Must You See To Believe?

I am at Sugar Loaf (NY) United Methodist Church this morning. The Scriptures are Acts 5: 27 – 32, Revelation 1: 4 – 8, and John 20: 19 -31. Services are at 11 and you are welcome to attend.

This has been edited since it was first posted.  I will be at Monroe UMC (Monroe, NY) on May 12th; services are at 8:30 am and 10:15 am and you are welcome to attend.  I will also be at Sugar Loaf again on May 5th.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

I began working on this message back on March 13^th, the day that just happens to be the anniversary of William Herschel’s discovery of the planet Uranus in 1781.

Now, to be sure, Herschel wasn’t the first person to observe this planet in its journey across the evening sky. In fact, its presence had been recorded as early as 1690 but it was considered more of a star than a planet because it moved slower and was far dimmer than the planets known at that time.

It speaks of our own natural skepticism that those who first saw Uranus as it traveled across the sky were unwilling to characterize it as a planet. Even Herschel thought, despite the lack of evidence to support his thought, that what he had discovered was a comet rather than a planet. But as others looked at what Herschel described and gathered their own data, it became apparent that what was being observed was, in fact, a planet and not some other stellar object.

Science is very much an observational experience and others must be able to replicate what has been observed. The validity of one’s observations is predicated on the ability of others to see, for the most part, the same results that you have reported.

We are reminded of this by the announced discovery of cold fusion in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Fusion, in chemistry and physics, is the combination of atomic nuclei to form a new nuclide. The fusion of hydrogen atoms to form helium atoms is the reaction that gives our sun and all the stars their source of energy. If we could develop reactors here on earth that could replicate what takes place on the sun, then we would have a relatively safe and relatively unlimited energy source. But such replication requires that we create on earth a mini-star with its accompanying high temperature and pressure. There are those who feel this is a possibility that will be accomplished within the next few years.

But what if we could some how force hydrogen atoms to fuse together and form helium atoms at room temperature and pressure? We would be saved the expense that comes with high temperatures and pressures and have an easily developed power source that ran on our tap water.

And this was what was announced in 1989 – the discovery of cold fusion, the combination of hydrogen atoms to form helium atoms at room temperature and pressure. Unfortunately, the discoverers of this process were more interested in gaining the fortune that would come with the discovery and they rushed their announcement. As others attempted to replicate their discovery, flaws in the process were discovered and ultimately the discovery was discounted.

Now, there is nothing wrong with the theory behind “cold” fusion; in fact, it was first proposed in the mid 1930s. But because others could not replicate what was first proposed in 1989, very few people are willing to pursue such research today.

The failure of others to replicate what was first reported is a natural extension of Thomas’ thoughts to his friends that night in the closed room some two thousand years ago, “if I don’t see it, how can I be sure that it happened?”

It is only natural that Thomas would ask for proof. It is in our nature to do so. Now, we also read in today’s Gospel reading that Jesus told Thomas that others would believe though they would not see the evidence that Thomas wished to see.

My question this morning is how those who did not see will come to believe. John gave part of the answer when he wrote that the stories were written down so that others will believe.

In Hebrews 11: 1 we read, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Clarence Jordan translated this in his Cotton Patch Gospels as “Now faith is the turning of dreams into deeds; it is betting your life on the unseen realities.

We are here today because something brought us here. Perhaps we have come because we have questions about our faith that could only be answered by things seen and unseen, in this time and place. But these are difficult times in which to question faith or even to begin asking questions about God, Christ, Christianity or religion in general.

And the answers that we often get don’t help our seeking.

We see a world of hatred and violence, death and destruction, and we want to know where God is in this world.

We see the church today, both in general and in denominational and local terms, as a dying church and if it is not dying it seems to be one that is no viable in today’s society. Somewhere along the line, the church that began as a movement and gathering has lost its direction, its ability to show others what it is that they first saw. The skeptics in today’s society see the church and they do not like what they see; they see a church that is closed and inflexible, unable to meet the needs of the world in which it lies.

And there are those who would say that the answer lies in a strict adherence to a set of rules and regulations that are to be accepted without question or hesitation. What we need today is a society grounded in some sort of Judeo-Christian law such as was first expressed in the Old Testament. And those who offer such solutions tell us that they and they alone understand what it is that God wants and that we are not to question our faith or their authority. To do so is to destroy one’s faith.

