in Sacramento CA

A New Website - www.MustBeGuida.com

2010-01-01T12:49:00.000-08:00

A new website has been created for the storage and easier retrieval of all these intellectual gems that have been collected - www.MustBeGuida.com. The name comes from one of the better stories on the site and is, of course, not case sensitive.

I am grateful to blogspot for their chance to post here and encourage anyone looking for free Internet space to use their services.

As for me, there will no longer be any new postings at this address. If you are looking for anything on this website, you will find it much more easily at the new website.

Thanks for allowing me to share.

Jim Guida
Sacramento CA

BRUSH WITH GREATNESS - WITH RELISH!

2009-11-11T10:52:00.000-08:00

A few summers back, we were vacationing in Lake Tahoe when Sami and I saw the Oscar Meyer Wienermobile at a supermarket parking lot. We were chatting with the drivers who said they were planning to stop in Sacramento, so we invited them to our house for a home-cooked dinner.

A few days later, they pulled up in the Weinermobile, all 27 feet of it, much to the delight of ourselves and our neighbors. The drivers were very gracious and when Sami said she was sorry she had to leave for soccer practice, they offered to give her a ride!

Meanwhile, at Sam Brannan Jr. High School, soccer practice was just beginning. Coach Harris was reviewing the roster with his assistant coach, when a giant, bright orange and yellow hot dog rolled into the school parking lot. Without missing a beat, Harris looked up, said “It must be Guida,” and then returned to his clipboard.

"Good Night, Angel. I Love You."

2009-09-18T22:35:00.000-07:00

Since the day she was born – literally nearly every single night for the past 18 years – I have kissed my daughter as she laid sleeping in her bed and told her, “Good night, angel. I love you.” There were times I was out of town and there were times when she was away at camp or at a friend’s house. But for every night she and I shared a roof, I told her I love her.

Sami is packing for school and will be leaving this weekend for college. I recall the instant she came into the world and remember her beautiful face when she went out the door this evening. And though she was almost always asleep when I kissed her good night, I pray that no matter where she goes and what she does, she will always know. I love you.

A QUOTABLE QUOTE

2009-09-06T09:55:00.000-07:00

"I am good at catching and I'm good at swimming and I'm good at dancing and I'm good at running. I'm especially good at running. That's why my name is Chase."

- Chase Matthew Guida, six years old, August 29, 2009

RULES TO LIVE BY - Vacation Traveling

2009-07-10T09:07:00.000-07:00

My Father taught me an important lesson about vacation traveling. Before you leave, put all the clothes you plan to take on your bed. Then take all the money you plan to take next to it. Then put away half the clothes and double the amount of money.

Graduation Day

2009-06-13T21:39:00.000-07:00

"DIGNITY. ALWAYS DIGNITY."

Gene Kelly as Don Lockwood in Singing in the Rain
Jim Guida - Master of Arts in Theology, Fuller Theology Seminary

Samantha Lynn Anthony Sami Jo Spike Guida - C.K. McClatchy High School Graduate 6-5-09
James Anthony Guida - Fuller Theological Seminary MAT 6-6-09

Check out this YouTube link for more - and thanks Andy!

A FAVORITE SAYING - "In the end. . ."

2009-05-24T01:39:00.000-07:00

"In the End, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."

As quoted by Samantha Guida from the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., in Samantha's High School Yearbook.

Samantha will be 18 on her last day of high school and her Father loves her very much.

St. Francis of Assisi - Taking Care of the Boss' Property

2009-05-19T22:15:00.000-07:00

This paper was written for a Church History class 2008. Prior to this paper, my experience with St. Francis was a plaster statue in my Father's garden. I am a better person after studying St. Francis. Perhaps you will be likewise inspired.

INTRODUCTION

Statues depicting St. Francis can be found in gardens throughout the world, often with a bird perched on his outstretched hand. There is the legend that if you bury a statue of St. Francis in your front yard, you will have good luck in selling your house. Statuary and superstition aside, St. Francis is so much more than the Garden Gnome of the Catholic Church and his contributions to Christianity are vast. It seems almost sacrilegious to focus on his relationship with the animals, when his spirituality goes so much deeper. But it is through this natural introduction that so many seekers in today’s world meet the man who continues to change the Christian world for the better, even 800 years after he was born.

Francis’ influence is also strong in the secular world. For instance, the three largest cities in California are directly or indirectly named after St. Francis of Assisi. San Francisco for obvious reasons; Los Angeles, whose original name is Pueblo de Nuestra Senora La Reina de Los Angeles de Portiuncula – Town of Our Lady of the Angels of the Little Portion – which is from St. Francis’ main church and headquarters in Assisi, the Little Portion;[1] and San Jose, which is the county seat for Santa Clara County, named after Saint Clare of Assisi, Francis’ friend and disciple.[2] Santa Fe, New Mexico – the second oldest city in the United States still existing, was named "La Villa Real de la Santa Fé de San Francisco de Asís" - "The Royal City of the Holy Faith of Saint Francis of Assisi”[3]

Over 1500 books and articles have been written on the son of Assisi, beginning with a biography in 1229, just three years after his death.[4] This short paper hopes to share the history of this Christian leader, taking a small part of his amazing contributions as “an ecologist before his time (and) a friend to animals”[5], to explore his relationship with the natural world and, in turn, with God.

A brief biography may be helpful to those not familiar with the personal history of St. Francis. Born in 1181 in the Italian city of Assisi, the man known as Francis was originally baptized as Giovannie (John) Bernardone, given the name by his mother, Pica (though other biographers list her as Giovannia[6]), while his father, Pietro Bernardone was trading in France. Upon his return, the wealthy merchant gave his son the nickname Francesco, to reflect his passion for France, and it stuck.

Francis loved the good life that his father’s success provided him, and he proved adept at the family business. He enjoyed the many luxuries that were his, involving his friends in a lifestyle rich in merriment and mischief.

His dreams of becoming a knight changed after serving a year as a prisoner of war, followed by another year of illness. At 24, he joined another military expedition, but suddenly withdrew during his journey and returned home. Once home, his slow conversion to solely serving Christ found him demonstrating very odd behavior, including giving away his father’s goods, his clothes and horse to the needy and finally renouncing all the worldly possessions he owned, living as a hermit in an abandoned church under the most meager of circumstances. It is from this rebirth that his order was founded.

ST. FRANCIS’ UNIVERSAL NATURE

Although best known for his relationship with his avian brothers and sisters, Francis’ natural concerns went far beyond that limited border. Prior to the teachings of Francis, Christians interpreted Genesis as entitling them to treat all other forms of life as their slaves. It was Francis’ belief that God’s work “should be respected and loved no differently from men.”[7] Thomas of Celano, a 13^th century Franciscan biographer of St. Francis, said that Francis “was filled with compassion toward dumb animals, reptiles and other creatures. . . . In the most extraordinary manner, never experienced by others, he discerned the hidden things of nature in his sensitive heart.”[8] Simply put,

Francis had a relationship to everything: to man, beasts of the fields and forests, the birds, the fish, trees, flowers, even stones, the sun, the moon, the wind and the stars, fire and water, rain and snow, storms, the earth, summer, winter, and the tender elegy of springtime. With all of these he dealt courteously and admitted them to the circle of his immediate family, for a man who believes in and loves his Creator with his whole heart must also dignify and love all of His creations.[9]

In spite of his deep devotion to God’s non-human creatures, Francis never exhorted against the meat-eater or the hunter, as long as the person could show he loved the living animal or showed humility in the presence of a game bird and its beauty. “Francis accepted and lived with the hunter, the fisherman, the farmer, the butcher. He neither humanized nor sentimentalized animals. But he did feel for them, admitting them to their rights of kinship with him and giving them the same courtesy that he bestowed upon his fellows.”[10]

Francis’ love for nature was not limited to animals. He asked a brother preparing a garden to leave a patch for flowers, so he could enjoy their beauty and scent. A woodcutter was reminded to make sure that enough of the tree be left for it to grow again. “He exhorted cornfields and vineyards, stones and forests, all the beauties of the fields and green things of the gardens, to love God and serve him willingly.”[11] It is the teachings of St. Francis that “one of the fundamentals of the universe was its unity; every component related to every other in a logical and harmonious pattern.”[12]

BIRDS

If someone were to be asked, “What do you know about St. Francis?” a likely response would be, “Isn’t he the guy who talked to the birds?” History tells us that, indeed, Francis of Assisi did talk to the birds and, what’s more, they listened!

Although the story has been “sentimentalized out of all proportion,”[13] Francis’ biographers tell of the time when he was on his way home, reflecting on his apparent failures. He announces to his companions that “he would probably have a more respectful hearing from the birds.” Spying a large flock of birds of various species, he runs toward them swiftly, greeting them with his usual cry of “The Lord give you peace.” Astounded that they did not fly away, Francis asked that they listen to him preach. He begins,

“My brother birds, you should greatly praise your Creator and love Him always. He gave you feathers to wear, wings to fly, and whatever you need. God made you noble among His creatures and gave you a home in the purity of the air, so that, though you neither sow nor reap, He nevertheless protects and governs you without your least care.”

The birds stretched their necks, spread their wings, opened their beaks and looked at him. He passed through their midst, coming and going, touching their heads and bodies with his tunic. Then he blessed them, and having made the sign of the cross, gave them permission to fly off to another place. . . And from that day on, he carefully exhorted all birds, all animals, all reptiles, and also insensible creatures, to praise and love the Creator.[14]

Another story tells of the time when Francis was to speak to the Villagers of Alviano. A large flock of swallows was making such a raucous noise that the people could not hear Francis. The preacher then implored the birds to be quiet, saying “My sister swallows; now it is time for me to speak, since you have already said enough. Listen to the word of the Lord and stay quiet and calm…” Not only did the birds suddenly grow silent, but they did not move from their perches until the sermon was over.[15]

When given a pheasant to feast upon, Francis instead tamed the bird. As proof of the animal’s ability to come and go as he chose, an out-of-town doctor was given the animal to take home. Soon, the bird was back in Francis’ cell. Another time, Francis persuaded a boy to hand over some turtledoves that the boy had trapped. Francis then made them nests, where they settled and raised their young for many generations.[16] Other stories include a wren that nestled for a long time in Francis’ cowl and Francis’ attempted duet with a Nightingale, which quickly outsung the friar.[17]

Francis so loved the birds that he wanted towns and corporations to take time off from levying taxes and scatter crumbs, instead, on the frozen roads. He pleaded for hostels where strays could be fed and housed, and he raged against the caging of larks. He declared, “If I ever talk to the emperor I will implore him, for the love of God, to decree that no one should trap or in any way harm our sisters the larks. Likewise the lord of every town and village should see that all their people scatter the roads with grain for the birds on Christmas Day.”[18] In fact, of all his feathered brethren, Francis loved larks most. He said they reminded him of friars in their habit and hood of brown feathers, humbly gleaning food from the fields and singing God’s praises.[19] Individually, however, it must have been a crow he adopted that, like all adopted crows, became fiercely loyal. This crow “sat next to him at meals and came on his visits to the sick; when he died it followed his coffin to San Giorgia, refused to leave or eat, and very soon died too.”[20]

OTHER ANIMALS

Francis’ love of animals did not focus solely on birds. Wild beasts would flee to him from their abusive masters, lambs and sheep were rescued from slaughter and even worms were removed from the roadway, for fear of being trampled. Animals were reported to smile when he petted them, grant his requests and obey his commands. He called all animals by the name of brother and sister. It is clear why St. Hubert is the patron saint of hunters and not St. Francis, for it is Francis who freed a rabbit captured in a trap and returned netted fish to the open water.[21]

Francis felt so strongly for the mistreated animals of his day, for the snared birds and the beaten horses and hungry dogs that he went to the burghers, to the governors, finally to the emperor, begging for a law against their abuse. He demanded that farmers be forced to treat their cattle humanely and give them an extra treat on Christmas Day.[22]

Francis quieted noisy frogs (not difficult in Italy where they don’t care for human company); and when given a large fish by a fisherman, he slipped it back into the water where it swam beside the boat until Francis sent it off with a blessing. Another fisherman gave Francis a fish which refused to leave his lap until he had finished a long meditation.[23] Francis purchased the lambs that were being taken to the butcher in order to save their lives. He fed the bees in winter that they might not perish.[24] Brother Leo, a companion of Francis, remembered Francis’ delight in a cicada, which sang in a fig tree next to his hut at the bottom of the garden. Each day he lifted it onto his finger where it sang for an hour before he replaced it on a branch.[25]

It is the story of the wolf which plagued Gubbio which best speaks of Francis’ love of animals and the respect he commanded from them. A large male wolf was ranging around the town of Gubbio during a very hard winter, when prey in the forest was scarce, domestic animals weakened or dying, and the townspeople found it difficult to bury their dead. Rumors about the wolf grew so grisly that no one dared leave the city walls.

Francis agreed to deal with this wolf and found that it was an elderly animal, perhaps reduced to taking any feeble livestock it found and occasionally scavenging limbs from corpses. The story tells how Francis, addressing him as Friar Wolf, said “Come to me, Brother Wolf, and I order you, in the name of Christ, neither to harm me nor the others.”[26] Francis then rebuked the wolf for his reign of terror but acknowledged this was due to hunger. He therefore proposed a pact between the wolf and the people by which they kept him fed, while he promised to stop his attacks on them and their animals.

By now a crowd had gathered, who shouted their agreement; and when Francis held out his hand to the wolf to seal the contract, the story goes that the wolf stretched out its paw in return, expressing its assent “with movements of its body, tail and eyes.”[27]

Some of the stories about Francis may sound apocryphal, like the tale of the grasshopper that on a winter midnight came to help him sing his office, leaving its tiny tracks in the snow to shame monks who had been too slothful to assist. Still, his heart truly brimmed over with such affection it had to scatter like rain onto animals as well as men.[28]

THE FIRST CRECHE

“For I would make a memorial of that Child who was born in Bethlehem, and in some sort behold with bodily eyes His infant hardships; how He lay in a manger on hay, with the ox and ass standing by.” (The words of Saint Francis quoted in The First Life of Saint Francis of Assisi by Brother Thomas of Celano, 1229)[29]

Although it is now a holiday tradition for Churches all over the world to present living crèches, it was St. Francis who created the first such tableau. He was inspired one winter night in 1223, as he and one of his followers were making their way to the tiny town of Greccio, to spend Christmas there. While walking, Francis looked out over the fields and saw some shepherds sleeping in the moonlight. They reminded him of the shepherds long ago to whom the angel had appeared, telling them to go and greet the Christ Child, born that day in a stable in Bethlehem. Francis created his crèche using only a straw-filled feeding trough as the manger, set between a real ox and a donkey. The manger served as the altar for Christmas mass.[30]

THE NATURAL ELEMENTS

Francis also embraced the elements of earth, wind, fire, and water as if they were living creatures. He saw the earth as our Mother and praised Brother Wind “for bringing us changes of weather.” Sister Water was so precious to him that when he was finished washing, he would not throw it arbitrarily to the ground, where it might get stepped upon. Fire held a special fascination for him and he “hated putting out candles and lamps or smother fires, and quenching their flames.”[31] When physicians were prepared to apply red-hot irons to cauterize his temples as an aid against his growing blindness, Francis asked of the element, “Brother Fire who art nobler and more useful than most other creatures. I have always been good to you and always will be so for the love of him who created you. Now show yourself gentle and courteous with me and do not burn me more than I can stand.” After the cauterization, Francis declared, “If that is not enough burning, then burn it again, for I have not felt the least pain.”[32]

THE PATRON SAINT OF ECOLOGISTS

Lynn White, a professor at the University of California in 1967, wrote that St. Francis was “The greatest spiritual revolutionary in Western history.” Lynn wrote that what St. Francis proposed is an alternative Christian view of nature and man’s relation to it, offering “the idea of the equality of all creatures, including man, for the idea of man’s limitless rule of creation.” Although Francis failed in achieving this goal, his efforts were in the right direction, since “the roots of our trouble are so largely religious, the remedy must also be essentially religious, whether we call it that or not.” In proposing St. Francis as “a patron saint for ecologists,” we must learn and be inspired by his example. [33]

Eight hundred years before the first “Earth Day,” Saint Francis lived a remarkable life in the name of Christ as a lover and protector of all God’s creations. His lessons then are more valuable today than ever before.

