But That Is Not To Be . . . . Or Is It?

I was reading my Facebook time line the other day when I came across a post that one of my high school classmates had lost his wife. That really didn’t surprise me because we had spoken recently about her health and how she wasn’t getting better.  What really got my attention was the names of folks who were extending condolences and offering prayers. I took note that the classmates on that list formed a group who had lost their spouses.

It was then that I realized out of the Pasadena High School (TX) 1965 graduating class of 488 students 74 had already died. As I perused that Facebook thread I had a wave of sadness flow over me as a realized we were losing friends who were a part of our formative years at an ever increasing rate.

I realized that we are all mortal and we have all entered the final leg of our journey here on earth and have an appointment with death. I really am not trying to be morbid. The Bible says, “It is appointed unto man once to die.” (Hebrews 9:27).  I am trying to look reality in the face for a few minutes.

So, as I enter the final miles of my journey here on Earth I have given some thought to "What Next?" I mean what about death and dying as a Christian. I know that Jesus said, “I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.” Yet here I sit in the face of so powerful a statement of eternal life thinking about death.

It is clear from Jesus' words that for the Christian, life goes on eternally.  We know that when we lose someone we love who also loved and followed after Christ, we will see them once again. Yet still there is the pain of separation.  I have been married to the same woman for more than 53 years at this writing. I assure you we have literally become one flesh in every sense of the meaning of that phrase. I have spent a lifetime being a “we” and I am not sure how I will discover the “me” in our we.

By the way, the words of Jesus above are the reason you never hear me speaking of Loved ones who have entered eternity as being lost or dead. They are not lost because I know where they are and they are not dead they are just living out of sight until I join them. I like the term "passed" when speaking of what the uninitiated call death. They haven't died they have passed from the realm of the temporary to the land of the eternal. Just another digression to which my readers have become accustomed.

When I think of “death” I see only the death of the body in which I life. “By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return" (Gen. 3:19).  So if the body dies and returns to the Earth from which it came what is Jesus speaking of when he says we have ‘everlasting life” that shall never die.

Do you remember in Genesis where the Scripture says, “And God breathed into his nostrils and man became a living soul” (Genesis 2:7). Death takes place when our person leaves it. The body receives it animation from the living spirit within us which is the breathe of God. So, what are we . . . we are a living soul and as long as we are functional in this world we live within a physical body.
So if when I die my body returns to the Earth from which it came what happens to me. Paul speaking for the believer in Christ says that to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord and Jesus told the believing thief who died along side him that was a place called Paradise.
I take great comfort in that.

However, for those of us who have found in our spouses our soul mates and truly become one flesh “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). As mentioned earlier my wife and I have spent 53 plus years becoming a “we” . . . . one flesh. For people like us (Susan and myself) we find it difficult our selves from each other. We truly have become one.  Someone said parting is so hard that they sometimes wished they had never loved.

Alfred Lord Tennyson was insightful when he said “It is better to have loved and lost than to never have loved at all.” But that is precisely why our losses wound us. However, I would suggest to you that we are better off having had the opportunity to love than we are had we never loved. Not loving may leave us unscathed but we would never have known the intimacy of loving and being loved.

I have to confess that though we have had our share of struggles and challenges along the way but as we faced them together our live for each other became deeper and stronger. God has given us a good life.  In my heart and mind I literally hurt at the thought of death and the separation from those we love it brings even if it is only temporary. You see, for me, even with the struggle, life together has been heaven enough and I would be content to go on forever just as it is now.

But that is not to be . . . . or is it?

Because of this I have to remind myself that as Christian neither of us are a citizen of this world trying to get to heaven; we are  citizens of heaven making your way through this world.

This world is not my home I'm just a passing through
My treasures are laid up somewhere beyond the blue
The angels beckon me from heaven's open door
And I can't feel at home in this world anymore

Oh lord you know I have no friend like you
If heaven's not my home then lord what will I do
The angels beckon me from heaven's open door
And I can't feel at home in this world anymore

I have a loving mother just over in gloryland
And I don't expect to stop until I shake her hand
She's waiting now for me in heaven's open door
And I can't feel at home in this world anymore

Oh lord you know I have no friend like you
If heaven's not my home Then lord what will I do
The angels beckon me From heaven's open door
And I can't feel at home In this world anymore

As hard as it is to understand death is particularly “bearable” for the Christian. We know that death can only bring a temporary separation. For now, we are left behind. But one day, Christ will come, and we will be forever reunited with our people.

That’s why we don’t “grieve as those who have no hope.” In other words, Christians do not grieve like those who are not Christians. Because we serve a living God, we have hope. Because Jesus died, was buried, and rose again on the third day, we have hope . . . . . confidence that what God has said will come to pass.

