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.

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!

Theology

The beauty of 52 Sundays

or why we gave two years to bringing the Heidelberg Catechism to video… and more

*****

There is something disarming about the Heidelberg Catechism. It doesn’t begin with abstract definitions, but with comfort. Our only comfort.

Many of us have encountered, or experienced ourselves, a quiet guilt about “not knowing enough theology,” as if faithfulness were measured primarily by intellectual mastery. The Heidelberg resists that posture. Designed to be digested slowly over the course of a year, it teaches with patience. It repeats itself intentionally. It understands that formation takes time.

And it certainly took time to capture that on film.

Today, we find ourselves standing at a moment we honestly didn’t know how to imagine back on July 13th, 2023 when our organization, Faith to Film (FaithToFilm.ca) first took on this project. Every Lord’s Day of the Heidelberg Catechism now has a completed video. Fifty-two videos. Twenty-six pastors. Multiple denominations. One catechism. A full, freely available teaching resource on ReformedConfessions.org that did not exist before, but now it does.

Why we started

Pastor Hans Overduin took on Lord’s Days 15 and 23.

Too often, Christian content is forced to choose between depth and visual excellence. We didn’t think that tradeoff was necessary.

The Reformed confessions, in particular, seemed like an area crying out for this kind of care. Written centuries ago, they articulate truths that remain deeply relevant today. Truths with direct application for people wrestling with today’s fears, today’s doubts, and today’s hope. The church has never failed to recognize their value. They remain central to catechesis, preaching, and discipleship. And yet, the digital representation of them has not sufficiently reflected the clarity, weight, and beauty of the truth they contain.

We wanted to do something about that.

Our broader vision continues to be a single digital home for the Reformed Confessions where learning is layered. A video for introduction. A quiz for reinforcement. Extended material for deeper study. Illustrations that help concepts land. A place where churches can confidently send their people, knowing they will be met with clarity, pastoral care, and theological integrity.

Not to replace traditional catechesis, but to supplement it and to provide access for those who may not have the same proximity to teachers or resources, whether new converts, families, or believers in other parts of the world.

The Heidelberg Catechism felt like the natural place to begin.

We are deeply grateful to the twenty-six pastors who lent their voices to this work. Though they serve in a range of congregational settings, they spoke here in one voice, bearing witness to the unity the Heidelberg Catechism has long provided to the Reformed church. Their participation reflects a shared commitment to teaching what has been confessed, received, and faithfully passed down through generations.

The long middle

Rev. John van Eyk addressed Lord’s Days 11 and 13.

What we didn’t fully anticipate was just how long this patient approach would take. Don’t be mistaken, we understood the importance of moving slowly. We simply wanted the fruit of patience immediately. After all, two and a half years is long enough for enthusiasm to fade. Long enough for schedules to clash, funding to stretch thin, and momentum to feel fragile.

This is why we are so grateful for everyone who supported this work.

There is also a unique weight to the nature of this work. We regularly found ourselves asking difficult questions: Are we honoring the gravity of these truths? Are we preserving the warmth that Ursinus and Olevianus intended? Are we being careful, not only with words, but with images?

There is a real challenge in visually representing biblical and theological concepts while maintaining a healthy reverence for God’s name and character. Navigating that tension was no small task.

So yes, it is true that this has been a challenge, but it’s hard to stay stressed when the very content you are producing is a balm for your own soul. Sitting there, mouse in hand, editing a video on Lord’s Day 1, and being reminded that you are "not your own, but belong body and soul, to your faithful Savior, Jesus Christ." Time after time the words of the pastor on screen would cut straight through the producer mindset and hit the believer's heart.

It really is a profound thing to experience. To realize that the very truths you are trying to broadcast are the same truths holding you together while you do it.

Ready for you to use

Pastor Mark Wagenaar tackled Lord’s Days 52 and 22.

At this point, the Heidelberg Catechism series is no longer a project we are working on, but a free resource the church can now rely on. Go to ReformedConfessions.org, watch the videos, sit with the illustrations, and work through the questions. It is our prayer that it finds its way into your homes, classrooms, membership instruction, or quiet personal study.

We pray that, in the steady rhythms of teaching and repetition, God would use this work as He has so often used catechesis: to form believers who know what they believe, why they believe it, and how that belief shapes their lives before Him and before one another.

Above all, this moment draws our attention away from ourselves and back to the God who preserves His truth across centuries, cultures, and mediums.

As we look forward to the development of the remaining Three Forms of Unity, we rest in the knowledge that the weight of this work does not fall on us. We are not the reason these words endure. We are witnesses to the fact that they do. “The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever” (Isaiah 40:8).

Kyle Vasas and David Visser are a part of the team at Faith to Film which, in addition to ReformedConfessions.org, has done video series on Calvinism and Essential Truths, and is in the planning stage for one on office bearer training. Check out all their work, and how you can support it, at FaithtoFilm.ca.

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – April 4, 2026

Woody takes on screens? I wasn't expecting much from Toy Story #5, but with Woody and the crew taking on tech, I'm looking forward to this... 3 dodges that can derail any discussion Apologist Greg Koukl on the how skeptics will use "the ad hominem fallacy, the genetic fallacy, and the straw man fallacy" to avoid having honest discussions. And he shows how to get discussions back on track. US vice president thinks UFOs are demons J.D. Vance took that position based on his Judeo-Christian worldview. “I don't think they're aliens. I think they're demons anyway…. I mean, every great world religion, including Christianity, the one that I believe in, has understood that there are weird things out there, and there are things that are very difficult to explain. And I naturally go, when I hear about that sort of extra supernatural phenomenon, I go to the Christian understanding that there's a lot of good out there, but there's also some evil out there. And I think that one of the devil's great tricks is to convince people he never existed.” And creationist Gary Bates agrees. Canada should heed warnings from Dutch tax on unrealized gains The Netherlands House of representatives just passed legislation that would tax unrealized capital gains at 36 percent. That means, if your retirement stock portfolio grew from $50,000 to $150,000 this year, you would have to pay  government $36,000 on that $100,000 increase in value. One big problem? You don't actually have any of that money yet – it's still invested in your stocks. So, as this article shares, a "person would either have to sell the stocks, dig into their savings, or take out a loan to pay the government." And, as anyone who has stocks knows, that $100,000 increase could take a sudden drop at any time too. So what does such a tax encourage? To steer clear of investing, where the losses will still hurt, and your gains will be taxed before you've even realized them. If you think a tax on unrealized gains could never happen in Canada, consider the similarity behind our property taxes. As I spotted on the 'Net, from a fellow named Ron Rule: "Imagine if income taxes were based not on how much you made, but how much your town decided you could have made. That's basically how property tax works. The assessor decides what your house is worth, then taxes you as if you paid that price." Property values in places like Hamilton and Toronto have doubled in a decade, which means that people who bought homes before the market went crazy are now getting taxed on gains they won't "realize" until they sell their house. And if they bought a $500,000 home in 2015, and are now paying taxes on a house worth $1 million, the taxes may well force them to sell – their assessed increases, never actually seen in their bank account, might just drive them out of their home. A biblical case for border security US Speaker of the House Mike Johnson wrote this back before Donald Trump became president again. There is a certain sense in which I would suspect all readers would be united about border security. We lock our house doors, as Franklin Graham put it, not because we hate those outside, but because we love those inside. So we'd all be united in wanting to keep the drug and sex traffickers and other criminals out. But what of those who have no nefarious intent, and are simply looking for a better home? The practical observation in that case is, we can only start to consider those situations once the border is secure, so we can then sift the latter from the former. I wonder if Mike Johnson would support sponsorship programs, so that the individuals he speaks of, perhaps working through their churches, could act in rescuing some? Pierre Poilievre tells Joe Rogan he supports letting doctors kill their patients Last month Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre made an appearance on the most popular podcast in the world. Federally, his party has been leading the opposition against euthanasia for the mentally ill, and we can be thankful for that. But, in an appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience, he told Rogan that he actually supports giving people the choice to murder themselves. That's a problem, and for the mentally ill too, because if euthanasia is a right and is good medicine for some, then how can you deny this treatment for others when it could instantly alleviate their affliction? If it is mercy to kill some sufferers, why isn't it mercy to kill other sufferers too? What fixed standard can Poilievre (or Joe Rogan) appeal to that would permit death to be used to "help" the physically ill, but not the mentally ill? What immovable line can you draw once you've decided killing is caring? The lady below is coming out hard against Poilievre, and makes a very compelling practical argument against every form of euthanasia, highlighting the many enormous abuses underway in Canada's euthanasia culture. But the problem with her practical argument is that it invites a practical solution. Have better laws. Spend more on palliative care. Making the waiting time longer, etc. But no practical solution will safeguard life so long as a culture doesn't value life. And we will only value life when we no longer thing its value comes from us, or from others, or from what we can do or experience. It is only when a culture looks upward and understands that life – our own life – is not ours to dispose of as we wish, but is entrusted to us by God above, that it can draw a fixed line: Do not kill (Ex. 20:13). (This woman, Kelsi Sheren, takes God's name in vain several times, and drops an f-bomb or two, but I'm sharing the video anyway, because she presents here, in 20 minutes what you may not have heard in months of the mainstream media's euthanasia coverage.) ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