But it is the challenge that allows our faith to grow; it is the challenge that gives us the ability to help others come to know and understand. It was Jesus’ own challenge to the rigidity and inflexibility of the religious authorities that was the central focus of His mission. It was Jesus’ challenge to the power of the religious authorities to dictate to the people what they were supposed to believe that gave rise to our presence here today. And it was how Jesus taught the people and showed the people what was possible that gave them hope that tomorrow would be better.

But this is not possible in a church today that is more of a social club than a place to know and meet Jesus.

In Shakespeare’s play, “Julius Caesar”, Cassius tells his friend Brutus, “The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings.” The cartoonist Walt Kelley had his cartoon hero Pogo expressed it this way, “We have met the enemy and he is us.”

Most people, if you were to ask them, would probably say that Jesus Christ is very much the image described in Revelations, a man cloaked in the whitest of white robes and bathed in the brightest of bright lights.

But we are also reminded that Jesus Himself told us that

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

“The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

“Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

I am afraid that many people have encountered Jesus sometime during the journey but they did not know it.

Laurie Beth Jones, in the prologue to her third book, Jesus in Blue Jeans, described her encounter with Jesus as follows,

Many years ago I dreamed that I was standing in a meadow. Suddenly I saw a man approaching me. As he got nearer I gasped to realize that it was Jesus in Blue Jeans. When he saw the expression on my face he said, “Why are you surprised? I came to them wearing robes because they wore robes. I come to you in blue jeans because you wear blue jeans.” (from “A Chance Encounter”; I first mentioned Laurie Beth Jones’ encounter with Jesus Christ in a message I gave at Tompkins Corners back in 2003 (“And When You Least Expect It”) but I didn’t really explain what happened to her; I would do that in “A New Vision” (which is also a companion piece to what I said last Thursday – “To Offer a New Vision” ) and “By the Side of the Road”.)

We are more apt, as Laurie Beth did, to meet Him in a casual encounter during the day; in fact, we are probably not even going to know that it was Him until later. The prayer that guides us when we are in “Grannie Annie’s Kitchen” includes a statement that one of those who come to be fed each Saturday might well be Jesus.

And if they did not know they had encountered Jesus, it is highly unlikely that they can help others see Jesus. If our own lives mirror the society that rejected Jesus two thousand years ago, how will those who society has rejected today see Him today?

During this past week, I heard something that reminded me of a Yardbirds song from the early 1960s. For those who remember such things, this was the rock and roll band that Eric Clapton was first a member. Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page also played for this group. The particular song that I was reminded of was a post-Clapton song, “You’re A Better Man Than I.”

You’re A Better Man Than I (B. Hugg / M. Hugg)

Can you judge a man,
By the way he wears his hair?
Can you read his mind,
By the clothes that he wears?
Can you see a bad man,
By the pattern on his tie?

Well then, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Yeah, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Oh, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Yeah, Mr, you’re a better man than I.

Could you tell a wise man,
By the way he speaks or spells?
Is this more important,
Than the stories that he tells?
And call a man a fool,
If for wealth he doesn’t strive?

Well then, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Yeah, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Oh, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Yeah, Mr, you’re a better man than I.

Can you condemn a man,
If your faith he doesn’t hold?
Say the colour of his skin,
Is the colour of his soul?
Could you say that men,
For king and country all must die?

Well, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Yeah, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Oh, Mr, you’re a better man than I,
Yeah, Mr, you’re a better man than I.

What exactly was it that got Peter and the other disciples in trouble with the authorities two thousand years ago? Was it that the just preached that the authorities hanged Jesus from a tree? Or did they, the disciples, do the same things that Jesus did, the same things that John as well as Matthew, Mark, and Luke wrote about – heal the sick, feed the hungry, found clothes for the poor, and give comfort to the oppressed?

Was it that they disciples continued what Jesus began? Were the things that got John Wesley in trouble with the authorities the same things that Peter and the disciples did, heal the sick, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, give comfort to the oppressed and give those forgotten by society knowledge that they are part of society and not simply on the edge?

