John H Armstrong

What Andreas Widmer Learned About Business and Entrepreneurship from the Pope

Business entrepreneur Andreas Widmer has a truly great story to tell. His new book, The Pope and the CEO, tells this story and makes a hugely valuable point about both business and poverty. Widmer says, “The pope showed me what real leadership looks like. He modeled for me how to pursue our God-given potential. Not coincidentally, this also makes us and those around us better employees, more capable of and more willing to work hard at building a stronger company. That is something that makes both good human sense and good business sense.” Amen!

Andreas Widmer served as a member of the elite Swiss Guard for two years. The guard is a security detail that protects the pope. (I had the opportunity to talk to some members of the Swiss Guard at the Vatican in March and find their work very interesting.)  In this new book Andreas Widmer gives us a behind-the-scenes look into the life and thinking of Pope John Paul II, “the most authentically human person I’ve ever met.” He reveals how these memories shaped and forged his own success, after he served at the Vatican, as a corporate executive.

Papal biographer George Weigel has called Widmer’s story a powerful example of leadership at work. In this new book Widmer recounts his personal experiences in serving Pope John Paul II and then relates the secrets of successful leadership that he learned directly from the pope. Both the story and the secrets are worth the time and the book.

Widmer moved up the ladder of business success and eventually became senior management in a $600 million company.This company, Dargon Systems, developed voice recognition system for computers. When he helped to sell the company he was involved he relates that he learned a hard lesson. The company that bought the business was fraudulent. He says the leaders of Dragon went with their stomach not their heart and they paid for it deeply. He began to think a lot more deeply about business rather than just balance sheets. The result of this process shows powerfully in his new book.

What Andreas Widmer says the pope actually taught him was about the value and importance of entrepreneurship. The pope said that when you look at the market you must focus on the goal, not the system itself. He says the pope taught him that the real human goal of any enterprise was human flourishing and prosperity. These results, flourishing and profit making, rests on three legs: (1) The freedom that comes from participatory government. We must be able to vote and have a say in the direction of our human affairs. (2) A free economy. The law must be “blind.” Everyone is the same before the law. Without this freedom, joined with the “rule of law,” economic association will not work properly. (3) A robust public moral culture. This is the only thing that will check the appetites of the first two. Put simply greedy capitalism is a real problem but the solution is not to attack freedom.

You can watch Widmer talk about these principles and his new book on a recent Wall Street Journal interview. The interviewer should have allowed Widmer to talk more but the second half of the interview is worth waiting for it you take eight minutes to see it. Andreas Widmer is part of the Seven Fund. SEVEN (Social Equity Venture Fund) is a virtual non-profit entity run by
entrepreneurs whose strategy is to markedly increase the rate of innovation and diffusion of enterprise-based solutions to poverty. I am also pleased to say that Andreas Widmer also has a relationship with Acton Institute.

The Freedom & Virtue Institute: A Grassroots Commitment to Human Dignity and Flourishing

In my role as a Senior Advisor to Acton Institute I enjoy many opportunities to teach, write and network with other Christian leaders. One of those leaders is Ismael Hernandez. I met Ismael at Acton University in Grand Rapids in June of this year. (If you are interested please note that the next AU occurs June 12-15, 2012. I hope some of you will plan to join me.)

At our meeting this June Ismael Hernandez and I exchanged business cards and then began a correspondence. I grew interested in his small but well-focused work. He directs the mission of The Freedom & Virtue Institute in Ft. Meyers, Florida. This work is dedicated to the disseminating idea of a free and virtuous society and thus champions the ideas of freedom and virtue and supports practical strategies to realize and implement these ideas.

Ismael correctly believes that human freedom and private initiative are the best instruments to effect lasting and positive change in society. This is why their work highlights the limited role of government and the importance of family, communities, volunteer organizations and churches. This practice is at the core of what Acton Institute promotes so I’m deeply interested in Ismael’s work.

The Freedom and Virtue Institute believes that the essential virtues build character and promote individual and collective well-being. These are essential to authentic human fulfillment and flourishing. They understand that it takes people who believe this deeply to promote it through teaching and modeling it.

They also believe that each human person is unique and unrepeatable and thus each human person is called to know the truth and do good. The human person possesses a dignity that comes from being made in the image of God. This means that the person must remain at the forefront of ideological commitments and social action.