Does time heal all wounds? No, but Christ does. I’m grateful today that though I will one day say farewell to or others will say it to me that farewell is really just, “Farewell for now.”  Add to that the fact there is a sense in which we will still be walking hand in hand together even though one has left. Paul once said, “behold I show you a mystery.” Well I want to share with you a mystery. As we walk with Jesus here on Earth and the other with Him on streets of gold we are both walking with Jesus and in him with each other. It is that mystery that I know they are not dead they are just not here.

Will we hurt and grieve. You betcha we will! Those who love deepest hurt the most. But we do not grieve as those who have no hope. Because He lives we shall also live. Time does not heal the broken heart but Jesus does bind up the wounds.

I have been asked at virtually every memorial service I have conducted questions like: Will we recognize each other in heaven? Will we have a body and if so what will it be like? What age will we be in heaven? I do have opinions about these and perhaps one day, if there is interest I'll share them.

Suffice it to say that when death opens the door to eternity and we step through we will be changed in a moment as in the twinkle of an eye and we will find ourselves in His presence and realize that we appear as He does. Clearly we will know each other but the relationship will be different and it will be eternal and it will be deeper and more significant than anything we shared here.  Anything else might well be just speculation. . . . . . Oh, keep in mind they are not lost when we know where they are.

Just a few thoughts about things to come. Things we will all experience if Jesus delays his coming.  It that case I'll meet you in the air.

Neither a Borrower Nor a Lender Be

I read something this morning that got me to thinking about my own practice at lending money or extending credit to family, friends and acquaintances. Seems a friend of mine extended credit to a friend of his who because of circumstances found himself unable to pay the debt.

My immediate thought was, if that were to happen to me what should I do? Notice I didn’t say what would I do but what I should do.  Debt creates an uneven relationship between two people. Essentially it makes one person a slave and the other person their master. God didn’t intend for us to live in that kind of unbalance with people, and the friction caused by such arrangements can actually damage and worse yet destroy relationships. If you really value your relationship with someone, forgiving their debt will help you preserve the core friendship that matters most. I might add, you do so quietly.

You have done nothing wrong by insisting on aa debt being paid but you have done better when extending forgiveness. With that said, I will now turn to my subject.

In Hamlet, the character Polonius counsels his son Laertes before he embarks on his visit to Paris saying, “Neither a borrower nor a lender be; For loan oft loses both itself and friend.” Good advice I'd say.

The meaning is pretty straight forward - do not lend or borrow money from a friend, because if you do so, you will run the risk of losing both your friend and your money.

In my first church as a pastor, Highland Park Baptist in Kilgore, Texas I had a deacon, M.A. Smith, who told me essentially the same thing and who showed me what I believe is a better way. Mr. Smith was without question the wealthiest man in our church but that was not always the case. He was one of those few people men of wealth who could honestly empathize with people who struggled financially.

I remember standing with him in a Drug store, I believe near the corner of Main and Hwy 259 on Valentine's Day. We had just returned from Grapeland where he had some gas wells. We had stopped to pick up a Valentine cards for our wives. While there he told me, "I was standing right here many years ago when I had the greatest day of my financial life. It was here, that for the first time in my life I realized I could tell the clerk 'how many without asking how much.'"  I would learn much more about his early struggles as my time in Kilgore passed.

But I digress. It was M.A. Smith who told me, "I never lend money to my friends. If they need it I will just gift it to them"  I asked him why and he explained, "Well, if I loan them something and they can't repay the feel guilty and I risk losing a friend and I run the risk of having ill feeling toward them and damaging a friendship."

I have thought about that over the years and I too have adopted that policy as my own and I recommend it. You will find over time it will stand you well and it will strengthen your friendships.

Mr. Smith went on to tell me that he expected his friends to let him know when they had needs going unmet but he also thought it was his responsibility to become aware of such needs. People are proud and proud people will not ask for help but that doesn't change the fact that there is a need I can meet.  I cannot tell you how many $1000's of dollars he brought over my time in Kilgore to me to give anonymously to people he knew were struggling. One more trait I discovered he did not distinguish between his friends and people who resented his wealth.

Remember, when Scripture tales about God loving a cheerful giver it is not talking just about giving to the church. M.A. Smith had discovered the real meaning of giving in this statement by Jesus, "When you have done it to these the least of my brothers you have done it unto me."  Jesus really nailed it when he said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” In fact he believed that God had given him the “Midas touch” for the express purpose of helping people in need and that if he quit giving his money away in ways that helped others he would himself soon find himself among the needy.  He often quoted to me the words of Moses in Duet. 8:18, “But thou shalt remember the Lord thy God; for it is He that giveth thee power to get wealth.”