[1] Mary Jo Duffy. Francis, Brother of the Universe. MCG Publishers. New York, NY. 1980. 49.

[2] Julien Green. God's fool : the life and times of Francis of Assisi. Harper and Row, Publishers. New York, NY. 1985

[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Fe%2C_New_Mexico

[4] Donald Soto. Reluctant Saint – The Life of Francis Assisi. Penguin Books. New York, NY. 2002. xvi.

[5] Ibid. xvii.

[6] John Holland Smith. Francis of Assisi. Charles Scribner’s Sons. New York, NY 1972. 16

[7] Adrian House. Francis of Assisi. Paulist Press. Mahwah, NJ. 2000. 177

[8] Ibid. 180.

[9] Paul Gallico. The Francis book : 800 years with the Saint from Assisi. Roy M. Gasnick, ed. Collier Books. New York, NY. 1980. 82.

[10] Ibid. 83.

[11] Adrian House. 178.

[12] Ibid. 158.

[13] Donald Soto. 100.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid. 101.

[16] Adrian House. 179.

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid. 197.

[19] Ibid. 144.

[20] Ibid. 179.

[21] Donald Soto. 101.

[22] Phyllis McGinley. The Francis book : 800 years with the Saint from Assisi. Roy M. Gasnick, ed. Collier Books. New York, NY. 1980. 81.

[23] Adrian House. 179.

[24] P. Pourrat. The Francis book : 800 years with the Saint from Assisi. Roy M. Gasnick, ed. Collier Books. New York, NY. 1980. 85.

[25] Adrian House. 178.

[26] Lawrence Cunningham, ed. Brother Francis: An Anthology of Writings by and about Saint Francis of Assisi. Harper & Row, Publishers. New York, NY. 1972. 75.

[27] Adrian House. 181.

[28] Phyllis McGinley. 81.

[29] Joanna Cole. A Gift from St. Francis: the First Crèche. William Morrow & Co. New York, NY. 1989.

[30] Joanna Cole. 15.

[31] Adrian House. 181.

[32] Paul Gallico. 84.

[33] Lawrence Cunningham, ed. 94.

***

Of the many sources I used for this paper, my favorite was G.K. Chesterton's “Saint Francis of Assisi, which is available for less than $5 at half.com or amazon. Of course, you could also always borrow my copy.

The best known writing of Francis of Assisi is The Canticle of the Sun, which you can find at http://www.webster.edu/~barrettb/canticle.htm?fb_page_id=5962643525&

There is also an excellent move - "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" - which encompasses his story beginning with the time of his recuperation. And yes, you can borrow my copy if you want.

GEORGE BUSH AND THE BIBLE

2009-04-12T20:42:00.000-07:00

If you are interested in this subject, I encourage to read the book GOD IN THE WHITE HOUSE by Randall Balmer (2007), which examines how politics and religion have interacted from the time of John F. Kennedy to George W. Bush.
Amazon.com and Half.com both carry it at a discount.

The paper below was originally titled "God in the White House." The title has been changed and the content slightly updated for this post. It was my first graduate paper and was written in 2003, when George W. Bush was still in the White House.

GEORGE BUSH AND THE BIBLE

INTRODUCTION

United States Presidents have called upon God from the very beginning of our nation. Thomas Jefferson, who would become the third President of the United States, wrote in the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

George Washington was not shy about calling upon a Supreme Being in the first Thanksgiving proclamation, decreeing that November 26 “be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country . . .” It was also Washington, who, when taking the oath of office as the first President, added this four-word prayer of his own: “So help me God.” Abraham Lincoln, 16th President, told his Cabinet that the victory during the United States Civil War at Antietam was a sign from God that Lincoln should issue the Emancipation Proclamation, which announced an end to slavery in the United States. Every President since Washington has acknowledged his Christian belief, some more fervently so than others. Woodrow Wilson, President during World War I, spoke publicly of praying “on bended knee.” Franklin Roosevelt, on the day of D-day, of the greatest military invasion of modern times, led the nation in prayer. Every President since Dwight Eisenhower took office in 1953 has addressed the National Prayer Breakfast each year. Jimmy Carter, 39th President, was a Sunday School teacher while living in his home state of Georgia and still publicly speaks about his faith.

This long history of God in the White House is offered as a platform, from which we will investigate its former occupant, George W. Bush and examine his use of God in his political actions. Bush’s comments and actions will be evaluated solely by how it compares to the Holy Bible. Other documents and writings will be considered, but the Bible will be the final arbitrator as to the accuracy of Bush’s statements. What will not be done is to examine Bush’s political actions outside of faith-based statements and actions, looking only at those things in which Bush explicitly invokes God and/or scripture.

GEORGE BUSH’S CHRISTIANITY

George Bush is an avowed Christian. In December, 1999, during his campaign for the presidency, Bush was asked during a debate “What political philosopher or thinker do you most identify with and why?”” Bush answered “Christ, because he changed my heart.” When asked to explain more, Bush continued “When you turn your heart and your life over to Christ, when you accept Christ as the savior, it changes your heart and changes your life. And that’s what happened to me.”

It was no less a religious personage than the Rev. Billy Graham who brought about the change in Bush’s beliefs. The Rev. Graham was spending a few days with the senior George Bush and his family. One morning, George Jr. and the Rev. Graham went for a walk together. In his autobiography, Bush writes that Graham “sparked a change in my heart. (He) planted a mustard seed in my soul, a seed that grew over the next year. He led me to the path, and I began walking. It was the beginning of a change in my life. I had always been a ‘religious’ person, had regularly attended church, even taught Sunday school and served as an altar boy. But that weekend, my faith took on a new meaning.”

The Rev. Graham would go on to be a friend of the Bush family by appearing in Florida, the home of Governor Jeb Bush, George’s brother, two days before the election in November 2000. The Rev. Graham, appearing with George Bush in a church in Jacksonville, the state capital, said “I don’t endorse candidates. But I’ve come as close to it, I guess, now as any time in my life, because I think it’s extremely important,” adding “I believe in the integrity of this man.” Eventually, Bush would be put in the White House based on a difference of 537 votes out of 5,825,043 . It cannot be stated that Bush won Florida and eventually became President because of Graham’s endorsement but it can be generally accepted that any endorsement from someone so well known and respected as the Rev. Billy Graham would make a positive difference in the number of votes cast for Bush, especially in so close a race.

BUSH AND CREATIONISM

Bush is a firm advocate of Creationism, the belief in the literal interpretation o f the Bible regarding how everything was created. In respect to education, Bush has “no problem explaining that there are differences about how the world was formed. I mean, after all, religion has been around a lot longer than Darwinism . . .. I believe God did create the world. And I think we’re finding out more and more and more as to how it actually happened.”

Examining Bush’s comment in respect to the Bible, he says “I believe God did create the world.” In Genesis 1:1, the Bible reads, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” (NIV) The two statements are almost identical.

BUSH AND THE POSTING OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS

The Justices of the United States Supreme Court, the highest judicial authority in the country, have made many rulings regarding the posting of the Ten Commandments on public property, most recently regarding Alabama State Chief Justice Roy Moore’s placement of a monument to the Ten Commandments in the rotunda of the Judicial Building in Montgomery, Alabama. The Supreme Court refused to block an order forcing the chief justice to remove the monument from the state’s Judicial Building, ruling that state support for the Ten Commandments violates the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

George Bush’s view are contrary to the views of the judicial branch of the US government. Bush has said he has “no problem with the Ten Commandments posted on the walls of every public space.” Unfortunately, when asked which version of the Ten Commandments he would like to see posted, he responded “The standard version.”

Unless President Bush was referring to the New American Standard Bible or the English Standard Version, there is no “standard” Bible and, hence, no “standard” interpretation of the Ten Commandments. In fact, there are countless available English translations, including the New International Version, The Message, Amplified Bible, New Living Translation, King James Version, Contemporary English Version, Reader’s Digest Version, New King James Version, Twenty-first Century King James Version, Worldwide English, Young’s Literal, Translation, Darby Translation, Wycliffe New Testament and the New International Version - UK . A sampling of two of these Bibles, taken at random, show differences in their interpretations of the Ten Commandments. Though the similarities far outweigh the differences, the differences must be considered and extend far beyond “Thou shalt” vs. “You will.” The New International Version reads, “You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God. . .” The New American Standard Bible reads, “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain. . .” The difference between misusing the name of God and taking it in vain can be considered significant. One more comparison to make our point has the NIV reading “Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy.” The NAS reads “Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy.” One version says the Sabbath day is already holy and is kept so by being remembered. The other version says that the sabbath (lower case “s” included!) must be kept holy through the ongoing working of remembering it. Subtle differences perhaps, but differences nonetheless and compounded exponentially when factoring in all the other versions of the Ten Commandments available. So when George Bush says “Surely we can agree as a society on a version that everyone can agree to,” he is not only grammatically flummoxed, but offers a challenge that cannot be met.

“FREEDOM IS GOD’S GIFT”

George Bush has often used a variation of the phrase “Freedom (or Liberty) is God’s gift to humanity.” He often phrases the statement as “The liberty we prize is not America’s gift to the world. It is God’s gift to humanity.” In his 2003 State of the Union speech, he proclaimed that “the liberty we prize is not America’s gift to the world. It is God’s gift to humanity.” After Saddam Hussein had been captured by American troops, President Bush announced, “You’ve heard me say this a lot -- and I say it a lot because I truly believe it – that freedom is the almighty God’s gift to every person, every man and woman who lives in this world.” Bush went on to say, in regard to Hussein’s capture, “Justice was being delivered to a man who defied that gift (of freedom) from the Almighty to the people of Iraq.”

It’s a nice sentiment. But is it Biblically sound? Does the Bible, in fact, say that freedom and liberty are God’s gift to God’s people? A concordance search of the words “freedom” and “liberty” only produce 19 passages from the Bible, none of which proclaim or imply that freedom or liberty is a gift from God. A more intense study of the Bible may find such references and certainly analogies can be made from many of the Bible stories. Also, as theologians, we can say that everything is a gift from God. But when the topic is specifically researched, the Bible is nearly mute. Galatians 5:1 reads “It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to yoke of slavery.”(NIV) Though freedom through Christ is a very real experience for Christians, it is non-existent for the vast majority of the Muslim people of Iraq. The Old Testament reading of Isaiah 61:1 also comes close to touching this subject, in proclaiming “The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me, because the LORD has anointed me . . .to proclaim liberty to captives and freedom to prisoners.”

It seems almost picayune and mean-spirited to begrudge the President this comment. His thoughts are not far from those of Thomas Jefferson, who is generally accepted as one of the most intelligent presidents ever to occupy the White House. In 1774, two years prior to the nation’s Declaration of Independence, Jefferson wrote “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time.” Unfortunately, be it one of our earliest Presidents or our 43rd President, the statement does not stand the test of a basic Biblical examination.

“I BELIEVE WE WORSHIP THE SAME GOD”

In a joint news conference on November 20, 2003 with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, President Bush was asked, “When you talk about peace in the Middle East, you've often said that freedom is granted by the Almighty. Some people who share your beliefs don't believe that Muslims worship the same Almighty. I wonder about your views on that.” President Bush answered, “I do say that freedom is the Almighty's gift to every person. I also condition it by saying freedom is not America's gift to the world. It's much greater than that, of course. And I believe we worship the same God.”

This was not the first time a President made such a remark. Found amongst his personal papers after his death in 1972, Harry S Truman, 33rd President of the United States, was a handwritten manuscript. Truman wrote, “Jews, Mohammadians, Buddhists, and Confucians worship the same God as the Christians say they do. He is all seeing, all hearing, and all knowing." Though Truman’s comments are merely a footnote to history, George Bush’s same declaration has incurred controversy and discussion. Richard Lano of the Southern Baptist Convention told the Baptist Press that Bush’s comment was in error. Lano said “We should always remember that (Bush) is the commander in chief, not theologian in chief.” Theologians have argued on both sides of the fence as to the accuracy of Bush’s remark. To answer the question, “Do Muslims and Christians worship the same God”, requires an understanding of the Muslim faith.

Muhammad was a man born in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, around 570 AD. He married at 25 and became a trader. According to the Muslim faith, about 15 years later, when Muhammad was around 40, he had an encounter with the Angel Gabriel, the same Angel Gabriel who came to Zechariah in Luke 1:18 and whom God sent to Mary in Luke 1:26. Although Muhammad was illiterate, the angel Gabriel, over the course of 23 years, gave the trader Muhammad the directions that would become the Qur’an (Koran), which is the holy book of the Islam faith. Because of this encounter and Muhammad’s spreading of the teachings he learned, Muhammad is recognized as “the Messenger of God.”

The Qur’an identifies Allah as the same God to whom Abraham offered his son Isaac in Genesis 22. Abraham then made the first pilgrimage to Mecca, which is now the holy city of Islam. Historically, the first Christians were Jews, whose belief in one Supreme Being is what separated them from the polytheists of the time. As these Jews were converted to Christianity, they understood that though they now worshiped Christ, the power of Christ came from his Father, the same Father which the Jews worshiped as God.

The Qur’an reads, in Chapter Two, Verse 163 “And your God is One God; there is no God but He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful”. When Mohammad began preaching the Qur’an, he included Christians and Jews amongst his converts. It is not a stretch of faith by any means, then, to accept that, when the monotheistic Jews and Christians converted to Islam, that the one God of which Mohammad spoke is the same God under which the Jews and Christians practiced their faith.

Another indication that Muslims, Jews and Christians worship the same God is shown in the warring history of the Muslims, who battle polytheist – those who worshiped multiple gods – but did not battle Jews and Christians, accepting that they were all worshipers of the same God or, in Arabic, Allah.

The most telling evidence of Muslims worshiping the same God as Jews and Christians comes from the Qur’an itself. Chapter 5, Verse 69 reads “...[T]hose who believe (in the message of Islam), and the Jews, the Sabaeans, and the Christians – all those who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and act righteously – no fear shall come upon them…” However, Timothy George, writing in ChristianityToday.Com, states that the God of Muhammad cannot be the God of Jesus. George reminds us that we are baptized as Christians in the name of the Creator, the Messiah and the Holy Spirit. Many worship services are dismissed with the blessing “May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.” Though it may be one of the most difficult aspects of Christianity to grasp, Christians acknowledge that Creator, Christ and the Holy Spirit are all one as God. The Bible tells us that God and Christ are one in John , which reads “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. . . .The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.” Clearly, John was speaking about the Christ. This is in direct contradiction of the Muslim faith, whose first basic guideline is to “Eliminate any anthropomorphism (human qualities) from their conception of Allah. His attributes are not like human attributes, despite similar labels or appellations.” In short, the Islamic God cannot be human in any form, unlike the Christian God, who came to earth as Jesus Christ.