Further, Ismael believes we are called to autonomous living and independence. What this means is that each of us must take charge of our improvement to meet the challenges of life in community. This does not suggest that we live in isolation but instead presumes a deep personal responsibility for our actions and affirms our inherent capacity to better ourselves and help others.

The Freedom and Virtue Institute also believes in the moral benefit of work and diligence in developing character. Reward must be connected to achievement in order to avoid the attitude of entitlement, dependency and victim identity. When we work, we utilize the gifts God has given to us for our benefit and that of others. Linked to the moral benefit of work is the role of the entrepreneur. The entrepreneur is a person who recreates their environment and is accountable for the inherent risks and the outcomes of their personal endeavors. Thus the Institute affirms the entrepreneurial vocation as the pursuit of one’s goals and passions by using the talents and capacities with which they are endowed.

Finally, the Institute believes that nothing should be done by a bureaucracy that can be done as well by a smaller, simpler or more local community. Limited government and personal freedom ought to reign supreme over the centralization and excessive intervention characteristic of the welfare state.

I encourage you to check out The Freedom and Virtue Institute. If you live anywhere near Ft. Meyers, Florida, you might set up a time to meet Ismael and get involved. The address of the Institute, and Ismael’s email, is listed here if you’d like to contact him directly:

Freedom & Virtue Institute
2714 Oakridge Court, Suite 602-D
Fort Myers, FL 33901
(239) 322-8082
[email protected]

Dealing with Consumerism Through Biblical Asceticism

Let’s face it – there is a growing personal freedom that comes by living in a culture deeply rooted in materialism and consumerism. If I have enough money, and the desire to spend it, I can buy a new car, a bigger home or a new iPhone or iPad. In fact, I can have all of this stuff and never even pay for it, or at least not for several years anyway. This is not all bad. But this particular kind of consumerism feeds into two major problems – individualism and hedonism. And these two problems create devastating moral consequences in our society. This explains, I believe, why so many well-intentioned Christians link free markets with consumerism and them reject them both in the process. I tried to show yesterday why this connection was false.

Make no mistake about this -- the dangers here are very real. In fact, a great deal of modern evangelistic practice has fallen into a consumerist trap. We seek to fill a personal niche by appealing to consumer needs and desires. We tell consumers (the non-Christians we are evangelizing) that they need the message of the gospel more than they realize. We then package and market the gospel (?) in a way that helps them see just how much they need it. The problem with this approach is that it gets really close to embodying a view of God that makes him as the author of our personal satisfaction. The real answer to this should be found in Christian churches and communities where alternative Christian virtues are actually taught and nurtured.

I believe Christians further err when they turn everything into one of two categories – a blessing or a curse. When this happens we apply this blessing/curse thinking to wealth and the personal freedom we have to build and grow a business. I wish I could count how many times I’ve heard Christians say that great wealth will destroy America, thus assuming that great wealth is a huge curse. On the other hand I almost never hear people say it would be a great blessing if we became a very poor nation. Why? Because poverty brings its own problems and these also destroy both growth and personal faith.

What should we do about the confusion that we’ve created about economic freedom, wealth and consumerism? First, we need to be clear about the difference between capitalism and consumerism. Capitalism, at least as an understanding of how economies work, is not taught in the New Testament. What is taught is how Christ sets us free. And this freedom extends to all areas of life – public and private. This includes the freedom to buy and sell, to build one’s own business, to possess wealth and to save money and give it away.

Monasticism is a distinct calling for some. But we are not all called to be monks who renounce material wealth. But, and I believe this is a missing link here, there is a proper ascetic discipline that we all need. This means that we all need the kind of Christian discipline that checks consumerism in a major way.

Asceticism, from the Greek áskēsis, refers to "exercise" or "training.” In the Christian sense asceticism describes a lifestyle characterized by abstinence from various (legitimate) worldly pleasures. Like an athlete that “works out” in order to win we “work out” in order to attain our Christ-like goals. Our mistake is to think that we have sacrificed deeply because we do not steal or kill. This behavior is expected of all people, redeemed or not. For the Christian real sacrifice means to give up what we could have kept for ourselves in order to attain a higher purpose. A proper asceticism will always stress pursuing Christ-centered spiritual goals by giving up what is permitted so that we can become more like Jesus. If we engage in this kind of biblical asceticism we will come face-to-face with Western consumerism and thus find the proper means to address its seductive power in our lives and churches. But if we confuse economic freedom with consumerism we will fall for solutions to this problem that will only create unforeseen consequences that are dangerous to our personal well-being and culture.

