Transparent heart icon with white outline and + sign.

Life's busy, read it when you're ready!

Create a free account to save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.

Subscribe Now! Open envelope icon with @ symbol.
White magnifying glass.

Search thousands of RP articles

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ.

Open envelope icon with @ symbol

Get Articles Delivered!

Helping you think, speak, and act in Christ. delivered direct to your Inbox!

Line-art icon representing RP article category
Kids
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Magazine
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Articles
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Book Reviews
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Movie Reviews
Line-art icon representing RP article category
Daily devotional

More of Reformed Perspective!

People we should know

A couple friends you should meet: Jay Adams & D. A. Carson

It’s no secret that I love books. Here in my study I often feel like I’m surrounded by good friends. Some are old friends, centuries old, but the two I’d like to introduce you to in this article are still writing today. The aim of this brief introduction is to help you find good friends for yourself — in other words, to find edifying reading that will give you a better understanding of the Christian faith, a greater grasp of the gospel, and a deeper love for Christ.

Jay Adams (1929-2020)

What does Jay Adams have in common with the Puritans? I mean, besides many theological commonalities? Both are objects of intense prejudice. Everybody knows that Jay Adams and his counseling methodology is bad, but very few people have actually read anything by Jay Adams. In the Canadian Reformed community, the source of this deep antipathy for Adams can be traced back to a 1977 article in Clarion by Dutch theologian C. Trimp. The article (originally a lecture he delivered at our seminary here in Hamilton), while expressing some appreciation, generally took Adams apart. Trimp’s critique would be echoed by CanRC leaders for years to come. However, what Trimp wrote was based on just one early book of Adams (Competent to Counsel) and, in the meantime, Adams had written several more books. In some of those books, he explained himself further and negated many of the criticisms that Trimp offered. I began reading Adams in university and was immediately impressed by his deep commitment to Scripture and the Reformed faith.

Jay Adams is the author of more than 100 books and remains an in-demand lecturer. He did his seminary training at Reformed Episcopal Seminary and completed a Ph.D. at the University of Missouri. From 1963-1983, he taught at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia. Prior to that, he pastored a number of Presbyterian churches, including an Orthodox Presbyterian congregation. The Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church currently holds his ministerial credentials. He was the founder of the Christian Counseling and Educational Foundation (CCEF.org) as well as the National Association of Nouthetic Counselors (now called the Association of Certified Biblical Counselors – see BiblicalCounseling.com). He’s currently involved with the Institute for Nouthetic Studies (Nouthetic.org).

Why is Jay Adams important?
Jay Adams is important for precisely the same reason I first appreciated Adams back in university: he takes the Bible seriously. He writes on a variety of subjects, from Christian living to counseling to preaching, but whatever the topic, sola Scriptura is his touchstone. You may not always agree with his conclusions, but you have to agree that this is the right approach. Basically, Adams takes the presuppositional approach of Cornelius Van Til and applies it to pastoral theology. I’ve read about a dozen of Adams’ books and have learned a lot from them.

Where do I start?
As mentioned, Competent to Counsel was one of Adam’s earliest books, published in 1970. It’s an important book, but it does leave a lot of questions hanging.

If you’re interested in Adam’s counseling methodology, a better place to start would be A Theology of Christian Counseling: More Than Redemption. A good follow-up would be How to Help People Change: The Four-Step Biblical Process. A couple of other books that are more directed to the regular “person in the pew”: What To Do on Thursday: A Layman’s Guide to the Practical Use of the Scriptures and The Biblical View of Self-Esteem, Self-Love, Self-Image. Preachers and aspiring preachers need to read his Truth Applied: Application in Preaching.

What to watch out for?
Adams is a controversial figure. On a formal level, some people have a difficult time getting past Adams’ tone and style. For some, he’s too strident, too forceful, too critical, or too this or that. Theologically, questions have sometimes been raised about Adam’s concept of habituation. George M. Schwab wrote an article in the Winter 2003 Journal of Biblical Counseling (published by CCEF) alleging that Adams was more influenced by O. Hobart Mowrer and William Glasser than by Scripture on this point. When someone has written as much as Adams, you can expect that there will be disagreements and critiques.

Meanwhile, another generation of counselors has arisen and some of these (esp. at CCEF) have modified Adams’ approach in what may be described as a kinder and gentler direction.

And while this is not a serious theological faux pas, if I remember correctly, Adams is also postmillennial in his eschatology.