Although historically, Judaism, Christianity and Muslim may have come from the same Creator God, the holy book of the Muslim faith, the Qur’an, is in direct contradiction to the New Testament of Christianity. By the interpretations given to these two books, the God of Islam is not the God of Christianity.

BUSH AND THE WAR IN IRAQ

Every President since George Washington has had to send soldiers into combat. Most of these men who actively served as Commander in Chief of the US Armed Forces have also proclaimed to be followers of Jesus Christ, the same Jesus Christ who taught us to “turn the other cheek” and who admonished the disciple who took up a weapon to protect the Messiah.

The world would be substantially better if everyone followed the Christian tenets of peace that are the founding of many other pacifistic faiths. Unfortunately, the short-term risks to life, property and liberties are too great to “lay down our plowshares and turn our swords into pruning hooks.” George W. Bush is no exception and he is a master at putting God on the side of the Americans. In his Easter and Passover radio address on April 19, 2003, President Bush said, in respect to a soldier who had died in combat in Iraq, “America mourns those who have been called home, and we pray that their families will find God's comfort and God's grace. His purposes are not always clear to us, yet this season brings a promise: that good can come out of evil, that hope can arise from despair, and that all our grief will someday turn to joy, a joy that can never be taken away. ” The Bible teaches us that we are all sinners and that by accepting Christ into our hearts, we can be redeemed. In the resurrection of Christ, we gain hope from despair. And that with peace through Christ, our joy is eternal.

In the same speech, Bush says, “This holy season reminds us of the value of freedom, and the power of a love stronger than death.” The “power of a love stronger than death” can be attributed to the love of God and the promise fulfilled, again, of the resurrection. However, when Bush tries to turn his war into a religious experience by claiming that Easter and Passover serve as reminders of freedom, he is only tangentially referencing the Easter message. Praising a Christian God for God’s help in battle seems to be paradoxical. The Old Testament is rife with God’s orders to “go and slay” the enemy. But as Christians, we must follow the directions of Jesus Christ.

George Bush is more of an Old Testament believer and never misses a chance to tie the war in Iraq into a religious battle. In his remarks at a White House dinner, with Ambassadors and Muslim Leaders , celebrating Ramadan - a time for Muslims for inner reflection, devotion to God, and self-control - Bush addresses the group, saying, “As we gather during this season, we are mindful of the struggles of the men and women around the world who long for the same peace and tolerance we enjoy here in America. Brave American and coalition troops are laboring every day to defend our liberty and to spread freedom and peace, particularly to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan.”

The President’s speeches are filled with instances of his calling upon God to help Americans win the war. One more example is the National Day of Prayer Proclamation for April 30, 2003. Of the five paragraphs in the speech, two are dedicated to war: Today, our Nation is strong and prosperous. Our Armed Forces have achieved great success on the battlefield, but challenges still lie ahead. Prayer will not make our path easy, yet prayer can give us strength and hope for the journey. As we continue to fight against terror, we ask the Almighty to protect all those who battle for freedom throughout the world and our brave men and women in uniform, and we ask Him to shield innocents from harm. We recognize the sacrifice of our military families and ask God to grant them peace and strength. We will not forget the men and women who have fallen in service to America and to the cause of freedom. We pray that their loved ones will receive God's comfort and grace."

Calling upon the Almighty in times of war is a Presidential action that goes back to the beginning. During the Revolutionary War, George Washington, advised his troops that “The fate of unborn millions will now depend, under God, on the courage and conduct of this army .... Let us therefore rely on the goodness of the cause and the aid of the Supreme Being, in whose hands victory is, to animate and encourage us to great and noble actions."

So whereas George Bush – and most every US President before him – has used prayer to advance the cause of war, Biblically it is not congruent with New Testament teachings.

SUMMARY

As a Christian, George W. Bush’s faith-related comments and interpretation and use of scripture are far from perfect. However, based on the examples above, his use is no different than his predecessors in office nor does his use waver, excluding the wars, from the intent of the Bible; that is, he is not speaking falsehoods to justify actions that are contrary to Christian teachings. He clearly has a layman’s knowledge of the Bible and the Christian faith and speaks it passionately. His use of God in his political actions is in keeping with biblical scripture.

BIBLIOGRAPHY and footnotes available by request. But really...

IT MAKES NO SENSE!

2009-03-28T10:52:00.000-07:00

Consider the lowly penny, ditched in a bowl on the dresser or tossed in a jar where it will eventually be … what? Deposited in the change-O-meter at the grocery story? Given away under the pretense of charity. Buried under a tree in the backyard with photographs of the family and a note for the future? (Okay, that last idea is pretty cool. I’ve done it more than once.)

But how much longer should we hang on to this antiquated, money-losing proposition. Money losing? Yes – ridiculously so. How much is a penny worth? One cent – which is the formal way the US Government recognizes the coin. And how much does it cost to make one cent? Estimates vary from 1.23 cents to 1.67 cents. But the key is in the numbers to the right of the 1. It costs more to make a penny than a penny is worth.

Maybe they make up the difference in volume, as the US Mint produces 8 b-b-b-billion pennies each year. Eight billion cents = 8,000,000,000 coins. Moving the decimal as Mrs. Larson taught me in the fourth grade means that it totals $80,000,000.00. Eighty million dollars, in case your eyeballs started to cross at all those zeroes. And how much can we estimate it costs to make 80 million dollars? Let’s split the difference and say 1.45 cents for each coin x 80 million and I think it’s $116,000,000,000, but my calculator erred out. One hundred sixteen million dollars to produce 80 million dollars worth of … well, dollars, in a sense.

So wotta ya gonna do about it? On the higher level, write your Congressperson and Senator and tell them that we don’t need the penny, we don’t want the penny and we can’t afford the penny. Then watch them leap into inaction. Or more likely, watch the lobbyists for the zinc industry, of which "copper" pennies are made, continue to pour over $100,000 into their pockets.

On a personal level, don’t take the pennies you are given in change when you are shopping. Throw them in the Tip Jar (cheapskate), leave them on the counter “for the next poor slob,” as I like to say, or give them to the next person in line, saying, “Here – in case you need these." Depending on your shopping habits, this may actually cost you as much as 15 cents a day, but remember – you are working towards a greater cause.

But frankly, none of this will make a difference. The only way the penny would likely be eliminated is if McDonald’s and Starbucks and Wal-Mart and the other major retailers began rejecting their use. I’m not saying they shouldn’t accept pennies – I’m saying they shouldn’t give them out. Work with me here. If you are buying your whatever and the penny total comes to 1 or 2 cents, the company should round down and charge you the lower price. If the total is 3 or 4 cents, the charge should round up to the nickel. If you want to pay with pennies, go ahead. Maybe they will leave them on the counter for the person who thinks they are getting cheated out of their two cents, while very likely spending dollars on something they don’t need. But if the larger retail establishments set this tone and it gains in popularity, the vote-seekers in Congress will eventually make the daring choice of doing the will of the people. And soon, those pennies will go the way of the two-cent piece.

By the way, did you know it costs almost seven cents to make a nickel? One step at a time, though.

WHY I WENT TO SEMINARY

2009-03-27T20:57:00.000-07:00

I was raised in a church home with Mother taking us most every Sunday, but I came to accept Christ on my own through Young Life in High School. Unlike a lot of Christians who have made a conscious decision to accept Christ into his/her heart, I cannot tell you the moment I said, “Jesus – I am yours.” But since High School, I have been a follower of the teachings of Jesus.

My original studies came from reading the Gospels as they were translated in the “The Good News” version of the Bible. I have always been practical in all my readings, often missing the deeper meanings of John Steinbeck and even Mark Twain and the same failings followed me in my Gospel readings. I was not unlike the disciples, to whom Jesus explained many teachings by way of parables or stories – and then had to explain what the parables meant. My eating habits may be vegetarian, but my reading has to be “meat and potatoes.”

At the ancient age of 47, I chose to formally pursue an education in theology. Intellectually, it has been a gold mine for me. Academically, not so much. I have learned that everything we need to know about God – in all three forms of Creator, Messiah and Spirit - starts with the Bible. And reading the Bible is a good thing. But understanding the Bible is another thing – an undertaking that opens an awareness that is never finished. To know the Bible is to know God – who is unknowable. Yet that doesn’t mean the journey should not be taken. Reading the Bible will help us understand it as far as our existing knowledge will take us. But it is only through advanced study – of the culture and the geography and the history and the people and God help me, the languages – can our knowledge of those who wrote the Bible and, in turn, the Bible itself, expand.

My goal in reading the Old and New Testaments of the Bible is to explore how much Jesus Christ loves me and why. It is that encouragement that then moves me to be a better man, a better person and, most important of all, a better Christian.

Not everything I study at Seminary takes me to that goal. Some of the studies, in fact, seem to be an obstacle to my learning about Jesus. There are times in my studies when I’m ready to say “Furget it!” And the word I use isn’t “Furget.” But whatever the final outcome of my studies may be, it is my prayer that the knowledge that has been gained - a knowledge that comes at a price of personal sacrifice, of family time, finances, and, for very brief moments, self-esteem - will not be a light hidden under a bushel but will serve as a torch to light the path that all I know will trod upon, sharing a peace and love that is available to everyone for the asking and bringing to each of us a heaven on earth.

I share this mostly to encourage you to seek and walk this path and also in the hope that you will hold me accountable to these ideals as I try to walk it with you.

Thanks for being a part of my life.

My Father, His New Doctor, and Abbot and Costello

2009-02-02T10:07:00.000-08:00

MY FATHER had only good things to say about the Veteran's Hospital in Palo Alto, California. He appreciated the staff and the doctors, many of whom were from the Stanford Medical School "next door." As often happens, he was assigned a new doctor and, to hear him tell the story, it went something like this...

HOSPITAL ADMINISTRATOR: Mr. Guida, you will be seeing a new doctor on your next visit, Dr. Hu.

DAD: Who?

HA: That's right, Dr. Hu.

DAD: Who is my new doctor?

HA: Yes, you'll be meeting with her next Thursday.

DAD: I'll be meeting with who?

HA: Yes, at 2:00 PM.

DAD: Who will I be meeting?

HA:

DAD: (At this point enjoying the joke very much) What is the name of my new doctor?

HA: Dr. Hu is your new doctor.

DAD: Who?

and so it went.

If you have ever laughed at anything I have said or written, you can thank my Dad. We lost him four years ago this week and we all miss him. To Dad, I'd like to dedicate this classic bit of comedy ...

Abbot and Costello's
"Who's on First?"

Abbot: I’d like to recite the poem “Casey at the Bat.”

Costello: (From the audience) Hey, that’s baseball, isn’t it?

Abbot: Yes. Yes it is.

Costello: (Coming on stage) I have a question about baseball.

Abbot: You do?

Costello: Yeah. I got confused what with the World Series and all and I was hoping you could tell me who the players were.

Abbot: You want me to tell you the players’ names?

Costello: Yeah, you know stuff. Tell me the players’ names.

Abbot: Okay. Well, let's see. We have on the bags - we have Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third.

Costello: That's what I wanna find out.

Abbot: I say Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third -

Costello: You know the fellows' names?

Abbot: Certainly!

Costello: Well then who's on first?

Abbot: Yes!

Costello: I mean the fellow's name!

Abbot: Who!

Costello: The guy on first!

Abbot: Who!

Costello: The first baseman!

Abbot: Who!

Costello: The guy playing first!

Abbot: Who is on first!

Costello: Now whaddya askin' me for?

Abbot: I'm telling you Who is on first.

Costello: Well, I'm asking YOU who's on first!

Abbot: That's the man's name.

Costello: That's who's name?

Abbot: Yes.

Costello: Well go ahead and tell me.

Abbot: Who.

Costello: The guy on first.

Abbot: Who!

Costello: The first baseman.

Abbot: Who is on first!

Costello: Have you got a contract with the first baseman?

Abbot: Absolutely.

Costello: Who signs the contract?

Abbot: Well, naturally!

Costello: When you pay off the first baseman every month, who gets the money?

Abbot: Every dollar. Why not? The man's entitled to it.

Costello: Who is?

Abbot: Yes. Sometimes his wife comes down and collects it.

Costello: Who's wife?

Abbot: Yes.

Costello: All I'm tryin' to find out is what's the guy's name on first base.

Abbot: Oh, no - wait a minute, don't switch 'em around. What is on second base.

Costello: I'm not askin' you who's on second.

Abbot: Who is on first.

Costello: I don't know.

Abbot: He's on third - now we're not talkin' 'bout him.

Costello: Now, how did I get on third base?

Abbot: You mentioned his name!

Costello: If I mentioned the third baseman's name, who did I say is playing third?

Abbot: No - Who's playing first.

Costello: Never mind first - I wanna know what's the guy's name on third.

Abbot: No - What's on second.

Costello: I'm not askin' you who's on second.

Abbot: Who's on first.

Costello: I don't know.

Abbot: He's on third.

Costello: Aaah! Would you please stay on third base and don't go off it?

Abbot: What was it you wanted?

Costello: Now who's playin' third base?

Abbot: Now why do you insist on putting Who on third base?

Costello: Why? Who am I putting over there?

Abbot: Yes. But we don't want him there.

Costello: What's the guy's name on third base?

Abbot: What belongs on second.

Costello: I'm not askin' you who's on second.

Abbot: Who's on first.

Costello: I don't know.

Abbot & Costello: THIRD BASE!

Costello: You got an outfield?

Abbot: Oh yes!

Costello: The left fielder's name?

Abbot: Why.

Costello: I don't know, I just thought I'd ask you.

Abbot: Well, I just thought I'd tell you.

Costello: Alright, then tell me who's playin' left field.

Abbot: Who is playing fir-

Costello: STAY OUTTA THE INFIELD! I wanna know what's the left fielder's name.

Abbot: What's on second.

Costello: I'm not askin' you who's on second.

Abbot: Who's on first.

Costello: I don't know.

Abbot & Costello: THIRD BASE!

Costello: The left fielder's name?

Abbot: Why.

Costello: Because!

Abbot: Oh, he's center field.

Costello: Look, you gotta pitcher on this team?

Abbot: Now wouldn't this be a fine team without a pitcher.

Costello: The pitcher's name.

Abbot: Tomorrow.

Costello: You don't wanna tell me today?

Abbot: I'm tellin' you now.

Costello: Then go ahead.

Abbot: Tomorrow.

Costello: What time?

Abbot: What time what?

Costello: What time tomorrow are you going to tell me who's pitching?

Abbot: Now listen. Who is not pitching. Who is on fir-

Costello: I'll break your arm if you say Who's on first. I wanna know what's the pitcher's name.

Abbot: What's on second.

Costello: I don't know.

Abbot & Costello: THIRD BASE!

Costello: You got a catcher?

Abbot: Oh, absolutely.

Costello: The catcher's name.

Abbot: Today.

Costello: Today. And Tomorrow's pitching.

Abbot: Now you've got it.

Costello: All we've got is a couple of days on the team.

Abbot: Well, I can't help that.

Costello: Well, I'm a catcher too.

Abbot: I know that.

