas also classifies wisdom as an intellectual virtue. Unlike the other intellectual virtues, wisdom (often called "practical wisdom") cannot be misused because it is habitual. It perfects the intellect so that the individual seeks and executes only the good. In the perfecting of the human soul, practical wisdom and the moral virtues interact in a unified and harmonious way ("the unity of the virtues").

Aquinas accepts Aristotle's view that the moral virtues can be acquired through habitual practice suggesting that the moral virtues are not necessarily theological in nature. But Aquinas also believes that God can infuse the moral virtues into the individual soul. Virtue infused is God's work; it is not humanly achieved, and therefore, it makes possible the supernatural display of the moral virtues. Thus for Aquinas, it is possible for an individual to habituate the moral virtues in one's life through acquiring them (in continuity with Aristotle), but such displays will only be ordinary, that is natural. An extraordinary, supernatural embodiment of the moral virtues requires the grace of God which, according to Augustine, is what "God works in us, without us" (On Free Will). Moderation acquired, suggests Thomas, restrains an individual from eating and drinking what is harmful to the body, but moderation infused leads to fasting and abstinence from drink in order to bring the body into divine subjection.

It is this differentiation between acquired moral virtue and divinely infused moral virtue that turns Aquinas' attention to theological virtue.

Opinion Central Poll 2009.13: Final Results

Are you invested in the stock market in some form?

Bishop N.T. Wright on Hell

In three parts:

Lenten Levity-- The Fourth Sunday

An angel was feeling rather blue with the uniform sameness of heaven and went to see St. Peter. "All I do," the angel said, "is play the harp endlessly, and I'm getting bored."

St. Peter asked, "What would you rather do?"

The angel answered, "I like to dance."

"We don't allow dancing here in heaven," St. Peter said, "but I can see you need a change so I will allow you to take advantage of a once-in-an-eternal-lifetime offer. I will allow you 24 hours leave to return to earth and dance."

"I'm gone," the angel said and in a flash the angel was in California and quickly found a dance hall run by Samuel Frank. Checking the harp and wings, the angel boogied and danced and had a great time until just seconds remained of the leave.

The angel grabbed up the wings and immediately was in heaven again. Returning to St. Peter, the angel said, "I'm back and I am so happy. I'll never feel bored again."

St. Peter said, "That's wonderful, but where is your musical instrument?" "Oh, no," the angel said, "I left my harp in Sam Frank's Disco."

A Prayer for the Fourth Sunday in Lent

Almighty God, You know that we have no power in ourselves to help ourselves: Keep us both outwardly in our bodies and inwardly in our souls, that we may be defended from all adversities which may happen to the body, and from all evil thoughts which may assault and hurt the soul; through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Book of Common Prayer

The World According to Calvin and Hobbes 2009.4

Click on the image to enlarge

Quote of the Day 2009.5: Stupid Hymns

"In a spirited polemic, John Stackhouse complains about the stupidity of contemporary Christian hymns: 'We are the most educated Christians in history, and yet our lyrics are considerably stupider than our much less educated Christian forebears.'"

"I sympathise with Stackhouse’s complaints. But in all fairness, I think the majority of hymns have always been pretty stupid. If we think the 19th century (for example) was full of great hymn-writers, it's just because our hymnbooks today include only the highlights from that entire century. And let's face it, even the highlights are usually pretty atrocious. Hymns typically suffer either from painfully bad lyrics or from a trivial, no-less-painful sentimentality."

"The great hymns-- and there are so few great hymns: if you subtract the Christmas carols and Charles Wesley, there's hardly anything left-- are always the exception. For strange and mysterious reasons, these hymns awaken our feelings of reverence and love and thanksgiving and joy. In spite of the fact that they are hymns, they somehow manage to communicate truth and to evoke deep feeling."

"Furthermore, it's worth noting that our more progressive contemporary churches have actually invented a brand new way of writing bad hymns: these are the hymns that sound not so much like worship as the recitation of an official policy document. All the fashionable leftist causes are celebrated and affirmed with solemn sincerity; everything is carefully included, so that the entire song unfolds with all the humourless deliberation of a meeting of the committee of management. As I said, there are several kinds of bad hymns; but these ones are probably the worst of all (even though it is a genuine achievement to have invented an entirely new way of writing badly)."

You can read Ben Myers' entire post, "Are our hymns becoming stupider?" here.

There Is No Such Thing as an Insignificant Contribution

Willie Santiago, my friend and brother in Cuba, tells the story of a young missionary from the United States traveling to Cuba in the 1920s. It was under her ministry that Willie's grandmother came to know Christ as her Lord and Savior. Willie says if were not for that missionary from America, he would have never come to know Jesus from his parents who learned it from his grandmother, and he would not be in mission today with Christians from the United States. Eighty plus years ago, God was preparing the way, not only for the conversion of one woman in Cuba, but for the salvation of many in the succeeding generations, and the mission to this day that continues to spread.

