JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN ETHICS VOLUME 11, NUMBER 3 AGGREGATE ISSUE 55 SUMMER 2005 “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, ‘Make straight the way of the Lord.’”Isaiah 40:3; John 1:23 Lessons From Shadowland The struggles of C. S. Lewis in Shadowland I had read about and viewed in the screen drama. I never expected to visit that land myself. Yet Job-like, it crashed in upon our family without warning. A regular exam. A suspicious shadow. A biopsy. The startling words from the physician—“You have breast cancer.” Neither Audra nor I have ever expected immunity from disease or difficulty. Yet somehow we believed cancer would never visit our home. For most of our adult life we have eaten the right foods, exercised vigorously, avoided all cancer-causing agents, and taken regular exams. None of Audra’s four older sisters or her mother had this disease. But the tests were conclusive: aggressive invasive ductal adenocarcinoma. The months of April and May have been hectic, confusing, and often like a roller-coaster ride. A wonderful surgeon explained with empathy and clarity Audra’s condition. We had discovered the cancer early. A lumpectomy was needed, followed by radiation. We were elated. Our daughters and a son-in-law (a physician also) stood outside the surgeon’s office hugging, crying, laughing, and praying—thanking God for the good news. The surgery
went so well—after three hours, Audra was released and she experienced no pain
at all. The best news was no cancer found in the margins and none in the four
lymph nodes removed. Again we were elated. In the waiting room of the However, a roller-coaster plunge was ahead. The pathology report discovered the tumor was larger than expected—chemotherapy was recommended. Consultation with an oncologist confirmed the need for six treatments, followed by radiation. Although he noted, “You are cancer free,” he also said, “There is a possibility of recurrence. The treatments are insurance—they will reduce the risk by about 15%.” For almost fifty years I have ministered to people experiencing grief, praying with them, consoling them, and sometimes saying, “I understand.” But I really didn’t. Until Shadowland came to me, I didn’t know the depths of real grief. I had taught and preached about Kubler-Ross’s stages of grief, explaining the progression from Denial to Anger to Bargaining to Depression to Acceptance. But it is different on the other side—and that is where I was. I found myself wandering between these different emotions, sometimes in disbelief, often feeling angry—not at God, but angry that my sweet, kind, supportive wife was going through this. I don’t believe I ever “bargained” with God for her cure, although one night I slipped out of my bed into another room, and cried my heart out to God asking for mercy and grace. I know as one who has conducted so many funerals that we all die. And as a believer in Jesus, I know death is just a doorway into the presence of God. As a pastor and a theology teacher, I KNOW the right answers, but Shadowland is not about knowing—it’s about feeling and experiencing and not knowing. It is about life. As strange as this may sound, I’ve told folks that my experience is much like what I’ve seen at funerals, as relatives and friends gather to remember a loved one. It is a sad occasion, but it is also a time of joy, unity, shared love, and the lessons of Shadowland, which help us rediscover life. For our family, these lessons blessed us all.
In
Pilgrim’s Progress, the hero Christian journeyed from the City of We’ve Got Mail “Sometimes
I feel so alone in Baptist life, then your magazine comes and I say, ‘I’m not
the only one out here. There are others like me.’ And I keep on believing and
praying and hoping that one day we will become Baptists again. “Thanks a
million for the Valentine books! I have given one to David, one to Lan, and two
to the church library. I trust they will achieve wide readership.” “The
journal is like manna to my hungry soul—hungry for contact with real Baptist
Christians—and all bonafide followers of our Lord. It was my joy and privilege
for thirty-five years to teach at our “late” seminary—Southwestern—having been
displaced by the present enforcers of fundamentalism.” “I wrote
Foy and congratulated him on the publication of his book. Now I want to
congratulate you on the super job you do . . . so much food for thought!” “Reading
O’Brien’s Pilgrim in a “Thanks for
CET—I enjoy every issue. And, thanks for Breakfast at the Elite Café. I spent
more time there than I should have when a student at Baylor. . . . When I came
to the Baptist Message [as editor], it had not printed photos of blacks ‘unless
they were in a foreign mission situation that included a white SBC missionary.’
I changed that policy [and] I wrote an editorial about race . . the only time
in 27 years I have ever really been afraid for my life.” “I’m
greatly appreciative of my copy of Foy’s new book . . . Thank you for all the
good work you do promoting Christian ethics.” “I read
Breakfast at the Elite Café and it brought back many memories of my days at
Baylor in the early forties. I was not aware that Don was your brother . . . a
great football player. I also enjoyed the articles on Fundamentalism and
Reflections of an SBC Refugee. I regret that I have been driven out of the
denomination I loved and served. SAD!” “Every
issue, every article enriches my life and challenges me to be a better person.” “I am with
a group of men who do church construction as a mission project. We share
devotions with each other three times a day. I plan to use Foy Valentine’s
article, “Ich Glaube an Gott.” Could I have some copies to share to introduce
our men to CET?” “I find
myself saying with Elijah, ‘Lord, all have forsaken you and I alone am left’ or
“Lord, am I wrong?’ Then comes the current issue of CET holding fast, faithful
to our Lord and my hope and faith are renewed and strengthened. Praise God!” “I commend
you for maintaining the Maston-Valentine et. al. tradition by emphasizing the
integral role of ethics in the Christian faith. Its absence is sadly needed in
the SBC leadership.” “Now that I
am 84 years of age this 2004 book is even more delightful reading! Foy and
Brooks Hays, along with Roselyn and Jimmy Carter have kept my faith in humanity
alive and well!” “I would
love to give each of my Reba Class members at South Main BC one of Foy’s
books—we have 48 on roll. I am hoping to get them to subscribe to CET.” “I should
like this gift marked in memory of my old friend, Howard Bramlette, for many
years a valued staff member of the Student Dept. of the SBC and one of many who
were ‘purged’ after the fundamentalist takeover.” Why Are We Here? Note: This keynote address was delivered at the Inaugural
Convocation of the Baptist Seminary of Kentucky on A certain divinity school dean made it his practice to welcome new students to the campus by urging them to give themselves seriously and with discipline to their studies while in school. He told them it was likely to be their last chance for an extended period to read, think, and try to puzzle out the nature of the faith they would seek to communicate in their vocations. “You need to know,” he said, “that when you get out of here and take up your vocations, no matter what you say, some people will believe you!” Those of us who’ve been around divinity schools and seminaries very much would concur in that assessment. The call of God to vocational ministry can be daunting if not a terrifying thing. That call needs a period to “puzzle out the nature of the faith” which we are called on to articulate. The Baptist Seminary of Kentucky exists to provide such a period, and we’re here today to celebrate this new educational dream and the reality which it is now becoming. We’re here because of the faithfulness of Baptist leaders who pointed the way . . . because of Baptist prayers which have sought the Spirit’s guidance . . . because of grassroots support from men and women across our state (and elsewhere) who believe in this dream . . . and because of the empowering grace of a God who goes on calling people forward into the knowing and doing of God’s purposes in our time. And I would urge us, even at this early hour in our journey together, to remember often that confession of faith found in a wonderful African-American song:
For example, we’re here Because Of A History Worth Remembering. Bill Moyers calls the digital clock one of the signs of our time—no view of any past or future hours or minutes, just the present moment. But someone has wisely noted that we ought to learn from the past and from other people . . . since life’s too short to make all the mistakes ourselves! As spotty and uneven as it may be, Baptist history at its best contains a bedrock conviction about the priesthood of all believers. It grows directly out of New Testament teaching and practice. All believers in Christ are included in the salvation and service of the Gospel. And when, in some of the latest New Testament writings, some distinctions between clergy and laity begin to emerge, they are clearly distinctions of function and not of status. All of God’s people are called to be servant-priests. The Protestant reformers and other voices of dissent in the sixteenth century recovered that concept of an all-inclusive faith and practice. Clergy? Yes—as preachers and teachers of the Word, set aside for specific pastoral ministry within the Body of Christ. But all believers are to serve the cause of Christ, and no vocation is less or more important than another. The Anabaptists (in many ways, our spiritual forebears) went even further. Theirs was a “people’s church” movement with the basic assumption that the members themselves were indeed the major carriers, teachers, and preachers of the Christian faith. Some historians have said that it wasn’t that the Anabaptists had no clergy; actually, they had no laity. Every believer a minister! My So, when we
Baptists got to Sometimes
that’s been messy and unsatisfying. Our preachers weren’t as well educated as
others in those early days. Pastors and lay leaders got crossed up with each
other in church fights and splits (you may recall the saying that Baptists get
along best in small groups—(preferably of one person each !). But freedom has
been worth the risk. And today, even with quality theological education for our
clergy, in a church full of priests and ministers, it is still servant
leadership to which we are called ( The autocratic, CEO, lord-and-master-pastor model which would now clergify our churches and place power in the hands of a pastoral elite may well be a quicker way to build a statistically and financially successful organization than by the slower, uneven path of participatory democracy. But the Church is not called to make the Fortune 500 list. We are called to be the body of a Servant Lord at work in the world. And we cannot greatly value those to whom we witness and minister on the outside of our churches at the same time that we belittle the role of lay believers on the inside. The Baptist Seminary of Kentucky knows about inclusive priesthood and servant ministry. It’s a convictional incentive which springs from our history—a history worth remembering. We are here
also Because Of A Heritage Worth Preserving. We now live in what most pundits
are calling a “post-denominational” age. The brand-name loyalties of earlier
days don’t seem to matter as much. It’s a spiritual smorgasbord these days, and
people are shopping in more places than ever. Nearly 7% of our national
population is into some form of New Age experience. Islam is the world’s
fastest growing religion. I saw a cartoon where one guy asks his buddy, “Have
you explored the mysteries of an Eastern religions?” His friend replied, “Yes,
I was a Methodist once in Baptist triumphalism (“God’s Last and Only Hope”) was never a good thing, and it now seems more arrogant and irrelevant than ever . . . especially when you recall recent Southern Baptist history. So when one denominational leader asked a few years back, “Where would God be without Baptist?” I’m ready to laugh and say, “In many cases, probably a lot better off!” Still, we
do all right at times. On a Sunday afternoon down in Down in The
So when the Baptist World Alliance met in its first congress in 1906, Alexander Maclaren insisted that the first official action be for those present to stand and recite the Apostles’ Creed—affirming Baptist ties to the great, historic faith of the larger Church. I’m affirming here that our contribution to the larger Body of Christ is not insignificant. Though not unique to us in every particular, we do have a heritage worthy of preservation—precisely because of its ongoing relevance in a post-denominational time. It is a heritage of soul competency and the freedom to make spiritual choices like a personal profession of faith, intercessory prayer, and personal accountability in spiritual gifts for ministry in the church and to the world. We believe in no coerced conscience; faith must be freely chosen and expressed, or it cannot be faith. Ours is a heritage that affirms the authority of scripture, alongside the obligation to be responsible interpreters. Our heritage includes local church autonomy and the mandate to do mission and ministry in the immediate context as well as to the “uttermost part of the earth.” And every Baptist congregation is free to ordain any and all of those it deems called by God to provide leadership in such work. Ours is a heritage of religious freedom and church-state separation. Since we were birthed in dissent from state churches and compulsory religion, we Baptist know well the necessity for freedom of or from religion in a pluralistic society. We fully understand that words like “faith” and “forced” don’t belong in the same sentence. Our
pastoral secretary at Maeyken Wens, an Anabaptist woman of the sixteenth century, was arrested for preaching the Gospel as she understood it from her own study of scripture. She was imprisoned and tortured and, refusing to recant, was sentenced to death by burning. Part of her sentence by the court was that her tongue be screwed to the roof of her mouth so that she might not preach on the way to her execution. Her teenage son took his younger brother to the execution and, when it was over, they searched the ashes to find the screw with which their mother’s tongue had been silenced. It was a precious symbol of an unfettered conscience! And in the
middle of the next century, British Baptist John Bunyan was put in We’re here
today, then, because of a heritage which is worth preserving. Roger Williams of
Still, there’s another convictional incentive which brings us here, namely, A Task Worth Doing. Hear this from our mission statement: The Baptist Seminary of Kentucky will provide Christian theological education committed to spiritual depth, intellectual honesty and moral integrity. This has never been more urgent. We’re at this historic moment in Baptist theological education because of denominational leaders who, nearly twenty-five years ago, spoke of wanting parity. Their focus, however, turned quickly to talk of purity . . . and to the tasks of purging and control. When Southern Baptists wrote their first confession of faith in 1925, historian W. W. Barnes warned us that there might come a time when such confessions could become weapons to be used in the name of orthodoxy. What a prophet he turned out to be! We have watched a cadre of “godly men” strive to turn theological education into indoctrination . . . to make robots and shibboleth-sayers of our brightest young women and men . . . to turn wonderful teachers and scholars into intellectual handmaidens or eunuchs (or to force them from our faculties and out of our schools). Thank God for a place like the Baptist Seminary of Kentucky where academic freedom lives, so that intellectual curiosity and spiritual integrity might thrive as well! This new educational dream, simply put, is to foster and maintain such a climate in which to train those whom God is calling to do the work of vocational ministry. A look at our curriculum will tell you that here we have scholarship balanced with spirituality. Here is introspection balanced with witness. Here is the quest both to understand and to apply the meaning of holy scripture to daily life. Ours is a faculty committed to learning Christ, sharing Christ, and doing the ministry of Christ in a spiritually-hungry cultural context. And it is a time of spiritual hunger in our culture. The ravages of the human journey alone will create a search for faith. What was it that Joseph Parker said? Preach to hurting people and you will always have a congregation. But these days I hear other voices as well: “Can you show me a faith that’s able to connect the dots of life and death and meaning?” “Now that the scientific and technological saviors of modernism have come up short, is there a way to tap into something deeper?” “All the food and drink I can consume, all the dollars I can make, all the influence I can wield, all of it together forces me to ask if there’s not something I haven’t found. Is there something more . . . something of spirit . . . of God?” Such yearnings recall Thomas Merton’s comment that every now and then the Church ought to ask itself, “What do we have to offer the world that the world doesn’t have too much of already?” Our educational dream here is to train women and men to keep asking and answering that question, so that believers in Christ may become disciples and not just converts. Because scattered across the landscape of institutional Christianity are a lot of people with do-it-yourself religion, a collage of god-scraps gathered from all over—about “a mile wide and an inch deep.” There are yet others, very religious folks, who are so narrow they can look through a keyhole with both eyes at the same time. Their take on Christian truth is “my way or the highway.” And there are many who gush with energy and enthusiasm for everything but hard questions and serious thought. They’re spiritually brain-dead, except for the sounds of pious clichés and breezy god-talk. Surely we can love the Lord our God with all our hearts and minds better than this! It will help if we have trained and committed leaders, taught in places like the Baptist Seminary of Kentucky. Years ago,