Does Economic Freedom Lead to Consumerism?

A number of false conclusions are drawn by focusing only on outcomes. A common one focuses on the dangers of free markets and an open economy. Critics, especially earnest Christian critics, often attack economic freedom and capitalism based upon the very real dangers of consumerism. This association between markets and consumerism is so common that it often goes unchallenged. I hear it almost daily. But is the connection between free market capitalism and consumerism correct? Does opposition to consumerism, which is clearly a rampant problem in the church in the West, obligate one to oppose markets and growing a (global) business? Keep in mind, before you leap into this debate, that you should always ask a few questions before you leap.

The first question should be obvious? What exactly is consumerism? So far as I can tell the term "consumerism" was first used in 1915 to refer to the "advocacy of the rights and interests of consumers" (Oxford English Dictionary). But this is not the common way most modern writers use the term.  Consumerism refers rather to the sense that was first used in 1960 when the word referred to an "emphasis on or preoccupation with the acquisition of consumer goods" (Oxford English Dictionary). In the light of the following texts I think we should oppose consumerism, or preoccupation with goods:

“Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; your life does not consist in the abundance of possessions” (Luke 12:15).

“Try to be content with essential food and clothing. If you are attached to riches, you can be trapped by senseless desires” (1 Timothy 6:8-10).

Jesus enjoyed the good things of life such as friendship, food, wine and even a cushion under his head. He lived a non-possessive (simple) life. He was unusually detached from family, friends and material things. But the reasons are deeply rooted in who he was and why he came to live and die.

At the same time it seems apparent that more than a few of the faithful, in both the Old and New Testament, were wealthy. The point here is that you can be wealthy and detached from stuff at the same time, though Jesus clearly says it is very difficult. This is why you must “Be on your guard against all kinds of greed” (Luke 12:15). The sin is not in having things but in being owned and controlled by the things you possess. This gets very close to what consumerism really is when our definition is clear. A consumer, as the more recent definition says, is preoccupied with acquisition! You can have wealth but not be preoccupied with it. In fact, some of the finest Christian benefactors in history have been extremely wealthy. Monasteries, colleges and hospitals have all been built because of Christian wealth.

The problem here needs sharper and clearer definition if the followers of Christ are to live well in the West. Consumerism has become a dominant ideology in Western culture. Seeking and having more is a reason to live for many, many people. “Born to shop” creates a few smiles but it is a terrible thing to admit!

The aim of Christian teaching is to help the followers of Christ think through an issue like this one critically. What is the relationship between the church and culture at this point? This leads to a number of other pertinent questions:

1. Does the church build and develop along consumerist lines?

2. Do we imitate consumerism in the way we present the gospel?

3. Have we been clear about the discipleship of all of life or just about private, spiritual concerns?

4. What public policy best serves the true enrichment of our neighbors? (This is one for considerable debate and Christians can legitimately disagree about this and should keep talking and listening.)

I believe we moved, especially in the post-World War II era, from a more healthy form of capitalism to a morally uncontrolled consumerism. Because of this shift in our culture arguments are made today for consumerism that should be challenged. But in the process we should not attack economic freedom through good intentions that are wrongly based.

 

St. Clement of Alexandria on the Value of Wealth

I wrote several blogs last week about the value and importance of the Church Fathers. One of the early Greek Fathers was Clement of Alexandria, born in Athens around A.D. 150. His parents were pagans. He was converted to faith in Christ and began to travel widely searching for faithful Christian teachers. He attended the famous School of Theology in Alexandria, founded by Pantaenus in A.D. 180. After he settled there he became the director of the school, thus Clement of Alexandria. A few years after he became the director he was forced to quickly flee during the persecution of Septimius Severus. He took refuge in Cappadocia, where he died in A.D. 215, thus he is called a Cappadocian Father.

St. Clement is considered one of the forerunners of what we now call systematic theology. He was the first Christian writer to recognize secular philosophy (Neoplatonism) and incorporate some of its major ideas in service of the Christian faith. Most of his literary output has been lost but one work, on riches and wealth, is still considered valuable to the church. Commenting on Mark 10:17-22 Clement addressed some of the common interpretations of this text by saying:

1. Our Lord was not telling Christians to get rid of their wealth. He was telling them to banish from their souls the primacy of riches. “Unfettered greed can suffocate the seed of true life.”