Costello: Now suppose that I'm catching, Tomorrow's pitching on my team and their heavy hitter gets up.

Abbot: Yes.

Costello: Tomorrow throws the ball. The batter bunts the ball. When he bunts the ball, me being a good catcher, I wanna throw the guy out at first base. So I pick up the ball and throw it to who?

Abbot: Now that's the first thing you've said right.

Costello: I don't even know what I'm talkin' about!

Abbot: Well, that's all you have to do.

Costello: Is to throw the ball to first base.

Abbot: Yes.

Costello: Now who's got it?

Abbot: Naturally!

Costello: If I throw the ball to first base, somebody's gotta catch it. Now who caught it?

Abbot: Naturally!

Costello: Who caught it?

Abbot: Naturally.

Costello: Who?

Abbot: Naturally!

Costello: Naturally.

Abbot: Yes.

Costello: So I pick up the ball and I throw it to Naturally.

Abbot: NO, NO, NO! You throw the ball to first base and Who gets it?

Costello: Naturally.

Abbot: That's right. There we go.

Costello: So I pick up the ball and I throw it to Naturally.

Abbot: You don't!

Costello: I throw it to who?

Abbot: Naturally.

Costello: THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING!

Abbot: You're not saying it that way.

Costello: I said I throw the ball to Naturally.

Abbot: You don't - you throw the ball to Who?

Costello: Naturally!

Abbot: Well, say that!

Costello: THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING! I throw the ball to who?

Abbot: Naturally.

Costello: Ask me.

Abbot: You throw the ball to Who?

Costello: Naturally.

Abbot: That's it.

Costello: SAME AS YOU!! I throw the ball to first base and who gets it?

Abbot: Naturally!

Costello: Who has it?

Abbot: Naturally!

Costello: HE BETTER HAVE IT! I throw the ball to first base. Whoever it is grabs the ball, so the guy runs to second. Who picks up the ball and throws it to What, What throws it to I Don't Know, I Don't Know throws it back to Tomorrow - triple play.

Abbot: Yes.

Costello: Another guy gets up - it's a long fly ball to Because. Why? I don't know. He's on third and I don't give a darn!

Abbot: What was that?

Costello: I said I don't give a darn!

Abbot: Oh, that's our shortstop.

(My Note: This is very slightly adapted for a presentation at a church talent show. If you ever get a chance to perform this, even doing a "readers theater" version, you will bring down the house -- assuming you can get through it without cracking yourself up first. If you want to see this done professionally, here's a couple of fellas who do it pretty well - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sShMA85pv8M)

RULES TO LIVE BY - BIG ONES LOOK OUT FOR THE LITTLE ONES

2009-01-17T13:11:00.000-08:00

"BIG ONES LOOK OUT FOR THE LITTLE ONES"

Adapted from a line in HOOK, the Robin Williams/Dustin Hoffman movie about Peter Pan and Captain Hook.

Last summer, my nephews, Chase and Dylan, were at a campground lake. Although the road between the campground and the lake was very quiet, we warned them to be extra careful while crossing. Chase assured Dylan that they would be safe. “Stay close to me,” he said to his three-year old cousin. “I’m five.”

Chase and Dylan

Big ones looking after the little ones is not limited to age or size. A young person who knows more about something than an older person or a small person with the tools to help a larger person do not belie this rule.

“Big ones” – however you wish to define someone in that respect – should always look out for the “little ones.”

"Whoever is the greatest should be the servant of the others."

Matthew 23:11

**********

Tangentially related, Chase knows his numbers and that he is 5. He also recognizes the number 52 - my age. During a time together, I asked him, “Do you know why we are such good pals? It is because you are five ... and I am five too!”

That number will change on January 20, 2009 and I would like to thank everyone who voted for Barack Obama in the swing states for the best present anyone could give me. The United States, for the past 100 years, has been "the big one who looks after the little one." That part, in the greater picture, never changed. What will change is that we will be the "good guys" again. I look forward to that.

RULES TO LIVE BY - What they don't teach you in Business School

2009-01-09T20:01:00.000-08:00

Rule #1 for the employee can and should be easily adapted for the student by replacing the word "boss" for "teacher." The same could also be said of a child and a parent, but who are we kidding? Or you could attempt to make the swap for "husband" or "wife," but I wouldn't recommend it. Regardless of how you adapt it, here it is.

RULE #1 - THE BOSS IS ALWAYS RIGHT

Equally important to RULE #1 is RULE #2.

RULE #2 - WHEN THE BOSS IS WRONG...

SEE RULE #1

If you follow this rule, you will never get in trouble. It is that simple.

Another rule they don't teach you in Business School is

THE FIRST RULE OF A SALESPERSON

It is often said that "the customer is always right." This, of course, is nonsense. If the customer ordered something in red and then he said he had asked for it in blue, then the customer is not right. What the good salesperson must do, however, is make it right without costing the company their long-term profit. To that end, The First Rule of a Salesperson is:

THE CUSTOMER IS NOT ALWAYS RIGHT -
BUT THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS THE CUSTOMER

IF I WERE IN CHARGE...

2009-01-01T12:02:00.001-08:00

IF I WERE IN CHARGE...

I WOULD PUT A WEST COAST SMITHSONIAN MUSEUM AT THE PRESIDIO IN SAN FRANCISCO. The Smithsonian Museum in Washington, DC is a treasure trove of Americana. What is on display is but a small percentage of what is available and currently kept in their basement or, in my imagination, a warehouse like that found at the end of RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (which this curmudgeon refuses to call INDIANA JONES AND THE RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and completely dismisses the same warehouse in the unfortunate INDIANA JONES AND THE MOVIE WITH THE REALLY STUPID, LONG TITLE). But I digress.

Smithsonian – and by their nature, Americana – treasures, available for public viewing on both coasts. On a beautiful piece of federally-owned property. Which is currently being seriously under-used.

I WOULD MAKE THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL ANTHEM "AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL" instead of that ode to war which nobody can sing, THE STAR SPANGLED BANNER. AMERICA THE BEAUTIFUL represents all that is good about our nation. For those who cannot see that this is a nation built on a foundation of God’s principals and don’t care for the line “…God shed His grace on thee…”, you can change that line to “…come shed your grace on thee…” It works. But really, our national motto is IN GOD WE TRUST. Get over it. And if you are sensitive to our neighbors to the north, which are also part of America, then petition to move the United States border 100 miles north and you will encompass over 80% of the Canadian population. As for Mexico, they don’t complain as much and it is usually in Spanish so most folks don’t know what they are saying anyway.

If you have any further question on the beauty of this choice, go to http://kids.niehs.nih.gov/lyrics/america.htm

THE UNITED STATES MINT WOULD MAKE A DOLLAR COIN THAT LOOKED LIKE A DOLLAR COIN AND NOT A BUS TOKEN OR A BRASS QUARTER. Make it a different size. Put a hole in the middle. Have it made of two different metals. Just get it right once! For example...

Those are just three of the things I would do. How about you?

Marriage, the Bible and "The Great American Experiment"

2008-11-11T11:02:00.000-08:00

There is something called "proof-texting," wherein someone has a thought and then they search the Bible to find corroboration of that thought. It is bad preaching and it is bad theology. And it has been used with venom against certain types of God's Children.

I believe that the civil rights being fought for today are no different than the civil rights that were fought for with marches in Birmingham and Washington, DC and came to its nadir on a hotel balcony in Memphis.

Many people, including friends of mine, believe homosexuality is a choice. I do not. But that not withstanding, I believe in the liberties of consenting adults. That is the politics of our country and the ongoing evolution of the "American Experiment." This issue, unfortunately, has become intertwined with religion, obliterating the line between "Church and State" - another important part of the "American Experiment." To those who believe that homosexuality is anti-Biblical and a threat to Christianity, I offer the following:

Those who tout Leviticus 22:18 “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable." as their reason against homosexuality might want to read all of Leviticus. Whereas homosexuality is "detestable," adultery, according to Leviticus 20:10, is punishable by death. Homosexuality is "detestable," Adultery is "punishable by death." Quite a difference. And when three of the four Gospels of the New Testament tell us that "anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matthew 5:27), it makes it difficult to apply these teachings of the Bible literally.

Add to that Deuteronomy 24's permission for a man to divorce his wife with a piece of paper ("If a man marries a woman who becomes displeasing to him because he finds something indecent about her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, gives it to her and sends her from his house...") against Matthew 19's admonition from Jesus against divorce ("anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery") and the question becomes even more tangled.

I am a Bible-believing Christian who believes the greatest commandments - Love God and Love Your Neighbor - take precedence over all the other rules. I wrestle with the Bible daily in learning all it's passages and what they mean to me in today's world. I do know that the Bible is not to be taken in "sound bites" but needs to be understood in its greater context.

RULES TO LIVE BY - Absolute Driving Rules

2008-10-20T09:12:00.000-07:00

In my many years behind the wheel, I have found three absolutes in driving. These are not “good tips” or “things to watch out for” – they are hard and fast rules and should be learned by every Driver.

ABSOLUTE DRIVING RULE #1 –

ALWAYS STAY BEHIND THE CAR IN FRONT OF YOU. This metaphysical rule was given to me by Dick Edwards, the father of one of my best friends, Garen Edwards. It is the first Absolute Driving Rule I learned, back in the ‘70’s. It is also the best ADR there is.

ABSOLUTE DRIVING RULE #2 –

NEVER, EVER – UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES – NO MATTER WHAT – PUT YOUR KEYS IN THE TRUNK. Put them in your pocket, hold them in your mouth, drop them on the ground – but do NOT put them in the trunk. Once they are in the trunk, there is no such thing as “for just a second.”

ABSOLUTE DRIVING RULE #3 –

NEVER DRIVE MORE THAN NINE MILES OVER THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT. This does not mean you SHOULD go nine miles over the Posted Speed Limit – just that you should never go MORE than nine miles over the Posted Speed Limit. I have never received a speeding ticket or been pulled over when observing this rule. I have been ticketed for going faster – and that is an expensive lesson. You will not get to your destination noticeably faster if you go 15 or even 20 miles over the speed limit and the risks of getting a ticket – or worse, violating ADR #1 – are significant. I have also never been in a situation where observing this Rule is dangerous because I am going slower than safety permits. Tangentially related to this, remember that if you see a police car in front of you, slow down. If you see a police car behind you, it's too late.

THE JUST WAR THEORY

2008-10-04T14:39:00.000-07:00

Taken from Kingdom Ethics by Glen Stassen and David Gushee, InterVarsity Press, 2003. Click here to purchase the book from Amazon.com

The Just War Theory, originally written in the 4th century and updated through history, is just as vital today as it was in the time of the Christian Roman Empire. Although this is a very abridged version, the words are taken verbatim from the text unless (noted).

From Kingdom Ethics:
The Just War Theory makes the logical point that in order to justify the killing that occurs in war, there must be a reason so important that it overrides the truth that killing people is wrong.

The moral theory of the Just War “begins with the presumption which binds all Christians: we should do no harm to our neighbors; how we treat our enemy is the key test of whether we love our neighbor; and the possibility of taking even one human life is a prospect we should consider in fear and trembling.”

The reasons come in the form of criteria for when a war is just. All Christians – and others – need to know and remember the eight criteria of Just War Theory. Only if we know the rules that determine when war is just or unjust can we exercise our conscientious responsibility in deciding whether to support or oppose a ware which a government proposes to wage on our behalf.

1. Just Cause. This includes the stopping of a massacre of large numbers of people and stopping the systematic and long-term violation of the human rights of life, liberty and community.

Some say that only the defense of one country from attack by another counts as just cause for war.

Some add the criterion that the side wagering a "just war" must have a comparatively more just cause than the other side, but most everyone thinks their own cause is more just than the other side’s. Therefore we stay with the more objective definition (listed above).

2. Just Authority. Constitutional processes must be followed, so the people who will pay with their lives and resources will be represented in the decision. Furthermore, the approval of the United Nations or a representative international body or coalition should generally be sought.
For these two kinds of just authority to function, both government truthfulness and freedom of the press are required so that people can judge situations accurately. Deceitful authority is unjust authority, especially when the deceit is in the service of getting people killed.

3. Last Resort. All means of negotiation, conflict resolution and prevention must be exhausted before resorting to war.

4. Just Intention (Final Cause or Future Aim). “The only legitimate intention is to secure a just peace for all involved. Neither revenge nor conquest nor economic gain nor ideological supremacy are justified.”

5. Probability of Success. “It is wrong to enter into a war that will kill many people … in order to achieve a more important goal, if we will quite surely lose and not achieve that goal, and all those people will die in vain.”

6. Proportionality of Cost. “Proportionality requires that the total good achieved by a victory will…outweigh the total evil and suffering that the war will cause. No one should prescribe a cure that is worse than the disease.”

7. Clear Announcement. The government that is about to make war must announce its intention to make war and the conditions for avoiding it. Stipulating the conditions for avoiding war enables the other side to know what it would take to avoid or stop the war.

8. The War Must be Fought by Just Means. (U)sing the huge arsenals of nuclear weapons would cause far worse destruction than any alleged gain, and so any nuclear war would be unjust.
Forbid(den) is “direct, intentional attacks on nonmilitary persons (and) individuals not actively contributing to the conflict.” Bombing a military target like a tank or a weapons factory may have the indirect effect of killing some civilians. That is a realistic and allowable consequence of war (though nonetheless horrible), so long as it truly is unintentional and indirect, and its cost in lives is proportional to the gain.

HOW NOT TO ARGUE FOR THE JUST WAR THEORY
Use of Just War Theory must be based on nonviolence and justice. A Christian who supports Just War Theory should see it as the most effective way to minimize violence and injustice, not merely to rationalize making war. “Just War Theory does not try to justify war. Rather it tries to bring war under the control of justice.”

A FAVORITE SAYING - I guarantee the answer is "NO" if you don't ask the question.

2008-10-02T21:09:00.001-07:00

A FAVORITE PHOTO - Summertime Fun......

2008-09-30T07:51:00.000-07:00

If you are little and it's hot, most anything will do for a cooling dunk! If you look closely, you can see that Samantha is sharing her fun with Pocahontas. The lines you see from this scanned photo are from the tape used to permanently affix this picture to my Planner. Apparently, glue hadn't been invented yet.

MY BRUSH WITH GREATNESS

2008-09-24T15:34:00.000-07:00

If you know me, you know I am a not a Sports Guy. Nonethess, here is MY BRUSH WITH GREATNESS.

I was in the Denver airport annoying decent people when a Mother and her young daughter sat down next me. The daughter had a dish of ice cream and I - never one to miss a chance to make a new friend and to eat ice cream - asked her if she brought me one. She giggled but declined to share, much to my disappointment and I told her I didn't want her icky ice cream anyway. As the conversation continued, she introduced me to her little doll, "Fancy Nancy." Naturally, I inquired if "Fancy Nancy had ants-ees in her pants-ees," which sounds better than it reads and caused her great delight and I was required to repeat it many times. Her Mother said they were traveling to San Francisco to see the little girl's Father. I thought, "How sad - the little girl has to travel all that way to see her Dad."

I asked, "Where does he work?" and she said, "He plays for the Colorado Rockies." And just to confirm what a Sports Guy I am, my first thought was, "Oh, he must be playing at Candlestick Park." You know Candlestick Park. It is where the San Francisco Giants played - IN 1999! Since then, they have made their home at AT&T Park, still along the waterfront, but closer to downtown San Francisco.