We are challenged today to see the world in the same way that Jesus saw the world; as those who have come before us have seen the world. But to see the world with these new eyes, we need to understand and believe that which cannot necessarily be seen, our faith in Jesus. It is very easy to do the things that others have done – feed the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the sick and bring comfort to the oppressed – but if we do it solely as a cognitive exercise, we have done little for ourselves.

We may feel good about what we have done but we really haven’t shown Jesus to others. If we have not experienced Jesus, then all of our works are done with our mind and not our heart.

I began this message by talking about the discovery of Uranus. Many had seen the planet before it was “discovered” but it was only when the proof was confirmed that everyone understood that they were seeing something new.

Must you see to believe? It is an interesting question because to believe, to have faith is to trust in the unseen. But you trust in the unseen, the presence of Christ through the Holy Spirit, because others have and you have seen the change in their lives. Jesus told Thomas that others would believe even though they had not seen but Thomas went out into the world and told them what he had seen and that is why they believed.

Will others see Jesus in you and what you do every day because Jesus is in your heart and soul? Will what you do each day to help others be because you have encountered Jesus, not in some whiter than white robe, bathed in the brightest of bright lights but rather as someone walking along the street dressed in blue jeans or a business suit?

When we proclaim to the world that we have decided to follow Jesus, we proclaim that we have opened not only our mind but our heart and our soul. Is that what others see when they encounter you? There is an opportunity today to open your hearts to Jesus, to say to Him that you want to walk with Him, no matter where that walk takes you. You make that decision on faith and on faith alone. But others will see where you are going and they will see Jesus and they will come to you.

It may be that you have accepted Christ into your heart but have been looking for ways that in which you can show the world that you have encountered Jesus. Today is the day to open your heart to the power of the Holy Spirit to lead you to that solution.

“Celebrating Grannie Annie’s Kitchen”

One of the people who comes each Saturday to Grannie Annie’s Kitchen is becoming a poet.  Thomas wrote this in honor of the 2nd Anniversary of Grannie Annie’s Kitchen on November 3, 2012. Let me know if you are interested in how you can support Grannie Annie’s Kitchen. And enjoy the poem.

“The Ultimate Lesson of Sandy”

It is two days past Sandy and time for some thoughts.

Some might say that my family and I were lucky, others would say that we were fortunate. There were very strong wind gusts most of Monday afternoon and into Tuesday but we didn’t get much rain and we never lost power. Some member of the family did lose power on Tuesday when tree limbs fell on power lines in their neighborhood but the outage wasn’t long.

I was totally amazed by the predicted track of Sandy, coming up from Florida, following the Gulf Stream past North Carolina and Virginia, then taking that sharp left hand turn into New Jersey and New York. One of the computer models had Sandy going to the Canadian border and then turning right. I swear that I thought it was going to go to Boston, go out to sea, turn left again and come back to New York for a second visit. There have been a couple of hurricanes that have done that in the past, though I don’t think they were this far north.

Seeing the storm track west towards Chicago was interesting and seeing surfers on Lake Michigan even more so. Seeing the snow in the Appalachians made for a very interesting weather story as well.

When I saw that Sandy was turning left early in the model and going to New Jersey I relaxed a little bit. Not a whole lot, mind you; I guess that having lived through Carla in ’62 and Camille in ’69 keeps me from every relaxing when there is a hurricane. I had a sense that Katrina was going to be a major problem but, to be honest, I never had that same feeling with Sandy.

And I had that wrong. Seeing the devastation that was the New Jersey sea shore and knowing the damage and havoc that Sandy left for the lower end of Manhattan, I remember that one should ever take a hurricane or tornado lightly.

I don’t know the entire extent of damage in this area. I know that friends 5 or 10 miles away are without power; I know that many across the river will not have power for a few more days. I have to go to my church tomorrow and check on the refrigerator there to determine what foodstuffs we might have lost in preparation for Saturday’s breakfast at Grannie Annie’s kitchen. I suspect that this Saturday we may have a higher number of guests but this is only an estimate on my part today.

I grieve at the loss of one’s home and property. For some, recovery will be easy and short; for others, it will be a long time before they are able to return to the point in the lives where they were on Sunday afternoon. I grieve at the loss of life. Things can be replaced; lives cannot.