When there is smoke…

You think you know someone. Five years – truly, has it already been five years that we have spent morning, noon and night working side by side? How many meals, how much laughter, how many truly delicious accomplishments we have achieved together only to arrive at this Easter morning and have you, the oven I’ve grown to trust, inexplicably burn the bacon beyond recognition?!! The betrayal runs deep. Now, hopefully there aren’t any readers who are questioning the underlying necessity of bacon in the life of the believer. If so, go read Nehemiah 8 and then come back. I’ll wait. A large platter of bacon, crisped to perfection, is my weekly gift to my people, the reminder of all the wondrous things we mortals can experience this side of paradise. Over the years, I have moved through many different seasons and methods of bacon prep. In the newlywed years, I attempted bacon on a paper-towel-ensconced plate in the microwave. This works better, I admit, if you hadn’t thought it a brilliant idea to register for large, square dinner plates that, when placed in the microwave, aggressively prohibit the rotation mechanism, thus producing bacon that is highly, almost toxically cooked on one end and raw on the other. I then spent multiple years employing the electric skillet on the countertop method, which was largely fine but had two predictable problems I never seemed to entirely stay ahead of: I buy cheap griddles (yes, that technically makes me the problem, so make it three predictable problems) and they always seem to have large dead spots in the center, thus requiring a complicated mosaic of fatty meat scattered about that can cook approximately three pieces at a time, and the grease catch always has a tendency to break, which I consistently fail to notice until the grease has dripped all across the counter and floor, leaving an exciting patch for walking on days after the bacon has been consumed. Then I was introduced to cooking bacon in the oven and, dare I have the hubris to say, I shall never go back? It has now become a part of my own personal Sunday morning liturgy. To get the family up and out to worship without a stressed atmosphere, I wake up an hour or so before the rest and go cook bacon. Later, when everyone is up, I pop the already cooked bacon back into the now cooling oven to warm it back to perfection and voilà – eat the fat! This was my plan on Easter morning... And then the oven betrayed me. Now, if ovens could speak, mine would probably say (and for some reason, I hear this in an Australian accent), Whoa now, Missy, I am not the one who broke the pattern, you did! You acted the dingo (again, Australian) and left the oven on for too long and you did not pay close attention when you warmed the bacon back up, which is why your family had to eat LIMP TURKEY BACON on Resurrection Sunday! At this point, obviously, I would push random buttons on the oven that would make it stop talking and probably clean itself. Ha, and so there. But then... I would have to acknowledge that the oven, while unnecessarily preening and self-righteous and sporting a cooler accent than mine, was correct – I assumed the bacon was safe. I stopped paying attention. Smoke always ensues when we stop paying attention. It is really no different in our daily walks with Christ. We have areas that we let our guard down (you know the one, that guard we are told to keep up with unceasing vigilance because our adversary the devil roams about like a lion seeking one to destroy?). We feel safe, spiritually, and fail to pay attention to the faint aroma of singed flesh that is beginning to permeate our relationships, our thoughts, our homes. One such example that leaps to mind for me is that brief window of time at the end of a long day when you and your spouse finally get to go to bed. How many thoughtless words have been spoken in those last moments of the waking hours? How many misunderstandings could have been avoided, how many apologies would not have become necessary, if we were to go to bed, spiritually, with a knife under our pillow, ready to spring to the cross at the first sign of temptation? Because that is the only recourse when you light God’s good gifts on fire: Christ. He is your only protection, your true security, the only place you can and must turn again and again in the midst of temptation, of failure, of opposition, of smoke. Some kitchen fires... some relational fires... leave an aroma in the air that lasts for days. I spent a solid 48 hours haunted by the Easter bacon. But with each acrid whiff, I am given the choice to turn, and return, to the Gospel and put my hope in His unfailing protection. He is not done handing out bacon. So, I cannot be done standing guard, in His grace alone....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Science - General