when he was teaching homiletics at Ours is a task worth doing, and we will take that task seriously . . . along with those persons and churches which it encompasses. One other thing, please. This dream will be realized best in A Community Worth Gathering. As a brand new school, our start-up numbers are modest . . . but we do have numbers! A community is gathering to learn and worship and grow together. That fact is not to be overlooked or under-valued. Here’s what I mean. That fact is not to be overlooked or under-valued. Here’s what I mean. Long before there was a canonized Bible, there were churches, faith communities. In fact, the New Testament was written largely to provide those early congregations with documentation and instruction. So the Church is the bridge over which the Bible has come to us. Thus, today, it is in a gathered faith community that our conversations with scripture and all of Christian theology will be most useful. Hear me, I do not mean to minimize personal understanding, but what a help it is to have believers who will give feedback . . . provide fresh information . . . think different thoughts . . . ask different questions . . . and bring diverse ideas to the table. In an earlier time (and before the use of inclusive language) it was cogently said that “a wise person makes up his mind for himself, but only a fool makes up his mind by himself.” The learning of faith and faithful leadership is too important for us to be victims of our own untested assumptions, superstitions, or ignorance. We need each other for clarity and focus. Already in
these early months of this fresh, new dream we have a gathering community of
faculty and students where Christian commitment and intellectual ferment hold
exciting promise for the One of the
friendships I made in Today, I’ve talked about a few things not to be left behind as we pursue this new educational dram. I would urge us, however, to turn loose and leave behind other things—like our grief, our anger, and (most of all) our despair and hopelessness. Let them go! God is obviously doing new things in our time, and God welcomes partners. Let us go on—with deep, deep trust and great, great joy! The Ten Commandments and
Public Piety: The Contrasting Styles of Jesus and Judge Roy Moore Judge Roy
Moore has emerged as one of Recent polls indicate that as many as two-thirds of Americans sided with Judge Moore in his quest to have the massive display of the Ten Commandments serve as a permanent symbol of the reality of God in American life. Judge Moore maintains that it is his right, even his duty, as a public servant to “acknowledge God” as the Supreme Ruler of the Universe and the foundation of all American law, and that this was best achieved during his tenure as a judge by displaying the Ten Commandments monument prominently in the state’s chief courthouse of which he served as chief justice. Even after
a federal district court and a federal appeals court held that the Ten
Commandments monument constituted an “establishment “ of religion in violation
of the First Amendment and the monument was removed, Judge Moore insisted that
he was right and the courts were wrong. Then, after the U.S. Supreme Court
declined to hear the case and a State of Alabama Judicial Ethics Commission
stripped him of his office as chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, Judge
Moore began championing his cause around the nation in television interviews,
public speeches, and internet sites set up to educate the world about his
mission. How should we evaluate Judge Moore’s stance? Is he indeed a hero or just a defiant, misguided and defrocked judge? How should Christians regard his behavior? Most importantly, can we look at what Jesus said and did for some measure of guidance? And what about the separation of church and state principle that was the basis for the courts’ rulings that Judge Moore’s monument was a violation of the Constitution? Is there really a biblical basis for adhering to the separation of church and state? Is Separation of Church and State Really in the Bible? The Bible is not a blueprint for political ordering—unless of course, one wishes to restore the theocratic system that was central to the Old Testament Hebrew order. In the New Testament, however, the Mosaic Law is expressly repudiated; the people covered by a “New” Covenant—Christians are saved by grace, not by strict adherence to the law. The end of theocracy means the end of the fusion of religious and state authority. By teaching that Christians should “render unto Caesar that which belongs to Caesar and unto God that which belongs to God,” Jesus was recognizing the distinctively different roles of church and state. Christians owe secular duties to the state and spiritual duties to God. The New Testament does not teach a “pure” separation of church and state, however, since Christians are encouraged to pray for state authorities and to submit to their authority. But while submission to secular rulers is encouraged, nowhere in the New Testament is it taught that secular governments should themselves take on a religious character. Jesus modeled this quite well. He required submission to the Roman authorities, even though that government was often hostile toward Jews and celebrated the divinity of the emperor. Emperor worship was technically blasphemy under Jewish law, but Jesus never encouraged overthrowing the emperor or starting a movement to reform the Roman government to acknowledge God in a more appropriate way. Jesus never tried to make a corrupt and pagan government a “Christian nation.” He was modeling what today we call the “separation of church and state.” What is Biblical Piety? Contrast
this with the repeated assertion of Judge Moore that Jesus’
behavior can be contrasted with Judge Moore’s in other ways as well. Jesus
never suggested to public officials that they pray in public settings. His
advice to everyone was: “When you pray, go into your room, close the door and
pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in
secret, will reward you” (Mt. 6:6). Jesus modeled this by always retiring to
quiet, remote places to pray. Yet when Judge Moore was a district judge in
Jesus spent no time crafting large monuments of the Ten Commandments and erecting them in places where everyone could see them. He did not wear a Ten Commandments T-shirt or carry a copy of the Ten Commandments with him, stopping here and there to make sure they were posted in public places for all to be reminded that the law of God was the foundation of society. Jesus’ mission was not a political one, but rather a spiritual one, laboring to offer himself as the means of personal salvation to all who would hear. Jesus’ goal was to make Christians, not to Christianize the Roman government. I suspect Judge Moore wants to make Christians too, but unlike Jesus, he abuses political institutions by using them as a means to achieve his goal. Jesus
certainly did not go on the speaking circuit to convince all Romans that the Somehow I
cannot get a picture in my mind of Jesus promoting the Ten Commandments in
these rather self-indulgent ways. Moreover, Jesus never sought political office
to convey his message, yet Judge Moore is now contemplating running either for
Governor of Alabama or President of the Is Judge Moore
and his supporters claim that posting the Ten Commandments will help fill what
is increasingly becoming a “naked public square.” But our nation already
affirms in many ways the belief that God’s sovereignty extends to our national
life. The national motto, “In God We Trust,” is imprinted on our currency.