Conclusion
Writing about Jay Adams in a positive way is a risky endeavor. For every positive point that one might rise, there will be a host of people who raise the negatives. Adams is not infallible, but he does respect the infallible Bible and he is Reformed in his convictions. I know that my life and ministry have certainly been enriched by his writings. Perhaps he has something to offer you too.

By the way Jay Adams blogs at nouthetic.org/blog.

D. A. Carson (1946- )

Donald Carson has a Canadian connection, being born in Montreal in 1946. His father was a Baptist pastor and missionary, first among English-speaking Quebeckers, then among the French. For Don Carson, one of the results is bilingual fluency. He did his undergrad studies at McGill University in Montreal, and then obtained a Master of Divinity degree from Central Baptist Seminary in Toronto. Carson was ordained in 1972 at a Baptist church in Richmond, BC. He then went on to obtain a Ph.D. in New Testament studies at Cambridge.

After some years as a professor at a Baptist seminary in Vancouver, he moved to Wheaton, Illinois, to take up a position teaching New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. He’s still there today. He’s written numerous books and articles. He frequently speaks at conferences and is actively involved with The Gospel Coalition.

Why is D. A. Carson important?
Carson has three endearing qualities.

First, he is a New Testament scholar with a high view of the Bible. He believes fervently in biblical inspiration and inerrancy. Unfortunately, there are not many high-level NT scholars with such views of their subject matter.

Second, Don Carson loves the gospel. This is reflected in his work with the Gospel Coalition and Together for the Gospel. His passion for the good news also surfaces in just about everything he writes.

Third, Carson, like Mike Horton, is able to produce both high-quality scholarly writing and popular works that will edify any Christian.

Where do I start?
If you’re looking for something to whet your appetite, the best place to start is Carson’s biography of his dad, Memoirs of an Ordinary Pastor (which can be downloaded for free at The Gospel Coalition).

Then ease into Carson’s biblical scholarship with his helpful little volume, The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God. If it’s devotional reading that you’re looking for, check out his Scandalous: The Cross and Resurrection of Jesus. If you’re a seminary student, or if you’re a pastor and haven’t read it yet, Exegetical Fallacies is a must-read. If you have an interest in postmodernism and hermeneutics, The Gagging of God is a thorough treatment.

What to watch out for?
Well, if you haven’t guessed it already, Carson is a Baptist. I don’t view the denial of infant baptism as a minor, insignificant matter. However, honestly I don’t recall reading anything from Carson that has ever leapt out at me as being distinctly Baptist. It’s not as if he makes a point of arguing for believers’ baptism in each of his books, or even laying the foundation for that position. I think his purposes are higher.

Another point worth mentioning is that Carson is not a cessationist — he believes that charismatic gifts did not cease with the time of the apostles. But again, this is not a strong theme tainting his writings. With regards to the doctrine of salvation (soteriology), Carson is Calvinistic. He holds to the doctrines of grace. Moreover, he frequently refers to the importance of confessional Christianity. He doesn’t mean that as a reference necessarily to the Three Forms of Unity or Westminster Standards, but to the kind of Christianity that grounds itself in confessions generally oriented to the Protestant Reformation. Though I don’t care for the expression myself, some would call him a “Reformed Baptist.”

Conclusion
I heard Don Carson speak a few years ago at the Canadian Gospel Coalition Conference just a few streets over from us here in Hamilton. I was impressed. He writes well, but speaks even better. Pretty much anything that Carson writes, I’ll read. If he’s speaking nearby, I’ll be there. I guarantee that this friend will edify you as well.

Dr. Bredenhof is the author of many books including God Did Say! which is available at here.

Red heart icon with + sign.
Pro-life - Abortion

An Emergency Room is not the Church

Why “We Need a Law” doesn’t talk about the Gospel but you should  ***** One of the questions ARPA Canada has received most often pertains to ...
Red heart icon with + sign.
Homosexuality

One in ten? Alfred Kinsey’s most famous lie

Even if you haven’t heard of Alfred Kinsey you probably have heard about one of his key “findings” – that 10% of all people are homosexual. Dr...
Red heart icon with + sign.
Theology

How are we to read the Bible?