Wild about beetles

From a young age some people are fascinated by beetles. For example, English author A. A. Milne wrote a delightful poem concerning a boy and his pet. The poem, in Now We are Six (1927), recounts the experiences of a boy who put a beetle in a matchbox for safekeeping. However disaster struck when his nanny, apparently looking for a match, inadvertently let the beetle out of the box. And Nanny let my beetle out - Yes Nanny let my beetle out - She went and let my beetle out - And beetle ran away. A search is set up and, happily, a beetle is discovered. It was Alexander Beetle I'm as certain as can be And he had a sort of look as if he thought it must be ME." So Nanny and the boy quickly shovel their find into the matchbox. This lady is determined not to make the same mistake again. And Nanny's very sorry too for you-know-what-she-did, And she's writing ALEXANDER very blackly on the lid." This delightful scenario has no doubt occurred through many generations in many countries. Even today, some children enjoy beetle pets. And all of us can appreciate beetles for what they tell us about their Designer, even if we are not in the market for a pet. Rhinos The scary looking rhinoceros beetles are among the largest beetles. Although they may grow to more than 150 millimeters, or 6 inches long, they are completely harmless to humans since they do not bite or sting. The claim to fame of these beetles is the horns, one projecting from each side of the thorax (section behind the head), and another one pointing forward from the centre of the thorax. These insects are sort of the Triceratops (horned dinosaur) of the insect world! They are a subgroup of the scarab beetles and, like most scarabs, they have strong legs – some species can lift up to 850 times their own weight! Our interest in this group of insects comes from the fact that children in Japan like to buy or catch these insects for pets. Apparently it is particularly fun to breed these pets. While most scarab beetles are not as showy as the rhinoceros beetles, they nevertheless are a most interesting group of insects. Beetles are a group of insects that exhibit sheathed wings. The front pair of wings (projecting from the back of the middle section or thorax) is hardened for protection. Underneath we find a second pair of wings which look more typical of insect wings. In order to fly, the beetle raises the hardened pair to expose the other pair which do the actual work of flying. In that beetles all exhibit a head, thorax (with three pairs of legs, besides the 2 pairs of wings), and an abdomen (covered by the hardened sheathed wings), they all are basically similar in design. It is in the design of the antennae, mouth parts, leg structure and ornamentation (color, patterns and projections) that we see variety between beetle groups. And variety there is indeed! In total, worldwide, there are about 165 families of beetle. We find most species collected in six extremely diverse families, each with about 20,000 or more described species. The scarabs or Scarabaeidae, are stout-bodied beetles measuring between 2mm long to 17 cm (almost 7 inches). Many scarab beetles exhibit bright metallic colors, especially on the hardened exterior wings (called the elytra). These insects have distinctive club shaped antennae, the component parts of which can fan out like leaves, in order to sense odous. The front legs often are broad and powerful for digging and the hind legs more so. Some of the most famous scarabs include dung beetles, June beetles, rhinoceros beetles, Hercules beetles and Goliath beetles, as well as those ever unpopular rose chafers. The Hercules beetle is the most famous of the rhinoceros beetles. Native to the rainforest of the Americas, this creature's central horn is extremely large and intimidating. Goliath beetles on the other hand, are among the largest insects in terms of body size and weight. Native to Africa, they measure 60-110 mm (2.5 - 4.5 inches) for males. The diets of scarab beetles range from fruit, to fungi, to dead animals and even the slime trails of snails. Dung beetles It is however the dung beetles, which are particularly remarkable. These species feed partly, or exclusively, on animal droppings. Dung, however, can be resource in short supply. The dung beetles have a wonderful sense of smell, based in their antennae, for locating this resource when it is fresh. Cows in a pasture apparently produce about 12 pats per day, per individual animal, but the location of these droppings is hard to predict. Once the odor reaches one beetle, it probably has also attracted many competitors, so speed is essential. One elephant dropping in east Africa was monitored in the 1980s. Four thousand insects arrived within a half hour. It took 16,000 dung beetles only two hours to entirely clear away 1.5 kg (3 lbs) of manure. Some dung beetles roll the dung into round balls which they immediately remove from the scene. They then bury it in a suitable spot in order to use it as food, or as a chamber to shelter and feed their young. Others merely bury dung where they find it. Still other species simply live in the manure where it has been deposited. The true dung beetles roll freshly deposited dung into round balls which may be very heavy compared to the insect. In one study, beetles averaging 2-5 grams in weight, moved dung balls which averaged 6-240 grams and they did this at speeds of up to 20 cm per second. That is fast going! Speed is essential because other dung beetles will steal the ball if they can. The male then pushes the ball in a straight line, despite all obstacles. One can move the farthest and fastest away from point A, when one travels in a straight line. If eggs are to be laid in the resource, the female follows behind, rides along, or helps push the ball. The dung beetles prefer the droppings of grazer animals (herbivores). These droppings are notoriously rich in undigested nutrients and in moisture. The beetles don't need anything else to munch or drink. Mostly the males push the ball backwards, rolling it with their hind legs. An item in the May 2012 National Geographic described how dung beetles may find themselves navigating across sand as hot as 150 degrees F (66 degrees C) during the day in South Africa. To cool their parched feet the beetles frequently climb up on top of the dung which may be only 73 degrees F, or 26 degrees C, compared to the hot sand. When scientists outfitted the beetles with heat resistant silicon booties the beetles did not need to climb up on the dung as frequently. It is evident that dung beetles, while proceeding backward in a straight line, need to orient themselves to prevent their moving in a circle. Features in the landscape will not work as points of reference because the insects are too close to the ground. Obviously the key is to look up to the sky. Previous studies have shown that beetles can navigate using the sun or the moon, or patterns of polarized sunlight or moonlight. Star bugs! Now a study, published in the Feb 18, 2013 issue of Current Biology, documents that dung beetles can also orient themselves by the stars, specifically the Milky Way. Marie Dacke of Lund University declares that her study with dung beetles is the very first demonstration that any creature, other than humans, can orient themselves by the Milky Way. In order to prove her point, she needed to be able to turn the stars on and off. Thus she obtained permission to deploy her beetles in the Johannesburg planetarium. With the "sky" darkened, the beetles went round in circles, but with the sky illuminated by stars, the beetles proceed nicely outward. One commentator remarked that dung beetles achieve a lot with minimal computing power in the brain. It is certainly interesting that this navigational skill is uniquely conferred upon a beetle. Scarab beetles are not exactly obscure insects. There are apparently about 30,000 species in the family, comprising about 10 per cent of all known beetles. The dung rollers were in former times venerated by the ancient Egyptians who compared the emergence of the young beetles from underground to the daily rising of the sun in the east. It is obvious, moreover, that these beetles are important contributors to a clean environment. By removing and burying dung they prevent disease-ridden insects from multiplying, and they also contribute to soil fertility. A project in Australia (1965-1985) involved the introduction of 23 species of dung beetles. There were native species already present, but they were unable to deal with the droppings of cattle, which have a different chemical consistency then the droppings of the native marsupials. This agricultural initiative resulted in improved fertility in pastures, and vastly reduced numbers of insect pests. But the scarab beetles are only one beetle family out of about 165 families. No doubt, the diversity of beetles and their interesting stories could fill many books. Other beetles The weevils (Curculionidae) are a very large family of usually small beetles (less than 6 mm or 1/4 inch long). Their distinctive feature is their long downward curving snout. The mouth parts at the tip are less elaborate than in many other groups. This does not prevent these beetles from damaging many crops. One of their infamous members is the cotton boll weevil. Others of the 60,000 species include those munching on nuts, fruits, stems and roots. The ground beetles (Carabidae) are another large and interesting group. Their claim to fame, besides their beautiful shiny black or metallic ridged hardened wings (elytra), is the pair of glands in the lower back of the abdomen. These glands produce nasty or even burning secretions guaranteed to make any creature threatening the beetle, extremely unhappy. Among the noxious products released by such insects are hydrocarbons, aldehydes, phenols, quinones, esters and acids. Among this infamous group we find the bombardier beetles which combine chemicals in a mixing chamber just prior to explosively releasing quinones at 100 degrees C along with a gas mixture. Most of these ground beetles live under bark of trees or under logs or rocks. Most are carnivores, eating any kind of invertebrate they can overpower. Because they eat many caterpillars which are plant pests, most ground beetles are fairly popular. Many of these beetles too, in former years, were prized by collectors because of their large size and showy color patterns. Many beetle families have unpopular representatives. The small darkling beetles (Tenebrionidae) with about 20,000 species, are named for their plain dull bluish black or brown color. Their preferred diet is fresh and decaying vegetation. However some of them make a habit of exploiting processed grain products. This group includes the confused flour beetle, the red flour beetle and mealworms. Such spoilage of food has apparently long been a problem for human societies. May Berenbaum mentions (p. 144) that alabaster vases from Tutankhamen's tomb (dating from about 1350 B.C.) were found to contain Tribolium castaneum, the red flour beetle. Many people feed Tenebrio (mealworms) to various pets, but the mealworms living on their own, are bad news for stored grain products. The leaf beetles (Chrysomelidae) include the Colorado potato beetle which has no trouble, once present in any numbers, in eating a potato plant completely to the ground. Another infamous member of this family is the flea beetle. These small dark beetles have very strong hind legs for jumping. Flea beetles are particularly enthusiastic about plants in the mustard of crucifer family. Cabbages, broccoli, cauliflower, radishes and the like are all fair game. And these beetles are a major economic concern on canola crops, also in the same plant family. Ladybugs One of the most delightful beetles however is the Coccinellidae family which includes ladybugs. These are predators of aphids and scale (bad plant pests) among other victims. We have only to consider the ladybugs to derive some appreciation of the diversity among beetles. Ladybugs are small, up to 10 mm long (0.4 inch). They are round, broadly oval or narrowly oval. They can be orange, red, yellow or black. The elytra is decorated with black spots, red spots, white spots or spots stretched into bars. The number of spots varies from 0, 2, 3, 7, 11, 13 or more. Over 5000 species are found worldwide and of these, there are about 450 species native to North America. Ladybugs and indeed all beetles, are wonderful examples of the richness and variety we see in nature. Beetles are quite plain in their basic organization. The amazing diversity in appearance as well as in lifestyle, tells us something about the Creator. God loves variety and He loves beauty! The fancy elaborations on the beetle theme in terms of talents and appearance, can only serve to increase our interest in the creation. Could the various ecosystems survive with plainer looking beetles? No doubt. But isn't it fun to be able to observe and enjoy beetles in all their vast variety? This first appeared in the June 2013 issue. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Economics, People we should know

Friedrich Hayek (1899-1992) showed us that free enterprise is necessary for freedom