2. It is not something new to renounce riches and distribute them to the poor. This, said Clement, was done long before Jesus came. Some did this to devote themselves to the arts and in search of vain knowledge while others sought fame and glory by this means.

3. What our Lord does command here is something new, something proper to God who alone gives life. Clement writes:

He does not command what the letter says and what others have already done. He is asking for something greater, more divine, more perfect than that which is stated –that we denude the soul itself of its disordered passions, that we pull out the roots and fling away what is foreign to the spirit. Here, then, is the teaching proper to a believer, and the doctrine worthy of the Savior. Those, who before Christ’s coming despised material goods, certainly gave up their riches and lost them, but the passions of the soul increased even more. For having believed that they had done something superhuman, they came to indulge in pride, petulance, vainglory, despising others.

Clement wrote that a person could give everything away only to doubly regret his decision. To teach that Jesus intends for every disciple to give up everything contradicts statements like those of Luke 16:9, which urges us to make friends by the use of wealth. “Riches then should not be rejected if they can be of use to our neighbor. They are accurately called possessions because they are possessed by people, and goods or utilities because with them one can do good and because they have been ordained by God for the use of men.”

What Clement is saying is that goods and possessions can be instruments in the hands of skilled servants who use them to bless others and advance great good. “Riches, then, are also an instrument.” If rightly used they can bring about justice and service. He added, “In themselves riches are blameless.”

So what is the problem with riches? Riches present an opportunity to do great good or serious evil. “The one to be accused is the person who has the ability, through the choice he makes, to put it to good use or to misuse it. And this is up to the mind and judgment of man, who is free and able to manage what is given him for his use.” Simply put, we are required to be good stewards of all goods and possessions we have been given by whatever means.

So the problem riches present to us, concludes Clement, is in how they are used by our disordered passions. “The rich – who are going to find it difficult to enter the kingdom – will have to understand these words intelligently, and not in a dull and superficial way.”

My experience with people who possess great means is that this is an accurate understanding of the true problem. The real problem is not in riches themselves but in human passions and desires. Wealthy people can bring immense blessing to people and mission. Make no mistake about this, prosperity is always to be preferred to poverty. But those who prosper must understand that they bear greater responsibility to deal with their passions and desires and to use their possessions and goods for the kingdom of God.

Does Christian Social Service Call for the Faithful to be Poor?

The subject of Christian vocation, wealth and poverty has been frequently debated and quite often misunderstood. On one side Christians argue that Jesus calls all his followers to renounce wealth in order to enter the kingdom of God. On the opposite Christians have argued that wealth is good, desirable and a great blessing to be pursued by all believers. The truth is that both extremes are wrong. It would be so easy if one were right but the biblical evidence will not support either of these positions.

First, wealth can be embraced and used wisely by faith. The first Christians were often poor, but not exclusively so. As I read through the New Testament recently I noted again that there were clearly some wealthy people in the early church. And the Old Testament reveals that many godly people were also wealthy, even extremely wealthy in some cases. (God never condemns this fact!)

Over time the gospel penetrated into Caesar’s household and men and (especially) women of means became patrons and disciples of the faith. The apostles never told such people to sell their possessions and give them all away. They did clearly charge these wealthy Christians to be generous, to give with great liberty and joy. I think a strong case can also be made for living modestly without ostentation and a showy consumer-driven lifestyle.

Second, some believers were called by the Holy Spirit to live in poverty (to be sub-merged in this world as my friend John Hayes puts it) because these were the circumstances in which the gospel found them and/or these were the circumstances in which they could best serve others who were poor and God called them to this way of life and service. Within a few centuries some Christians were called to a mission among the poor and in this calling they took a vow of poverty. One can think of great reformers like St. Francis in this light. Mother Teresa comes to mind in the modern world but there are thousands of such people that most of us have never known about.

Most of us know no one personally who has been called to live and serve in poverty. This is a huge tragedy! When Christians talk about solving poverty and know no one who is a Christian living in poverty they prove to be theorists with little or no real understanding of the nature of poverty or of what it does to real people. Few of the “real poor” are in most of our congregations so we have no idea how this problem shapes lives in a myriad of harmful ways.