There were some who felt that they knew the power and strength of Sandy better than anyone else so they choose to stay behind when the order for evacuation came. I hope that those who choose to stay learned first hand the power of a hurricane and that should there come another opportunity such as this, they heed the warnings to evacuate and not stay behind.

Sadly, those who choose to ignore the evacuation warning now find themselves without food or water, power or heat, and no way to get those things which are necessary to life. Those groups who bring aid to people in need at times such as this will not go into areas that have been evacuated.

Lessons from last year’s storms (Irene and the Halloween snow storm) were remembered by some this year. But other lessons that have been taught over the past few years still haven’t been learned. People have been talking about the vulnerability of the New York subway systems for years now but nothing has ever really been done. And now, the flaws and vulnerabilities in the system have been shown and massive work must be done. In many areas of the northeast people still haven’t learned about the dangers of power lines mixing with tree limbs. One of these days we will have a better system of power transmission (though I don’t know what we are going to do about power transformers).

People will rebuild and start over; some will start over at whatever point in life they are for they have no other choice. Others will insist that their lifes be rebuilt at the point in life where it was disrupted because they have the wherewithal to do so.

But please remember this. Before Sandy came to visit the northeast, there were people without homes; there were people who were hungry. The number of homeless, the number of hungry, the number of individuals without adequate healthcare have been on the rise for the past few years. There will be a temporary increase in those numbers because of what Sandy did. What I hope today and in the coming days is that the decrease that will come as we rebuild will decrease beyond the temporary increase and we will take this opportunity to really removed homelessness, hunger, and poverty from this society.

“What Is A Vote Worth?”

What is a vote worth?

When you consider how many people in the world today actually get to freely vote and what the people of this country went through to get the vote, one cannot put a value on a vote.

I once wrote that voting was a political protest (“A Simple Act of Political Protest”) and that such a protest can only be done in a free country. So what value can you put on freedom?

In that same article I pointed out that I wasn’t thrilled by many of the candidates who were running for President and I am still not thrilled or impressed. At this point, I am considering which of the third party candidates I will vote for. Now, for some, this means that I am throwing away my vote.

I still remember the first time that I voted in a national election; it was the 1972 election and I voted by absentee ballot in Memphis so that I could vote for Al Gore, Sr. for senator from Tennessee. National Republicans had decided that Al Gore, Sr., did not properly represent the state of Tennessee and they targeted him for defeat. I had the opportunity to use my old address in Memphis (since my parents still lived there) to vote by absentee ballot and I did. Unfortunately, the beginnings of the Republican “southern strategy” prevailed and Gore lost.

There was one election where I did not vote, in part because I failed to register to vote, and I have regretted that decision ever since. One’s vote is a precious commodity and to not vote is the ultimate waste. Voting is very important to me and I propose that not voting is a waste, voting for a third party candidate is very much a protest.

This will not be the first time that I have voted for a third party candidate. In the 1980 election, I voted for John Anderson. I even had a bumper sticker on my car showing my support. Now, as it happened, when the vote totals for the community were published in the local paper, there was one vote for the Communist Party candidate and many people thought that I was that particular voter. One can only speculate why they thought it was me and not someone else is anyone’s guess.

Understand that my decision is based on the present situation. I am registered as a member of one of the two major parties, in part because changing one’s registration in New York is a little complicated (in other words, you can’t do it on-line; at least, when you get your driver’s license, you are registered to vote). But I remember something that George Wallace said when he ran for president in 1968.

It may seem strange that I would use a quote from Governor Wallace since those who read my blog know that my experiences with regards to him are not favorable by any means. I saw his 1968 and 1972 campaigns as a continuation of the policies and thoughts that brought him to prominence in the early 1960s. I still saw him as a segregationist and an avowed supporter of “states’ rights.” His 1968 campaign, though couched in populist terms, was one of the first campaigns in recent history to use ignorance, fear and hatred as integral parts of a campaign.

In one respect, if you did not know George Wallace, you might find it very, very easy to hate him. But if you understand that George Wallace was first and foremost a politician, then you have an understanding of how he thought.

