The dishonest manager

Often working people (usually rightly) say that work barely gets a mention in Church yet when you look at the stories Jesus told large numbers of them are to do with work.

Luke 16. 1 - 13 is one of those stories and it may well be the one that it is most difficult to understand. The story and the teaching based on it seem contradictory and it doesn’t seem to fit with other things that Jesus said and taught.

A manager is wasting his employer’s money. He is found out and fired. The beginning of the story makes sense to us. It’s what happens next that causes a problem. The manager then reduces the debts that various people owe to his employer in order to get on good terms with them before he leaves his master’s employment. Although he is again wasting his master’s money, this time the master praises what he has done.

Jesus goes on to say that we should use our money to make friends and that this will help us to be welcomed into eternity. That seems almost the reverse of his saying store up treasures in heaven rather than treasures on earth. Then to compound all the complications he commends faithfulness after having told a story in which the dishonest manager is praised for his dishonesty.

How can we find a way in to a set of teaching that seems contradictory and confused? It may be that the key is Jesus’ statement that we should make friends for ourselves. Although the dishonest manager remains dishonest there is a change that occurs in the story. And we can see that change most clearly if we think about the manager’s work-life balance.

At the beginning of the story, friendships and responsibility seem low on his list of priorities. He is managing his employer’s property but wasting his employer’s money. It is likely then that his life is focused around work and money. However, when his job comes under threat, he suddenly realises that relationships – friendships – are actually more important than work and money and figures out a quick way of building friendships. At the end of the story, if we return to his work-life balance, work will have decreased in importance to him while friendship and responsibility for his own future will have increased.

The teaching that follows the story makes it clear that Jesus does not condone dishonesty; if this manager is dishonest in small matters then he will also be dishonest in large ones. The manager’s fundamental dishonesty does not change but the priority he places on relationships does. In other teaching Jesus sometimes uses the formula; if someone who is bad can do X then how much more should you or how much more will God do X. He uses it, for example, when he talks about God giving the Holy Spirit: if fathers who are bad, he says, know how to give good gifts to their children, how much more will God give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him.

What Jesus does in this story is similar. He is saying that if shrewd, worldly people, like the dishonest manager, can come to see the importance of relationships, then how much more should we do the same. Not following the example of the manager in using dishonesty to build relationships but following his example of learning to prioritise relationships in life and in work.

The Relationships Foundation sounds like it is likely to be a dating agency but is actually an organisation founded and run by Christians that believes that a good society is built on good relationships, from family and community to public service and business. They study the effect that culture, business and government have on relationships, create new ideas for strengthening social connections, campaign on issues where relationships are being undermined and train and equip people to think relationally for themselves. They are one example of an organisation that is seeking to prioritise relationships in life and in work as Jesus encouraged us to do. There are, of course, others, with the Mothers’ Union being among them, but the work that the Relationships Foundation attempts to do aims to encourage good relationships throughout society, not just within family life.

Why is this so important? Jesus throws out a hint when he says “make friends for yourself … so that … you will be welcomed in the eternal home.” Jesus seems to be hinting that the relationships we form now in some way continue into eternity. Paul says something similar in 1 Corinthians 13 when he writes that faith, hope and love remain using a word for ‘remain’ which suggests that acts of faith, hope and love continue into eternity. Building relationships Jesus and Paul suggest may not just be good for the here and now but may also have eternal implications. All the more reason then for us to learn from this story and, whether we are at home, at work, or in our community, to prioritise the building of good relationships with those around us.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Clash - Card Cheat.

The priority of relationships

Luke 16. 1-13 may well be the parable that it is most difficult to understand. The story and the teaching based on it seem contradictory and it doesn’t seem to fit with other things that Jesus said and taught.

A manager is wasting his employer’s money. He is found out and fired. The beginning of the story makes sense to us. It’s what happens next that causes a problem. The manager then reduces the debts that various people owe to his employer in order to get on good terms with them before he leaves his master’s employment. Although he is again wasting his master’s money, this time the master praises what he has done.

Jesus goes on to say that we should use our money to make friends and that this will help us to be welcomed into eternity. That seems almost the reverse of his saying store up treasures in heaven rather than treasures on earth. Then to compound all the complications he commends faithfulness after having told a story in which the dishonest manager is praised for his dishonesty.

How can we find a way in to a set of teaching that seems contradictory and confused? It may be that the key is Jesus’ statement that we should make friends for ourselves. Although the dishonest manager remains dishonest there is a change that occurs in the story. And we can see that change most clearly if we think about the manager’s work-life balance.

