Saturday, January 28, 2006

Hate and Disdain


In response to my recent “Wayward Christian Soldiers”, Jeff writes, “Unfortunately the far political left of our nation is still in "Hate George W. Bush" no matter what mode. This pushes the far right to become even more extreme in countering the far left's disdain of any action taken by the current administration.” (See full content of his comments posted on blog at http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/2006/01/wayward-christian-soldiers.html)

Keywords in his response are “hate” and “disdain” which capsulate one of the most infectious problems within many modern day societies. I see a parallel between his expression of American’s ever growing political disease and the current Palestinian’s state of affairs. The Palestinian elections this week, a vote of 77%, elected an overwhelming majority of the Hamas party (Islamist movement of militant, terrorist, fundamentalist seeking to over through Israel) in lieu of the more moderate Fatah party, which has been in power. The Fatah party (secular) was founded in 1958 by Yasser Arafat to create an independent state of Palestine and also has some history of terrorism, namely, al-Fatah, in 1970’s.

It seemed to be a contemptuous celebration by the adherents of Hamas party filling the streets with all ages, but seemingly by TV lens a large number of young and even pubescent males, not even of voting age. What can incite in young people this kind of ‘in your face’, disdainful exuberance? It’s unrelenting hatred breeding generation to generation in people who have little hope for a better life. But what causes this inbreeding in its transfer to the next generations?

The clerics of the Mosque, men of the holy order claiming to speak for God, a religious fragment of Islam gone awry, are responsible for an ill-preordained society. This is the politics of religion bringing ill-fate, insolvable, resolve for a peaceful settlement between Palestinians and Israelis. Also, the question has be asked, in U. S. and Israel support for the Fatah party, what bearing did that influence have in the minds of the moderate Palestinians who already resent the U. S. and Israel? In an interview with a Palestinian lady appearing to be very intelligent, she expressed consideration for the current ruling regime but would not admit to voting for them, the Fatah. Otherwise, some moderates were just feed up with the status qo, corruption of current regime. So what does this have to do with things here at home?

Jeff’s, accurate description of chasm between extreme right and left (hatred beginning mostly during Clinton administration and continuing through Bush administration), a disdain for each other, inciting many of our legislators to deplorable political tactics, is the main reason our congress can’t deal with the important issues. Admittedly, there is a gulf between ideas and issues on each side. Although, resolutions could be imminent, if parties strived for mutual respect and conciliation. Much of this chasm can be traced to Conservative/Liberal Talk aired programs - http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/2006/01/response-to-conservativeliberal-talk.html - and excessive religious-political power amassment - http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/2006/01/wayward-christian-soldiers.html. If these insidious exercises are not constrained our country may be in for a rude awaking. Free speech is one thing, but hatred and disdainful attitudes entrap and make governments ineffective to legislate. Can democracies survive this test?

The Bush administration has made some progress in promoting democracies, but also with many shortcomings. I believe you will find this article interesting, “The Realities of Exporting Democracy” - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/24/AR2006012401901.html?referrer=email&referrer=email. It is a review of the Bush administration’s influence for success and failure on exporting democracy. Once again in this article, we are reminded of some repressive regimes that otherwise might be legitimate democracies.

Let me hear from you!

Saturday, January 21, 2006

Wayward Christian Soldiers


Wayward Christian Soldiers
Jan. 21st, 2006

(Critical Action is now posted on Weblog at: http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/)

If you have followed my writings of past you know my passionate, strong belief in separation of church and state. In the article printed herewith, Charles Marsh, professor of religion at University of Virginia, makes a good case to support my conviction. He has cautioned that the conservative evangelicals have amassed political power at the cost of integrity to the gospel message. His research reveals ministers who from the pulpit endorsed the Iraq war leading up to the Iraq invasion, even when doing so required them to recast Christian doctrine. In addition, he refers to John Stott, ---http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/John+Stott ---- previously referred to in Critical Actions. In a related article, “Who Is John Stott”: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/30/opinion/30brooks.html?ex=1137906000&en=8ef6c8a5e19b28f2&ei=5070 David Brooks acclaims John Stott as the true evangelical leader and not Jerry Falwell.

This writing is not to suggest that the Iraq invasion was wrong or right, but bring to bear critical thinking about church and state.

Prior to the 2004 presidential election at a family setting, someone made the comment: “If a candidate’s religion was right then everything else would be ok.” Even though I believe that was a rhetorical (I hope.) statement, if really believed, and some people do, it would be a shortsighted avowal. To put religion as the definitive qualification for an office is in the narrowest of tunnel vision. However, as John Danforth, a Episcopalian minister and moderate Republican, has put it: “People of faith have the right, and perhaps the obligation, to bring their values to bear in politics, but not to approach politics with a certainty that they know God's truth, and that they can advance the kingdom of God through governmental action.” The article by John Danforth from which this quote is taken was published in CA on June 17th, 2005: http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/2006/01/i-didnt-say-it-but-moderate-republican.html
  • Charles Marsh: What will it take for evangelicals in the United States to recognize our mistaken loyalty? We have increasingly isolated ourselves from the shared faith of the global Church, and there is no denying that our Faustian (meaning inserted: pertaining to or resembling or befitting Faust or Faustus especially in insatiably striving for worldly knowledge and power even at the price of spiritual values; "a Faustian pact with the Devil") bargain for access and power has undermined the credibility of our moral and evangelistic witness in the world. The Hebrew prophets might call us to repentance, but repentance is a tough demand for a people utterly convinced of their righteousness.
Those who know me, I trust, recognize that I take my Christian faith seriously by witness and good works. That’s a freedom that I cherish, and I believe it’s in need of protecting for all people. Religious freedom will not endure if religious egoists amass political power in government. Not to compare religions, but will we take a lesson from the experiences of Islam’s sect-religions of Muslim countries and their religious fanatics? Namely one leader, the Iranian defiant President Mahmound Ahmadinejad who has made known he soon expects the coming of the Mahdi, a messiah figure whose return will herald the end of the world. Pick one from our own, the obsessive Pat Robertson. Imagine him as our U. S. President! Surely our divisions in faith beliefs and growing fanaticisms, like theirs, will bring further upheaval in politics, governmental affairs, and put in danger our religious freedoms.

What’s your opinion?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
January 20, 2006
Op-Ed Contributor
Wayward Christian Soldiers
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/20/opinion/20marsh.html?th&emc=th