When Wallace entered politics, he was probably a populist in the manner of Huey Long. But in the 1960s, simply being a populist wasn’t sufficient to get elected, especially if segregation and the life style that protected rich whites was being attacked. Wallace lost the 1960 governor’s election to an outright segregationist and he vowed that he would never let that happen again. When he won the governor’s election in 1962, he was more of a segregationist than any of the other candidates. This is the George Wallace that I encountered and it would be these memories that saw him in 1968 as the worst of the candidates and not a viable alternative to either Richard Nixon or Hubert Humphrey (not that it mattered, I couldn’t vote that year anyway).

To say that George Wallace had an epiphany would be an understatement but Arthur Bremer’s attempt to assassinate him in 1972 provided the impetus that would change his attitude. I think that he also saw that Alabama as a state was being harmed by the way people saw him and he began a slow but perceptible change. (For more on that change, read Peter Jenkin’s Walk Across America.)

But George Wallace’s characterization of the Republican and Democratic parties as “Tweedledee” and “Tweedledum” rings even more true today. I see two parties where the rhetoric may seem different but there are times when you cannot tell that there is a difference.

The following are my thoughts about the current political situation. I put them before you as a critique of the current situation and the basis for determining what I am looking for in a potential third party.

One party says that it is for the common person and the other isn’t but which one is and which one isn’t? Both parties chase rich and corporate donors and neither will ever seek any reform of campaign finances as long as they can get billions and billions of dollars from corporate donors. Both parties say that they are for the people yet neither party did anything when the Supreme Court ruled that corporations in effect had the same rights as individuals.

Poverty rates in this country have risen to their highest levels since 1965 – why is that? The gap between the rich and the rest of the world (forget the middle class; it is a group in name only) keeps getting bigger and bigger.

Can it be that neither major party really cares for the people, other than the rich and the powerful? Why have we not come to an understanding that the minimum wage does not lift the people out of poverty but merely insures that they will stay there? Where is the fight for the living wage?

Oh, I know that some will say that even raising the minimum wage hurts the small businessman or businesswoman but there has never been any definitive proof that it does. What we do know is that when people have the income, they will use it. In other words, they become consumers and can support small businesses. Tampa and Charlotte didn’t seek the national conventions because of the politics; they sought the conventions for the revenue that would come in.

Why is it that health care is discussed in terms of the health care business, a business run by insurance companies, and not in terms of the well-being of the people? Could it be, as I will suggest later, that we don’t understand and are unwilling to seek new solutions, especially if such solutions will take away from the rich and the powerful and give to the poor and needy?

We spend more in terms of destroying people and things than we do building things and helping people.

Neither party is particularly concerned about the loss of liberty and personal freedom in this country. We passed laws, supported by both parties, in 2011 which restrict the freedoms of individuals (interestingly enough, one of the provisions of these bills is that one is not to know that these freedoms have been restricted – can you say “Star Chamber”?).

The major political parties of this country have a very interesting concept of personal and individual liberty. Members of each party, no matter which side of the aisle they sit on or where they stand regarding political freedom will say that they are entitled to personal liberties and freedom but they have the right to tell you what to do, think, and say.

I would add at this point that faith, religion, and matters pertaining to and about God are not matters of political discussion. Yes, the word politics comes from the same root word that gives us people and politics are the people’s business, right, and choice. But such a right, such a choice does not give a national organization such as a political party the right to dictate what one believes or to say that one belief is better than another belief. Let’s face it, when you make a statement that your belief is better than mine, you are operating out of either sheer ignorance or sheer arrogance. Similarly, if you ridicule or belittle the faith of another, calling it superstition or magic, you are also operating out of either sheer ignorance or sheer arrogance. And when you use your faith or belief system to dictate what occurs in the public classroom, you are overstepping the boundaries of both faith and education.

There should be a priority on education in this country but neither major party wants to do that, unless it meets some other goal. We sent ten missions to the moon in the 60s and 70s and twelve men walked on the moon. Even though each of the Apollo missions that successfully landed on the moon did some scientific work, only the last Apollo mission (Apollo 17) could be considered a truly scientific expedition. The ulterior motive was not science but politics; when we beat the Soviet Union to the moon, our desire to go beyond earth’s atmosphere began to dwindle and when the cost of the Viet Nam war became too great, funding for NASA and scientific research in general began to get cut. That’s the way it has been in this country; we will fund destruction but not construction.

