Learning to say I Love You more often One of the great sins of being married a long time is not saying you love your spouse often enough. We slip into this quite innocently. By the time we recognize our problem the solution requires some caving in to materialism. So I bought some fancy chocolate and a goofy valentine's day card and hid them in a place where she would see it first thing in the morning. She was impressed. She thought I forgot. Now for the hard part. Learning to say I Love You more often.
Comments [] TrackBack [] 8:39:40 AM Google It!    

Worried about the ACLU? Display only the commandments Jesus taught us
BY GREGG EASTERBROOK
Friday, February 4, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

Soon the Supreme Court will take up the question of whether the Ten Commandments can be displayed on government property. At the heart of this culture-war blockbuster will be two familiar and rivalrous claims: first, that any government sanction of religious material violates the separation of church and state; second, that the Ten Commandments promote morality and so their display must not be prohibited. We will undoubtedly hear one side decrying Christian activism run amok and the other godless secularism run amok.

Yet there is an alternative to the Ten Commandments--namely, the Six Commandments, enunciated by Jesus himself. And the Six Commandments could hang in any public facility without jeopardizing the separation of church and state.

In the Gospel of Matthew, a man asks Jesus what a person must do to enter heaven. He answers: "Keep the commandments." The man inquires: "Which ones?" Here is how the biblical account continues: "And Jesus said, 'You shall not murder; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness. Honor your father and mother. Also, you shall love your neighbor as yourself.'"

Debating what laws are more important than others was a long-standing exercise of the rabbinical tradition in which Jesus was educated. But in these verses, which have a parallel retelling in the Gospel of Mark, Christ is not merely offering an opinion about law. Something wholly remarkable happens--Jesus edits the commandments.

Quickly now, which commandments did he leave out? "You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourselves an idol. You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the Lord your God. Remember the Sabbath Day, and keep it holy." These are the commandments having to do with formal religious observance--from today's perspective, the ones that clash with the Establishment Clause. Jesus' Six Commandments make no mention of God or faith. They could be posted on public property without constitutional entanglements.

If Jesus taught Six Commandments, why do Christians talk so much about 10? As a churchgoer, I am amazed at how many of my fellow Christians do not seem to know Christ's teachings. Consider, for instance, that Jesus instructed: "Give to everyone who begs from you." Watch throngs of Christians pass panhandlers without giving and you'll have an example of how unfamiliar many are with the content of their Redeemer's ministry.

Because the Six Commandments de-emphasize formal observation of religion, some Christian traditionalists pretend that the verses do not exist. In a lifetime of sitting through the sermons of various denominations, I have never heard a minister make more than passing reference to Christ's deletion of commandments. Such was his gift that, in the Gospel of John, he simplified all moral and spiritual instruction into a single dictum: "This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you." That modification of the original commandments also de-emphasizes formal religion and as such is also given short shrift by institutional Christianity. Many Christians seem to prefer the Ten Commandments because they embody a sense of might, mountaintops and divine wrath.

But if displaying Scripture in public is meant to encourage morality, surely the Six Commandments serve the purpose. Read them again:

You shall not murder.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness.
Honor your father and mother.
Also, you shall love your neighbor as yourself.

Comments [] TrackBack [] 9:06:19 AM Google It!    

I was helping out in an info area at the church last Sunday. A woman came in after the service and was visibly distraught over something. Although my primary job is to help people find information on our various programs, I occasionally find myself in many different roles. This woman was upset over Farenheit 911 and wanted to know what the church was going to do about the issues brought up in the movie. Then she told me she knew it was propaganda but she couldn't get over it. So I listened. She desparately needed to talk this problem out. When I did talk to her it was to share my concerns over the conditions of the Iraq people and our young soldiers. I carefully avoided political opinions since I knew this her seeking healing and not about how smart I was. I tried to encourage here to step back from the rhetoric of the movie and talk to her friends about her concerns. She started to feel much better. As we were finishing up she tried to talk me into seeing the movie. I politely refused. I have not seen any of the previous Michael Moore movies.  I am not anti-Michael Moore as much as I would prefer to spend my $9 to go see something like Spiderman 2. Now that's entertainment! When I wanted facts about 9-11, I read the 9-11 commission report.