One of the greatest social theorists of the twentieth century was a libertarian – some would say conservative – economist named Friedrich Hayek (1899-1992). Hayek spent his life arguing that free enterprise is not only necessary for economic prosperity, but also essential to maintain political liberty. For much of his career, he faced overwhelming opposition to these views, but he did eventually gain some mainstream acceptance, winning the 1974 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences. Hayek’s life and legacy An important book about Hayek has recently been published, written by Dr. Eamonn Butler of the Adam Smith Institute in London, England. It’s called Friedrich Hayek: The ideas and influence of the libertarian economist (2012), and it summarizes Hayek’s life and key insights. Hayek was born in 1899 in Vienna, earned a doctorate in law from the University of Vienna in 1921, and a doctorate in political science from the same university in 1923. At the University of Vienna Hayek became a close associate of Ludwig von Mises, the leading figure in the “Austrian School” of economics, which emphasizes the importance of the free market. Hayek and Mises then set up an economic think tank and Hayek undertook economic research. His research demonstrated that bad government policy was the cause of the “boom and bust” cycle of many countries’ economies, and he predicted that the USA was about to experience such a bust. Shortly thereafter, in 1929, his prediction came true, with the Wall Street Crash and the beginning of the Great Depression. In 1931 Hayek took up a position teaching economics at the prestigious London School of Economics in England. He became a naturalized British citizen in 1938 after Hitler took over Austria. The Road to Serfdom In April 1945 Readers' Digest released an abridged version of Hayek's Road to Serfdom. While the original is 250+ pages, this version is just 60. It can be read for free online here. There is also an 18-page cartoon summary that was meant to create interest in the longer book. You can find the comic at Mises.org/books/TRTS where you can also download the original, both of them also free to download. Because of World War Two, Hayek began to focus more on political science. He was afraid that totalitarian ideas were going to sweep the world, not just in the more vicious forms of Nazism or Communism, but even in the softer form of socialism. He believed that the moderately socialistic direction of the Western countries in the mid-twentieth century would ultimately lead to authoritarian government. To articulate this view, in 1944 he wrote a book called The Road to Serfdom, which was very controversial and quickly sold out its first print run. Butler notes that this book was: read by the young Margaret Thatcher, who later said she found it "the most powerful critique of socialist planning and the socialist state." It made Hayek’s name in America, too, where tens of thousands of copies were sold, and Reader’s Digest distributed another 600,000 copies of its own condensed version. Due to this publicity, Hayek gave lectures across the USA and became a visiting professor at Stanford University. In order to help spread libertarian ideas, in 1947 Hayek assembled 39 British, European and American scholars who supported individual freedom to found an organization that would promote the intellectual case for the free society. Because this meeting was held at the Swiss resort of Mont Pelerin, it was called the Mont Pelerin Society. This increasingly important organization still exists today to pursue the same goal. Shortly after World War Two, a former Royal Air Force fighter pilot named Antony Fisher went to Hayek to get advice on how to promote free enterprise in the face of popular socialist assumptions. Hayek convinced Fisher that the best thing would be to found a think tank that would generate intellectual arguments for freedom. A few years later, in 1955, Fisher set up the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), the first of several free market think tanks that would become very influential by the late 1970s and 1980s. Fisher would later play a role in the creation of Canada’s Fraser Institute, as well as like-minded think tanks in other parts of the world. Rise to prominence In 1950 Hayek became a professor at the University of Chicago. While there he wrote one of his most famous books, The Constitution of Liberty, articulating the foundations and principles of a free society. In 1962 he moved back to Europe to be a professor at the University of Freiburg in West Germany. As mentioned previously, he won the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences in 1974. And over the course of the 1970s he wrote a three-volume set called Law, Legislation and Liberty, once again expressing the intellectual case for the free society, as opposed to socialism. Besides the Nobel Prize, Hayek also received other honors. Butler points out that in 1984, Queen Elizabeth II made him a Companion of Honour (he described it as "the happiest day of my life"), and in 1991 he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by George H. W. Bush. Hayek died in 1992, after seeing his ideas receive acclaim in many academic circles, as well as influencing the policies of some English-speaking democracies (especially Margaret Thatcher’s Britain) and some newly-liberated Eastern European countries. Freedom versus socialism Among Hayek’s many insights, two are of most significance for Christians. First, he argued that modern societies are much too complex to be centrally planned by government (i.e. socialism doesn’t work). Secondly, he argued that attempts to engineer societies to conform to some concept of “social justice” inevitably lead to authoritarian government (i.e. socialism leads to tyranny). Many people believe that if human societies were completely planned and run by governments, they would be much more efficient and fair. In Western societies today there are so many different kinds of products, of so many different shapes and sizes, that the situation is virtually chaotic. So if the government could decide what is produced, all of the products could be standardized, leading to economic efficiency. As well, there is a considerable amount of inequality in society, because some people benefit much more than others in a free market system. Through central planning, the government could equalize incomes, and thus enhance social justice. 1. Too complex for central planning But Hayek points out that societies are much too complex for any human organization to be able to centrally plan successfully. Societies are spontaneous orders, with millions of people every day making economic decisions of various kinds. How could a government possibly be able to aggregate and apply all of the information that would be necessary to anticipate these economic decisions every day? It’s simply impossible. Any attempt to do so would lead to all kinds of economic problems (think, for example, of the old Soviet Union). Consider one particular example of this problem, namely, the determination of salaries in a centrally planned economy. Should a nurse get paid more than a mathematics professor? Should a butcher get paid more than a coal miner? There are thousands of different occupations, and the central planning authority would have to determine each of their salaries relative to each other. How could they possibly know what was right? Hayek correctly argued that the free market takes care of this efficiently without central planning. People pay us for the goods and services we produce because they value those products. So market rewards do depend, in a very real sense, on the value that we deliver to other members of our society. They also reflect the scarcity and skill of the producers, the numbers of customers who want the service and the urgency or importance that buyers attach to it Therefore a person’s salary reflects a number of economic factors, not the political calculation of a bureaucrat. If there are too many people pursuing a particular occupation, their salaries will go down. If there is a shortage of people in a particular occupation, their salaries will go up. In a free market society, economic information is communicated through prices. Prices are signals that indicate “to everyone where their product is most highly valued, and prompting them to steer their efforts and expertise in those directions.” Say, for example, that there is a shortage of tin. Because there is not enough of it, its price will rise. Due to the price increase, companies that use tin will use less of it or find a substitute for it. The extra demand for the substitute will in turn bid up its price, and prompt those using the substitute to seek yet other materials to substitute for that; and so it goes on. The entire market order adjusts to the shortage of tin, even though hardly anyone knows what caused it. The overall point is that free markets automatically adjust to changing conditions. It’s part of the nature of the free market to process all kinds of information and respond to it spontaneously. Central planners could never hope to know all of this information and to be able to respond to changes in the economy so rapidly and effectively. Besides the fact that socialism doesn’t work, its tendency is to lead inevitably to authoritarian government. A central planning government must determine how labor, land and other productive resources are used in the economy. It has to coordinate all these different factors so that they work towards the completion of the government’s plan. In such a situation, everyone would have to do what the authorities have determined is necessary for the achievement of the government’s objectives. Individuals must expect to be uprooted and deployed at the direction of the authorities, since personal life now counts for nothing compared to the good of the collective – a good that is defined by those same authorities. Butler summarizes the point this way: “When governments believe they can ‘run the country’ just as they might run a factory, our lives and property become a mere input at their disposal.” 2. Inequality can be a good thing A centrally planned economy can redistribute resources between people and therefore lead to a situation of greater material equality. However, the loss of freedom necessary for such an endeavor is quite high. As well, the economic benefits of inequality are lost. In the economic sphere, inequality is not always a bad thing. Yes, you read that right: inequality is not necessarily a bad thing. Butler describes Hayek’s insights on the economic importance of inequality this way: Inequality is not just the outcome of the market process: it drives the market process. The high gains made by successful producers act as a magnet, pulling people and resources to where the greatest value can be captured, and away from less productive and less valuable uses. So people and resources are attracted to where they will make the greatest possible contribution to future incomes. And this is a continuous, dynamic, growing process. The inequality that so many people resent is, in fact, the very attraction that steers effort and resources to their most productive applications, pulling up incomes at every level. Hayek argued that the government should have a minimal role in society. Mostly it should be concerned with national defense and enforcing the rules (laws) that protect people from each other. It would also provide public goods such as roads, land registries, organized responses to natural disasters, and other things that governments can do best. He also saw the need for government “to support needy groups such as people with disabilities, those incapable of work, orphans or the elderly.” Needless to say, the government can fulfill these tasks without becoming socialistic. Conclusion Hayek was not a Christian scholar and he was not trying to promote a Christian perspective. Nevertheless, his scholarship dovetails well with Biblical Christianity because he believed in the need for a private property-based economic system. The Bible establishes private property as an essential institution and assumes a private property-based economy. In this respect Hayek’s intellectual work supports an economic system much like what the Bible demands. There are few twentieth century thinkers that were as important and influential as Friedrich Hayek. Whereas so many academics think that mankind is smart enough to re-engineer societies through governmental power, Hayek was humble enough to concede that human beings are very limited in their knowledge and that their efforts to re-engineer any society are bound to be detrimental. While not everything in his thinking can be embraced by Christians, his overall perspective on economics and society provides a powerful intellectual antidote to the socialistic fallacies that are still common in North American colleges and universities today. Hayek and his ideas are featured below in a couple of epic rap battles vs. his economics arch nemesis, John Maynard Keynes. ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

The conceited apple-branch: a Romans 12:3-8 fable?