From January 16 to 18, in 2014, the Canadian Reformed Theological Seminary hosted a conference on the topic of hermeneutics. It's a big word, but the...
Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

A game for every situation

Visitors to my house are often surprised at the number of board games I own. OK, I’ll be the first to admit that I probably have too many games. Wha...
Red heart icon with + sign.
Being the Church

Laughter in the pews

My mother has a wise saying, one of many I might add, that if you go to church faithfully, you'll experience lots of interesting things. And she wasn't even talking about the sermons. She was referring to those unexpected events during the church service, things that shock or surprise us, or may even move us to fits of giggles or tears of laughter. I suppose each of us will have a favorite story to tell. And for some reason, things seem excruciatingly funny just when we're trying to be the most solemn. The smart shopper This tale happened on a Sunday morning late one January. The matronly Mrs. de Member (not her real name) sailed confidently up the aisle with a row of children in tow. This was a normal weekly occurrence. However, this Sunday the confidence was sadly misplaced. Mrs. de Member, no doubt in the busyness of getting half a dozen children church-ready, had forgotten to do a final check on herself. Perhaps her husband had already tooted firmly on the Suburban's horn, to remind his family that it really was time to go. After all, he did not want to be the last one in the consistory room, again. The brothers were not always gentle in their ribbing. Yes, if Mrs. de Member had done that final mirror check, she certainly would have noticed the sales tag that was now flapping and twirling from the back collar of her brand new winter coat. The offending stub informed all the curious that Mrs. de Member was a most frugal shopper. Apparently, she had waited until the price had been reduced, not once, not twice, but three times to less than fifty percent of the original! As she and her family settled into their pew, a couple of irreverent young rascals in the bench behind her snickered. Their mother signaled vigorously to shush them. Of course, no one was brave enough to draw Mrs. de Member's attention to the advertisement, and certainly no one had thought to bring a pair of scissors, to perhaps unobtrusively snip off the wayward tag. By the end of the service, everyone within reading distance knew the price down to the penny, including GST. Mrs. de Member was not in church in the afternoon. One of the little ones had apparently developed a bad cold over the lunch hour. Alone in the pews Church attendance with one's unpredictable progeny can be a challenging, and often humbling experience. Training the young ones to sit still and listen takes weeks even months. With some more recalcitrant offspring, years. (Some never learn, but move effortlessly from embarrassing their long-suffering parents to annoying the vigilant elders, who keep a hawk's eye on the socializing teens on the balcony.) In any event, the Sunday eventually arrives when a young Dad and Mom, let's call them Jim and Jenny, feel confident enough to attend the Lord's Supper, together. After having sternly warned their young ones to behave and having left a generous supply of peppermints with the eldest to be doled out at the appropriate moment, Jim and Jenny march resolutely up the aisle to the table. The minister greets them with a smile, and they take their seats, facing him. The minister speaks, the participants listen, the bread is passed, participants chew gently and swallow unobtrusively. All is quiet in the pews. The minister speaks once more, lifts the silver carafe high and the sparkling red liquid pours in a glittering stream into one of four silver goblets. He speaks the familiar words. He passes a goblet to his right, then one to his left. At that precise moment, a shrill little voice pierces the stillness. "Amy, give me a peppermint! Mommy said we could have a peppermint when the minister poured the wine!" A titter of barely suppressed laughter ripples through the pews. Here and there a Mom and Dad give each other a knowing wink and a sympathetic nudge. Remember what it was like? Jenny rubs her nose nervously, as a red flush creeps slowly up her neck and suffuses her face. Jim rummages in his trouser pockets, retrieves a pristine white handkerchief, and surreptitiously wipes his unexpectedly perspiring brow. How did it get so hot in here, all of a sudden? Thankfully, no further audible altercations ensue. Amy must have doled out the peppermints according to plan. The wine goblet, dutifully sipped from by all, has made its way around the table, and been returned to its place in front of the minister. All are attentive to the brief meditation. The organ begins the strains of a familiar psalm. The congregation joins in. The music fades, wafting gently upward to the rafters. The minister stands and nods. The participants rise and turn toward their pews. Jim and Jenny come down the aisle, eyes averted, shoulders rigid. Quickly they find their seats. And then again that high-pitched, persistent voice. "Mommy, Amy didn't give us any peppermints, but I said she had to, 'cause you told her to." "I know dear," Jenny whispers, placing her fore finger firmly over little Jimmy's lips. "Sh-h-h! You can tell me about it later." Congregational lore Two stories. There are many more. There was the time the minister lifted the lid off the baptismal font, only to find there was no water. Or the time when there was not enough wine to go around. Or the time the minister almost forgot to serve the wine. There was the time when an elder hauled his misbehaving daughter up front to sit in the elders' bench with him. The poor minister was so taken aback, he attempted a few more sentences, and then pronounced a speedy "Amen." Grandmas have fainted. Children and even an elder reading the sermon have vomited up their breakfast and whatever else they might have eaten before church. Collection bags have been dropped; coins and candies have rolled down the aisles. Birds and bees have flown in through open windows. Conversations from consistory rooms have been overheard by whole congregations, via the minister's microphone. Bibles have dropped from balconies on unsuspecting members seated below. And the best stories become part of congregational lore. They become part of our identity and shared experience. And in a strange way, they help us to love each other better....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Christian education - Sports