When we do fund construction, it is still in the form of traditional work, work which can and should be characterized as “pork barrel politics”. I am not saying that we should not maintain our roads and infra-structure though it is too often clear that we haven’t. But we only think in terms of the usual and not the new. There is very little funding in new means of communications or safe power transmission (how many times do we have to rebuild blown down power lines after a thunderstorm, tornado, or hurricane before we decide there are better ways of transmitting power?)

Neither party is truly willing to seek alternative energy systems. While they both say they want to end our dependence on foreign oil, their answer is utilize fossil fuels in this hemisphere. It really doesn’t matter whether we are looking at foreign or domestic sources of oil, the use of fossil fuels still generates CO₂ and potentially SO₂ and NO_x, which means that we haven’t faced the issue of global climate change and acid rain. And we still use our military as a de facto police force overseas to insure the continuation of oil supplies. There is something drastically wrong with that picture.

And how much of what is spent on the military is actually spent for military personnel? I would make the argument that monies spent on the military-industrial complex do not actually go to the military but to contractors and individuals who support the elected officials who put the factories in their congressional districts. And that puts us back where this all started – the only people who elected officials think about are those who give them money.

And finally we come to the issue of taxes. I always love to hear those who say that their taxes are too high and we need to cut spending. But they will never cut all of the spending, only that which is spent on things that they, the speaker, find distasteful. They will not cut military or security spending, yet the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security are the two biggest parts of the Federal government budget. Those who argue for cuts in spending want to take it out of social spending and that means that it only hurts one group of people, the poor.

And we dare not raise the taxes on the rich, for they are the ones who create the jobs that will make this country great. We have been hearing that mantra for how many years now? When is that going to start working? It hasn’t worked so far.

So, I look at the two major parties and I wonder what can I do? As soon as I can easily do it (it still requires a paper form to change your party affliation in the state of New York), I am changing my party affliation. If nothing else, that will stop the phone calls and mailings from my present chosen party asking me for money; I guess they think it is possible to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. In voting for a third party candidate and encouraging others to vote for a third party candidate, perhaps we can send a message to the major parties that their politics don’t work any more. But to effect change in this country will take more than voting in protest; it will take organization at the grass roots level and that will take years. But it has to be done.

If I understand history and what transpired in the 1960s when it came to politics, I know that such a change can be done, though it will take between eight and ten years to accomplish. In 1964, Barry Goldwater ran one of the most conservative presidential campaigns in the history of this country. His defeat in that contest was widely touted as the death of the Republican Party in this country. Obviously, that didn’t occur. But what it did was force those who saw themselves as the “true believers” to reorganize themselves at the grass root levels with the avowed goal of never letting that happen again. We see today the efforts of that grass roots organization; interestingly enough, those who are the beneficiaries of that work do not feel that Barry Goldwater is conservative enough. My, how times have changed.

And the Democratic Party, in light of all that has happened over the past forty years or so, has never seemed to grasp what they have to do, hoping and praying that the Republican Pary will do something to itself that will allow the Democrats to survive to live another year. So, any third party that wants to make a go of things must make a serious effort at grass roots organizing, not simply running an alternative candidate every four years.

At the beginning I asked what a vote is worth. My vote is worth my freedom and I shall vote to exercise my right and freedom. But to insure that others may have the same rights and same freedoms, I must also work to insure that those same rights and freedoms are maintained. My vote is worth nothing unless I follow through before and after each election.

“The Not-so-Social Gospel”

I got an e-mail the other day from Tikkun entitled “What if Jesus had been a Republican?”  Rather than copy the post (which came from another source, which was attributed in the e-mail), I am supplying the link to the original document – “The Not-so-Social Gospel”.  It presents a very interesting commentary on the infusion of the New Testament with current Republican philosophy.

“Tell Me Why?”

First, a disclaimer – there is a song playing on WFUV that includes the line “tell me why” but I am not using that song.

The other day I posted “They Are At It Again, version 2”. Now, I hear that Paul Ryan is illegally using a Twisted Sister song (see “Twisted Sister to Ryan: Stop”). This same article points out that the lead singer for the group “Rage Against the Machine” wrote an op-ed against Ryan in Rolling Stone.

So how is it that the GOP insists on using songs that are probably the antithesis of their image? And why, when they insist that they are for the individual they keep on violating individual rights?