Knowing my Manly-Man friend Ken Baca of Denver and my best friend/professional sports writer, Rick Chandler, would be interested, I asked her what her husband's name is, so I could dazzle them.

"Todd Helton," she said.

"Todd Hilton?" I asked.

"No," she smiled "Helton."

Apparently, he's quite good - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Helton

Sermon - IT'S ON THE MONEY

2008-09-21T00:20:00.000-07:00

Given 6-22-08 at Parkside Community Church, Sacramento

In preparing a sermon each week, preachers have the benefit of the lectionary – a collection of Bible passages for each week that is decided upon by a council of churches internationally. If a pastor uses this lectionary, she or he can then focus on preaching the Bible, instead of offering the same message each week. Using the lectionary also prevents what is called “Proof Texting” – using the Bible to support your own beliefs. My Father use to tell me that “even the devil can quote scripture,” and it is important that we understand the Bible as best we can in its context and not to make our own point. Proof texting has been used in American history as far back as the earliest days of slavery and as recently as, well, tomorrow’s newspaper. In your own Bible citations, you want to avoid proof texting and, as a preacher, you want to stay away from it as much as possible.

Unless, of course…
During my time here at Parkside as your Intern, it has been my pleasure to serve as the High School teacher for the Sunday School class. In the last class we had this year, I asked the students what they would like to see covered in a sermon and they responded they would like to hear about the Importance of Relaxing and Reducing Stress. I had always believed – and I act on the belief – that one can hand one’s troubles over to Christ and Christ will take the burden. I can’t tell you where I learned this, but in researching the Bible passages for this sermon, I actually came up with a paucity of choices. I do believe that Jesus the Christ is the answer to all our problems, but on this issue, proof-texting has failed me. Which is why I’m going back to the lectionary the next time I preach. But for now, I’d like to share with you some ideas on trusting God with your burdens, be they emotional, spiritual, physical or financial. (Note: The texts used for this sermon are Psalm 9:7-10 and Matthew 11:25-30 )

Beyond the gospels, we do find Paul’s letter to his friend, Philemon, wherein Paul writes, “Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.” I had a long and undistinguished career in sales, but there is one thing I learned – I can guarantee you the answer is “No” -- if you don’t ask the question.

It is true that God knows everything that is on our heart and mind. But it is up to us to give voice, either out loud or silently, to our problems. When a problem is just a fear floating around in our imagination, it can grow into all sorts of frightening concepts. But once we have given voice to it, it becomes a real thing and if it is real, it can be dealt with. Giving some substance to our concern does not automatically resolve the problem – it is not like Billy Batson saying, “Shazam!” - but it is the first step to solving the problem.

There are many ways to relieve stress – meditation, medication, chanting “Nam Miyoho Renge Kyo,” yoga, self-hypnosis, guided imagery massage, breathing exercises, aroma therapy or any other number of things that might work and which we won’t talk about today.

I also don’t want to pretend that what I share today is the last word on the subject. In fact, I can only pretend it to be the first word on the subject, with a hope that it may start you on your way to a happier life.
If you are facing some dilemmas in your life, I believe that the love of Christ is a solution to resolving them. If you are not facing some dilemmas in your life, I believe that you are dead and I’m sorry to hear that.

We all face problems of various degrees and, as believers, or those seeking, I encourage you to turn to God. When we invoke the name of God, in prayer or beseechment, we, perhaps unconsciously, acknowledge the Supreme Being as Lord of all. We don’t call upon God the same way we call upon a teacher or a boss or a parent or anyone else with authority. God is God – Capital “G” and all.

Psalm 18 tells us that “The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer. My God is my rock, in whom I take refuge. God is my shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.”

God is our refuge. But we should not look upon the Creator God as our pal, someone who’s gonna post bail if we screw up. For that, we have the Ultimate Redeemer -- our hero, Jesus the Christ.

It is a brand new ball game when God in the form of Jesus comes to earth. Gone are the pleas to “smite thy enemies, Lord” and in its place, we are reminded – yes, of the Old Testament adage – to “Love Thy Neighbor.” The difference now is that Jesus shows us how to do that.

As a side note, I am compelled to share that in my preparation for this sermon, I learned that the word “smite” actually appears only once in the text of the Bible. But there sure seemed to be a lot of smiting going on!

But I digress. Another difference between the Old and New Testament – and in our reading today – is how the Creator God of the Old Testament tells us that God is a refuge for those who are troubled. We are told that those of us who believe will never be forsaken by God. This is important and there is great comfort in that. And even greater comfort comes to us in knowing that in the Messiah God, Jesus the Christ, not only are we never forgotten, but clearly told to lay our burdens with Christ.

In the Apostle Peter’s first letter in the New Testament, he writes "God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble. Humble yourselves, therefore, under God's mighty hand, that he may lift you up in due time. Cast all your anxiety on him because he cares for you.”

“Humble yourself.” The first step in getting help is acknowledging that you need help. The second step is knowing that you can’t handle the problem alone. Our brothers and sisters with Alcoholics Anonymous know this, as well as others who use a 12-step program to fight their addictions. Their problem is so serious that they must admit their addiction has made their life unmanageable. Even if the conflicts we are facing are not as serious as that, we can still find value in their steps, which include handing over our problems to God and to “seek, through prayer and mediation to improve our conscious contact with God, praying only for knowledge of God’s will for us and the power to carry that out.”

I stand here equally guilty of proof-texting the 12-steps of Alcoholics Anonymous and I am using this merely as an illustration. If addiction is part of the demons you are facing, please seek out a more thorough solution than what I am presenting here.

Trusting Jesus – giving him your problems – is an effective solution for when I deal with my emotional and spiritual challenges. I want to urge you to seek out Christ as the first solution. Attending church, sharing Christian fellowship, and reading the Gospels – the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – are just three ways to be closer to Christ and to feel comfortable in calling upon him as we would a trusted friend. When we are in a relationship with Christ, we are in touch with love – a love in our life that is unsurpassed. Loneliness, low self-esteem, troubles with a relationship, and other like dilemmas can all be handled by seeking Christ’s message to us – that we are loved and that we are worthy of his love, just by asking for it. In God We Trust.

Just as a happy heart makes us emotionally better, so does it affect our physical well-being. Studies have proven many times over that a person in a faith relationship who attends church regularly is physically healthier than someone in a similar situation who depends solely on earthly solutions. We can also turn to our Christian Science brothers and sisters, who depend on God’s healing presence for nearly every ailment. I do believe – and I take this from their own information – that “no one is beyond redemption. Salvation (does not) occur at some point in the future, but that the presence of God’s goodness can be experienced here and now—and by everyone.” It is their belief that most medical problems can be addressed and resolved through prayer to God. Simply put, they believe in mind over matter. Not the human mind, but God’s purposeful and mindful intention to heal our wounds. Obviously, there is controversy and confusion about this and nothing in the Christian Science belief specifically prevents their members from being inoculated or having a broken bone set by a physician.

And I want to assure you that we can embrace some of their beliefs and still be good Congregationalists, just as there is value in studying Buddhism, Islam, Baha’i or any other faith. While I believe in the power of medicine, be it a Western medical doctor, chiropractics, or the placing of needles in certain parts of the body, I most firmly believe that the power of our Trinity God and the work it can do alongside these human endeavors.

Some of us here may be facing our final days on earth. How can we trust a God who is going to let us die, leaving loved ones behind? I don’t have a flip answer and won’t pretend to understand what that someone is going through. But I would like to share something that gives me comfort. If our illnesses are such that we are not destined to stay on earth; when natural death comes, we still have the ultimate healing available to us. That healing will come at the resurrection, when our sleeping souls are lifted heavenward and we are healed of all ailments. That is the greatest gift we have waiting for us and it is ours for the asking. In God We Trust.

Finances are always a tricky subject for me to discuss. I maintain that as long as Bill Gates goes to work every day, we’ll never have enough money. But how much is enough? Last week we read from Matthew 10, wherein Jesus sends out the 72 disciples with the instructions to “not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep.” St. Francis of Assisi followed this instruction 1100 years later, and we still revere his name 900 years after that! I have met people who happily live on the streets by choice and I know others who dwell in mansions and worry about how the bills will be paid. Although prayer and growing in your relationship with God is our theme today, I am not telling you that God will help you pay your bills or get you a new job. No matter how hard you pray. I speak from experience. But if we are having money troubles, we can certainly look at the examples set by the Gospels and others and evaluate our needs compared to our wants. Through prayer, we can focus on a solution and by sharing our prayers – remember that humility thing I mentioned earlier – we may have solutions presented to us.

Regardless of our situation – be it Prince or Pauper, Athlete or Activity-Challenged, publicly Adored or Abhorred – we can find a peace of mind in the Peace of Christ. Because…

In God We Trust.

FLYING THE FRIENDLY SKIES WITH MY SWISS ARMY KNIFE

2008-09-20T20:44:00.000-07:00

I travel a lot and don't always remember to take out of my pocket and pack away my fabulous Midnight Manager II Swiss Army pocket knife, with the light and the pen and the flat nail file and the deadly 1 1/2" blade which apparently terrifies the FAA.
To that end, I have written the Victorinox company, which makes these wonderful tools. This is my letter:

Dear Victorinox,

I have been a faithful Victorinox Swiss Army knife user for over 20 years and do not leave the house without one in my pocket. My current favorite is the Midnight Manager II.

My current job requires a great deal of air travel and, as you can imagine, your essential tools are not welcome aboard US Airplanes. In fact, I have “lost” two knives, because I forgot to pack them. As you offer customized knives for hunters, golfers, parachutists and other specialty users, I am hopeful that you might consider a model for air travelers. This model would include:
A Light,
Compass,
Pen,
Magnifying Glass,
Tweezers, and
a Digital Clock,
none of which should threaten our friendly skies.

Thank you for your consideration.

UPDATE!
On October 14, I was surprised to receive the following response:

Dear Jim,

Thank you for contacting Victorinox Swiss Army. Thank you very much for your suggestions. I will forward your email to the appropriate department for review. We have had many suggestions regarding our pocket tools and airline requirements, so there may be a tool in our future that is 'air safe'.

Please let us know if we can be of further assistance and thank you again for contacting Victorinox Swiss Army.

Sincerely,
Aime
Victorinox Swiss Army Customer Service

HOW I BESTED CAPTAIN JACK SPARROW -- TWICE!

2008-09-19T09:04:00.000-07:00

In New Orleans Square at Disneyland in April, 2007, we were told we could find Captain Jack Sparrow up in the Art Gallery, the inclement weather not being to his suiting, despite the fact, as our guide told us, "He hasn't been in water in a very long time. And he smells like it."

Captain Sparrow greeted us warmly with a dismissive sneer and wave of the hand, but did finally deign to engage in conversation. I repeated the comment about his not being in water in a very long time, to which he responded, lips curling, "What do you think I work on, dear boy?"

"That is ON the water," I replied, "not IN the water."

He paused, looked at me with the slightest hint of appreciation, and said, "Boom!"

The next morning, we were dining at Cafe Orleans, again, in New Orleans Square. As our food was being served, Captain Sparrow swaggered near us with his wenches. In the spirit of hospitality, we invited him to join us for breakfast. He approached our table, sniffed our fare and politely declined. Which is to say, he didn't turn the table over and smash the dishes to the ground.

I don't remember why, but I then offered the Captain a small coin, which I showed him, palmed and then pretended to pass off to him. He left with his coin purse, only to return moments later to demand his coin. I pointed at one of his escorts and said, "She has it," while taking her hand and dropping the coin in as I opened her palm. Obviously dazzled by my wizardry, the good Captain offered a badge of honor for the wee ones in our group and left merrily on his way.

And that is how I bested Captain Jack Sparrow -- twice!

A LOVE STORY

2008-09-19T06:24:00.000-07:00

Before going to bed that night, Cory stopped in his daughter’s room and kissed her sleeping face good night, as he had done every night since she was born, two years ago. He then padded into his own bedroom and quietly slipped in beside his wife, who had gone to sleep shortly after putting their daughter to bed.

Sleep usually came fitfully to Ann, who was eight months pregnant with their second child, but tonight she was resting soundly. It was Cory who was anxious, although he didn’t know why. Though he had no worries, his mind was charged, like the air just before a thunderstorm. He thought about his job, his friends and his growing family. His life was at peace yet he knew that tonight especially he needed to be alert to something.

Sometime in the night, he awoke with a start, as if something had touched him, a presence felt but unseen. Ann was still sleeping soundly, and the house was quiet, save for the clock in the living room counting down the seconds. Cory got out of bed effortlessly, gliding across the bedroom floor and into the hallway. He looked in Margot’s room and, despite the presence of another person beside her bed, felt no fear.

“What do you want?” he asked the Stranger.

“Do you know who I am?”

“I know of you. But I expected a shroud and a scythe.”

“I move with the times,” the Stranger said, smiling slightly.

“What do you want? You can’t have her, you know,” Cory told the Stranger.

“That’s not for you to decide,” replied the Stranger. “Besides, this will be a quickly forgotten dream for you. All you’ll know is that you shouldn’t have put the shelf over her bed. She won’t feel a thing.”

“No,” said Cory. “You can’t want her. Why don’t you take me?”

“Oh, your time isn’t for quite a while. And besides, why should I? You know who I am and what I do. What can you offer me that’s better?”

Cory looked at his beautiful daughter, then at the shelf above her bed.

“Oh, don’t try and cheat me,” the Stranger said. “If not tonight, I’ll get her soon enough.”

“But if you take me,” Cory said, “you’ll have one less soul working for the Lord.”

The Stranger looked surprise. “Contrary to popular belief, I do not work for the enemy. I merely take them. Where they go is out of my control. But you intrigue me.”

“Then let’s strike a deal.”

“No,” said the Stranger, “no deal. But this is what is going to happen. Your daughter will live to have children and grandchildren of her own. But you will never see them.”

Cory paused. “I understand.”

“No you don’t,” said the Stranger. “You think you are doing something grand and noble. But you will never know. You will be stricken and you will weaken and eventually I will come for you. And all during that time, you will ask ‘why me?’, never knowing that this is the trade-off, never knowing that tonight, I traded your daughter’s life for your own. Get that shelf fixed, as I can’t be everywhere always. And I’ll see you in due time.”

The next morning, Cory woke up and, reaching for his slippers, strained a muscle in his back. He could barely walk, let along stand up straight. He called the doctor for an appointment and left work early.

The physical examination was cursory and the doctor waited until the x-rays were returned before prescribing medication. The muscles appeared fine, but the doctor was angry, as it appeared the technician had smudged the print. He ordered more pictures taken and this time he was sure.

The cancer appeared as a small spot in the back of his neck. Had the camera moved a quarter inch lower, it would have been missed entirely. Though it was found malignant, the surgery later that week seemed to remove all of it. Now was the waiting game.

Camille was born a beautiful, blue-eyed angel, like her sister. Medical procedures for Cory continued as the girls grew. The family found a church home and Margot startied school.

The week before Camie started kindergarten, the family joined in together in an “end of the summer” camping trip. They had much to celebrate, as it appeared the cancer had been beaten. As they were unloading the car, Cory slipped and twisted his ankle sharply, shooting the pain up through his knee. No Stranger to sports accidents, he wasn’t to concerned about the injury. That night, he slept on the sofa, his ankle iced and elevated.