Is the good foul good? Playing basketball a different way

The object of basketball is pretty simple. You and your four teammates want to put the ball through your opponent's hoop. This is how you score. The other team also wants to score, but on the opposite hoop, so they will try to take the ball away from you. You must not let them! The winner is the team that manages to put the ball through their hoop the most times, in the time allowed. It's that simple. Simple, but it sounds like things could get kind of violent, right? This is where the rules come in. Basketball is a non-contact sport. There is even a rule that says so. The rules control the violence by punishing players who biff their opponents too obviously. The most common punishments are called free throws, which are free chances to score. Usually allotted in two's, they are given to the player who has been biffed to compensate him for the biffing he received. Biffing is, of course, also known as fouling. With players being punished for fouling, you would think they would do what they could to avoid committing fouls. After all, both the letter and the spirit of the rules are against fouling. But sometimes, late in a game, when one team is behind by only a bit but there doesn't seem to be enough time to catch up, they will foul their opponents on purpose. By fouling they do give their opponents free chances to score, but the clock stops. The strategy is simple. The team that is behind will foul the worst shooter on the other team and stop the clock. After the fouled player takes his shots (which they hope he will miss) they will get the ball back. The clock will start again and they will race down the court and hope they get their shot in. Then they will quickly try and foul again to stop the clock. This way only a few seconds of game time can be made to last a much longer time So it is actually to a team's advantage to foul in this case. This brings up two problems Christians might consider. The first is ethical. Fouling is against both the spirit and letter of the rules, so should Christians commit deliberate fouls? The second problem is also ethical but of a more concrete nature. Late in a game when one team tries to deliberately foul, the refs often won't call it. They know it is to the offending team's advantage so they will only call it if it is very, very obvious. The practical result is that these late, deliberate fouls are often very, very hard fouls. So again, should Christians commit these deliberate fouls? Some would say it's just part of the game. That is a somewhat legitimate argument. Sure the letter and spirit of the rules say that fouling is wrong, but anyone playing the game knows that these type of late game fouls will occur. No one is surprised, so in a way these fouls are a part of the unwritten rules for the game. That is just how it's played. But there is still the potential problem of injury, and the problem we should have with deliberately "biffing" someone. Sure it's a part of the game, but it doesn't have to be. In the Golden Bears' Summer Basketball League almost everyone is at least 6'2" and the average weight is somewhere above 200 pounds. The fouls in this league are already hard fouls and the league's organizers really didn't want to see any harder fouls late in the games. So instead of calling fouls the regular way the Golden Bears did it with a twist. If you committed a foul your opponents got one point and kept the ball. If you committed a foul on a player shooting the ball and he scored, the basket counted, and he still kept the ball. The clock never stopped and you could never regain possession of the ball by fouling a player. There was never an advantage to fouling someone. The end result was a league in which almost everyone had fun, and no fights occurred. It's just one approach, but it's worth considering....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Education