Congress and most of our state legislatures open with prayer each day led by
state-paid chaplains. We observe an annual national day of prayer. We invoke
the name of God in the Pledge of Allegiance. We observe numerous national
holidays that are religious in nature. We even affirm the right of government
bodies to display religious symbols such as crosses and menorahs, provided they
are clearly muted with secular symbols. These are generic symbols that validate
the religious character of Is There a There is actually a very simple solution to the Ten Commandments controversy. For those who think the Ten Commandments are important, they should memorize them—and have their children memorize them. In this way, they carry the truths of the Ten Commandments in their hearts, and have no need to resort to public displays. Moreover, refusing to decorate government property with the Ten Commandments respects the religious values of members of religious traditions who are offended by the displays. In the end, opposition to state-sponsored displays of the Ten Commandments does not arise out of hostility to the values set forth in the commandments. Rather, it proceeds from a deep respect for the diversity of religions that enjoy the freedom to practice their faith on American soil—those that embrace the Ten Commandments and those that do not. By adhering to the principle of separation of church and state we best fulfill the Constitution's mandate of religious liberty for all Americans and the human mandate to treat each other with respect and dignity. This is not Roy Moore’s way, but I believe that this is Jesus’ way. Note: Judge
Moore was probably given a boost in his undeclared race for governor of
EthixBytes “I have
been fed from fields I did not till. I have crossed bridges I did not build. I
have sat in the shade of trees I did not plant. I have received knowledge I did
not research.” “An
unconscious people, an indoctrinated people, a people fed only partisan
information and opinion that confirm their own bias, a people made morbidly
obese in mind and spirit by the junk food of propaganda is less inclined to put
up a fight, ask questions, and be skeptical.” “Today,
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld warned “Don’t send
your kids to Baylor. And don’t send your kids to A & M.” “We know
that when we look to Representative DeLay, we see not only a man of God but a
man who is willing to sacrifice, whatever the cost, simply to do what is right.” “Activist
courts, aided by liberal interest groups . . . have been quietly working under
the veil of the judiciary, like thieves in the night, to rob us of our
Christian heritage and our religious freedoms.” “A
casino-rich tribe [Coushatta Indians in “People try
to make a sharp distinction between interpreting the law and legislating from
the bench. But which one that is, is often in the eye of the beholder.” “The
separation of church and state became a concept in the law in 1947. Until then,
it never existed. It’s not in the constitution. It came out of a letter that “I first
thought we were fighting for God, but then I learned we were fighting for
wealth and land.” “I met
Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The
difference is that Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns, and to give him
maps the better to target those guns.” “The ethics
of war—when we go to war, how we go to war, and whether we tell the truth about
going to war—are central to religious ethics.” “Religious
groups who want to erect religious symbols in public places must only keep
their mouths shut about the religious reasons for doing this, pretend they’re
all secular, and they have a good chance of getting away with it.” “Should any
political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance and
eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again
in our political history.” “Our job is
to reclaim “Consumerism
is not so much about having more as it is about having something else. . . .
What marks consumerism as something new is its tendency to reduce everything,
both the material and the spiritual, to a commodity able to be exchanged.” “President
Bush said most of his tax cuts are for low and middle-income Americans. In
fact, most—53%—will go to people with incomes in the top 10% over the first 15
years of the cuts. More than 15% will go just to the top 0.1%. “Growing at
a rate of about 900 inmates each week [since mid-2003], the nation’s prisons
and jails held 2.1 million people, or one in every 138 U.S. residents . . .
[due to] laws and practices that have focused on punishment and prison as our
primary response to crime.” “After
seven years of marriage, I’m sure of two things—first, never wallpaper
together, and second, you’ll need two bathrooms, both for her. The rest is a
mystery, but a mystery I love to be involved in.” The President At President Bush delivered his first 2005 commencement address on
May 21 at In the past two months alone, GOP leaders have suggested God is on their side in public discussions about the medical care of Terri Schiavo, judicial-nominee votes in the U.S. Senate, and the treatment of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay over charges of unethical conduct. This follows an election in which the president regularly spoke of the need for government to support “faith-based” initiatives, a religiously grounded “culture of life,” and traditional marriage. For some time now there has been heated debate about whether President Bush is different from other presidents in his wielding of religious rhetoric. He is. What sets Bush apart is both how much he talks about God and what he says when he does so. In his Inaugural and State of the Union addresses earlier this year, Bush referenced God eleven times. This came on the heels of twenty-four invocations of God in his first-term Inaugural and State of the Union addresses. No president since Franklin Roosevelt took office in 1933 has mentioned God so often in these high-state settings. The president nearest Bush's average of 5.8 references per each of
these addresses was Ronald Reagan, who averaged 5.3 references in his
comparable speeches. No one else has come close. Jimmy Carter, widely considered
to be as pious as they come among Bush also talks about God differently than have most other modern
presidents. Presidents since For example, in 1941, Roosevelt, in a famous address delineating
four essential freedoms threatened by fascism, said: “This nation has placed
its destiny in the hands and heads and hearts of its millions of free men and
women; and its faith in freedom under the guidance of God.” Similarly, John F.
