Where is our earthly security?

Barry was away this week. Now, the service had a social worker talking who has been down working on loving the poor and downtrodden — she used to work for Servants for Asian Poor and now works serving the Auckland Poor. She gave a testimony, but it kind of fell flat, despite having worked with people in similar circumstances. The sons and I talked about it a bit: Barry pays attention to liturgy, to timing, to making things work. And without that extra bit of care, things did not work as well. However, some disciplines remain. We alluded to Ruth in the family talk and discussed families in the sermon. The text for today links the ideas of security and the levirate law, although it removes that part of the Text). The levirate law, was designed to provide security within a family.

Ruth 3:1-5, 4:13-17

1Naomi her mother-in-law said to her, “My daughter, I need to seek some security for you, so that it may be well with you. 2Now here is our kinsman Boaz, with whose young women you have been working. See, he is winnowing barley tonight at the threshing floor. 3Now wash and anoint yourself, and put on your best clothes and go down to the threshing floor; but do not make yourself known to the man until he has finished eating and drinking. 4When he lies down, observe the place where he lies; then, go and uncover his feet and lie down; and he will tell you what to do.” 5She said to her, “All that you tell me I will do.”

4:13So Boaz took Ruth and she became his wife. When they came together, the LORD made her conceive, and she bore a son. 14Then the women said to Naomi, “Blessed be the LORD, who has not left you this day without next-of-kin; and may his name be renowned in Israel! 15He shall be to you a restorer of life and a nourisher of your old age; for your daughter-in-law who loves you, who is more to you than seven sons, has borne him.” 16Then Naomi took the child and laid him in her bosom, and became his nurse. 17The women of the neighborhood gave him a name, saying, “A son has been born to Naomi.” They named him Obed; he became the father of Jesse, the father of David.

Now, I find Naomi’s first comment illuminating. She worked out who was the richest relative in the family, and strongly urged Ruth into courting this man, and not the younger men in the town — which is something Boaz praised her for, because she was clearly young enough to do that and as a widow, such courting would have been legitimate. This is not in the text. For Naomi, the security in this world was within the family and within the covenants that a family brings.

Now I can hear many people say that this is simply heresy. Our security belongs with God. If we suffer in this life, it will be a sharing in the suffering of Christ. I am not arguing about this, but instead I’m referring to how God ordered Israel to set things up in the time of the judges.  God stated that our security should be in the family, not the state. And definitely not this.

I see an infinite chain letter into the future in order to bankroll the ever increasing number of Party voters. This year, 40.7% of all births in the US were to single women – babymommas, who are all but guaranteed to vote for the Party. That enables elections to roll one direction.

The upper class white feminists may be failing to reproduce directly, but by encouraging the increase in the number of babymommas, they are reproducing themselves in a very real sense. Semi literate View-watching babymommas won’t be writing manifestos like Germaine Greer or Sulamith Firestone or Susan Brownmiller, but they do not have to. The writing has been done. The institutionalization of “family” as “babymomma and her children is well under way. The cornering of men into smaller and smaller areas of life is also well under way.

I do not see the peak of feminism reached yet. Not even close. Regardless of how this election turns out, men will be further compressed, processed, cornered and pushed into impotent irrelevancy, by other men in service to the feminine imperative.

It is fairly clear that the US election was close, and the demographic structure of the US went the way that the Dem. strategists wanted: women voted, particularly single women, and men stayed home. That was enough to win a close election.

But we are not to assume that the government will provide our earthly security. The crown, government, cannot be relied upon… what is happening in Greece could happen elsewhere. (Hat tip Whale oil)

Greek unemployment rose to 25.4pc in August. Youth unemployment rose to 58pc.

Under the official forecast, the economy will contract by a further 4.5pc next year, so it fair to assume that lots more people are going to lose their jobs. It is certainly not going to improve in any meaningful way for years to come.

This is what happens when you lock into the wrong currency and block the escape routes – or join a “burning building with no exits” in the words of William Hague.

Even if Greeks comply with all demands, public debt will reach 179pc of GDP next year. Perhaps there will be some sort of formula to cut debt service costs by shaving 50 basis points off interest on rescue loans, and persuading the ECB to forgo “profits” on its estimated €40 billion holdings of Greek bonds (though unrealised profits would seem be courting fate).

We cannot rely on the state, yes. But to rely on families we need to start honouring the family, and that includes husbands, as Elspeth points out.

I haven’t abandoned my passion for encouraging women in their God-given roles as wives and mothers. I believe in it too strongly and I believe that the Scripture is true: A child left to himself brings shame to his parents. But I’ve also developed an aversion to our society’s penchant for undermining men everywhere we turn: from the media, to the counselor’s office, even from the pulpits. If we want to stem the tide, we need to be more vigilant about the words we speak and the things we tolerate.

It isn’t enough to silently sit by and watch, wondering what will become of the young men of the next generation. However small my contribution to the good and godly men under assault, I want to make it. Not just in terms of speaking out against liberal ideology, but also so-called conservative ideology if it serves to undercut the role of a man as the leader of his family.

The church needs to go counter the culture. We cannot allow our children to grow up in an atomized world. This has costs: for some men it means that you do not take that promotion — I am just beginning to travel for work, having minimized this for the last three years, as my boys can now fend for themselves for short periods of time. (They are both old enough to work part time or supervise children in NZ law).  I have not worked as hard as I could of. This means that I am forgoing promotion until the next two year cycle — in 2014. And one of the reasons I have not been dating is the kids.

But many in the church would call me evil. I am divorced, a solo Dad, (the kids are not with their mother) and not with another member of the sisterhood: I must be either gay (acceptable) or a misogynist bastard (not acceptable). Not a man trying to provide some stability and security to his children. Which is, in effect, my duty. For our earthly security is tenuous, but lies within families.