Was Hans Christian Andersen thinking of Romans 12:3-8 when he wrote this? Perhaps not…. but he could have been. ***** It was the month of May. The wind still blew cold, but from bush and tree, field and flower, came the whisper “Spring has come.” Wildflowers covered the hedges, and under one little apple-tree, Spring seemed especially busy, telling his tale to one of the branches which hung fresh and blooming, and covered with delicate pink blossoms that were just ready to open. Now the branch knew well how beautiful it was – this knowledge exists as much in the leaf as in our blood. I was not surprised when a nobleman’s carriage, in which sat a young countess, stopped in the road right by. She said that an apple-branch was a most lovely object, and an example of spring at its most charming its most charming. Then the branch was broken off for her, and she held it in her delicate hand, and sheltered it with her silk parasol. Then they drove to the castle, in which were lofty halls and splendid rooms. Pure white curtains fluttered in every open window, and beautiful flowers stood in shining, transparent vases. In one of them, which looked as if it had been cut out of newly fallen snow, the apple-branch was placed, among some fresh, light twigs of beech. It was a charming sight. Then the branch became proud, which was very much like human nature. People of every description entered the room, and expressed their admiration. Some said nothing, others expressed too much, and the apple-branch very soon came to understand that there was as much difference in the characters of human beings as in those of plants and flowers. Some are all for pomp and parade, others are busy trying to maintain their own importance, while the rest might not be noticed at all. So, thought the apple-branch, as he stood before the open window, from which he could see out over gardens and fields where there were flowers and plants enough for him to think and reflect upon, it is the way of things that some are rich and beautiful, some poor and humble. “Poor, despised herbs,” said the apple-branch, “there is really a difference between them and one such as I. How unhappy they must be, if that sort can even feel as those in my position do! There is a difference indeed, and so there ought to be, or we should all be equals.” And the apple-branch looked with a sort of pity upon them, especially on a certain little flower that is found in fields and in ditches. No one gathered these flowers together in a bouquet; they were too common. They were even known to grow between the paving stones, shooting up everywhere, like bad weeds, and they bore the very ugly name of “dog-flowers” or “dandelions.” “Poor, despised plants,” said the apple-bough again, “it is not your fault that you are so ugly, and that you have such an ugly name. But it is with plants as with men, – there must be a difference.” “A difference?” cried the sunbeam, as he kissed the blooming apple-branch, and then kissed the yellow dandelion out in the fields. All were brothers, and the sunbeam kissed them all – the poor flowers as well as the rich. The apple-bough had never considered the extent of God’s love, which reaches out over all of creation, over every creature and plant and thing which lives, and moves, and has its being in Him. The apple-bough had never thought of the good and beautiful which are so often hidden, but can never remain forgotten by Him – not only among the lower creation, but also among men. However, the sunbeam, the ray of light, knew better. “You do not see very far, nor very clearly,” he said to the apple-branch. “Which is the despised plant you so specially pity?” “The dandelion,” he replied. “No one ever gathers it into bouquets; it is often trodden under foot, there are so many of them; and when they run to seed, they have flowers like wool, which fly away in little pieces over the roads, and cling to the dresses of the people. They are only weeds. But of course there must be weeds. Oh, I am really very thankful that I was not made like one of these flowers.” Soon after a group of children came to the fields, the youngest of whom was so small that he had to be carried by the others. And when he was seated on the grass, among the yellow flowers, he laughed aloud with joy, kicking out his little legs, rolling about, plucking the yellow flowers, and kissing them in childlike innocence. The older children broke off the flowers with long stems, bent the stalks one round the other, to form links, and made first a chain for the neck, then one to go across the shoulders and hang down to the waist, and at last a wreath to wear round the head. They all looked quite splendid in their garlands of green stems and golden flowers. It was then that the oldest among them carefully gathered the faded flowers – those that were going to seed in the form of a white feathery crown. These loose, airy wool-flowers are very beautiful, and look like fine snowy feathers or down. The children held them to their mouths, and tried to blow away the whole crown with one puff of their breath. “Do you see?” said the sunbeam, “Do you see the beauty of these flowers? Do you see their powers of giving pleasure?” “Yes, to children,” scoffed the apple-bough. By-and-by an old woman came into the field, and, with a blunt knife, began to dig round the roots of some of the dandelion-plants, and pull them up. With some of these she intended to make tea for herself, but the rest she was going to sell to the chemist, and obtain some money. “But beauty is of higher value than all this,” said the apple-tree branch; “only the chosen ones can be admitted into the realms of the beautiful. There is a difference between plants, just as there is a difference between men.” Then the sunbeam spoke of the abundant love of God, as seen in creation, and seen over all that lives, and of the distribution of His gifts to all. “That is your opinion,” said the apple-bough. Then some people came into the room, and, among them, the young countess – the lady who had placed the apple-bough in the transparent vase, so pleasantly beneath the rays of the sunlight. She carried in her hand something that seemed like a flower. The object was hidden by two or three great leaves, which covered it like a shield, so that no draft or gust of wind could injure it. And it was carried more carefully than the apple-branch had ever been. Very cautiously the large leaves were removed, and there appeared the feathery seed-crown of the despised dandelion. This was what the lady had so carefully plucked, and carried home so safely covered, so that not one of the delicate feathery arrows of which its mist-like shape was so lightly formed, should flutter away. She now drew it forth quite uninjured, and wondered at its beautiful form, and airy lightness, and singular construction, so soon to be blown away by the wind. “See,” she exclaimed, “how wonderfully God has made this little flower. I will paint it with the apple-branch together. Every one admires the beauty of the apple-bough; but this humble flower has been endowed by Heaven with another kind of loveliness; and although they differ in appearance, both are the children of the realms of beauty.” Then the sunbeam kissed the lowly flower, and he kissed the blooming apple-branch, upon whose leaves appeared a rosy blush. This article was originally published in the May/June 2028 issue of the magazine. This is a lightly modified/modernized version of Andersen's “The Conceited Apple-Branch.” ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Health-adjusted life expectancy plummets

Canadians can expect 3.5 fewer years of good health compared to a decade ago, according to recent data published by Statistics Canada. Life expectancy has increased steadily in Canada and throughout the world for many decades, though with a noticeable dip around the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. But it is one thing to live longer, and another to live healthier. The Statistics Canada report examined health-adjusted life expectancy (HALE), a measure of the number of years in good health an individual is expected to live. Comparing the period of 2000-2002 to 2010-2012, HALE increased by nearly two years, to 70.4. But fast-forward a decade later to 2023, and HALE has dropped to 66.9 years, erasing the gains from the previous decades. Factors that contribute to the drop include the thousands of annual deaths from drug overdoses, increased mental health challenges, increased obesity, more misuse of drugs and alcohol, and a strained healthcare system. Although other countries also experienced a drop, it wasn’t as significant. The World Health Organization reported a 1.6 year decrease for HALE during and after the pandemic internationally. And although Canada ranked 5th in the world in life expectancy in 1990, our ranking has plummeted to 25th today. The Statistics Canada study noted that Canadian females have a life expectancy of 84 years and a HALE of 67.7 years, while males have a life expectancy of 79.6 years and a HALE of 66.4 years. Scripture makes it evident that God sovereignly determines how many days we live (Ps. 139:16) and is the One who gives us health or takes it away (Jer. 30:17, Ps. 103:3). We also learn from passages like Proverbs 3:1-2 (“keep my commands in your heart, for they will prolong your life many years and bring you peace and prosperity”) that walking in line with God’s Word is good not just for our spiritual health but also our mental and physical health. This correlates with studies that find that those who regularly attend religious services live about four years longer than average and have a much lower (up to 33 percent less) risk of death at any given moment....