By CHARLES MARSH
Charlottesville, VA.
IN the past several years, American evangelicals, and I am one of them, have amassed greater political power than at any time in our history. But at what cost to our witness and the integrity of our message?
Recently, I took a few days to reread the war sermons delivered by influential evangelical ministers during the lead up to the Iraq war. That period, from the fall of 2002 through the spring of 2003, is not one I will remember fondly. Many of the most respected voices in American evangelical circles blessed the president's war plans, even when doing so required them to recast Christian doctrine.
Charles Stanley, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Atlanta, whose weekly sermons are seen by millions of television viewers, led the charge with particular fervor. "We should offer to serve the war effort in any way possible," said Mr. Stanley, a former president of the Southern Baptist Convention. "God battles with people who oppose him, who fight against him and his followers." In an article carried by the convention's Baptist Press news service, a missionary wrote that "American foreign policy and military might have opened an opportunity for the Gospel in the land of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob."
As if working from a slate of evangelical talking points, both Franklin Graham, the evangelist and son of Billy Graham, and Marvin Olasky, the editor of the conservative World magazine and a former advisor to President Bush on faith-based policy, echoed these sentiments, claiming that the American invasion of Iraq would create exciting new prospects for proselytizing Muslims. Tim LaHaye, the co-author of the hugely popular "Left Behind" series, spoke of Iraq as "a focal point of end-time events," whose special role in the earth's final days will become clear after invasion, conquest and reconstruction. For his part, Jerry Falwell boasted that "God is pro-war" in the title of an essay he wrote in 2004.
The war sermons rallied the evangelical congregations behind the invasion of Iraq. An astonishing 87 percent of all white evangelical Christians in the United States supported the president's decision in April 2003. Recent polls indicate that 68 percent of white evangelicals continue to support the war. But what surprised me, looking at these sermons nearly three years later, was how little attention they paid to actual Christian moral doctrine. Some tried to square the American invasion with Christian "just war" theory, but such efforts could never quite reckon with the criterion that force must only be used as a last resort. As a result, many ministers dismissed the theory as no longer relevant.
Some preachers tried to link Saddam Hussein with wicked King Nebuchadnezzar of Biblical fame, but these arguments depended on esoteric interpretations of the Old Testament book of II Kings and could not easily be reduced to the kinds of catchy phrases that are projected onto video screens in vast evangelical churches. The single common theme among the war sermons appeared to be this: our president is a real brother in Christ, and because he has discerned that God's will is for our nation to be at war against Iraq, we shall gloriously comply.
Such sentiments are a far cry from those expressed in the Lausanne Covenant of 1974. More than 2,300 evangelical leaders from 150 countries signed that statement, the most significant milestone in the movement's history. Convened by Billy Graham and led by John Stott, the revered Anglican evangelical priest and writer, the signatories affirmed the global character of the church of Jesus Christ and the belief that "the church is the community of God's people rather than an institution, and must not be identified with any particular culture, social or political system, or human ideology."
On this page, David Brooks correctly noted that if evangelicals elected a pope, it would most likely be Mr. Stott, who is the author of more than 40 books on evangelical theology and Christian devotion. Unlike the Pope John Paul II, who said that invading Iraq would violate Catholic moral teaching and threaten "the fate of humanity," or even Pope Benedict XVI, who has said there were "not sufficient reasons to unleash a war against Iraq," Mr. Stott did not speak publicly on the war. But in a recent interview, he shared with me his abiding concerns.
"Privately, in the days preceding the invasion, I had hoped that no action would be taken without United Nations authorization," he told me. "I believed then and now that the American and British governments erred in proceeding without United Nations approval." Reverend Stott referred me to "War and Rumors of War, " a chapter from his 1999 book, "New Issues Facing Christians Today," as the best account of his position. In that essay he wrote that the Christian community's primary mission must be "to hunger for righteousness, to pursue peace, to forbear revenge, to love enemies, in other words, to be marked by the cross."
What will it take for evangelicals in the United States to recognize our mistaken loyalty? We have increasingly isolated ourselves from the shared faith of the global Church, and there is no denying that our Faustian bargain for access and power has undermined the credibility of our moral and evangelistic witness in the world. The Hebrew prophets might call us to repentance, but repentance is a tough demand for a people utterly convinced of their righteousness.
Charles Marsh, a professor of religion at the University of Virginia, is the author of "The Beloved Community: How Faith Shapes Social Justice, from the Civil Rights Movement to Today."

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Critical Actions is now posted on Web log.


Critical Actions is now posted on Web log.
Blog @: http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

The above address will carry you to my web-log, commonly known as a “blog”, which is a website that displays in chronological order the postings by one or more individuals and usually has links to comments on specific postings.

When I officially began writing “Critical Actions: What’s Your Opinion” (CA) about a year ago, early own, I gave four reasons for its initiation:

  • Truth (my concern about e-mail rumors, false information being propagated for personal agendas.)

  • My interest in various topics and the value I put on sharing ideas, thoughts, and opinions with others

  • Communication: the importance of good and proper dialog, to advance the greater good of society

  • A higher purpose for e-mail (I enjoy some of the humorous and edifying e-mails, but I also believe that e-mail should be taken more seriously as an effective modern day communications tool.)

(Read elaboration of the 4-points @ http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/2006/01/there-must-be-better-use-higher.html)

I know that I’m not the savviest writer, but maybe I can better hone my skills to become a better communicator in expressing my deepest heart-felt values. There are many topics I would like to comment on, including some books I’ve recently read: “The World is Flat”, “Our Endangered Values”, “If Grace is True” and others. I always appreciate and value your input and comments to my entries.

In bringing the blog site up-to-date for each article written in the past year, I have added your comments below the z-bar (zzzzz). (an improvised divider at major transitions in the article) If I have missed any of your comments, please advise and I’ll update. There are still a few issues with operation of this Blogger site, so you’ll understand the posted format doesn’t necessarily come across as it has been written in the MSWord I use. Included below are some helpful tips on navigating the site.

Thanks for your indulgence and allowing me to share with you my thoughts during the past year. I look forward to the New Year and hearing from you. After all, what’s life without someone to share it with? Best wishes!

Cornell

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
About the blog and how to navigate the web-log (blog) (http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/):

  • When you click this address it opens to main page showing only the most recent posted article. (The posting of the most current writing is the only one you will see in the opening page, however the Index allows you to go to previous posted article.)

  • At the top of page the name of blog is shown: “Critical Actions: What’s Your Opinion?” Immediately beneath the tile is the description of he blog: The opinions hereof on religion, politics, economy, humanity, or other topics, are an exercise of self-examination in developing critical thought processes on important issues. Further objective is to encourage others to engage in introspective, honest, respectful, dialogue on issues that will affect our lives - our children's future.

  • There are two ways to surf the Index of articles:

  • Titles of the most recent ten (10) postings will usually show on left side of page (I think depending on how it opens.) if your computer screen is wide enough. If not it may show on left below the article. To follow older postings, click any title in the index and the next older ten (10) titles will show.

  • Or: At top of blog page in the “dark blue header bar” click on: “Search This Blog.” This index will open the most current ten (10) titles showing first line of the article – then you can move on to next pages 2,3,4, etc. to see older postings.

  1. On the main title of the posting, if a “Lighthouse” symbol is shown immediately preceding the title – it means the article is related (linked) to another article. By clicking on the title it will immediately carry you to the related article. Additionally, you may find URL addresses written within some of the articles that by clicking on them will link to another article.

  2. For “Comments from others” to all the previously posted articles, I have printed below the original article. (If I have missed any, please advise.)

  3. To make comments on any articles that have been posted click on “Comments” at bottom of article, and a window will opens to type in. (If your comments are lengthy, it may be more convenient to write on Word doc and paste in window.)
Options for signature are:
  • Other – Please use this and sign

  • Anonymous –

E-mail will be sent to me when your comments are made showing your response.

Friday, January 06, 2006

Preaching a "Celebrity Gospel"


Preaching a ‘Celebrity Gospel’By Mark CreechWhat’s a Christian Answer?
July 10th, 2005
Reverend Mark Creech is condemnatory of both Billy Graham and Joel Osteen - http://www.joelosteen.com/site/PageServer - for preaching a ‘celebrity gospel’, which in his words:

  • “A ‘celebrity gospel’ should be deemed for what it is: anathema -- something to be shunned and reviled by the faithful.” “The hope or objective of a celebrity gospel is that people might feel helped and encouraged, not condemned or judged.” “Moreover, any gospel message that fails to deal with sin -- messages that fail to specifically address sin -- are not setting forth the need for people to be reconciled to God. Such messages fail to address why one needs to be saved.”
Well, I have heard both preach, Graham of course more over the years than Osteen. I haven’t read Osteen’s book, although my wife has and found it meaningful and spiritually uplifting. Both these evangelist do deal with sin. Albeit a different approach that, maybe, Mr. Creech could learn from. While Reverend Creech, it sounds as if, would deliver a message of condemnation and judgment, the Celebrity Gospel (CG) ministers deliver a message of faith, hope, and charity, without always prescribing/identifying the sins of the one who needs to repent. I think most of us know what our sins are, and we as Protestants do not have to confess to anyone except God, who will judge and know if our confessions are bogus or incomplete. What more is required for our atonement with God -- other than to love God with all our hearts, mind, soul, and strength and to love our neighbor as ourselves?God, I believe, welcomes a positive message of the good news. In thinking about the good-news message my first thoughts turned to Luke 4:16 when Jesus read from Isaiah: 18 “The uSpirit of the Lord is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me 9to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To vset at liberty those who are 1oppressed; 19To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.” Then He sits down as if enough said. Now is that not a positive message? Of course we know Jesus went on to say, among other things, likening Himself as a prophet, 24 “Truly I tell you, no prophet is accepted in the prophet’s hometown.” Now here again is the John 14:6 when Rev. Creech said, “When preachers fail to make central to their message what Christ said of himself -- "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man cometh unto the Father but by Me" (John. 14:6) -- they have compromised the gospel and left their audience with no certain means to find their way home.” Even though I personally accept the way of Jesus doesn’t mean there are not other ways to God. In fact I think the insistent-gospel of this passage does a grave disservice, an injustice to humanity, of the 4.4 billion people outside Christianity who for the most part will never hear the good-news Christian message.Another point to be made in this article, aside from the fact that Rev. Creech in differentiation to the CG ministers would have his “one-and-only-truth” religious beliefs to influence politics, is the fact that Franklin Graham likewise relies on politico for his religious support. Evangelist Billy Graham who has tried to stay clear of politics, especially since he ran afoul of Jews in disparaging comments recorded in a conversation with President Nixon. Of course, he has on many instances since when asked about that profusely apologized to the Jewish people. Billy came to Franklin’s rescue after a disparaging statement Franklin made about Muslims after 9/11. However, most recently Franklin found it necessary to correct a political snafu by his father who had made a complimentary remark toward the Clintons when he said Bill Clinton should be an evangelist. The gracious words Billy Graham bestowed to the Clintons recently apparently caused much consternation among constituency of Samaritan's Purse, Franklin Graham's relief organization, and the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association. The following link: http://wwwbeliefnet.com/story/170/story_17016_1.html gives Franklin’s well crafted response, but in a separate interview, Franklin gave a more political answer, as paraphrased: “Dad did not really mean that Clinton should be an evangelist; he was joking, it was only in jest, besides Clinton has not been called to preach. We certainly are not in agreement with their politics.” A Christian response that could have come from someone like Dr. Tony Campolo - http://www.tonycampolo.org/index.shtml - (Bill Clinton’s Christian counselor and speaker at The 2000 NC Annual United Methodist Conference) might have gone like this: Yes, Bill Clinton could be an evangelist, if called by God. God has used some very appalling characters and sinful people throughout Biblical history, included among them the murderer and most sinfully converted Saul, St. Paul, who in very large part is responsible for founding the Christian Church.My wife Jane, a 3rd grade teacher for years, has related her embarrassment over responding to small children after the discomforting Clinton Presidency. While I could empathize with her, I have said, why not have given them a Christian lesson response, such as: You as a child will come to learn that some good and intelligent people do very bad things. You should be aware that there could be sever consequences for anyone who makes bad choices. Sometime in your life, if not you, someone close to you or someone you know will be in deep trouble over a bad choice. Above all, you should remember that what is equally important as the sinner’s redemption, it’s your forgiveness of them.When we as Christians stop condemning, for the things we know nothing about, and start giving Christian answers and looking for Christian solutions, whether it be the daughters and sons of Allen Keys, Dick Cheney, Dick Gephert, or any other parent of a lesbian or gay child, then we will have advanced ecumenically for greater unity in Christian ministry. If only we could search our hearts for all children and adults of biological and mental disorders - beyond their control - which may cause offensive behaviors. One thing I do admire about the Cheneyes, withstanding the very bright Lynn Cheney’s disparaging remarks (a political answer) about John Kerry that “he just wasn’t a good person”, is their resolute position for their lesbian daughter, even in a counter position, political or Christian, of the president. There is no greater example of working together in a Christian solution than with President George H. Bush and President William J. Clinton running side by side in the tsunami relief efforts. Further, give credit where credit is due: George W. Bush in granting a record aid to African nations, the only continent of this world that is poorer than it was 25-years ago. I only hope we can pay for it.Oh, did I mention something about the need for separation of church and state?Some say as in the adage of the country song: “If you don’t stand for something, you’ll fall for anything.” Maybe it’s time to initiate a new motto: “Be careful what you stand for; when you think you have the TRUTH, Keep Searching!” Truly, I do want to stand for something – and I want to make sure it’s in alignment with the will of God – as I believe that’s the vigilant stand of a Billy Graham or a Joel Osteen.That’s my sermon for this Sunday. I’ll see you in church. Hope you get a good one at your church today.Cornellzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzhttp://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/7/52005mc.aspThe Right Frame of MindPreaching a 'Celebrity Gospel'By Rev. Mark H. CreechJuly 5, 2005(AgapePress) - I don't know who first coined the term "social gospel." But it's generally understood among conservative evangelicals to be an American theological aberration. The social gospel rose to prominence during the 1960s, when preachers strayed from the gospel of the grace of God and started proclaiming a message of salvation through "good works." The social gospel essentially advocates redemption based on social action, without teaching the necessity of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord.No one who understands the Holy Scriptures would deny our Lord calls us to good works or to social action. Nevertheless, the Bible teaches such should be wedded with the message of salvation in Jesus Christ alone. Corporate or societal righteousness is actually an outgrowth of the masses coming to know Jesus Christ.I consider the social gospel something to be considered anathema -- something to be shunned and reviled. The danger it poses, however, pales in comparison to another, more recent, very popular approach to the gospel today that is extremely deadly. It too, I believe, is a theological aberration. We might call it a "celebrity gospel."A celebrity gospel is when a preacher compromises the gospel of Christ in order to achieve or sustain a celebrity status. When a preacher proclaims a celebrity gospel, offenses are stringently avoided. There is no need to carry a Cross -- no need to take a stand theologically or politically. Christ is preached, but without preaching against sin. The good news of Jesus Christ is set forth in vague generalities designed to keep from dividing the audience. The hope or objective of a celebrity gospel is that people might feel helped and encouraged, not condemned or judged.Two good examples of preachers proclaiming a celebrity gospel of late are Dr. Billy Graham and Joel Osteen. Please understand it troubles me deeply to speak negatively of either one of these ministers. I consider myself unworthy to even shine their shoes. Dr. Graham has preached to more people in the world than any other evangelist in history. Joel Osteen serves the largest church in America, has a national television ministry, and has had a book on the New York Times best-seller list for several weeks. But I have witnessed compromises to the gospel of Christ by these two that I can only assume are driven by their desire to protect their celebrity.For instance, talk-show host Larry King, on CNN's Larry King Live, recently interviewed both men separately and in so many words asked them if they believed people of faith outside of Christ would go to heaven. Graham's answer: "That's in God's hands. I can't be the judge." Osteen responded: "Here's my thing .... I think it's wrong when you go around saying, you're saying you're not going, you're not going, you're not going, because it's not exactly my way." Both acknowledged their own faith in Christ, but wouldn't clearly delineate that there is only one mediator of salvation between God and man -- Jesus Christ (I Timothy. 2:5).When King asked Graham and Osteen about involvement by preachers in politics, both expressed their own reluctance to do it. Graham said, "I'm trying to stay out of politics. And I've been queried quite a bit lately, why I don't take a stand on certain issues." Later in the same interview, King asked Graham whether he believed people were born homosexuals or not. Graham would only say, "Well, that's a big debate." King then pressed the issue and asked, "But if it's not a choice, it can't be a sin. Right?" To which Graham replied, "Well maybe. God will make that judgment, not me. I'm not deciding who's a sinner and who is not." When Osteen was asked by King about issues like abortion and same-sex marriage, he said he believed same-sex marriage was not what God intended, neither was abortion the best, but he wasn't going to call anyone a sinner. He added he doesn't even use the word "sinner."Why is this a matter of concern? It's a matter of great significance because it's a breaking away from sound Christian doctrine. When preachers fail to make central to their message what Christ said of himself -- "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man cometh unto the Father but by Me" (John. 14:6) -- they have compromised the gospel and left their audience with no certain means to find their way home. We would all do well to consider the example of the early Christians, who lived in a pluralistic and liberal-minded city like Rome, yet wouldn't take a pinch of incense and place it on a fire before a graven image of Caesar because they were unwilling for Jesus to be considered just another god in a Roman pantheon. They believed Jesus was the one true God and that only He was Lord, not Caesar. For that faith they were willing to die of unspeakable tortures. Moreover, any gospel message that fails to deal with sin -- messages that fail to specifically address sin -- are not setting forth the need for people to be reconciled to God. Such messages fail to address why one needs to be saved.The message of the Cross is not simply a message about God's love. It's also a message about God's anger at sinners. The message of the Cross contends that God has been offended. Sin is so vial in God's eyes it necessitated the violent and bloody death of His own Son to assuage His wrath. It says no matter how good you may think you are, this is what you deserve: what Christ experienced on the Cross. Christ died in your place to pay the penalty for your sin and there is no other way to be saved except through Him. The apostle Paul referred to this as "the offence of the Cross" (Galatians 5:1) -- a message no preacher has a right to neglect.Lastly, preachers unwilling to address political matters of moral import are derelict in their duty to obey Christ's command to be "salt and light" (Matthew 5:13,14). What is more, their neutrality in such matters is a departure from the example of early church leaders like Telemachus, who gave his own life to stop the gladiator games in Rome. Then there's John Knox, who changed all of Scotland in his lifetime. John Wesley, the founder of Methodism, whose sermons often addressed issues like indentured servitude, rampant drunkenness, slavery, and the poor health of the peasant class. William Booth, founder of the Salvation Army, sought by law to destroy the prostitution racket in London during his day. And let's not forget the Black Regiment -- those ministers who wore black robes and contended from the pulpit for freedom during the days of the American Revolution. Without them there would have never been an America.Though it may be very popular and garner the support of thousands -- though it may bring in the big crowds, result in high praise and the adulation of most -- the preaching of a "celebrity gospel" is not acceptable with God. W. Philip Keller summed up the matter when he wrote: "The high calling to which God calls those chosen ones to speak on His behalf is not only a holy duty but also a lonely life. It is to be very much among the suffering and sorrows of our society but also (more often than not) somewhat alone in bearing the burdens -- frequently misunderstood and often wrongly accused. Christ came to us as the Man of sorrows, acquainted with grief. So it is to be expected that those who follow Him will taste the same suffering and endure the same disdain. This is inevitable."A "celebrity gospel" should be deemed for what it is: anathema -- something to be shunned and reviled by the faithful.
(image placeholder)(image placeholder)(image placeholder)