Comments [] TrackBack [] 9:41:04 AM     

God made us sisters, Prozac makes us friends I was real happy with the progress our dysfunctional family had made towards sitting at a table and having a pleasant Sunday dinner and converstation. That is until last night. My wife got into quite a snit with her sister. The subject of the arguement is not important. Arguements like this are never about anything important. It quickly got out of hand and could not be reigned in. My son later described it as a brawl. I was embarrased by my wife's behavior. The only thing worthwhile that occurred that evening was on the way home. My son started to counsel his mother on forgiveness, pig headness, and controlling her temper. He was calm and earnest and she reluctantly discussed her feelings about her sister with him. He navigated the minefield of his mother's emotions quite nicely. I am proud of him.
Comments [] TrackBack [] 10:42:12 AM Google It!    

Surviving Sunday dinner My wife, her sister, and her mother do not get along. I still find it amazing that I am the only one who can keep a civil relationship with all three but sometimes I wish I had community water fountain laced with Prozac for those ladies. Last night we had a Sunday dinner together. It has been quite a while since we last ate together.  During dinner I guided the conversation away from the petty personal issues to the petty issues of politics and we had a fine time. The food was great and everyone was happy. I topped off my contribution with a dementia test Aunt Ann had sent me in an email. We ate desert and laughed as we all failed the test miserably.
Comments [] TrackBack [] 8:09:50 AM Google It!    

The Grand Experiment

Recently I heard Dr. Dobson provide an idea about encouraging saving and generosity in teenagers. He recommended making a standing offer to match any contributions your child makes to their savings account or to the church. Two days ago I offered the same plan to my son. Yesterday at church I had forgotten my offer to my son when the offering plate arrived. Dutifully he reached into his billfold and put some of his money in and looked at me. I found myself scrambling throught my billfold to match him. I hope he continues and has fun with this. The importance of managing money wisely is a difficult lesson.

Comments [] TrackBack [] 1:26:08 PM Google It!    

When does the separation of church and state become threat to good public policy?

I have been playing around with several thoughts about the separation of church and state. The doctrine of separation of church and state appears to mean different things to different people. This subject continues to be very misunderstood. I did a little internet search and came up with a very nice page, Separation of Church and State Home Page. It makes a persuavise argument for the separationist viewpoint. Their politics slip in here and there but overall the presentation is factual and informative.

The most interesting question that wandered into my brain after reading most of the site is: How much of the federal interpretation of separation of church apply to state governments?

My thought process goes this way. Their site does a nice job explaining the limited role of the Federal government and they make a nice argument that the Constitution does not borrow a lot from the Ten Commandments by saying murder, stealing, etc., are state issues. Then it struck me! When you get down to it, most issues affecting the common man are covered by state law. So why has the federal courts stepped in and made changes on state and local government public policy issues? Is this good law or just an example of federal power? Most of the court cases have been really silly and the only effect has been to make the Federal courts look silly. If the powers of the Federal Government are “few and defined” and religion is not one of the powers defined, why do they seem to be stretching to take on cases that forces their interpretation of church and state doctrine on the states? The polls show that the people believe in the separation of church and state but not to the degree required by the Federal courts. I don't believe that courts should change their decisions because of recent polls but popular opinion ultimately sways judicial opinion. I get this sense of a desire by the Federal courts to try explain their decisions on this law as perfect when the public says something different is required. If a state or local government has a practical reason for including a relationship to religious texts (Ten Commandments text posted in public buildings) or symbols(e.g. cross in the seal for LA) and the people agree, why not let the states and local governments make the decisions on public policies that affect them? This begs the question, does a state have the authority to implement "less strict" separation of church and state view because their need to change the public’s perception to state issues(e.g. murder, quality of local education) is higher than the need of the Federal courts?

Comments [] TrackBack [] 1:09:10 PM Google It!