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Saturday Selections – Mar. 21, 2026

Make college less expensive by making it less expansive? When colleges were Christian it made sense that they had certain basic courses that would be required of all students. While it would be arguable then too what those basics should all be, understanding that God's fingerprints are everywhere evident gives a basis for His people to want at least an overview of the broad topics of music, arts, athletics, history, math, logic, and maybe more. But when colleges aren't Christian, and those in charge can't even understand that boys can't become girls, we know better than to believe they have the wisdom to know what core subjects all students should be exposed to. The many problems with BC's human rights regime The Devil will try to obscure, confuse, and hide or, as is happening here, silence the truth, because he can't beat it. Now, God's Name is holy, thus there are also Christian reasons for some restrictions on speech. But the case for broad freedoms of speech is actually this Christian one: We aren't worried about protecting God's Truth. We know it isn't fragile, so it doesn't need to be protected with protective speech codes. And we understand that the Holy Spirit uses people, and the dialogues we have, to bring people to Him, thus people need to be free to propose even errors, so they can be corrected and exposed. But the more our culture turns their back on God, and His 10 Commandments, the more they, as Chesterton put it, will govern by their 10,000 commandments – laws and restrictions without end, governing not just actions, but speech, thoughts, and feelings. If Christianity isn't true, then why the outrage at Epstein? "...modern pagans despise Christian sexual morality, but they are also forced to borrow from it as they condemn the kind of horrific treatment of women and children revealed in the Epstein files. The 'uncomfortable truth about the Epstein accusations,' as Paul Anleitner posted on X, is that… 'We only find them morally reprehensible because of Christianity.'" Elders are competent to counsel Christians underestimate the wisdom God has given us in His Word. Christians also overestimate the wisdom of the world. We think we need to turn to the "experts" in matters of counsel, even though these are the folks who say that boys can become girls, sex before marriage is fine, homosexuality is just another lifestyle (and doesn't lead to incontinence), and life doesn't begin until you are born. Christians stand up for a Sikh in court The Sikh didn't want to swear a loyalty oath to the queen because he said it would conflict with his oath to "Akal Purakh and to his spiritual guides" to which his religious convictions say he owes sole allegiance. The courts initially said that swearing loyalty to the queen didn't violate his religious belief because swearing loyalty to the queen wasn't really about swearing loyalty to the queen. Hmmmm.... The courts could have concluded that the Sikh's stand just couldn't be accommodated, but this excuse about there being no conflict was relativistic nonsense, pretending that words don't mean what they clearly do. So the Christian Legal Fellowship was happy to intervene. The Canadian government is now deciding who's a journalist The media are said to be a watchdog for the governed, holding to account the governors. But what if that government started subsidizing the press, but only the reporters it favored? And what if "the government is not just subsidizing the press, it is defining it and accrediting it"? Then what we have is a clear attempt by the government to turn the people's watchdog into the government's lapdog. See also below Conservative MP Rachael Thomas talking to former CBC host Travis Dhanraj about how Conservatives were specifically excluded from being given time. https://youtube.com/shorts/oAT5G0QBxqg?si=zMCrdlBSY73thN6S...

Red heart icon with + sign.
News

Alberta introduces law to restrict euthanasia

On March 18, Alberta Justice Minister Mickey Amery rose in the Alberta legislature to introduce Bill 18, the Safeguards for Last Resort Termination of Life Act. “It is my hope that if Bill 18 is passed, it will set an example for the rest of Canada, because hope should always be easier to access than death.” With this bill, Alberta is set to become the first Canadian jurisdiction to formally restrict euthanasia in Canada. This is big news and a massive win for pro-life advocacy in Canada. While the media, government bodies, and legislators have signaled concerns about euthanasia, there has been little appetite to reverse course. Until now. What does Alberta’s Safeguards Bill do? The Safeguards for Last Resort Termination of Life Act restricts euthanasia in many ways. First, Bill 18 will prohibit doctors from murdering any of their patients who are not nearing natural death. Euthanasia was initially legalized only for those whose natural death was “reasonably foreseeable,” but it was also legalized for non-terminal conditions in 2021. Alberta’s bill turns back the clock and clarifies that Medically-Assisted Death (MAD) will only be available for people with a prognosis of natural death within 12 months. Second, Bill 18 will prohibit euthanasia for people with mental illness as their only underlying condition. As of right now, euthanasia for mental illness is scheduled to become legal across Canada on March 17, 2027, although this expansion has been delayed a couple of times and there is a federal bill right now that proposes to scrap this expansion entirely. Alberta’s legislation means that no matter what the federal government does about euthanasia for mental illness, it will not be offered in Alberta. Third, the Safeguards for Last Resort Termination of Life Act bans healthcare providers from initiating a conversation about euthanasia or advertising euthanasia in medical facilities. If assisted suicide is offered or advertised in hospitals, patients may feel pressured or encouraged to consider it. If passed, Bill 18 would allow health professionals to talk about euthanasia only if the patient brings it up first. Fourth, this legislation would codify conscience rights into law. It allows medical professionals not to provide euthanasia, assess a patient’s eligibility for euthanasia, or refer a patient to a euthanasia provider against their conscience. Bill 18 would also protect healthcare facilities’ freedom to opt out of providing or participating in euthanasia. This is increasingly an issue for faith-based institutions that want to provide care without murdering their patients. Fifth, this proposal would establish better oversight over euthanasia. Although euthanasia is still an exception to murder in Canada’s Criminal Code, governments have implemented very little oversight to ensure that existing rules are followed. Bill 18 will establish better oversight, review euthanasia deaths, and impose professional penalties for failure to follow criminal or provincial regulations. Sixth, the bill cracks down on “doctor shopping.” Right now, if a person is refused euthanasia by one doctor, they seek out another doctor who will approve their request. For example, in 2024, a woman who was refused euthanasia by her doctors in Alberta was later approved for euthanasia by a doctor in British Columbia. Bill 18 will prohibit doctors from referring a patient to a doctor in another province. Those are the biggest changes Alberta is proposing, though the legislation contains even more restrictions on medical assistance in dying. How can you respond? This legislation is the most pro-life legislation introduced by a sitting government since Brian Mulroney’s failed abortion bill over 35 years ago. While the bill is very likely to pass in Alberta’s majority government, it is still a good idea to send a note to your MLA urging him or her to support this legislation if you live in Alberta. You can also thank the Premier and the Minister of Justice for their leadership on this issue. Those who live outside Alberta should also reach out to their MPP/MLA, health minister, and premier to ask them to introduce similar legislation. Bill 18 only applies in Alberta. But every suffering person deserves these safeguards against euthanasia, no matter their postal code. Proverbs 24:11 counsels us to “Rescue those who are being taken away to death; hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter.” While Reformed Christians shouldn’t rest until euthanasia is outlawed entirely, Alberta’s Safeguards for Last Resort Termination of Life Act will certainly rescue many and try to hold back many more. Top photo is, from left to right, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, Justice Minister Mickey Amery, and an Ontario doctor who also spoke, as they announce to reporters Bill 18’s euthanasia restrictions. Photo is by Chris Schwarz/Government of Alberta and used with the government’s permission....