In short, I actually get more out of giving than the person I give to gets by being the recipient of my gift.  I have often wondered that when Jesus said, “the poor you have with you always” He wasn’t also saying, “you have plenty of opportunities to know the joy of giving and sharing.”

So let me summarize: “Neither a borrower nor a lender be; For loan oft loses both itself and friend” but cheerfully give to those in need.

1. There is nothing inherently wrong with borrowing or lending money. Although God appears to hate usury (interest and I’d say especially compounded interest). Sometimes in our financial dealings demand it. We need not lecture on how and why the situation needing a loan came about . . . we only need to know the need is there and it may be our only recourse.

2. When dealing with friends and relatives I suggest that if you want to be of help to them you should gift them not loan to them. Loans in reality only shift need from one pocket to the other.

3. We should always have our antennas up and working as to the needs our friends and family have. While there is no shame in sharing your need many, like myself, will never ask friends or family for help. I believe we must protect their pride/dignity or whatever you wish it. Personally, I don’t want to owe my friends and family and money or them me for the very reasons that Polonius gives.

I am thinking about Christmas . . . it is that time of year.

Today I was thinking about Christmas and how different it is from  those of my childhood. Christmas as a child was filled with anticipation and hopeful expectations. Christmas shopping when I was a kid was always an "almost didn't get it done thing."  My Dad was an independent garage man and the auto repair business was really slow during the Christmas season. People simply put off getting things done on their cars that weren't absolutely necessary. After all, they could use that money for Christmas expenses.

Neither my Dad or myself blamed them for that. However, it always meant that we had to wait until the last minute for Christmas preparation and gifts. I cannot remember a single Christmas when Dad and I were not shopping for Mom's Christmas present on December 24. Mom, like me had to share her birthday (Dec 30) with Christmas so when someone gave either of us a gift is was a 2fer.  But, I suppose the very fact that Dad and I were both shopping together for the most important woman in either of our lives was a Christmas gift in and of itself.

In addition we had a great family tradition that involved our extended family gathering wherever my grandparents and later just my grandmother lived. It was wonderful to be together as the Appleby Clan surrounded by aunts, uncles and cousins. I miss those days. Some of my fondest memories are from that time. I really do miss those days.

Over the years Christmas has changed for me. When I was the kid spoken of above it was to a large measure all about me and what I was going to get. As time past and I grew and matured the circle of Christmas joy increased. In 1966 Christmas added another person to the family. It was the same tradition except that the person I was shopping with was no longer my Dad but my wife. Yep we married on December 23 and went Christmas shopping on December 24th. But, other than that the Christmas celebrations pretty much stayed the same.

Within a few years, Christmas of 1969 to be precise, Christmas really took on a major change. Our marriage turned into a family and on Christmas 1969 there was three of us. That was the year when we (Susan and I) learned our place in the family pecking order. You see up until 1969 our families saw us as the focus of Christmas. Either they came to our house or we went to theirs but in every instance it was our young daughter, Tabetha, who was the focus of Christmas giving. To be sure we still got a gift but Tabetha was buried beneath the gifts.

Years came and went during which more children were added to our family. There was a son (Matthew) born in 1972, another daughter (Charity) in 1976 and another daughter (Anastacia) born in 1980. Wow, our own grand parents, siblings and children. It was a little like the days of my childhood.

Suffice it to say that in my nearly 73 years I have seen and experienced a lot of Christmas celebrations. Some were lean and some were fat but all were centered in the Christmas story as recorded in Luke's gospel.

That brings me to now. These days I celebrate Christmas from the perspective of a long life and the aging process. For Susan and myself Christmas has the same meaning as always but it is a radically different celebration. Retirement, health issues, and just the cost of living have all contributed. We no longer offer the lavish Christmas dinners, buy gifts as though they were going out of style, send the greeting cards to the hundreds of people who enriched our lives or attended a myriad of Christmas parties and celebrations.

Most of our Christmas is now spent quietly with each other. We don't need more things in our life. We have more now than we can keep up with. Many years ago when visiting in a nursing home an elderly lady took my hand and with teary eyes said to me, "All I want for Christmas is to be with my children and grandchildren. I want to hear their voices and the laughter and I want to just touch them." I realized then what I know now what it was about Christmas that I loved from those earliest days to today. It wasn't the gift, it was the one doing the giving, it was the shopping, it was who we shopped for, it wasn't the crowd, it was the people. That's it. Christmas was about the people in my life and like that long passed lady in the nursing home I want to spend it with people who are near and dear to my heart.