Kennedy, in 1962, during the height of the Cold War, said: “[N]o nation has
ever been so ready to seize the burden and the glory of freedom. And in this
high endeavor, may God watch over the Contrast these statements, in which presidents requested divine
guidance, with Bush's claim in 2003 that “Americans are a free people, who know
that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The
liberty we prize is not Such certainty about God's will is troubling when found in a
president and administration not known for kindly brooking dissent. This makes
it particularly noteworthy that Bush encountered something in his visit to More than 800 faculty, alumni, students, and friends of the college signed a letter published by the Grand Rapids Press, decrying Bush administration policies. The letter included these words: “By their deeds ye shall know them, says the Bible. Your deeds, Mr. President—neglecting the needy to coddle the rich, desecrating the environment, and misleading the country into war—do not exemplify the faith we live by.” Another letter expressing similar sentiments was signed by one-third of Calvin's faculty, while dozens of graduating seniors wore stickers on their caps and gowns that read, “God is not a Democrat or a Republican.” Such courageous words prompt the hope that, in these challenging times, politicians who are quick to speak about God might also learn to listen. Note: David Domke is an Associate Professor in the Department of
Communication at the “Justice”
Or “Just-Us” Sunday Much was written and said during the run up to and aftermath of the so-called “Justice Sunday: Stop the Filibuster Against People of Faith”—or as Bob Edgar, of the National Council of Churches, called it, “Just-Us” Sunday—pointing out the arrogant presumption that the organizers of the event are right and godly and those who disagree are not only wrong but hostile to people of faith. The Baptist
Joint Committee weighed in full force with an early media statement and helped
organize a counter press conference the Friday before. Many thanks to our
friends Joe Phelps, pastor of One of the most cogent op-eds about what was objectionable about Justice Sunday was penned by Cary Clack writing for the San Antonio Express-News. I think Mr. Clack hit the nail right on the head. His basic point was this: what was wrong about the Justice Sunday extravaganza was not its purpose but its premise. The purpose of the rally was fine: to allow people of faith to speak out on the important issue of whether the filibuster should be used in the U.S. Senate to oppose judicial nominations. Although the event was shrouded in unmistakable partisan wrapping, reinforced through a video pitch by the Senate’s majority leader, it was entirely appropriate for those with strong views to speak out in the public square. No, the problem with Justice Sunday, as Clack points out, was the premise that those who oppose judicial nominees are carrying out a vendetta against people of faith or are motivated by some kind of religious bigotry. This premise is hopelessly flawed. It was a shameful abuse of religion to suggest that God has taken up sides in this debate. Whatever our differences on the filibuster and on judicial nominees, there are people of faith on both sides, and neither has God in their hip pocket. An unintended consequence of Justice Sunday was to highlight the vast number of people of faith in this country who are willing to stand up and publicly oppose the narrow self-righteousness that was revealed at the rally on Sunday night. It is clearly as wrong to sacralize secular policy issues as it is to try to banish religious voices from the debate in the first place. As Clack aptly points out, “In the political realm, people of faith can be opposed to other people of faith on given issues without either side being condemned to the fires of hell. Being a Christian isn’t synonymous with being a political conservative. That there is a Christian right and Christian left is a testament to how people find different interpretations and inspirations in the same sacred text. But there is something wrong with never having spoken to a person, not even knowing their middle name but purporting to know the condition of their soul. Who, not even knowing the contents of the other person’s prayers, has the right to judge their relationship with God?” Moreover, I see no concerted effort to deny anyone a judgeship based on his or her religion. Debate about whether a nominee is fit to serve as a judge is not only legitimate but goes to the heart of the confirmation process. No one should be denied the right to serve based on some religious litmus test, but policy positions and legal philosophy are fair game for public scrutiny—however motivated by religious conviction they may be. Religious belief does not give anyone a free pass to the bench or any public office. Yes, the Baptist Joint Committee defends the right of people of faith and religious organizations to advocate with their religious voices in the public square and to serve our country as public officials. But, at the same time, we must discourage claiming divine authority on behalf of public policy issues, characterizing political opponents as anti-God and lying about their motives. Note: Reprinted
with permission from Report from the Capital (May, 2005), the newsletter of the
Baptist Joint Committee, Life After Schiavo Terri Schiavo has died, her cremains interred. The news media has long since focused attention elsewhere. And now—after fifteen years of having lived in a severely brain-damaged state, sustained by daily enteral tube-feedings, unknowingly enmeshed in a twelve-year family feud over her treatment plan—it finally is all over for Terri. But it is not all over for others. Indeed, the repercussions of her dying will remain with the Schiavo and Schindler families, and all of us, for years yet to come. There is of course the lingering sense of loss and sadness experienced now and forever by those who loved their wife, daughter, sister, patient, and friend. Life after Terri’s death surely involves grief along with some relief. Most of us, including those who claimed to advocate on her behalf, did not personally know Ms. Schiavo. Yet, we too are affected by her dying and death. Deep political and ideological divisions remain among us. People of good will remain at odds regarding what happened, what should have happened, what ought now to happen or in the future with regard to similar patient situations. I have yet to find anyone willing to request similar medical treatment in her own future case, however. On that matter alone there is near unanimity. No one of my acquaintance says they wish to be tube-fed and hydrated for fifteen years after entering into anything like persistent vegetative state or especially a minimally conscious state. Beyond that agreement, perspectives differ widely on the Schiavo case. Within our own families and social circles we continue to disagree about what “really” happened to Terri’s brain and body, within the Schiavos’ marriage and their extended family. We see differently the various court proceedings, state and federal legislative interventions garnering executive signatures. Speculations vary on what was in the hearts and minds of protesters and supporters on both sides, or in the nonprofit coffers of those who seemed to profit at Terri’s expense. We understand differently the biases of media or religious spokespersons. We are a people divided. Even the autopsy report* is not expected to settle the issue of Terri’s disputed diagnosis. Many are disinclined to base their judgments on medical findings, scientific evidence or jurisprudence. The physiological facts about Terri Schiavo may not impact at all the ideological beliefs at play here. So one could anticipate the autopsy itself will forever be disputed, the examiners will be seen as biased or bought. Some will claim a pending miracle was thwarted by Terri’s death or that she did not receive therapies that could have made a difference in outcomes. For years to come, we will live in the wake of socio-political process gone awry. “Separation of powers” became a murky concept in the Schiavo case. There was evidence of one branch of government encroaching upon that of another, the federal upon state’s jurisdiction, Church upon State, and the public upon the private sphere. It will take some time even for the world’s greatest democracy to work through this national moral morass. Misinformed and uncivil discourse propounded of late impacts unfairly physicians, patients and proxies who face decisions about foregoing artificial nutrition and hydration. How will references to “starvation”, “murder”, or “torture” affect those who have made or will need to make these already wrenchingly hard treatment decisions? Will some hesitate to utilize tube-feeding at all for fear that it cannot be stopped? Will