Red heart icon with + sign.
In a Nutshell

Tidbits – March 2026

Still true in some places… Johan had left Edmonton to go up northward, near Neerlandia, for a bit of skydiving. Late Sunday evening he was found in a tree by a farmer. “What happened?” asked the farmer. “My parachute didn’t open!” Johan replied. “Of course not,” said the farmer. “Around here most nothing opens on Sunday.” Even if your wife is a ninja…. In his book, This Momentary Marriage, John Piper takes on the task of teaching men what it means to be men. Building on Ephesians 5:21-33 he points out a number of roles males should take on including one he wishes was “too obvious to need illustration,” that of protector. He notes that this role is not given on the basis of ability, but gender alone – this is what real men do: “If there is a sound downstairs during the night and it might be a burglar, you don’t say to her, ‘This is an egalitarian marriage, so it’s your turn to go check it out. I went last time.’ And I mean that – even if your wife has a black belt in karate. After you’ve tried to deter him, she may finish off the burglar with one good kick to the solar plexus. But you’d better be unconscious on the floor, or you’re no man. That’s written on your soul, brother, by God Almighty. Big or little, strong or weak, night or day, you go up against the enemy first. Woe to the husbands – and woe to the nation – that send their women to fight their battles.” Great podcast for the kids If you’re looking for a podcast to play for your kids on a long drive or family trip, you may want to check out Angela O’Dell’s explicitly Christian “Real Cool History for Kids.” These 15-minute-or-so episodes are aimed at kids 6-12, and with more than 150 to choose from mom and dad can pick a topic that will interest them too – O’Dell covers everyone from Queen Elizabeth to Karl Marx and Charlie Kirk to Bonnie and Clyde. Our family has been listening off and on for years now, and have really enjoyed tackling two or three at a time. She is very clear about bringing a biblical worldview to the show (and in her dinosaur episode, she even comes out as a 6-day creationist!) – I don’t know that we’ve ever heard a take we didn’t agree with. Check out “Real Cool History for Kids” at AngelaODell.com or wherever you listen to podcasts. Chesterton and Charlie on Original Sin Chesterton spoke of how some religious sorts were disputing whether Man was even in need of washing – was he actually sinful? How ridiculous, Chesterton argued, for men incapable of even imagining sinlessness in their dreams, to “deny human sin, which they can see in the street.” “Certain new theologians dispute original sin, which is the only part of Christian theology which can really be proved.” Charles Spurgeon made the same point this way: “Any man who declares children to be born perfect was never a father. Your child without evil? You without eyes, you mean!” Pious sounding evasion When evangelist Ray Comfort first heard the St. Francis of Assisi quote, “Preach the Gospel; where necessary, use words” it, rather ironically, left him “upset beyond words.” This quote is used to encourage a type of “lifestyle evangelism” that involves “less talk, and more walk.” Instead of preaching the Word to their unbelieving friends and neighbors, Christians are supposed to just let their light shine by living good lives. There is something to this idea – God tells us we can impact the unbelieving with the way we live our lives (1 Pet. 3:1-2). But that doesn’t negate the need to use the Word (Rom. 10:14). Comfort exposed the empty piety of the St. Francis quote with a story. In a refugee camp thousands of children were on the brink of starving to death even though there was food enough to give them. Why weren’t they being given the food? Because one of the aid workers had held up a sign that said: “Feed the starving children. Where necessary, use food.” Such an approach would be insane, but, Comfort insists, no more so than thinking we can preach the Gospel without using words. Earth thrown in “If you read history you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were those who thought most of the next. The apostles themselves, who set out on foot to convert the Roman Empire, the great men who built up the Middle Ages, the English evangelicals who abolished the slave trade, all left their mark on earth, precisely because their minds were occupied with Heaven. It is since Christians have largely ceased to think of the other world that they have become so ineffective in this one. Aim at Heaven and you will get earth ‘thrown in.’ Aim at earth and you will get neither.” – C.S. Lewis Are creationists pitting Scripture vs. science? We who hold to a recent (in the last 6,000 years or so), six-day creation are sometimes accused of pitting Scripture versus science. After all, doesn’t mainstream science tell us the universe is billions of years old? Now, if that’s what we’re calling “science” then it is true, us six-day sorts do know we’ve got a problem. But when mainstream scientists hold as their a priori assumption that only naturalistic explanations are valid, they’re the ones picking a fight. After all, Romans 1 and Ps. 19 affirm (as do our own eyes) that all of creation testifies to its supernatural origins. And that’s not the only Scripture vs. secular science conflict. Genesis 1:27 declares “male and female He created them” but the medical and psychological experts won’t stand for such binary bigotry. The Bible says children are a blessing but we’ve got experts lamenting each new addition’s carbon footprint. While God presents life-long monogamy as best, mainstream science says it simply isn’t natural...though homosexuality is. Yes, this is science – of a sort – pitted against Scripture, but the conflict isn’t of our doing. If we are troublemakers it is only because, standing as we are on the firm foundation of God’s Word, we refuse to be moved. As Douglas Wilson put it: “The Bible teaches that Adam produced death. The opposing view has to say that in some manner death produced Adam.” Those are the two sides, and there is no reconciling them. We who follow a God/man who died and rose, can’t avoid a fight with any and all who say dead men don’t rise and the supernatural isn’t. That’s the fight to be had. So let’s rise to it! Reagan’s principal, on parenting Ronald Reagan remembered his high school principal fondly, recounting how he had his priorities in place. And as principal he was standing in loco parentis and so there is a reminder here how parents should prioritize: “I was in the principal’s office once in Dixon High School, and I wasn’t there just to pass the time of day. Well, at one point he said to me, ‘You know, I don’t care what you think of me now. I’m only interested in what you think of me fifteen years from now.’” Can you put that in writing? In a recent issue of Focus on the Family’s magazine, parent Renae Green shared how she was teaching her 11-year-old to stop tattling. “I told my children that I would only accept and review written complaints.” Implementing this new policy has her daughter thinking twice – is her brother’s behavior annoying enough to warrant working through the paperwork? And, most of the time, her answer is, no. Too proud to seem weak Walter Dean Myers is a children’s author I haven’t read, but his own story sticks with me. Money was tight, and his mother was an alcoholic – when he was 14 she stole the money he’d been saving up to buy a typewriter. His janitor dad, not rich by any means, stepped in and bought the typewriter for Walter instead. But that was the last time his dad showed any interest in his son’s writing. Walter went on to write over 100 books, and, as he told his own son in an NPR interview, Walter’s dad “never said anything good about my writing…. And that really, that really hurt, that really bothered me.” Walter tried to get his dad’s attention by turning some of his dad’s own stories into published work. “I would show them to him, and he would never comment on them. So, when I did that, then I said, he hates me. You know, he hates me.” When his dad was dying, Walter brought him the book he’d just published, “And he picked it up and he looked at it, and then he just laid it down.” It was only after his dad died, and Walter looked through his papers, and saw they were all signed with an X, that he realized his dad didn’t know how to read. And that’s why he’d never said anything about his writing. So here was a son too hurt to ask why his dad wouldn’t read his work, but, hitting closer to home, a dad, too proud to let his son see his shortcoming. Parents, we’ve all learned lessons the hard way, and while those might be embarrassing moments, if we want our kids to sidestep some of the troubles we blundered through, we will need to share our weaknesses. There is such a thing as sharing too early, or too much, but, as this sad story shows, we can be tempted to share too little....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Assorted

The slippery slope is real

Some weeks ago I wrote a piece about a San Francisco pastor, Fred Harrell, who had recently attacked the doctrine of penal substitutionary atonement. In doing so, I made a connection between Harrell's prior shifts  – first, adopting the ordination of women and, second, endorsing homosexual relations – and his most recent movement away from the clear teaching of God's Word. My conclusion was to posit this as evidence of a slippery slope, further noting that in our cultural moment the slippery slope is usually entered at the point of ordaining women to office in the church. It would be an understatement to observe that this post touched a raw nerve for some readers. (One well-known pastor wrote me privately to accuse me of being schismatic. It is a feature of our times, I am afraid, that to defend the consensus on which we have built unity is to be labeled as divisive.) Of the different reactions one that most surprised me was a denial that there is validity to the idea of slippery slopes. My initial response to this criticism is to marvel that people can take this position in light of recent church history. Still, the topic is important enough that I think it good to defend the reality of the slippery slope. Why is the slope slippery? First, let me define what I mean in referring to the slippery slope. The slippery slope simply notes that those who remove the restraint against worldly conformity place themselves in peril of further and more damaging accommodations. The slope becomes slippery when the source of friction is removed. Far from the logical fallacy of which it is charged, there is a logical basis for the slippery slope argument: when the authority of Scripture is yielded to cultural demands, the loss of that authority renders us vulnerable to further cultural demands. Herein lies the wisdom of Scripture: "If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?" (Ps. 11:3). Indeed, the very first Psalm begins with a portrayal of the slippery slope, charting a progression from "the counsel of the wicked" to "the way of sinners" and ultimately to "the seat of scoffers" (Ps. 1:1). That it’s slippery doesn’t mean everyone slides In making these observations, I do not mean that anyone who changes his or her view in the direction of cultural preferences is irrevocably bound to further concessions. It is blessedly true that people and churches have taken a perilous step to the left (or right) and later reconsidered, and to note examples of this happening does not prove that their previous action had not been imperiled. It is because the slippery slope can be escaped by recommitting to Scripture that warnings of peril are of value. Moreover, I do not mean to suggest that those who make any concessions to culture over Scripture have already abandoned the atonement of Christ. I am suggesting, however, that the slippery slope is...well, slippery. Those who remove traction from their feet may very well slide much further than they first thought possible. As Fred Harrell's progression illustrates – together with those of the PC(USA), CRC, RCA, Church of Scotland, and other denominations – the abandonment of clear biblical teaching at one cultural pressure-point (women's ordination), imperils us with further capitulations (homosexual acceptance), and if unchecked will find itself challenged to avoid "touching the Jesus Box" (i.e. denying even the resurrection of our Savior). It starts with women’s ordination Second, I noted that in our time, the slippery slope is usually entered at the point of women's ordination. This tendency is not surprising, since the assault of secular culture against the Bible is most tenaciously focused on gender and sexuality. To uphold biblical gender norms, including the Bible's clear teaching on male-only ordination is the single most inflammatory position that Christians may hold in our culture. For this reason, it is hard to find an example in recent history when a Christian leader or church denomination moved from biblical conservatism to unbiblical cultural conformity when the slide did not begin with the ordination of women to church office. It stands to reason, then, that we should avoid thinking that we can conform to the worldly demands regarding gender and avoid further accommodations of greater significance. What about women deacons? This brings me to the topic of women deacons. Several critics accused me of asserting that to support the ordination of women to the office of deacon is to abandon the gospel. This response is noteworthy because I made no mention of women deacons in my original post. I will admit, however, to being unpersuaded that the move to ordain women deacons in the PCA is unrelated to a broader agenda of cultural accommodation. In saying this, I do not mean to question the sincerity of those individuals who advocate the position that women should hold the office of deacon. But I would note the growing tendency among these same persons to employ women in roles that are as associated with the office of elder. For example, in many churches pastored by ministers who are supportive of the ordination of women deacons, women are placed in the pulpit during worship services for the public reading of Scripture and to offer the congregational prayer. Women are assigned to distribute the elements of the Lord's Supper. These are functions associated with the office of elders, not deacons. Moreover, word has recently come that pressure is being exerted in one PCA presbytery to install a woman as its stated clerk, making her a member of a court composed exclusively of ruling and teaching elders. Where is the outcry against these tendencies from those who say that they are only wishing to ordain women as deacons? Conclusion The slippery slope, then, is real. And the sole restraint against it – against all our sin and tendency to compromise – is our obedience to the voice of the Spirit of Christ speaking in Holy Scripture. Therefore, the counsel given by Jeremiah at another moment of cultural of peril seems urgent: Stand by the crossroads, and look and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls (Jer. 6:16). In this way alone will we navigate the perils of our times, fortifying our fidelity to Christ. This article was originally published in the Sept/Oct 2017 issue of the magazine. Rev. Richard D. Phillips has been the Senior Minister of Second Presbyterian Church in Greenville, South Carolina (PCA) since July 2007. A version of this article first appeared on Alliance for Confessing Evangelical’s Reformation 21 blog under the title “Standing Firm on the Slippery Slope.” It has been reprinted here with permission....