I want to see my children and grandchildren. I want to watch them run and play. I want to hear them shriek with joy and watch them eat. I want I want them to know that their presence brings me more joy and warms my heart. I want to touch them and feel the life the exude. That would be Christmas for me.  I also want them to know when the Christmas gathering is done and they all leave that is the loneliest day in my life. I go from a full heart to a feeling of emptiness. So don't show-up leaving. It only helps your conscience and hurts their heart.

But I know children are no different than  was I at their age. When I shopped with my Dad in paragraph one above it was important that I get my Mom something I believed she would see as wonderful, Of course I didn't realize then what I know now and that is it didn't matter what the gift was it blessed her.

However, I also know now what I didn't know then and that is over the year she garnered a lot of things she really didn't need and a few she didn't really want. So I have thought about the kinds of gifts we "Old Folks" would use and find helpful. I talked with people my age about this and a few people who are care givers and they shared their ideas about gifts for people like us.  Nearly everyone said, "Money would be nice."

Now understand, whatever you give we will love just because you gave it. So hear it is:
1. High on the list was anything that would provide financial relief. Rent may not be much but you'd be surprised what we old folks could do is we could just skip a rent payment. Another thought in this group of ideas would be utilities for a month of a year or a cable TV expense (Television is their companion most of the year).
2. A short trip somewhere like a bed and breakfast or even in your home for a few days. Send them on a cruise (call me on this one I can help).  Elderly folks rarely get away from the house except to visit the doctors. Some actually know their doctors better than they do their families. Why, they see them more frequently.
3. Gift cards to their local grocery store, fast food restaurant, or online store like Amazon.
4. Be creative, I'll bet you can come up with something special.

Finally, don't take it personal if they do not give you a gift in return. Remember, they are limited as to income, they find it harder to go to busy shops, have no idea what to buy.

I don't want a lot for Christmas

There is just one thing I need
I don't care about the presents
Underneath the Christmas tree
I just want you for my own
More than you could ever know
Make my wish come true oh
All I want for Christmas is you

I don't want a lot for Christmas
There is just one thing I need, and I
Don't care about the presents
Underneath the Christmas tree
I don't need to hang my stocking
There upon the fireplace
Santa Claus won't make me happy
With a toy on Christmas day

I just want you for my own
More than you could ever know
Make my wish come true
All I want for Christmas is you

The Way We Were . . . . Why?