life-sustaining, death-prolonging treatments continue for other patients long after the medically and ethically appropriate thing to do is to withhold and/or withdraw? Will reactive legislation soon reverse a decades long societal consensus that patients or their legal surrogates may refuse any and all treatments as a matter of constitutionally protected right to privacy? Will a living will matter in the days just ahead? Will we honor a properly executed healthcare directive, a designated healthcare proxy, or even prior family conversations about end of life care? What will life be like, and dying, after the Schiavo fiasco? If there is a good to come of this tragedy, it may be in the partial breaking of a death-denying taboo. Families are talking together about dying and death, about what would constitute a good death or not. We are conversing about when a feeding tube would be desirable, and when our family surrogates had better stop such treatments “if you don’t want me to come back and haunt you!” Thousands are requesting and executing advance directives for the first time. One can hardly do so without acknowledging mortality. When we accept the inevitability of our own demise, we may think more clearly, less fearfully, about acceptable and refusable medical treatment options for ourselves and for those we love. It could result in respectfulness for those who choose differently. End of life care may be enhanced instead of impeded. If so, one dimension of life for us, after Terri Schiavo’s tragic death, could actually improve. In her memory and for our own sakes, let us hope for this end. *On Terrorism, Religion, and
War The tragedy
of 9-11 focused the thinking of most Americans on terrorism. We have been led
to believe that the tragedy was caused by an evil enemy, who suddenly appeared
out of the Christianity
throughout the centuries has persecuted Jews. With the enlightenment and
reformation of the 19th century, the Jews hoped to be accepted in
the world, especially in Western society. But repeatedly governmental and
church policy gave them only limited opportunity and protection; therefore,
early in the 20th century a movement arose by some Jews to return to
the “promised land” ( However,
after World War II, the Western world, and especially the The
Palestinians, as well as Now, after
over 50 years of being deprived of their homes, their political freedom, and
their heritage, the third generation of these deposed people have resorted to
the kind of desperate resistance that people with little hope use. Small groups
or individuals resort to acts of resistance, i.e., terrorism. Their life
situation has led many of these refugees to adopt an attitude of despair. After
all, life seems to have no future because an enemy has taken their homes,
killed, imprisoned, and tortured members of their family, and sought to destroy
their culture and religion. With the attitude of desperation and despair, many
of these displaced persons are susceptible to following any religious fanatic
or a radical political leader that encourages them to be a martyr for their
homeland and religion. If the person becomes a “holy warrior,” not only has he
or she become a patriot for the freedom of Palestinians, but also they have
become a religious martyr and are thus guaranteed a place in paradise. And if
one is going to fight, especially if he expects to die in the struggle,
certainly he would want to strike out against the correct enemy. This has
resulted in not only terrorism in Israel, but it also set the stage for lashing
out at the main military and financial supporter of Israel—which for over 50
years has been the United States. Therefore, it follows that it is both a
religious duty as well as a patriotic duty to do harm to Anti-American
feelings have grown in the Arab and Moslem countries because of the In the past
several years, the effort to maintain separation of church and state has been
eroded. Now we see the political activities of the religious right, as well as
of the Jewish community, promoting their religious outlook by supporting and
pressuring the federal government for more military support and financial aid
for As the Our
nation’s idea of creating this democracy has resulted in further violence in So what is
the answer to international terrorism? At least in part, it is to treat all
persons with respect and equality. The Perhaps now
is the time to say we have accomplished our mission and did what we planned—destroyed
any potential for weapons of mass destruction and brought down Hussein. We
should declare that our job is completed and leave their country. Training them
to have a military force before we pull out has the great potential of making
their internal conflicts even more bloody. Let them put their country back
together in a manner compatible with their culture and religion. Our trying to
make Let each
person in our nation embrace the love of God as each individual perceives God
in his heart, but let our nation not try to force by law or military conquest
the beliefs of any religious group of our country onto another people. We
should not use religion as a tool or excuse for national policy. Separation of
church and state was fundamental in making us a great nation, so let’s keep
religious dogma out of national policy. If a particular religious group wishes
to restore or support Can
Terrorism Alerts Make You Ill? Experts writing in the British Medical Journal in recent years have identified an ancillary threat of terrorism to the average population of a country. According to Simon Wessely and other researchers a psychological response to the threat of terrorism in the form of mass sociogenic illness may be a primary threat of terrorism. Their findings have very real implications for countries that continually magnify the threat of terrorism against their own populace in order to achieve a political agenda. Examples of mass sociogenic illness remind us of the dangers of inadvertently amplifying psychological responses to chemical and biological weapons and thus adding to their impact. One example is the routine use of investigators clad in space suits to assess possible terrorist attacks. Another is that the United States government is considering placing detectors to identify chemical warfare agents on the Washington DC subway system. It is possible that these alarms will in practice cause greater disruptions to transport systems than the attack itself, given the high probability that such detectors may give false alarms. There were 4500 such alerts in the Gulf war and none was associated with a confirmed attack.[i] These findings raise the question of how much responsibility the U.S. government under the Bush administration has toward its citizenry regarding continued elevations of threat levels through the current Homeland Security Advisory System. A review of the use of the system since it was introduced in the months following 9-11 show that levels have often been raised during times when the administration was attempting to achieve some political purpose. For example, during the critical time of the passage of the Patriot Act levels rose with little rationale to justify the rise. In fact, critics argue that the threat levels don’t seem to be tied to any procedural guidelines at all, but merely change at the whim of the Homeland Security Administration. The net effect of this is to negate any real value of the warning system but still attempt to keep the country engaged in political decision-making and co-optation of their collective will through irrational fear. The use of fear of an unknown enemy who could strike at any time to gain political advantage over a people is no new technique. History is rife with examples of leadership that has unethically manipulated the thought processes of whole nations of peoples through irrational and often unrealized fear. Of course, the German nationalism of the mid-twentieth century driven by xenophobia and anti-Semitism stand out but the ethnic cleansing that has occurred throughout the world at various periods of history have all been used by governing bodies to address “threats” to their countries and manage the populations. So why should this practice be so egregious to citizens of the United States? Simply because the U.S. has been developed on principles of free thought and personal civil liberties. The strength of the nation is the very freedom of diversity that heightened anxiety over suspected terrorists threatens to jeopardize. After real or imagined episodes of fear of attack, citizens tend to yield personal liberties in return for promised security. The biggest danger of prolonged and U.S. exacerbated terroristic threat to the citizenry is the psychological erosion of the belief that liberty must be preserved primarily. Finally, sociogenic illness may manifest itself in prolonged and profound psychological trauma, rendering the country unable to recover from any real attacks by terrorists. Imagining a toxic chemical attack on a country after a prolonged heightening of unrealized terroristic threat, Wessely states: The general level of malaise, fear, and anxiety may remain high for years, exacerbating pre-existing psychiatric disorders and further heightening the risk of mass sociogenic illness. The ... uncertainty over the chronic health effects of low level exposure to toxic agents will further increase anxiety in the affected communities. Because health officials cannot provide blanket assurances that no harm will result from brief or non-symptom producing exposure to toxic agents, frustration and then a growing distrust of medical experts and government officials may result, robbing state institutions of the trust they need to manage recovery. Lastly, unconfirmed or controversial hypotheses about the health effects of exposure to chemical and biological weapons will probably become contentious scientific and media issues in the years ahead, as has occurred after numerous chemical and radiological incidents, the Gulf war, and the Balkans deployment.