All I want to know is why they can’t speak the truth about what they believe and act the way that they say they believe? Just tell me why?

“They Are At It Again, version 2″

Back in February of 2012, I posted a piece entitled “They Are At Again” (yes, I know that it is missing an “it” but I sometimes type faster than I think) in which I noted a New York Times article that indicated that the GOP was being told (again) to stop using songs without permission from the artists.

Well, guess what?! They haven’t learned. The band “Silversun Pickups” has sent the Romney campaign a cease-and-desist letter because the Romney people are using one of the band’s songs (“Panic Switch”) without the band’s permission. I have never heard this band or this song but based on the title of the song used I would agree with the band’s attorney who wrote in the letter “While you are (probably) inadvertently playing a song that describes your whole campaign, we doubt that “Panic Switch” really sends the message you intend.” (From Cheat Sheet “Band Sends Romney Cease and Desist” and TMZ “Mitt Romney Accused of Hijacking Pickups Song”)

As I noted in my earlier piece, “The Difference Between Republicans and Democrats”, the McCain campaign was asked to stop using Jackson Browne’s song “Running on Empty” and John Hall’s “Still the One.”

The Republican party makes a big issue about being inclusive and being the party of the individual. But I guess, especially when one considers the statements and thoughts of Paul Ryan, the only individual who counts is one’s self; everyone else is second.

They are a party who feels that they are entitled to steal the intellectual property of others but no one else is entitled to a fair deal.

I am tired of both sides throwing mud at each other but I guess I am even more tired when things such as this, the violation of copy-right law, occurs because it only shows the hypocrisy of the party and does little to move this country forward.

“There’s A Sermon In Here Somewhere But First a Warning!”

There is a sermon in this somewhere but it is more important that you also be aware of what is happening before writing the sermon.

A friend of mine received the following e-mail this morning:

From: “Victory Church, UK” <victoryconferencedesk@gmail.com>

Subject: Symphony of Praise – Celebration of Victory Conference 2012.

Date: July 24, 2012 6:49:27 AM EDT

To: <name deleted>

Victory Church, UK.

Greenforge Way

Springvale Ind Estate

United Kingdom

NP44 3UZ

http://www.victorychurch.co.uk/

Host Pastor: Pastor Richard Taylor Email:victorychurchukdesk@gmail.com

Tel Phone: + 44 7045750464

Grace and Peace unto you <name deleted>,

REQUEST FOR SPEAKING ENGAGEMENT

I am Pastor Richard Taylor of the Victory Church,United Kingdom. We are writing to invite you to be our guest speaker at this year Symphony of Praise – Celebration of Victory Conference 2012.  After reading through your profile at http://www.nyac.comThe lord has direct us to email you for this assignment .All travel arrangements,speaking fee and accommodation will be taken care of as soon as you honor this invitation.

Venue

Spurgeon Hall (Church Hall)

Greenforge Way

Springvale Ind Estate

United Kingdom

NP44 3UZ

Date : 4th to 6th of September 2012

Topic:The Effect Of Compromising God”s Standard

We will send you all binding documents including a Letter of
Invitation and Contract Agreement as soon as you honor our invitation. Email any questions you may have. We await your earliest response.

Remain Blessed

Pastor Richard Taylor

Senior Pastor

Victory Church

Tel Phone: + 44 7045750464

Now, as far as one can tell, there is such a church and the pastor of that church is the person named in the e-mail. The link to the web site is valid and that is where the fun begins. When you check the contact information for the church you get an entirely different set of e-mail addresses. Neither of the two e-mail addresses used in the e-mail match the e-mail addresses for the church or the pastor (who has his own private e-mail address and web site).
That particular information prompted me to turn to Google and see what I found. Using Victory church scam I came away with a site which gave me some additional information.

This e-mail and its variants really do nothing wrong; you are invited to preach or sing or do something in return for your expenses being covered. So you are tempted to reply and begin the process. Their reply is to ask that you submit a certain sum of money by Western Union transfer to cover the cost of the work permits you will need for doing the work in the United Kingdom as well as providing your bank information so that the funds can be transferred to you quickly and efficiently. At this point, one either realizes what is transpiring or is taken for a fool.