How many Christians have unfortunately come to believe that their contributions to the purposes of God in this world are small and do not count. They think that unless they can convert the masses like Billy Graham, or open up an entire country to the Gospel, like Hudson Taylor did with China, or unless they do something to be written about in books and magazines, their contribution to God's kingdom is not important. I wonder if that young American missionary in Cuba realized the impact her mission would have on so many others, even to this day?

God has made all of us for mission in this world and there is no such thing as an insignificant contribution. We certainly need the Billy Grahams and the Hudson Taylors of the world; thank God for them. But in truth, God accomplishes most of his kingdom work through people like you and me; people who attend average to somewhat above average-sized churches with various ministries, and who give our time, talents, and resources to God's kingdom work in this community and in this world. And God takes our individual contributions and he puts them together into something that brings honor and glory to his name. When we belittle our contributions to God's work, we make light of the God who gives each one of us different gifts and graces that will allow us to accomplish his will in our lives.

Every follower of Jesus Christ is an ambassador here on earth. We represent Christ. We do not set policy; it is not our job to decide what Christ's purposes are here on earth. Our task is simply to articulate in word and deed that Jesus loves this world and has made its salvation possible. It is quite a privilege to be called by the President of the United States to be an ambassador. How much more of an honor to be called by the King of Kings to represent him here on this earth?

Our mission has eternal significance. The biblical writers always have their eyes on eternity. When the great cathedrals of Europe were built, the first workers knew that they would not be alive to see the church's completion. They were laying the foundation for something that would be finished after they were gone. Jesus says, "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where things decay, but store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where nothing deteriorates." What we do in the present matters, not only for our eternity, but also for the eternity of others.

No MBWR This Weekend

I apologize that there will be no MBWR this weekend. I have a full schedule from morning through evening Friday, Saturday, and Sunday.

The Weekly Roundup will return the following weekend.

President Obama, the Culture Wars, and Abortion: David Gushee Speaks Out

In an editorial from USA Today, David Gushee, evangelical Christian ethicist (his co-authored book, Kingdom Ethics is a must-read) and supporter of President Barack Obama, expresses his concern over the president's "short record on abortion-related issues" which are in his words, "familiar-- and disappointing-- rather than revolutionary."

Gushee had hoped, and it appears from his editorial that he still hopes President Obama will make good on his promise to "roll out a major abortion-reduction initiative," but his moves so far only seem to indicate a change of course that simply looks like the typical Democratic Party perspective on abortion. In his brief time in office, President Obama has reversed a presidential order on the Mexico City policy. He also revoked President Bush's executive order that prevented medical professionals from being forced into providing abortion services against their consciences, although some have argued that conscientious objection would likely remain in place. Nevertheless the change was symbolically disquieting to say the least. Third, the current president has nominated pro-choice extremist Kathleen Sebelius as Secretary of Health and Human Services (She is Catholic and has been severely criticized by her bishop.), and lastly, Obama directed another change of course in providing federal funds for embryonic stem cell research. Gushee writes that he finds none of this extremely surprising, but he had supported the president in the belief that he might lead in navigating a third way on abortion.

Gushee gets to the heart of the matter and the danger when the church gets too close to and too cosy with Caesar:

"Mexico City, conscience clause, Sebelius, embryonic stem cells. In each case, I have been asked by friends at Democratic or progressive-leaning think tanks not just to refrain from opposing these moves, but instead to support them in the name of a broader understanding of what it means to be pro-life. I mainly refused."

"But I do confess that my desire to retain good relationships with the Obama team has tempted me to give what was asked in return for the big payoff of a serious abortion-reduction initiative that I could wholeheartedly support."

"But this kind of calculation is precisely what has gotten Christian political activists in trouble in the past, not just for 40 years but for 1,600 years. We gain access to Caesar in order to affect policy; we hold onto access even if it involves compromising some of what we want in policy; in the end, we can easily forget what policies we were after in the first place. I think this definitely happened to the Christian right. It doesn't need to be repeated by the Christian center or left."

And then Gushee quite eloquently and decisively makes the case for why abortion is intrinsically related to other pro-life issues as well.

"My understanding of the majestic God-given sacredness of human life tells me that a society that legally permits abortion on demand is deeply corrupt. It pays for adult sexual liberties with the lives of defenseless developing children. That practice, in turn, desensitizes society to the implications of paying for prospective medical cures with defenseless frozen embryos, which themselves are available because our society pays for medically assisted reproductive technology by producing hundreds of thousands of these embryos as spares. And yes, that same commitment to life's sacredness has grounded my opposition to paying for national security with torture, or paying for today's affluence with tomorrow's environmental destruction."