Red heart icon with + sign.
Magazine, Past Issue

Mar/Apr 2026 issue

WHAT'S INSIDE: We’re excited to share the winners of this year’s brick building contest. Once again, we received hundreds of entries, and once again we hope that what’s featured here in the magazine will motivate you to go online to watch the contestants’ videos, which are a must-see! Check them out at ReformedPerspective.ca/bricks2026. Reformed Perspective’s Bucket List Book Club (the RPBLBC for short!) had its first two Zoom call meetings of the year (with 100+ participants) and it is never too late to join in. Go to ReformedPerspective.ca/BLBC to find out how to join our next Zoom call, and get more information on other books we’ll be reading this year. We have two feature articles this issue – the cover article on putting sports in its proper place, and "Blessed are the caregivers" on a role most of us will take on at some point in our lives, but, as with the Hoogerdyks, it may come when we aren't expecting. We have three options for you to read the magazine. First up is the flipbook edition, with its turning pages. Below that, you can click the cover to view the pdf in your browser, or click here to download the PDF (14 mb) RP Mar-Apr 2026   INDEX: A business tithe on sales / Blessed are the caregivers / Can you build it better? Yes, you can! / Retirement: What are you retiring from? What are you retiring to? / The case against the draft / The beauty of 52 Sundays, or why we gave two years to bringing the Heidelberg Catechism to video / Carried / When sports is an idol / Life skills every high school graduate needs to know / Come and Explore: made in God's Image / In a nutshell / Proverbs: a different sort of devotional / Good, great, and gift: RP's 3 levels of best books / Why Reformed theology writes better fantasy / Great books for boys 10-13 / Business success channeled into kingdom growth / Anne deJong is taking a palette knife to the Rockies / When there is smoke... / Crossword / A theology of cleaning / How to catch Ice Age man using digital reindeer / More than the magazine / In Christ...

Red heart icon with + sign.
Culture Clashes

When sports is an idol

Eric Liddell showed how Christians should do sports differently ***** In July 1924, Scottish sprinter Eric Liddell refused to race in the qualifying heat of the Olympic 100-meter competition. A devout Presbyterian, Liddell had been heavily favored to win the event’s gold medal. When schedule-makers placed the qualifying heat on a Sunday, however, Liddell resigned from the competition rather than violate his conscience by competing on the Lord’s Day. Liddell’s story has been honored for over 100 years through biographies, children’s books, and the blockbuster movie Chariots of Fire. For Christians, Liddell is a model of godly participation in sports, a demonstration that playing and watching sports may bring glory to God when contained by self-control. Sunday as sports day The challenges Liddell faced, however, have not disappeared in the modern context. Today, youth sports fill up Sunday morning after Sunday morning in the calendars of many Canadian families, impeding church attendance and implicitly inculcating an alternate-catechism. Sunday is also the preferred day for many major televised sporting events including the Super Bowl, the Olympic gold medal hockey game, and the World Cup Final – in addition to standard NFL, NHL, MLB, NBA, and CFL broadcasts. A day designed for lasting spiritual benefit has become a feast day for temporary entertainment. Some benefit Scripture affirms that bodily training – including involvement in sports – is of some benefit. However, when this temporary benefit hinders growth in holiness, the Christian should lay aside such a hindrance. Of course, Christians must also avoid the trap of gnosticism, the ancient heresy which taught that the material world, including the body, is inherently evil. Against this, the early Church asserted that the incarnation and resurrection of Christ proves the inherent goodness of the body as designed by God – every human being has a body that is designed by God and must be respected rather than ignored. Paul tells the Corinthians “whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Cor. 10:31), giving spiritual worth to the regular care of the body. Participation in sports, then, may glorify God by exemplifying stewardship of the body, and valorizing the self-control which marks high-level athletes. This is affirmed by Paul himself when he tells Timothy that “while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come” (1 Tim. 4:8). The “some value” of bodily training may be incurred through direct participation or by watching professional athletes compete at the highest level – giving cause to rejoice in the creative wonder of God. These benefits, however, are only applicable to the heart of a God-worshipper. When our human bodies are offered as sacrifices to self rather than “living sacrifices” to God, the temporary benefit dissipates and instead becomes a hindrance – a distraction from the eternal benefit of holiness. A rival religion The temporal must always serve the eternal. If what is temporal, fleeting away, and quickly aging is honored as the ultimate prize of life, then bodily training is of very little value. If, however, the body is disciplined for action in service to God, there is great value in sport. By contrast, the world often presents sports as a rival religion to Christianity. Fans congregate together, watch repeatedly, spend money, make pilgrimages, and speak constantly of their favorite teams. This rival religiosity is reflected in the habits of Canadian families. In addition to exorbitant costs, families are often required to travel long distances for extended periods of time for children’s sports. Perhaps more alarmingly, avid sports fans spend countless hours consuming sports-related content on TV, social media, and audio platforms. Increasingly, the cost of lost time is conjoined with the cost of squandered wealth as recently-legalized sports gambling leads to dramatic increases in the number of individuals reporting sports gambling-related addiction and financial crises. There’s plenty of reasons, then, to want to topple this growing idol. Whose glory? So how should Christians respond to a sports-obsessed world without becoming modern gnostics? Here, the example of Eric Liddell is helpful. Eric Liddell invested a significant amount of time into training. He endured pain, studied other athletes, rose early, and traveled far distances to compete. Yet he did so to the glory of God. When faced with the choice to glorify himself or to present his body as a living sacrifice by keeping God’s law, Liddell did not hesitate – a decision that baffled onlookers. Eric Liddell understood that physical training was of “some value” but, more fundamentally, he understood that godliness is of eternal value. Liddell flourished as a Christian in sport because he did not worship sport. Sport, instead, was for him a means by which he could present his body as a living sacrifice. In later life, Liddell became a missionary to China, pouring out his life for the sake of lost souls in a foreign nation that knew little of his athletic achievements. Ultimately, Liddell would die in that country, having become sick in a Japanese concentration camp during the Second World War. The youth he served inside the camp reported his last words: “It's complete surrender.” Liddell died as he had lived: in obedience to the Master who was able to deliver eternal godliness to his soul, far beyond the “some value” of bodily training. Even as Liddell’s once athletically unmatched body began to fade, his eternal godliness and joy – which his sporting career helped cultivate – became stronger and stronger. Today, the location of the gold medal sacrificed by Eric Liddell and won by Harold Abrahams is unknown. Liddell, however, is seated with Christ on high – having received the reward of his total surrender. And his body – trained by godliness – will soon be raised to immortality. Though his medals are corroding and will one day be consumed by fire, his eternal reward is everlasting. With Liddell as an example, Christians should play and watch sports as if it holds some value, all the while remembering that godliness is of eternal value. Josh Senneker is a Christian political operative from Southern Alberta. He grew up playing Little League baseball and cheering for his two favorite hockey teams: the Calgary Flames and whoever is playing the Edmonton Oilers....

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 32 33 34 35 36