I just read an article in the Christian Post under the headline: "New York public school rejects student Christian club, OKs LGBT Pride Club." The longer I live the more I appreciate the remarkable community that nurtured me during my formative years. I read articles like these and wonder, "Why."  Why do these kinds of divide exist? I used to think that my high school years were typical of young people of my generation. But the older I get the more I see that maybe, just maybe they were more exceptional than I have previously thought. To be sure we did all the things that other high schools were doing during that era. We played basketball, football and a host of other sports. We had bands that practiced in our garages, choirs in church and at school and in after hours were developing the music of the 1960's (You need to read Vicki Welch Ayo's The Boys From Houston for details of that last comment). We had boy and girl friends, went to school dances and drive in movies. I say all this to point out on the surface at least we appeared to be like all the others of our time. But there was something about the class of 1965 that was different. It is hard to put one's finger on just what made it different but I assure you looking back from the advantage of 2019 something made it special. I really don't recall students being divided by their religious, political, or moral beliefs or lack thereof. I have strained my brain trying to recall the few people with whom I had issues. In the few cases I recall was not because of the beliefs but because of what they either did to me or said about me or my family. And, I should add that treated my friends badly. But even in these cases there was never any lasting animosity or was my anger transferred to others of their particular demographic. In fact, a few of these became good friends over time. Now, I can hear some of you reading saying, "Well, sounds like you're describing a homogeneous group." I guess in a sense I am but not in the traditional sense. We didn't look alike; we weren't all from the same social or cultural backgrounds; we weren't all religious and those who were religious spanned the gamut of religions. I suppose we were by default homogeneously Caucasian but it was not an intentional thing and not exclusively so since there was also in our community a large Hispanic population (I distinguish between Latino and Hispanic. For me Hispanic represents people from a Spanish tradition while Latino speaks of people speaking a "romance language" of Spanish, Portuguese or Italian.) With all the religious, cultural, and individual heritage traditions there was an over arching acceptance of people different in many ways from ourselves. I know it was true for me and I suspect for most of my friends and fellow students. We just didn't see our differences as a reason to dislike or condemn. I can't speak for others but I trace this tendency in myself back to the days when we lived in Orange, Texas just a block down the street from the "Projects" (government low income housing). That and a father who taught me long before Martin Luther King came on the scene that you judge people based on their actions and character and not such superficial things such as color, culture etc. In talking with fellow students from those days I find they had a similar upbringing. We often speak of our parents as the "Greatest Generation" and that largely because of the Second World War. But I see them as the Greatest generation because not only what they did historically but what they taught and modeled to their children. It seems that my friends parents were teaching them essentially the same things I was learning at home. Indeed, home seemed in those days to be the pot in which our character was molded. All I know is that the few organizations to which I belonged were blind to color, social standing, and culture. In many ways we were a curious lot. Not curious in the sense of strange but in the sense that we had a wide ranging curiosity. It wasn't until the so called university experts began to gain a voice in our social structure that the high view of the home, church and culture began to be chipped away. In their efforts to "fix" the so called deficiencies in our basic institutions that societies fabric and individual lives really began to come unraveled. This has continued at an ever increasing rate and I see little change on the horizon. Instead of "fixing" our institutions we weakened them. We moved societally away from absolute values that there are things you just do not do and others that are required of you to a system of situational ethics that taught that every situation must be decided on its own merit. In our growing up everyone knew what the boundaries were. We may have crossed them but we knew we were at risk by doing so. Rights were expanded as maturity was developed. I recall that when I was at Houston Baptist College the only qualifiers for a group on campus was that it must have a service and learning component and if memory has not totally atrophied that was the standard in High School as well. I must add that membership was restricted enrolled students. There were no cultural, racial, or social barriers or qualifications to restrict membership. So, our clubs and organizations were composed of people who chose to be involved because of their interest sets. You were not involved in baseball because you liked the game. The same was true of the Thespian Club. You were not accepted or rejected based on anything other than your desire to be a part of that group (Some groups, such as a few competitive sports groups, had a maximum number set by the State and some like Regional and State musical groups were restricted by number of places and level of talent and ability). So, what to do? Well, in my ideal world Christians would get back to basics and realize that God's intends to change society not by social manipulation but by conversion; nor by legislation but through persuasion that the Judeo-Christian ethic is the superior foundation for government that is inclusive; and that individual family values are more effective than University created systems in developing individuals of good character and integrity. We need to take a pause in "looking to the future" and take a few minutes to look to the past and relearn the truth that "the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world." I long to see a day when the lessons taught and the example set during our formative years are consistent with one another. I want to see parents set high moral and ethical standards and then to consistently live them. I have been told that we each have a preferred way of learning. But I believe however you learn the moral and ethical principles of life you must see them being lived out. Morality and ethics like spirituality is more caught than taught. In my mind knowledge is meaningful only if it is reflected in action. We are what we do and not just what we think. This is true for children and it is true adults. Here is what I wish we had learned before we reached first grade. I wish we had learned the lesson of the bean sprout in the cup. The bean sprouted, grew-up and then dies. That was intended to teach us everything we needed to know about life's tenure. We are born, we live and we will die and that will prove to be a short time over our three score and ten years. We also should have learned that we need others. We need to find our support group and family is the first place we find support from others. That is followed by our friends, life companion, workplace, and church. Remember how we were told in preschool to "Hold hands and stick together” as you go outside. Why, because that's where the danger lies and that is where we need each other. Besides, the world can be a lonely place when you're alone. I think maybe, because of our parents and then later reinforced by our teachers and hammered home by the untimely passing of high school friends we had an underlying sense of the importance and brevity of life and the significance other people have in our well-being. This produced a group of people where lawyers weren't need to build community or resolves differences.

Impeach 45? . . . . but Why?