The religious right has unfortunately emphasized abortion as the only pro-life issue. The evangelical left has now come along and rightly argued that what it means to be pro-life is much larger, but in the process they have basically paid only lip service to the protection of the unborn while they have clearly focused only narrowly on the one or two issues of central concern (e.g. poverty and/or the environment). Their criticism of the one issue politics of the religious right is in reality nothing more than a matter of do as I say, not as I do.

What David Gushee has done is to exercise his intellectual and moral integrity and speak out in favor of being pro-life in all respects, and calling on President Obama to keep his word to those evangelicals who supported him and to provide a third way on abortion that is truly revolutionary.

There are other prominent voices from the evangelical center and left who have declared their support for the current president and have also claimed that they oppose abortion. Will they join David Gushee or will they remain silent?

We have yet to hear from them.

.
+ + + + + + +
.
Cross-Posted at RedBlueChristian

The Quotable C.S. Lewis #15: God, Prayer, and Time

"I should like to deal with a difficulty that some people find about the whole idea of prayer. A man put it to me by saying 'I can believe in God all right, but what I cannot swallow is the idea of Him attending to several hundred million human beings who are all addressing him at the same moment.' And I have found that quite a lot of people feel this."

"Now, the first thing to notice is that the whole sting of it comes in the words at the same moment. Most of us can imagine God attending to any number of applicants if only they came one by one and He had an endless time to do it in. So what is really at the back of this difficulty is the idea of God having to fit too many things into one moment of time."

"Well that is of course what happens to us. Our life comes to us moment by moment. One moment disappears before the next one comes along: and there is room for very little in each. That is what Time is like. And of course you and I tend to take it for granted that this Time series-- this arrangement of past, present, and future-- is not simply the way life comes to us but the way all things really exist. We tend to assume that the whole universe and God Himself are always moving on from past to future just as we do."

--Mere Christianity

Opinion Central Poll 2009.12: Final Results

Have you made your vacation plans for summer?

Audio Sermon 03.15.2009

"The Journey into Faithfulness" (Philippians 3:1-16)

Lenten Levity-- The Third Sunday

A man is driving down the road and breaks down near a monastery. He goes to the monastery, knocks on the door, and says, "My car broke down. Do you think I could stay the night?"

The monks graciously accept him, feed him dinner, even fix his car. As the man tries to fall asleep, he hears a strange sound. The next morning, he asks the monks what the sound was, but they say, "We can't tell you. You're not a monk."

The man is disappointed but thanks them anyway and goes about his merry way.

Some years later, the same man breaks down in front of the same monastery. The monks gain accept him, feed him, even fix his car. That night, he hears the same strange noise that he had heard years earlier.

The next morning, he asks what it is, but the monks reply, "We can't tell you. You're not a monk."

The man says, "All right, all right. I'm dying to know. If the only way I can find out what that sound was is to become a monk, how do I become a monk?"

The monks reply, "You must travel the earth and tell us how many blades of grass there are and the exact number of sand pebbles. When you find these numbers, you will become a monk."

The man sets about his task. Some forty-five years later, he returns and knocks on the door of the monastery. He says, "I have traveled the earth and have found what you have asked for. There are 145,236,284,232 blades of grass and 231,281,219,999,129,382 sand pebbles on the earth."

The monks reply, "Congratulations. You are now a monk. We shall now show you the way to the sound."

The monks lead the man to a wooden door, where the head monk says, "The sound is right behind that door."

The man reaches for the knob, but the door is locked. He says, "Real funny. May I have the key?"

The monks give him the key, and he opens the door. Behind the wooden door is another door made of stone. The man demands the key to the stone door. The monks give him the key, and he opens it, only to find a door made of ruby. He demands another key from the monks, who provide it. Behind that door is another door, this one made of sapphire. So it went until the man had gone through doors of emerald, silver, topaz, amethyst.

Finally, the monks say, "This is the last key to the last door." The man is relieved to no end. He unlocks the door, turns the knob, and behind that door he is amazed to find the source of that strange sound.

But I can't tell you what it is because you're not a monk.

A Prayer for the Third Sunday in Lent

O Lord, who hast mercy upon all, take away from me my sins, and mercifully kindle in me the fire of thy Holy Spirit. Take away from me the heart of stone, and give me a heart of flesh, a heart to love and adore Thee, a heart to delight in Thee, to follow and enjoy Thee, for Christ's sake, Amen.

St. Ambrose of Milan (AD 339-397)

The Methodist Blogs Weekly Roundup 2009.9.188

Submit your post to umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com by noon EST on Saturday to guarantee that your post is included.

*Rules for Inclusion

The week in review in the Methoblogosphere:

Scott McKay posts on provocation and violence.

Who are the poor among us? How should we help them? Dale Tedders asks the questions.