Home education - a way of life

"I get to help bake bread!" "Jason, can I read to you while you paint?" "Let's invite somebody over today. We can make cream puffs." Another day has begun. In our 'school' every day is a new adventure and the children plan their days as much as I do. It's been called "delight-directed learning," and we are enthusiastic advocates of this approach to home-education. The basic idea is to find out what interests your child has, and then to guide him to useful resources and experiences so he becomes an "expert in his field". Because we are not bound to a curriculum, we can use whatever books and resources we believe will be helpful and they can work at the pace which allows them to absorb the subject to the highest degree. Another advantage is that we can wait until our children are ready before teaching them new concepts, and we found this especially beneficial in teaching our son to read. Not everyone follows this approach. In 1997, there were over 6000 families home-educating in the province of Alberta, and each family chose the methods which were best for their children. Many home-educating parents follow a curriculum that provides daily lesson plans, workbooks and textbooks. They like the structure this provides and need the assurance that everything is being covered. Even so, they usually find that because one-on-one teaching is so effective, they can finish all the bookwork in the morning and use the afternoons to pursue other things. What Should They Be Taught? "But how do you know that your children are learning everything they need to know for adulthood??!" This is a question which we are frequently asked. It's true that they won't know everything by the time they turn eighteen, but then again, who does? Education should prepare children for a lifetime of learning, and the best thing we, as parents, can do when our children are young, is instill in them a love of learning and teach them how to communicate effectively, to write well, to be respectful and self-disciplined. These are the kinds of things young people need in the world, and if they don't know who the second president of the United States was, they'll know where to find the answer if they need it! Not that I'm downplaying the importance of history - our children need to know that there was life before they came along! We believe that the most important thing our children need to be trained in is good character. Developing patience, perseverance, diligence, obedience, generosity, self-control, discernment, resourcefulness, orderliness, compassion, deference, and a host of other qualities is a life-long pursuit which is best begun when our children are young. Nobody has a greater interest in our children's character development than we parents do, and nobody has a greater motivation either - we have to live with them! Here's a quick quiz for you: what do Winston Churchill, Alexander Graham Bell, Albert Einstein, the Wright Brothers, Philip Melanchthon, Leonardo da Vinci, Abraham Lincoln, Charles Dickens, and John Wesley have in common? They were all home-educated! I'm not saying that every home-educated child will grow up to be a genius, believe me, but I was very interested to read about these famous home-educated people, and I wonder what curriculum (or lack of it) they used! So how were we introduced to the concept of home-education? A friend of ours, who knew that we were looking into education options, called me up and said, "I heard this guy on the radio talking about home-schooling. It sounds kind of interesting; here's his phone number." And that was the beginning of a whirlwind of phone calls and questions, because this was only two months before our eldest was to start school. We decided to take the plunge and try it for a year, since kindergarten wasn't compulsory, and if it didn't work out we could put her in school for grade one. Instead, it has turned out to be a great source of joy for us to see our children grow and mature, to talk with them often, to have the best hours of the day with them, and to guide them in the ways of the Lord. And our children have the freedom to pursue their interests, to spend as much time as they want on what they are working on, and to be best friends with each other! What About Socialization? This is another thing we are often questioned about. What is "socialization," anyway? Is it not learning how to interact appropriately with others of all ages, having good manners and good habits, and behaving properly? These can all be learned very effectively in the setting of a family and in spending time with friends in the church and neighborhood. Peer pressure is avoided and they are free to be themselves and grow up slowly! So what do our kids do all day? We have three children: Jessica (12), Michelle (9), and Jason (8). Jessica does a lot of reading, Michelle is a craft enthusiast, and Jason plays with Lego a lot. They spend time together outside and get in each other's way occasionally. They have chores to do every day (dishes are a favorite), but a lot of their time is their own. Every so often, I say the word "math" and everyone dives for cover. Unfortunately for them, some things just have to be done, and times tables, borrowing and carrying, and fractions have all had their turn on the table. Spelling, handwriting, and phonics are other non-options. But then there are social and science topics that are theirs to choose. Middle Ages, Australia, bears, South America, seals, tigers, and beavers have all been covered, and the science kit is always available. The little electric circuit with a car wired in is fun to get out once in a while. Scooping creatures out of Grandad's pond and raising tadpoles