The pain had made him slightly feverish, though the air conditioning kept the house cool. He hadn’t been to the doctor in about a year and during that time, unbeknownst to him, the cancer had re-appeared.

The Stranger stood beside him, as he had many years before in Margot’s room. The cancer riddled his body and the Stranger knew that Cory’s time had come. He reached out to the sleeping body, once strong and athletic but now racked with pain. His hand, inches from the face, was stopped by the voice.

“Not yet,” the voice said.

“Not yet?” the Stranger asked.

“No. You may take him as was your agreement, but My work in him is not yet done. He still has much to teach.”

“As you wish,” the Stranger said.

Soon the family learned that the cancer had returned. Cory and Ann were faced with many difficult decisions. They were guided by learned physicians, loving friends and the strength of their faith. Ann kept as normal a life for the family as was possible. Cory continued to work for as long as he could. He participated in the church activities and, more than once said, “If I was given the choice to not have this cancer, I would not make that choice. This illness has brought me closer to God and made me stronger in my faith.” His family and his friends were supportive at all times, being with him at home and spending time with him in the hospital.

Eventually his time did come and the celebration of his life filled one of the largest churches in the city. Years later, his friends still remember him fondly, keeping close within their hearts the lessons he taught them – to love life and to share that love.

October 16, 2001

MARK TWAIN being neighborly

2008-09-17T10:19:00.000-07:00

This is taken from MARK TWAIN LAUGHING, edited by P.M. Zall

The Reverend J. Hyatt Smith relates about his meeting Mark Twain while they both lived in Buffalo. "Mark Twain occupied a cottage across the street. We did not see very much of him, but one morning as we were enjoying our cigars on the veranda after breakfast, we saw Mark come to his door in his dressing-gown and slippers, and look over at us. He stood at his own door and smoked for a minute, as if making up his mind about something, and, at last, opened his gate and came lounging across the street. There was an unoccupied rocking-chair on the veranda, and when my brother offered it to him he dropped into it with a sigh of relief. He smoked for a few moments and said:
"Nice morning."
"Yes, very pleasant."
"Shouldn't wonder if we had rain by and by."
"Well, we could stand a little."
"This is a nice house you have here?"
"Yes, we rather like it."
"How's your family?"
"Quite well - and yours?"
"Oh, we're comfortable."
There was another impressive silence, and finally Mark crossed his legs, blew a puff of smoke in the air, and in his lazy drawl, remarked:
"I suppose you're a little surprised to see me over here so early. Fact is, I haven't been so neighborly, perhaps, as I ought to be. We must mend that state of things. But his morning I came over because I though you might be interested in knowing that your roof is on fire..."

RULES TO LIVE BY - THE LONE RANGER'S CREED

2008-09-17T00:34:00.000-07:00

written by Fran Striker

1. I believe that to have a friend, a man must be one.

2. That all men are created equal and that everyone has within himself the power to make this a better world.

3. That God put the firewood there, but that every man must gather and light it himself.

4. In being prepared physically, mentally, and morally to fight when necessary for that which is right.

5. That a man should make the most of what equipment he has.

6. That "this government, of the people, by the people, and for the people," shall live always.

7. That men should live by the rule of what is best for the greatest number.

8. That sooner or later... somewhere... somehow... we must settle with the world and make payment for what we have taken.

9. That all things change, but the truth, and the truth alone lives on forever.

10. I believe in my Creator, my country, my fellow man.

A Paper - DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. - BEYOND THE DREAM

2008-09-17T00:12:00.000-07:00

An examination of Dr. King’s work towards ending the Vietnam Conflict in the 1960’s

INTRODUCTION

Vincent Harding, considered by learned scholars to be “one of the best interpreters of Martin Luther King living” today says that Americans have of a “tremendous fixation on the Martin Luther King of the . . . "I Have a Dream'' (speech) -- magnificent, beautiful oratory. . . Something in us wants that triumphant, sun-drenched hero to stay right there, so that we can almost worship, not only him, but those words that he spoke.”

The “I Have a Dream” speech is considered the greatest speech of the 20th century by many. It is passionate, moving and iconic of the civil rights march and Dr. King’s place in it. However, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. went beyond the good fight of racial equality and justice. The United States of America in the 1960’s was a time of great social, cultural and political turmoil. Rock and Roll was still in full swing and the parental teeth-gnashing that it brought, only to be succeeded by its equally rebellious sound from four chaps from Liverpool. Protests for civil rights – fair treatment for the American Negro, which we will refer to in this paper in the more current nomenclature as “Blacks” (as opposed to their Caucasian “White” brothers and sisters) – was exploding on the national landscape, primarily in the southern United States, but, through the still fairly new medium of television, sending shockwaves reverberating across the nation. Finally, the Vietnam War or, more correct, the Vietnam Conflict, was growing from a few “military advisers” in the early 1950’s to an Armed Forces involvement equal to all but the most major conflicts in US history. It is Dr. King’s public opposition to the Vietnam War which we shall examine. This examination is important because it takes someone considered “one of the greatest men of the 20th century” and puts the spotlight on his endeavors beyond the civil rights movement for which he is best known.

A SUMMARY OF THE BEGINNING OF THE VIETNAM WAR

The US government’s official reason for their involvement in Vietnam was to prevent the spread of Communism throughout Asia, for it was the government’s belief that if Vietnam fell to Communism, the country next door would fall and so on. Those who felt differently accepted that Ho Chi Minh, the leader of Vietnam was a Communist but was “first and foremost a popular, courageous champion of Vietnamese independence.” In a speech given at Riverside Church on April 4, 1967, Dr. King gives the history of the Vietnam Conflict as such: The Vietnamese people proclaimed their own independence in 1945 after a combined French and Japanese occupation and before the communist revolution in China. They were led by Ho Chi Minh. Even though they quoted the American Declaration of independence in their own document of freedom, we refused to recognize them. Instead, we decided to support France in its reconquest of her former colony. . . .Even before the French were defeated ...they began to despair of their reckless action, but we (the United States) did not. We encouraged them with our huge financial and military supplies to continue the war even after they had lost the will. Soon we would be paying almost the full costs of this tragic attempt at recolonization.

After the French were defeated…we supported one of the most vicious modern dictators, our chosen man, Premier Diem. The peasants watched and cringed as Diem ruthlessly rooted out all opposition, supported their extortionist landlords, and refused even to discuss reunification with the North. The peasants watched as all of this was presided over by the United States influence and then by increasing numbers of United States troops who came to help quell the insurgency that Diem’s methods had aroused. When Diem was overthrown . . . we increased our troop commitments in support of (Vietnamese) governments which were singularly corrupt, inept, and without popular support.

EARLY OPPOSITION TO THE WAR

Former US Senator and 1972 Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern writes how, in the early stages of the war, Dr. King and his advisors felt that the civil rights cause was so important that King should not divert his attentions to the Vietnam Conflict. However, King did not remain silent for long on the subject. As early as March, 1965, while US President Lyndon Johnson escalated the military’s involvement in the conflict, King spoke at Howard University in Washington, DC, publicly expressing his view for the first time that “The war in Vietnam is accomplishing nothing.” As President Johnson continued to increase military involvement, King spoke out again, demanding an immediate and unilateral de-escalation of the conflict, stating that the war “is corrupting American society from within and degrading it from without.”

PATRIOTIC PROTESTING

Often in times of war, those who decry the violence are branded as traitors to their country. As early as the autumn of 1965, King had declared that the Vietnam Conflict proved “War is obsolete” and urged those who felt differently not to confuse his desire for peace as being disloyal to his country. His anger at a government that would try to shame Vietnam protestors into silence gave him strength, saying, “We’re at a terrible stage when we confuse dissent with disloyalty and we view every protester as a traitor.” King continued to take on those detractors, announcing “I am an American” and insisted that his patriotism was based on a “love of democracy, justice, and peace.”

THE MINISTRY OF REVEREND MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.

First and foremost, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a preacher. Knowing that peace-making was such an obvious part of his ministry, he would “sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I am speaking against the war.” King knew that the gospel of Christ was for “all men-for communist and capitalist, for their children and ours, for black and for white, for revolutionary and conservative.” He also reminded his listeners that his ministry “is in obedience to the one who loved his enemies so fully that he died for them” and that, as a minister, “I am mandated by this calling above every other duty to seek peace among men and to do it even in the face of hysteria and scorn.”

In response to those who said King was wading in waters in which he didn’t belong, he replied simply “I believe war is wrong . . . I am an expert in recognition of a simply eloquent truth. That truth is that it is sinful for any of God’s children to brutalize any of God’s other children, no matter from what side the brutalization comes.”

While addressing his congregation at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia-a church founded by his maternal grandfather, and made one of the largest and most prestigious Baptist churches in Atlanta by his father -Reverend King again stated his case simply, saying “it’s just as evil to kill Vietnamese as it is to kill Americans.”

In July, 1967, King was asked on the television program Face to Face why he was spending more time speaking out against the war in Vietnam than raising funds for job training and scholarships for those who need it. King set the caller straight, saying ‘ninety-five percent of my time is still spent in the civil rights struggle … so you have a misconception there. On the other hand, I’m a clergyman. I was a clergyman before I was a civil rights leader, and when I was ordained to the Christian ministry, I accepted that as a commission to constantly and forever bring the ethical insights of our Judeo-Christian heritage to bear on the social evils of our day. And I happen to think war is one3 of the major evils facing mankind. . . . . Whenever I see injustice, I’m going to take a stand against it whether it’s in Mississippi or whether it’s in Vietnam.”

This anonymous caller was not the only one confused by King’s priority. A month earlier, National Urban League Director Whitney Young told King “I wish you could give more attention to civil rights.” King responded “I am giving most of my attention to civil rights. The press gives all the publicity to what I say on Vietnam.”

WHY KING OPPOSED THE VIETNAM WAR

King absolutely felt that the fight for equality for Blacks and for an end to the Vietnam Conflict were tied together. He recalls walking amongst the angry, young Black men of the 1966 race riots, telling them that they must not use weapons and bombs to solve their problems. Their response shattered him, as they asked Dr. King why it was wrong for them to use violence to meet their needs but was acceptable for their government to lay waste to a beautiful land and its people? King knew that his life-long pursuit of a non-violent world had to be fought not against men with Molotov cocktails, but against “the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today: my own government.”

The Civil Rights/Vietnam battle was more than a call for non-violence. According to the New York Times, “there were twice as many Negroes as Whites in combat in Vietnam at the beginning of 1967 and twice as many Negro soldiers died in action in proportion to the numbers in the population.” Adding to the injury of a higher percentage of Black vs. White soldiers in combat and being killed was the insult that King and all of America could watch on TV. Black soldiers and White soldiers living together, fighting together and killing a common enemy together, yet at home they wouldn’t be allowed to sit together in a public school. Until recently, these two men could share a fox hole but not a lunch counter.

King’s greatest concerns about the war were for the largest and smallest reasons. On one side, King was genuinely afraid for the well-being of the world itself. In speaking in Riverside Church in New York on April 4, 1967, Rev. King sermonized that “If a negotiated settlement were not soon reached, Chinese involvement would become certain and world war equally inescapable. In the last Sunday sermon Rev. King ever gave, speaking to the National Cathedral (Episcopal) in Washington, DC on March 31, 1968, he announced that “Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind . . . (If Vietnam) continues, we will inevitably come to the point of confronting China which could lead the whole world to nuclear annihilation.” “It is worthless to talk about integrating,” King said, “if there is no world to integrate in.”

The other side of the coin seemed to touch King the deepest. In January, 1967, King was planning to take a short vacation. At the airport, he picked up a handful of magazines and, flipping through the January Ramparts, came across an illustrated story “The Children of Vietnam.” The photos of dead babies and burned children so sickened King that he pushed away his plate of food, saying “Nothing will ever taste good for me until I do everything I can to end that war.” Long-time friend Bernard Lee said “That’s when the decision was made. Martin had known about the war before then . . . and had spoken out against it. But it was then that he decided to commit himself to oppose it.” King himself wrote that, upon reading the article, he would “Never again . . . be silent on an issue that is destroying the soul of our nation and destroying thousands and thousands of little children in Vietnam.”

THE CIVIL RIGHTS PROTEST VS. THE PEACE MOVEMENT

Dr. King never wanted to merge the two protests he was leading-civil rights for Blacks and an end to the Conflict in Vietnam-into a single movement. Yet, to him, one fed off the other. It was the cost of the war in relation to the money being taken away from social welfare programs that he spoke about most often. In “A Testament of Hope,” an essay published posthumously, King wrote “The Great Society (US President Lyndon Johnson’s plan for civil rights) has become a victim of the war. . . I have little doubt that there would have been a gradual increase in federal expenditures in this direction, rather than the gradual decline that has occurred, if the war in Vietnam had been avoided.”

In his Riverside Church sermon, Rev. King spoke about the "…real promise of hope for the poor, both black and white, through the poverty program. There were experiments, hopes, new beginnings. Then came the buildup in Vietnam, and I watched this program broken and eviscerated as if it were some idle political plaything of a society gone mad on war. And I knew that America would never invest the necessary funds or energies in rehabilitation of its poor so long as adventures like Vietnam continued to draw men and skills and money like some demonic, destructive suction tube. So I was increasingly compelled to see the war as an enemy of the poor and to attack it as such."

In 1967, King lamented in his book, “Where Do We Go From Here?”, the $332,000 the Washington Post calculated it cost to kill a single enemy, asking what lives would be changed for the positive if that money was used here in America to help the poor, the uneducated and the homeless. In March, 1968, that cost had risen to “five hundred thousand dollars to kill every Vietcong soldier. . .while we spend on fifty-three dollars a year for every person characterized as poverty-stricken in the so-called poverty program; which is not even a good skirmish against poverty.”

He summarized his concern in a speech to Realtors in San Francisco, saying “Riots are caused . . . by a national administration more concerned about winning the war in Vietnam than the war against poverty right here at home.”

ENDING THE WAR

When King spoke of ending the war, he did so both eloquently and practically. At Riverside Church, he told the parishioners, "We still have a choice today; nonviolent coexistence or violent co-annihilation. We must move past indecision to action. We must find new ways to speak for peace in Vietnam and just throughout the developing world, a world that borders on our doors. If we do not act, we shall surely be dragged down the long, dark, and shameful corridors of tie reserved for those who possess power without compassion, might without morality, and strength without sight."

Practically speaking, King had a five-point plan for ending the war:
1) End all bombing in North and South Vietnam.
2) Declare a unilateral cease-fire in the hope that such action will create the atmosphere for negotiation.
3) Take immediate steps to prevent other battlegrounds in Southeast Asia by curtailing our military buildup in Thailand and our interference in Laos.
4) Realistically accept the fact that the National Liberation Front has substantial support in South Vietnam and must thereby play a role in any meaningful negotiations and any future Vietnam governments
5) Set a date that we will remove all foreign troops from Vietnam in accordance with the 1954 Geneva Agreement.

Young men were being drafted to fight in the Vietnam Conflict and Dr. King urged these men to file as “conscientious objector,” someone who by reason of his beliefs is opposed to participating in war. A CO may be discharged from military service and is exempt in the event of a draft, performing alternative service as civilian if called up. King said we must “counsel young men concerning military service . . . and challenge them with the alternative of conscientious objection. . . I recommend it to all who find the American course in Vietnam a dishonorable and unjust one. Moreover, I would encourage all ministers of draft age to give up their ministerial exemptions and seek status as conscientious objectors. These are the times for real choices, not false ones.”