Andrew Thompson exclaims, "Finally Mississippi is #1."

Bishop Robert Schnase offers thoughts on who benefits from nest building.

Craig L. Adams posts on God the Fulfiller.

David Hallam on the collapse of American evangelicalism.

Reflections on love in tough times from Questing Parson.

Lorna Koskela insists it's all rubbish. Best of the Methoblogosphere!

Dave Perry says goodbye to God the cosmic puppeteer.

Matt Kelley offers his reasons for why he stays in the UMC.

Ponderments on kenosis from Keith McIlwain.

Dave Camphouse publishes his sermon notes.

Ken Hagler cogitates on the mess in his office... and everywhere else.

The ignorance of Lent-- Enlightenment from Art Ruch.

Gavin Richardson reflects on getting over our control issues.

Shane Raynor reminds us that dialogue is not a one-way street. He also gives us an update on the dialogue.

Kevin Baker ruminates on reaching those for the cause of Christ. Best of the Methoblogosphere!

Imposter syndrome and ministry-- Some thoughts from Sally Coleman.

Greg Hazelrig posts his thought for the day on John 1:43.

Deb Spaulding writes on living in the eternal present.

Richard Heyduck is tired of talking stuff down.

If this were still the 80s or the 90s, Steve Heyduck would be happy.

Andrew Stoddard posts reflections on Jeremiah 3:6-18, Romans 1:28-2:11, and John 5:1-18.

Jim Parsons decisively writes about clergy haters.

Henry Neufeld is thinking out loud about the ministry of complaining.

What are the doors of your church like? Kim Matthews wants to know.

Dave Faulkner's Sabbatical, Day 41.

"Knowing the Law"-- A sermon by Tony Mitchell.

Olive Morgan plugs "Redemption Song."

Guy Williams recounts the young clergy meeting in Nashville.

"Simon the Zealot"-- A sermon for the Second Sunday in Lent by Beth Quick.

Andy Bryan suspects that we have supressed zeal.

Sky Lowe-McCracken wonders how much he will give up for the sake of Christ and his Kingdom.

Some thoughts on President Obama's reversal of President Bush's stem-cell policy from Daniel McLain Hixon.

Will Deuel is being positive about ordination.

Out of the mouths of babes from the blog of Mark Winter.

Joseph Yoo on the UMC and wandering in the wilderness.

Kevin Watson reminds us that there is no limit to God's saving work in Christ.

Reading the Bible from three worlds, part 1, from Brian Russell.

Jeremy Smith reflects on God as eagle eye.

Pastor Cynthia wants to live not just work.

Truth is Stranger than Fiction 2009.8

SoCal robbery suspect tries to become policeman

The Associated Press
Posted: 02/28/2009 10:56:55 AM PST

CHULA VISTA, Calif.—A San Diego County man wanted for a store robbery was arrested after he showed up to take an examination to become a police officer, authorities said.

Romeo Montillano, 40, was arrested Wednesday for investigation of robbery, making criminal threats and grand theft. He remained in the San Diego County jail on Saturday on $110,000 bail, according to the county sheriff's Web site.

Investigators had identified Montillano as a suspect in a Dec. 8 robbery at a Chula Vista Kmart where a man stole a television, DVD player and telephone, then beat up employees who confronted him in the parking lot, police spokesman Bernard Gonzales said.

A short time later, investigators learned that Montillano had signed up to take the February Police Department entrance exam, Gonzales said.

Police called to Montillano, who apparently was unaware he was being sought for the robbery. Montillano said he was in Las Vegas but would return for a Feb. 18 orientation for police applicants, Gonzales said.

Montillano didn't show up but called police to apologize and explain that his car had been impounded in Las Vegas, Gonzales said.

In a later e-mail, Montillano told officers that he planned to take a bus and would be there for the police exam.

On the day of the test, Montillano signed in and was arrested, Gonzales said.

Gonzales said as Montillano was being taken into custody, he asked whether he would still be able to take the police exam. Told he couldn't, Montillano asked whether he could reapply and take the test later.

Crown Wearers in Heaven, Cross Bearers on Earth

Throughout his letters Paul never views the cross of Christ as a distant event in the past. He does not believe it to be simply a fact of history for scholars to ponder in their "ivory towers." Paul does not understand the cross of Christ as irrelevant for the way the followers of Jesus live.

Indeed, Paul clearly believes that we cannot be saved unless we, in some way, participate with Christ in his crucifixion. Paul writes to the Galatians, "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but it is Christ who lives in me" (2:20). We encounter this same theme in other places in Paul, "We know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin" (Romans 6:6). "We are afflicted in every way...always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be made visible in our bodies" (2 Corinthians 4:7-10).