Wednesday, January 04, 2006

Paul Harris Fellow


Paul Harris Fellow


June 2005
If you don't have a connection with Rotary you may not know what it means to be a Paul Harris Fellow (PHF). To be named a PHF in The Smithfield Rotary Club usually indicates a special honor for recognizable community service, but more importantly it indicates that the person being honored has given, or someone has contributed in their name, a significant monetary contribution to The Rotary Foundation. In the case of my grandson the honor went not to a person of long and distinguishable community service but to a young achiever with aspirations worthy to become a service-oriented contributor to society. (image placeholder)
Liam had previously informed me that he wanted to become a Rotarian. Of course this pleased me very much. For it has been my opinion that while there are many people doing something for their communities there seems, to me at least, to be less evidence of service-mindedness in the younger workforce. Therefore, if I could make one impression on young people, among all the other responsibilities they have in family as well as their professions -- it is the importance of their responsibility to give something back to society as well.

Paul Harris was the founder of Rotary in 1905. The 2004-05 Rotary Foundations goal is $100 million US dollars ($100,000,000.00) -- all for Rotary's fourth objective: The advancement of international understanding, goodwill, and peace through a world fellowship of business and professional persons united in the ideal of service. Copied below is a brief synopsis about the foundation. To learn more about the foundation and what it does, click on any of the highlighted/underscored words.

Come to visit the Smithfield Rotary Club on any Monday evening at 6 PM, Johnston Memorial Medical Mall, Smithfield, NC.

About The Rotary Foundation
The Rotary Foundation is a not-for-profit corporation that supports the efforts of Rotary International to achieve world understanding and peace through international humanitarian, educational, and cultural exchange programs. It is supported solely by voluntary contributions from Rotarians and friends of the Foundation who share its vision of a better world.
The Foundation was created in 1917 by Rotary International's sixth president, Arch C. Klumph, as an endowment fund for Rotary "to do good in the world." It has grown from an initial contribution of US$26.50 to more than US$55 million contributed in 2002-03. Its event-filled history is a story of Rotarians learning the value of service to humanity.
(image placeholder)The Foundation's Humanitarian Programs fund international Rotary club and district projects to improve the quality of life, providing health care, clean water, food, education, and other essential needs primarily in the developing world. One of the major Humanitarian Programs is PolioPlus, which seeks to eradicate the poliovirus worldwide. Through its Educational Programs, the Foundation provides funding for some 1,200 students to study abroad each year. Grants are also awarded to university teachers to teach in developing countries and for exchanges of business and professional people. Former participants in the Foundation's programs have the opportunity to continue their affiliation with Rotary as .
For more information on current Foundation program awards and financial status see the Rotary Foundation Fact Card and the Rotary Foundation Annual Report, both of which are available for download.

Bringing FAITH to ACTION



Bringing FAITH to ACTION
December 9, 2005
  • “He (Jesus) himself did not regard truth as something we simply ‘uphold’ and ‘maintain’, but as something we choose to live and experience. So that our search, like his search, is primarily a search for orthopraxis (true practice) rather than orthodoxy (true doctrine). Only a true practice of our faith can verify what we believe.” “Jesus can help us understand the voice of Truth but, in the last analysis, it is we who must decide and act.” Albert Nolan: Jesus Before Christianity

Is our FAITH “on the whole a DOCTRINE” or must it be essentially rooted in PRACTICE? Is the practice of Christian mission an incorporation of our belief (doctrine)? At times we may find ourselves sitting on the sidelines, too comfortable in our doctrine of salvation to join in our responsibility (oath) for Christian Missions. The world’s problems, or those close around us, may seem too large and complex, beyond anything that we could ever do to improve the plight of humanity. But as Christians we must try, if our Faith is to be aligned with “the calling of JESUS”. What better time than CHRISTMAS to focus on our Christian mission of witness, serving, and giving. We know what Jesus has already given us --- best we ask now: What is the GIFT Jesus would bring to humankind delivered by us today? As an insight I share with you a message adopted from Centenary United Methodist Church’s December Newsletter. I hope you have a Merry Christmas!

What is Mission?

A mission in Christianity is not only one of witness, but one of service. Rev. Flynn’s sermon of Nov. 13th emphasized seeking out and serving those around and near us, those that are “not too far from here.” In fact his message accentuated as integral to our faith and salvation is our heeding Jesus’ call to serve people in dire need. Jay Locklear’s sermon on Nov. 20th delivered a similar message from which I include part of the selected gospel lesson herein. Below are the lyrics of Michael Crawford’s (renowned performer of Phantom of The Opera) song Not Too Far from Here. These moving words express in part how the virtues of our Christian mission might be fulfilled.

Lest we forget who our neighbor is or who is “not too far from here” be reminded that all inhabitants of this planet are as close as our backdoor in this modern day of technological travel and worldwide seamless, instant communications.

As our dedicated Christian servants put their faith into action (serving others) by word, deed, and gift, remember them in prayer. A Centenary mission work team departs for the Gulf hurricane area on December 5th. Natural disasters and tyrant governments that persecute and governments complicit in atrocities around the world – continue to put people in helpless situations. Jesus calls us to lift humankind.