OPPOSITION TO THE PEACE MOVEMENT

Though history has shown us the error of the Vietnam Conflict, it was not so obvious at the time and Dr. King had more than his share of detractors, some obvious and some from within his own house.
The obvious opponents to King’s Vietnam protest occupied 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue-The White House. Originally, King found hope in the presidency of Lyndon Johnson. In September, 1964, UN Ambassador Arthur Goldberg, as a representative of Johnson’s, in an attempt to quiet King’s protestations about the war, told King that while his “Vietnam position was commendable, the American Government was equally resolved to effect a negotiated settlement and that, in fact, a peaceful settlement was imminent.” Sadly, neither King nor Johnson would live long enough to see a cease-fire put into place a long nine years later.

As the war continued, King cared less and less for Johnson, considering him the “embodiment of inflexible, outmoded cant and political deviousness . . . devoid of statesmanship . . . trapped by the ‘military-industrial complex.’” Although a guest of President Johnson’s at the White House signing of the voting-rights bill in August, 1965, King rebuffed later invitations to the White House from Johnson, owing to King’s reluctance to “confront a man whom he personally mistrusted and whose policies he regarded with ever-increasing distaste.” By June, 1966, King’s antiwar position had completely alienated him from Lyndon Johnson. However, when King telephoned Johnson in August of that year about civil rights issues, Johnson spoke with King about his protestations of the war. To Johnson’s credit, King said the President promised to help with Los Angeles poverty program and “…never asked me not to speak out on Vietnam. He just explained his position.”

In 1968, prior to Lyndon Johnson’s announcement that he would not run for re-election but focus on the problem of Vietnam, King spoke glowingly of presidential candidates Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy, saying a new President was “absolutely necessary. We must end the war in Vietnam. The President is too emotionally involved, and face-saving is more important o him than peace.”

Another denizen of the Executive Branch, J. Edgar Hoover of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, had long suspected King of “being an instrument in the hands of subversive forces seeking to undermine our nation.” It is Hoover’s voluminous wiretappings of King’s private communications and the subsequent Freedom of Information Act that allow us to peer into the private life of the man we are studying.

Hoover had been Director of the FBI for almost 50 years, nearly all of them looking for Communists. He was looking in the wrong direction at King though. Dr. King believed his desire to end the conflict in Vietnam was one way to fight the Communist menace. He spoke about how a “positive revolution of values is the best defense against communism… War is not the answer. Communism will never be defeated by the use of atomic bombs or nuclear weapons... We must with positive action, seek to remove those conditions of poverty, insecurity, and injustice, which are the fertile soil in which the seed of communism grows and develops.”

Many members of the newspaper medium were also opposed to King’s stance on Vietnam. The New York Times said King shouldn’t combine the civil rights and peace movements; the Pittsburgh Courier, a newspaper written for a Black readership, said King was “tragically misleading” his people and the Washington Post said some of his statements were “sheer inventions of unsupported fantasy.” Legislators, magazines and others questioned his loyalty to the United States.

Opposition to King’s stance came from within the Black community as well. The board members of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), of which King was president, voted that if Rev. Martin Luther King was to speak out against the Vietnam War, he could do so only as a private citizen and clergyman, and not as the president of the SCLC. In the summer of 1966, the SCLC applauded King’s courageous expression of his concerns, but felt that the SCLC should focus on the “rights for the Negro citizens of this country.”

In April of the next year, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) said that any attempt to combine the efforts of the civil rights and the peace movements was “a serious tactical mistake” and an Urban League spokesman dismissed Dr. King and the SCLC when he said the civil rights fight is ‘…back where it began. It’s us and the NAACP.”

Dr. King’s ongoing battle against the war cost him and his organizations public support and financing. In January, 1967, he was no longer one of the “Ten Most Admired Persons.” In March of the same year, civil rights leaders had not supported him at a fund-raising banquet in New York. Stanley Levison, Chair of the fund-raising for the SCLC, told King that his stance on Vietnam was going to send the organization to the poor-house. King told him “I don’t care if we don’t get five cents in the mail. I’m going to keep on preaching my message.”

AFTER THE WAR

King’s message was not just for the end of the war, but for reparations to the Vietnamese once the fighting was finished. His plan was to offer asylum to any Vietnamese who feared for his life under whatever new regime took over. The United States must make reparations for the damage that had been done to the country due to the war. And medical assistance must be provided to bring the people of Vietnam back to health.

SUMMARY

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., was a man who lived his conscience. On April 4, 1968, while in Memphis, Tennessee to support striking sanitation workers, King was brought down by an assassin’s bullet. In his fight for justice and peace, he gave the ultimate sacrifice.
Though the goal of a cease-fire in Vietnam was not be realized until 1973, King’s words have lived on beyond that conflict and are still spoken and heard today. It is hoped that his call for justice and peace, which ring frighteningly necessary today, as America faces another unwanted military incursion, will not be lost.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS
Carson, Clayborne and Kris Shepard, eds. A Call to Conscience The Landmark Speeches of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. New York: Intellectual Properties management, Inc., in association with Warner Books. 2001

Garrow, David J. Bearing the Cross - Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. New York: Wm Morrow and Co., Inc. 1986

King, Martin Luther, Jr. Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community? Boston: Beacon Press. 1967

Lewis, David E. King A Critical Biography New York: Praeger Publishers. 1970

Washington, James, ed. A Testament of Hope - The Essential Writings of Martin Luther King, Jr. San Francisco: Harper & Row. 1986

INTERNET
American Rhetoric http://www.americanrhetoric.com/top100speechesall.html,
The Association for Religion and Intellectual Life http://www.aril.org/king.html
PollingReport.com http://www.pollingreport.com/20th.htm

A FAVORITE SAYING - "Deeds, not words."

2008-09-16T23:54:00.001-07:00

Taken from the television show THE ADVENTURES OF YOUNG INDIANA JONES, the quote is from the actress playing Emmeline Pankhurst, a turn of the 20th-century suffragette.

There are so many other ways to say this - "Walk the walk if you're going to talk the talk," "Put up or shut up," or "Put your money where your mouth is." But Mrs. Pankhurst's quote is so succinct and so perfect that it should be everyone's motto. As a Christian, I find it particularly challenging. it is easy to say, "Love your neighbor," but do I do that when the sonuvabitch cuts me off on the highway? Live the life that Christ wants us to live - feed the hungry, clothe the naked and visit the lonely. Do Justice, Love Mercy, Walk Humbly with God. Deeds, not Words.

For more about Emmeline Pankhurst, you can visit http://www.newstatesman.com/200504040026 and, of course, Wikipedia, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmeline_Pankhurst

A FAVORITE SAYING - "...the power of our example."

2008-09-16T23:49:00.000-07:00

This is not a political blog. But when a politician says something that will matter long after the balloons have dropped and the ballots have been miscounted, then I believe it should be shared and remembered. To that end, President Bill Clinton reminds us, as United States Americans, that "People the world over have always been more impressed by the power of our example, than by the example of our power."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziABqNaM34c

A FAVORITE SAYING - "Fair Play for Those Who Dare to Dream"

2008-09-16T23:31:00.000-07:00

The quote is from Marketa Irglova’s Oscar speech for Best Original Song at the 2008 Academy Awards. The full quote is, “Hi everyone. I just want to thank you so much. This is such a big deal, not only for us, but for all other independent musicians and artists that spend most of their time struggling. This - the fact that we're standing here tonight, the fact that we're able to hold this - it's just to prove, no matter how far out your dreams are, it's possible. And, you know, fair play to those who dare to dream and don't give up.

“And this song was written from a perspective of hope and hope, at the end of the day, connects us all, no matter how different we are.”

My favorite part of this story is that the quote was almost never heard. Market Irglova and her musical partner and co-winner, Glen Hansard, were "played" off the stage after Mr. Hansard's very genuine and humble thank-you. However, host Jon Steward invited Irglovea back on to the stage after a commercial break for her moment.

I love seeing grace in people, in this case all three involved. I fail miserably in emulating them.

Go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qx8yLvb0gZM for a video of their speeches.

A Paper - CHRISTIANITY IN THE GOLD RUSH ERA

2008-09-16T23:13:00.000-07:00

This is an academic look at the men and women who came with the '49er's to share a different kind of treasure. It is one of my favorite papers and I am deeply indebted to Dr. Richard Hanchett of San Diego for his previous work.

INTRODUCTION

Monday morning came cold and clear to James Marshall’s work crew. They were building a saw mill on the American River at Coloma, about 50 miles east of where their boss, John Sutter, made his home, in Sacramento, California.

Despite human occupation for millennia in the foothills of what we now call the Sierra Nevada and the value that these occupants had put on gold for centuries, it wasn’t until January 24, 1848, that Marshall’s crew found a few, tiny nuggets. The announcement of this discovery made its way to the more populated eastern United States, and to the rest of the world, beginning the largest voluntary human migration in the history of mankind.

Along with the dreamers who had heard tales of instant wealth, came the “Christian Soldiers” – missionaries, ministers, their wives and lay preachers whose duty it was to share the gospel with these 500,000 fortune hunters; to preach to them of the wonders of Christ and how they should “not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, . . . where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven. . .” (Matt. 6:19-20).

This is their story.

GOLD!

After lying barely hidden for centuries, why was gold suddenly discovered now, when California was now part of the United States, having passed through the governments of Mexico and Spain and the Native Americans before this time? And it wasn’t just at a fledgling sawmill in the foothills. Seven months later, on July 4, John Bidwell, a friend of Sutter’s, created his own (financial) Independence Day when he made one of the richest strikes of the Gold Rush. His strike was on the Feather River about 70 miles north, while Pearson B. Reading found gold in the Trinity River, about 150 miles beyond Bidwell’s strike. But, again, why now?

At the time, Minister E.L. Cleaveland asked “Why, Sir, why were the immense treasures of California hidden from all the world, even from the keen-scented Spaniard, until she was annexed to this Republic? And tell me, if anyone can, why it was that the title deed of transference had no sooner passed into our hands, then she gave up her mighty secret, and unlocked her golden gate. Is it possible not to see the hand of God in all this?”

In the 1849 report of the American Baptist Home Mission Society, it is written that the timing of the discovery of gold in California is “evidence of a special plan of God by which the heathen nations of the world could be converted to Christ . . . To think otherwise ‘. . . would evince a narrow view of the purposes of Him who has drawn these multitudes of Pagans to our shores.’”

MISSIONARIES, MINISTERS, PREACHERS AND PRIESTS

Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists and the other organized churches were just as anxious to mine the gold of unsaved souls as the miners themselves were to mine the more tangible rewards waiting for them in California.

Although it was the Protestant churches in the east that sent the vast bulk of preachers to California, the first missionary to arrive as a direct result of the Gold Rush came from the opposite direction – the Hawaiian Islands! Presbyterian Minister Timothy Dwight Hunt followed the flow of fortune-seeking islanders to California, arriving in October, 1948. In San Francisco, he was asked to conduct non-denomination services and was given the “curious title” of chaplain of San Francisco.

The Catholic Church already had a stronghold in California, mostly along the southern and coastal areas of the state, but there was one church in Sacramento. During the Gold Rush, the priests and others working under the banner of the Catholic Church focused less on evangelism and more on maintaining the piety of those already confirmed in the faith, which was mostly the Mexican and French miners.

Churches had difficulty finding suitably qualified men to make the journey west and maintaining their physical and spiritual strength. The trip was an arduous one and some volunteers were rejected because they couldn’t convince the missionary board that they could make it. Others were found wanting to take this adventure at the expense of the Mission Society’s, likely abandoning the scripture for the sluice box once they arrived in the gold fields. When mentioned at all, documentation differs on how well the preachers were received in the gold country. Hanchett writes that “Many diaries . . . contain no mention of religion or religious services. Writers of others are personally indifferent to religion, but think that clergymen exert a beneficial influence on society.”

William Swain, whose diary is used as the basis for the book “The World Rushed In”, writes "Religion and religious services, like everything else in California, is singular and unnatural. There is preaching occasionally by some Doctor of Divinity or gold-hunting minister; but all denominational cast or character is kept carefully out of view-in sort, it is a kind of mongrel preaching, a little of everything and not much of anything. . .”

Another unflattering picture of the Preacher-Gold Miner could come right out of a scene from the movie “Paint Your Wagon.” “On the occasion of the death of a miner a preacher turned miner was called upon to officiate; while he was praying at the grave, all the miners reverently on their knees, some of the crowd idly let the newly dug earth run through their fingers and then discovered that it was rich with gold. Upon the minister-miner discovering it he hastily dismissed the service, the body was removed from the grave where it had been lowered, and the minister and congregation joined feverishly in prospecting and taking out the new diggings.” We can only hope the minister didn’t say “haul him out!” with the body being flung far from the former gravesite!

Most Gold Rush preachers, however, fared better in history. “Father” David Thompson is much revered by his church as the first preacher to arrive in California, in 1848, as a representative of the Church of the United Brethren in Christ. Though Reverend Thompson was the initial member of the church to come, many followed, along with “quite a number of laymen . . . who were loyal to God and the church.”

Itinerant preachers usually had no trouble in finding a congregation to share their message. They would usually ask the proprietor of the largest building in the town for its use, permission for which was almost always granted. This was true even if, as was usually the case, the largest building in town was a saloon. A Sunday sermon was usually allowed by the barkeep, despite the reduction it may have on the Sunday trade and the rare disruption from an inebriated soul, inquiring, perhaps indelicately, as to what was going on. A wise preacher knew not to take advantage of the keeper’s generosity and would find a more suitable structure if he intended to stay a while.

Even if a building was not available, preachers, priests and missionaries would find a place to speak the word; beneath a canopy of fir trees or beside a crystal creek – what better place to spread the joy of God’s gifts? These preachers could either be traveling ministers or mining clergyman, who would also serve at funerals or other religious events.

A great number of preachers found that they could ply their spiritual trade with a Bible in one hand and a spade in the other. The Reverend Walter Colton, a chaplain and alcalde of Monterey, known to try his hand at mining, never forgot to share the gospel, even when only a handful of listeners would gather. William Hatch was sent as a chaplain for a mining company, but never got a chance to work in that capacity, the company breaking up before it even began operations. Nonetheless, Hatch took Bible in hand and, in 1849, preached to his fellow miners, being recognized for living the word as well as speaking it. Others spreading the gospel may not have been ordained or even trained in the theology, but were simply good men who owned a Bible and had the need to share its contents.

Hanchett says it best in the effectiveness of the preacher-miner. “Talk of God over pan or cradle, however, and preaching about riches in heaven to men not finding them in California had the same effect as the tolling of church bells on Sunday morning. Reminded of home, men began to act as if they were home.”

Those who were formally sent by their churches to preach the gospel had two goals in mind; social and religious improvement. They felt it was their moral duty to keep the sheep away from the many vices that accompanied the quest for gold.

The transitory nature of the gold miner – going wherever the next strike was found – made the building of churches difficult in the early years of the Rush. Street preaching and camp meetings, so successful in the east, did not have the same results in California. Until gold mining became less of an adventure and more of a job, with its incumbent stability, permanent church buildings in the Gold Country were few and far between.

Those churches that did exist could not boast of large memberships but could certainly claim a large congregation. Silas S. Harmon led a Presbyterian service in Sonora. Though the membership rolls were stuck at 30, Harmon would preach to a hundred souls and twice had to seek larger quarters. Generally speaking, this percentage held true, with a church having twice or treble the amount of worshippers as it would find on its membership list.