We could continue with the quotations but suffice it to say that, according to Paul, there is a participatory aspect of the cross of Christ. In the process of salvation we are in some way crucified with Jesus, and if we are not crucified with him, then we cannot be raised with him. Charles Spurgeon said, "There are no crown wearers in heaven who were not cross bearers on earth."

It is an easy thing to view the cross of Jesus Christ from the bottom of the hill called Calvary. To be sure, it may be somewhat distressing to see the person on that cross in pain and agony. We may very well feel badly for him. We may even shed a tear or two; but once it is over and he is dead, we can return home to the routine of life-- the mortgage and the car payment, working 9 to 5, and raising the children. He is dead and life goes on. Yes, it is an effortless act simply to watch the crucifixion from a distance.

But what if we are meant to do more than watch it happening to someone else? What if we are meant to hang there in shame and pain? Yes, I know the Bible says that Christ died in our place, that is true. Christ's death was unique and in one respect not repeatable. Nevertheless, the cross of Christ will not be our salvation until we are willing to put to death all those things in our lives which put Jesus on the cross in the first place. Jesus hangs on the cross because of you and me. Every act of greed and selfishness, every word of boasting and false pride, every sin of racism and sexism, every word of gossip and back-biting, deception and falsehood; everything not pleasing about our lives is what put Jesus Christ upon the cross. We are guilty.

Our culture is not much into guilt. It is supposedly not good for us. It is damaging to our self-esteem, so we are told. "I'm OK, you’re OK." Of course, there is unjustified guilt. People can feel guilt over the wrong things. There is, however, justified guilt. Some guilt is good; for it causes us to reexamine our lives, and, hopefully, make changes.

Who crucified Jesus? We are all guilty as charged. Yet, that act of crucifixion perpetrated by all of us is also our means of escape from the sin that ensnares us; provided we willingly crucify those things that put Jesus on the cross in the first place.

This is not easy. We love our sin. If sin is such a detestable thing for us, why is it such a continual problem? Yet, if we are willing to overcome our sin, God is able to help us. The same power that raised Jesus Christ from the dead is available to us so that we might crucify and bury our sin and raise our self, our image into the likeness of Jesus Christ.

Aquinas on Virtue #2 (The Intellectual Virtues)

In my first post I noted that Thomas Aquinas utilized St. Augustine's definition of virtue. Augustine stated that virtue was a habit "by which we live righteously, of which no one can make bad use, which God works in us, without us" (Augustine, On Free Will). For Aquinas this is a good working definition. But in order to understand his distinction between intellectual and moral virtue, we need to hear Aquinas' own understanding:

"Virtue denotes a certain perfection of a power. Now a thing's perfection is considered chiefly in regard to its end. But the end of power is act. Wherefore power is said to be perfect, according as it is determinate to its act. Now there are some powers which of themselves are determinate to their acts; for instance, the active natural powers. These natural powers are in themselves called virtues. but the rational powers, which are proper to humanity, are not determinate to one particular action, but are inclined indifferently to many: and they are determinate to acts by means of habits, as is clear from what we have said above. therefore human virtues are habits" (Summa Theologica, II).

What does it mean that virtue is a certain perfection of a power. For Thomas, powers fall under two categories: natural and rational. Natural powers refer to the attributes of God. Such powers are natural and therefore perfect because they are untainted by the fall. Thus for Aquinas the word "natural" cannot be used for creation post-Eden since it is tainted by sin and therefore in an unnatural state. Natural powers must relate only to God.

Rational powers refer to those attributes that are as Aquinas states, "proper to humanity." Intellectual virtues are those habits that move men and women toward the perfection of the intellect, theoretical and practical. For Thomas, three virtues that perfect the intellect are understanding, science and wisdom. Understanding comprehends first principles, science apprehends truth, and wisdom recognizes higher causes, preeminently God.

Again these three are virtues in that they employ the rational that seeks the natural, thus they are proper. But Thomas knows that this raises the inevitable question that he himself premptively asks in the Summa: "Can there be intellectual virtue without moral virtue?" If Augustine is correct that virtue is a habit "of which no one can make bad use," how does Aquinas explain the destructive use often made of the intellectual "virtues" of understanding, science, and wisdom?

The Myth of Wall Street vs. Main Street

I have said in previous posts that populist politics is popular with many people because it sounds so good and it allows us to foster class envy toward those who have more than we do. The problem with populist politics is that it is based on many myths. The mythical construct that I am concerned with in this post is the false notion that is touted by many politicians and political pundits that somehow there are two separate and competing factions of the economy: the fat cats on Wall Street vs. the regular Joes and Janes on Main Street.

Please consider the following:

First, two-thirds of the American people are invested in some way in the stock market. This is no longer 1929 when only the wealthy purchased shares. Average Joes and Janes have pensions, IRAs and 401k's. Many other run-of-the-mill Main Street people have additional investments in mutual funds and college funds for their children. As the stock market drops, so do their investments and so do their plans for retirement.