Cornell Cox, Co-Chair
Your Missions Committee

  • Matthew 25: ‍41‍ “‍Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‍‍‘‍Depart from Me, you cursed, ‍‍into the everlasting fire prepared for ‍‍the devil and his angels: ‍42‍ for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; ‍43‍ I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.‍’

  • 44‍ “‍Then they also will answer ‍Him, saying, ‘‍Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?‍’ ‍45‍ Then He will answer them, saying, ‘‍Assuredly, I say to you, ‍l‍inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.‍’ ‍46‍ And ‍m‍these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.‍”

NOT TOO FAR FROM HERE

Somebody’s down to their last dime.
Somebody’s running out of time,
Not too far from here.

Somebody’s got no where else to go.
Somebody needs a little hope,
Not too far from here.

And I may not know their name,
But I’m praying just the same
That you’ll use me Lord to wipe away a tear.
Because somebody’s crying not too far from here.

Somebody’s troubled and confused.
Somebody’s got nothing left to lose,
Not too far from here.

Somebody’s forgotten how to trust.
And somebody’s dying for love,
Not too far from here.

It may be a stranger’s face,
But I’m praying for Your grace
To move in me and take away the fear.
Cause somebody’s hurting not too far from here.

Help me Lord not to turn away from pain.
Help me not to rest while those around me weep.
Give me a strength and compassion,
When somebody finds a road of life too steep.

Somebody’s troubled and confused.
Somebody’s got nothing else to lose,
Not too far from here.

Somebody’s forgotten how to trust.
Somebody’s dying for love,
Not too far from here.

Now I’m letting down my guard,
And I‘m opening my heart.
Help me speak Your love to every needful ear.

Someone is waiting, not too far from here, no too far!
Someone is waiting, waiting, not too far from here

How to Deal With Muslim Nations and Terrorist


How to Deal With Muslim Nations and Terrorist
Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Questions continue to be raised as how to deal with Muslim nations and the terrorist threats. I admit I probably don’t know what I’m talking about (except for what I hear and read), but maybe then I’m in good company because it seems few people know much about this quandary or how it may best be resolved.
Recently my friend Richard R. sent to me writing by Major General Vernon Chong, USAF, ret. and asks what I thought. Chong’s hypothesis is that the terrorist war is for real and we must unite to win the war. Read full text at: http://adjunct.diodon349.com/Attack_on_USA/this_war_is_for_real.htm
  • Excerpts: “ I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I hope now after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in, and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about! Do whatever you can to preserve it.” Whether Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal, and that includes the Politicians and media of our country, and the free World!” “There are those who find fault with our country, but it is obvious to anyone who truly thinks through this, that we must unite!”
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
My response:

There is little in Chong’s composition that I would disagree.

Without question the terrorist war is for real – and civil society must win.

His writing was probably immediately following the 2004 Nov. election, so I wonder if the general after a year would have anything more to add – knowing of the every-growing difficulty to execute this war on Iraqi ground; another 1,000 war deaths and untold maimed, crippled bodies, not to mention the destructive toll on Iraqis and their infrastructure; secret prisons in Eastern Europe; the killing of three (3) defense attorneys for co-defendants in Saddam Hussein’s trial (more and more evidence of a civil war); what has happened in Spain, England, and now in France and the rising unrest among Muslim youth of inopportunity around the world.

GM Chong did not address a premise for alternative ways to wage the war (I’m not necessarily referring to winning hearts and minds.), which I believe to of furthermost importance:

  1. How (in what ways; on what premises) should the terrorist war be fought? May I suggest:


  • Guns, bullets, missiles, and bombs, to head off a few suicide boomers and insurgents in Iraq, will not win it alone. Overall, battle-force will prove to be the lesser element to effectively win the war.

  • It’s a war of Ideology where sleeper cells must be disrupted and used to get to the nucleus of organization, but moreover the teaching cells of brainwashed sick minds must be uprooted.

  • It will have to be a war more geared to covert operations with cooperation of many Islamist throughout the world. A Muslim problem must engender Muslin solutions.

  • A greater effort must be made in world trades (to bring more Muslim nations into the World Trade Organization), to bring the deprived Islamic populations of theocratic, monarch, dictator, or even a republic such as Egypt (94% Sunni) rule into modernity. We can’t make all these free republics, but we can be proponents for equal opportunity in economic development to make modernity a possibility. Of course Islamic traditions must make way for change. A ray of hope may come for the fundamentalist (anti-modernist) if they can be raised in or the proximity of homes with some economic empowerment. When economic opportunity expands, people will gain promise of a better life and move in their own right to gain freedoms. Such has happened in Communist China, as economic markets continue to develop.

America may sell or market democracy to other countries, but we can’t impose it anymore than we can impose our religious beliefs on other cultures. However, with an ongoing commitment to diplomacy to work with Muslim nations it may eventually bring about some measure of democratic rule, even though that will be problematic. As reported: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/egypt/index.html?inline=nyt-geo

“A meeting of Muslim nations initiated by the Bush administration ended in discord on Saturday after objections by Egypt blocked a final declaration supporting democracy.”


  • The unity of world nations is more important than the unity of one US Nation to win this war. America unilaterally cannot win this war.

Few people would disagree that Saddam Hussein was a tyrant dictator who needed deposing (if it could benefit the county’s people as a whole), just as many more need disposing. We are now learning more about the North Korea’s tyrant one-man dictator, KIM Jong Il – who is unsurpassed in bringing dehumanization on a country’s people. Words cannot describe the images currently being reported by CNN.

Iraq may be a legitimate terrorist battleground, since we are now there. If it’s to be the forefront of the terrorist battle, then let’s change the course, set a new plan for winning. It’s seems doubtful that elections will be a turning point. Otherwise, as Chaney (or was it Rumsfeld) has suggested we could be there 12-years and more. Count the toll in financial, life, dismemberments, and Iraqi relations! Disunity will continue on this war until there is a better plan to win both on Iraqi soil and to other ends of the world. That’s a debate that’s needed, not only in the US but also more importantly with allies and Islamic nations, from which must come some basic resolution about “how and where”, even while we continue wholehearted support of our troops.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

For further interest I refer to two excellent articles that give what seems a possibility reasonable resolve and reality in our Iraqi battle dilemma:

Milton First’s op-ed, “The Arab League to the Rescue” in NYT on 11-12-05 may be a viable solution to the current Iraqi situation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/12/opinion/12viorst.html?th&emc=th


  • Excerpt: The Arab League can be America's best exit strategy. True, we would be asking Arabs to clean up our mess. But the Arab states have an interest both in America's leaving and in Iraq's cohesion. At the very least, the Taif model suggests that Arabs are likely to do better than America at getting Iraqis to rebuild their society together. The alternative, as it was in Lebanon, is more bloodshed.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Additionally NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF op-ed “The Exit From Iraq” on 11-13-05 gives an enlightening, what I believe realistic, view of our current situation, especially with regards to the vast majority Iraqi’s opinion of our occupation: http://select.nytimes.com/2005/11/13/opinion/13kristof.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fNicholas%20D%20Kristof

  • Excerpt: Cut our losses This has an obvious merit: Iraq may fall apart no matter what we do, and if we're going to give up and pull out we should do so now rather than wait until after we've spilled more blood.

  • That said, immediate withdrawal strikes me as utterly immoral. A surgeon who botches an operation should not walk off and leave the patient on the table with a note: "Oops. This didn't go as planned. Good luck, but I'm outta here."

Politics aside on how we got in the war, there is plenty room for debate such as the division even within the Republicans: the fight between the views of John McCain, Colon Powell and apparently 90% of the US Senate with regard to prisoner torture vs. the administration’s will to continue in what some consider inappropriate prisoner treatment.