[ii] Ultimately a government has a primary responsibility to protect its citizens from the threats of harm. To use those threats to gain political advantage or advance agendas that erode the freedoms and liberties of the citizenry is unethical and antithetical to the founding principles of the United States. The only legitimate approach is to provide accurate and timely information to U.S. citizens regarding threats to their security, while safeguarding the liberties and diversity that make their country great. Anything less than this is unconscionable. POETRY Feeling A Draft SOMEONE MUST HAVE LEFT A WINDOW OPEN FOR I FEEL A SLIGHT DRAFT COMIN ON. WAR HAS BECOME OUR NATIONAL PASTIME BUT WE'RE RUNNING OUT OF SOLDIERS TO TAKE CARE OF ALL THE HOT SPOTS. TOO MANY CELLS OF INSURGENTS ON THE LOOSE WE SMASH EM HERE AND THEY POP UP THERE. WE'VE GOT THE BIGGEST AND BEST GUNS IN THE WORLD BUT THEY'RE JUST NOT DOING THE JOB WE'RE GONNA NEED MORE SOLDIERS TO HOLD DOWN OUR TENOUS POSITIONS. IT WASN'T SUPPOSE TO BE THIS WAY IT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE A CAKE WALK. NOW AFTER TWO YEARS WE STILL CAN'T CLAIM VICTORY AND THAT AGAINST A VERY WEAK NATION WITH NO WMD'S LET'S OPEN UP THE WINDOW REAL WIDE AND LET THE DRAFT ON IN SO THAT EVERYBODY, EVERY YOUNG MAN AND EVERY YOUNG WOMAN CAN FEEL THE BREEZE. WAR IS HELL AND IT'S TIME FOR EVERYONE TO KNOW THE PRICE OF GOING TO BATTLE ON A FLIMSY EXCUSE. LET'S NOT JUST LEAVE IT TO THOSE FROM THE HOOD AND WHITE KIDS FROM LET'S SPREAD OUR EMPLOYMENT AND OUR LOVE OF WAR TO EVERY HOUSEHOLD. MAYBE THEN, MAYBE THEN, AND ONLY THEN WILL WE CEASE VIEWING WAR AS THE LATEST FLIK OUT OF Wal-Mart and Human Dignity:
Labor Practices Come Under Fire The public relations campaign rolled out early this year by Wal-Mart to “set the record straight” regarding its labor practices has done little to quell the open warfare between the company and its critics. The back-and-forth charges highlight a stark contrast in viewpoints. The company
proclaims that efforts to unionize the tire and lube units of stores in A study by
the state of Sorting out the whole truth from half-truths is no easy task. But does any of this matter to the rest of us? It does because human dignity is involved, said Todd David Whitmore, who directs the Program in Catholic Social Tradition at the University of Notre Dame. Catholic social teaching has long held out for the dignity of all persons under the belief that all persons are born in the image of God. “The flourishing of human beings depends upon our interconnectedness,” said Whitmore. Catholic social teaching describes that interconnectedness as “solidarity.” “Where there is a lack of solidarity between persons, then there is a lack of recognition of human dignity and therefore, a lack of recognition of the way we all image God,” said Whitmore, associate professor of theology. Work is an important part of human dignity, he said. “Not only do we need a living wage to make ends meet, but it is part of human dignity to be paid for the work that we do.” An outspoken critic of Wal-Mart’s labor practices, Whitmore believes that the giant retailer bears watching, if only because of its size. Wal-Mart
Stores Inc. is the world’s largest retailer, with $256.3 billion in annual
sales. It employs 1.6 million people worldwide and has more than 3600 facilities
in the Officials of the company contend that many of the attacks on the company occur precisely because it is the biggest kid on the block. “You could almost go down the list of Catholic social teaching’s articulation of the ways in which the dignity of workers must be recognized because they are created in the image of the Triune God. Wal-Mart violates virtually every one of those,” said Whitmore. Wal-Mart
not only violates the standards of Catholic social teaching, but it does so in
a way that does not meet the Department of Labor’s code of conduct, said
Whitmore. According to Whitmore, any factory that violates more than one of the
fundamental The fundamental code of conduct set out by the Labor Department includes paying minimum wage, keeping a time card, paying overtime, paying on time, and maintaining safe working conditions. The battle over the public’s perceptions of the company has been heating up in recent weeks. The company launched its public relations offensive in mid-January by placing a full-page ad in more than 100 newspapers across the country. The ad took the form of a letter from CEO H. Lee Scott. “There are
a lot of ‘urban legends’ going around these days about Wal-Mart, but facts are
facts,” said Scott. “Wal-Mart is good for consumers, good for communities, and
good for the In February, the secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO said that the “entire labor movement” will be involved in a campaign to drive some business away from the company by exploiting Wal-Mart’s image problems. The unions are talking of spending $25 million a year on the effort, more than has ever been spent in a union campaign against a single company. The New York Times has been particularly vigilant in covering labor issues involving Wal-Mart. Here are some of the controversies covered by the Times and other media: Child
labor. The Child Labor Coalition says Wal-Mart has a history of child labor
violations. In one incident in 2000, Employee
health care. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution noted in a Employee
lock-ins. Wal-Mart came under fire several years ago for its practice of
locking employees inside stores in the middle of the night. Wal-Mart argues
that this is to protect employees in high-crime areas and to guard against
employee theft. Several cases have been documented of employees being denied
medical attention because they did not have access to keys to the doors and one
employee died when an ambulance could not reach him, according to a Times story
published Labor
unions. The Associated Press has covered recent unionizing activities at
Wal-Mart in detail. In February, Wal-Mart said it would close a store in For the most part, Wal-Mart has opposed the freedom of association of workers, said Whitmore. Freedom of association is a key point in Catholic social teaching, he said, because part of who we are is our ability to relate to other persons in a free way. “Wal-Mart is now big enough to just close the store outright and not suffer while sending the message to other stores: you unionize, you lose your job,” said Whitmore. Wages. The
company faces about 40 wage and hour cases seeking class certification,
according to its Website. Whitmore said one suit in Gender discrimination. Six current and former Wal-Mart associates are pursuing legal action against the company. The suit was certified as a class action behalf of 1.6 million women. Wal-Mart is appealing the decision and notes that more than 40 percent of its managers are women. Illegal workers. In October 2003, federal agents raided 60 Wal-Mart stores across 21 states and arrested 250 illegal immigrants who worked as janitors for outside contractors. According to the The Wall Street Journal, Wal-Mart has been in talks to settle the probe that is focused on whether it knew that the janitorial firms hired illegal workers. Note:
Reprinted by permission from Vital Theology, The Two Swords of Pope Benedict XVI Wading into the turbulent waters of the relationship between church and state is always a treacherous affair, whether entering from the church or state side. With the installation of Pope Benedict XVI, we might be reminded of this fact. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger entered into these deeps during the last presidential election cycle, as Martin Marty has noted with “grumbles” to which I would add my own [“Considering Pope Benedict XVI,” April 25]. Cardinal Ratzinger raised the specter of excommunication for those Catholic politicians who did not steer clear of a pro-choice position. This brought to my mind the actions of Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085), who dove headfirst into church-state relations with the express intent of ensuring a church completely free of any secular entanglements. Gregory VII rendered much subsequent tinkering with the church-state line to be just that—mere tinkering by comparison. He not only excommunicated King Henry IV at the Lenten Synod of 1076 (the result of a long-brewing confrontation between the two), but [Gregory VII] took the additional step of deposing him. He obliterated the line between church and state, and was soundly and widely criticized for his glaring innovation and revolutionary use of papal authority. Previously, Pope Gelasius I (492-496) had commented on the relationship between the church and the empire: “[T]here are two powers by which chiefly this world is ruled: the sacred authority of the priesthood and the authority of kings. And of these the authority of the priests is so much the weightier, as they must render before the tribunal of an account even for the kings of men.” While this might at first seem to support the position of Gregory VII, it was widely believed that the Gelasian “two swords” theory maintained that these two powers—political and religious—should not be held by the same person. This battle culminated in the eleventh century, as the papacy attempted to wrest control away from the king and other secular rulers who were practicing Lay Investiture. That is, they had begun to name bishops, who were thereby invested with secular and sacred authority. The Investiture Controversy—the title often given to the hubbub surrounding the late eleventh-century reform movement that sought to rectify this practice, and which reached its peak during the pontificate of Gregory VII—was settled in 1122 with the Concordat of Worms. The Concordat stated that the king had the right to invest bishops with authority in the secular realm, while the church would endow bishops with the signs of sacred authority. The separation of the two swords was regarded as the most palatable compromise, as each side realized that the chaos following Gregory's political use of papal authority was detrimental to all. Pope Benedict XVI ascends to the papal see amid a set of public
attitudes that differs dramatically from Gregory's day, most notably in that a
great many people outside the church seem to be quite sanguine about the former
cardinal's foray into the political calculus of the The most significant problem with such action on the state side of the church-state line is straightforward. When the popes of the thirteenth century acted on the precedent set by popes such as Gregory VII and Innocent III, secular powers began to treat them as just one more common prince to combat, bargain with, or vanquish. Similarly, today the church might come to be viewed as simply one more group which both politicians and the general populous either pander to, co-opt, or, perhaps worst of all, ignore. A complementary effect is produced on the church side. When so involved in the secular fray, the church loses its voice; the Gospel itself is simply tuned out, as cynics regard the church’s preaching to be one more way to produce a victor aligned with a particular political perspective. The church, I think, cannot afford this kind of diminishment. So we might hope, then, that Pope Benedict XVI will relinquish the political sword he is poised to use. His hands will be full enough without it. Note: This article first appeared in Sightings ( Lost . . . in I left At about While
looking at my map I realized that I was lost. Tulia was not on my route to
The
courthouse square in Tulia is one of its major tourist attractions. As I
explored it and the surrounding area I spotted an antique shop across the
street. I headed for it. I’m always looking for some reminder of my rural life
in west I stopped
in Paint Rock one time and came away with a pair of old leather “knee pads”
like the ones I wore as a boy on our farm north of The antique
shop had free coffee. While I enjoyed a cup I struck up a conversation with the
shop owner, Jeannette Herring. She is a former English teacher who is a member
of the She asked where I was from. “ “What do you do there?” “I have practiced law for over 30 years . . . and I’m a writer.” The “writer” part of my answer brought an immediate response, “What kind of writing?” “Stories mostly about everyday people that I have met in the law practice and their conversation about the part God plays in their lives. They are what I call stories of faith in faded blue jeans. Hold on a minute and I’ll give you a copy of my book.” I went to my pickup and returned with a copy of Gentle Mercies, Stories of Faith in Faded Blue Jeans. We talked about the book and how I had begun writing ten years ago for the journal Christian Ethics Today when Dr. Foy Valentine invited me to submit an article. I told her that since that first article I have had an article in over forty consecutive issues. “Do you know about our local artist?” she asked. “No,” I replied. “Kenneth Wyatt. He paints the kinds of things that you write stories about.” Debra Barnes, a local resident who had come into the shop, volunteered to take me to Wyatt’s studio. I’m really
glad that I accepted Debra’s offer. Wyatt’s painting of Jesus, the Apostles,
and cowboys are incredible! I don’t know how I have lived in Wyatt, a retired Methodist minister, was out of town. I determined then to return to Tulia to talk to him. I have a book I want him to illustrate. I should have an agent like Debra Barnes. I spent $140 on Wyatt’s books and paintings. I left
Tulia thinking that if one is going to get lost in Little did I know what still lay ahead! Read on . . . On September 3 a letter arrived from Jeannette Herring: “Dear Mr. Haralson: I don’t know what prompted you to come to Tulia that day in July when you were on your way to the writing workshop, but I wanted to tell you that your stories and your book have had quite an impact. My husband writes a farm article for the weekly Tulia newspaper. He is an avid reader of farm articles and keeps up with the world news, but he hardly ever has the time or takes the time to sit down and read a book. I related to him that you had been in the store and had left your book. He sat down that same evening and read over half of the book without stopping. As he was reading, he kept remarking that he knows several friends of ours who could benefit from the book and that we should order some to have on hand to hand out to people when we felt they needed something to brighten their day. My husband told me to order at least 10 more than I had names down to hand them to, so I am hoping that I am ordering enough to accommodate the people who we have in mind to give them to.” “As I said, I don’t know what prompted your coming into Tulia or why you happened into my store. My business had been so slow during June and July that I was little discouraged. However, on that day, I had sales totaling more than for any week for those two months. I know that God takes care of His children, and I trust Him to do just that. I also believe that He allows us to see miracles in little ways. Thank you for giving me a little ‘miracle’ that day. I teach a Junior-Senior girls’ class at church, and I couldn’t wait to tell them on Sunday about meeting you. I have shared some of your stories with them.” “I recently went to a committee meeting at my church, and my pastor handed me a copy of Christian Ethics Today, Summer 2004. In it was an article by you and one by your brother. He knew that I would be interested because my husband had told him about your book, and had related to him that you had been in my store. I told him that I would like to have you in our church at some point, and he said that perhaps that could be arranged.” “I am enclosing $300 for 30 of Gentle Mercies. I finished reading the one that you left at my store, and I realized how many of the people with whom I come into contact could benefit from or relate to the stories in the book. Sincerely, Jeannette Herring” It wasn’t
long afterward that I got a call from Charles Davenport, pastor of the I returned to Tulia and spoke on a Sunday night. After our story time together, I spent over an hour signing my books. My newfound friends who had come to listen ended up buying over $850 worth of my books. Tulia is a great place to get lost, thanks to folks like Jeannette and John Herring. Lost? Was I truly lost? Those of us who are on this journey called life know that God puts us where he intends for us to be. There are no accidents. Myth: Baptists Don’t
Believe In Women Pastors Without a
guiding principle, the Bible’s teachings on women may appear to be confusing to
some people. Only husbands of one wife should be deacons (1 Tim. |