CHURCH DENOMINATIONS

Membership was on the minds of all the major denominations and it seemed that it was just as important to bring people to Christ as it was to bring them to their Christ, be he Baptist, Methodist, Catholic, or any of the other Christian faith.

The list of Christian Churches which sent missionaries and ministers reads like the Saturday religious page of the Sacramento Bee; a Methodist Mission Society and its schismed brother, the Southern Methodists, Episcopalians, Baptists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Cambellites, Catholics, Mormons , Church of the United Brethren in Christ and others.

There was cooperation amongst the Christian brothers in the sharing of pulpits to traveling preachers, joining together to form common societies, such as temperance meetings and opening their doors to new congregations which did not have standing structures of their own.
One reason for this policy was the distance in miles and attitude from the brethren’s stricter and less flexible eastern cousins. Differences and wrongs that have been ingrained for years don’t exist in the new west and each discussion is new, based on new ideas, opportunities, and challenges.

But the competition between denominations still existed. A Baptist clergy wrote that lost opportunities “. . . will result in loss to ourselves as a denomination.” Church-goers in San Francisco noticed the progress made in other churches and asked, “Where is the Episcopal missionary spirit?” Isaac Owen, of the Methodist Missionary Society, stressed the importance of being the first to build a church in a community. When a second denomination wants to build a second church, they “will have twice the trouble to build (that) the first have,” while a Congregationalist wrote home to ask why there is no Congregational minister “north of Marysville, while the Methodist are sending theirs into every mining town. . . . More than half of the people here have been attending this and the Presbyterian Church and would give two dollars when they give one.”

WOMEN IN THE GOLD RUSH COMMUNITY

During the first few years after California’s 1850 admission as the 31st of Union, Protestant church leaders were beset with a number of challenges, chief amongst them the lack of women members. A Gold Rush camp was a male dominated society, and with it came all the “diseases” of maleness – coarse behavior, brutality, homesickness, lack of respect and the other animalistic expressions that may arise.

Women played a major role in the growth of the church in the Gold Rush era, primarily due to their scarcity. When women did arrive, those who were not “working girls” were often the wives of ministers and added much to the community. In 1854, a miner wrote that “One true, pure woman is worth a volume of sermons. . .” Elisha Crosby writes in her diary that “as women and children became more common, men were reminded of home and began to take pains in the way they dressed and to act like gentlemen.”

In 1852, the presence of women is credited for the increase in religious activities, higher forms of entertainment, the elevated tone of conversation and amusement and the shaming away of vice.
A respectable woman was treated with great attention and deference. Those women who used the scarcity of females for their own financial gains earned money, but a decent women earned respect. “Old or rich” wrote the world traveler, Ida Pfeiffer, in 1853, “well- or ill-dressed, every woman was treated with respect and kindness” and even “the most vulgar blackguard (would) abstain from swearing in the presence of a lady. . .”

Women made churches community centers, giving a place for the 49er who left his Mother and Sweetheart at home to pursue his material fortune. By having a wife by his side, the pastor was able to not only have a help-mate in his many responsibilities, but to give the bachelor miners a vision of a home.

A monograph is written on the special burdens a pastor’s wife must carry. From the day a Pastor’s wife enters the parish, she is a marked woman. Her dress is expected to be of the most saintly pattern. The color of ribbon may endanger the peace of the whole community . . . She must be the best woman in the world, the head of all benevolent enterprises, Sunday schools, ladies fairs. . ., sewing circles, Bible classes, etc. She must be the politest woman in the world, receiving calls at all times and visiting from house to house, and making herself generally agreeable. She must be the most exemplary woman in the world, never laughing above the prescribed key. In short, she must be the paragon of all excellence, and possess a constitution like a horse, patience like an ox, and good nature like a puppy. . . (She) is to ‘cotton’ to the caprices, tastes, and prejudices of the parish, without a farthing’s consideration.

Because many pastors were given limited salary and expected to make up the difference on their own, it was essential that they start a church as quickly as possible. A wife, along with other women in the church, proved to be invaluable, as they “distracted men from saloons and attracted them to church.” Women were also invaluable in the perennial and omnipresent fund-raiser, the “church fair,” beginning with the first church fair in California, held by the women of the Presbyterian Church (Old School) in San Francisco. Hanchett writes that “church fairs were so popular and so remunerative that they were probably held in every Protestant primary church, as well as in many secondary churches.

SUMMARY

The Gold Rush era was not a godless or godforsaken place in history, but was a rich opportunity for Christians to reach out to the unsaved, who had been brought together by God’s hand and a sawyer into as large a congregation as one could imagine. Though there were scoundrels in shepherd’s guise, most men of the cloth preached true and hard, spreading the good news at every opportunity. They were assisted by their sisters in Christ and together brought the hopeless, the lost and the unsaved into God’s house.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCE

BOOKS
James Russell Davis “A history of the Evangelical United Brethren Church in California 1849-1962” (University of Southern California June 1963)

William F. Hanchett, Jr. “Christianity in the Gold Rush Era - Summary of the
Dissertation” (University of California, Berkeley 1952)

J.S. Holliday, The World Rushed In - The California Gold Rush Experience (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981)

William Mead Muhler, “Religion and social problems in Gold Rush, California: 1849-1869. (Graduate Theological Union, 1989)

INTERNET
http://www.sierrafoothillmagazine.com/bidwell.html Sierra Foothill Magazine

http://www.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?page_id=21333 State of California, California State Parks

Sermon - GOD'S RULES, GOD'S TOOLS

2008-09-15T21:04:00.000-07:00

Given Sunday, September 7, 2008 to Parkside Community Church, Sacramento CA

I’d like to spend some time today discussing the rules that God has given us. It makes sense to go to the beginning. In doing so, we can turn to our Jewish brothers. A devout Jew will wear a shawl with 613 knots, the exact number of Laws contained in the first five books of the Old Testament. I’d now like to read each one of those laws.
No, just kidding. But we do need to understand our foundational laws and what they mean to us before we can follow them. A dynamic preacher with strong resources and compelling style could deliver a sermon on this topic that could last for hours and only seem like minutes. Unfortunately, you have me. I shall speak for a few minutes and it may seem like hours, but I promise that we’ll get out of here in time for the picnic. And, yes, that includes Communion.
As Christians at Parkside, we talk about God as a Trinity – Creator, Christ and Holy Spirit. One God, Three Forms. In our conversation today, we will focus on the Creator God, who handed down the laws to Adam and Eve, to Moses, and to those who followed them. As Christians, we may ask why this is important. We are not Jewish and we are not required to follow Jewish law. Except that all Christians have a foundation in Judaism. The Apostle Paul wrote in his second letter to Timothy that “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of god may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.” We want to remember that although this letter is part of our New Testament, Paul’s reference to Scripture was actually to the Hebrew Bible – what we call the Old Testament. Our Testament had not been collected yet from the writings of the Gospels and the letters from Paul and the others. So our New Testament Paul is telling us to follow the Old Testament writings.
But should we follow all 613 laws? This is where it gets tricky. Because the mission of Christ on earth was to give us God’s word and teach us to follow it. However, Christ’s teachings were not to follow the law precisely but to follow the law as God’s will. And what is God’s will? Well, quite frankly, that is why I come to church and study my Bible and am blessed to have fellowship with all of you – so that I can better learn God’s will.
But getting back to the foundation. When we think of God’s laws, our first thoughts most likely go to what we call The Ten Commandments. But God has been telling us what to do from the very beginning, by both word and example.
In the Beginning, God created our world and populated it with plants. God put the stars in the skies and the animals on the earth and on the sixth day, God created humanity. But it’s the seventh day that interests us here. Reading from Genesis 2, we know that “By the seventh day God had finished the work God had been doing; so on the seventh day” – say it with me – “God rested.”
On the eighth day, some may feel God made chocolate, but let’s focus on the Sabbath.
God is clear on the need for Sabbath or, a day of rest. It is one of the few things in the Bible where God tells us to “Do as I do, as well as what I say.” In Deuteronomy 5, we read God’s direction to “Observe the Sabbath day by keeping it holy, as the LORD your God has commanded you. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant, nor your ox, your donkey or any of your animals, nor the foreigner within your gates, so that your manservant and maidservant may rest, as you do.”
There are two points in this declaration that I have wrestled with. First of all, God is not saying, “Go nuts one day a week – it doesn’t count!” As I understand this, God is telling us that we work hard six days a week and we need a day for rest. As the season approaches, I don’t believe God meant rest as ten hours watching football, though I must confess this is not specifically prohibited in the Bible.
When God tells us to rest, it is for our benefit, so that we may better ourselves. It is to give rest to our family and our servants - human and animal - and to our land. It is a time to spend in quiet contemplation. Which brings up the second point that had troubled me – what are we all doing here? And why are the Pastor, Organist, Choir Director, Sound Technician, and I don’t know how many others working today?
Actually, that part of the question is easy. God tells us to take a Sabbath – a day off after six days work. God did not tell us which day to take; that choice is entirely up to us. Historically, Christians have chosen Sunday as our “church” day. We do this to celebrate the Risen Lord, Jesus the Christ, whose empty tomb was discovered and who came back to us from death on a Sunday. The specific Jewish day of Sabbath has historically been what we call in English “Saturday.” Linguistically, we can find some form of “Sabbath” in the Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, Russian, Romanian, Polish, Czech and Bulgarian languages and thank you Google.com translations.
For those who choose to work on a Sunday, the “Blue Laws” of the community no longer exist. But our direction is clear – take a sabbatical. Take an intentional day that doesn’t require you to be busier than an average work day. Don’t be so active on your day off that you need a day off to recuperate from your day off. And respect those who choose a sabbatical inconsistent with your own. I say this specifically on behalf of Pastors, of whom some folks believe only work one day a week and even then only for an hour or so. Allow Pastors and others who work a schedule different from you to take their day and, more importantly, allow yourself to take that day. Work hard six days out of the week and develop the habit of taking the Sabbath. Then rejuvenate yourself by spending that time in God’s glory.

I mentioned before the Ten Commandments, as given to us from God through Moses in Exodus and again in Deuteronomy. I would like to tell you that these are God’s Commandments and are not Suggestions, but it goes much deeper than that. In the original Hebrew, language of the Old Testament, the Commandments are known as the “Decalogue.” However, they are not listed as Commandments, but as “the ten statements.” The Ten Statements. Not the fire and brimstone that the word “Commandments” conjures up, is it? We all probably have the vision of Charlton Heston with his two tablets; while lightening and thunder explode around him, emblematic of a fearsome God laying down the law. But let me suggest another picture. Have you ever told someone – maybe a young child who is misbehaving – “don’t do that.” Quietly. Lovingly. Imagine God, in talking with Moses, not with drama, but with quiet love.
“Don’t kill.
Don’t steal.
Don’t lie.”
As you know, I am a learned seminary student. So that you can get the full impact of what I am saying, let me quote the Ten Statements to you from memory. They are:
* Do not have any other gods before me.
* Do not make idols to worship
* Do not use God’s name improperly
* Remember the Sabbath
* Honor your Father and Your Mother
* Do not murder
* Do not commit adultery
* Do not steal
* Do not lie
* Do not covet that which is not yours.
I offer these today not to preach on them specifically but to remind all of us that as obvious as some of these rules seem, we find so many ways to misinterpret them. God tells us not to covet, but in the movie “Wall Street,” Gordon Gecko tells us that “Greed is Good” and Michael Douglas does such a good job with the message that maybe he’s right.
We aren’t suppose to lie, but what if that dress really DOES make her look fat?
We don’t steal, but if I can sneak out of work early, am I going to reimburse the company that part of my wage?
We don’t commit adultery, but how many of us have looked twice at Halle Berry or Antonio Banderas? Even President Jimmy Carter, a man who lives his Christian faith every day, admitted to “committing adultery in my heart many times.”
I offer these merely as examples of how we know the rules and still find ways around them. We have to work harder... I have to work harder at following them more closely. Just as God told the Israelites , so it is true today that we must “Do what is right and good in God’s sight.”
God’s rules did not end with the Decalogue. Anyone who has trudged through the books of Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy know this. In our 21st century superiority, we may sniff at Biblical laws that prohibit the mixing of cotton and wool and don’t give a second thought to which animal cloven-footed or chews the cud. And we have advanced beyond Deuteronomy 22, which call out for death to adulterers, yet in some cases not beyond Leviticus 18, which tells men to “not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.” Adultery is punishable by death; homosexuality is “detestable.”
We must understand the times that these laws were handed down, knowing that they were done so for very specific reasons. I am not advocating that each one of us follow all 613 laws, but how do they apply to us as Christians?
We find our answer in the teachings of our savior, Jesus the Christ, who told us to 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind.” What is interesting to me is that this isn’t original with Jesus. He got it from his Dad, who, way back in Deuteronomy tells us to “Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength.”
But that “love your neighbor” part – that’s all ours, right? I’m afraid not. In the Old Testament book of Leviticus we are told to “love your neighbor as yourself.” If you don’t believe me, drive by the B’nai Israel synagogue on Riverside Drive – it’s permanently affixed 20 feet high on the outside of their temple!
So what are we to do? As Christians, we know that the foundation of our belief is in the Old Testament. We’re all in favor of a Sabbath, although maybe the part about working hard the other six days isn’t so swell. We try to follow the Commandments, as best as we can. At least the ones we remember. Loving God is easy because there is no accountability – until it is too late. And we can love our neighbor as long as he keeps his dogs quiet at night or she doesn’t cut me off on the highway. But is there a simpler way to follow God’s law? I offer Micah 6:8b – “And what does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” This is my path in following Christ. It is my prayer that the lessons God has given us will guide you in finding and following your path.

Come On! Come On!

2008-09-15T21:00:00.001-07:00

I want to write about my nephew, Chase, and his soccer game today.

Chase has just started kindergarten, which also puts him in league with other like-aged boys and girls in a recreation soccer team, which plays other teams from as far away as anywhere else in the extended neighborhood he lives in.

Watching the "Six and Unders" play soccer is not unlike watching puppies wrestle an old sock stuffed with other old socks. They are both having a wonderful time and no one should interfere. Any adult who watches children play in general also are envious of how quickly friendships can be made of former strangers. Unlike the machinations that go on with the older people - usually beginning with the teens - a child will find another child his own size and temperment and ask, "Do you want to be friends?" The answer has always been a resounding "Okay!" and off they go.

Today's game took place on a field that would be rejected by goats as being too unkempt. A soccer ball could be found somewhere in the clump of children and grass and moved sparingly across the shortened field. As movement of the ball was limited, this allowed the children time to mingle with and make new friends, jersey color not being a consideration. Such a spontaneous friendship erupted between Chase and a boy on the other team. As they shared observations on grass and what their hands looked like, the game continued. Suddenly, from the clump of players, a Hercules of a player kicked the ball well over 20 feet! Obviously, she was a ringer, but this caused great excitement as all the players, including Chase's new friend, rushed towards the moving ball.

Chase, however, was still searching for bugs in the grass, so his new friend stopped running and came back to Chase, pulling him to the ball and shouting, "Come on! Come on!" Together, they then ran with the rest of the kids to see what all the excitement was about.

How often, in any sort of competition, do we return to those falling behind and shout an encouraging, "Come on! Come on!"?