At the beginning of the story, friendships and responsibility seem low on his list of priorities. He is managing his employer’s property but wasting his employer’s money. It is likely then that his life is focused around work and money. However, when his job comes under threat, he suddenly realises that relationships – friendships – are actually more important than work and money and figures out a quick way of building friendships. At the end of the story, if we return to his work-life balance, work will have decreased in importance to him while friendship and responsibility for his own future will have increased.

The teaching that follows the story makes it clear that Jesus does not condone dishonesty; if this manager is dishonest in small matters then he will also be dishonest in large ones. The manager’s fundamental dishonesty does not change but the priority he places on relationships does. In other teaching Jesus sometimes uses the formula; if someone who is bad can do X then how much more should you or how much more will God do X. He uses it, for example, when he talks about God giving the Holy Spirit: if fathers who are bad, he says, know how to give good gifts to their children, how much more will God give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him.

What Jesus does in this story is similar. He is saying that if shrewd, worldly people, like the dishonest manager, can come to see the importance of relationships, then how much more should we do the same. Not following the example of the manager in using dishonesty to build relationships but following his example of learning to prioritise relationships in life and in work.

The Relationships Foundation sounds like it is likely to be a dating agency but is actually an organisation founded and run by Christians that believes that a good society is built on good relationships, from family and community to public service and business. They study the effect that culture, business and government have on relationships, create new ideas for strengthening social connections, campaign on issues where relationships are being undermined and train and equip people to think relationally for themselves. They are one example of an organisation that is seeking to prioritise relationships in life and in work as Jesus encouraged us to do. There are, of course, others, with the Mothers’ Union being among them, but the work that the Relationships Foundation attempts to do aims to encourage good relationships throughout society, not just within family life.

Why is this so important? Jesus throws out a hint when he says “make friends for yourself … so that … you will be welcomed in the eternal home.” Jesus seems to be hinting that the relationships we form now in some way continue into eternity. Paul says something similar in 1 Corinthians 13 when he writes that faith, hope and love remain using a word for ‘remain’ which suggests that acts of faith, hope and love continue into eternity. Building relationships Jesus and Paul suggest may not just be good for the here and now but may also have eternal implications. All the more reason then for us to learn from this story and, whether we are at home, at work, or in our community, to prioritise the building of good relationships with those around us.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Buddy Miller - There's A Higher Power.

A crisis of faith & life (3)

It is here that the theologians of the exile can help us in hearing and responding to the call of God:

• First, because they have been there before us - they were the divorcees of God – we can understand from them something of why we feel as we do.
• Second, because their pattern of reflection and re-interpretation based on the tradition gives a biblical means of reviving our roots and re-claiming our disputed lineage. We need to dream up what Church is and can be for future generations all over again. As a start, we could re-examine our biblical and church heritage by retelling the stories to ourselves and to others. This is where developments in narrative theology and storytelling may be of some use to us in finding a way forward. Graham Cray has argued that we are a ‘hinge generation’ making the transition between a Church that was addressing modernity and one that will in future address post-modernity and beyond. Therefore, we should not expect to have all the answers to hand but instead should engage in a re-examination of our roots in order to imagine our future on a scale that is at least equal to that of the theologians of the exile.
• Third, our interim strategy should involve the threefold approach of assimilation, voicing hurt and articulating hope:
  
  · Assimilation: as we operate within a culture which is at best ambiguous towards Christianity, the Church needs to develop the Joseph’s, Daniel’s, Nehemiah’s and Esther’s for our generation. These will be people able to be hidden advocates for our faith and able too from within to show up the inadequacies of the dominant culture and point that culture towards Christ. The examples of The Relationship Foundation and Work Structuring Ltd give us two models from the worlds of public policy and work that provide hints about the way to go;
  
  · Voicing hurt: following Jesus – who has removed all the barriers to intimacy - we should expect to move corporately into the intimate relationship with God that these theologians experienced individually, thinking and acting as God does. Our experience as the body of Christ should be that we think with the mind of Christ. Jesus’ thought and action was modelled on the suffering servant and our aim should be to live as Jesus’ body in and through that same model.
  
  · Articulating hope: we need to protest the present because it hurts and is less desirable and faithful than what is promised in the theological tradition. Hope springs from hurt and therefore the future will only be re-imagined if we do not feel satisfied with the present. We need to make common cause with those most hurt by the dominant culture because God hears and wants to respond to their cries through us. They are also in the places where the inadequacies of the dominant culture are most apparent. Common cause can also be made with those identifying judgement on the dominant culture. Judgement on consumer capitalism is most likely to come through the changes that it has and is making to the eco-system. We need to further develop our theology of green issues speaking and acting publicly and symbolically in this arena.