Second, the companies whose shares are dropping are also employing real "Main Street" people. Of course, there are indeed many businesses that are not publicly traded, but there are plenty that are, and when Wall Street is hurting it inevitably effects, even those businesses that do not offer shares. Remember the pensions and let us also not forget that even health care insurers have a stake in the stock market. And for the one-third who are not directly invested in the market, many of those persons have money in banks, all of which have connections to Wall Street in some way.

Third, when the stock market loses money less tax revenue is generated. The less people make, the less they pay to the federal government. With all the talk about raising and cutting taxes, historically the government receives the most tax money when people make more money regardless of the tax rates of the middle class and the wealthy.

Fourth, which is connected to the previous point, when government receives less tax revenue, it looks to make up for the shortfall by raising taxes in other ways. These taxes are usually levied on goods and services that people absolutely need, even though it is a time when they can least afford them. The tax relief that is offered through the federal government is lost in the increased state taxes on those goods and services paid by consumers. In tough economic times the private sector, as well as state and local government have to tighten "the economic belt" which makes things difficult for everyone. (By the way, have you noticed that the only institution not cutting back is the federal government?)

Fifth, when Wall Street is hurting unemployment rises on both Wall and Main Streets because the vast majority of jobs in this country are created by the private sector. It is really a myth that government "creates" jobs. It only does so when it institutes more bureaucracy. By getting out of the way, government creates the environment that fosters the right conditions for the private sector to flourish. This does not mean that government regulation is not necessary. Government's role is not to restrain capitalism per se, but its worst impulses; and if it does not restrain those impulses they will indeed run amok hurting everybody.

None of this excuses the bald-faced greed we have seen on Wall Street for the last almost twenty years. The Bible condemns greed in no uncertain terms, particularly when it takes advantage of the least advantaged. But as we condemn such greed, let us also not forget that it was not just the greed of the wealthy fat cats, but also the greed of the average consumer, who over the last twenty years has also been enjoying the money party with sub prime home loans, two new SUVs in the garage with two huge payments, and investing in the latest technological gadgets and going further and further into debt in the process. And let us not forget that the federal government started this mess by threatening banks into giving bad home loans to people who could not possibly afford to make the outrageous payments. (Here the worst impulses of the federal government were not restrained.)

We should condemn greed to be sure, but that is a vice that tempts all of us, not just those who are in a higher tax bracket. It is also not about coveting the lifestyle of those who have more than we do. The Bible condemns envy as well. It is about everyone being good and faithful stewards of what they have and understanding that if Wall Street doesn't flourish, neither does Main Street; and Wall Street would do well to remember that without Main Street, its financial future is also in serious doubt.

One final point needs to be made-- regardless of whether one is a CEO or a bank executive or a small business owner or a laborer for a company, as Christians we have a moral obligation to be Christians in whatever station we find ourselves. We can debate how the economy works or should work, we can discuss whether government's role should be greater or lesser in the private sector, and those are important discussions; but for Christians, the one thing that should be agreed upon by all is that we have a moral obligations to be Christians and to reflect the Lordship of Jesus Christ in all that we do. That includes how employers treat their employees, it has implication for how employees labor for the glory of God, and it also clearly includes all of us who should seek the good of the other. How that is fulfilled is not always clear, but the goal is worthy and, therefore, so is the discussion.

But none of this will happen if the greed that brings class distinctions and the envy that creates class warfare prevail. If Christians fall into one or the other extreme, they will have nothing significant to offer to the economic and moral discussion.

+ + + + + + +

Cross-Posted at RedBlueChristian

Opinion Central Poll 2009.11: Final Results

How many hours of sleep do you average each night?

The World According to Calvin and Hobbes 2009.3

Click on the image to enlarge

Sermon Podcast 03.08.2009

"The Journey into Faith" (Mark 9:14-29)

Lenten Levity-- The Second Sunday

An Irishman moves into a tiny hamlet in County Kerry, walks into the pub and promptly orders three beers.

The bartender raises his eyebrows, but serves the man three beers, which he drinks quietly at a table, alone.

An hour later, the man has finished the three beers and orders threemore.

This happens yet again.

The next evening the man again orders and drinks three beers at a time, several times. Soon the entire town is whispering about the Man Who Orders Three Beers.

Finally, a week later, the bartender broaches the subject on behalf of the town. "I don't mean to pry, but folks around here are wondering why you always order three beers?"

"Tis odd, isn't it?" the man replies, "You see, I have two brothers, and one went to America, and the other to Australia. We promised each other that we would always order an extra two beers whenever we drank as a way of keeping up the family bond."

The bartender and the whole town was pleased with this answer, and soon the Man Who Orders Three Beers became a local celebrity and source of pride to the hamlet, even to the extent that out-of-towners would come to watch him drink.