I believe the basic principle is clear. All Christians are called to charity but not all to poverty. Father Cantalamessa noted this in his Lenten sermon that I quoted from the past two days when he said, “The aim [of sharing in love] was not to make everyone poor, but that none of their members should ever be in want.”

If this is right, and I believe it clearly is, then the new global context calls upon all of us who have much, which includes most of those who read this blog, to embrace charity with a more open spirit and intelligent social theology. What is lacking is both the theology and the will to serve.

“Service,” said Father Cantalamessa, “is a universal principle; it applies to every aspect of life: the state ought to be at the service of its citizens, politics at the service of the state, the doctor at the service of his patients, the teacher at the service of his pupils, etc. But it applies in an altogether special way to the servants of the Church.”

Service is not, in itself, a virtue. It flows from various other virtues, “especially humility and charity” adds Cantalamessa. “It is one way in which that love which ‘does not pursue selfish interests, but those of others',’ manifests itself, and gives of itself without seeking any return. Service in the Gospel is unlike service in the world, [it] is not the proper characteristic of the inferior, of the one in need, but rather of the superior, of the one who is raised high.”

Consider what he is saying:

1. Service is universally important and commonly recognized by ordinary people as such.

2. Service applies to every aspect of life.

3. The state should serve its people, politics serves the state, etc.

4. The servants of Christ have a unique calling to serve because of their Lord’s example and his teaching them to serve as he did.

5. Service flows out of virtues such as humility and charity.

6. Service manifests itself in a way that expects nothing in return.

7. Service is not an expression of my being superior to the one I serve but the exact opposite; i.e. I am the inferior serving the one who is greater! This makes Christian service radically “other worldly” as theologians have put it.

The Church and the World of Business

I have personally engaged in a number of attempts to connect the field of business with the redemptive mission of Christ. The typical evangelical approach to applying one’s faith to vocational activity is admittedly facile. It primarily emphasizes personal piety and evangelism within the workplace rather than a genuinely kingdom centered perspective regarding divine calling, or vocation. This approach is utterly inadequate in transforming culture or in effectively bearing witness to the in-breaking of God’s reign in Christ.

What is needed is for men and women in the world of business to see their activity as a redemptive instrument in service of the kingdom. This is scarcely heard of in modern evangelicalism, much less encouraged. In fact, most churches and pastors have little or no idea how to actually do this in practice. Business leaders seem to threaten many pastors if the truth is known. This is why I find serious business leaders checking out on the local church again and again. They are not giving up on Christ and the kingdom, just on the way the church fails to engage with them in the context in which they are called to live as entrepreneurs and leaders. A lot of new, creative thinking and teaching is needed to help make this happen. This is why I thank God for the initiatives of many who do teach in this area.

What is required is a radically different business model that will take the kingdom seriously and then emphasize the faith element required to live humbly for Christ. This approach would very likely be seen as foolishness in the hard-hitting context of secular business. Christian business leaders—who have up to this point been largely dormant or misguided—need to become deeply involved in advancing Christ’s kingdom or one of our most important means for transformation will be lost.

My friend Michael Craven has written: “Given the influence upon our culture, if not the world, that American business wields; I could think of no greater need.” I agree, I can think of “no greater need,” at least in the everyday world of business and making money. When will the church get into the world of business and make disciples who can transform this sphere of human endeavor?

Acton University June 14-17

I am honored to be on the faculty for one of my favorite conferences in America, the Acton University. AU meets June 14-17 in Grand Rapids, Michigan. For four days each June, the Acton Institute convenes this wonderful ecumenical conference of pastors, seminarians, educators, non-profit managers, business people and philanthropists from more than 50 countries. It is simply one of the most interesting and impactful events that I have ever attended. I have been several times in the past. This year I will go to teach “Protestant Social Ethics.” (See the faculty link below.)

600 people of faith gather at AU to integrate and better articulate faith and free enterprise, entrepreneurship, sound public policy, and effective leadership at the local church and community level. With this week of fellowship and discourse, participants build a theological and economic infrastructure for the work of restoring and defending hope and dignity to people around the world. This is the core of what is called Acton University.

Registration is now open for the 2011 Acton University (AU), where this year's distinguished international faculty will once again guide participants through an expanded curriculum, offering even greater depth of exploration into the intellectual foundations of a free society. Please check out the links to see who is teaching what and when. If you cannot afford to attend, but fit the core audience of an Acton event, contact Acton about scholarships.