has also been exciting for some (dad was unimpressed!). We are blessed in Alberta to have very reasonable home-school regulations that allow us the freedom to choose our own curriculum and teaching methods. We are required to register with a school board in the province. Various options are available to fulfill this requirement. The school board keeps records of our children's progress and assigns a facilitator who visits twice a year. They provide tests (government achievement tests, Canadian Test of Basic Skills, and others) if the parents want to make use of these. The board also provides funding for supplies (up to $510 per child per year upon sending in receipts, starting in Grade 1), and group lessons. Art supplies, books, and educational games are all covered by this funding. Where's Your Education Degree? "But you're not qualified to teach your children!" This is a misconception that holds many parents back from home-educating their own children, but studies have shown that even high school dropouts can effectively teach their children. All the parents need is to be literate and to have a love and concern for the overall development of the children that God has entrusted to them. It's true we are not government certified teachers, and it's true we're not experts on all the topics our kids ask us questions about, but some of the most rewarding experiences we have with our children are when we are learning together with them. There are always going to be things that we don't know, but we can show them where to find the answers, and let them discover things for themselves. Books, other people, educational videos, and field trips have been wonderful sources of information for us. We visit the library frequently and request books on topics the children are interested in. Setting an example of enthusiasm for learning is much more of a motivation for our children than trying to give them the impression that we know it all! We are members of a Christian support group in our city consisting of over one hundred families. We meet once per month to exchange ideas, hear about new opportunities, and use the library that belongs to the group. Each year a science fair is organized where the children can do a project and explain it to others. A field trip committee organizes various outings which families can go on together. Some of our favorites have been the John Walter Museum, Safety City, voyageur canoeing, and the Ukrainian Pioneer Village. These field trips are an opportunity to meet with other home-educating families. In the spring one of the families in the support group organized a track and field day, which was great fun! We try to take advantage of opportunities which we feel will advance the academic, social, and character development of our children. On to University Another query that home-educators often hear is "What if they want to go on to college or university?" We are not experts on this, as our oldest is only in grade seven at the moment, but from information which we have gleaned from meetings, conferences, and home-school families with older children, most colleges and universities have become much more open to the "home-school graduate" in the last five or ten years. Applicants from home-school families are not as rare as they once were, and for some colleges the writing of standardized equivalency tests is all that is necessary. For others, the Math and English Departmental exams must be written. In most cases though, it is recommended that students meet with the registrar ahead of time (in grade ten or eleven) to discuss options. It is also possible to qualify as a "mature student" upon reaching the age specified by the college (sometimes as low as 16 if the student has been out of school for one year). Another option students have to learn a trade is apprenticeship. This idea has been growing rapidly in home-school circles as it allows parents to have input into who their child's "teacher" will be. It is usually possible to find a Christian individual who does just what your young person wants to do, and most would be glad to have an assistant who works for free in exchange for being taught the necessary skills. This is just one of the ways that apprenticeship could work. Opportunities abound for motivated young people! As home-educators, we are often told that our children are naive. I must confess when we hear this we are encouraged. Do we really want them to be "worldly-wise," aware of all that goes on in the world around them? Their young minds are not equipped to deal with that kind of information. Should we talk to them about the evil practices of the world so that we can explain why they are wrong? That isn't right. Romans 16:19 says, "I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil." It is our duty as parents to shield our children from wrong influences and ideas. They will hear about it soon enough when they are older, and then they will be better able to deal with it and to stand firm in the faith they were brought up in. We are thankful that we heard about home education when we did. Our children are a gift from our Heavenly Father, and we treasure every day we have with them - they will be grown before we know it! Home education is a wonderful way to stay close to our children, to know what they are learning, and to guide them in the ways of the Lord. The primary responsibility of raising and educating children rests with their parents, and we have chosen to fulfill that responsibility ourselves instead of delegating it to others. It has become a way of life for us, and we are grateful for the opportunity to teach our children at home!...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Economics