Yes, GM Chong, we need to unite, but first let’s make sure it’s a winnable plan. Anything short of a plan to win requires an exit strategy. Our forces have gone beyond the call of duty in a mire of civil strife. If the “terrorist war” is lost it will not be on Iraqi soil – for the war extends far beyond. Iraqis will lose whatever is lost in Iraq, not American forces. Now, after two and a half years, it’s Iraqi’s responsibility to defend their country from a civil war.

My conclusion is that the inevitably growing world-economic interdependency, economic opportunity for all, by which tools must come to collapse anti-modernist values and cultures in the long term will prove the most important component of the plan to win the terrorist war. In the meantime, it will be the unity of all concerned nations for our safety and building a platform - whereby a seamless communication between nations will join the battle to uproot the ill mind of the terrorist.

Cornell Cox
Smithfield, NC 27577
cornellcox@msn.com

A Powerful Emotion for Humanity



A Powerful Emotion For Humanity
Wednesday, October 26, 2005

You might imagine, out of all the interesting and disturbing things happening nationally and worldly, why I would chose to make a statement about Rosa Parks.

Immediately when Jane, my wife, retired in June 2003, we went on a 10,000-mile sightseeing trip around the United States. Of all the beautiful sites, interesting places and indelible memories captured in more than 1,400 digital photos, none caught my attention more than one. It was one of our last stops in Dearborn MI that we visited the Henry Ford Museum and Greenfield Village. http://www.hfmgv.org/ Of course, I expected to see many Ford automobiles, but much to my surprise there was a lot more to see in Greenfield Village: Thomas Edison’s workshop and his inventions, the homes of Noah Webster, Robert Frost and many more. The museum includes all makes and models of automobiles, although many more things that reminds us of our rich American heritage. Truly, it’s one of the greatest collections of items that join us in memory to important events of our past history.

The trip’s heartstring encounter was experienced in this museum at an exhibit that brought on a swell of powerful emotions: the resurrected Rosa Parks bus. http://www.thehenryford.org/exhibits/rosaparks/default.asp --- To sit in the seat where Rosa Parks had unassumingly made history was an eerie experience. An era where in the silence of many good people acquiesced in injustices and an inhumane life for many --- suddenly was in flashback.

The memory of Rosa Parks is imperative, not only for those of ill-bred prejudices who would impede the advancement of humanitarian causes, but also for those who’s silence of complicit-inaction continue to fail humankind: be it genocide, racial hatreds, ethnic intolerance, needless starvation, or any injustice or deprivation of opportunity for all people. In her death we remember a person whose life inspired justice far beyond this one act of a bus seat. If we (persons of this world) could stand just half as brave and tall as Rosa Parks, to honor the courage she exemplified under demoralizing duress, the world would be on its way to building a better understanding, goodwill and peace to the far corners of this earth. Parks’ life was our model and the foundation on which you and I must continue the building of justice.


BUS SPECIFICATIONS
TDH-3610, Serial # 1132, Coach ID #2857General Motors Corp., Pontiac, Michigan Delivered in March 194836 passengersDiesel engine, Hydraulic transmissionUsed in Terre Haute, Indiana, 1948-54Used in Montgomery, Alabama, 1954-71Sold as surplus to Roy H. Summerford, 1971Purchased at auction by The Henry Ford, 2001Acc. 2001.154.1

Relief: TAXES or CHARITY


Relief: TAXES or CHARITY
October 1, 2005

· In the words of Mother Teresa:

· “People are unreasonable, illogical and self-centered; LOVE THEM ANYWAY.
· If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish ulterior motives; DO GOOD ANYWAY.
· If you are successful you win false friends and true enemies; SUCCEED ANYWAY.
· The good you do will be forgotten tomorrow; DO GOOD ANYWAY.
· What you spent years building may be destroyed overnight; BUILD ANYWAY.
· People really need help but attack you if you help them; HELP PEOPLE ANYWAY.
· Give the world the best that you have and you’ll get kicked in the teeth; GIVE THE WORLD THE BEST YOU’VE GOT ANYWAY.”


How all the natural-disasters-relief expenses unfold will be one of the most important issues this nation has ever faced. Leave blame behind, nothing will compare to the potential consequences for recovery capital to put communities back together.

Of recent weeks there have been negative voices to the effect that many of the affected people do not deserve a helping hand. Some of these cynical views have been in e-mails, and some have even been fictitious messages (e-rumors) propagating humanity in a depraved condition. In our churches we work generously without judgment of worthiness to aid all people.

Just how extensive and what should the role of faith people be in providing for immediate relief, but even more to the reestablishment of communities? Or do you think it is for the most part government’s responsibility? $250 billion – and more! Should government step aside for private enterprise alone to rebuild? For whatever out government’s role, is it willing to take responsible action now to pay through additional revenue and spending cuts – not to further bankrupt our treasure and put the financial burden on the backs of our children and their children? Regardless of who pays, if it’s government or charities, accountability is imperative. For government’s role, this is an initiative coming from Senators Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, and Barack Obama, Democrat of Illinois, who have called for a chief financial officer to review expenditures before the money is spent, rather than more inspectors general to audit records after the fact.

We could forgo government’s aid for recovery by putting into practice the commands of our Christian Faith – to be servants. That’s not such a ludicrous statement! Certainly it’s not illogical, if Christians were to fulfill The Great Commission. The 76% Christian population in the US and other aid that might come from outside, could totally pay for the recovery. But will the Mother Teresa’s step forth?

As some have suggested, God is in control by allowing devastation on sinful humanity (I don’t believe that.), God may as well be testing our Christian response to fill the needs of deprived humanity. That includes our responsibility with other deprived third-world countries where hunger and disease are rampant – not to mention the scourge of genocide. My friend Richard, a retired UMC minister, says, “I believe charity begins at home, however according to John Wesley "The World is my Parrish". It seems to me that it becomes a both/and not an either/or.” Perhaps it begins at home because that’s where we can more readily be effective, one on one. In far off lands the individual’s resource become more difficult to apply, except through a collective voice or financial support of an organization, such as the United Methodist Committee on Relief. Additionally, The Salvation Army in its William Booth design is one of the most effective world wide in relief – to serve those of the least of us. (I have attached herewith an article, from Wall Street Journal’s 9-29-05 edition, highlighting the Army’s relief work in the Gulf area, which also describes difficulties of Red Cross. Please understand this inclusion is in no way to put down the RC. I have known people who admirably work for RC and I know it plays a very important role.)

At my church service last Sunday, our preacher said, “Christianity is not a “religion”; it’s a relationship with God through Jesus Christ.”

Unequivocally, Jesus did practice a relationship with God by tending to the sheep, serving mankind. He was SERVANT. He expressed that “God is Love” through the indisputable practice of His service and compassion to the “least of those among the flock”. Jesus did say in Mark 12: 29th “The first of all the commandments is: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. 30 And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment. 31 And the second, like it, is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” Luke 6: 27 “But I say to you who hear: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28 bless those who curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you. 29 To him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer the other also. And from him who takes away your cloak, do not withhold your tunic either. 30 Give to everyone who asks of you. And from him who takes away your goods do not ask them back. 31 And just as you want men to do to you, you also do to them likewise.” Jesus does not stop here; He continues the exhortation of His “Rules of Kingdom Life.” These are hard words, and I dare say few Christians, including fundamentalists who say they believe in literal interpretation, make a serious attempt to live by them.

In light of the recent scourge of humanity wrought by recent natural disasters, not to mention starvation and genocide in other parts of the world, will we endeavor to be more than a token for Jesus’ Kingdom here on earth? If we “love our neighbor as our self” (And we can only love God if we do love our neighbor as ourself.) it does require more than just the lip service or a token: “I believe in Jesus as my Lord and Savior, and if you’ll do the same everything will be ok.”