Then, one day, the man comes in and orders only two beers. The bartender pours them with a heavy heart. This continues for the rest of the evening-- he orders only two beers. The word flies around town. Prayers are offered for the soul of one of the brothers.

The next day, the bartender says to the man, "Folks around here, me first of all, want to offer condolences to you for the death of your brother. You know-- the two beers and all..."

The man ponders this for a moment, then replies, "You'll be happy to hear that my two brothers are alive and well."

"It's just that I, meself, have decided to give up drinking for Lent."

A Prayer for the Second Sunday in Lent

Almighty Father, You have called me to walk by the light of Christ, Your Son, and to trust in His wisdom. During Lent, I submit my self to Him completely and strive to believe in Him with all my heart. With my renewed commitment to Jesus, I endeavour to continue His work here on earth in helping to build Your Kingdom so that all may benefit from the message of salvation. Amen.

The Methodist Blogs Weekly Roundup 2009.8.187

Submit your post to umweeklyroundup@yahoo.com by noon EST on Saturday to guarantee that your post is included.

*Rules for Inclusion

The week in review in the Methoblogosphere:

Should we ban hate? Daniel Hixon asks the question. Best of the Methoblogosphere!

Richard Hall is celebrating World Maths Day.

John Lomperis blogs about the phrase, "That's so gay!"

Joseph Slife on retired UM pastor John Ed Mathison's seven concerns about the UMC.

New hymnal and old controversies according to Andrew Thompson.

"Secret Acts of Righteousness"-- Reflections from Mitch Lewis.

Bishop Robert Schnase writes on some church experiences as running a marathon.

Scott McKay reflects on memories of his baptism.

John Montgomery on sources for Lent 2009.

Ordained Ministry in the UMC, part 2, from Sky Lowe McCracken.

Stephen Taylor posts on small hinges.

Kathy James reflects on a snowy day in the South.

Evangelism and invitation from Andy Bryan.

Beth Quick preaches on Judas, who would later betray Jesus.

A preaching study from Guy Williams on Mark 8:31-38.

Olive Morgan writes on the churches' warning on the moral challenge of climate change.

"The Cross of Christ"-- A sermon from Jim Parsons.

Tony Mitchell preaches on "Promises Made, Promises Kept."

Dave Faulkner posts on day 34 of his Sabbatical-- computer troubles, the CT scan, Christian music, and animation.

Kim Matthews has learned a few things from her son.

Christians contribute to the confusion in biblical interpretation according to Henry Neufeld.

Andrew Stoddard posts reflections on Deuteronomy 9:23-10:5, Hebrews 4:1-10, and John 3:16-21.

Steve Heyduck is reminiscing.

Discipleship goals #5 from Richard Heyduck.

Deb Spaulding posts reflections on one holy breath. Best of the Methoblogosphere!

Gerry Charlotte Phelps believes that it is worse than we think.

Greg Hazelrig cogitates on his final day in Jerusalem.

Are you fed up with Churchianity? So is Sally Coleman.

Shane Raynor scribbles some thoughts on GracePoint's departure from the UMC.

Some additional thoughts on GracePoint from Gavin Richardson.

More thoughts from Art Ruch.

Ken Hagler writes on spiritual fitness.

Ken Carter ponders a faith that stretches us.

The Pastor's Corner, March 2009 from Dave Camphouse.

Keith McIlwain offers a Wesleyan response to inerrancy.

Will Grady ruminates on Jesus and the honour of the High Priest.

Moving Methodism from Dave Warnock.

What is the real role of the clergy? Matthew Kelley asks the question.

David Perry shares a different viewpoint on taking up the cross.

Prophetic input from Lorna Koskela.

Failure and ideological perspective from Michael Daniel.

What to give up for Lent? Pondering from Rick Mang.

Ha! So, you actually heal people? Marty Schwartz answers the question by giving glory to God.

Echoes from Michelle Hargrave.

Of whom do you complain? Questing Parson wants to know.

David Hallam warns us, "Don't mess with this blog!"

Opinion Central Poll 2009.10: Final Results

Should the U.S. Government nationalize troubled banks?

Truth is Stranger than Fiction 2009.7

3/3/09: Math fans to celebrate Square Root Day

From Associated Press

March 02, 2009 7:55 PM EST

REDWOOD CITY, California - Dust off the slide rules and recharge the calculators. Square Root Day is upon us.

The math-buffs" holiday, which only occurs nine times each century, falls on Tuesday - 3/3/09 (for the mathematically challenged, three is the square root of nine).

"These days are like calendar comets, you wait and wait and wait for them, then they brighten up your day - and poof - they're gone," said Ron Gordon, a Redwood City teacher who started a contest meant to get people excited about the event.

The winner gets, of course, $339 for having the biggest Square Root Day event.