Only the people living in the cemetery do not know or have not heard that the Democrats are trying to build a case for impeaching the President of the United States and have been doing so since before he was even elected. We have heard very little for the last two years but "Impeach 45" from the Democrat Party. All sorts of attempts have been made at developing some kind of evidence that he has done something that so egregious that the only recourse is impeachment. All of these have failed. Presently they are trying to string him up (not allowed to use word "lynch" because it is offense to some people)  with some sort of "abuse of power" charge. This effort is taking place in a Democrat controlled committee of the House of Representatives chaired by the man who has been leading the charge to destroy the President. For the present I will say noting of the motives behind all this except to say that I believe the motives are purely political, not honorable and the process is disingenuous. I will note that the case against the President is being built around two things. 1. The use of a "quid pro quo" in negotiating with a foreign power; and, 2. The use of a private track in foreign policy. The process for putting all this together is the secrecy of closed doors. Here are some of my thoughts on all this . . . . . In thinking about the "Quid pro quo" thing I find myself wondering what all the hullabaloo is about. "Quid pro quo" simply means "this for that."  It is the very heart of every negotiation and diplomacy. The person (substitute business or country) with the strongest hand usually gets more of what they want than does the person with the weaker hand. My point is simply this: Just because there is a "quid pro quo" does not a crime create let alone a "high crime" or "misdemeanor." The second thing that confuses me is the hubbub about have a duel policy track. One, the official State Department track and a second independent Presidential track. This is nothing new. Presidents have been doing personal and independent diplomacy for longer than I can remember. It began when Washington favored a separate track using Hamilton's private track (Treasurer Secretary) over Jefferson's (Secretary of State) official track regarding the French Republic. Virtually every President since then has used dual tracks for diplomatic negations and relationships in general. Not only did they use dual tracts they engaged in personal diplomacy and negotiations. They did this with both domestics issues as well as international ones. It was a standing joke on the Hill that when Lyndon Johnson invited someone to the Ranch and while there said, "Lets take a walk" that whoever was on that walk was going to do whatever they were asked. Why was that the case . . . . . well, as the story goes, Johnson knew where all the skeletons were buried."  You can only imagine what the quid pro quo was then. The third thing that puzzles me is the use of closed door meetings in the House of Representatives for non-national security matters. This is the "People's House" and it appears to me that that is the last place where closed door meetings would be held. This practice hearkens back to the old "Cloak Room" meetings where things were decided before a committee "rubber stamped" the cloak room decisions. Secrecy allows for all sorts of shenanigans and wrong doing. With the exception of "surprise parties" for birthdays, anniversaries and planned retirements very little done behind closed doors is wholesome. Everything that goes on behind closed doors hinges upon the integrity of the people conducting the meetings. However, I have learned from experience that behind closed doors you learn that public integrity and private integrity are two entirely different things. Besides, decisions made behind closed doors are always subject to skepticism on the part of those not in the closed meeting. This process is illegal for City Councils, School Boards and all kinds of public bodies. The single exception is for personnel matters involving people who work for those governmental entities. If the sauce is good for the gander then it is good for the goose. From where I sit there is nothing of significance in any of this that would lead me to think "Impeach 45." It is time for the House and all their allies in the intelligence community (deep state) to lay down their swords and let the people decide come November 2020. If we have learned anything in this grand experiment call The United States of America it is the voice of the people that matters. We don't need the professional politicians and the bureaucrats to use spin and hyperbole to shape our thinking. Just lay all the cards on the table and we'll let you know what we think and what we expect. We need a really bright shot of daylight on Washington. To paraphrase Henry II,  "What miserable drones and traitors have we nurtured and promoted in the People's House who treat the office of President with such shameful contempt." Will no one rid us of these turbulent congressmen?"  I guess that will be "We The People" come the general election in November 2020

Impeachment or Coup d'etat

I heard a Democrat Congressman say that the minority (meaning Republicans) are "Darn lucky these hearings aren't public" implying that, as Jack Nicholson said in the movie "A Few Good Men," . . . . . “You can't handle the truth!" He seems to suggest that if we had heard what he has heard in secret we could not handle it. I say, let me be the judge of how I handle what has been said in the secret place. It is not the witness’s testimony I fear . . . . .  it is the second hand reporting of that testimony that he and Adam Schiff decide to let me hear that I fear.

Well, to him I say, the truth may be hard and painful but it is only the truth, the whole truth and nothing except what is true that will set us free from the grip of half truths.
At the prompting of Dr. A.O. Collins I penned the following on the inside cover of my Journal. . . . . .

From the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth
From the cowardice that shrinks from new truth
O God of truth deliver us.
From the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth
From the laziness that is content with half truth
O God of truth deliver us.

Adam Schiff has conducted his committee meetings as if it were a Grand Jury procedure allowing only his witnesses to testify and to do that in secret meetings closed to both the public and the Congress. His first reason for secrecy was the protection of a whistle blowers’ identity. He has since marshaled several other weaker reasons. In my view and many other Constitutional authorities his whole process is a violation of the Constitutional process for impeachment. I would add that because of his own clearly and publicly stated bias against the President and his own public record of lying about the matters before his committee disqualify him to chair let alone judge the maters he claims to be investigating.

I would remind Congressman Adam Schiff and the others after his ilk of the words of Jesus regarding testimony, light and darkness . . . . . "This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil."

Darkness hides and conceals what is happening. That is why the thief comes under cover of darkness and not in the noonday light. So also does the conniver who desires to protect his own complicity in evil doing. I have seen and heard men say things in closed meetings that they would never say in public because of blow back and damage to their reputation.

Later Jesus made it clear that the actions and deeds done in secret will one day be subject to the bright light of truth and revelation. He categorically stated, "There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, and nothing hidden that will not be made known. What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs."

Many a life has been destroyed by the actions of men hiding behind closed doors. Let your "Yea" be "Yea" and your "Nay' be "Nay." Speak the truth as you understand and believe it to be but do so in the open where your testimony can be examined by the people whose lives are affected. Speak the truth. Speak the truth in public where it can be heard and tested. Speak the truth in love and without rancor or ill will toward those who truth spoken harms or vindicates.