In the West we exist within a time of crisis. We are the generation for whom the city has fallen - the ‘hinge generation’ existing between paradigms. Our experience may be of exile, loss, and bereavement, the ending of our known world. This experience can be a means of identification with Jesus in suffering, a means of entering in to the paradigm of the suffering servant – a paradigm that is more authentically Christian than that of the dominant culture – and a means of entering into a mature, intimate relationship with our God. Our God is a God of new beginnings, of fresh starts. He is the resurrection God and, therefore, the one who gives hope that we can rise from the ruins:

“There ain’t nobody asks to be born There ain’t nobody wishes to die Everybody whiles away the interim time Sworn to rise from the ruins by and by

The engines are droning with progress The pistons are pounding out time And it’s you and me caught in this juggernaut jaunt Left to rise from the ruins down the line

We will roll like an old Chevrolet The road to ruin is something to see Hang on to the wheel For the highway to hell needs chauffeurs For the powers that be

Go and tell all your friends and relations Go and say what ain’t easy to say Go and give them some hope That we might rock this boat And rise from the ruins one day

Ever try to carry water in a basket Ever try to carry fire in your hand Ever try to take on the weight of the everyday freight Til’ you find that you’re too weak to stand

Why so pale and wan, fond lover Why so downcast and desperately sad We can walk, we can talk We ain’t yet pillars of salt We will rise from the ruins while we can."

(Mark Heard - Rise from the Ruins)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Mark Heard Tribute Project - We Know Too Much.

A modest finance proposal

The latest Rethink email bulletin from the Relationships Foundation contains the following modest proposal about relational lessons from the 'credit crunch':

"It is disastrous, from a relational perspective, for a bank which makes a loan to be able to sell on the whole of that loan to other banks. The economic consequences of this taking place on a massive scale are ones which we are all living with at the moment. At the very least, originating banks ought to be required to retain 20% of the risk in relation to the original loan, so that they have sufficient incentive to take proper precautions to see if the borrower can afford to make the repayments. In relation to more complex forms of on-selling, where the repackaged loans have been divided up into different tranches, the originating bank ought to be required to hold on to a greater percentage of the so-called equity tranche, i.e. the riskiest portion of the loans, which bears the highest risk of non-repayment."

Read the whole piece here and blog comments here.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

The Flying Lizards - Money (that's What I Want).

The Jubilee Centre

The Jubilee Centre have redesigned their website to enable visitors to explore their resources and different spheres of interest more effectively. The new website also includes a blog, where they will be commenting regularly on stories in the news and reports of social trends. This serves as a forum for discussion and debate where visitors can engage with the issues, with the Centre, and with each other. Join the discussion by leaving a comment through the Engage! section of their website.

Also worth checking out is the website of their sister organisation, the Relationships Foundation. Both have a particular focus on relational living.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elvis Costello - Indoor Fireworks.

There were giants in those days (4)

Finally, their emphasis on relationality. They chose to explore aspects of coinherence and relationality at a time when progress was achieved through specialisation and when World Wars were undermining belief in human brotherhood. Relationality, however, was fundamental to their vision enabling them to explore the links between past, present and future within works that aimed at being holistic and reconciliatory.

Eliot’s Four Quartets ends with our arrival at the place of our beginning but, for the first time, with knowledge of the place itself. This knowledge is of unity:

“A condition of complete simplicity
(Costing not less than everything)
And all shall be well and
All manner of thing shall be well
When the tongues of flames are in-folded
Into the crowned knot of fire
And the fire and the rose are one.”

This knowledge is also that of the eldila in Lewis’ Perelandra:

“In the plan of the Great Dance plans without number interlock, and each movement becomes in its season the breaking into flower of the whole design to which all else had been directed. Thus each is equally at the centre and none are there by being equals, some by giving place and some by receiving it, the small things by their smallness and the great by their greatness, and all the patterns linked and looped together by the unions of a kneeling with a sceptred love. Blessed be He!”

In this aspect of their thought, these artists were ahead of their time. Now, with the growth of the global village, globalisation, the international community and the world-wide web, inter-connectivity is a ‘live’ issue. Moynagh describes globalisation as involving “the interlocking of nations so that they begin to form a single unit” and argues that as “[p]eople across the globe are becoming connected in new ways … this will transform our lives … [providing] fresh opportunities to be in touch with others”. “New networks will give rise to a new society”. This optimism is echoed by Susan Greenfield. She predicts that as we communicate and learn through new technologies, “we won’t see ourselves as individuals any more”. Instead, “[w]e will be a living web”, “more networked and connected, less separate”. This change will come because “when people learn predominantly in visual form from screens, they won’t think in linear ways, but in “hypertext”, free-associating between ideas in the same way information is accessed on the web".