Albert Nolan (who would make the case that scriptures support Jesus’ intent for His ministry to be more an implementation of service and compassion for neighbor than a true doctrine) in his book Jesus before Christianity:
· “He himself (Jesus) did not regard the truth as something we simply ‘uphold’ and ‘maintain’, but something we choose to live and ex­perience. So that our search, like his search, is primarily a search for orthopraxis (true practice) rather than orthodoxy (true doc­trine). Only a true practice of the faith can verify what we be­lieve.” “Jesus can help us to understand the voice of Truth but, in the last analysis, it is we who must decide and act.”

“God is still speaking” is the sign I saw at the entrance of a United Church of Christ recently. If God is still speaking, will God speak through righteous acts of good deeds we uphold in our relationship with God through Jesus in His “Rules of Kingdom Life” here and now --- or will we concede government’s further financial-hole digging? What’s better: to pay in taxes or charity? Will enough Mother Teresas come forth with hands of love and purses open?

Thanks to everyone who supports “those of the least of us.”

‘’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’

In a related article: Church Must Reclaim Mandate to Provide for the Needy
http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/9/272005d.asp
· Excerpt: We have to raise up people to understand that government cannot protect them," Daubenmire says. In fact, the former high school coach contends, "It's not the role of government to protect them, and it's time for the Church to reclaim the job that we've been mandated to do -- to feed the hungry and to clothe the naked and to reach out to those that are hurting. Those are Christ-ordained mandates that the Church must do, and we want to help wean people off of federal government."

‘’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL - SEPTEMBER 29, 2005

Along Battered Gulf, Katrina Aid Stirs Unintended Rivalry

Salvation Army Wins Hearts, Red Cross Faces Critics;
Two Different Missions

By CHAD TERHUNE
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
September 29, 2005; Page A1

EAST BILOXI, Miss.-- The town hall meeting last week started like a church revival, with more than 200 Katrina survivors singing "Amazing Grace" under a big red tent on a football field here.

The opening prayer asked the Lord to strengthen hands, feet and minds for the rebuilding ahead. Then city officials and residents counted their blessings, thanking the dozens of volunteers who had arrived here after the storm and the donors who had sent money and supplies. People in the crowd saved their biggest applause for the Salvation Army.

[Eula Crowell]" They were the only ones here in the beginning," Eula Crowell, 57 years old, said after the meeting. She lost her house to the massive storm surge that inundated East Biloxi, where many of the city’s poorest people live. For the past month, she has relied on the Salvation Army for water, hot meals, groceries and other basic goods. The group also gave her $50.

The Salvation Army has the biggest presence among the nonprofit groups and churches helping out at East Biloxi's Yankie Stadium, the hub of local relief efforts. Volunteers live in tents on the football field -- "Camp Bayou," as some call it. In the parking lot, volunteers unload pallets of water, apple juice, canned goods and diapers. Last week, the Salvation Army began passing out boxes of cleaning supplies.

The American Red Cross was mentioned at the meeting too, but in a different way. "We want to know where the money is," Ms. Crowell said when she cornered a Red Cross official who attended the gathering. "All these people across America are giving money over the TV. I would tell them to put it back in their pocket."

Across the hurricane disaster zone, stretching from Alabama to Texas, an unexpected and unintended rivalry has developed between the two nonprofit organizations most closely associated with the aftermath of calamity. Here in some of the poorest parts of Mississippi and much of the Gulf Coast, the Salvation Army is drawing praise for its swift arrival in the most distressed areas and clearly winning the hearts of desperate residents. To some people here, the Red Cross, under growing criticism for letting bureaucratic hurdles slow down aid in the disaster area, suffers by comparison.

The Salvation Army is helped by its military-style structure, which is designed for rapid mobilization and which puts a premium on training people in advance to deal with disasters. It can draw on more than 65,000 employees in the U.S., nearly double the paid staff of the Red Cross.

The Salvation Army's daily work in permanent shelters with the homeless and poor and with people trying to put their lives back together after an apartment fire or years of alcohol and drug abuse helps too. The organization’s focus on alleviating human suffering in the name of Jesus Christ resonates in this section of the Bible Belt.

Lightning Rod

The Red Cross, the world's dominant relief group, is naturally a lightning rod for criticism. Among aid groups, it stands out for its international reach, breadth of services and fund-raising prowess. The organization has raised nearly $1 billion in donations since Katrina hit, representing about seven of every 10 dollars given for hurricane relief, according to the Chronicle of Philanthropy.

The Red Cross has been more ambitious than any other organization in the Katrina aftermath, dispatching 163,000 staff and volunteers to shelters and aid centers. Many are volunteers working in a disaster for the first time and armed with only a few hours of training. Several volunteers at the Baton Rouge River Center, one of the largest Red Cross shelters, quit over the disorganization they saw there. Others were sent home early because they couldn't handle the work emotionally, according to volunteers there.

Charlotte McGee of Harvey, La., has slept in the Baton Rouge River Center auditorium for three weeks along with four daughters and four grandchildren. "Everyone in here I talk to is complaining about the same things. These volunteers just treat us like crap," Ms. McGee said. "We don't want to be here, either, but if you didn't volunteer for the right reasons, then go back home."

Only people living at the Baton Rouge shelter could apply for emergency financial aid there. Volunteers say that rule frustrated many other storm victims who walked in seeking help and got a flier instead urging them to keep calling a busy toll-free number. The Red Cross pays out $360 for a single person to $1,565 for a family of five or more.

The Red Cross acknowledges that its phone lines have been overwhelmed. It is expanding its phone bank operations, hoping to process up to 40,000 financial-aid claims per day.

A spokeswoman for the Red Cross says the disaster is so massive that complaints and glitches are inevitable. And with more than 100,000 volunteers in the field, some inevitably won't be up to the job. "We were challenged like never before" by Katrina, said Devorah Goldburg, spokeswoman for the Red Cross in Washington. "I think we rose to the challenge. We know we are not perfect. We are asking people to be patient with us."

Lisa Burbridge, an East Biloxi resident whose home was flooded, said she had no luck over the phone so she waited more than five hours at a Red Cross financial-assistance center on Saturday, Sept. 17. But it never opened that day. Late that evening, a police officer got on a bullhorn and told people waiting to go home empty-handed. "There is no organization from the Red Cross," said Ms. Burbridge. She has depended on groceries and other donated goods from the Salvation Army for the past month. "Thank God for them."

Both the Salvation Army and the Red Cross say they don't see themselves in competition and that the need for hurricane relief far surpasses the capability of any one organization. Salvation Army officials declined to comment on the Red Cross at all. Ms. Goldburg of the Red Cross said: "We think it's great the Salvation Army is out there. ...Our missions are a little bit different."

No one doubts that the Red Cross has touched many lives for the good in recent weeks. This past weekend, the organization housed 120,000 people in nearly 500 shelters across the country, split about evenly between people who evacuated for Katrina and Rita. The Red Cross is housing another 300,000 in hotels and has given 530,000 families some form of financial assistance.

The Salvation Army, founded in 1865 in London and best known for its bell-ringing Santas soliciting donations to red kettles outside stores between Thanksgiving and Christmas, is both an evangelical Christian church and a major relief agency. It adopted a quasi military command structure in 1878, and today it still uses uniforms and military ranks for its 3,700 "officers," who are also ordained ministers. It has an additional 62,000 employees at its 9,000 Salvation Army centers around the country, which usually hold weekly worship services.

Tight Budget

Outside management experts have credited the Salvation Army with operating efficiently on a tight budget. That reputation has served it well as it took on a larger and larger role in disaster response since Hurricane Andrew in 1992 and the Northridge, Calif., earthquake two years later. Now that immediate assistance has been given, Salvation Army employees are beginning to work with residents on their long-term needs for housing, furniture, employment and help with utility bills and other financial issues.

"We do this extremely well because we are already there 365 days a year serving the poorest of the poor in these communities," said Maj. George Hood, national community relations secretary for the Salvation Army. "We are serving many of the same clients, but now they don't have homes."