Space and scholarship funds are limited - so register or apply now! Please visit au.acton.org where you will find the online registration form along with complete conference information.

More than 80% of the Acton University conference marketing is accomplished through word of mouth (or, more precisely, through the forwarding of emails and direct referrals, thus blogs like this one). Please spread the word about this great event to friends, colleagues, and students who may be interested. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact Kara Eagle at [email protected] or by calling 616.454.3080. I would love to see you in June. I know several friends are planning to come and several board members of ACT 3 will also be present. We will likely even have an ACT 3 table for a meal or two so we can fellowship together during the week.

What Do You Really Sacrifice for the Kingdom?

Self-denial is generally misunderstood by Christians. The common wisdom seems to be that self-denial is denying yourself something that you should not do in the first place. Such is simply not the case. We truly deny ourselves when we refuse to do something that we are free to do but then choose to surrender because of the Spirit’s leading us to give for the sake of Christ’s kingdom. The spiritual irony here is that nothing we ever give up will not be replaced, if not in this life, then clearly in the next. This does not mean that we are all called to make a vow of poverty. The church has never taught such an idea except in cultic contexts. A vow of poverty is a voluntary witness made by a few who are called to witness to the gospel in this unique way.

But all of us, rich and poor, can make free choices to forego legitimate pleasures and activities for the kingdom. This thinking comes to bear particularly on those of us who earn a pretty decent amount of money. The truth is that the vast majority of you who read this blog are in the top 5-7% of the world in average income. We all have discretionary money that we can use for something we enjoy or we can freely give up to invest in the kingdom. I was once amazed at how few Christians understood this simple truth but now I am amazed when I meet someone who does understand it. We are lulled into this lifestyle by several common mistakes:

1. What we earn we are free to spend anyway that we choose so long as we tithe, especially if we give away larger sums of money.

2. If we make more money then we are entitled to spend more on ourselves since the Lord has blessed us so abundantly. Living in opulence is good for others and a robust economy.

3. Wealth is inherently good (“the love of money is the root of all evil” NOT “money” in and of itself) so the more we have and spend on our own family the better we provide for those we love. We are all entitled to live the “American Dream” because we live in America so long as we honestly earn our money.

4. We all need to have enough money to provide for our long term future lest we presume on God to provide for us or become paupers someday.

I could list a few more common myths but these are enough to establish my central point.

With this in view I recently watched the testimony of a businessman named Alan Barnhart, a brother in Christ that I do not know. This is one of my all-time favorite stories of how much more blessed it is to give rather than to receive. This man is not preaching “health and wealth” nor is he telling anyone what they should do about their life, their business or their personal income. If you are inspired by this then act. I wonder what would happen if ordinary younger men and women would put this type of faith into practice and then see what happens over the course of the next 20-25 years. If you feel guilty when you watch and listen to Alan you should ask, “Why?” It could be that you do not understand the freedom Alan speaks of so eloquently in his simple, compelling testimony.

How a Little Can Do a Lot

It goes without saying that I take great joy in my son and his heart for mission. He is a rather amazing young man. He has begun a flourishing ministry to middle school kids in public schools that is now in its eleventh year. He planted a church because of the disciples he had made though his wider ministry and the need he saw to connect them to a living community of faith. He is deeply involved in social issues relating to immigration and has helped me to see this issue far more clearly than anyone else I know.

Matt is my firstborn (1973). He is also my friend and peer. I will always be his dad, and he will always be a son, but our relationship has matured into one of deep friendship and trust. I need him speaking into my life in order to hear what the Spirit is saying to me. We meet often to talk, listen and pray for one another over a meal.

Recently Matt (second from right in the photo) returned from a trip to Uganda, his first to Africa. He has made many trips to Latin America and speaks fluent Spanish but Africa was not on his agenda as he tells in a recent post. He called me from Uganda and we spoke as if he was next door. How things have changed since he was a boy and I called him from India several times. I had to schedule a phone line, plan way in advance and hope that I got a clear connection. The Information Revolution has shrunk the world in so many wonderful ways, making it all the more possible for Christians to serve one another across the world.

Matt provided a moving account of his recent trip and what he sought to do in Uganda. I hope you will read it. I think it will give you a glimpse of how so very little can accomplish so much. On the last day you and I will stand before Christ. I think he will ask us “What did you do for the least of these?” I want to have an answer that is fitting with the authority and mission of the One I will stand before in that day. I hope you do too.