Gordon's daughter even set up a Facebook page - one of a half-dozen or so dedicated to the holiday - and hundreds of people had signed up with plans to celebrate in some way. Celebrations are as varied: Some cut root vegetables into squares, others make food in the shape of a square root symbol.

The last such day was five years ago, Feb. 2, 2004, which coincided with Groundhog Day. The next is seven years away, on April 4, 2016.

Where's Jesus?

Many years ago, when our children were very young, during our vacation in North Carolina we stopped at Duke University so I could show our children my alma mater. The girls had not been there since they were babies, and since Dad was always talking about what a wonderful place Duke was, I decided I should show it to them.

I saved the best part of the tour for last and we entered Duke Chapel. There was the typical sign when one enters a cathedral asking that visitors be quiet, as there may be people praying and meditating. So with our four children we walked quietly to the front of the chancel area. As we walked I drew their attention to the sculptures and stained glass, giving them a lesson on why the sculpture of Paul was in one place, and Peter in another. As I whispered in the midst of the silent, praying people, our son Jason (about four years of age) blurted out at the top of his lungs, "Where's Jesus?" "Where's Jesus?" He wasn't interested in Paul. He didn't care about Peter. He wanted to see Jesus.

I tried to quiet him down discreetly, but to no avail. "Where's Jesus?" "Where's Jesus?" As people were raising their heads looking at us-- some smiling, some not-- I finally pointed to the stained glass window at the back of the chancel and I said to him, "Jason, there's Jesus!" Instead of silencing him, he shouted all the louder, "Jesus!" "Jesus!"

That is the heart of it all, isn't it? It is conviction of the New Testament writers that Jesus is Lord and the crux of Christian faith. The center of Christianity is not an idea, not a program, but a person-- this carpenter from Nazareth. For the church Jesus is the center of the faith and must always be.

The church gets into trouble when it loses sight of Jesus. When something or someone else becomes the center of that faith community's life and worship, it falls into serious trouble. Those groups we typically call cults have lost the central place of Christ, and have substituted someone else, a visionary or a self-proclaimed prophet. Visionaries and prophets are supposed to point to Jesus, not to themselves.

The task of the church, the followers of Jesus is to keep the main thing the main thing. That main thing is Jesus. There can be no substitutes. It's Jesus. Every Sunday we gather together for worship and Sunday School, at every church meeting, in all of our educational events, classes, special services, mission outreach; in everything we say and do, we should see Jesus in our midst. If we cannot see Jesus in our midst, then not only is it impossible to fulfill our tasks as disciples, it is impossible to present Jesus to others; for many people are looking for Jesus. Some of them may not know they are looking for Jesus, but they are. There are people like you and me who need to be transformed. There are people like you and me who are hurting. There are people like you and me who need hope. There are like you and me who need the truth. There are people like you and me who need Jesus. They want to see Jesus, and the only way they will be able to see and meet Jesus is through us. If they do not see Jesus in us, they may not see Jesus at all.

The New Testament says that Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God (Colossians 1:15-20). Since we are made in the image of God, that means our lives reflect the image of Jesus Christ; and that must mean something for the way we live every day. People need to see Jesus. They are looking for Jesus in us. Can they see him?

Aquinas on Virtue #1 (Introduction)

In his Summa Theologica, Thomas Aquinas offers a closely reasoned and orderly Treatise on the Virtues. Aquinas drew heavily from the philosopher Aristotle, but also imported theological considerations that moved beyond the ancient Greek philosopher.

Aristotle was concerned with (among other things) what has been referred to as the function argument, that is, virtue refers to the ability of something to function well. The virtue of the horse is running, the virtue of the knife is cutting. When the matter of function is applied to the human person, one asks what characteristics allow a person to live well. This not only refers to the qualities necessary for an individual in the performance of his or her job, but also to one's station in life as a husband or wife, etc. Aquinas utilizes St. Augustine's definition of virtue as a habit "by which we live righteously, of which no one can make bad use, which God works in us, without us" (Augustine, On Free Will).

Thomas' concerns are two-fold: First, he considers the qualities necessary that define the good, that is the virtuous life, and second, the good assumes a particular end or a purpose for human life. What is that end? What is that purpose? Aquinas argues that there is an ultimate end, a ratio bonitatis, which can only be achieved by an ultimate goodness. Aquinas is well aware of the fact that human beings have competing and conflicting understanding of what constitutes goodness, but taking his cue from Aristotle that virtue is what benefits the polis, Aquinas reasons that not all accounts of goodness are created equal. Thus one must not only work through what the good is, one must also delineate the virtues or habits that contribute to the good, which has as its end eudaimonia (often translated "happiness," but better rendered as "flourishing").

Aquinas divides the virtues into three categories: intellectual, moral, and theological.