The Salvation Army estimates it has helped about 500,000 storm victims in the past month by serving 4.3 million meals and handing out groceries, store vouchers, mops and buckets and other essential goods. It has rotated a team of about 12,000 employees and 28,000 volunteers into the field on two-week stints, drawing on donations of $185 million so far.

No Transportation

In East Biloxi, where many of the African-American, Hispanic and Vietnamese families had no cars or lost them in the storm, Ms. Crowell said she had no transportation to reach the closest Red Cross financial-aid center about 10 miles away. Many of the roads remain impassable, and traffic is painfully slow.

Brian Fern, an American Red Cross official on assignment from Muncie, Ind., looked Ms. Crowell in the eye after the town hall meeting and said, "I understand ma'am. We are stretched. We are stretched. We will have a site in East Biloxi soon. But I don't know where yet."

Frustrated that the Red Cross hadn't shown up, local math teacher Susan Turner took matters into her own hands. She became a Red Cross volunteer and began taking down people's information for cash payments under a small white tent in East Biloxi. "The Red Cross didn't do anything for us. They know they are in trouble just like FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency],” Ms. Turner said.

Late last week, nearly 100 people waited on folding chairs for their turn to apply for cash grants. Ms. Turner drives the paperwork each afternoon to the closest Red Cross center and retrieves the checks about two days later. She began passing out some of the first checks over the weekend.

Daniel Jackson, 59, was grateful Ms. Turner was there to fill out his application. He was set to receive $965. "We lost everything we got," said Mr. Jackson. His car was destroyed by the flooding. He says he needs money to pay his bills and to buy clothes for his 16-year-old daughter and himself. His wife is in a Biloxi hospital with lung cancer.

The Red Cross says it has struggled to have a presence in some of the hardest-hit areas because there are few buildings left standing with adequate space and parking for the large number of storm victims expected to show up. That was the challenge in East Biloxi.

"We are not in every neighborhood we need to be. We are in every neighborhood we can be," said Laura Howe, a spokeswoman for the Red Cross in Mississippi.

This week, a month after Katrina flattened most of East Biloxi, the Red Cross hoped to finally open a financial-aid center here. But the opening has been delayed.

Response to Conservative/Liberal Talk Radio


Response to Conservative/Liberal Radio
9-30-05
‘’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’
Read the original post (Conservative/Liberal Talk Radio) which prompted these responses at:

http://criticalactions-what-isyour-opinion.blogspot.com/2006/01/conservativeliberal-talk-radio.html

Friday, September 30, 2005 (This is my answer to Jeff’s response tagged below z-bar (zzzzz).

Jeff, thanks for your response.
You make some interesting points.
As I begin this response, I include an excerpt from my this-morning devotion, written by Lloyd John Ogilvie, a former chaplain of the US Senate – because it’s an enlightening lead-in to the problem we discuss:
  • “Marriages are crippled, families are hurt, friendships are destroyed, companies are unproductive, cities are blighted by unresolved social problems, and government is often debilitated by people who become party to acrimonious discord because of loyalty to their parties rather than what’s best for the nation.” (This theme is resounded again in a current article written today.)
First, I prefer not to put things into a political context (liberal or conservative for that matter), even though conservative/liberal-talk radios are political arms. The meanings of the words: liberal and conservative (LC) have been misrepresented and ill defined. To be a liberal has become a stigmatization. To be a conservative no longer has the connotation (meaning) of the traditional conservative of years past. If you could pull out all the extremist elements (normally lumped in one or the other) and how you suggest they react (Both sides indulge in personal attacks. Have you heard of Ann Coulter?), then there could be an honest, rational discussion.
You are right about liberals not having a cohesive voice, for there is no one to lead.
It’s the fanatical rhetoric taunted on the LC-talk shows that lumps each other to be the norm of their respective parties. Of recent the so-called conservative voice for agenda and message has become discombobulated, because many of the traditional conservatives have backed away, speaking out in disagreement with the administration. There are progressive liberals and conservatives of the traditional values that we in either stream may proudly identify with or respectfully disagree. These truly responsible progressive leaders must be our advocates in practice and persuasion to bring back rational thought-processes for civility in politics and governance. The practice and persuasion must first be born of a respectful character in the masses, lead by citizens who demand better from their representatives or others who may callously erode ethics in governmental and political processes.
The ballyhoo of radio-talk shows, irresponsible political hacks, and other extremist --- to some extent, are a reflection of the character of America’s citizenry. Yes, the airwaves support what we listen to, regardless of content. That’s the reality of commercialism.
On a brighter note two US House Representatives, good decent men, a Republican and a Democrat, have recognized the degeneration of respectfulness within the US House of Representatives and are trying to do something about it. I salute them for their efforts through the Center Aisle Caucus.
http://www.house.gov/apps/list/speech/il15_johnson/021605center.html
  • Washington, D.C. - U.S. Reps. Steve Israel (D-Long Island, NY) and Tim Johnson (R-Urbana, IL) announced the formation of the Center Aisle Caucus today alongside Former Speaker of the House Thomas Foley (D-WA) and former House Republican Leader Bob Michel (R-IL). The Center Aisle Caucus will be an inter-party group of House Members committed to working cooperatively to promote mutual respect and discourage personal attacks and achieving a more respectful and civil climate for conducting the nation’s business.
Government and politics need more level-headed voices, who refrain from biased-political instincts --- rather to serve the common good of all people, like David Gergen. http://www.davidgergen.com/ Gergen has worked for Republican and Democrat administrations. More Chuck Hagels (R) would serve our country with great honor.
David Brooks gave an excellent summation on the mark when he says politicians need Deaniac hyper-partisanship to organize hatred around our top leaders; it’s this hate-mongering-type partisanship that keeps breeding an infectious disease. LC-Talk-radio disease!
  • http://select.nytimes.com/2005/09/29/opinion/29brooks.html?th&emc=th (also in full print in today’s editorial section of N&O) Excerpt: “Will we learn from DeLay's fall about the self-destructive nature of the team mentality? Of course not. The Democrats have drawn the 10-years-out-of-date conclusion that in order to win, they need to be just like Tom DeLay. They need to rigidly hew to orthodoxy. They need Deaniac hyperpartisanship. They need to organize their hatreds around Bush the way the Republicans did around Clinton.”
One may listen to LC-talk radio with an understanding of its biased content. It is raw politics, used too many times to distort truth. A steady diet could lead to nausea or, in the worst, a bedeviled inflated bloviation. Neither adds to the good of civil discourse. If things improve it will begin with you and me. Will we have the decency to exercise prudence in respectfulness and demand the same from those who purport to represent us?
I’m not sure what you meant by your question: Is this not voice of the people being the voice of g-d?
Best wishes,
Cornell
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
9-30-05
Cornell,
I read the forward you sent out regarding the ongoing battle of the media libs and conservatives with much interest. The conservatives indeed do have an agenda and are not ashamed to spell it out. Liberals for the most part have difficulty in putting forward their actual viewpoints, i.e. the desire to reduce liberties claiming that it is for the common good to follow their dictates.
Today's liberals cannot enter into logical discussions to backup their political goals. Most will not tolerate reasonable disagreement with their positions. Some will go off on non-linear tangents and emotional appeals to make their arguments. A few will go on a personal attack of their opposition.
Conservatives make the effort to expalin their positions in rational terms. To be sure, some can be abrasive and sarcastic-- this is a methodology to break through the cynicism of the masses that these media pundits rely upon for ratings. It's a tough audience out there and it takes a measure of 'schtick' to build and hold that audience. Consider that those such as Limbaugh, Boortz, Hennety, et al, could not remain on the air without commercial support.
Is this not voice of the people being the voice of g-d? Or is this all just more grist for the millstone of public consumption?
Regards, Jeff