Trust me, the scripture does not err on any level or application when it says, "and you shall know the Truth and the Truth shall set you free."  Might I suggest that it is fear of the public “knowing the whole truth” that has driven these Congressional hearings behind closed doors.

A word about Whistle Blowers and secrecy. When Jeremiah purposed not to speak God’s word for fear of retribution he finally stated, “But if I say, ‘I will not mention his word or speak anymore in his name,’ his word is in my heart like a fire, a fire shut up in my bones. I am weary of holding it in; indeed, I cannot.” 

In a like manner the information that a whistle blower feels must be made know would be like a fire in their bones and they must speak, secrecy or no secrecy.  The importance of their message outweighs any possible personal repercussions. If you name them then take ownership of your testimony before them. The accused has the right to confront their accusers.  When it comes to material things secrecy may not be harmful but when it involves actions that will forever change an individual life, or the lives of many lives or the nation secrecy is anathema.  It opens the doors to treachery. When secrecy is imposed not only is the witness’s testimony called into question but those who judge the veracity of his testimony are called into question as well.

So if the Democrats insist on holding hearings on undoing a Constitutionally prescribed Presidential election let everything be done in a fitting, orderly and open way so that the people who elected that President can see and know whether or not the facts justify the action and hold the perpetrators accountable. It is we the people who will decide whether justice has been served or a cloakroom coup has been executed but we must have all the information and facts to judge fairly and vote appropriately.

This whole affair began prior to the election and has continued nonstop since 2016 and in my view when taken in its full context is nothing short of a coup d'etat.

The Don Quixotes of the Christian Left

Alex Wong/Getty Images 

My old friend, the late James Dunn, who was a firebrand for religious liberty in the tradition of Roger Williams, John Leland, George W. Truett and the other great Baptist leaders before him, understood the dangers of civil religion but he also understood the command to be salt and light influencers of our culture through political action. He, unlike the present Director and staff at the BJC, never participated in the propagandistic language of Newspeak to create a Don Quixote windmill against which to joust. He sought to persuade men in order to win them to his view . . . . not hammer them with self-righteous proclamations and disingenuous straw men. His views were birthed in Scripture not Progressivism.

The Baptist Joint Committee on Public Policy (hereafter referred to as BJC) is spearheading a campaign against what they label as Christian Nationalism. The name is not original with them but Amanda Tyler the BJC’s Director and her staff have adopted it and taken the lead on trying to expose and destroy it. Her stance has received the endorsement of  Michael Curry, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church; the Rev. Elizabeth Eaton, presiding bishop of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America; Sister Simone Campbell, head of Catholic social justice lobby NETWORK; Tony Campolo, founder of Red Letter Christians; Jim Winkler, president and general secretary of the National Council of Churches; Melissa Rogers, former executive director of the White House Office of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships under President Barack Obama; the Rev. Jimmie Hawkins, director of the Presbyterian Church (USA)’s Office of Public Witness; and the Rev. Paul Baxley, executive coordinator of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship . . . . . all Left leaning Christian leaders (Progressives).

From the list above and others found elsewhere it appears that this disingenuous indignation that seeks to bring condemnation down upon the heads of Conservative Christians who dare to be found active in the public square is the result of theologically liberal Christians who afraid of the gains social conservatives who are Christians have made in the last few years. They are attempting to sideline faithful Christians by creating “Christian Nationalism” which one prominent conservative historian has referred to as a "radioactive term" designed to soil their reputation.

What is Christian Nationalism? . . . . It is the “merging of Christian and American identities by distorting both the Christian faith and America’s constitutional democracy. Christian nationalism demands Christianity be privileged by the State and implies that to be a good American, one must be Christian."

By defining Christian Nationalism this way Amanda Tyler, et. al. are seeking to redefine nationalism in a way that implies something sinister about conservative Christians who love their country and who often refer to the United States of America (hereafter referred to as “America”) as a Christian Nation. The very term Christian Nationalism is a “Newspeak” implying that there is something sinister about Christians who love their country. Are there people who would like to see the United States and Christianity merged into a single entity?  I am sure there is. There all kind of nutty people in our world and sadly our religious and political leaders too often pander to some of them. I am also sure that among the nutty people are a few who would like to see the country adopt the Bible or the Koran as the basis of our national government. Some would support Sharia law. Other twits want a Socialistic agenda and to do away with things like Electoral College and the Senate. Neither of these constitute a significant threat.