Jones provides a theological underpinning for a ‘hypertext’ approach to knowledge. Jones believes that objects, images and words accrue meanings over the years that are more than the object as object or image as image. This is the idea of the signifier and the signified that is found in semiotics. All things, therefore, including human beings and other living creatures are signs re-presenting something else in another form. Recessive signs which re-present this multiple signification are what Jones aims to create in works such as The Anathemata and Aphrodite in Aulis. Maritain suggests that it is multiple signification that creates joy or delight in a work of art:

“the more there is of knowledge, or of things presented to the understanding, the vaster will be the possibility of joy; this is why Art, in so far as ordered to Beauty, does not, at least when its object permits, stop at forms or at colours, nor at sounds, nor at words taken in themselves and as things, but it takes them also as making known other things than themselves, that is to say as signs. And the thing signified may itself be a sign in turn, and the more the work of art is laden with significance … the vaster and the richer and the higher will be the possibility of joy and beauty”.

For Jones such signification is the essence of a Christianity, which has, at its heart, the re-presenting of Christ under the form of bread and wine. When the sign is the thing signified what you have is incarnation, the union of the natural and the supernatural.

This same correspondence is also found in the work of Williams. He argues that the supernatural and, ultimately, God himself, is known “through images within the natural”. At its best this is the Beatrician moment, when “one can know himself to be … in Love; one can have a sense of living within the beloved”, of imaging and participating in the “supernatural fact of coinherence”. “All things,” Williams suggests, “are held together by correspondence, image with image, movement with movement. Without that there could be no relation and therefore no truth. It’s our business – especially yours and mine – to take up the power of relation”.

Once we have seen that we live from others, then Williams suggests that we are able to live for others through mutuality, reciprocity and exchange. “At the root of the physical nature of man,” he wrote, “lie exchange of liking, substitution, inherence. The nature of man which is so expressed in the physical world is expressed after the same manner, only more fully, in the mental and spiritual”.

Again, the Incarnation is key. Williams says that Jesus, “preferred to shape himself within the womb, to become hereditary, to owe to humanity the flesh he divinitized by the same principle – ‘not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God.’ By an act of substitution he reconciled the natural world with the world of the kingdom of heaven, sensuality with substance. He restored substitution and co- inherence everywhere; up and down the ladder of that great substitution all our lesser substitutions run; within that sublime co-inherence all our lesser co-inherences inhere”.

For Williams, exchange has economic and political implications as well as ecclesiastical and personal. Similarly, Sayers argues that “… the Church, as a Christian society, is concerned … to sanctify humanity … the whole of humanity”. “She must,” Sayers argues, “include within her sacraments all arts, all letters, all labour and all learning … she stands committed to the assertion that all human activity, whether of spirit, mind or body, is potentially good – not negatively, by repression, but positively, and as an act of worship. Further, she must include a proper reverence for the earth and for all material things; because these also are the body of the living God”.

This is so Sayers believes because “the Trinitarian structure which can be shown to exist in the mind of man and in all his works is, in fact, the integral structure of the universe, and corresponds, not by pictorial imagery but by a necessary uniformity of substance, with the nature of God, in Whom all that is exists”. Therefore, all human making follows this Trinitarian, coinherent, inter-connected pattern:

“First: there is the Creative Idea; passionless, timeless, beholding the whole work complete at once, the end in the beginning; and this is the image of the Father.

Second: there is the Creative Energy, begotten of that Idea, working in time from the beginning to the end, with sweat and passion, being incarnate in the bonds of matter; and this is the image of the Word.

Third: there is the Creative Power, the meaning of the work and its response in the lively soul; and this is the image of the indwelling Spirit.

And these three are one, each equally in itself the whole work, whereof none can exist without other; and this is the image of the Trinity.”

Through recessive signification, the Way of Affirmation, the Beatrician moment and the Trinitarian patterning of making, a theological basis for inter-connextivity and the networked society can be formed which holds the potential for the Church to “join up the fragments of society” in the way that Sayers and these other artists envisaged.

In our day, people like Moynagh through The Tomorrow Project, Michael Schluter of The Relationships Foundation, and Christian Schumacher of Work Structuring Ltd. are developing policy and practice on the basis of these ideas while the likes of Walter Brueggemann and Mark Oakley in speaking respectively of funding the counter-imagination and the collage of God are taking our theological understanding of relationality further. While seeking to understand and build on the work of such thinkers and practitioners we should not neglect or under-estimate the extent to which the artists considered in this series can fund the counter-imagination of the Church as it builds a collage of God for the 21st century.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert Randolph & The Family Band- Deliver Me.