I guess those who have the 2.5 million dollars in a bank still want to give away the money but they realize that most people would rather work for the funds than simply take them. It is an interesting evolution of the Nigerian bank fund scam; I even got an e-mail from someone saying that they were an FBI agent and they needed my help tracking down one of the Nigerians behind the scam. I might have bought the idea except that it wasn’t an official government e-mail and the e-mail addresses used weren’t official government e-mail addresses. So “they” are trying something new.
I have put notes about similar problems in “An Emerging Technical Problem”and “Continuing Thoughts on Emerging Technical Problems”.

Like I said, there is a sermon in here somewhere but take heed of the warning first.

More Money for Teachers

There is an article out this morning that states that President Obama is proposing to credit an elite corps of master teachers, an plan that will bolster science and mathematics education in this country.  It will cost approximately $1 billion dollars.

On the whole, that is a great idea.  But two things caught my eye; first,  it will reward high performing teachers.  And how will these teachers be determined?  Will we continue to use existing testing procedures which make test scores the basic measure of a teacher’s effectiveness?  As I have pointed out on more than one occasion, the only way that you will ever know if someone is a good teacher is to see what happens to his or her students five or ten years after the class.  Focusing on the short-term tells you nothing about what is going to happen in the long run.  Maybe in a few years, after we have tested every student and know how things turned out, we can offer a correlation between test scores and success.  Right now, we don’t have that capability.

Second, the money will be a stipend paid to current teachers.  I see this as “soft” money, money that can disappear in a heartbeat.  The problem with the science and math education reforms of the late 1960s was that when the money end, so did the reforms.  Schools were expected to continue doing what was done but without the financial support provided by Congress (let’s not even discuss the current attitude in Congress about funding any program that the President suggests).

This is is not about the Department of Education and what it does or does not do.  If, as the article states, there are 80 some programs designed to improve teacher effectiveness, then we probably want to combine, consolidate those programs so that funds are directed where they need to be and not to overhead and needless over-management.

This has to be about the future and our ability to think about the future in ways not yet imagined.  Right now, as I have stated more times than I care to admit, we can solve problems where the answer is in the back of the book; we cannot solve problems that haven’t been created yet.  And when the problem gets created, then it will be too late.

This is about our children, not about ourselves.  If we care about our children, we will work to improve all the schools in this country, knowing that the money spent now will be saved in productivity later.  We cannot make that statement about the educational system right now.

If we are serious about educational reform, let us make sure that we get the best people and we pay competitive salaries from the start.  Right now, those that need to be teaching are elsewhere because they cannot afford to be teaching.  We need to change the salary structure in our schools so that the money goes to the classroom teacher and not the administrator.  We need to make sure that math and science classes have laboratories so that what is taught is used and not simply produced.

I am glad that there is a discussion about giving teachers more money.  I hope that we can do it instead of just talking about it (again).

How to Make Sure I Won't Visit or Return to Your Church

Reblogged from Tuesdays with Morris:

Today, I found myself thinking about some of the reasons I would not visit or return to any given church. So, I thought I’d share some of those and invite any of my readers to share their reasons too!

1. Horrible Website

• I’m not really talking about design here…instead I’m talking about content.
• In the world of church websites, I really think simple/user friendly websites are best.

Read more… 1,086 more words

I wanted to "reblog" this because it echoes some of the thoughts I have expressed on a couple of occasions in the past. I have visited a number of churches over the years and very seldom have I been greeted. Now, I came for a specific reason so greeting was not high on my list (except the one time when the pastor wanted me to come and wanted to know what happened). I agree with the notes about the web site. I know where most of the churches in this area are and their starting times but I know that many newcomers to the area are going to check the website. If if is out of date or incorrect, they probably aren't got to go there. The "find-a-church" function on the umc.org page is a great help but I think that many churches don't even know it exists or what information about the church is given. Same thing about Facebook - Facebook is great if one can get to but is it set up for visitors? I think that the bulletin is the most crucial piece of written information that any church has; it is the one thing that is likely to go home with the visitor and provide them with the resources to follow up on any questions they might have. Coffee hour - I have actually been told that people should be grateful that they are getting a cup of coffee after church and that other "goodies" shouldn't be served. If we see the coffee hour as part of the Sunday morning ministry, that is not a good thought to have. I hope others will look at this post and consider what visitors will see when they walk into their church.