Most Christians I know believe that mixed with the empiricism of John Locke and Alexander Pope are the moral Principles of the Christian Scripture. From early founders fleeing religious persecution to those who simply wanted a new start in life for their families virtually every people group that constituted the founding culture whether Christian or not accepted the fact that the moral and ethical standards found in the Christian Scripture were the underpinnings of the new nation. Even the "Create a more perfect union” made an appeal to the commonly accepted notion that our basic rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness come from God and were not negotiable.

It is also true that the founders recognized that government and religion should not be organizationally united. Hence the prohibition on government in the first amendment of involving itself in religion. They included no such provision for religion. So while Jefferson spoke of a wall of separation existed between state and church it was a wall to keep government out of religion not religion out of government.

So I find myself asking, “And just what is that you're against that is real? I'm a Christian and I'm against "gobbledygook." Do you know what it is that I am against when I call it “gobbledygook?” Well, just so you know I am against the use of “Newspeak” to distort and confuse.  Through the use of propagandistic language marked by euphemism, circumlocution, and the inversion of customary meanings and that is what Christian Nationalism is they denigrate conservative Christians.

If you are just talking about merging  Christian and American identities by distorting both the Christian faith and America’s constitutional democracy then say so and there is a better than even chance I'll agree. However, when you added “Christian nationalism demands Christianity be privileged by the State and implies that to be a good American, one must be Christian" you revealed your true colors. So I have to ask, “Who the heck are or talking about?”  This is a Quixotic windmill. Never in my 73 years among Christians and Baptist in particular have I ever heard anyone say that to be a good American you must be a Christian. That’s just a cleaver phrase designed to be a windmill, i.e., create a reality out of a non-reality.

To go a little further . . . .I had posted on the BJC Facebook page a short blurb about the use of "Newspeak" and I got a response that said,  "Yes David, but it is a little more comfortable than Christian White Supremacist isn't it."  I don't know exactly what this person was saying but I have a strong inclination that "Christian White Supremacist" is what their Newspeak term "Christian Nationalist" really means. That in turns says something about how folks who follow the BJC see conservative Christians. So anytime you are referred to as a Christian Nationalist they are in reality lumping you in with White Supremacist and by extension Neo-Nazis.

As I said, I have never heard anyone but Leftist leaning Christian leaders make the statement that to be a good American you had to be a Christian. I have never head it. What I have heard is, “dedicated Christians make good citizens.” I have heard conservative Christians stress the need to win, through evangelistic efforts of preaching, teaching, personal testimony, home visitations etc. to win the non Christian to faith. All of these fall within the Christian’s responsibility under God not government,. Laws that minimize these efforts or make them altogether impossible are to be challenged and changed.

Add to this the fact that we are to be salt and light in the national culture both through how we live personally and for what we endorse and seek to enact into law politically. Christians are to do that both individually and are to organize themselves in ways that effectively bring these things to pass. This IS NOT Christian Nationalism!  It is simply Christians living out in the real work their faith. Unfortunately for the Christian Left (Christian Socialist and Progressives) the basic truths of the Scripture run contrary to their world view.  I encourage the “Christian Left” to consider that there was a reason God wrote the Ten Commandments in stone and not on parchment.

The people that the BJC seek to suck into the false category of National Socialism are Believers who simply believe the Bible. Their mantra is, “The Bible says it and that settles it” whether I believe it or not is irrelevant to its validity.  Christians seeking to bring their government into compatibility with Christian moral values through political action are seeking to do exactly what our founding fathers said they were doing . . . . . “Create a more perfect Union.” We are committed to the rule of law even when that law violates our understanding of Scripture but we also will not surrender our right to change those laws to ones that are more compatible with our Christian ethics and morals. So get used to it.

The BJC and other Left leaning Christians know full well that men such as the late Jerry Falwell, Robert Jeffress and conservative pastors/leaders across the nation are not and never have sought to merge the Church with the State. Quite the contrary . . . . . We simply believe we have been tasked by God to call the nation to righteousness and to implore and yes pressure the “secular” leadership to lead the way. We are to be both salt and light to our world and that means pressing the culture to evolve a nation that adheres to the core principles of Scripture. Blessed is the nation who God is the Lord."

I suggest the BJC look around. The real threat to the Republic and to the church is not the merging of the two. There is no evidence that there is any risk of that. To the contrary. The government is under assault fro liberalism, socialism and internal corruption. The church is under attack the world over and Christians are literally dying for their faith; being excluded from the American public square by court rulings that are too broad and sweeping . . . to the point of literally “throwing the baby out with the bath water.”

I further suggest that the America has nothing to fear from conservative Christians. Christians do not want special standing they want equal footing. Trust me, the conservative Christian is not the enemy . . . . their love for their Lord overflows into love for their country as established by our founding fathers. The conservative Christian's sin is that he loves both God and Country and stand in the way of the Socialist Left whether they be Christian or not and their goals for this nation.