If strikes are bad can unions be good?

I grew up hearing horror stories about unions but little else. Unions were bad because union members threw bottles and sticks at their opposition. Later on I found that unions often supported political parties that favored abortion. There was more harsh criticism when a teacher's union went on strike, demanding more money and holding the students for ransom. Unions were bad because their actions were bad. But is it possible to have a good union, even a Christian union? What if such a Christian union took a stand against picket line violence, didn't support political parties, and didn't strike? Would there be a place for this type of union? Maybe. Is there such a union now? No. The Christian Labour Association of Canada (CLAC) almost fits the bill. It's certainly against picket line violence, and doesn't support any political parties. That already elevates it above almost every other union but the CLAC is better than other unions in still other ways. Secular unions' are condemned in most Reformed circles for several reasons, including: Many require an oath of allegiance promising unconditional obedience to the principles of that union's constitution. Christians can't promise this type of obedience to anyone or anything besides God. Secular unions promote a class struggle between employers and employees, as if the two were natural enemies. Whereas the Bible instructs us to love our neighbor as ourselves, these unions encourage animosity between owners and their employees. The idea of a class struggle between the rich class and the poor class is accepted as inevitable by these unions (Karl Marx also thought it was inevitable). Unions strike. In contrast the CLAC recognizes God's supremacy and encourages a cooperative environment between employer and employee. Instead of advocating a class struggle they repeatedly emphasize respect and cooperation. But while the CLAC differs from most unions in these respects, it still shares the other unions' willingness to go on strike. They go on strike a lot less often, but they still go on strike. So the question is, can Christians go on strike? What Are Strikes? Employees have always had the ability to leave their jobs when they're unhappy with either the working conditions or their salaries. All they have to do is quit. When employees strike, however, they leave their jobs and prevent anyone else from taking them. They retain a claim to their job even as they vacate it. There is also a coercive element to strikes. They are designed to force employers to capitulate to employee demands. And what's wrong with that? The first problem is the harm caused by just such a strike. Whenever a business is shut down by a strike the people who have come to depend on that business suffer. The most obvious example is a teacher's strike, where the students suffer, but the same thing happens no matter what type of business is involved. A strike at a tire manufacturer will hurt (and maybe even shutdown) the automaker that's dependent on that tire supplier. The striking workers hurt innocent third parties. I once heard a union representative argue that there was no such thing as innocent third parties. He reasoned that if company B bought supplies from company A because of A's good price, and A had a good price because he unjustly underpaid his workers, then B was at least partially responsible for this injustice. B was encouraging injustice by supporting an unjust employer and so B would only get what he deserved if he was hurt by a strike at company A. This whole argument hinges on the union representative's idea of justice. He thought it was unjust to underpay workers. It might very well be, but who exactly is supposed to decide what a just wage is? Is $5 just? How about $10? Obviously it depends on the type of work. A McDonald's employee can't expect to get paid as much as computer engineer. But still the question remains, exactly how do you determine a just wage for these two positions? Wages, just or not, were at one time determined by free enterprise ideas of supply and demand. The lower the supply of qualified workers, and the higher the demand for those workers, the higher the wage would be. And vice versa. So an entry-level unskilled position at McDonald's, a position anyone could fill, receives a low wage, and a highly skilled, sought after computer engineer makes hundreds of thousands. On a basic level this seems fair, and even just to most people. We can clearly understand why some people are paid more and others are paid less. Skilled people get paid more and people in unpopular jobs get paid more because they are skilled, and because they are willing to do jobs no one else will. But when unions are thrown into the mix things get a bit peculiar. Have you ever wondered why mailmen get paid so much? Well back in the good old days of my father's youth (long, looooong ago) they weren't paid much more than an entry-level wage. After all, it didn't take a lot of brains to deliver mail, (really, how different is it from what your paperboy does?), so the post office didn't have to offer a high wage to attract employees. But then unions got involved and someone decided that mail delivery wasn't an entry-level position, it was a career. Minimum wage obviously wasn't good enough for a career position (perhaps it was even called unjust) so with the help of a number of strikes the union managed to substantially increase their workers wages. And they managed to substantially increase the cost of mail too. But why did their wages increase? Only because the union decided their jobs were career positions, not entry level. The union decided, and it had nothing to do with justice or fairness. And when steel workers, or grocery store clerks go on strike for another 25 cents an hour, it again is simply a union decision, and it has absolutely nothing to do with justice. Any attempt to link pay increases to justice is simply rhetoric meant to disguise the harm being done to the truly innocent third parties. And that's what's wrong with strikes. Strikes hurt third parties, not to further the cause of justice, but to further the striking workers' own welfare. The striking workers are thinking only of themselves. Non-striking Unions? Selfishness is only one problem with strikes. The coercive nature of strikes, where the employees try to bring their employer to his knees, isn't exactly in keeping with a Biblical theme. But if strikes are bad can unions be good? Yes, because unions don't have to go on strike. As mentioned before, employees have always had the option of quitting their jobs if they were unsatisfied with either the working conditions or the wages. If employees didn't have this ability they would be little more than slaves. Now, if a certain employer decides to pay unreasonably low wages, this non-striking union could advise its members to quit and seek employment in more profitable fields. But that isn't all such a union could do. As it stands now the CLAC already has a retraining center for employees who have lost their jobs. The center is paid for with union dues, and is used to retrain workers for new jobs usually with their same company. This center could be used to train employees to find new jobs in new fields of employment with other companies. Then when an employer decided to be unreasonable, his workers wouldn't be limited to just the jobs he was offering, at the unreasonable wage he was offering. If he wanted to retain them, he would have to start paying them a reasonable amount. A naïve dream? Perhaps a bit...but all the good dreams are....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Science - General

Star gazing and star guessing

The night sky has always fascinated mankind. Ancient people were able to identify many constellations and follow their annual paths across the sky. In...
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31